Gil Jesus

In this telephone call to President Johnson, Warren Commission member Sen. Richard Russell ( D-GA ) discusses the Single Bullet Theory and remarks, "I don't believe it" to which Johnson agrees. Commission members Russell, Boggs and Cooper did not accept the Single Bullet Theory.

Thanks for that info. I couldn't find it in a search of this forum but I'll search the web and hope I find it somewhere else. Thanks again.

With what the DNC is doing to change the rules regarding delegates and who gets them, he may not have a choice. If you campaign in New Hampshire, you can't get any delegates in Illinois or Georgia ? What is THAT all about ? He has no chance of getting the Democrat nomination because he's not far enough to the Left. He's old-school Democrat ( what he calls a Kennedy Democrat ) which is like a moderate in today's political area. And he's not a one-trick pony, not some anti-vax nutcase as depicted in the MSM. He's intelligent and very well versed on foreign and domestic policy. His message has gotten the attention of a lot of voters, myself included.

Exactly. And the reason why I suspect Trump as Tucker's source is that Tucker's show was broadcast ( Dec. 2022 ) several months after they spent time together at the LIV Golf Invitational Series Bedminster ( July 2022 ). In spite of his having the # 1 show on the network, with an average nightly audience of 3 million, Tucker was fired from Fox News four months after that broadcast. I never watched his show, but as I understand it, the excuse for his firing was that he had made false statements about Dominion, the voting machine giant, who sued FOX and won a $ 787.5 million lawsuit. And just like that, without warning, Tucker was out at FOX and none of the major news networks picked up his wildly popular show. One month after Trump and Carlson spoke at the golf tournament, the FBI raided Trump's Mar-a-Lago home to search for documents he may have taken "illegally" when he left office. Did those documents include some he had seen regarding the JFK assassination ? I don't know, but you have to admit, the timeline here is very suspicious. July 2022: Trump and Carlson spend time together at the golf tournament. Aug. 2022: Mar-a-Lago raided by the FBI for "documents" Trump illegally took. Oct. 2022: Mary Ferrell Foundation sues for release of ALL remaining JFK files. Dec. 2022: Carlson reveals he has a source who has seen the remaining files on the JFK assassination and they implicate the CIA in his assassination. April 2023: Carlson is fired by FOX News. June 2023: Trump indicted by a Grand Jury in Miami for, "taking classified national defense documents from the White House after he left office and resisting the government's attempts to retrieve the materials". July 2023: President Joe Biden issues his final release of the JFK files in July 2023, exempting almost 4,800 pages of files to be retained by the CIA. RESULT: The CIA and the "deep state" win again. Whether Trump is credible on this subject or not, I can't say. He says all kinds of wild things that have you shaking your head. But the circumstances here are very suspicious. All I'm saying is that this is why I suspect Trump is Carlson's source.

THANK YOU

EXACTLY. It's getting so you can't even mention anything currently going on in the case without people losing it over Trump. At the mere mention of his name people go into attack mode. It's amazing. I don't think we've had a President so hated by half the country since Lincoln.

I'm not running defense for anybody. I'm getting sick and tired of you Trump haters accusing me of things I'm not doing. I posted a video and asked a question because I have a sneaky suspicion that Trump is Tucker Carlson's "source". And if that's true, he's already opened his mouth and spilled the beans about the CIA being involved in the assassination and I was wondering if he was going to do it AGAIN with Napolitano. And for the record, I'm not a Republican or a Democrat. I'm an Independent voter and independent thinker and always have been, who votes for the candidate whose policies I agree with. I vote for policies, not parties. In fact, I voted Democrat in 7 of the last 8 Presidential elections. So don't accuse me of "running defense" for Donald Trump, because you don't know what you're talking about. Grow up.

I'm not feeding you anything. I posted a video and asked a question. You hate Trump, I get it. If you don't believe the judge, that's your business. If you resent my asking questions, that's just too bad.

It's amazing how they can deem credible ONE witness who has something to add to Oswald's guilt, but consider multiple, corroborating witnesses who have something that casts doubt on the official story as not credible. They're like jurors in a murder case who only hear one side of the story: the prosecutor's opening remarks, the witnesses he presents to make his case and his closing remarks. No defense case, no cross examination, no opportunity to present the defense's own witnesses and experts and no examination of the evidence. They have "their truth". They don't want to hear it. People argue, "this wasn't a court case". Then why was it conducted as half of one ? IMO, it's just BS.

Judge Andrew Napolitano talks about a conversation he had with then President Trump about releasing the JFK files a month before Trump left office. Makes you wonder if the reason they're all hell-bent on throwing his ass in jail is because they're afraid he's going to say something ?

In this interview with ABC's "Nightline" in 1988, former Texas Gov. John Connally finally reveals a shooting sequence that destroys the Single Bullet Theory. The first shot hit the President The second shot hit Connally The third shot hit the President Hear it from the Governor's own lips: Corroborated by the Zapruder film https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/Z230.mp4 Witnessed by a bystander https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oNZ2xCrzulI Concluded by the FBI https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/page-1.png

Dr. Gary Aguillar and Dr. Josiah Thompson discuss the "snowstorm" of fragments in President Kennedy's X-rays and conclude that jacketed ammunition would not leave such a trail.

I'm sure it's just a coincidence that the dictabelt screwed up during the timeframe which J.D. Tippit was being killed. I'm also sure that it's just a coincidence that the Bowley broadcast is 39.83 seconds long and the anomaly just happens to be long enough to cover it at 48.13 seconds. I timed both on my Movie Maker. But they're just coincidences, I'm sure.

Another interesting thing about this is the transcripts, especially the FBI's version, which was supposed to transcribe ALL of the transmissions, but like the Dallas Police version, it left out the broadcasts between Capt. Talbert's 10-4 at 1:11 and unit 212's ( Off. Spradlin) call a 1:14. ( I determined Spradlin called at 1:14 by counting backwards from Barnhart's call at 1:15 ) The FBI never mentioned those broadcasts, including the "skipping" anomaly, and instead noted that timeframe as the "end of belt Six". I find it strange that both the Dallas Police and the FBI saw fit to not transcribe the radio broadcasts between 1:11 and 1:14 pm. Can any of the Warren Commission's supporters explain why this particular timeframe was omitted from the official transcripts ?

The Dallas Police dictabelt recording and transcript from 11/22/63, covering the stretch of time that Dallas Police officer J.D.Tippit was shot dead. Note that the there is an anomaly in the dictabelt at 1:12 pm Dallas time. ( around the 5:00 minute mark in the video ) Was the dictabelt altered ? Can anyone with radio broadcast experience or experience with dictabelts explain what happened here ? Why it kept repeating over and over something that had been previously said, like an old skipping album record ?

As someone who has had years of experience using two-way communications, including police radios, I suggest it is YOU who has no idea what you're talking about. Here's the dictabelt recording 31 seconds before Bowley called on the radio. There was no one keying the mic for 90 seconds before his call. The transmissions were loud and clear, which they would not have been had someone been keying the mic. https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/bowley-call.mp3

Doesn't matter what they were there for. All that matters is what the witnesses said. And once again, your interpretation is wrong. The witnesses were not talking about the Walker photographs. And the key phrase is "any particular photograph recovered from this residence". Allow me to explain it to you. "ANY" is a word depicting something all-inclusive. That means ALL of the photographs. If they had said that the detectives did, "not personally recall any of the photographs they were shown", that would be exclusive to the Walker pics because those were the pictures they were shown. But they didn't say that. They said that they did not recall, "any particular photograph recovered from this residence". I don't understand how you can't grasp the meaning of any photograph from this residence. In fact, they reported the witnesses' answers to viewing the Walker pics separately. When the Walker photos are shown to them, they couldn't recall any of them as well.

I thought the "Russian 35mm and brown case" might have been a weapon. LOL. Still waiting for them to answer the question.

Experts discuss the coverup of the assassination of President Kennedy and its implications for the future of America.

I see J.B. Hicks' name there on the CSSS document. He testified for the Warren Commission. How many questions did Commission counsel ask him about the "backyard" negatives he received ?

I never lose any sleep over your INTERPRETATIONS of what the witnesses MEANT because your interpretations are usually wrong. As they are this time. The document didn't say he couldn't describe them. It said he couldn't recall any of the photographs, even though he testified that, we all looked at it and said, "that looks like the rifle used in the assassination". ( 7 H 209 ) Adamcik's testimony is corroborated by Detective Henry Moore, who testified that, "we all looked and commented on it." ( 7 H 216 ) Like Adamcik, Moore later told the FBI that he, does not recall any particular photograph recovered from that address. ( CD 1066, pg. 255 ) This in spite of looking at the photograph Gus Rose found and commenting on it at the scene. Only a couple of months after their testimony and all of a sudden these two detectives could not "recall any particular photograph" ? Their statements to the FBI had nothing to do with any description. They all looked at the photo. They all commented on the photo. They mentioned the rifle in the photo. They knew what the photo contained. A couple of months later, they told the FBI that they didn't know anything about, "any particular photograph recovered from that address." Sounds to me like they were trying to distance themselves from the discovery of the photographs.

Thanks Dave. Hope all is well. I'm keeping you in my prayers, buddy.

Funny that you mention John Adamcik's initials on the backyard photographs because he told the FBI after his Warren Commission testimony that, "he does not personally recall any photographs that were obtained from this residence."

Thanks Pat. Can you imagine police making copies of photographs that are evidence in a murder case and selling them for a profit ? Talk about police corruption !!!!

Charles, they were so bad that Capt. Fritz was demoted by then Dallas police chief Carl Hansson. Fritz formerly was in charge of the entire detective division but was demoted to head of homicide and robbery. This FBI memo from 1949 shows that, "Captain Fritz does not cooperate with other divisions of the Department or with this Bureau". If you read the bottom paragraph, you'll see that there was a case where a woman allegedly tried to rob a bank and was apprehended by police. As evidence of her guilt, Fritz allegedly had a note she passed the bank teller, but would not release it to the FBI. Shutting out divisions of your own department or the FBI and refusing to release evidence are examples of tactics one uses in the act of framing people for crimes they did not commit. It seems that Fritz had a history of doing these things.