Gil Jesus

According to the autopsy face sheet, the President's back wound measured 7x4 mm. As a bullet enters the skin, tissue accelerates radially and is displaced centrifugally. The size of the entry wound is transiently larger than the caliber of the bullet, but typically the defect reversibly contracts to a diameter smaller than the cross-sectional area of the bullet due to the highly elastic properties of skin." https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9462949 In other words, the 7mm bullet hole in Kennedy's back was made by a bullet whose diameter was larger than 7mm ( 0.284 inches ). The 6.5mm bullet's diameter is only 0.264 inches., making it doubtful IMO, that the wound was created by 6.5 ammo. As I've mentioned in my essay on the 7.65 Mauser, one of the two rifles brought into the Texas School Book Depository two days before the motorcade was a Mauser which had been converted to a 30.06. The diameter of 30.06 ammo is .308 inches, larger than 7mm and certainly capable of having made the wound. Again, this is only my opinion based on the contracting of the skin from the wound's original size in comparison to the diameter of the ammunition. Could this wound have been made by 30.06 ammunition ?

Maybe that's why he pardoned him, to avoid the publicity the trial would have caused. There may have been a lot of skeletons the CIA didn't want known. Put the case to rest, just like shooting Oswald.

I agree with that. Not the least of his transgressions was moving the back wound up to the base of the neck. Ford was also the FBI's eyes and ears on the Commission. IMO, Ford was deep state all the way. Funny how ex-CIA chief G.H.W. Bush just happened to be Vice-President when Reagan was shot.

Did the CIA bring down Richard Nixon because of what he knew about the Kennedy Assassination ? Was Gerald Ford's ascension to the Presidency his reward for keeping the Warren Commission off the CIA's back ? Has the CIA and its allies in the Deep State really been running the country since November 22. 1963 ? Is this the "new form of government" Jack Ruby tried to warn Earl Warren was coming ? Here's some thoughts for the younger fans. https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/Tucker-Carlson-Nixon-Ford-CIA.mp4

I've already signed it. https://jfkfiles.kennedy24.com/

There was the way the authorities handled Oswald after his arrest, using tactics that were illegal and unethical from a legal standpoint. Tactics one would not use in a normal criminal investigation where the suspect was guilty, but tactics one would use certainly in a case where they were framing an innocent man for a crime he did not commit. Reason # 2: The way the authorities handled Oswald. a. authorities continued to question Oswald after he had asked for an attorney, violating his Constitutional rights. Once Oswald asked for a lawyer, all police-related activities regarding him should have come to a halt. “When a suspect in custody asks for a lawyer, from that point on police can not interrogate the suspect at all without an attorney present. It’s not enough to just let the suspect talk to an attorney on the phone. He has to have an attorney present if he has asked for one. That rule remains in effect the entire time the suspect is in custody.” — Jenna Solari, Senior Instructor, Federal Law Enforcemnt Training Center. In this video, Oswald repeatedly tells the press he's being denied counsel and asks for "someone to come forward to give me legal assistance". This was a violation of his Constitutional right to legal counsel under the 6th amendment. In this video, as the questioning of Oswald continues, Dallas Police Chief Jesse Curry admits that Oswald had previously asked for a lawyer. b. authorities prevented Oswald from contacting a lawyer by not allowing him to make a phone call until the afternoon of Saturday, the 23rd. Documents indicate that Oswald was not allowed to use the phone until 1:40 pm on Saturday, the 23rd. He was allowed to make the call on Saturday afternoon, after police were confident that his chances of reaching Attorney Abt were slim to none. Under Texas law, if Oswald did not have a lawyer by the time he was arraigned for the murder of officer J.D. Tippit, the judge should have appointed one to him at that arraignment. ( 7 H 331 ) That arraignment was at the 7 o'clock hour on Friday evening. No such appointment was ever made. c. Oswald was held incommunicado on the afternoon and evening of the assassination. Marina Oswald testified that although she asked to see her husband on the 22nd, she was denied access to him by police. ( 1 H 77 ) Oswald was not allowed to speak with his family in order to prevent him from asking them to obtain a lawyer for him. d. Members of the American Civil Liberties Union were dissuaded from speaking to Oswald Gregory Lee Olds was the President of the Dallas Civil Liberties Union. He had been contacted by one of his board members at 10:30 pm On Friday, the 22nd, regarding Oswald’s being denied counsel. He called the police station and spoke with Capt. Fritz, who told him that Oswald had been given the opportunity to request counsel and had not made any requests. After deliberation, Olds and three others headed for Dallas Police Headquarters. Olds and his party arrived on the fourth floor, where they met Charles Webster, a lawyer and professor of law at SMU, who took them in to see Capt. Glen King. Olds testified that “Captain King ……assured us that Oswald had not made any requests for counsel.” ( 7 H 323 ) Two of the party went downstairs and confronted Judge David Johnston: “Two of the others, I believe, went downstairs to the basement where Justice of the Peace David Johnston was…… he also assured us that there had been an opportunity of–Oswald’s rights had been explained, and he had declined counsel. Said nothing beyond that. I think that was the extent of our inquiry.” ( ibid. ) There’s a difference between never requesting counsel and being offered counsel and denying it. And of course, we know that both of these accounts are lies because in his testimony before the WC, Sgt. Gerald Hill said that Oswald had requested counsel at the time of his arrest inside the Texas Theater. ( ibid., pg. 52 ) Later in his testimony, Hill reiterates: Mr. HILL ………he had previously in the theatre said he wanted his attorney. Mr. BELIN. He had said this in the theatre ? Mr. HILL. Yes; when we arrested him, he wanted his lawyer. He knew his rights. ( ibid., pg. 61 ) e. Dallas Police allowed a non-criminal attorney to speak with Oswald. District Attorney Henry Wade had been under pressure from lawyers regarding the treatment of Oswald. One of the issues was Oswald’s repeated public claims that he was not being allowed legal representation. On Saturday, the 23rd, one of the attorneys who were pressuring Wade contacted H. Louis Nichols, President of the Dallas Bar Association to request that he look into whether or not Oswald had legal representation, wanted legal representation or wanted it but had been denied of it. Nichols response was to call Henry Wade on the phone and make an inquiry. ( 7 H 327 ) Nichols testified before the Warren Commission that Wade told him that as far as he knew Oswald had not asked for any lawyer so Nichols asked Wade to give Oswald a message that the Dallas Bar Association would provide him with a lawyer if he needed one. Nichols then called Capt. Glen King of the DPD to ask if Oswald had a lawyer: “Captain King said that as far as he knew there had been no one representing him, and as far as he knew, Oswald had not asked for a lawyer. He had not asked for the right to call a lawyer, and had not asked that a lawyer be furnished to him—” ( ibid. ) Capt. King offered Nichols the chance to talk to Oswald but Nichols “didn’t know whether I wanted to or not at this point”. Nichols was reluctant to get involved. "I didn’t know to what extent I would, or wanted to, or should become embroiled in the facts. I wanted to know whether he needed a lawyer, and I didn’t anticipate that I would be his lawyer, because I don’t practice criminal law. ( ibid. pg. 331 ) It was a point well taken. To have a civil lawyer go in to question Oswald alone was a joke. A civil lawyer would never ask the right questions: Was he being beaten? Was he being starved? Was he being deprived of sleep? Was he being isolated from his friends and family? Was he being denied counsel? Nichols didn't want to be "embroiled in the facts". He didn't want to hear of Oswald's treatment at the hands of police. However, Nichols was pressured into going by a law professor from SMU. Nichols’ reluctance to become involved in the issue causes the SMU professor to light a fire under his butt as if to say, “It’s been over 24 hours since his arrest and he hasn’t asked for an attorney yet ?” When Nichols asks Oswald if he had a lawyer, Oswald starts complaining about his treatment: Mr. NICHOLS. I asked him if he had a lawyer, and he said, “Well, he really didn’t know what it was all about, that he was–had been incarcerated, and kept incommunicado, and I said, “Well, I have come up to see whether or not you want a lawyer, because as I understand–” I am not exactly sure what I ,said there, or whether he said something about not knowing what happened to President Kennedy, or I said that I understood that he was arrested for the shot that killed the President, and I don’t remember who said what after that. This is a little bit vague. ( 7 H 328 ) Here Nichols is having an exclusive talk with the accused assassin of President Kennedy, and he can’t remember what was said in the exchange ? Mr. STERN. He, I gather, used the word “incommunicado” to describe—- Mr. NICHOLS. Yes; that was his word. Mr. STERN. Did he elaborate on that, or any—or indicate to you that he had not been able to see members of his family or other people of his choice? Mr. NICHOLS. No; he did not say that he had been refused anything. Just didn’t elaborate, and I REALLY DIDN’T ASK HIM at that point. MY INQUIRY WAS INTENTIONALLY VERY LIMITED. I merely wanted to know whether he had a lawyer, if he had a lawyer then I had no problems. If he asked for a lawyer and they did not offer him one, that was contrary to what I had been told, because I had been told, as far as the police were concerned, and Mr. Wade, as he recalled, that the man had never asked for a lawyer. Nor had he asked to call a lawyer, for the right to call a lawyer, so that I was interested in knowing whether or not he had a lawyer and whether or not he had requested a lawyer and been refused….. I didn’t go into the other questions, or whether or not he wanted to see his family and hadn’t been permitted. I really was concerned about whether or not he had a lawyer or wanted a lawyer, or whether we had any obligations to furnish him one. ( ibid., pg. 330 ) In addition, when Oswald asked for John Abt or a lawyer from the American Civil Liberties Union, Nichols told him that he didn’t know Abt and he didn’t know any lawyers who were members of the ACLU but admitted under oath that “as it turned out later, a number of lawyers I know ARE members”. ( ibid. pg. 329 ) Nichols then went before the media and stated that Oswald had "turned down my offer for help". ( ibid. pg. 330 ) Nichols never mentioned to the press Oswald’s request for John Abt or the American Civil Liberties Union. He never mentioned to the press Oswald’s complaint of being held “incommunicado”. Nichols reluctance to get involved in this case made him a puppet for the Dallas authorities who were pushing a narrative that Oswald did not want legal counsel. There may have been other reasons why Nichols was reluctant to get involved with getting Oswald legal assistance. According to his own testimony, Nichols was “connected” to the Dallas Police and the City of Dallas. Nichols used to work for the city attorney’s office, and at the time of Oswald’s incarceration, still represented the city credit union and had a brother on the police force, so, he had known many of these city authorities for years. ( 7 H 327 ) Gregory Olds of the ACLU told the Commission that the visit of Dallas Bar Association President H. Louis Nichols to speak with Oswald on Saturday went a long way in reassuring Olds’ questions about suspected denial of counsel to Oswald: Mr. OLDS. Mr. Nichols went down late this afternoon, I think around 5:30, and he reported after that that he had seen Oswald in respect to the same reasons that we had for going down there Saturday night, to see if he wanted some sort of legal representation, and to make sure whether or not he was denied—being denied it, and he said that he was satisfied that–in essence, Oswald told Nichols he was satisfied with the situation. ( ibid., pg. 325 ) Nichols’ public statement after visiting with Oswald that Oswald had denied his help dissuaded the ACLU from contacting Oswald as they had planned to do on Saturday night. But it also damaged Oswald’s chance of obtaining counsel outside of Dallas as well. There was a reason why police chose to let a non-criminal attorney speak to Oswald and kept him away from a criminal attorney. f. Without a defense lawyer, Oswald was at the mercy of the Dallas Police, who took advantage of the situation by assembling lineups in such a way as to make Oswald the only choice the witnesses could make. In one of the more blatant examples of police misconduct, the Dallas Police constructed lineups unfairly. In the first two lineups, Oswald was displayed with a dark-skinned, 34 year old detective wearing a brown sport coat, a 31 year old blond detective wearing a white short-sleeved shirt and a red vest, and a short, heavy jail clerk wearing a grey woolen sweater. In addition, Oswald was handcuffed to the two detectives. This is what the witnesses saw: In lineup # 3, Oswald was displayed with two prisoners who happened to be blond and the same jail clerk wearing the same grey woolen sweater. In lineup # 4, Oswald was displayed with two teenagers and a Mexican. No witness who saw Tippit's murderer ever described him as: being in his mid-30s and dark skinned, or blond and wearing a red vest, or short and heavy and wearing a grey woolen sweater or being a Mexican. In fact, Detective Perry's dark skin was noted by witness Sam Guinyard in his testimony that the men in the lineup were not the same color. ( 7 H 399 ) This left the battered, bruised and handcuffed Oswald as the only choice the witness could make. Police would never have gotten away with this kind of unfair display had Oswald's lawyer been present. g. No recording or transcription of the interrogation sessions were made The reason for this would be to prevent anyone other than those present in the room from knowing what was said by the suspect during his interrogation and what was done to him. Without a recording or transcript of what was being said, it allowed the authorities to create a hearsay narrative that was based on their word and their word alone. h. Police arraigned Oswald for the assassination of the President at 1:35 am. This tactic is referred to in interrogation circles as "sleep deprivation". Interrupting the sleep of a suspect in order to break him down and confess to a commission of a crime is a form of torture and its use by police is illegal and a violation of a suspect's protection against cruel and unusual punishment under the 8th Amendment. i. even after receiving death threats, Dallas Police stubbornly kept to the scheduling of Oswald's transfer and refused to change it. Normally, the police would take ANY and ALL security precautions necessary to protect their prisoner and see to it that he was safely transferred into the custody of the County Sheriff. But not this time. Police had made public the time of Oswald's transfer, a tactic counterproductive to the safety of the prisoner. Dallas Secret Service head Forrest Sorrels testified that, "when I heard they were supposed to take him out at 10 o'clock --- that was the announcement and so forth on the radio and the papers --- I remarked to Captain Fritz that if I were he, I would not remove Oswald from the city hall or city jail to the county jail at an announced time; that I would take him out at 3 or 4 o'clock in the morning when there was no one around." ( 13 H 63 ) Of course, making public the time of Oswald's transfer in a city crying for revenge for the assassination was a foolish move. Or it could be a ploy in hopes that some vigilante would take Oswald out. DA Henry Wade wanted to move Oswald on Friday evening, but was told by Capt. Fritz that Sheriff Bill Decker, "did not like for prisoners to be moved in the nighttime." ( CD 4, pg. 32 ) Whether Decker liked it or not, he was under the impression that the move would be made Saturday evening. He had made arrangements for the transfer at that time and around 9 pm was shocked to learn from a reporter that the move had been scheduled for 10 am Sunday morning. ( 12 H 47 ) He called the police station to protest the time of the transfer and was told that Oswald, "wouldn't be moved that night and that's all there is to it." ( ibid., pg. 49 ) But something happened later that evening that caused Decker to lobby once again for an earlier transfer. The phone threats After 12:30 on Sunday morning, Decker was advised at home by his office that the FBI had notified them of a death threat against Oswald. He called the Police station and advised that Oswald should be transferred immediately ( 12 H 49 ). The response from police was that they would check with the Chief. Sometime between 3 and 4 am, not having responded to the Sheriff's request, the FBI contacted Capt. W.B. Frazier of the police dept. Capt Frazier was the shift commander in charge at that time. The agent who contacted him, Newsom, was never called to give testimony. Finally, Capt. Frazier tried to contact Chief Curry at 5:45 am, but could not contact the Chief because his phone was off the hook. ( 12 H 54 ) Frazier testified that he was preparing to send a cruiser by Chief Curry's house when he was relieved by Capt. Talbert and that Talbert sent a cruiser to notify the Chief. At 6:30 am, Curry called the police station and was notified by Talbert of the threats. His instructions were to tell the sheriff and the FBI that he would be in his office at 8:30 or 9:00 am and would call them at that time. ( 21 H 660 ) This is 6 hours AFTER Decker called the police dept to transfer Oswald immediately. It seems that there was a reluctance on the part of the police to wake Chief Curry and that his getting a good night's sleep had priority over the safety of the prisoner. Or that the police department was not interested in protecting the prisoner. There also seems to be a level of reluctance on the part of Chief Curry at the time of his notification, to set in motion the events necessary to move the prisoner immediately and instead made it known that he would not be available for another 2 or 2 1/2 hours. In any event, the Chief made sure that Oswald was not going to be transferred at any other time prior to the publicly announced time of 10 am on Sunday morning. Regardless of any threats. In a normal homicide investigation, officers who worked long and hard on that investigation would like nothing more than to see the fruits of their labor result in a conviction. Normally, in order to get that conviction, the safety of the prisoner would take priority over anything else. You can't get that conviction without a trial. And nothing is more embarrassing than to have a suspect die in your custody, whether it is at the hand of someone else or by suicide. Some people will, however, choose embarrassment over jail time. Coming in Part III: Reason # 3: the way the authorities handled the evidence.

In 1966, Mark Lane interviewed Nancy Hamilton, formerly known as Nancy Perrin Rich, a bartender at Jack Ruby's Carousel Club. Hamilton told him that Dallas Police officers and DA Henry Wade drank for free at Ruby's club and looked the other way when Ruby violated the local liquor laws.

In this case, there is evidence that there was an assumption of guilt at the time of Oswald's arrest as well. Johnny Calvin Brewer testified that during the struggle with Oswald in the Texas Theater, "I heard some of the police holler, I don't know who it was, 'Kill the President, will you ?' " ( 7 H 6 ) This only goes to prove that this was the culture of the prosecutorial system in Dallas.

by Gil Jesus ( 2023 ) There are basically several reasons why I believe that the Dallas Police/ FBI/ Warren Commission's case against Oswald was fraudulent. I believe that these reasons are the "smoking guns" of Oswald's innocence because not only were many of the steps taken by authorities ILLEGAL, they do not fall into any category of what a normal homicide investigation would involve. Not the least of these reasons was that the prosecutorial system in Dallas was corrupt. Reason # 1: The prosecutorial system in Dallas was corrupt In a criminal case, the credibility of the case is directly connected to the credibility of the people making the case. Justice cannot be served if the justice system is geared to anything other than bringing the REAL perpetrators to justice. During the tenure of Henry Wade as District Attorney of Dallas County, the DA's office was interested in only one thing: conviction rates. Conviction rates are determined by dividing the number of convictions by the number of arrests. For example, if you had nine convictions out of ten arrests, you'd have a 90% conviction rate. Wade compiled a conviction rate so impressive that defense attorneys ruefully called themselves the 7 Percent Club. The problem with this system is that your interest is not necessarily in convicting the guilty party, but instead convicting the person you arrested. And if you arrested the wrong person, it would require you to manufacture evidence against that suspect in such a way to convince a judge or jury of his guilt. This is exactly what they did in Dallas County under Henry Wade's tenure. Nineteen convictions — three for murder and the rest involving rape or burglary — won by Wade and two successors who trained under him were overturned after DNA evidence exonerated the defendants. https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna25917791 District Attorney Craig Watkins became the first black elected chief prosecutor in any Texas county back in 2006. The new DA and other Wade detractors said the cases won under Wade were riddled with shoddy investigations, evidence was ignored and defense lawyers were kept in the dark. They note that the promotion system under Wade rewarded prosecutors for high conviction rates. In the case of James Lee Woodard — released in April 2008 after 27 years in prison for a murder DNA showed he didn't commit — Wade's office withheld from defense attorneys photographs of tire tracks at the crime scene that didn't match Woodard's car. John Stickels, a University of Texas at Arlington criminology professor and a director of the Innocence Project of Texas, blamed a culture of "win at all costs." "When someone was arrested, it was assumed they were guilty," he said. "I think prosecutors and investigators basically ignored all evidence to the contrary and decided they were going to convict these guys." In other words, the Dallas DA wasn't interested in convicting the right person, he was interested in convicting the person who was ARRESTED. Wade wrote a manual for prosecutors in 1969 that was used for more than a decade. It gave instructions on how to keep minorities off juries. By 1953, Henry Wade already had the city wired. Reporters treated his word as gospel, sometimes even buttressing Wade’s efforts in court with their own testimony. The Dallas Police Department and County Sheriff’s Office eagerly did his bidding. Henry Wade's word was gold. Wade was so highly regarded by the people of Dallas that he was able to convince a jury in 1954 to send an innocent man to the electric chair. https://www.dmagazine.com/publications/d-magazine/2016/may/henry-wade-executed-innocent-man/ Wade's office had no problem charging innocent people for crimes they did not commit and presenting evidence in such a way as to obtain a conviction by a judge or jury. With such a skill for framing innocent people for crimes they did not commit, the credibility of the DA's case against Lee Harvey Oswald deserves a second look. As does the authenticity of the evidence in this case.

I agree. For a simple "disturbing the peace" charge ? Since when does the FBI get involved in anything other than a federal crime ?

Coming to Paramount Plus November 14th.

Ron, the CIA works in a very compartmentalized way. Each asset only knows his own role and this allows for deniability if the s**t hits the fan. There are no records kept. The weapons are provided by like-minded allies in the military. The President's protection is relaxed by the Agency's allies in the Secret Service. The coverup is under the direction of an FBI Director that the Agency can control through blackmail. The autopsy handled by ( again ) its allies in the military in order to coverup the President being shot from multiple directions by multiple shooters. The patsy is selected by the Agency because he's an FBI informant who is trying to infiltrate the Agency's training of the assassins in New Orleans. When the training camp is raided by the FBI, the Agency moves it to Mexico. Oswald's movements are controlled by Agency assets like George DeMohrenschildt and Ruth Paine. The Agency knows that Oswald will not wander far from his family, so at the time it's being announced that Kennedy will come to Dallas, Ruth Paine drives to New Orleans and brings a pregnant Marina and baby June back. Ruth Paine, as you know, also played a role in getting Oswald a job in a building that was on the motorcade route. The Kennedy-hating superintendent of the building, Roy Truly, hired Oswald "temporarily" as extra help. In fact, Truly hired two men, one for the other warehouse and one to work in the building at 411 Elm St. Truly selected Oswald to work at the Elm St building. A month later, the Trade Mart was selected as the luncheon site. It wasn't necessary for Connally to know that there was going to be an assassination attempt on the motorcade route. All he had to know was his role and his role IMO, was to make absolutely sure that the Trade Mart would be the location for the luncheon. He may have thought an attempt would be made there, because when the shooting started, he seemed shocked at the timing and yelled out, "My God, they're going to kill us all." And he wasn't talking about Oswald.

When the FBI visited Milteer after the assassination, they had the recording, so they knew what he said. When he denied that he ever said it, he should have been arrested right on the spot for making a false statement to a federal agent. He should have been taken back to the FBI office and told that he'd be spending the next five years in Federal prison unless he revealed the source of his information. If he lawyered up, the recording would have been played for him and his lawyer to hear. At that point, he would have had no choice but to either cooperate with the investigation, or go to prison. Under those circumstances, most defense lawyers would have advised their client to cooperate. That's how it would have been handled in a normal murder investigation. But this was not an investigation, this was a collection of evidence against Oswald. So once he denied saying it, the FBI simply reported his denial and the issue was dropped.

My October-November 1963 timeline. It is incomplete, but I would like to share it with the group anyway. October 4, 1963: Governor Connally meets with President Kennedy at the White House. He later has dinner with Vice President Johnson. Oswald is back in Dallas and stays at the local YMCA while he looks for work. October 10, 1963: The Constitution Party holds a meeting in Indianapolis at the Marott ( not Marriott ) Hotel to, "put an end to the Kennedy, Khrushchev and King dictatorship." William Somersett attends the meeting and tells the FBI that there was talk of killing President Kennedy by those in attendance. October 15, 1963: Ruth Paine calls the Texas School Book Depository and arranges for a job interview for Oswald with building superintendent Roy Truly. Truly interviews Oswald later that day and hires him for $1.25 per hour as a temporary clerk filling customer book orders. Oswald starts work the following day. The FBI office in New Orleans contacts an informant inside the US Communist Party for information regarding Oswald and his wife. ( 17 H 797 ) October 18, 1963: The Delaware State News declares, "Yes Virginia, there is a Santa Claus. His name right now happens to be Kennedy----let's shoot him, literally, before Christmas." ( Manchester, Death of a President, pg. 46 ) October 20, 1963: Kenneth O'Donnell, special assistant and appointments secretary to President Kennedy, calls Jerry Bruno, the advance man for the Kennedy trips, and asks him to come to the White House to discuss the trip to Texas. October 21, 1963: Bruno meets with O'Donnell and is told to contact Walter Jenkins, one of Vice President Lyndon Johnson's top administrative assistants, to solicit his input for the trip. October 24, 1963: Bruno meets with Jenkins, who tells Bruno about the stops that Governor Connally has suggested. The first stop would be San Antonio on November 21 and drive in a motorcade to Brooks Air Force Base, then fly to Houston and drive in a motorcade to the Rice Hotel, where the Albert Thomas dinner was originally scheduled to take place, and stay overnight at the hotel. Then on the morning of November 22, the president would fly to Fort Worth to receive an honorary degree at Texas Christian University at 9:30 a.m. and then ride in a motorcade for the short distance to Dallas, where he would attend a luncheon at the annual meeting of the Dallas Citizens Council at the Statler Hilton Hotel. Finally, the President would attend a fundraising dinner in Austin before returning to Washington. United States ambassador to the United Nations Adlai Stevenson II delivers a contentious speech on United Nations Day at the Dallas Memorial Auditorium, where he is booed and heckled. After the speech, he is struck on the head with a picket sign and spit upon. Several people, including Stevenson, warned Kennedy against coming to Dallas, but Kennedy ignored their advice. October 25-26, 1963: General Walker tells an audience in Jackson, Mississippi that, "it's interesting that the Communists killed first the people who helped them in their revolution", and suggests that because Kennedy had helped the Communist cause, the audience could expect the Communists to kill Kennedy. Walker is planting the seeds of a PSY-OP that will be the early "explanation" of the assassination of the President a month later. October 29, 1963: Bruno meets with Henry Brown, president of the Texas AFL–CIO and a friend of Senator Ralph Yarborough, to obtain his input from labor leaders. He then has lunch with Governor Connally to review his itinerary. The sharpest dissension is over the location of the Dallas luncheon. The Yarborough camp suggests that it be held in the Women’s Building, a massive exhibition hall on the state fairgrounds. Connally insists that it take place in the Grand Courtyard of the Dallas Trade Mart, a smaller venue, and that it be by invitation only. Bruno was taken aback by Connally’s intransigence about the location. The governor tells Bruno that Kennedy cannot come to Dallas unless the event is held at the Trade Mart. https://www.texasmonthly.com/the-culture/john-f-kennedy-place-setting/ In late October, 1963, David Christensen was an Air Force sergeant who was stationed at an RAF base in Kirknewton, Scotland. The base had a relationship with the CIA and was used by the CIA as a top-secret listening station. He intercepted a communication in late October 1963 that an assassination attempt would be made on Kennedy. October 30, 1963: Bruno and Johnson aide Clifton Carter visit the Texas cities that the president will visit. The San Antonio and Houston sites are checked and confirmed as acceptable, but when visiting Texas Christian University in Fort Worth, Bruno is informed by school officials that the university does not intend to confer an honorary degree to the president and that they have only approved the use of their campus as the location for a speech. Bruno informs Connally of this development, and Connally says that he will meet with the university's board of regents the next night. Bruno travels to Dallas to evaluate the ballroom at the Statler Hilton Hotel where the luncheon is planned to take place on November 22. He is met there by J. Erik Jonsson, chairman of the Dallas Citizens Council ( and an owner of Texas Instruments ) and Robert B. Cullum, chairman of the Dallas Chamber of Commerce and owner of the Tom Thumb Food Stores. Cullum informs Bruno that the ballroom at the Statler Hilton is now unavailable because organizers of a bottlers' convention had reserved it and would not surrender it. Jonsson and Cullum suggest the Dallas Trade Mart, but after visiting the site, Bruno dislikes the many catwalks that would be above the president, which, in light of the Stevenson incident that had just occurred a few days earlier, could present a security problem. He asks to be shown other available sites in Dallas. October 31, 1963: Bruno is informed that Governor Connally is unhappy with the decision not to use the Trade Mart for the luncheon because of the catwalk issue. Bruno agrees to visit the Trade Mart again but retains his misgivings. Connally telephones that he has met with the TCU board of regents and that they will not confer an honorary degree on the president. President Kennedy is asked at a press conference about rumors that Lyndon Johnson will not be selected as his running mate in the 1964 election, which Kennedy denies. At the end of October, the Chicago Secret Service received an FBI teletype detailing a plot by four Cuban gunmen to kill Kennedy in Chicago with "high-powered rifles" during a motorcade. The President was scheduled to visit there on November 2nd to attend an Army-Navy football game. Two suspects were arrested and detained by the Secret Service in Chicago on November 1st. Two others escaped. The two that were arrested and detained were released shortly after their arrest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- November 1, 1963: The Fort Worth visit is eventually resolved when the city's chamber of commerce agrees to sponsor a breakfast for the president. Because of this, the president's overnight stay is changed from Houston to Fort Worth so that he will have time to attend the breakfast. That same day, Thomas Arthur Vallee, a vocal Kennedy critic and member of the John Birch Society, was arrested by the Secret Service in Chicago after a search of the vehicle he was driving revealed that he had an M-1 rifle, a handgun and three thousand rounds of ammunition. Vallee had asked his employer for the day of Kennedy's motorcade off. When arrested, he had been driving a car with New York plates, number 311-ORF. Kennedy's Chicago trip was cancelled, and Vallee was released on November 2nd. November 4, 1963: Robert Kennedy received a letter from Byron Skelton, a Democratic Committeeman from Texas, asking that Dallas be dropped from the President's itinerary because "they" would kill him there. Citing General Walker's pronouncement that Kennedy was a "liablility to the free world", Skelton believed that such a man was capable of doing the President harm, and observing the attitude in preparations for the President's trip, he simply felt that it was not safe to go there. Skelton felt so passionately about bypassing Dallas that he flew to Washington to plead his case. White House Secret Service agent Winston Lawson is informed that he has been assigned to the Dallas visit. Paul Rothermel, Head of Security for Hunt Oil, sends a memo to H.L. Hunt notifying him that the attempt to assassinate the President will be made during the motorcade, "there will be violence on the parade route taken by President of the United States John F. Kennedy", he writes. Rothermel also notifies the Dallas FBI and the Dallas Police of this threat. ( FBI file # 62-109060, Sec. 182, pg. 2 ) November 6-7, 1963: AWOL Pfc. Eugene Dinkin walks into the U.N. Press Office in Geneva, Switzerland and tells a stringer for Time-Life that "they" were plotting against Kennedy and that "something" would happen in Texas. The information was forwarded to U.S. military authorities, the FBI and the CIA. November 7, 1963: During the first week of November, Elizabeth Cole, President of the International Students Club at Hunter College, attended a Foreign Students Convention at Rutgers University in New Jersey. She claims to have overheard a Spanish speaking Cuban student talking on the phone describing the assassination of President Kennedy. According to Cole, the Cuban student mentioned the city of Dallas, a book publishing company and a "high government official" who would protect those involved. Cole claimed to have reported the incident to the FBI the next day during a phone call witnessed by her mother, but the Bureau said it had no record of her call. ( FBI file # 62-109060, Sec. 178, pgs. 49-59 ) November 9, 1963: Miami Police informant Willie Somerset recorded a breakfast meeting with his friend Joseph Milteer, who outlined the assassination of President Kennedy. Milteer was taped by Somerset as he spoke of Kennedy's coming visit to Miami on November 18th: November 14, 1963: an "unnamed subject" who had been arrested in Piedras Negras, Mexico on September 30th for stealing three cars, told the FBI "that he is a member of th Ku Klux Klan and that his sources have told him that a militant group of the National States Rights Party plans to assassinate the President and other high-level officials". The FBI's Washington D.C. headquarters tells the Secret Service that, "no information was developed that would indicate any danger to the President...during his trip to Dallas". Acquiescing to the wishes of Governor Connally, Kenneth O'Donnell reverses his prior decision to hold the Dallas luncheon at the Women's Building and changes the location to the Dallas Trade Mart. According to both O'Donnell and Bruno, this change in the luncheon site, although seemingly insignificant at the time, dramatically alters the motorcade route taken through Dallas. November 15, 1963: The White House announces that the Dallas Trade Mart will be the site of President Kennedy's luncheon address and that a motorcade will proceed through downtown Dallas. November 16, 1963: Lee Harvey Oswald visits the Dallas FBI office. ( Dallas Morning News, November 24, 1963 ) I believe that it is this visit where he leaves the note for Agent Hosty. This would have been the Saturday before the assassination, when Oswald did not go to Irving for the weekend. November 17, 1963: Hoover sends out a teletype to all FBI offices notifying them that "information has been received by the bureau that a militant revolutionary group may attempt to assassinate President Kennedy on his proposed trip to Dallas November 22-23 1963. All receiving offices should immmediately contact all CIs ( Criminal Informants ), PCIs ( Potential Criminal Informants ), logical Race and Hate groups ( KKK, NSRP, Nazis ) and determine if any basis for threats. Bureau should be kept advised of all developments by teletype." In other words, no written reports: notify the Bureau by teletype. If the information was found to be true, it would end up in the hands of Hoover, who would make sure that the Secret Service would not be warned. November 18, 1963: Kennedy confides to his good friend senator George Smathers of Florida that Vice President Johnson wants First Lady Jacqueline Kennedy to ride in the car with him during the upcoming tour of Texas. The exact motorcade route is finalized and published in the Dallas newspapers. November 19, 1963: The White House formally announces the timetable of events for the president's visit, including a planned arrival time of 12:30 p.m. CST at the Trade Mart. November 20, 1963: In the early morning hours of November 20, 1963, a drug addict and prostitute named Rose Cheramie was found lying on the side of the road near Eunice, Louisiana. She had been thrown from a moving car. State Police Lieutenant Francis Fruge, investigating the incident, asked her what had happened. She told him that she had been travelling from Florida to Dallas with two Latin men. When he asked her what they were going to do in Dallas, she replied, "pick up some money, pick up my baby and ....kill Kennedy." Battered and bruised and in a state of near hysteria, she was transported to Louisiana State Hospital in Jackson. She appeared to be under the influence of some drug. At the State Hospital, she repeated her claim to the doctors several times, saying that the President would be murdered in two days and said that she got her information from "word in the underworld". But because of her emotional state at the time, she was thought to be in a drug-induced delirium and her story was not believed. Meanwhile in Dallas, Warren Caster, regional manager for Southwest Publishing Company, brings two rifles into the Texas School Book Depository, a 30.06 deer rifle for himself ( described as a "Mauser" ) and a .22 caliber rifle he claims is a Christmas gift for his son. The rifles are examined by TSBD manager Roy Truly and Supervisor William Shelley. This action is witnessed by Lee Harvey Oswald, who tells the Dallas Police of it after his arrest. ( this is as far as I've gotten )

for the evidence in this case, or know where i can find them ? Thanks in advance.

Yes thank you. It is troubling to know that the FBI transcripts were incomplete, given the seriousness of the crime and the need to present the evidence in a concise way. But the radio broadcasts make no sense. Dispatch calls a unit, the unit responds, and then nothing ? It calls another unit and the unit doesn't respond ? A unit calls dispatch and their call is not answered ? There may be an explanation for it missing from the transcripts, but it's missing from the broadcasts. What kind of broadcasts are these ? Is the signal 7 at 817 West Bayless or 817 West Ayres ? Is the Signal 9 at 4916 Rival or 4916 the Lap ? Where's the overlap designed so that they didn't lose any broadcasts ? Was there no radio traffic between 1:12 and 1:14 ? And if there was, where is it ? And what are we to make of the strange transmissions I've capitalized ? There's a lot to unpack there. As one who suffered a heart attack myself in 2002, I know how it knocks the hell out of you. Please accept my best wishes for a full and speedy recovery. I'll keep you in my prayers.

FBI and Dallas Police transcriptions end at 1:11 and resume at 1:14. The following is the radio traffic and transcription that they did not transcribe ( to the best of my discernment) : https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/no-transcription-111_114.mp4 Disp. 603 603 603 Disp. Signal 16 the Gardner and Denver Company 4700 Shane Rd. ( 1:11 ) 603 10-4 Disp. 65 meet him there. 65 65, 10-4. 16 16 Disp. 16 16 ( unintelligible ) Disp. 10-4, a squad needed ? 16 I don't think so. 45 45 returned to service Disp. 10-4 65 Was that for 65 ? Disp. No 65, continue on your call, 4700 Shane 65 4700 Shane 21 21 Signal 7, 817 West Bayless ( 1 :11 ) VOICE: AINT THIS BE WHETHER Disp. 222 VOICE: IN OR OUT ??????: 7 on West Ayres ? Disp. 817 VOICE : OH COTTA ( oh God ? ) 65 65 Signal 9, 4916 Rival, Manager's office ( 1:12 ) Disp. 45 45 45 VOICE: DID YOU GET YOUR 4-TRACK ? VOICE: HEY VOICE: Signal 9, the manager's office, 4916 the Lap VOICE: DID YOU GET YOUR 4-TRACK ? DID YOU GET YOUR 4-TRACK ? DID YOU GET YOUR 4-TRACK ? DID YOU GET YOUR 4-TRACK ? DID YOU GET YOUR 4-TRACK ? DID YOU GET YOUR 4-TRACK ? DID YOU GET YOUR 4-TRACK ? ?????? : CAN YOU MEET ME AT FIRE RAM ? ?????? : 10-4 Transcription then resumes at 1:14. Neither the FBI nor the Dallas police gave an explanation why these transmissions were not included in their transcripts. The FBI version refers to these broadcasts as a "belt change", while the DPD version ignores them completely. I'm particularly interested in why the FBI, who was supposed to be transcribing all of the radio traffic, failed to transcribe these broadcasts.

Good observation Mart. Trump uses the word "fake" a lot.

Researcher / author Harold Weisberg gives his thoughts on the assassination.

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