James DiEugenio

This seems really weird to me if its true. I have a hard time thinking it is. In reading the amendment, I simply do not see how it applied to this situation. To me it clearly denotes that somehow the president becomes physically incapacitated. And the only times it has been used has been for that purpose. Now if this condition should become ongoing or permanent it does allow for the president to be removed and the VP to take charge. Sort of like declaring a conservatorship if someone is senile. But to use this the way these guys wanted to use it? I would not even say that this was a stretch. In legal terms, it was worse than that. Firing Comey was not the Saturday Night Massacre.

Here is some follow up to the McCabe interview last night:

FC: This is about two days now and you never replied to my questions about the Tippit case. Recall, you said that since Oswald shot Tippit he must have killed JFK. (If I were you I would not want to reply either.)

Gary, you make Vince Bugliosi look like an amateur. He had about 2600 pages, but that was on the whole case and each aspect.

The Nazis were clearly bent on dominating Eurasia, and with Italy and Japan, probably the world, although I would not include Western Hemisphere there. I do not think you could say that about the USSR.

This started the day after Comey was canned. Here is some more info on it. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/02/17/mccabe-60-minutes-interview-graham-investigation/2870876002/ Now, lapdog Lindsey is going to call these guys to testify on the hill. Round and round it goes.

Isn't it interesting that this was all over Trump canning Comey. In other words, the president fired your boss and now you are going to remove him from office? Compare that with what JFK was doing. I mean its night and day.

Well, Mr. Wheeler this is sure as heck interesting isn't it, the Bureau was trying to get rid of Trump. And the guy said it on national TV: https://consortiumnews.com/2019/02/16/the-fbi-came-close-to-staging-a-coup/

bart: That is the right answer. Its pretty clear that by this time the fix was in. To say that you saw Oswald anywhere else but where Hoover wanted him to be? Are you serious? In Dallas? The FBI inquiry into this case was a pathetic joke.

Bingo

I am sure Bart will post Doyle's full reply, of which the above is only a small segment. He already did at ROKC.

Thanks John. But as I said I agree with those sentiments. Its a nest of vipers over there.

I always thought that the date of November 16th was really something. That was only a few days before D Day. Plus Wade said he met with Hosty about 48 hours before. BTW Joe, don't you also have a later date for the whole LHO leaving the note at FBI HQ also or is that the late date for him leaving the note?

Nice one Tony.

Well, FC that was five hours ago I asked you to reply to these problems in the Tippit case. After giving you a day and a half. If you do not reply relatively soon, I will proceed to add more of these to show you just how hopeless it is to try and use the TIppit case to impute guilt to Oswald on the Kennedy case.

In other words, if we buy this, he does not need a better photo like he told Al Rossi he did. Further I should add the Doyle reply is much fuller than the above. I am sure Kamp will post the whole thing with his responses here. He already did at ROKC.

So Dave, you are saying that you could only get 240 lines of resolution once you went to tape from that?

Well, someone call up Coppola to settle this dispute.

I thought this was one of the best parts of the book. (Aside from the brilliant introduction of course.) It seems to me to be obvious that the CIA was working on conditioning a mind controlled assassin for about a decade or more before RFK was killed. In fact one of the most memorable parts of John Marks' The Search for The Manchurian Candidate, is when he interviews a hypnotist about this subject and the guy replies it would take three months to program an assassin, and about six to program a patsy. When you throw in the fact that Dr. Herbert Spiegel, the preeminent doctor in the field at that time, said that as far as being susceptible to hypnosis, he would rank SIrhan as a Five on a scale of 1-5; plus Professor Dan Brown, the preeminent expert in the field today said he would rank Sirhan on a scale of 1-10 as an 11. He said the problem he had was not hypnotizing Sirhan, but getting him out of a trance state once he was in. It was also clear to Simson Kallas, Sirhan's prison psychologist, that someone had placed certain mental blocks in his mind. This prevented him from recalling who had done the programming. But I agree with Ron that the interview that Langman did with Bryan is quite incriminating.

What I am saying is that today, I have very serious doubts that Oswald was in Mexico City when the CIA says he was. If that meant misleading the FBI, then that was the result.

More or less. Just recall what the Dulles brothers did for those German corporations during World War II.

What was the original format that Darnell and Weigman were shot on?

John, I think you should differentiate what I said, from what you said above. The last paragraph is yours not mine. The first three lines are mine. Although I agree with the sentiments.

Well, in my opinion it was from where the Dulles brothers came from, Sullivan and Cromwell. Also, Eisenhower was schooled by the CFR when he was president of Columbia. Finally, Nixon was Nixon, an unregenerate slime ball who was a stooge for corporations from the moment he ran for office and the Red Scare to inspire fear and paranoia. He was also on the take from the Shah, Battista and the Greek Junta.