James DiEugenio

👋 Nice one William.

Sandy: I met Rob a few times when he was working on his docudrama series for cable. He was going to base that on three books: Fonzi's, Dick Russell's, and Jim Douglass' book. So that should give you an idea of where he was headed. One of the scripts I saw was largely based on Nagell, Russell and Schweiker. But then that series was dropped and he is now doing a podcast. Which I think begins in a coupel of weeks. I have not seen any of the scripts for that.

Sandy: You are correct on this. The whole thing about being "an item" was that Bobby did the Twist with MM at his sister's house in Santa Monica in 1962. Ethel Kennedy was there. RFK called his father at this time, who could neither speak nor walk due to the stroke he had in late 1961. MM was kind enough to talk to him and later write him a note wishing him well. Jean Kennedy Smith wrote a note back to MM thanking her for her kindness and noting her and RFK being "an item" due to their dance. John Siegenthaler later said that he danced with Kim Novak at one those gatherings, but he could assure everyone they were not "an item".

Its starting to look like that.

Thanks Ben. THat is what the true meaning of Secret Agenda really is. It exposed that there really was a shadow government that is invisible but actually run things. But is not visible to the average american since the MSM filters through only images they want Joe Blow to know. Take a look at how look they stalled the public from seeing the Z film. In watergate is was hiding the connections between Hunt and McCord. Concealng that McCord was a security expert and disguising Hunt as a keystone cop type. And Helms screaming the CIA had nothing to do with Watergate. Meanwhile all three men were familiar with each other. And McCord despised Prouty.

Hunt did not lead the Watergate burglars. That was supposed to be Gordon Liddy. But it seems clear by Hougan's milestone book that Liddy's position was only titular. He did not know that, and in fact was in denial of it to the end of his life. Its pretty obvious from the evidence that Hougan collected that McCord and Hunt were off the reservation. In fact, from what Hougan did in excavating the crime, I would wager that Watergate was a Dick Helms operation. And Nixon discovered that the CIA had booby trapped him too late. You can see that from that call I extracted in this article. https://www.kennedysandking.com/obituaries/the-mysterious-life-and-death-of-james-w-mccord There are very few books you will read as impacting and as revealing as Secret Agenda. On top of that it is well written. If you have not read it, you are missing the Big Picture about what really happened to this country. Bernstein and Woodward were part of a cover story. And I think that is why Bernstein wrote that article The CIA and the Media. And from Newman has discovered, McCord may have been even more of an operator than even Hougan realized.

I will be in Cincy the day before and then driving into Pittsburgh with Matt Crumpton. At the Mercantile Library I will be making the case that Oswald could not have been convicted at trial. In fact the DA would have been routed. This will partly be from the new book coming out that Matt and I are contributors to. I will preview that a bit later. In Pittsburgh, i will be doing a Big Picture presentation that has never been done before in any manner. How the death of JFK led to the rise of the Neocons.

Thanks so much for this Lori. This Macht incident is really something since they had to detain him twice on the same day? He is a real estate agent? But Bobby's house is not for sale. That is some real wild stuff about Aispuro.

Yes I will be in Pittsburgh for the Wecht conference. With Landis, Rob Reiner and Newman etc. What is the AUS? Are you from down under?

Greg: Jeff did provide info about the Tehran Conference and that was pages ago. So then, whenever one replies to one of these charges, Mike goes to another one. Diverting from the fact just established. And make no mistake, virtually all of these were brought up by McAdams in the first place. You can check that for yourself. And almost all of them were replied to by Len Osanic years ago.

Here is the notice, at the Mercantile Library, 6:00 https://www.mercantilelibrary.com/events/calendar/2023/11/14/jfk60-james-dieugenio

The other trash artist was Epstein. (Man, can you imagine being on the side of Epstein and McAdams?) Take a look at how correct Fletcher was on a charge by Epstein. (And how lucky BOR is to have such good listeners.) https://www.kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-articles/fletcher-prouty-vs-edward-epstein

Sandy, This junk is mostly out of the McAdams play book. All this rubbish had been effectively countered, especially by Jeff, and Mike knows it. And if he does not know it he is being deliberately obtuse. Mike had a pretty good JFK site at one time, he has pretty much denigrated himself on this forum.

Let me add one more thing about this issue. As time has gone on, and more and more evidence has surfaced showing that Kennedy was getting out, I am more and more in the camp that this was the main reason behind the assassination. Some of this has to do with how fast the policy was reversed, e.g. NSAM 288, which--disagreeing with Newman-- Fletcher thought was the real order that turned the whole thing around. And also, the completeness with which it was overhauled. All of those changes leading to the chilling scene out of Karnow and Newman, of LBJ saying to the JCS, "Just get me elected and I'll give you your damn war." Another thing that disturbs me is the CIA trying to change its estimates in the fall of 1963. This indicates that they knew Kennedy was using the false prognostications as the basis for his withdrawal plan. In other words, he was hoisting them on their own petard. The CIA and JCS were so disturbed by Kennedy's plans to get out that they prematurely exposed NSAM 263, which Kennedy wanted to keep secret until after the November Honolulu Conference They made it public out of Saigon in October, so Bundy said, well, you might as well announce it since your enemies already did so. Prouty was on to most of this back in the 80's. And then Newman filled it in with more detail. The November 1961 meeting, where Kennedy exploded at his advisors over Vietnam, described in his revised edition, is worth the price of that book. The revelations about this reversal to a mass audience was a true shock to the system. Which the MSM did all it could to try and deflect. And they were dead wrong and deserved to be humiliated. Which they were; Sec Def May of 1963.

Mike Griffith does not want to think that JFK's withdrawal plan was for real. Even though David Kaiser, James Blight, and Gordon Goldstein, among others, have proven that to be the case. Kennedy was unmistakably getting out of Vietnam. Period. Over and out. Ignoring all the problems with the Selverstone book, he tried to say it was the only book to read on the subject. Whew. It was Prouty who originally gave Stone the idea to center his feature film on NSAM 263. So Mike wants to trash Fletcher. Kennedy should be recognized and praised for having the wisdom and the insight to avoid going to war in Indochina, as he was advised not to by DeGaulle and MacArthur. Unlike LBJ and Nixon, who not only did go to war, they expanded the horrible conflict into Laos and Cambodia. With disastrous results, including the genocide in Cambodia. Kennedy deserves kudos for what he was trying to do. And Oliver Stone deserves a lot of credit for making the Prouty/Newman thesis the fulcrum of his feature film.

Jean: What Bart means is that the DPD did not know about this that day. The FBI had this and the theory is this is what they used to put together the story in Chicago.

Did anyone listen to it? Wha did he list? I hope the work of Betsy Wolf is in there.

Every once in awhile I make a mistake and look at a Griffith post. Yes Mike, I think the title of this thread is loony. Its Mark Shaw BS, and Shaw has become a sideshow who has nothing to do with solving the JFK case today. RFK was not in Brentwood, or close to Brentwood, that day. And the group pictures in Sue Bernard's book prove that beyond a shadow of a doubt. (pp. 186-87) MM passed on by the process of ingestion not injection. Dr. Boyd Stephens of SF who was hired to do a review wrote that "The person metabolized the Nembutal in a manner consistent with oral ingestion of a large quantity of pills, and further that the metabolic process had reached the stage where much of the toxic material had already reached the liver and was in the process of at least beginning the excretion process." (McGovern, pp. 494-95) After reviewing his work, attorney Ron Carroll agreed with Stephens. Namely that an injection would have produced a much higher blood level of the barbiturate, and a much faster death, without the evidence of the extended metabolic process which allows for the liver to absorb the toxic substance. (ibid, p. 495) This is what is usually called hard evidence or core evidence. The only real question about her death is: was it an accidental overdose?

There are two concepts that are at play here. First, Burden of Proof, which means the prosecution has the responsibility of convicting the defendant beyond a reasonable doubt. They must a bring a case and the jury must accept it 12-0. Standard of proof refers to the degree to which the prosecution must convince the jury with evidence that 1.) Must be accepted by the court as being relevant, legally obtained, and not tampered with throughout chain of custody, and 2.) With witnesses who can withstand the attempt at impeachment by the defense. The Commission felt that they could use any evidence or testimony they liked in order to convict Oswald. It got so bad that the junior lawyers on the staff objected to certain witnesses like Brennan, Marina, and Markham. But, as Redlich said, the Commissioners wanted them. When the HSCA started, experienced prosecutors Sprague and Tanenbaum knew that the Commission's case was full of holes, plus there were vast areas where they did no inquiry, plus a lot of exculpatory evidence was left out. Sprague was very puzzled as to why the WC did not buy Odio since she seemed to him to be a most credible witness. And both of them realized that the Commission had whiffed on Mexico City. In his interview on Out of the Blank, Blakey seems to admit that he bought the Warren Commission. He has been slowly backing away from that ever since. The Commission's case could not have withstood cross examination.

In a new book I have contributed to, The JFK Assassination Chokeholds, Canadian lawyer Andrew Eiler examines this question in a rather full way. Marcus is correct, the prosecution would have the burden of proof in this case. And since it was a homicide, the necessary standard would be beyond a reasonable doubt. That is the highest legal standard there is. And it has to be unanimous. Andrew goes though what both the Commission and HSCA did and shows that those two proceedings would not even match the lower standards of proof, that is the clear and convincing standard or the civil standard of preponderance of the evidence. The reason they were able to do what they did was because they completely stripped the defendant of his rights, there was no procedure to determine rules of evidence and testimony and there was no plea or rebuttal to a jury. As Oliver Stone showed in JFK Revisited there is much crucial evidence that would be argued as inadmissible at a pre trial evidentiary hearing. (Bugliosi was passing gas when he tried to ignore this problem in his book.)And there were several witnesses who would have been blown off the stand during cross examination. But the HSCA and the Commission allowed these exhibits and witnesses to be used against Oswald. (BTW, Brennan refused to testify for the HSCA under any circumstances.). And, in fact, Specter simply told the Commission, we either go with the SBT or we have to start looking for a second assassin. Which is not a valid legal proposal, its one made up out of necessity. Recall, Joe Ball called Markham an utter screwball. Scobey said that Marina should not have been allowed to testify. The above could only be done in complete defiance of any fairness or equity to the defendant. And make no mistake, as noted above, the Commission lawyers were aware of this problem, just read the Liebeler Memorandum. When Ray Marcus asked Liebeler to admit the Commission was wrong in 1967, the UCLA law professor said "Ray. sometimes we get involved in things that are bigger than ourselves."

Please, Bill and Ben. How long did it take for the PM figure to take hold in the critical community? Like maybe 45 years after Bernabei's work was lost? There were two people in or around the building who were seen, Baker's guy on the 3rd or 4th floor, and Worrell's guy running out the back. LHO was not on the 6th floor at the time, when you have to lie like Givens' lied and Brennan lied, it did not happen. And LaTona exposed the lie by Day.

You know Greg, it would really be better for you not to emulate your buddy Paul Hoch in your eagerness to slam me. For you end up making as many errors as him. I wrote over two annotated pages on this subject in Destiny Betrayed. (pp. 204-07). And I did something that you apparently did not: I talked to two people who inspected the pictures at the Archives. Namely Carol Hewett and John Armstrong. It was a package with paper inside it. No one knows if it was a bag or sheet because the package was slit at one end. So its hard to figure how long the original paper was. But the FBI says it was 18 inches. The problem, according to Carol, is that in the FBI photos she saw there is no tape measure next to it. I was not, in any way, the first person to discover this or to write about it. Way back then Meagher wrote about it in 1967 and then Hewett inspected it and so did Armstrong. There was clearly a cover up about this matter, and I delineate it in my book.

Will someone read it. I will not give them my money. https://www.historytoday.com/archive/feature/what-killed-kennedy

NBC also never cooperated with the ARRB on the Sheridan documents.

From what I know about him, Viggo is a really cool guy. I would really not like to see him in a pile like this. Of course, I feel the same way about Mamet.