Cliff Varnell

3 hours ago, Keven Hofeling said:

It's not rocket science. This really is very simple. Anyone capable of a minimum level of objectivity upon watching the following two-minute excerpt of the August 9, 2016 interview of Julian Assange by the Dutch television program Nieuwsuur can see that there was no reason for Assange to even bring Seth Rich up in the first place other than to register his concern that a Wikileaks source had been murdered; and MOST NOTABLY Assange does not even once deny that Seth Rich was the Wikileaks source for the DNC emails.

Assange had an excellent reason to bring up Seth Rich -- to divert attention away from his actual source.  

Assange does not even once verify that Seth Rich was the source.

You are unaware of the grave violation of journalistic ethics by revealing a source.  Here's an article about almost 50 journalists or news organizations jailed and/or fined for refusing to reveal sources, up to 2019.

https://www.rcfp.org/jailed-fined-journalists-confidential-sources/

3 hours ago, Keven Hofeling said:

 

Julian Assange did not explicitly violate the Wikileaks policy not to identify sources, but he did make a value judgment that it was more important to call attention to the murder than it was not to mention Seth Rich at all. This is the behavior of an individual who can hold two competing principles in his mind at once, and who recognizes that truth comes in various shades of gray rather than being black and white, which evidently is beyond your own abilities.

It's a violation of accepted journalistic ethics to reveal a source, and Assange properly said he would not comment on his sources -- like any good journalist.  Because you cannot grasp the idea he would protect his sources by bringing up Rich, you assume he was holding "two competing principles in his mind at once," which is nothing more than the product of your own imagination.

3 hours ago, Keven Hofeling said:

.And your expressions of concern for Julian Assange's reputation rings hollow, given your adherence to the political cult which first wanted to assassinate him, and now keeps him imprisoned on trumped up charges that no other journalist would be subjected to.

You smear people readily.  You don't know me or my politics.  You might think about taking medication for your over-active imagination.

3 hours ago, Keven Hofeling said:

 

You just don't get it, do you? If there had been any actual espionage involved in the purloining of the DNC emails, it would have been the FBI conducting the investigation and performing a forensic analysis of the DNC servers.

https://www.cnn.com/2017/01/05/politics/fbi-russia-hacking-dnc-crowdstrike/index.html

<q>

The DNC told Buzzfeed News that they did not receive a request from the FBI to access their computer servers.

“The DNC had several meetings with representatives of the FBI’s Cyber Division and its Washington Field Office, the Department of Justice’s National Security Division, and US Attorney’s Offices, and it responded to a variety of requests for cooperation, but the FBI never requested access to the DNC’s computer servers,” Eric Walker, the DNC’s deputy communications director, told BuzzFeed News.

The FBI instead relied on the assessment from a third-party security company called CrowdStrIke.

</q>

Somebody was performing CYA -- you automatically assume it wasn't the FBI.

3 hours ago, Keven Hofeling said:

 

Instead, the private IT firm, Crowdstrike, which was retained by counsel for the Hillary Clinton Campaign shipped the server to Ukraine and then for mere public consumption claimed its private analysis had confirmed Russian hacking. That's just not how real espionage investigations are conducted.

https://www.crowdstrike.com/blog/danger-close-fancy-bear-tracking-ukrainian-field-artillery-units/

<q>

In June CrowdStrike identified and attributed a series of targeted intrusions at the Democratic National Committee (DNC), and other political organizations that utilized a well known implant commonly called X-Agent. X-Agent is a cross platform remote access toolkit, variants have been identified for various Windows operating systems, Apple’s iOS, and likely the MacOS. Also known as Sofacy, X-Agent has been tracked by the security community for almost a decade, CrowdStrike associates the use of X-Agent with an actor we call FANCY BEAR. This actor to date is the exclusive operator of the malware, and has continuously developed the platform for ongoing operations which CrowdStrike assesses is likely tied to Russian Military Intelligence (GRU). The source code to this malware has not been observed in the public domain and appears to have been developed uniquely by FANCY BEAR.

Late in the summer of 2016, CrowdStrike Intelligence analysts began investigating a curious Android Package (APK) named ‘Попр-Д30.apk’ (MD5: 6f7523d3019fa190499f327211e01fcb) which contained a number of Russian language artifacts that were military in nature. Initial research identified that the filename suggested a relationship to the D-30 122mm towed howitzer, an artillery weapon first manufactured in the Soviet Union in the 1960s but still in use today. In-depth reverse engineering revealed the APK contained an Android variant of X-Agent, the command and control protocol was closely linked to observed Windows variants of X-Agent, and utilized a cryptographic algorithm called RC4 with a very similar 50 byte base key.

</q>

3 hours ago, Keven Hofeling said:

Given your blindness to the implications of the Julian Assange interview, I also do not expect your armchair lay-legal analysis to be capable of detecting such blatant nuances as presented by the repeated explicit denials of Crowdstrike President Shawn Henry in his December 2017 deposition by the House Intelligence Committee (that was declassified in 2020):

"...Asked for the date when alleged Russian hackers stole data from the DNC server, Henry testified that CrowdStrike did not in fact know if such a theft occurred at all: "We did not have concrete evidence that the data was exfiltrated [moved electronically] from the DNC, but we have indicators that it was exfiltrated," Henry said.

I already cited this.  The Russians did not exfiltrate the e-mails.  They hacked the DNC computer to set up the exfiltration by a non-State actor.  Probably Roger Stone's IT guy, who would no doubt live in fear of getting whacked.

3 hours ago, Keven Hofeling said:

Henry reiterated his claim on multiple occasions: 

• "There are times when we can see data exfiltrated, and we can say conclusively. But in this case it appears it was set up to be exfiltrated, but we just don’t have the evidence that says it actually left."

• "There’s not evidence that they were actually exfiltrated. There's circumstantial evidence but no evidence that they were actually exfiltrated."

• "There is circumstantial evidence that that data was exfiltrated off the network. … We didn't have a sensor in place that saw data leave. We said that the data left based on the circumstantial evidence. That was the conclusion that we made."

• "Sir, I was just trying to be factually accurate, that we didn't see the data leave, but we believe it left, based on what we saw."

• Asked directly if he could "unequivocally say" whether "it was or was not exfiltrated out of DNC," Henry told the committee: "I can't say based on that." 

In a later exchange with Republican Rep. Chris Stewart of Utah, Henry offered an explanation of how Russian agents could have obtained the emails without any digital trace of them leaving the server. The CrowdStrike president speculated that Russian agents might have taken "screenshots" in real time. "[If] somebody was monitoring an email server, they could read all the email," Henry said. "And there might not be evidence of it being exfiltrated, but they would have knowledge of what was in the email. … There would be ways to copy it. You could take screenshots." 

You left this part out:

MR. SCHIFF: lt provides in the report on 2016, April 22nd, data staged for exfiltration by the Fancy Bear actor.

MR.HENRY: Yes, sir.

3 hours ago, Keven Hofeling said:

"HIDDEN OVER 2 YEARS: DEM CYBER FIRM'S SWORN TESTIMONY IT HAD NO PROOF OF RUSSIAN HACK OF DNC"
By Aaron Mate, RealClearInvestigations | May 13, 2020 | https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2020/05/13/hidden_over_2_years_dem_cyber-firms_sworn_testimony_it_had_no_proof_of_russian_hack_of_dnc_123596.html

Instead of understanding Henry's explicit denials however, you are instead bedazzled by notions of "fancy bear" extrications, which constitute further indications that you have again just been suckered by the imaginings one would find in a cheap spy novel; in this case specifically, the corrupt Ukrainian military intelligence organization:

If you grasped what Henry actually said -- which you disingenuously left out -- you would know that there were no "Fancy Bear extrications."

3 hours ago, Keven Hofeling said:

What does the have to do with Crowdstrike's analysis of the Ukrainian military computer cited above?

Guilt by amorphous association?

3 hours ago, Keven Hofeling said:

 

 

"...The website also included audio of famed journalist Seymour “Sy” Hersh stating that he had confirmed that Seth Rich was responsible for leaking the DNC emails. According to Mr. Hersh, who was by no means a Republican or a Trump supporter, he could not find a media outlet willing to publish the Seth Rich story. In a separate phone call with Mr. Butowsky, Mr. Hersh said he obtained his information about Seth Rich from Mr. McCabe, the deputy FBI director...." https://caucus99percent.com/comment/430613

Andrew McCabe!  There's a real beauty.  A couple days after James Comey re-opened the bogus Hillary e-mail investigation McCabe leaked to the Wall Street Journal the on-going FBI investigation into the Clinton Foundation.  His excuse was absurd...

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/justice-department/internal-investigation-hits-mccabe-misleading-statements-n865811

<q>

The report says McCabe authorized the discussion of the FBI’s investigation into the Clinton Foundation with a reporter from The Wall Street Journal in an effort to “rebut a narrative” about McCabe’s impartiality in the investigation. The reporter had previously written about McCabe’s wife, who took campaign donations from Hillary Clinton’s close political ally Terry McAuliffe for her run in a state election in Virginia.

The IG found that while McCabe was authorized to release such information to news reporters, he did so to “advance his personal interest” and “violated” the FBI’s and the DOJ’s media policy, and therefore his actions “constituted misconduct.”

The report found that McCabe also contradicted his previous statements. During an interview under oath on Nov. 29, 2017, McCabe finally acknowledged that he had authorized the disclosure to the Journal. He then denied having said that he had not authorized the disclosure. The government watchdog found this contradiction to be in violation of the FBI’s offense code.

</q>

Your star witness is a proven liar not above acting in his own interest.

3 hours ago, Keven Hofeling said:

"And we are supposed to believe the FBI what's on that laptop?"

The FBI is desperately seeking to classify that laptop "top secret" for SIXTY-SIX YEARS!

I have a sneaking feeling that you have never been accused of being the sharpest knife in the drawer, have you Mr. Varnell?

You appear to project a lot.

The FBI had no problem sticking a couple of shivs into Hillary in 2016, so why would they protect the Democratic Party now?

2 hours ago, Keven Hofeling said:

It would appear, Mr. Varnell, that you are unaware of the true significance of the evidence you have proffered in your post in your misplaced effort to prove the alleged Russian hack of the DNC servers:

Cliff Varnell wrote:

You have posted the August 9, 2016 interview of Julian Assange by the Dutch television program Nieuwsuur and claimed that it stands for the proposition that Assange was denying that Seth Rich was Wikileaks's source for the DNC emails. I don't know if you were simply not paying attention to these events as they were happening, but in 2016 it was universally recognized that Assange was deeply distressed by the murder of his source for the DNC emails,

I'm sure he was, but his statement -- "we don't comment on who our sources are" -- discounts the possibility it was Seth Rich.  Your insistence otherwise is nothing but a smear.

2 hours ago, Keven Hofeling said:

and was stretching the boundaries of the Wikileaks policy of not commenting on its sources by going public in this manner.

"Stretching the boundaries"? 

No, that would be a gross violation of journalistic ethics.  That you insist on impugning the integrity of Julian Assange is disgraceful.

2 hours ago, Keven Hofeling said:

Whatmore, Nieuwsuur was fully aware of the significance of this and provided in the caption of the very video you posted for the opposite proposition that "Julian Assange seems to suggest on Dutch television program Nieuwsuur that Seth Rich was the source for the Wikileaks-exposed DNC emails and was murdered. "

Click bait isn't evidence.  When Nieuwsuur pressed him on it Assange said it was a matter of concern but he in no way verified it.

Assange wasn't revealing his source, he was protecting his source.  Classic misdirection.  A brilliant play by Assange.

2 hours ago, Keven Hofeling said:

Thus, as Mr. Varnell appears to be completely unaware of the significance of the sources he is providing, I suggest to the readers of this post that you watch the video itself starting at the beginning in order to gain an appreciation of what the now imprisoned journalist, Julian Assange, was trying to communicate in 2016 about his source, Seth Rich, without explicitly designating him as the source:

But the interviewer (mis)understood him to explicitly designate his source -- even though Assange explicitly said he would not comment on who his sources were.  You're flat out accusing Assange of lying.

2 hours ago, Keven Hofeling said:

 

Cliff Varnell wrote:

And again, you don't appear to understand that the December 2017 interview of Crowdstrike President Shawn Henry before the House Intelligence Committee that was declassified in 2020 demonstrates not that there was evidence of Russian hacking but that all along there had been NO EVIDENCE OF RUSSIAN HACKING. "

Factually incorrect.  In order to "set up" the e-mails for exfiltration the Russian actor Fancy Bear had to hack into the DNC computer.  He left the same cyber fingerprints found on an earlier hack of Ukrainian defense computers.

2 hours ago, Keven Hofeling said:

There are times when we can see data exfiltrated, and we can say conclusively. But in this case, it appears it was set up to be exfiltrated, but we just don't have the evidence that says it actually was..."

Yes, that's because the Russians did not exfiltrate the e-mails.  It was a "non-State actor".

I guess you missed this part, spoken by Schiff and agreed to by Henry:  data staged for exfiltration by the Fancy Bear actor

2 hours ago, Keven Hofeling said:

See in particular the following for a deep dive on the 2020 declassification of the testimony, and the historical context within which it took place:

"HIDDEN OVER 2 YEARS: DEM CYBER FIRM'S SWORN TESTIMONY IT HAD NO PROOF OF RUSSIAN HACK OF DNC"
By Aaron Mate, RealClearInvestigations | May 13, 2020 | https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2020/05/13/hidden_over_2_years_dem_cyber-firms_sworn_testimony_it_had_no_proof_of_russian_hack_of_dnc_123596.html

I guess Mate couldn't grasp this either:  "data staged for exfiltration by the Fancy Bear actor"  "Yes, sir."

2 hours ago, Keven Hofeling said:

Do you really not understand that if there had actually been any reason to believe that the Russians had hacked the DNC servers that the FBI -- and not the Hillary Clinton campaign retained Crowdstrike -- would have conducted an investigation and forensic analysis of the DNC servers?

Do you really not understand that it was the FBI who opened a phony investigation into Clinton's e-mails 11 days before the election which turned the tide decisively in Trump's favor?

2 hours ago, Keven Hofeling said:

"THE FBI NEVER ASKED FOR ACCESS TO HACKED COMPUTER SERVERS"                                                                    By Ali Watkins | BuzzFeed News Reporter | Posted on January 4, 2017 at 4:13 pm |   https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/alimwatkins/the-fbi-never-asked-for-access-to-hacked-computer-servers#.rp19Dg3Z2r

"JAMES COMEY: DNC DENIED FBI DIRECT ACCESS TO SERVERS DURING RUSSIA HACKING PROBE" By Andrea Noble - The Washington Times - Tuesday, January 10, 2017 |   https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/jan/10/james-comey-dnc-denied-fbi-direct-access-servers-d/

"CYBERSECURITY FIRM THAT ATTRIBUTED DNC HACKS TO RUSSIA MAY HAVE FABRICATED RUSSIA HACKING IN UKRAINE" | BY MICHAEL J. SAINATO | MARCH 23, 2017 | https://www.counterpunch.org/2017/03/23/cybersecurity-firm-that-attributed-dnc-hacks-to-russia-may-have-fabricated-russia-hacking-in-ukraine/

 

I don't see any rebuttal to Henry's claim that Fancy Bear hacked the DNC computers to "stage" exfiltration.

Why is that?

2 hours ago, Keven Hofeling said:

 

And do you really not understand what it means that when the FBI seized Seth Rich's laptop on the night of his murder, the DNC email files were found on it as well as evidence that Rich was in contact with Wikileaks?

So Seymour Hersh is quoting an FBI official?  

2 hours ago, Keven Hofeling said:

 

Moreover, are you oblivious to the fact that the FBI has now been busted for being in possession of Seth Rich's laptop -- after previously denying having it -- and is in contempt of a Court order to turn over the files to a plaintiff in civil litigation, which the FBI is trying to avoid BY HAVING THE FILES CLASSIFIED FOR SIXTY-SIX YEARS!

And we are supposed to believe the FBI what's on that laptop?

That's your basis for smearing Assange's ethics?

2 hours ago, Keven Hofeling said:

 

I would think that as a JFK assassination researcher you would have an understanding of government corruption, falsification of evidence and CIA Operation Mockingbird propaganda. Or are you for some reason under the impression that all of that is isolated to the JFK assassination exclusively?

I have an understanding that what's called "the Deep State" is deeply factional.  It was a faction of the FBI who pushed to re-open the Clinton e-mail investigation on the basis of e-mails they knew were duplicates.  Edward Snowden said at the time that it would have taken a half hour to determine the e-mails were duplicates, but the FBI took 8 days.

As a JFKA researcher I would think you'd have more skepticism toward the claims of the FBI.

2 hours ago, Keven Hofeling said:

Or is it that you are so hypnotized by the false two-party system dichotomy that you are blinded by the notion of red MAGA hats, and lose your wits and mind whenever that red flag is waived before you?

Projection.  Your smear of Assange is egregious; your reliance on the FBI reflects gullibility, as does your inability to process "data staged for exfiltration by the Fancy Bear actor."

2 hours ago, Keven Hofeling said:

Well I've got news for you partner: None of the information above that I have cited has anything to do with Donald Trump or the right-wing media echo chamber. We don't play your silly two-party dichotomy game, recognizing that the BOTH wings belong to the SAME corrupt bird.

I know all about the left-Russiagate Deniers.  You don't support Trump you just repeat some of his talking points and ignore his lust for autocracy.

2 hours ago, Keven Hofeling said:

The sad sordid truth is that you've been suckered by all of that divide and conquer nonsense.

Your smear of Assange shows who got suckered.

2 hours ago, Keven Hofeling said:

At the 1:04 mark in this interview Assange states: "We do not comment on who our sources are."

Assange has the highest journalistic ethics -- Seth Rich was NOT his source.  Assange said in another interview that his source was "a non-State actor" -- disputing the claim that he received the DNC e-mails from Russian operatives. 

A non-State actor might fear getting murdered in the streets by other non-State actors for whom they worked.

The House testimony of Shawn Henry of Crowdstrike, the company that investigated the hack of DNC e-mails in 2016, in regard to the Russian hacker Fancy Bear:

<q>

MR. SCHIFF: lt provides in the report on 2016, April 22nd, data staged for exfiltration by the Fancy Bear actor.

MR.HENRY: Yes, sir.  So that, again, staged for sure which, I mean, there’s not -- the analogy I used with Mr. Stewart earlier was we don't have video of it happening, but there are indicators that it happened. There are times when we can see data exfiltrated, and we can say conclusively. But in this case, it appears it was set up to be exfiltrated, but we just don't have the evidence that says it actually was.  </q>

Russians did indeed hack the DNC in order to “set up” the e-mail exfiltration by non-State actors.

38 minutes ago, Ron Bulman said:

Hash oil?  I haven't heard that term in thirty something years.  From personal experience, if Cory should choose to smoke a cigar, that would be a good choice.

Nah, we're just funnin' ya.  I've never smoked a cigar in my life.

22 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said:

SL--

If you move the discussion, then you do.

But I posted specifically and only about Ventura's stance on opening up the JFK Records, which would (I think anyway) totally back-up RFK2's stance. 

I think RFK2 is wise to select such a veep, if he does. 

If other EF-JFKA participants weigh in with their well-known partisan views and accusations...should not their comments be removed, but not the whole post? 

Paul B. makes a germane comment. We can be confident the two major parties will not open up the JFK Records. We can have a  reasonable level of confidence that RFK2 will. 

incredibly, conversations about prospects and possibilities of opening up the JFK Records Act get bumped off of the EF-JFKA, as some partisan sensibilities are affronted? Is that really a good outcome? 

This issue of the opening up the JFK Records should be very prominent in the EF-JFKA. 

Believe me, we will not tilt the national election come November, no matter what is debated herein. 

Ventura didn't get the VP nod.  RFKjr picked Nicole Shanahan, the vivacious ex-wife of Google founder Sergey Brinn.

I'm not claiming as a fact that BDM was a shooter,  I'm pointing to the evidence consistent with that conclusion.

Unlike Pat Speer I don't marry Pet Theories.

41 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:

You're being weird here, Cliff.

That's rich coming from you.

41 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:

The belief among many that shots came from the front has almost nothing to do with the BDM.

So what?  You appear incapable of dealing with the evidence.  You going to ever get beyond Pat Speer says Robert Groden says (maybe) that Faye Chism says (maybe) that she was Black Dog Man (maybe)?

41 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:

Everyone I've ever known who thought shots came from the front, with the possible exception of...you...believed the shooter was either behind the fence or on the South Knoll.

What part of the HSCA photo-analysis or Don Roberdeau's discovery do you not grasp?

41 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:

 

In the eyes of these people, pretty much everyone, BDM is a distraction. Heck, the HSCA, which you seem to believe suspected BDM was a shooter, said nothing of the sort. 

They said the photo wasn't clear enough -- but they didn't discount the possibility, did they?  They describe a very distinct straight line feature which is in no way consistent with a bottle of pop.

41 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:

As far as Groden and Roberdeau...they thought the shots came from the front, from behind the picket fence. I don't recall either of them saying they believed BDM was a shooter. 

So you couldn't be bothered to read his paper on the 2nd Rosemary Willis head snap at Z214.  Typical.

15 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:

It's not "opinions, Cliff. You have cited two of the three researchers who told me about Chism's brother and his girlfriend as support for your fantastical idea the BDM was a shooter, when I feel certain these men don't believe this. They told me this after talking to Faye Chism. I think the three men who told me this were Groden. Brownlow and Roberdeau. But I could be mistaken.

Until you can cite Roberdeau and Groden you're just talking smack.

15 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:

Maybe it was only two of the three.

Maybe you should just stick to the facts.

15 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:

But if Groden did not tell me this, then I feel fairly certain he does not believe BDM was a shooter, because I have stood by him in his booth and talked to tourists with him, and he has always pointed out the picket fence as the likely location for a shooter. If you can get him to claim otherwise, and that BDM was a shooter, well, I'd be surprised. But not shocked. 

Burden of proof is on you.  Did Groden write the HSCA photo-analysis?  Did Don Roberdeau disavow his 2001 discovery?  When you get the answers to those questions get back to us -- otherwise spare us your butt-hurt Pet Theories.

Discovery:


Very Close JFK Assassination Witness ROSEMARY WILLIS;
ZAPRUDER Film Documented .2nd. Head Snap:
West, Ultrafast, 1and Directly Towards
the Grassy Knoll

https://droberdeau.blogspot.com/2011/01/discovery-close-jfk-assassination.html

by Donald Roberdeau, 2001

On November 21, 2001, I publicly provided the following discovery with respect to Rosemary Willis's Zapruder film documented, clearly seen, ultrafast, second head snap.

Whatever it was that caused the ten-years-old girl's first slowing then stopping and measurably slower head turn reaction from Zapruder film frame # 190 to 213, her first reaction is not the most important Zapruder film documented reaction with respect to Dealey Plaza assassination very close witness, Rosemary Willis.

The most important documented reaction, by far, with respect to Rosemary is what caused and attracted her second Zapruder film documented reaction, that was a much, much faster, most likely impulsive reaction, that Rosemary displayed in an extremely rapid westward head snap that we can see with her head snap concluded with her very suddenly facing a line of sight aligned directly towards Mr. Abraham Zapruder and the grassy knoll picket fence corner location.

In 2001 while researching individual Zapruder film frames between Z-190 and 223, a second extremely fast, Rosemary Willis head snap became evident to me that had gone completely un-noticed and government investigations un-reported by dedicated researchers and "official" investigators since the assassination 38 years prior.

Please examine the ellipse circled Rosemary Willis in the key individual Zapruder frame numbers 214 through 223 between-the-sprocket-holes area, provided for you in the following frames, or, viewable even larger in another followup window, linked here....

This is the exact same grassy knoll picket fence corner location where Rosemary stated to U.S. government assassination investigators that she watched a person who had been located behind a "wall," suddenly and quickly disappear from her view right after she heard a gunshot audible muzzle blast, or, mechanically suppressed-fired "silenced" bullet bow shock wave [1]....

This is the exact same grassy knoll picket fence corner location = where several photographic evidences captured a person positioned in that same specific location in one instant, but, who quickly moved away (or escaped) and disappeared from that very same specific grassy knoll location within seconds (rapidly hiding into a closeby car trunk, or, a closeby station wagon's rear pre-hollowed-out and large hatch-covered compartment?) after the last of the assassins volley’s of shots when President Kennedy's head exploded....

This is the exact same grassy knoll picket fence corner location = where many attack witnesses stated that they heard, at least, one shot fired from....

This is the exact same grassy knoll picket fence corner location = from where attack witnesses maintained that they also observed gun smoke lingering close to....

This is the exact same grassy knoll picket fence corner location = from where attack witnesses smelled gun smoke close to....

This is the exact same grassy knoll picket fence corner location = where, even though witnesses were standing much, much closer to the Depository and even though witnesses were at least 61’ below the Warren Commission-apologists, supposed, “lone-nut” “snipers lair” window....many witnesses, many gunfire experienced witnesses, and many law enforcement professionals experienced in gunfire, also first chose to run towards the grassy knoll....

This is the exact same grassy knoll picket fence corner location = where a U. S. Secret Service Agent documented in writing on 11-22-63 that, instead of from the Depository located several hundred feet to his left and front while filming, Mr. Zapruder stated that a shot did originate from behind Mr. Zapruder [2]........

This is the exact same grassy knoll and parking lot locations = where prior to the assassination and immediately afterward, multiple still-unknown “agents” were encountered by several witnesses, even though all documented assignment location records for all U.S. government and Dallas local law enforcement persons thoroughly document that not even one real “agent” nor police officer was ever pre-JFK-elimination stationed inside Dealey Plaza, nor stationed in nor atop any of its surrounding buildings....

This is the exact same grassy knoll picket fence corner location = where the second, and most recent, Kennedy assassination government investigation scientifically determined to more than a 95% probability that a shot was fired from [3]........


Rosemary’s second head snap reaction directly towards the grassy knoll picket fence location at and after Zapruder film frame Z-214 is an important, very primary and very key consideration that carries infinitely more potent and stronger weight than her, measurably, much slower and leisurely first reaction seen earlier from frames Z-190 to 213.

36 minutes ago, Cory Santos said:

See I don’t really smoke.

You don't??  Good to know.  Now I feel free to infuse the rest of them with the finest Hoopa Valley hash oil.

36 minutes ago, Cory Santos said:

I just stock the cabana to impress Cliff.  He smokes.  He called me out!    When he realizes those eggs are not cage free oh snap.  

A prediction:  on April 20, 2024, the DEA will reschedule cannabis from Schedule I to 3 and the Prez race will be in the bag for Biden.

1 hour ago, Pat Speer said:

BDM would have been in clear view of Zaptuder and Sitzman, and for the three men on the steps should they have looked in that direction after hearing a sound. Are you really pushing that they had a sniper out in public, who would have to run across 30 feet or more to get out of sight?

He could have ducked down a few feet and been out of sight.  Rosemary Willis looked in that direction after hearing a sound and stated this "conspicuous"" person "disappeared in an instant".

1 hour ago, Pat Speer said:

And, if so, why would they have done that? The best angles for a sniper were from behind. Being that close while the limo was passing would make the tracking of their target much much harder, not easier. 

And you base this claim on your many years as a sniper?  Since the wound in his throat was not consistent with a conventional firearm, an unconventional weapon may have required the shooter to fire close in with the target moving toward them.

1 hour ago, Pat Speer said:

P.S. the HSCA panel looked into BDM at the urging of one of its members, Robert Groden, right?

Who cares?  They detected a "very distinct straight-line feature" in "the region of the hands."  Rosemary Wilis noted his rapid disappearance.  These points of information are inconsistent with your thinking on the matter.

1 hour ago, Pat Speer said:

 

As I recall, Groden is among those who told me this issue had been resolved, as it was Faye Chism's brother's girlfriend, or wife, I don't remember. In any event, feel free to track down Groden and see if  he still believes "BDM" was part of the assassination team. I suspect he does not. But it's Groden. So who knows? 

I care less and less about the opinions of "JFK researchers" as time goes by...

From HSCA report:

https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol12/html/HSCA_Vol12_0006a.htm

II. PRESENCE OF POSSIBLE GUNMAN ON THE GRASSY KNOLL

(24) The committee also examined information about the presence of a man near the concrete structure on the grassy knoll near the area where some witnesses said they believed gunfire had originated.

(25) The photographic evidence panel examined photographs make by Phillip Willis of the area of the grassy knoll and concluded that a photograph taken by Willis did show a person standing behind the concrete wall on the knoll.(72) The panel determined that photograph was taken at approximately frame 202 of the Zapruder film, which was after President Kennedy received the neck wound but before the fatal head shot.(73) According to the results of the panel's photographic enhancement and analysis, the figure in the Willis photograph was consistent with that of an adult approximately 5 feet 6 inches to 6 feet in height (74) and wearing dark clothing.(75) The panel also noted that in another photograph by Willis, which was taken after the Presidential limousine had left Dealey Plaza, the figure standing behind the concrete wall had disappeared.(76) The panel concluded that movement by the object was consistent with the
presence of a human being.(77)

(26) The photographic evidence panel also noted that in the first Willis Photograph, which shows the person standing behind the concrete wall, there is visible, near the region of the hands of the person at the wall, "a very distinct straight-line feature," which extends from lower right to upper right.(78) Nevertheless, because of the blur of the object in the photograph, the panel was not able to determine the actual length of the object and could not conclude whether it was or was not a weapon.(79)

(27) The committee interviewed Willis' daughter, Rose Mary Willis, on November 8, 1978, at her home in Dallas. Ms. Willis stated that she was present with her father and a sister in the area of the grass section of the plaza at the time of the Presidential motorcade on November 22,1963.(80)  Ms. Willis explained that as the President's car approached, she ran alongside almost to the triple underpass. (81) 

(28)  Ms. Willis stated that during that time, she noticed two persons who looked "conspicuous."(82)  One was a man near the curb holding an umbrella, who appeared to be more concerned with opening or closing the umbrella than dropping to the ground liked everyone else at the time of the shots.(83)  The other was a person who was standing just behind the concrete wall near the triple underpass.(84) That person appeared to "disappear the next instant."(85) Ms. Willis further described the location of this person as the corner section of the white concrete wall between the area of photographer Abraham Zapruder's right side and the top of the concrete stairway leading up to the center of the grassy knoll.(86)

 

50 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:

Black Dog Man was not behind the fence.

I didn't say he was.  I correctly placed him behind the concrete wall in front of the picket fence.

50 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:

That's Badge Man. Black Dog Man can be seen in one of the Willis photos, and also in the Moorman photo,

BDM is seen only in Betzner 3 and Willis 5.

50 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:

and is simply a black figure by the short white concrete wall where a soda pop bottle was found

Behind the wall.  The soda was found in front of the wall, yes?

50 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:

 

.in clear view of Zapruder's and Sitzman's location. The presumption I believe is that the bottle on the wall was the boyfriend's soda pop bottle, and that the girlfriend dropped her bottle. I think Sitzman thought it was done deliberately, moreover. 

She dropped the bottle while she was sitting and then disappeared in an instant?

50 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:

While I haven't collected quotes about black dog man, a quick google search shows you that the black dog man figure was right out in the open halfway between Zapruder and Sitzman and the men on the steps.

Factually incorrect.  BDM was behind the concrete wall.

50 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:

There was simply no way for that person to fire a rifle at Kennedy and not be noticed.  

Not all weapons are rifles.  All eyes were on the motorcade.  

3 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

I believe I heard the story about Chism's brother and his girlfriend from two if not three different researchers. I don't know if I believe it, but they seemed to believe it.

I'll take genuine photographic evidence and witness testimony over Pet Theories any day.

3 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

As far as "black dog man", the figure is so indistinct I don't think we can tell if it's a man or a woman.  

Fair enough.

3 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

As I sit here right now, I think the image is consistent with a dark-skinned African-American woman dressed all in black's eating her lunch.

She was eating her lunch on top of the concrete wall?

3 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

If I'm not mistaken Marilyn Sitzman supported this possibility by claiming a black woman broke a bottle on the sidewalk just after the shots.

On the sidewalk?

3 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

And, come to think of it, I think there's footage of this spilled soft drink somewhere--is it in Darnell's footage? I don't recall. But as I recall there's footage of a soda spill right by where this woman was supposedly sitting. 

Again with the sitting?

This doesn't square with the three points of information:  a distinct straight-line feature in the region of the hands, a conspicuous person, disappeared in an instant.

Far more consistent with a shooter.

31 minutes ago, Cory Santos said:

Why not ask the question?   What if all presidents since knew something everyone else did not and really had the best interest of the people in not telling?   Has anyone on here always told the truth?   Always disclosed everything?   No?   I know Cliff adds water to my booze before he leaves the cabana to make it look like he didn’t drink that much during his writing.  It’s a game.  I don’t really care as he is doing great with his creation.  I just go to Costco and buy more.  But the point is you don’t know.  Maybe you are better off not knowing.  

You might want to stay away from the cigars on the left side of the humidor.  They're fake Cubans in more ways than one.

6 minutes ago, Ron Bulman said:

Cliff, booze and the cabana?  Are you serious about the JFKA? 

I don't take Trump seriously about anything but his lust for autocracy

6 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

One of my earliest "discoveries" if you will was that Tink Thompson had misrepresented the statements of F. Lee Mudd in Six Seconds in Dallas, and that Mudd is most probably the man on the steps by Hudson. As far as the man behind them who immediately takes off and runs back into the train yards, I have heard from several researchers that he was Faye Chism's brother, and that he and his girlfriend at the time--who was sitting behind the short wall, and who people called "black dog man"--had no interest in coming forward, and wanted to be left alone. 

Perhaps someone else on this forum has more information... If so, please share...

 

Black Dog Man was a woman sitting behind the concrete wall?

The HSCA identified “a very distinct straight line feature...in the region of his hands”.  Rosemary Willis identified BDM as a “conspicuous person” who happened to “disappear the next instant.”  Doesn't sound like a woman sitting behind the wall...

Sheep in wolves' clothing don't run in packs -- they move in flocks.

Neutron Activation Analysis of CE399?

Get flocked.

38 minutes ago, Douglas Caddy said:

Thank you, Pat, for your detailed clarification of this subject. Paul and Cliff think my posting is irrelevant because it is old history, and the world has moved on. They apparently fail to recognize that the topic may be a new one to members of the Forum who have joined in recent times and to non-members who frequently come to the Forum for information. Your two discourses above are truly an education on the subject. Ever since I joined the Forum 18 years ago, I have been in awe of the extent of your credible knowledge of the assassination of JFK. You are a treasured asset to all.

No Douglas, I never thought the subject was relevant and I'm appalled that new members of the Forum will be lead down yet another meaningless rabbit hole.

Any discussion of anything in regard to the SBT is an abject waste of time, a distraction from the fact that 6.5mm FMJ don't leave shallow wounds in soft tissue.

The mystery to me is why this subject is of any interest whatsoever.

More false mystery rabbit-holery.

2 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

The fact that Harriman and Bundy were against the idea of the assassination being a communist plot proves that they were NOT the instigators of the CIA's plot.

Or it proves that the arrest of Oswald made their plan to blame Castro untenable.

Robert, you continue to reinforce the observation that Harriman/Bundy had more power than LBJ over the official US Government position on Lone Nut Oswald.

The same dynamic prevailed years later in regard to Vietnam.

1 hour ago, Robert Morrow said:

 

Lyndon Johnson, behind the scenes, told many people over the years that Fidel Castro murdered JFK before the Kennedys could murder him.

Since the Lone Nut Scenario fell apart for a majority of people by ‘66 it’s no surprise LBJ needed someone else to blame privately.

In the few days after the JFKA the only people he confided with this claim were Sorensen and Warren.

1 hour ago, Robert Morrow said:

Cliff Varnell: here is Lyndon Johnson AT PARKLAND HOSPITAL, as he sucked on his inhaler, REPEATEDLY SAYING "The International Communists did it" and LBJ is doing this in ultra right wing Dallas while so many, many people are immediately assuming that a Right Wing Dallas Nut has just killed JFK.

This is called DEFLECTION (from his own participation in the murder of JFK). Alfred Steinberg, was an accomplished and seasoned political reporter who knew Lyndon Johnson well.

A few hours later on Air Force One, Jackie Kennedy would tell her press secretary "Lyndon Johnson did it" as she was a firsthand witness to LBJ's totally fake histrionics.

Lyndon Johnson to Malcolm Kilduff, after Kiduff asked if he could make a statement that the president was dead:

"No, wait. We don't know if it's a communist conspiracy or not. I'd better get out of here and back to the plane. Are they prepared to get me out of here?" [Sam Johnson's Boy, Steinberg, p. 606, published in 1968]

Robert, I’ve cited this quote many times myself.  Johnson cooled his heels at Parkland waiting to hear if the patsy had been whacked.  Plan A was to blame the deed on Castro with Soviet complicity.  But when the patsy was captured alive that narrative became problematic.  So LBJ boarded AF1 and waited to hear how to move forward.  Bundy called from the Situation Room saying the lone assassin was in custody, and the minute LBJ got to the White House Harriman shows up with a tall tale about the unanimous view of the top Kremlinologists that the Soviets were not involved.  Cliff Carter then called Texas to insist Oswald was a Lone Nut.

LBJ followed orders then, just like he did years later with Vietnam.

3 hours ago, Robert Morrow said:

On the night of 11/22/1963 Lyndon Johnson tried hard to convince Ted Sorensen, a close aide to JFK, that the JFK assassination was a foreign conspiracy and he (LBJ) was worried about his own safety and security

 QUOTE

           On that Saturday evening, in Johnson’s vice presidential office in the Old Executive Office Building across the street from the White House, with his aide Bill Moyers sitting in, LBJ and I talked, as he had requested during his phone call the night before. We had scheduled the meeting earlier, but I bumped into LBJ that afternoon in the West Wing basement and he was running late.

Wait a minute — what’s this about LBJ trying hard to convince Sorensen of foreign involvement on Saturday night?  That’s not 11/22/63, that’s 11/23/63.  The people above LBJ in the scheme of things had already laid down the law on 11/22/63.

3 hours ago, Robert Morrow said:

          Almost immediately, LBJ asked, “What would you think of the possibility that a foreign government was involved in this?” “Do you have any evidence?” I asked. He handed me a government memorandum, not identifying any specific source, saying in effect that a foreign government had hoped to assassinate President Kennedy. “Meaningless,” I said. He persisted. Concerned that there was an international conspiracy, he raised the issue of his own safety and security.

 UNQUOTE

Meaningless.

3 hours ago, Robert Morrow said:

 [Ted Sorensen, Counselor: A Life at the Edge of History, p.380]

Alexander Haig on 11-22-1963 below: Lyndon Johnson believe that Fidel Casto killed JFK and LBJ believed that for the rest of his life

 QUOTE

 Soon President Johnson arrived with a small retinue, and he, McNamara, Vance, and a few others met in McNamara’s office.

Soon when?  LBJ’s first meeting when he got to the White House was with Harriman and Fulbright.

Jack Valenti – in “A Very Human President” (1973, p3)

<quote on>

Shortly before 7:00 P.M., I escorted Senator J. William Fulbright, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and Ambassador Averell Harriman into the office. I fidgeted outside, in the middle of what would have appeared to be an objective onlooker to be a mélange of confusion. No one of the Johnson aides, Marie Fehmer, his secretary; the late Cliff Carter, his chief political agent; Bill Moyers, nor any of the rest, was quite certain of what lay ahead. We were all busy on the phone and trying to assemble what measure of office discipline we could construct.

<quote off>

Soon after that Cliff Carter called Texas to pass on the order to charge Oswald as a lone gunman.

3 hours ago, Robert Morrow said:

 

Busy with my own concerns, I paid little attention to this. Later on, however, I learned that Johnson expressed deep concern over the circumstances of President Kennedy’s death and the effect it might have on the future of the Democratic party.

So later on Haig discovered LBJ’s “deep concern” — so what?  The elites made the decision on 11/22/63 to go with the Lone Nut scenario.  In ‘67 the same people told Johnson to carry on with the Vietnam War and in March ‘68 they told him to try to get out.

3 hours ago, Robert Morrow said:

          The fact of the matter is that Lyndon Johnson believed then, and believed until the day he died, that Fidel Castro was behind the assassination of John F. Kennedy, and that the murder of the President resulted from Robert Kennedy’s “obsessive desire to eliminate the Cuban leader.” As Johnson put it to Califano, among others, “Kennedy tried to get Castro, but Castro got Kennedy first.” If the Kennedy administration’s plots against Castro’s life became public knowledge, the logical conclusion of any investigation would be that President Kennedy’s assassination had been carried out by persons who had an interest in preserving Fidel Castro’s life. The implication hat the KGB was involved was inescapable; it exercised proprietary control over the Cuban intelligence service and must have regarded Castro as a unique Soviet asset to be protected by the most extreme measures. (Lee Harvey Oswald, the suspected assassin, had defected to the Soviet Union in 1959 and lived there until 1962, having married the niece of an official of the KGB before returning to the United States.) Should the background to the crime be exposed, it could be devastating to Democratic prospects for retaining control of the White House in the 1964 presidential election. Johnson believed that any finding that an assassin activated by a Communist government had killed the President of the United States would set off a reaction among the American people, in their fervent patriotism and what he described as their “natural conservatism” that would sweep the Democrats from office and probably deny them power for many years to come. I did not fully understand this argument, but of course I am not a politician.

 UNQUOTE

 [Alexander Haig, Inner Circles, pp. 114-115]

 

Johnson was good at BSing people, but push come to shove he did as he was told.