Christopher Hall

I found the video so interesting that I bought Morley's book.

Thanks, Wim. These are interesting clips. Why does VB think anyone still cares what he thinks? He won an easy, high profile case 35 years ago. He's a has been who obviously still needs $.

I enjoyed the book. But, why would he have been hung out to dry on the counterfeiting charges? I suspect that there was a Company reason for it. The whole counterfeiting operation seems like a perfect cut-out, and also something I could see the CIA or some anti-Castro group doing to destabalize the economy (ala Bernanke).

Thanks, Wim. This looks like a good resource. Chris

I agree. The transcript has a "staged" or "scripted" appearance. As to Wade never losing a case, I suspect that Wade assigned the tougher cases (where a defense verdict was likely or reasonably possible) to assistant DAs. I similarly suspect that he kept easier, high profile cases, along with countless plea bargains. These are just suppositions on my part, but I once worked with a litigator who made the same boast, and he had the reputation of assigning the tough cases to associates.

Pamela- What is NARA? Chris

See below for an upcoming auction, which includes Jack Ruby's Colt Cobra, Captain Will Fritz's Colt, JEH's Colt 32 and JEH's FBI Badge No. 1. http://www.guernseys.com/Auctions/Pugliese...hibitedlots.pdf I would have posted some pics, but I don't know how to do so. The auctioneer expects to clear $2,000,000 to $3,000,000 for Ruby's revolver. I wonder what has become of Oswald's Smith & Wesson and the Carcano. Keep scrolling to Elvis' revolver (note the hideous grips), which he, no doubt, had for assaulting his televisions. I have a birthday coming up, but I don't see anything in my price league. I have a Colt Agent 38 special, which is quite similar to Ruby's Cobra, except that Ruby's gun has the handy hammer shroud for easy, snagless removal from pockets.

I agree, Len. Perhaps she is attempting to be named to the panel of Scholars on 911, or whatever its name is. Since she is French, I would be more interested in hearing her views on the civil rights of the residents of the Paris banlieus. We seem to reflexively drift into discussions of the US during the Jim Crow period, as if it were yesterday, and ignore the current plight of Muslims and Africans in France.

Editorial from today's Washington Post: Mr. Buckley himself never posed as a heavyweight, though he loved to use words of many syllables and wrote incessantly -- books, columns, articles -- right up to his death yesterday at 82. His defining characteristic was that he was a man of good cheer who rarely got nasty in print or in person and who cultivated friends across the political spectrum, listened to them, and delighted in engaging one and all in civilized discourse, of which he was something of a master -- one who will be missed. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...id=opinionsbox1 I am still waiting for someone to supply even a shred of credible EVIDENCE that the late William Buckley had anything whatsoever to do with the assassination of JFK Or, for that matter, that he committed a crime.

The book is absurd, although entertaining. McClellan states that, as a former attorney in the Houston law firm which represented LBJ, he knows that the JFK assassination was orchestrated by the senior attorney in such firm (Ed Clark) with the assistance of Malcom "Mac "Wallace, who apparently had a role in some other Texas murders involving Bobby Baker. The reason for the assassination was the allegation that JFK was going to try to lower or eliminate the 27.5% oil depletion allowance. As someone who has spent the last 25 years practicing law, I simply do not buy the fact that some evil "senior partner" lawyer pulled off the assassination. While it may be possible that Clark had some peripheral involvement through his associations with the reigning big oil clique in Houston, I don't think that an old curmudgeon lawyer and a third rate thug orchestrated the JFK assassination. Chris: Have you actually read this book? Yes, I read and enjoyed it, but I just can't buy the thesis that a lawyer had JFK assassinated. I also saw Barr on "The Men Who Killed Kennedy", and he was quite credible on the air. I just can't accept his statement that Ed Clark and Mac Wallace played such a large role in the assassination. Or anything that deals with LBJ and his (alleged) murderous dealings with peple? Yes, the book chronicles these matters very well. If you think the oil depletion allowance was the reason for the hit, it would appear that you are unfamiliar with all the things Bobby Kennedy (etc) was up to just prior to Dallas. I certainly don't believe this, but the book strongly implies that it was the primary reason that Ed Clark facilitated the assassination. In short LBJ was one step from indictment at the same moment he was a heartbeat away. I agree, which is why I include LBJ in the sphere of people who had, or likely had, some involvement in the assassination. John: Yes Barr is working on a sequel that is near completion. (We had an email exchange yesterday). He has also gotten into the Jack Worthington matter (alleged son of JFK) and plans to challenge Bugliosi, which I think would be a grave mistake on Barr's part as he is just not up on the evidence in this case. The bug needs to be confronted by someone who can rip him a new one on every issue/lie. Dawn

The book is absurd, although entertaining. McClellan states that, as a former attorney in the Houston law firm which represented LBJ, he knows that the JFK assassination was orchestrated by the senior attorney in such firm (Ed Clark) with the assistance of Malcom "Mac "Wallace, who apparently had a role in some other Texas murders involving Bobby Baker. The reason for the assassination was the allegation that JFK was going to try to lower or eliminate the 27.5% oil depletion allowance. As someone who has spent the last 25 years practicing law, I simply do not buy the fact that some evil "senior partner" lawyer pulled off the assassination. While it may be possible that Clark had some peripheral involvement through his associations with the reigning big oil clique in Houston, I don't think that an old curmudgeon lawyer and a third rate thug orchestrated the JFK assassination.

Here's a review of The Commission by Evan Thomas of the New York Times. Shenon's book is currently #19 on their hardcover nonfiction bestseller list. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/04/books/04thom.html Thanks, again, Michael. I will take a look at it. I also agree with Ron that the confession tape is a fake.

I saw this piece this morning, but I totally missed the significance that it occured in Dallas. What were the SS thinking?

John- I wouldn't get too exdited about reading tea leaves and polls 9 months in advance of the election. 4 months ago, Rudy Giuliani and HRC were the presumptive nominees. There will be much more scandals, media buzz, meltdowns and gnashing of teeth before the election in November. That is of course true but Democratic voters have to make their decision now, not in November. That is why I expect them to go with Obama rather than Clinton. Obama is aware that only he can really represent change. McCain is very much part of the old party machine. Anything that comes out about his involvement with dubious financial backers will hurt him. I agree completely. McCain seems to personify, along with HRC, the entrenched political machinery that most Americans find disturbing. I disagree with many of Obama's positions, but he appears to be completely uncorrupted by the system. I think that his lack of experience in D. C., that HRC likes to point out, is a selling point. He will soon have a lot of lobbyists with money chasing him around. I hope that he maintains his integrity. The media also seem to be remiss in failing to report on his intelligence. He was editor or editor-in-chief of the Harvard Law Review. And, upon graduation, he took a pass on the big bucks and joined a Chicago civil rights law firm. Couple those qualities with his oratory skills and genuine likeability, and you have quite a candidate.

John- I wouldn't get too exdited about reading tea leaves and polls 9 months in advance of the election. 4 months ago, Rudy Giuliani and HRC were the presumptive nominees. There will be much more scandals, media buzz, meltdowns and gnashing of teeth before the election in November. The Democrats have a bona fide exciting candidate, for the first time in many years, and the Republicans will have someone who will probably follow the same script as Bob Dole in 1996 and President Ford in 1976.

This is "Lucky Lyndon" deja vu. Check out the following Bloomberg article from today: http://www.nypost.com/seven/02192008/news/...raud__98367.htm Obama got ZERO (0) votes in 78 out of 6,000 + polling places. Where is RFK, Jr., our country's voter fraud impressario , when his beloved HRC is the beneficiary of such blatant fraud? Kudos to Ted (it's certainly rare to hear me compliment him), Patrick and Caroline for displaying a consience and endorsing Obama. If RFK, Jr. changes his endorsement, President Obama may give him a plum political appointment, like ambassador to Gabon.

Yes, but the Clintons aren't. If you get my drift. As for McCain, he's the most brilliant choice for the Republican nomination since Bob Dole. Well put. I think that you are on the money on both counts.

In his just released book, The Commission, author Philip Shenon devotes an entire chapter to Mike Scheuer. A few excerpts: Among some of the (911) commission staffers, Scheuer had a nickname: 'the Prophet.' More than anybody else in the CIA, and much earlier, Michael Scheuer had understood the danger that Osama bin Laden posed to the United States. For four of his twenty-two years at the CIA, until he was ousted from the bin Laden unit and banished to a small cubicle in the agency's library in 1999, he had done little but think of ways to capture or, preferably, kill bin Laden. and regarding his testimony before the 911 Commission: Mike Scheuer wanted to be under oath. So many people were lying, spinning--even former colleagues at the CIA, the institution he loved no matter how often and enthusiastically it had tried to humiliate him. He did not want there to be any questions about his truthfulness. So bring out a bible and swear me in, send me to jail if I'm lying, he challenged them. and: Scheuer was outraged that so many good opportunities to capture or kill bin Laden had been missed, and his frustration boiled over later in 1999. He committed what amounted to professional suicide: He went outside his usual chain of command and sent an e-mail directly to (CIA Director) Tenet and most of Tenet's deputies on the seventh floor at CIA headquarters that listed the ten things that needed to change at the CIA if it was ever to succeed in ending the threat from al-Qaeda. A few days later, Scheuer was demoted to a "junior librarian." Shenon's book, The Commission is a fascinating and essential read on the inner workings of the 911 Commission. In November, 2004 Vanity Fair published an article entitled: The Path to 9/11 Lost Warnings and Fatal Errors; By the time the hijackers made their way into the U.S., memos, photographs, and intercepts had sounded alarms inside the C.I.A., White House, F.B.I., and European intelligence services. The authors were Ned Zeman, David Wise, David Rose and Bryan Burrough. The article contains a lot of information on Michael Scheuer Part of that article is reproduced here: http://www.accessmylibrary.com/coms2/summa...286-7181486_ITM Thanks for the correction, Michael. Who is Philip Shenon? His book sounds interesting, and I will take a look at it on Amazon. I guess that this explains why Sandy Berger risked his career and his freedom to steal and destroy documents from the National Archives relaing to the threat of OBL during the 2d Clinton Administration. I still think that OBL is dead.

While in Jarnagin's statement, he calls Robin Hood a "client", in her FBI interview, she says that they were dating. See her FBI interview here: http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/...p;relPageId=599 Steve Thomas Thanks. I wonder whether Jarnigan ever represented Ruby on anything.

The state of OBL's mind right now is room temperature. And who, except for someone wanting to make some money on a book deal, would admit to being the chief of the CIA's bin Laden unit from 1996 to 1999?

You can also read Jarnagin's letter to Hoover and an 8 page statement from him in CD 86 beginning on page 559 here: http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/...bsPageId=335594 Steve Thomas ************************* Thanks Steve: Here is just the first page..... B........ Do we know whether the FBI, in fact, received Jarnigan's letter/statement within 2 weeks of the assassination? I would be dubious of the recollection of a lawyer who felt the need to visit his stripper/client at her place of employment. On what matters did he represent her? If he purported to be her lawyer and she didn't have any charges or lawsuits against her at that time, why did she have a lawyer? I would speculate that stripping was not a particularly remunerative line of work in Dallas in 1963, so, if I am correct and if she had no pending legal matters, why would she go to the expense of hiring an attorney?

John- You asked a simple set of questions which deserve a concise reply. "If so, who will the conservatives vote for?" - Most conservatives will likely vote for McCain. Many of us, however, will vote for a third party candidate. I think that the McCain campaign doesn't realize the extent to which it has lost the conservative base of the Republican Party. It will find out soon enough, though. "What about the Christian Right who do not seem to trust McCain." I am a Catholic, and thus not a part of the Christian right. I don't listen to Rush, Sean Hannity, or any other right wing/neocon radio. I also don't know much about the polyester Bible-banging, gay-hating preachers who make the television "newsshows", but I think that they and their minions will largely vote for McCain, because they like winning. I would rather lose and be intellectually honest with my vote than vote for a candidate who really doesn't speak for me on many issues, but who has a "R" after his or her name. "Will there be a third party candidate?" - I sure hope so, preferrably Ron Paul, despite his statements to the contrary. If he doesn't, I will probably vote for the one who appeals to me the most. "Are the American people ready for a black president?" - Absolutely, and Obama should affirmatively answer this question for you in 9 months. Chris

That's good to hear. I wish the guy well.

A few years ago, Patrick Kennedy, in an interview published in the Providence Journal, opined that Fidel Castro was responsible for the death of JFK. Thanks. I would be interested in hearing the view of some of the rest of the clan (or at least the ones who would publicly comment) as to the assassination. If a family member of mine was struck down so publicly and audaciously, I would want to learn as much about it as possible, which is probably the case with many Kennedy family members. The same applies to the RFK assassination, of course.

Another bad idea from Specter. May I suggest the disbanded Oil for Food Committee? And Charles, I don't understand all of the associations that you made re (presumably) Patrick Kennedy's being "THE only Kennedy to have identified publicly a candidate for sponsor of the JFK murder." What does that mean? For a view into his character, check him out on youtube where he states (quite honestly, I have no doubt) that he hasn't "worked a f***ing day" in his life. I think that it was he to whom JFK,Jr. referred when he lamented that some of his cousins acted like "poster boys for bad behaviour" or words to that effect. Back to the point, though, I want to know who killed Bhutto and I suspect a conspiracy of some sort (probably by Musharef (sp?)), but the UN would be one of the last sources I would trust to perform a reliable investigation. I simply don't see us ever finding out what happened with respect to her murder. Am I the only one who is kind of reminded of Obama and the crowds he draws when I think of her most recent campaign?