David Von Pein

Question for Jim DiEugenio..... What was the exact date of your interview with David Giglio? Thanks in advance.

I've been doing it for 10 years on Blogger. So obviously they have no such "hotlinking" restriction.

Apparently you can't post a picture through G-Drive and embed the actual image into a forum post (unfortunately). And that's one of the reasons I have none of my photos stored at G-Drive. The best place for storing photos, IMO, is Blogger.com, which allows you virtually unlimited storage space for free (unless you've got super-enormous pics). Blogger, like Google Drive, is excellent (in my opinion). All you need to do, Sandy, is create a blog at Blogger for the sole purpose of uploading photos and just keep it set on "Private". I've got one of my Blogger blogs set up that way (that only I can see), which I use only for uploading pictures (and some short videos). I then grab the URL of the photo and put it into whatever blog post (on another blog) I want to use it on. The photos are all stored permanently in a series of "albums" within a separate storage area created automatically by Blogger. Here's one of my storage albums: https://get.google.com/albumarchive/116346794942510830112/album/AF1QipME6... I agree. I don't like Photobucket either. It's terribly slow and cumbersome now, which is why I've switched all my pictures to Blogger, which has the extra nice feature built-in to every image URL---the "S" feature (which I assume stands for "Size"). Instead of messing with re-sizing codes and tags, you can merely change the number after the "S" in the URL to change the size of the image you want to post, so that it will fit into whatever page you want to embed it on, without overlapping the page. (Example below.) http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-NNL7lh6-0o8/UE4Mp1wGfuI/AAAAAAAAIog/GrenGBwZYyc/s400/Jackie-Kennedy-And-Clint-Hill-In-Fort-Worth-Texas-On-11-22-63.jpg http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-NNL7lh6-0o8/UE4Mp1wGfuI/AAAAAAAAIog/GrenGBwZYyc/s340/Jackie-Kennedy-And-Clint-Hill-In-Fort-Worth-Texas-On-11-22-63.jpg ------

Exactly, Sandy. If you're logged in to anything "Google", you are automatically also logged in to Google Drive. Up until early last year, like you, I had never used the Google Drive service before at all. I never even knew it existed (even though it was created in 2012). But I'm glad I discovered it (better late than never). And, Sandy, whether you know it or not, you've got 15 gigabytes of free "Google Drive" storage space awaiting you at G-Drive anytime you want to use it. And that's a heck of a lot of space if you're storing only documents or photos. Videos, OTOH, are a different story.

G-Drive Follow-Up.... Well I'll be French-dipped! Ramon F. Herrera is absolutely correct about the single/double-clicking on Google Drive links (when viewing stuff out of a "Google Drive Folder", that is). I just logged out of all my Google accounts and accessed one of my folders, and, sure enough, just a single click is needed to get the file (or video) to pop up. But for most people in this Google-ubiquitous world we live in, I would guess that the double-clicking would still be required most of the time, since there are probably very few people here (or anywhere on the Web) that operate their computers without being logged in to a "Google" account. (I'm certainly one person who is never "logged off" completely from Google at any time.) Is there actually a person out there in cyberland who DOESN'T have at least one Google account? (I've got about 50.) Anyway, thanks for the info, Ramon. I'll keep it in mind if I'm ever logged off from Google ever again (as unlikely as that occurrence might be).

Oh, really? I was unaware of that difference, Ramon. That's interesting (and kind of curious too). I'll now log off and try it out.

Ramon is wrong when he says that "Google Drive" items only require one single click. (Is that what you really meant to imply, Ramon? ~shrug~) Anyway, all G-Drive links require double-clicks when you're clicking on something that's inside a Google Drive "folder" (or, in the case of Ramon's "Playground" link, it takes EIGHT clicks of the mouse to get to any actual content, since he's got his links situated in such a way where you've got a folder inside of another folder which is inside yet another folder). I'm not complaining, however. I love everything about Google Drive. I'm not sure I could live without it now, after discovering its wealth of storage and sharing possibilities in early 2016 AD. BTW, Michael Walton, as an "FYI" for you, I've added many more games and highlights and other assorted miscellany to my baseball archive (top two links below) since I last talked to you a few months ago. Now, if only I could find a baseball website equivalent to the JFK Library site, in which every Cincinnati Reds baseball game ever broadcast on radio is archived on downloadable MP3 audio (just like all of JFK's speeches and phone calls are now archived on public domain MP3s at the JFK Library site). If that ever happens, I won't leave the house for 9 years. https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0B-rcjDGNFEH_OE05Nk9RVVkxVUU https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0B294SBAT_oH6Z0JIT0V2N1M5YmM https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0B2ERm-cucsE0R0N6Snl4dFVnbmM http://dvp-video-audio-archive.blogspot.com/2016/12/dvp-audio-video-master-index.html

I'd love to do that....but that particular video comes from the JFK Library website, and that site doesn't allow downloading of any of its videos via any means. (But they'll allow downloading of all its audio files at any time; they even provide a "Download MP3" link for all MP3s. Go figure.) I've tried to download Library videos via RealPlayer, but that won't work either. So I'm forced to settle for the JFK Library embed on my site. If you know of any way to download such a video, let me know, because I would very much like to add that 1958 JFK video to my own archive of saved videos. It's a public domain video (per the JFK Library), so there's no problem with any copyright issue.

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2017/06/the-senator-john-f-kennedy-story-1958.html

Only this crappy version that I've had for years.... https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B66zFAvTgxxIcnlBWWtpaWgtVlE/view

FYI / FWIW.... In 1964, David Wolper's film crew filmed inside Ruth Paine's house while making the film "Four Days In November", including a scene filmed in the garage (which I've extracted from the film in my 2014 blog post below). It's a rather chilling reconstruction too, in that the filmmakers created this realistic replica of the blanket that assassin Lee Harvey Oswald's rifle was wrapped in as it was being stored in Mrs. Paine's garage for a couple of months prior to the assassination. The two pictures below depict Ruth Paine's garage. The photo on the left comes from the "Four Days" re-creation showing the simulated "Oswald rifle/blanket" on the floor; while the image on the right was taken by the FBI as part of a booklet entitled "Paine And Randle Homes", which can be found in Warren Commission Document No. 497. Click the pictures for a larger view: Re-created Movie Scenes: http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2014/11/four-days-in-november-re-created-scenes.html Also see: http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2013/04/dvp-vs-dieugenio-part-87.html#File-Cabinets

CD 497 -- FBI Booklet -- "Paine & Randle Homes".... http://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=10897#relPageId=10

Birthday videos, photos, and other miscellany: http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2017/05/happy-birthday-mister-president.html

Two more Category links.... JFK Assassination Debates JFK Assassination Films

Only if you're a CTer who wants to deny the obvious viability of the SBT. Gregory's statement/testimony makes 100% perfect sense. And if you think Charles Gregory was needed to "validate" the SBT, you're sadly ill informed. But, I guess this means we can now add Charles F. Gregory to the CTers' longgggg list of "liars" associated with JFK's death. The liars never stop coming, do they George? I found the truth many years ago. Oswald, alone, killed JFK and Tippit. I don't need to scour the Earth continuing to look for what is oh so obvious. CTers OTOH.... I agree. Bye, George.

Dr. Gregory's testimony makes perfect "SBT" sense. He tells us that NO BULLET was found inside John Connally. He then instructs people to search the areas where JBC was located to see if a bullet could be found. A bullet (found by Darrell Tomlinson) then turns up on Connally's stretcher on the first floor. Makes perfect sense to me. And it's a scenario that is perfectly compatible with the SBT. Everything about Charles Gregory's testimony makes perfect sense. Nothing about it is "full of errors". That's just George Sawtelle's opinion. Nothing more.

You think this is a "false statement", George?.... "We were disconcerted by NOT FINDING A MISSILE AT ALL. Here was our patient with three discernible wounds, and NO MISSILE WITHIN HIM of sufficient magnitude to account for them." -- Dr. Charles Gregory [Emphasis by DVP] IOW, you think Dr. Gregory was just lying through his teeth when he said that NO BULLET WAS FOUND INSIDE GOVERNOR JOHN B. CONNALLY, right? Or do you think Dr. Gregory was merely CLUELESS about any missiles that had been plucked from (or had fallen out of) the Governor's body on 11/22/63?

Why are you saying this? You have proof that Shaw looked at an X-ray of JBC's leg prior to giving his press conference on Nov. 22? Let's see that proof. Dr. Shaw also said this to the Warren Commission: Mr. DULLES - Did you hear at that time or have any knowledge of a bullet which had been found on the stretcher? Dr. SHAW - No; this was later knowledge. Mr. DULLES - When did you first hear that? Dr. SHAW - This information was first given to me by a man from the Secret Service who interviewed me in my office several weeks later. It is the first time I knew about any bullet being recovered. You're mixed up. Kennedy's stretcher was never near that area near the elevators where Tomlinson found CE399. So why on Earth are you saying JFK's stretcher was "stretcher B" in the hallway? That's positively wrong. No "magic" required at all. That's a CT myth, of course. The CE399 bullet was found on John Connally's stretcher in Parkland Hospital. No other solution even makes any sense.

George, That was Dr. Shaw who said the bullet was still in Connally's leg. But he was simply wrong, as the testimony of Dr. Charles Gregory proves.... DR. GREGORY -- "I think again that bullet, Exhibit 399, could very well have struck the thigh in a reverse fashion and have shed a bit of its lead core into the fascia immediately beneath the skin, yet never have penetrated the thigh sufficiently so that it eventually was dislodged and was found in the clothing. I would like to add to that we were disconcerted by not finding a missile at all. Here was our patient with three discernible wounds, and no missile within him of sufficient magnitude to account for them, and we suggested that someone ought to search his belongings and other areas where he had been to see if it could be identified or found, rather."

Does anyone really think this comment below made by Henry Wade in 1993, thirty years after the assassination, absolutely PROVES that there was an "extra" bullet plucked from the body of Governor Connally in the operating room? I sure don't, because the evidence in this case clearly indicates that only ONE WHOLE BULLET (CE399) was recovered in connection with the wounding of either JFK or Governor Connally.... "I also went out to see Connally, but he was in the operating room. Some nurse had a bullet in her hand, and said this was on the gurney that Connally was on...I told her to give it to the police, which she said she would. I assume that's the pristine bullet" -- Henry Wade; November 21, 1993 (Dallas Morning News) What Henry Wade actually saw was very likely an envelope containing the 4 bullet fragments removed from John Connally's wrist. To think that a nurse gave the police a SECOND whole bullet that came out of Connally's body--with the cops then deep-sixing (or losing) this bullet and never saying a single word about it ever again--is simply not a reasonable thing to believe.

ROBERT HARRIS SAID: And you [David Von Pein] continue to evade the statements by Connally, Wade, Nolan, Stinson and Bell, which prove that the real Connally bullet was recovered on the second floor and given to Nolan. DAVID VON PEIN SAID: Then where is that bullet that was picked up by the unknown nurse, Bob? No such bullet exists, and it never did exist. And one of the biggest reasons to know it never existed is the following testimony by one of Connally's doctors: DR. CHARLES GREGORY -- "We were disconcerted by not finding a missile at all. Here was our patient with three discernible wounds, and no missile within him of sufficient magnitude to account for them, and we suggested that someone ought to search his belongings and other areas where he had been to see if it could be identified or found, rather." Given the fact that the above testimony from one of John Connally's own doctors exists in the Warren Commission record, it's inconceivable to think that a bullet could have fallen from Connally's body and BEEN RECOVERED by a nurse, with this nurse then saying NOTHING to Dr. Gregory or anyone else about it. Another very interesting part of John Connally's book is the following excerpt taken from the very same page which also contains the part about a nurse picking up a bullet and putting it in her pocket: "A nurse spotted Nellie and handed her one of my gold cuff links. We never found the other one." Do you think that maybe a cuff link falling to the floor might make about the same kind of "clinking" sound as a spent bullet would make? And Connally says right there in his book that a "nurse" gave Nellie a cuff link. Couldn't that be the nurse who supposedly picked up a "bullet"? Maybe the "bullet" was really a "cuff link". In the final analysis, nobody can know for certain what the metal object was that John Connally heard falling to the floor on November 22. But the best evidence is: It certainly was NOT a bullet. ROBERT HARRIS SAID: David, Nellie was given that cufflink on the FIRST FLOOR. Do your homework. The nurse recovered the bullet on the SECOND FLOOR, as he was being transferred from his gurney. DAVID VON PEIN SAID: I think you MIGHT have been able to get the drift of my "cuff link" comment that I made earlier, Bob (even though you're pretending not to get that drift now). Main point being: A cuff link hitting the floor COULD have possibly sounded very similar to a BULLET hitting the same floor. Right, Bob? And since we know that Nellie Connally WAS, in fact, given one of her husband's gold cuff links in the hospital, by a nurse, I'm suggesting that the "metal object" that Governor Connally heard falling to the floor could possibly have been one of his two gold cuff links -- one of which he never saw again. Maybe it was the missing cuff link that the nurse put in her pocket, and it just never found its way back into the possession of the Connallys. Who can know for sure? Nobody can. And John Connally definitely did NOT see a "bullet" in the operating room. There is no corroboration for that at all. Not even from John Connally himself, including Page 18 of his book. He never said he actually SAW a bullet. And some people have claimed that Connally's co-writer on that book (Mickey Herskowitz) is responsible for some of the narrative credited to Connally in the book. (I have no opinion on that theory one way or the other, however.) We do have John Connally's Warren Commission testimony to help clear up this "bullet" matter, though. Connally told the WC this in 1964: ARLEN SPECTER -- "Do you know whether there was any bullet, or bullet fragments, that remained in your body or in your clothing as you were placed on the emergency stretcher at Parkland Hospital?" JOHN B. CONNALLY -- "No." Now, Bob, if your theory is correct, and if Governor Connally had REALLY seen a bullet that had fallen from his body onto the floor at Parkland Hospital on 11/22/63, don't you think that Arlen Specter's above question would have elicited a slightly different response from Connally? Now, yes, it's true that Specter's question related to the time when Connally was first being placed ONTO THE STRETCHER at Parkland. But I think it's a pretty big stretch to think that these words from Specter wouldn't have prompted Connally to say something to Specter about a bullet that had fallen from his body and onto the Operating Room floor (if such a thing had actually occurred): "Do you know whether there was any bullet, or bullet fragments, that remained in your body or in your clothing...?" Wouldn't you agree, Robert? [...] ROBERT HARRIS SAID: David, you have a tendency to attack irrefutable evidence. DAVID VON PEIN SAID: Oh, you mean like the "Connally heard a bullet fall to the floor, even though he never ever claimed to actually SEE that bullet that a nurse supposedly put in her pocket" stuff, Bob? Get real. ROBERT HARRIS SAID: If you hope to refute this issue, you need to address the STRONGEST evidence and testimony - not the single witness who was obviously wishy washy and easily talked into changing his story. DAVID VON PEIN SAID: Oh, so you now apparently want to claim that Raymond Marcus, who is a conspiracy theorist who thinks that CE399 is a "Bastard Bullet" (i.e., it's a fake and a fraud), had a desire to talk Darrell Tomlinson into "changing his story" about the stretchers. Is that correct, Bob? And Marcus [in his 1966 interview with Tomlinson, on Page 6] also somehow was able to strong-arm Tomlinson into saying that CE399 "appeared to be the same" bullet that he found on a Parkland stretcher two-and-a-half years earlier. Is that it, Bob? Because if you're not claiming that Marcus (a devoted conspiracy theorist who thinks CE399 is a phony bullet) was putting words into Tomlinson's mouth during their telephone conversation of 7/25/66, then why would you leap to the conclusion that OTHER people could have persuaded Tomlinson to "change his story" so easily? Face it, Robert, you're stuck with Ray Marcus' transcript. And you are certainly not in a million years going to suggest that Marcus was trying to get Darrell Tomlinson to say that CE399 looked the same as the stretcher bullet. BILL KELLY SAID: You also claim to enjoy humoring yourself by proving [Robert] Harris and [James] DiEugenio wrong, and as Harris has said, and I'm sure Jimmy D will acknowledge, they are open to persuasion and will correct the record where necessary, but that still doesn't change the fact that the provenance of CE399 is tarnished, there is evidence that it isn't what caused all of the non-fatal damage in the limo, and that its origin has never been established. DAVID VON PEIN SAID: CE399 is a bullet from Oswald's gun, Bill. That fact alone is powerful evidence that it IS a legitimate bullet in this case. And that's because, as I've mentioned before, it dovetails and fits perfectly with all of the other ballistics evidence connected with JFK's murder. Which is ballistics evidence recovered from THREE different locations by multiple law enforcement agencies. That's some fantastic across-the-board coordination for the bullet fakery in this case, wouldn't you agree Bill? The Secret Service and the FBI and the Dallas Police Department all got together and decided to make it look UNIFIED so that everything would come back to this conclusion in the end: Lee Oswald's Carcano was the murder weapon. Amazing that anyone could even begin to believe that any of the bullet/rifle evidence in this case is faked or planted when considering the fact that this stuff was recovered by different law agencies and was found in three separate places--Parkland Hospital, the Book Depository, and in the President's limousine itself. [...] The Warren Commission and the HSCA had no problem declaring that Oswald killed Kennedy. And the WC and HSCA had no problem declaring that CE399 was the bullet that struck both JFK and Connally. But apparently you think the HSCA was too stupid (or was too corrupt) to seek out the truth about the stretcher bullet. So they merely rubber-stamped the Warren Commission's conclusion of CE399 being the SBT bullet. And to think we need to know WHERE Oswald purchased the bullets he used to kill President Kennedy is just another one of the many chaff-like things that CTers love to prop up to cloud the true facts of Oswald's guilt. David Von Pein December 6-7, 2011 http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2017/01/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-1223.html http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2016/02/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-1104.html

Thanks again, Lance Payette, for your fine work in digging up the various pieces of banking information relating to this "Postal Money Order" topic. And I think it's appropriate at this point in time, nearly two years after my involvement in these PMO discussions began, to again ask this question that I first asked a year and a half ago: "How many things that appear to be legitimate about the Hidell money order does it take for a stubborn CTer to admit that the money order is, in fact, very likely a legitimate document?" -- DVP; January 9, 2016

http://Quoting-Common-Sense.blogspot.com