Allen Lowe

6 hours ago, Jeremy Bojczuk said:

Sandy Larsen writes:

Sandy and I are of one mind!

Many conspiracy theorists jump to the conclusion that everything that happened, both during and after the shooting, had been carefully planned in advance, and that those who instigated the assassination had the power to carry out those plans after the assassination.

But we know that the plotters, whoever they were, either didn't have the power to control the photographic record or simply were not concerned about what it might show (or both). If, as appears to be the case, more than one gunman was involved, there was always a chance that some bystander would capture images which demonstrated that more than one gunman was involved. The plotters, whoever they were, clearly were not bothered by the possibility that the shooting could be demonstrated to be a conspiracy. They may in fact have preferred the assassination to be seen as a conspiracy.

We also know that the lone-gunman explanation was put forward and promoted in the early stages by political apparatchiks for political reasons. That explanation was later promoted by the media for the same basic reason: to maintain public trust in established political institutions. There's no need to assume that insiders such as Nicholas Katzenbach or Earl Warren, or entities such as CBS or the New York Times which heavily promoted the Warren Report, had any connection at all to whoever instigated the assassination.

It really is time for people to look at the assassination story in a more nuanced way, by making a distinction between the plot and the cover-up. This may even help us to discover precisely who might have been behind the shooting.

I understand and appreciate your points, but do you really think the plotters had no thoughts as to what would happen in the aftermath, no plans for handling conspiracy allegations? One thing that I think is important to realize is how different the world was in 1963, just in terms of cameras and photographs - it wasn't like today when everybody who could breathe was documenting anything that moved; as we see, even the extant photographic record is vague, blurred, messy. I think the plotters knew how difficult it would be for anyone to produce a blatant document of third-party assassins; and I doubt anyone even thought about acoustical proof. And the real truth is that, without Zapruder and his film, we would be absolutely nowhere today.

On 7/4/2023 at 3:42 AM, Leslie Sharp said:

@Ron Bulman, If I can jump in here as coauthor of Coup in Dallas which you reference: as you know, we don't speculate Soutre was in the US; we know he was because Lafitte makes it clear in his 1963 datebook.

Of course it is possible Marton and Varga were aliases for those traveling with Souetre.  However, Hank referred to them based on the conviction his source was solid, that Hungarian revolutionaries [FNU] Varga and Lajos Marton who in August 1962 had made an attempt on de Gaulle's life in a similar plot to Dealey, traveled with Souetre to MC and into the US.

Adding to the tragedy for those who cared deeply about Hank is the loss of his relevant notes and documents which he had yet to incorporate in the endnotes to our manuscript; the Marton - Varga citation was a critical and unfortunate omission.

I posit that Hank's source was no less solid than undated photos of a country-club prison, Marton's own words, or records maintained by French authorities — which as I have now confirmed included not just sympathizers, but active Vichy government officials, including Jean Népote — listed in at least one QJ/WIN document and the head of INTERPOL which in 1963 was still riddled with N-azis tied directly to Reinhard Gehlen. In 1963, these "former" Vichy officials were only one degree removed from the strategist for the Dallas plot to assassinate Kennedy, Otto Skorzeny who tapped OAS Capt. Jean Souetre as a lead mechanic.

We then factor in Harlon B. Carter, who as head of SW Region of the INS including Dallas had control over Howell Norwood and Virgil Bailey and was responsible for the Texas Mexican border in 1963. Bailey and Howell were responsible for detaining two "French" citizens in Dallas; their official reports have never been made public.

Harlon Carter knew as a close comrade in the Border Patrol, sharpshooter Charles 'Boots' Askins — a military attaché at the US Embassy in Madrid where he liaised directly with Otto Skorzeny in the early '50s. Askins is named in the Lafitte datebook within hours of the names Souetre and Col. Jack Canon - another psychopath and expert marksman who served as Charles Willoughby's head of the Z. Org in Korea. Willoughby features in a half dozen Lafitte datebook entries.

Returning to convicted assassin Marton, according to an article published in Hungary Today on the anniversary of the Revolution, at 90+ he remains unrepentant for his role in Petit Clamart. The article goes on to reveal that he remains convinced America was the enemy of Hungarian "democracy," an assertion that is utterly laughable when one considers autocrat Viktor Orbán has been the PM of the country since 2010. (of interest to those who follow the trajectory from 1963 to the current political crisis in America: Just last month, May 23, 2023 —  Hungary's nationalist leader Orbán said he "wants Trump to win U.S. election" — CNBC reporting. Hungarian-American Sebastian Gorka, Trump's deputy assistant in 2017, served as advisor to Orbán in 1998. Gorka hosts the podcast "America First with Sebastian Gorka". You can't make this stuff up. I've wondered if the vigorous defense of Marton on EF is somehow a reflection of current political sympathies 

 

here we go; the fake Twist Party:

from Arnaldo Fernandez:

"The info provided by Thomas was pure crap. The story of the twist party (Castro intelligence agent Sylvia Duran instructing Oswald to kill Kennedy in a party that included Garro herself and the notorious red-hair Cuban negro invented by Gilberto Alvarado) was told by Thomas´ friend, Mexican writer Elena Garro, and dismissed by the FBI due to flagrant lies and inconsistencies, like all the other allegations of red conspiracies in Mexico City made by Alvarado and also Pedro Gutierrez, Salvador Diaz-Verson, Vladimir Rodriguez Lahera, Antulio Ortiz Ramirez, Marty Underwood…
Shenon put Garro´s crap in his fact-free analysis on the Castro connection. See “Philip Shenon’s Crap Detector”, by Arnaldo M. Fernandez and Jim DiEugenio, at http://www.ctka.net/2015/Shenon%27s%20Crap%20Detector.html"

On 7/1/2023 at 6:26 PM, Leslie Sharp said:

@Allen Lowe, rejecting a real time private record of the plot as it unfolded because it's "too good to be true" seems somewhat illogical. Arguing, in court, that the government — the prime suspect for many in the assassination research community — is withholding the smoking gun, and waiting for its release is not only equally illogical, it's patently absurd.

Lafitte made no effort to profit from the "too good to be true" datebook, nor did he pursue Hank or any other investigative journalist to advance a fraud, or a collector like Major Ganis to hawk his hoax.  Albarelli literally stumbled on to the Lafitte records, employing old-fashioned (he would cringe!) gumshoe detective skills. 

As he explains in ASO, Albarelli interviewed June Cobb for literally dozens and dozens of hours over a period of several years; he also tracked her claims by interviewing those she reported to and confirmed that her version of events in MC as she knew them was accurate and stood the test of time.  

Who have you interviewed to debunk the "twist" party, or who have you relied on for said debunking? Does Hank's journalistic reputation rest on that one event in A Secret Order which, as all who have studied it know, includes a copious amount of detail that stands the test of time?  

Fred Litwin read nine pages of Coup in Dallas and tossed it aside because we dealt critically with Permindex. Are you similarly concerned that the twist party confirmed Oswald in MC? If you read Coup, you will know that Lafitte kept a record of that period of Oswald's life related to the plot for Dallas, including his presence in MC on the alleged dates.

 

 

there was a well-known actor who was supposedly at that party who was interviewed and denied it ever happened or that Oswald was anywhere near there, and the woman who supposedly sponsored it was known as a CIA-connected informant. No, I don't have chapter and verse, this was exposed years ago as a complete fraud. Really, no one takes it seriously any more, and at this point I cannot re-trace the de-bunking, but the twist party idea is just beyonf idiotic. As for LaFitte, I just don't believe it, and there is not a single credible researcher - Simpich, DiEugenio, Talbot, Morley, Scott - who takes it seriously. You can keep chasing it, but at the end you will be back where you started, with nothing. And I am sorry, it is too good to be true, which means it is a contrived confirmation of everything some people want to hear. It is no more real than Judith Baker.

17 minutes ago, Steve Thomas said:

Allen,

According to the supporting Memorandum filed by Bernard Fensterwald in the lawsuit brought by Gary Shaw in 1981,

https://archive.org/stream/nsia-SouetreJean/nsia-SouetreJean/Souetre%20Jean%20063_djvu.txt

 

“In addition to his native French, Souetre speaks almost perfect English, 
Spanish, and German”. 

Steve Thomas

thanks.

two things -

1) I have never trusted Albarelli since, in A Secret Order, he expressed a belief in the ridiculous "twist" party that LHO was supposed to have attended. This is one of the dumbest theories of LHO's pre-assassination actions. It didn't happen.

2) This may seem strange to ask, but I think is completely logical: Did Souetre/Mertz or whoever else was supposedly involved from the French side speak English? Has anyone ever confirmed that he/they/it did?

I continue to be wary of supposed recountings of events like LaFitte's diary because they are just too perfectly designed to fit into the plot - they too perfectly satisfy our desires, so many years after the fact, to sum everything up into neat and tidy organizational explanations and to thus confirm our theories.

5 hours ago, Bill Brown said:

 

"Now that we're certain Oswald's role in Otto Skorzeny's strategy to assassinate Kennedy in Dallas was that of the designated patsy just as he insisted..."

 

"I'M JUST A PATSY"

You have to look at the patsy statement in it's entirety.

"They have taken me in because of the fact that I lived in the Soviet Union. I'm just a patsy." -- Lee Oswald

Oswald is clearly claiming that the Dallas Police Department is picking on him because he once tried to defect to Russia. He is not saying anything about mythical conspirators who are attempting to frame him for the assassination.

 

there is nothing clear about whom Oswald is claiming set him up - if anything it makes no sense for a guy, who was an intelligence operative caught up in the middle of an assassination, to blame the local cops, who were clearly responding to the immediate post-assassination dissemination of disinformation. LHO had been with Naval Intelligence since the 1950s (on the testimony of a gentleman I know to whom LHO admitted this), and the whole use of the term "patsy" is much different than what which he would have used if he was just a fall guy or had simply been set up by the locals to solve a murder they could not otherwise solve. "Patsy" is fraught with much deeper implications - show me a previous situation where a prisoner used that terminology - a simple local scheme would be referred to as a frame or a set up. "Patsy" is much deeper and broader, implying a scapegoat role which the arresting cops would not have come up with so quickly. Historically the burden of proof is on you to show that this was a common term used by arrestees to claim innocence. I have never heard it used this way otherwise. It shows a clear state of mind on LHO's part that he was being manipulated in a complex way. Otherwise he would have simply said "I am innocent."

The title of this thread is a double negative - I think you meant to say "So you THINK that Lee Harvey Oswald didn't drive." As I read your intent you are complaining that they are suggesting he didn't drive, which you think is nonsense. I agree. The way you wrote it sounds like you are complaining that they think he drove.

I like Biden, but the reason this is happening is that, though yes, I agree that is it b.s., he is allowing the intelligence services to convince him that he has to be The Responsible Adult; of course it's crap for 60-year-old info, but being president does, I am certain, change his perspective. Though some of my best friends are liberals, they tend to be easily cowed and too damned timid, and fall like duck pins to certain kind of right-wing fear mongering. It's disgusting to me, and this is like an informational nail in the coffin. I hope the lawsuit changes things but I honestly now doubt we will ever see most of this stuff; at least, to sorta quote Earl Warren, Not In Our Lifetime. The murderous forces of evil have clearly won this one (for now at least).

2 hours ago, Michael Griffith said:

One, you are misrepresenting Thomas's arguments, and ignoring many others. Much of the debate over McClain's position most certainly is subjective, and it is downright nonsensical to claim otherwise. You know there is no continuous photographic record of McClain's movements from the time he turned onto Houston Street and then onto Elm Street until the time he left the plaza. The fact that McClain lied so brazenly about his actions after he recanted his initial testimony should serve as bright red flag for skeptics of the acoustical evidence.

Two, AGAIN, if the police tape was not recorded in Dealey Plaza during the assassination, how do you explain all the correlations between the tape's gunshot impulse patterns and the field-test gunshot impulse patterns? How did those impulse patterns get on the tape?

You keep trying to prove that no one could have assembled the bicycle, and I keep trying to get you to explain why we have the assembled bicycle if no one could have assembled it. Rather than explain the existence of the assembled bicycle, you keep arguing that no one could have assembled it.

Does it not give you pause that the NRC panel, as determined as they were to refute the acoustical evidence, did not even attempt to explain the windshield-distortion correlations and admitted (albeit obliquely and without comment) that their own calculations showed that there was only a 7% chance that the timing-movement correlations were a coincidence?

thanks for all this, Mike, it is very convincing.   I do ask, re your earlier comment, what you regard as evidence that Zapruder was edited? I don't disagree with you, I am agnostic on this (and it makes more sense than the kind of alteration that others have alleged), but can you explain? Thanks.

truthfully, I am reading Roe's chapter in Gayle Nix's book, and it is sloppily written, contradicts itself, and poorly argued. So I would not be too worried about anything he says (and it is interesting how the LN'ers write so badly and seem to deflect criticism of their work; at one point I read Gus Russo's book, Live By the Sword, and I was similarly shocked by the weakness of his arguments and the obvious distortions; at least Von Pein knows how to do fake his documentation and cover up the gaping holes in his arguments).

14 minutes ago, David Von Pein said:

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2013/01/Lee Harvey Oswald's Decision To Shoot JFK

 

I think Von Pein did it and is trying to pawn it off on Oswald. What Dave's alibi? He actually has more motive, trying to cover it up for so many years.

On 6/2/2023 at 9:11 PM, David Von Pein said:

The most "absurd" assertion made by conspiracy theorists at this forum (or any other) is the assertion that Vincent T. Bugliosi's "Reclaiming History" has (in any major way at all) been "debunked".

Such a notion concerning Bugliosi's mammoth 20-year effort is not only utterly laughable, but also provably wrong (based on the sum total of evidence in the JFK case).

 

of course it hasn't been debunked - it's been bunked, proven to be nothing but bunk. Thank you for clarifying.

I am just reading your anthology, Gayle, but am mystified as to why you included Steve Roe, known widely as an LN'er. Also, truthfully, I just started his chapter and it is surprisingly sloppily written and poorly researched. I hope to finish reading it (though it is painful to do so, as I keep making editing corrections in my head) but I assume he is heading toward a conclusion that Dallas was a hotbed of radical-right activity in which the Leftist LHO pulled off the miraculous shooting feat which no sharpshooter has duplicated since.

However, I do look forward to the rest of the book.

on the other hand, maybe I over-stated. I think Michael Griffith's politics are....well, grossly wrong, but I have been reading his JFK work for years and I respect it hugely, and I think he broke a lot of new ground.

Ok, Mike, here is where you say I may be certifiably insane, am wanted in three states, owe everyone money, but you respect my opinions (and are glad I didn't marry your sister).

On 5/21/2023 at 7:14 AM, Michael Griffith said:

Look, it's very simple: I have never said, and never will say, "John Doe is extremely untrustworthy because he is an Obama supporter [or a Biden or Hillary supporter] and has been quoted as saying Obama did a great job." Such a statement would show me to have a rabid, extreme partisan mindset. Yet, you said that Mamet is "extremely untrustworthy" because he's a Trump supporter and has been quoted as saying Trump did a great job.

There are plenty of conservatives who don't buy the lone-gunman theory, but you and many others here act like a person cannot really care about JFK's death and understand its ramifications if they are not liberal. Some of you folks even accuse conservatives of being a manifestation of a Fourth Reich, of being "fascists," "dangerous," etc., etc. 

You and others keep ignoring the fact that JFK was a centrist Democrat who was fiscally conservative, who advocated a gigantic tax cut for the rich, who privately condemned Halberstam's coverage of the Vietnam War as biased and harmful, who said in June 1963 that "the Communist drive to impose their political and economic system on others is the primary cause of world tension today," who took a decidedly centrist approach to labor unions and declined to accept extreme union demands, who gave military personnel a larger pay hike than Eisenhower gave them, and who said the following about his increases in national defense on the very day he was murdered:

          In the past 3 years we have increased the defense budget of the United States by over 20 percent; increased the program of acquisition for Polaris submarines from 24 to 41; increased our Minuteman missile purchase program by more than 75 percent; doubled the number of strategic bombers and missiles on alert; doubled the number of nuclear weapons available in the strategic alert forces; increased the tactical nuclear forces deployed in Western Europe by over 60 percent; added five combat ready divisions to the Army of the United States, and five tactical fighter wings to the Air Force of the United States; increased our strategic airlift capability by 75 percent; and increased our special counter-insurgency forces which are engaged now in South Viet-Nam by 600 percent. (Remarks at the Breakfast of the Fort Worth Chamber of Commerce | The American Presidency Project (ucsb.edu)

never mind; see below.

54 minutes ago, Joe Bauer said:

AL...you've got me there.

I admit, my take on their dress is based only on my general perception of such.

I have traveled by train a dozen times in my life and been around fairly large train yards where passenger trains and cargo cars all stop and go through.

I've seen a few wandering fellows in those yards and even seen some on box cars as the long cargo trains go through cities and along roadways. Lot of rail traffic here in California.

Commercial train depots and most every open box car I have ever seen were filthy, as one would expect. Dirt, dust, debris, oily grime, rust, graffiti...you name it.

I assume the Dallas train yard and box cars there in 1963 were no different?

Still, my dress and appearance take on someone being found hanging around or even in box cars like the ones the Dallas "tramps" were found and pulled from is only a general assumption.

Shouldn't have posted it really.

 

 

apologies for being overly glib; I just worry, on this topic, that we have to be as attentive to detail and credibility as possible.

15 hours ago, Jonathan Cohen said:

And Oliver Stone is a Putin supporter. Does that make him untrustworthy to you as well?

absolutely;  not untrustworthy, but less trustworthy.  It damages his credibility quite seriously.

2 hours ago, Michael Griffith said:

Your comment shows that you are another person in this forum who allows your rabid left-wing partisan politics to dominate your thinking on the JFK case. You folks seem to use the JFK case merely as a vehicle to peddle your political views, and who says or implies that no one can truly care about JFK's death if they don't agree with your politics.

Jim Marrs, author of Crossfire: The Plot that Killed Kennedy, one of the most successful pro-conspiracy books ever published, was an ardent Trump supporter. Are you now going to suggest that we should all burn our copies of Crossfire?

Half the country thinks that Trump did a good job. However, very few people agree with Oliver Stone's recent embarrassing claim that Putin is a "great leader" for Russia. 

FIrst of all, Michael, you do the same thing repeatedly here - cite sources as unreliable because of their affiliations, past statements,  etc.  Please stop the bullshit - calling me "rabid" because I disagree with you. Worthy of Marjorie Taylor Green. And please stop the disgustingly dishonest debate method which implies I think we should burn the books of people we disagree with otherwise. Truth is, if this was the standard, with your insane advocacy of our fighting in Vietnam, there would be a giant pyre outside on my lawn. But I respect the JFK work you've done, which proves you are blindly and willfully wrong in this argument - I take these things as they come, and you yourself have brought enormous discredit on your prior work by taking these murderous and reactionary political positions. But I still read your work.

As for not trusting Mamet because of his political positions, it does damage my view of other things he says because it shows such huge intellectual gaps - as do your posts which, yes, would cause me to peruse your other claims with greater skepticism. Anyone who, 50 years later, supports mass murder (the war in Vietnam) is not gonna remain on my reading list.

perfect topic: No proof, no facts, no real info. Stone "may well hold knowledge." Sure, and so may 1,000 other people who may still be alive from that era.

we need to remember that Mamet is a Trump supporter and has been quoted as saying Trump did a great job; this immediately makes him, to my mind, extremely untrustworthy.

On 5/13/2023 at 12:41 PM, Joe Bauer said:

Except for the E. Howard Hunt look-alike the other two fellows were too well dressed and shaven to be real hobo's imo.

There is currently a Netflix TV movie show about Hunt and Liddy regards the Watergate event.

In one episode we see Hunt donning a wig to hide his true identity during one of his escapades before the Watergate break-in.

We all know fake disguises were definitely part of the intel covert actions protocol from time to time.

Elaborate ones included.

It's not illogical to keep this reality in mind when considering the possibility of disguises being used in important covert events.

 

 

in terms of appearance, how many tramps have you known and met?

On 3/28/2023 at 11:19 AM, Steve Roe said:

Mr. Lowe nice trying to make this into another LN vs. CT polarization game. 

Benjamin Cole wrote an article on DiEugenio's K&K stating he believed Oswald did fire at Walker.

 https://www.kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-articles/walker-oswald-and-the-dog-that-didn-t-bark

DiEugenio said this about Ben's article:

Benjamin Cole reexamines the “Walker Incident” and offers a better explanation than the one provided in the Warren Report by accounting for all of the anomalies in the evidence and witness accounts.

DiEugenio said this in his book:

For they were now saying that it was a 6.5 caliber, copper-jacketed bullet. One compatible with the alleged rifle in evidence. Yet, this was not the bullet the police retrieved from Walker’s house that night and Walker had held in his hand. That bullet was a 30.06, steel jacketed bullet.129 As the reader can see, the combination of Ruth Paine with the FBI allowed the Warren Commission to manufacture a case that likely did not exist. As we will see, this will recur.

DiEugenio, James. Destiny Betrayed: JFK, Cuba, and the Garrison Case (p. 202). Skyhorse. Kindle Edition. 

Problem here with Mr. DiEugenio's research is he misleads his readers. He cites (129) the DPD case report on the Walker shooting. Yes, the DPD case report did state the steel jacketed bullet, but nowhere in the case report did it describe the bullet as a 30.06. It clearly states the bullet was of unknown caliber. 

Lockstep with DiEugenio, Ben Cole states this in his article: 

But after the Kennedy murder, the DPD sent the steel-jacketed bullet—stated in police reports to be a 30.06 calibre—to the FBI. 

Again, there is no 30.06 caliber mentioned in the DPD case report from the investigating detectives. 

This is not the tired old LN vs. CT game: it's about getting the facts straight. 

Who is holding the baloney sandwich now? 

Steve - just because someone talks doesn't mean they are saying something.  NOTHING you quote puts LHO there with a rifle, nothing has him firing the rifle, nothing has him hiding the rifle. A million bullets would fit that rifle - ever hear of a firing range? You disappoint me, you are usually more clever than this in concealing your lack of knowledge. The LN case has sunk down so low that it has gone (as you have) where the sun don't shine. There were men there, a car with a license plate that was later cut out; and besides, think about it - if Oswald couldn't hit THAT target, how would he hit any other, especially one that was moving (and a feat which no sharp shooter has ever replicated; and don't start with your examples, I am talking about HITTING a moving target, not just getting shots off; even someone like you could probably do that)?

So, Steve....your time is up. As a matter of fact it has long since passed. Please slink off into the LN sunset.

2 hours ago, Steve Roe said:

Hello Mr. DiEugenio, anyone home? The Walker shooting took place on April 10, 1963. Oswald's rifle was found on 11/22, that's almost 7 months. Rifle cleaning solution? What in the world are you talking about? If it was dirty 7 months ago on the exterior, of course Oswald would have cleaned it.  You wipe it off with a damp cloth and if you wanted you can lightly oil the metal, polish the wood stock and run a bristle brush down the barrel. 

And who said he buried it in the dirt? He could have buried in a brush pile up near theMKT RR tracks. 

Earth to Steve Roe: Where is your proof? You LN nuts are all the same - you demand material, empirical proof until you don't demand material, empirical proof, which is when YOU make an argument. And honestly, the concealment idea is the dumbest effing thing I have heard in the whole JFK LN fiasco. Yeah, he could have buried it, you might have helped him. Anything is possible in LN Land. Try again, we on the other side are not that dumb.

On 3/23/2023 at 7:55 PM, Benjamin Cole said:

Obviously, I cannot prove what I wrote. I am speculating, or conjecturing. 

I conjecture LHO's role in a flag flag op was to fire at JFK once, an intentional miss. 

He did so...but he heard subsequent gunshots, and upon quickly going downstairs, sensed hysteria. 

By then, within a minute or two, he deduced or strongly suspected he had been made a patsy---and so went home and armed himself, justifiably in fear of his life. Why else become armed? 

Likely, there was a car nearby the TSBD that LHO was supposed to take to leave the scene. LHO elected not to take the planned escape car. A death trap. 

Bereft of any practical resources, LHO took a bus and then a taxi home to his revolver. 

I am agnostic on what happened with DPD officer Tippit. But someone murdered Tippit and plenty of cops entered the neighborhood, and LHO was on the run in the neighborhood. So LHO was captured in the TT. 

As always, IMHO. 

it's actually not certain that he was armed at the theater; are there any police evidence photos of the hand gun? We have only the Dallas cops' say-so, no evidentiary proof, as far as I know (other than the aural reports and supposed notes of what he said in the interrogation, for which there is no documented - as in recorded, or stenographer-driven - proof or confirmation. I think it is possible that he had some part in the whole thing, but there is no possibility he fired any gun; there is nothing placing him on the third floor, we know from the book by Barry Earnest that he did not descend from the sixth floor after the shooting, he was spotted in other parts of the building close to the time of the shooting. None of this adds up. The more we know, the less we know.

as for Lemay, LBJ thought he was involved in the JFK assassination, and told this to John Kenneth Galbraith (as reported by his son James).