Paul Brancato

Thanks Pete - I did find that one, but a longer one exists. I’m just not sure which thread it’s on, and I couldn’t find it in several months of Billings notes. I’m certain I read it though.

When I can find my original post I’ll be more specific. The basic story is that Oswald was seen at the Carousel with a tanned man with a scar above his left eyebrow. The witness to this says he took a picture of the table where they were sitting but Ruby spotted him and took the picture, or camera, away. This is somewhere in Billings notes. Also, DA Wade says Oswald was seen at the Carousel around Nov 10, 1963. Sorry - googling isn’t helping, and I’m not sure what thread this is on, but I’ll keep looking.

the LHO/escort sighting at the Carousel mentions the scar over the left eye.

Tom - in the Garrison files you went through did you see an entry by Billings regarding Oswald being seen with this ‘escort’ at the Carousel Club? I posted on this a few years ago, and I believe it’s in a thread about David Morales. Not sure if I can find it but I’ll try.

Jim - correct me if I misinterpret you. Is it your opinion that so called lone nutters like Roe and Parnell, and Litwin, are provocateurs who deliberately polarize discussions by attempting to create the illusion of false equivalencies? I agree with Pat and others that facts should be respected when they can be reasonably ascertained to be facts. From what I’ve read it seems to me that Litwin is being far more selective with ‘facts’ than Jim, or Larry, or Newman, etc are. A stalemate is as good as a win if your motive is to discredit those that believe JFK was done in by a conspiracy. I’ve always wondered what motivates those that put so much effort into debunking the writings and research of those who think that multiple shooters, and not LHO alone, did the deed. I know what motivates me to read and post here - a deep sense of loss.

Greg - that seems logical enough. Was it common practice to escort witnesses in police cruisers? That seems odd.

Thanks - that’s my recollection as well.

John Abt OR an ACLU lawyer. Two days in custody, asking for but not getting legal representation. No stenographer, no tape recording for the investigation of the crime of the century. Sorry David. The DPD simply could not be trusted to run a fair interrogation. It doesn’t prove Oswald’s innocence, but it goes a long way towards believing the few words we did hear out of his mouth. I have not been charged with that. I’m a patsy. I’d like a lawyer. And then the coup de grace - Ruby. Most of us of a certain age knew for certain at that moment that a coverup was in place.

David - what do you think of the fact that no transcripts or tape recordings of the DPD and company ‘interviews’ of Oswald have ever surfaced?

My two cents - I never found La Fontaine’s evidence convincing. I don’t have an opinion beyond that, but think the subject is a rabbit hole.

As I just shared with Jeff Carter, I’ve read so many negative stories on Manafort over the decades. He’s a crook for hire in my opinion. Jeff points out that he was business partners with Kilimnik for a decade. I’m not referring to Russia Trump collusion. It goes much deeper.

Thanks for this post. Yes indeed our journalism usually lacks historical perspective. Everything I’ve read about Manafort, going back a few decades at least, spells crook. Do you agree? I’m not asking from the Russia collusion angle.

Leaving your assessment of Jim, don’t you think there are good reasons to doubt that Oswald was there? Certainly there is no conclusive proof. Make no mistake, for the purpose of creating a patsy it was essential to believe he was. I am not familiar with your general take on things - do you think Oswald was the lone assassin?

Ben - I agree with this comment. You’re siding with Trump and his people. To paraphrase - the man doth protest too much. Unless I’m mistaken about what that quote means. The same for the Russia thing. Manafort was certainly guilty as charged. What exactly he was up to with his Russian friend is not clear, but whatever it was they went to great lengths to keep it secret.

This article is so disturbing on so many levels.

I’d like to add something. In my opinion if LHO got a significantly better job offer right after accepting a job at TSBD he would surely have been interested. People do this all the time. The assumption that the timing of the TSBD offers gives Ruth Paine a way out is illogical. Does someone wants to argue that Oswald knew about and ignored the better paying job because he had an agenda, calling for him to be in place at the TSBD? Clearly not - officially the JFK route was not publicly known at the time. But it’s possible that we are not privy to some deeper planning for the motorcade, such as having assassins in place first and then making sure the motorcade route planners cooperated.

Ben - Ms. Hutchinson was vetted, many hours worth. If some clown fed her a false story in order to discredit her later the egg is on their face, not hers. The Democratic Party is not the Deep State. For someone who claims to be aware of the politics of division you are pretty good at dividing. Ms. Cheney is demonstrating that she stands against the politics of division and should be honored for that, especially in your eyes. Trump is a clown. And that’s all? It’s a lot worse than that. It’s ok with me if you’re a Trumpster, but dishonesty is unacceptable.

I’m reminded of MacBird. I’m not sure I agree with my own prior conclusion, but for what it’s worth my Coup D’Etat 36 trading card set ended with LBJ.

What do you make of the postscript asking for donations for a trip to see a surgeon for a mysterious illness? Up until that point I was on board.

Great question. But given missing page, and very confusing and contradictory testimony, later writings etc how can we possibly know the answer? There is a black hole in my opinion where Oswald’s interrogation is concerned. No transcript? No recording? Seems deliberate

Hi Michael - would you consider summarizing the thread and why you think it bump worthy? Nice to see you post btw.

Thanks for this post Joe.

A forty hour workweek at $20 an hour after taxes is what? Living wage ain’t living.

Plus unemployment calculations have undergone many changes in the last few decades so comparing today’s numbers with past is a misnomer, apples and oranges. It’s true that job openings aren’t being filled. Why is that? I don’t think it’s a lack of available bodies. Restaurant workers are grossly underpaid. I read that 50% of Americans don’t have $500 in the bank for emergencies. Does anyone truly think the term wage slave is inaccurate?

That’s interesting Greg. So if Ruth never let LHO know about the phone call(s), and you knew that for a fact, you might question her motive for not doing so, or at least find fault with her decision?