Paul Brancato

All first hand accounts. Are your sources first hand accounts?

Michael - do you really want to get to the truth about the assassination?

If Prouty’s claims about JFK plans to leave VN were only his statements that would be one thing. But the NS memoranda are real, and the ‘liberal’ journalists who deny this are in fact revisionists. Why would I or anyone care what these ‘liberal’ say? Our media has perpetuated the myth that JFK was killed by a lone nut with no political objectives. Is that what you believe Michael? A simple yes or no would be appreciated.

What is the source for your rebuttal?

The 1994 interview is so prescient - incredible. He mentions Report From Iron Mountain, widely considered to be a farce. Might I ask what any of you think of this?

Michael - the Prouty interview is available. What is your source for your rebuttal?

To be clear, if my assumption is correct, the memo is from Clyde Tolson, and he claims that Katzenbach, then Deputy AG, told him that the man in custody in Dallas was to be blamed for the murder. I would read that as coming from Hoover, who had already told Katzenbach’s boss the same thing. Sandy - refresh my memory - who in the CIA was communicating with Hoover prior to his phone call to RFK? It sure seems like the FBI and Justice department were at loggerheads with the CIA and Military from the get go. This seems like a good reason for LBJ to be sitting on the crapper on AF 1 freaking out. If the planners were in communication with AF 1, and they were prepared beforehand with a designated patsy who they had linked in any way they could to Soviets and Cubans, it must have been painfully obvious to LBJ what came next. So in this case Hoover and LBJ decided to clamp down on this purposeful conspiracy and enforce the lone gunman theory immediately. It might also suggest that RFK knew enough to side with Hoover and LBJ on this immediately, through Katzenbach.

I too noticed the attempt to normalize the mocking of anyone that believes Operation Mockingbird was real and is ongoing. It would have been nice if the journalist had confronted RFK Jr on the spot instead of pointing out the fallacies afterwards regarding the effectiveness of Covid vaccines. As RFK Jr pointed out, the journalist was unprepared. He was there to do a hit piece disguised as ‘I came there in good faith to be fair but just didn’t like your manner or your theories’.

Thank you for saying it.

In Prouty’s own words, he certainly knew about Operation Bloodstone. I don’t know for a fact that he spent 3-4 years at Yale and did nothing else, no special assignments or travel. How can we know that?

The wilderness of mirrors, such an apt expression. Question - if you were JJ Angleton and William Harvey proved to you that Kim Philby was working for the Soviets, which he did, what would you do? I always thought that Angleton was either a fool, or he was a traitor. I never considered a third possibility, which is that he parlayed that knowledge in some way. What sense does it make that William Harvey and others would identify Philby as part of what later became known as the Cambridge 5, and then watch CIA, Angleton and presumably others as well, squelch their true identification? The ONLY thing that makes sense is that Philby was left in place as long as possible in order to use him. I put this on the current thread because I don’t think that travel records on McCord and Solie are enough to convict them of disloyalty. Angleton may have been running them, while the Soviets believed otherwise. Newman says he doesn’t care if Oswald was a shooter at Dealey Plaza or not. But if he is going to go on record as saying McCord was working for the Soviets AND running Oswald he needs to follow these ‘facts’ to their conclusions.

It’s not enough to put Michael on ignore. He should not be allowed to post here.

My oh my. I googled this and found zero mainstream coverage of the death or the suicide ruling. Snopes commented, saying rumors of anything but suicide were false. But reading their analysis just left me dumbfounded. They didn’t do any due diligence.

No way. I mean - yes, a lot of wasted space on the internet. But disputing the back wound?

Fwiw, I had just turned 14, and was visiting my grandmother in New Haven, the one and only time I did so, when the news of her death broke on tv. She was crying, and so I started to cry as well. The several days I spent with her stayed with me my whole life. She taught me to make sauce, and to love Liberace. And to appreciate Marilyn Monroe.

Michael Griffith - you weigh the words of LA detectives, biographers of Hollywood stars, what have you, against the word of two entire families vacationing in Gilroy, including RFK’s own family. I’ve read your material, and also McGovern’s. There is no comparison. The only conclusion one can draw is that Rothmiller and the rest of them are lying. You can’t possibly believe any of the Kennedy bashing you do here regularly. In my view what you’ve said regarding Jim D is far worse than name calling. Yet you persist, and the moderators allow it.

“I suspect your promised ‘decimating review’ will be as misleading, pitiful, ideologically driven, and amateurish as your ridiculous ‘review’ of Selverstone’s book The Kennedy Withdrawal.” Michael - that’s pretty inflammatory language.

Apperently they don’t know it. I keep reading it in one form or another, always presented as gospel truth with apologies to RFK admirers. And Cory, if memory serves, has what he considers to be inside info on Marilyn’s death as well. Please correct me Cory if I’m confusing something.

That is not a confession. That is Rothmiller saying that Lawford confessed to him personally. So this is all about the credibility of Rothmiller.

Please tell us where in the link Peter Lawford confesses

Yes, but Joe is right. As Jim D said the other night, no one shows up in California armed.

Duh - shows up to a campaign event uninvited and fully armed

Thanks - inciteful. It’s interesting that at a dinner party tonight with some of my oldest friends this subject came up, whereas it would not ever have done so without the Landis news story and the msm coverage of it. So why now? Possibly other ‘bombshells’ are on the horizon, designed to keep the mystery intact while appearing to be a search for truth. One possible scenario is a new official revelation that Oswald was actually a CIA asset, but admitting that at the time would have led to public speculation about the CIA’s role on Nov 22, hence the 60 year coverup which can now be revealed, along with the new idea that their ‘rogue’ asset had an accomplice.

Joe -That’s a good story that makes sense and could have been a meaningful avenue for research.