Ron Ecker

I agree with Ron Paul that Allen Dulles on the WC is pretty good hint of such a conspiracy. Whenever Paul got around to noticing it.

Ron Paul should have raised a son who would know better than to get himself beaten up by a neighbor over yard work. (Or do we know that it was actually a neighbor who beat him up? It could have been the Deep State.)

It seems odd to me that the Deep State would go to any trouble to try to depose Trump beginning on January 6 when he had already been deposed on Election Day in November. Was the Deep State that afraid that Trump’s efforts to overthrow the government would succeed before the end of his term? One thing at least stands out. It was not the Deep State that stood before that partially armed Mob on January 6, fired it up and told it to march to Capitol Hill. It was Donald Trump and (the two whom I recall) his consigliere Rudy Giuliani and another Trump stooge lawyer whose name escapes me. So was Trump himself, along with the fellow traitors in his inner circle, the Deep State? There is nothing deep about Trump. Has there ever been a more hollow man?

When Chansley was tried in court, I'm sure that he must have had his defense argue as a mitigating circumstance the courtesy and accommodation provided to him by the Capitol Police in perpetrating his crime. Surely he would have so testified in his own defense. If not, either Chansley is certainly an idiot or he had an idiot for a lawyer.

If the video shows what you see as open complicity on the part of the officers, why do you think it is openly done? I would think that police complicity would be conducted covertly, and not for all the world to see. Look at the police complicity in Dallas as an example. Let's say that that was policeman Roscoe White shooting from behind the picket fence. At least he was behind the fence and not shooting from in front of it.

I did a quick web search on Jacob Chansley. From Wikipedia: "U.S. Capitol Police Chief Tom Manger... specifically took issue with (Tucker) Carlson's claim that Capitol Police officers acted as "tour guides" for Chansley. He maintained that Capitol Police officers were badly outnumbered and did their best to use de-escalation tactics to try to talk rioters into leaving the building." Sounds like a much more plausible explanation than the notion that some Capitol Police officers were themselves insurrectionists.

I wonder if Dylan found his JFK song "Murder Most Foul" in Weberman's trash.

Frazier might have beaten Fritz with some curtain rods that Oswald had forgotten and left in Frazier's car.

Weberman, right! I remember he got involved in JFK research.

I've got an idea for a song. Has anyone written "The Ballad of Jack Ruby" yet? (Who was the guy who went through Bob Dylan's garbage?)

By himself, I certainly agree with you. But he had the means and opportunity to help, if only as a false sponsor or whatever. It's possible that these Mob bosses just liked to brag with lies, like the demented Marcello saying that he did it or Trafficante allegedly saying (paraphasing), "We screwed up, we shouldn't have killed Giovanni, we should have killed Bobby." If nothing else it certainly makes sense (but of course with no evidence) that it was a Mob boss (whether Marcello, Trafficante, or Don Corleone) who made Jack Ruby an offer that he couldn't refuse.

Jim, I have not argued that Marcello was involved. I was simply pointing out, on the subject of Garrison, that Marcello is one of the “usual suspects,” whether there’s any evidence or not, and the rather noticeable way that Garrison ignored him with respect to suspects (whether due to lack of any evidence or perhaps something else). That is all. Why ask me for evidence that I don’t have about something that I haven’t claimed? I think the HSCA Report said it well, i.e. it wasn’t lying all the time: that Marcello had the motive, means, and opportunity, but it didn’t find any evidence. On the subject of Marcello’s dementia, it is worth noting that one of the early signs of dementia is loss of short-term memory but not of long-term memory. I don’t know or haven’t heard if simply making things up is a sign of dementia or not. But if Marcello was involved in the assassination, I imagine he was involved before any dementia, and if he claimed, when he had dementia, that he was involved, it could be because he had long-term memory of being involved despite his mental condition and wasn’t just making it up. Who knows?

Well, Nixon appears to have been set-up by the Watergate burglary, so I guess that could be called a coup. In fact there was a book about it called Silent Coup. Carter’s downfall, as I recall, was the Iran hostage crisis and the failed rescue attempt. His election loss could be called a coup only in the sense of the October Surprise (Reagan’s people allegedly conspiring with Iran to hold the hostages till after the election) that may have helped decide the election. As for Trump, his downfall was being Donald Trump. He didn’t need any help. The fact that he may now be returned to the White House says far more about today’s America than it does about Trump.

I remember Paul running for president. Specifically I remember seeing him in a debate with several other candidates. I was impressed by him being the only one in the group who sensibly pointed out that we (meaning the U.S.) "can't afford to do it." Unfortunately I can't remember what it was that we can't afford to do.

I thought so too. Didn't bother to look it up. There's a link with the "resigned" statement, but it goes to a subscription article (about "The CIA Theory").

He tells Tucker Carlson it was November 22. Paul believes the CIA was directly responsible, and he knew the republic was lost when Allen Dulles was appointed to the WC. Carlson says, "So the guy who was responsible for the murder was investigating the murder." Ron Paul Tells Tucker Carlson the Exact Date There ‘Was a Coup and We Lost Our Government’ (msn.com)

The idea of the assassination as a military coup always reminds me of two emotional episodes involving Maxwell Taylor, who in 1963 was Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The episodes suggest guilt or remorse, unless we are to believe that the murder of a president by a lone nut, mobsters or Cubans was enough to make an Army general cry, not just months but years later. This is from “An American Soldier: The Wars of General Maxwell Taylor,” by his son John M. Taylor, pp. 290-291: “In mid-1964, just prior to his departure for Saigon, Taylor had several conversations with Elspeth Rostow, who interviewed him at his quarters for the Kennedy Library’s oral history series. All went smoothly until the subject of the assassination arose. According to Rostow, Taylor then broke down; for several minutes there was nothing on her tape except the sound of an occasional passing car. Once he had composed himself, the interview continued. “More than a decade later, at a family dinner, the subject turned to political dissent in the country under Nixon. Taylor had recently returned from a speaking engagement at a small New Jersey college, where hecklers had prevented him from speaking. He commented that Kennedy, had he lived, was the one person who might have preserved a degree of national cohesiveness. Then his voice broke; it was a moment before his normal self-control returned. Surrounded by his family, he had let his defenses down.”

Well, this is the kind of thing that makes you want to beat your head against the wall.

They must have shown Trump that Ted Cruz's daddy was not involved after all. Trump threw a bottle of ketchup against the wall and said, "No release!"

Jim, I just wanted to point out, on the subject of Garrison, that one of the usual suspects (credibly or not) in the assassination was a Mob boss right there in Garrison’s back yard of New Orleans. The only books on the subject I remember looking at are “Fatal Hour” and “Mafia Kingfish.” I don’t remember if I read the whole things or not. But in “Fatal Hour,” Blakey argues that Garrison approached the assassination, in the words of Carl Oglesby in Playboy (which proves that I only read that mag for the articles), as “a stooge of Carlos Marcello.” I don’t think I ever had an opinion on the possible role of Marcello in the assassination, or on any desire on Garrison’s part to cover it up, and as far as I know I still don’t.

Carol Burnett got her big break in show biz on the Garry Moore Show by singing "I Made a Fool of Myself over John Foster Dulles."

One knock against Garrison (justified or not) was that he chose to ignore an elephant in the living room, or more specifically Carlos Marcello, a Mob boss right there in New Orleans. The HSCA Report states that "The committee found that Marcello had the motive, means and opportunity to have President John F. Kennedy assassinated, though it was unable to establish direct evidence of Marcello's complicity". But Marcello was full of complicity according to G. Robert Blakey's "Fatal Hour," John H. Davis's "Mafia Kingfish," Lamar Waldron's "The Hidden History of the JFK Assassination," Mob lawyer Frank Ragano's "Mob Lawyer," and Stefano Vaccara's "Carlos Marcello: The Man Behind the JFK Assassination." Garrison mentions Marcello one time in "On the Trail of the Assassins," on page 337 of my paperback edition, where Garrison states, "I do not even know Carlos Marcello." Well, that settles that!

Pat, thanks. So it's a re-edit of a 2013 film, not a "long-buried" and "never-before-seen" interview. I'll take the Enquirer issue back to the grocery store and see if I can get my money back.

I saw the December 18 issue of the Enquirer this morning at the grocery store while buying all the 2-for-1 items I could find. I bought it because of the front-page headline “JFK Autopsy Cover-Up Exposed!” I felt like a sucker buying it, but figured hey, could there be something in here that I don’t know about? It turns out that there is (possibly). I’d like to know if what the Enquirer calls a “never-before seen interview” of seven Parkland ER doctors has in fact never been seen before. And if hasn’t been, why? More specifically, who buried the “long-buried video”? The rag, I mean mag, doesn’t say, or who dug it up from its burial, which leads me to believe it was never buried. The thing is, I wasn’t aware of this interview, which apparently did take place somewhere. At least there’s a photo of the seven doctors, “reunited in 2013” (it doesn’t say where or who interviewed them), sitting on three couches with a table between them. They are: Joe Goldstrich (“a fourth-year medical student when JFK died”), Lawrence Klein (then “a third-year medical student”), Ronald Jones, Donald Seldin, Robert McClelland, Kenneth Salyer and Peter Loeb. The article says these seven doctors “shared the same opinion,” that JFK was shot from the front. McClelland is quoted as saying, “There was more than one shooter.” Salyer says, “When I saw the autopsy pictures, I thought somebody had tampered with the whole thing and it made me very suspicious.” Goldstrich asks, “How could a gunshot from the rear peel the scalp from the front back?” Is this interview old news, or in fact something that whoever conducted the interview decided should never see the light of day? Or, is it just another National Enquirer invention to get gullible grocery-shoppers like me to buy it? The article goes on to mention Paul Landis on “the so-called magic bullet,” and Rob Reiner, who claims, it says, to have “indisputable proof JFK was murdered by no fewer than four people in a CIA operation ordered by then Vice President Lyndon B. Johnson.” Having not heard Reiner’s podcast, I have no idea if he makes any such a claim or not.

This paragraph in the press release stood out to me like a sore thumb: "Under Cover of Night is the first truly serious, comprehensive and accurate work about the JFK assassination which has ever been produced by anyone." I wonder what Jim DiEugenio, among others, thinks about none of his work being "truly serious" or "accurate."