Joe Bauer

Notice in the slow-mo video "everyone" shown in this reacts noticeably to Ruby's loud 38 shot into Oswald's gut...except Will Fritz. The two fellas on Fritz's right flinch. One raises his hands. The other snaps his head toward the shooting and a person bending down beneath them reacts even more with an animated head raise with startled eyes. How addled was Fritz to not show one sign of startledness? Was Fritz deaf?

Great slo-mo and repeat video. I feel that seeing the actual Ruby/Oswald shooting scene in this slow-mo back and forth moving format uniquely allows one to see and contemplate more important details and their importance versus still photos or regular speed video. Thanks for sharing.

I do feel I must defend McGraw-Hill and their textbook division a little - in this regards. My wife was a content editor for them for 25 years ( history was a main subject ) until just three years ago and now does the same thing for the company that took over this area of their business. I can't tell you how hard she worked to research content and create test questions for mostly secondary level textbooks. You cannot believe the difficult process of fact checking over and over and over and re-edits etc. Her patience and commitment is beyond anything I could ever muster for myself in any endeavor. Not disputing S.T. Patrick's criticism at all. I agree completely. But, a husband has to stand up for his wife when needed.

Ha! Very similar indeed in many ways especially expression. However at the time of Roscoe White's police photo he was noticeably balding. And his jaw seems stronger and his face fuller that Frenchy's.

Your explanation seems correct John Butler. As Chief Will Fritz so confidently and even boastfully said to the press one day after 11,22,1963 ..."this case is cinched!"

Unfortunately the following world news story will probably soon be interjected as a subject of debate in this 2020 presidential campaign if it actually does get majorly worse in numbers. Especially if it impacts the entire global economy any more than it has to the tune of tens if not hundreds of billions of dollars already in losses and it's just in the beginning stages according the the following N.Y. Post article. It will be a tough subject to deal with for every candidate. Definitely too late' to stop spread of coronavirus, expert says 1 hour ago - 'Definitely too late' to stop spread of coronavirus, expert says ... “It's definitely too late,” said Jin Dong-Yan, a molecular virologist at Hong Kong University's School of Biomedical Sciences. ... Chinese New Year festival in Miami canceled over coronavirus concerns ... With Post wires ... New York Post.

One of many troubling things about Trump voters is that even if it can be proved beyond any doubt that Trump engaged in major financial amount corrupt dealings with any of the following known groups: Russian Mob. U.S. Mob. Drug Cartels. Money laundering banks such as Deutsche Bank. And who knows who. They would still vote for the guy! They would vote for Hitler if they felt he was on their side regards their deepest xenophobic fears and hatreds. Trump constantly and purposely infers or even openly states his alignment with these blindly angry, hateful, intolerant and fearful people. Problem is, half of our society seems to be in this xenophobic mind set group politically, socially and emotionally. Interesting that a word so similar in spelling to xenophobic ( xenophilia) means the opposite.

Seems very logical and probable Chris. Those lights were bright and focused right at Oswald and his two escorts.

James Carville If Bernie is the nominee, I’ll vote for him. No question. I’ll take an ideological fanatic over a career criminal any day. But he’s not a Democrat. Yes, "career criminal" trumps all other disqualifying negatives by far. However I disagree with Carville's trademark shock hyper-bole labeling of Bernie Sanders as a fanatic. Sanders proposals basically just reflect the much more entire society benefiting government policies of the top 25 standard of living industrial countries of the world. Where the general welfare of "all" their citizens isn't hugely second to the first priority welfare of a small minority of our most wealthy, where just 5 to 10% of our society owns 85% of our wealth and exerts that same degree of imbalance of power influence over the rest of us. The proof of this fact is in credible documented statistics which for many years, even decades, show America being well behind these other social/democracy model countries in even the most basic and important standard of living areas and measurements. Health care, education, housing, transportation, cost of living, income disparity, retirement care, child and just delivered mother care, infrastructure, opioid and drug treatment, incarceration overload and on and on. Carville depicts someone looking at the rest of the majority of the world's best standard of living countries, that take care of their entire citizenries better than we do, and who states and promotes the most logical common sense proposals ( why can't we do or even "try" to do the same? ) and calls them a fanatic? Carville has always had kind of a "shock jock" showman's performance proclivity. Lacing his commentary with more profanities ( however comedic in context ) than any other supposedly serious political pundits. I wonder if this is perhaps simply to stand out as a more colorful character and get more attention and coverage in the press? He's right in many of his observations however and I agree with them. But imo he's not helping the cause of Trump defeating by disparaging the Dem candidates we have, no matter how cheap laugh profane comedy toned his commentaries on them and their fu##ing flaws are.

After watching the video Chris D. provided over and over and over again one of the questions I kept pondering was the same one T.Adams asks. You can see Oswald is looking right at Ruby while Ruby is coming out of the press line and advancing toward him. Ruby's distance out of the line and into the already quite small space between Oswald and the press line is significantly noticeable in the video. After Oswald looks straight at Ruby while Ruby is already advancing beyond all other persons in the crowd, he then looks away and forward again without the slightest look of concern. Ruby shoots Oswald while Oswald is still looking ahead. All this in what ... a two second time frame? One does see some flashbulb flashes happening throughout the brief time Oswald and his two escorts are walking to and arriving at the shooting spot. One of these occurs a split second before Ruby jumps out. I would imagine these flashes are very bright. Could it be that Oswald might have missed seeing Ruby first jumping towards him due to some very brief flashbulb blindness? So many other questions regards all the video of the Oswald basement entry/murder scene sequence. Captain Fritz's movements, actions and facial expressions right up to, during and right after Ruby's loud shot into Oswald's gut seem curiously odd in an illogically detached way. To the point of seeming bizarre if not suspicious. Fritz separates himself seconds before the shot and meanders several feet away into a security meaningless area and starts old man slowly and weakly waving his arms at no one close by? Except perhaps he was somehow directing the police car inching down to ramp to pick up Oswald? As if the person driving can even see him on the opposite far side of the car? Fritz's physical reaction response to the booming blast of Ruby's 38 is so delayed, it seemed indicative of advanced dementia. As well as his confused out-of-it facial expressions. For a guy who was ready to punch it out with a recalcitrant young punk Buell Wesley Frazier refusing to follow his confession signing orders just two days earlier, Fritz sure got much more old man addled quick.

Amazingly prescient. On one of the TV news broadcasts in Iowa a reporter questioned a women who says she voted for Donald Trump in 2016 and will again in 2020. She stated she is on Social Security disability. One assumes she gets by mostly on this "socialistic" program. The reporter mentioned to the Trump voter that Trump wants to cut SS Disability and make it harder to get. The woman's expression went blank for a second or two and then she stated she was supporting Trump because he is good for the economy. ? Now that makes sense doesn't it? Vote for someone who is publicly stating he wants to lower your own main source of living income. Typical middle class and lower Trump voting mentality. Voting against your own self interest. No, there is a deeper motivation with less than rich American voters in supporting Trump. One they will not publicly claim or announce. Mainly, it's about race.

Regards the 2016 presidential vote by groups chart above: Actual numbers like this are so thought provoking. So many questions. Here is one: Why would 28% of Hispanic/American voters ( a much higher number than I ever imagined ) vote for Trump? Someone so obviously antithetically opposed and unsympathetic to the genesis of most of their direct familial experience of immigration into America? One can assume that half of all Hispanics ( not just 1st and 2nd generation but probably even 3rd generation ) people in this country by 2016 arrived here illegally and/or were born from them here. Fairly proven statistics run into the tens of millions. Trump's 2016 campaign rhetoric in this area and toward these illegals was so overwhelmingly disparaging and inflamed with mostly angry toned anecdotes of violent criminal rapists, murderers, drug runners and pushers ... the worst of Mexico and other Central American countries. Since such a huge percentage of Central American people living in America by 2016 shared this illegal entry heritage you would think that their dislike of their most disparaging critic ( Trump) would reflect in the voting booth even higher than around high 60's to 70% ( some voted for others.) Yet, more than 1/4th of all Hispanic American voters voted for Trump in 2016? I cannot grasp the mind set of these Hispanic Trump voters. What benefit would they gain voting for Trump over Hillary Clinton and the much more immigration tolerant Democratic party? I have some speculations: Could it be that the more established Hispanic people of America are not as sympathetic towards the plight of their own fellow newer generation ethnic immigrants ( especially illegal ) as one would think? Could it be that the Hispanic/Americans who are 2nd, 3rd or even 4th generation and who have had decades of successful assimilation and who have in many ways achieved prosperous parts of the American Dream after leaving great poverty in their Latin American homelands, now resent the never ending stream of new poverty escaping Latinos? One can imagine a few reasons for this separation or even loss of shared ethnic heritage loyalty sympathy. These millions of newly arriving poverty stricken illegal immigrants compete for established Hispanic/ American labor jobs with lower income acceptance? The "I've got mine" mentality? Why keep letting in so many more of my desperate Latino brothers and sisters which only crowds out and threatens my own family's stake and opportunities? One could even imagine a cultural class dividing mentality " I don't want my now better off and more educated daughters hooking up with these new poverty stressed and poorly educated kids who have just arrived and go to school with them or are just living nearby?" Is there now an economic and education elitism that is present to some degree with long term residency Hispanics versus these newly arriving illegals that trumps even cross shared cultural origin bonds? I would like to hear some American Hispanic person's reasons for voting for Trump and the Republicans over the Democrats in the 2016 election. Their Latin American immigration policies were so clearly and easily understood with the Democratic party being much more liberal and sympathetic toward these voter's ethnic brethren. And will these 28% of Hispanics vote for Trump again in 2020? Even after he called some of their shared poverty stricken homelands..."xxxx-hole" countries?

2016 GROUP CLINTON TRUMP SEX Men 48 41 52 Women 52 54 41 RACE White 70 37 57 African-American 12 89 8 Hispanic 11 66 28 Asian 4 65 27 Other 3 56 36 AGE 18-29 19 55 36 30-44 25 51 41 45-64 40 44 52 65 & over 16 45 52 INCOME <$50,000 36 53 41 $50,000-$100,000 30 46 49 $100,000 & over 34 47 47 UNION HOUSEHOLD Yes 18 51 43 No 82 46 48 PARTY Democrat 37 89 8 Republican 33 8 88 Independent 31 42 46 POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY Liberal 26 84 10 Moderate 39 52 40 Conservative 35 16 81 MOST IMPORTANT ISSUES Foreign policy 13 60 33 Immigration 13 33 64 Economy 52 52 41 Terrorism 18 40 57 Sources: “Exit Polls 2016.” CNN December 9, 2016. <http://www.cnn.com/election/2012/results/race/president>. Notes: Exit poll results for 2016. Collected by Edison Research for the National Election Pool, a consortium of ABC News, the Associated Press, CBS News, CNN, Fox News and NBC News. The voter survey is based on questionnaires completed by 24,537 voters leaving 350 voting places throughout the United States on November 8, 2016, including 4,398 telephone interviews with early and absentee voters. “Don’t know” and “other” responses not included.

I would hope that my original thread here is more worthy than absolute nonsense. As I hope that the new fuller truth Trump assessment link I am listing in this post is also more worthy than nonsense. Anything is debatable I guess. However, I don't consider my concern ( hugely shared by millions of Americans ) regards the unprecedented angst, mistrust, and division in our society, which I feel Donald Trump has fed and increased in spades to dangerously irresponsible degrees, as nonsense. And even more importantly the ferocious and real U.S. Constitution balance of power battle going on right now between Trump and the Congress ( and which is being lost by Congress more so than any time in their history) and which if lost anymore, could allow a President to get away with things even more law and constitution violating than Trump and his power backers already have. My other great concern is how 80% of our major main stream national broadcast and print media ( of course Fox News but also ABC, CBS, NBC TV and their internet and radio affiliates, etc ) has imo refused to report Trump's balance of power attacking behavior in anything close to it's true potentially dangerous magnitude and effect to our entire self-governing and constitution protected liberty way of life. As well as Trump's incessant and shockingly crude, insulting and bully type personal behavior, words and actions which are outrageously unpresidential and dispiriting to the entire nation. And finally ... his seemingly strongly documented amoral personal behavior and corrupt business history before his presidency. Why is most of our national media in all these areas downplaying these dark truth's about Trump and covering for this guy! I believe it's simply because the majority ownership of these news corporations are of the same wealthiest 1% class and priority mind set as Trump. And they need him to protect, promote and increase their own personal wealth and control interests over this status quo. And add on to this Trump national media truth blackout, many millions of daily talk radio listeners who are inundated with 24/7 pro-Trump/liberal bashing propaganda by as many as 12 worked up and super highly paid right wing anger barkers every day! Limbaugh, Hannity, Mark Levin, Michael Savage... take your pick. This hugely financed angry toned liberal bashing super right wing radio political propaganda machine has for decades daily shaped the political mind sets of tens of millions of Americans way more than most even realize. It's been a very successful operation. However, we do have "a few" non-right wing people in our society who have the education, solid credential journalistic background experience and skills and national pulpit position and media exposure gravitas and who feel tremendous personal responsibility to publicly report what they have learned in their extensive and well documented investigative research into Donald Trump. And to share that which they feel is so concerning regarding this dark but true Donald J. Trump reality. Hence, their talks, books and interviews ( which can't compare in impact to daily nationwide right wing and Trump promoting radio broadcasts ) such as the one or two I am posting. Obviously, I share these investigative journalist's concerns regards Trump, including what I see as most Americans being kept in the dark or diverted from the full darker Trump truth by most of our main stream media. Hence the following link which I feel is another important piece of the Trump Truth effort imo. 37:38NOW PLAYING Author calls Trump "greatest con artist in the history of the world" 468K views2 years ago Excerpts of a lecture by David Cay Johnston, author of the bestselling book, "The Making of Donald Trump."

David...is this photo for real?

I just viewed the Oxford University/ Tony Schwartz November 4, 2016 lecture video again and in it's entirety. This is the third time I have done so since I first came across it. Each time I view this I find it more profoundly thought provoking. Not just about Donald Trump, but about myself and the society and even larger world reality we live in. I "implore" others in this forum to view this lecture. At least once, but a second time if possible. So many important points to discuss and debate regards it but this is Super Bowl Sunday and I am guessing at least some of our members would rather not spend much time discussing things beyond light family gathering and sports related banter. Maybe later after this now quasi-religious American holiday more members can find a little time to share their reflections on the lecture. I wish every non-Trump-locked-in American of voting age (and even just under if they are inclined in such matters ) could view this Tony Schwartz/Oxford University lecture before the next election. I am certain ( I would hope ) that most would find it of great value in it's thoughtful insight and amazingly prescient Trump warning message. I know I will view this lecture again between now and the next election. It becomes more relative in a personal value sense each time. Just a greatly truth important piece imo.

But Evelyn Lincoln wasn't on the plane herself right? Albert Thomas's sneaky smiling "way to go Lyndon" thumbs up gesture right in the middle of what should have been the most somber and devastated Jackie Kennedy empathy respecting demeanor assemblage gives the "whooping it up" charge some credibility imo. That photo of a smiling Thomas was sickening. He looked like a celebrating fan at a college football game after his team just kicked the winning field goal! And as I have mentioned in past postings, making super traumatized Jackie attend that swearing in ceremony for LBJ's photo op benefit was a travesty. It's hard to look at Jackie in those pics. Her eyes. Battle field shell shocked. Her dress, covered in her husband's 2 hour old blood. LBJ...what a gross character.

David, yes you did. What if so much dirt comes out on Trump and his team in the next few months that proves his greater guilt in these matters and exposes even more big nefarious revelations about Trump that are considered illegal and constitution violating? Do his cult like Republican defenders keep protecting him? I've never seen anything close to this kind of constitution attacking craziness and confusion with a President and his party in my almost 70 years. It's really ominous and even scary. Where does it end?

One detective for each block on massive crowd Main street? Both sides of the street? Tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands on Main street. One detective for thousands of people? Bob Carroll steps into a bar to shoot the breeze with an old buddy while on high priority security detail in the middle of JFK's one hour drive through town? And "Assignment Oswald" FBI Agent Hosty is ordering a meal in a downtown diner at the same time JFK is driving by? Didn't Hosty attend highest priority JFK security protocol meetings just that morning with his superiors? Did they tell him what his duties may have been until JFK was safely at the Trade Mart or later upon his departure? Did they include him getting a bite to eat at a diner right in the middle of JFK's ride through town? Hosty gave more effort and security priority in hunting down Marina Oswald for interviews before 11,22,1963. And talking about expected but failed highest priority security. The most threatened criminal suspect in American history was Lee Harvey Oswald. Tens of thousands of serious death threats pouring into the Dallas PD department from everywhere, world wide. I wonder what agent Hosty said and thought when he viewed the news footage of Oswald being walked into DPD basement and the blinding bright lights of press flashbulbs and a crushing frantic shoving crowd of reporters and escorted by just two handlers with Oswald at times slightly in front of them ??? And the general time of this event announced to the world ahead of time and in broad daylight instead of anything more secure and late at night to keep the crowds away? I wonder if Hosty may have said what I said as a 12 year old watching it happen on live TV. "NO WAY" I shouted over and over. I was shocked at how open Oswald was as soon as I first saw him come into the basement seconds before his wide open arrival behind the police car. From that second I sensed with every fiber of my mind and body that Ruby's whacking of Oswald was a set up. Oswald's whacking was the most telling event of a conspiracy imo and still is to this day. Even in my innocent 12 year old mind, I easily figured the most basic security plan for a person as important and threatened as Oswald should have been no public announcements of his movements and a complete circle cordon of physical security surrounding him 5 men thick at every turn when he was out of his cell. I wonder if James Hosty ever commented on the Oswald security situation where armed strip joint owner Jack Ruby had such easy and close access to him despite the presence of 70 armed security in the DPD building at that time? Great legacy for our government personal security agencies in Dallas that weekend. The "ultimate failure" with our President's security. And the ultimate failure with the lead suspect in the murder case in the hands of the DPD just two days later. Heads should have rolled within the DPD for the complete breakdown and failure to protect the most threatened and important criminal suspect in America's history.

Dershowitz's only admission regards any closeness to Jeffery Epstein's under age girl sex shenanigans was that he did indeed get a massage in Epstein's infamous Florida house of sex. But, he didn't take his underwear off and his masseuse was a big boned older German woman who looked like Ernest Borgnine with a wig. Alan Dershowitz: Sure I Got a Massage at Jeffrey Epstein’s Mansion, but I Kept My Underwear On! • 5 Welp, welcome to the slippery sleazy slope that comes with billionaire Jeffrey Epstein’s recent arrest for child sex trafficking. Internet sleuths have uncovered a 2015 video of Harvard attorney and Epstein’s friend, Alan Dershowitz, who worked to get Epstein a sweetheart deal in a 2008 plea agreement, admitting to getting a massage at Epstein’s mansion.During an interview with Miami news station WPLG regarding Britain’s Prince Andrew (another friend of Epstein) and his alleged sexual involvement with an underaged girl who was allegedly kept as a sex slave by Epstein, Dershowitz not only bashed the accuser, calling her an “admitted prostitute and a serial xxxx” but claimed that the then-teen was not victimized and in fact “made her own decisions in life.” Dershowitz admitted to being at the billionaire’s home but noted that he’d never seen an underaged girl at Epstein’s place despite sworn testimony from Epstein’s former butler who claimed that Dershowitz was at the residence at the same time that underaged girls were there. Dershowitz has an easy explanation for that: “Were there young women in another part of the house giving massages while I was around? I have no idea of that!” Oh, and did Dershowitz ever receive a massage at Epstein’s house? Yep. But Dershowitz claimed that it was from an adult woman and he kept his underwear on. “I kept my underwear on during the massage. I don’t like massages particularly.” Watch the entire interview below but I warn you, it’s triggering and mad cringey. Stephen A. Crockett Jr.

Vince you mention JFK's motorcade through Dallas being only 11 miles from Love Field. To the Trade Mart? Didn't the drive from Love Field to downtown take up most of that 11 miles? If so, from what I have seen of footage of that drive, there were no high rise buildings until downtown. Kind of residential with homes? And if the 11 miles was from Love Field to the Trade Mart, deduct another couple miles or more from Dealey Plaza to the Trade Mart. Again, no tall buildings on that stretch as well. My point being...that the stretch of actual multi-floor buildings in downtown Dallas was what ... 3 to 5 miles? Less maybe? And how many high rises on that stretch? 50? 75? 100? Manpower to place men on the building rooftops even at that number should never have been a problem. Agent Hill says they couldn't do this because of manpower shortages? Heck, you could easily find an extra 100 men from the local police and sheriff departments and even other agencies. Same with men on the ground scanning all the open higher building windows with binoculars starting a few minutes before and up until JFK passed under these? Imagine even one security person scanning the Texas Schoolbook Depository and the three other high story building windows in Dealey Plaza in that kind of time frame? If several innocent, untrained and unequipped ( no binoculars) sidewalk bystanders could easily see one or two men with rifles in the Book Depository higher floor windows just before JFK's car drove underneath, how could a trained and alert and equipped security person miss what they saw? Innocent people on the street in Dealey Plaza on 11,22,1963 did more common sense security than the so-called huge security team Jessie Curry bragged about regards JFK's motorcade. And why not use Sheriff Decker's personnel to do these other duties. They were told "in no way to participate in the motorcade security" ? How about telling FBI agent James Hosty...hey, maybe you could hold off going to a local diner for lunch while JFK is riding through one of the most violently radical, extreme right wing, JFK hating cities in the country at that time? When JFK gets to the Trade Mart, maybe then you could get yourself a burger and fries? Now there's a red flag if you ever saw one. As big as a sports stadium.

Interesting bio story. LBJ was difficult to work for. JFK a dream. Same story repeated often.

Where Ruby was and what he was doing before Dallas Morning News ad man John Newnam first saw Ruby in his office at 12:40 pm, and after 1:PM when he didn't on 11,22,1963, is so critical in importance, yet the WC just skipped through Ruby's meandering discrepancies in this area of questioning as if it wasn't. The stalled green pickup on Elm near the grassy knoll incident just hours before JFK's motorcade as described by Julia Ann Mercer and her picking Ruby's face out as the driver of the truck is one of my favorite - too odd and improbable to ignore - Dealey Plaza/ Jack Ruby stories. And Mark Lane's interview of former Ruby / Carousel club employee Nancy Perrin Rich/Nancy Hamilton as well. Rich/Hamilton's accounts of Ruby as a bag man in a gun running scheme to Cuba is a revelation regards Ruby being involved in so many other areas of intrigue that the Warren Commission refused to acknowledge or investigate. Jack Ruby...Man of mystery beyond a benevolent sandwich catering, Dachshund dog loving, hot head, out-of-line customer pummeling, classy strip joint owner wannabe...for sure.

Jack Ruby refers to Dallas Morning News ad man John Newnam often in his WC testimony regards Ruby's presence and actions in the DMN building before and up to the time of the news announcement of the shooting in Dealey Plaza. Mr. Newnam's WC testimony recounts Ruby's presence in Newnam's office on the 2nd floor on 11,22,1963 from 12:40 PM when Newnam returned from watching the JFK motorcade 7 blocks away on Main Street. Newnam testified he only saw Ruby in his office area from 12:40 PM and not at all earlier in the day. Newnam gives timelines regards Ruby's presence, actions ( his call to his sister ) and departure but he is unsure as to the exact times beyond 1: PM and whether Ruby left at that time or later. Newnam wasn't sure if Ruby was present in the office area when news of JFK's actual death was announced on National TV. If Ruby left Newnam's office around 1:PM or even 10 minutes later, that would give Ruby time to drive to Parkland, park, rush in and bump into Seth Kantor either right before Malcolm Kilduff's JFK death announcement or soon after. Newnam was Ruby's best corroborative witness to back up his DMN presence, actions and departure time line WC testimony. When you read Newnam's actual WC testimony about Ruby in the DMN building with him however, Newnam is clearly unsure about Ruby's departure time between the news of the shooting and the news of JFK's actual death. A critical factor in the Seth Kantor Parkland meet up case. Yet, the WC still decided to dismiss Kantor's Ruby at Parkland recollections and believe Ruby's claim of never going to Parkland. I read once that Kantor's WC questioner Burt W. Griffin changed his mind years later regards believing Ruby over Kantor and Kantor's claim of meeting and talking to Ruby at Parkland. True?

Really. Could you name some of these witnesses and share what they said? Any of them taken seriously?