Joe Bauer

No, No, No members !

I will never accept money from anyone for such a purpose.

I would immediately send any funds back to their senders.

I wish we on the forum could be made aware of other members and those who read the forum whether THEY truly are in dire need of assistance. That would be a a much more practical use of such a fund.

I am doing fine here in California.

How about starting a JFK financial need award fund?

For those in the JFK truth community who are truly having it rough?

I am doing better than perhaps some think I am doing.

Thanks again all. 

What an incredibly positive point about this forum in particular regards the character and humanitarianism of many of it's members.

A real brother/sisterhood community.

Robert, I just came across your post.

Oh my gosh!

I will never forget your incredible Dealey Plaza visit offer including your asking others on the forum to chip in as well. 

What a beautiful, appreciated and inspiring gesture.

Of course , I could never for one second accept funds from others for such an experience.

For many reasons.

I think that there are probably some on the forum or even regular non-member visitors who may be in worse financial or physical shape than me.

My not being in a position to take a trip to Dallas, Texas is much less of a concern to me because of that reason and others.

I have had so much bestowed upon me in my life ( the most beautiful, giving and good character wife for 37 years and two loving children ) that not having travel funds to travel to Dealey Plaza is no big deal at all.

That doesn't mean however I am not really, really moved by your gesture and posting this on the forum.  Thank you so much Robert.  What a kind and thoughtful humanitarian mind, heart and spirit you obviously possess.

From my own heart let me add this .

In my fantasy of winning the lotto (stupid I know but commonly shared by millions of others) one of the priorities I had planned upon acquiring such a windfall was to contribute cash awards to everyone on this and maybe other JFK truth seeking forums.

Regardless of their debate stance. Especially if they needed such which I am sure many do.

This would be my way of supporting the community of JFK ( and RFK and MLK ) truth seekers and giving them something real back for their lifetime of effort and keeping the flame alive.

So, in the same spirit of brotherhood Robert, I cannot thank you enough for this posting.

I am currently fine. We don't have any assets such as home equity ( renters for all our 37 years ) but we do have my wife's 401 K and I do get a small SS check and my wife will have a larger one in the future when she retires.

I have a heart condition called "AFIB" which does make me unsure about long distance trips anymore.

I have been provided with so many great and informative pictures and even videos of Dealey Plaza via this forum I truly feel as if I HAVE been there.

In spirit for sure.

So, no need for a DP travel fund for me...but BRAVO to you Robert for even thinking up such an offer, let alone posting this.

Truly touched and proud to be a forum member, Joe Bauer.

Steve, I just read all of officer Patrick Dean's WC  testimony via the link you provided.

Just this alone is a gold vein of further inquiry justification that seems to have been relatively untapped.

In my couple of years of being on the forum, I notice I keep finding myself coming back to Oswald's murder by Jack Ruby right inside the DPD building basement with what...70 armed security present?

To me, Oswald's murder under those circumstances is the single most serious and effecting action in killing a truly thorough investigation as to the guilt of Oswald and knowing if others were involved in JFK's assassination.

I want to do a study of the decision making process regards Oswald's transfer.

This would include everything the relevant "chain of command" ( DPD and others ) responsible for Oswald's transfer and his security during this claimed they decided to do or not do in this process and why.

Were any of the DPD command instructed to make these decisions by others outside of their authority?

I would ask members who may know of some past threads with relevant information in this area to please refer me to them.

Same goes for books or articles that focus on this aspect of the Oswald murder.

I have read the WC testimonies of Curry, Fritz, Batchelor and M.W. Stevenson.

And in these there are so many discrepancies and they were so poorly and insufficiently questioned especially as to who effected their decisions about Oswald that this area is begging for more scrutiny.

Losing Oswald was THE WHOLE CASE!

Losing Oswald was the greatest most damaging act of security breakdown in American history...with consequences that were so great and society effecting, it's hard for me to accept that heads did not roll and career standings weren't finished after that tragic fiasco.

If I were the President and/or head of the FBI on 11,24,1963 and were "seriously, genuinely and honestly" concerned about finding the truth about the JFK assassination, I would be outraged and even furious that the DPD lost the most important piece of evidence in this case ... with the excuse that they did what they did regarding Oswald's transfer security because ... they didn't want the press to be blocked from seeing Oswald?

Just ONE of the most incredibly false statements after Oswald was whacked by Jack Ruby was Chief Curry's claim that his department did a questioning survey of every DPD officer in the entire DPD who may have known or interacted with Jack Ruby in any way personally or professionally .  His survey results said that "25 officers" answered in the affirmative with "no more than 50 for sure."

Yet, "eye witness" after "eye witness" ( mostly former employees of Ruby ) stated that Jack Ruby knew at least half the Dallas police force during his many years as a club owner in Dallas and his hanging out at the DPD on an almost regular or even semi-regular basis.

Who wouldn't know someone like Jack Ruby who was involved in legality borderline, regularly scrutinized  business operations such as a strip joint for years. And his Carousel Club ads were in the main local paper for years.  "Your Host...JACK RUBY!"  Free drinks for cops!

It seems that half of Chief Curry's 25 DPD officers who knew Ruby were in and around the DPD building basement when Ruby sauntered in.

Officer Patrick Dean knew Ruby and said so on national TV just after Ruby had whacked Oswald.

Jim Leavelle mentions knowing Ruby personally often in his interviews.

DPD officer Blackie Harrison was inches away from Ruby who was hiding behind Harrison just before bursting out in front of Oswald. Read Harrison's WC testimony to see how well acquainted Harrison was with Ruby. And Harrison's police partner ( who also knew Ruby ) was right straight across from Harrison and Ruby during the shooting. 

Ruby mentions names of officers who he knew and saw that day right outside of the basement entrance like they were old pals...Pierce, Vaughn, etc.

And among the affirmative knowing Ruby police officers that responded to Chief Curry's survey...was Roscoe White one of these? White was an employee of the DPD during the JFK killing and Oswald's

White's wife Geneva once worked for Jack Ruby, if only temporarily and Geneva White claimed Ruby even came over to their house on social visits!

You would think Curry would have called every officer who claimed they knew Jack Ruby in for an extensive interview outlining their relationship with Ruby.

And if White was interviewed, do you think he volunteered that he served in the same military units and over seas locations as Oswald during part of his own Marine stint?

I would appreciate the links to other perhaps more detailed threads that go into the chain of command history of Oswald's security transfer on 11,24,1963.

47 minutes ago, Terry Adams said:

The fact that Hosty did not take his job seriously enough to, at least, verify where Oswald was on November 22, 1963 says that it is possible to place the blame for the assassination squarely at his feet!

Terry, was there any more dangerous threat person that Hosty was inclined to check on versus Castro loving Oswald on that day?

11 hours ago, Joseph McBride said:

I don't agree with the idea of banning anybody from posting. Particularly on a forum such

as this one, we should take great care to support the First Amendment. There

are legal limitations to free speech (such as libel), but unpopular opinions or ones most

people consider wrong-headed or offensive (such as some of James Fetzer's) should not be considered cause

for banning. Sometimes we can learn from opinions we do not agree

with; sometimes people can be wrong-headed much of the time but

still have some valuable views at other times (as Fetzer, for example, has). Personal insults and ad hominem attacks should be discouraged, in

my view, but otherwise unpopular views should be welcomed. 

 

"New opinions often appear first as jokes and fancies, then as blasphemies and treason, then as questions open to discussion, and finally as established truths."

       -- George Bernard Shaw

 

Much madness is divinest Sense-

To a discerning Eye-

Much Sense- the starkest Madness-

'Tis the Majority-

In this, as All, prevail-

Assent-and you are sane-

Demur-you're straightway dangerous---

And handled with a Chain-

 

    -Emily Dickinson (poem 435), c. 1862

Heard someone on another venue state they saw this on a protest sign during an event back in the 1960's

"I would rather have questions without answers...than answers without questions.

My prediction:

Whoever the Dems choose as their final 2020 candidate will not be running against Trump.

Trump himself knows he won't be the Republican candidate. If he isn't forced to resign before 2020 he will come up with some contrived reason ( such as a personal health concern ) for dropping out of running again.

Trump and for sure his entire family have many reasons ( but one main one ) for his not running in 2020.

They never dreamed that their personal, private and especially their "business" lives would be scrutinized as thoroughly as they have been with disastrous results.

Trump and his family simply have too much dirty laundry baggage and dealings that being so publicly exposed, have for sure made them regret the day Donald Trump accepted the nomination as the Republican candidate in 2016.

They want out of this 24/7 glaring, exposing and stressful spotlight nightmare ... like tomorrow.

And one can so easily see how much Melania hates her loss of privacy and that of her son.

She must yearn for the day she can again shop for and buy a $50,000 designer dress on 5th Avenue without the national press blaring this indulgence to the public masses.

Ivanka and Jarrod Kushner have basically been hiding out compared to their initial high profile involvement in the administration after so many negative stories came out regards their own business dealings such as the billion dollar 666 Fifth Ave. building boondoggle that somehow got taken care of by suspiciously mysterious investors.

They have young children too and of course want them out of this spotlight.

Big game hunter Trump Jr. has never been subjected to so many legal charges and investigations.

However, he seems to like the national celebrity spotlight despite the negative exposure. An ego like his father?

Donald Trump himself has never been so negatively exposed like he has as President.

His sexual trysts outside of marriage, their payoffs, his proven lies about them, his taxes, his decades of past business dealings with very shady characters, he hates living in the White House ( which he likens to a dump ) versus his lavish NY and Mar-a-Lago digs, he can't go a day without letting his hair down or taking a break from the make-up routine.

And Trump will be 74 in 2020.  Please.

Trump of course cannot be truthful about his not running in 2020. Not at this time.

Imagine if Trump announced today his true intentions of not running in 2020?

That would immediately take so much steam out of his Presidency ( lame duck syndrome ) it would be disastrous.

Everyone would say...hey, the guy isn't even gonna be around in another year and 10 months.

The major interest news and political spotlight would immediately be refocused onto perceived candidates running in 2020.

The Dems should be preparing to face someone highly vetted as a much more broad appealing candidate ( especially regarding the female vote ) on the Repub side in 2020. Someone who is so well groomed to counter the Trump daily conflict and confrontation craziness legacy that he will be tougher to beat than Trump would be.

35 minutes ago, Tony Krome said:

 

Whoever took this video footage did as professional a job as a trained cameraman for television news stations. And with something better than an average everyday family film camera.

Oswald seems completely at ease with his being filmed and for what seemed like several minutes.

As paranoid and cynical as Oswald was reported to be, you'd think he would have exhibited at least some suspicious glances back at a cameraman whom he didn't know from Adam. imo

Jim, using the JFK assassination in a comedy routine was career suicide as we know.

Overly serious and graphic, one might compare this effort to someone cracking jokes about Christ's torturous last day and crucifixion to an audience of Catholics on Good Friday.

SOMEONE GRAB THAT BLASPHEMOUS FOOL!

Mort Sahl got away with it to a degree but still experienced great career damage as a result. 

It's an interesting subject to think about because it reveals certain taboo truths about the JFK assassination in regards to it's psychological effect on our society which was and still is one of deeply disturbing and even fearful contemplation.

We fear the full truth about the JFK assassination because we were and still are not sure who was behind it and why. We fear greatly the possibility that powerful individuals and groups "in our own country and society" may have been the guilty parties on many levels such as the cover-up. 

Interestingly, Jim Garrison used humor in his tome "On The Trail Of The Assassins" that I found very funny and perceptively insightful.

Reminded me of Mark Twain with his colorful and homey descriptions of wildly eccentric characters such as David Ferry, Dean Andrews Jr., Jack Martin etc.and his somewhat cynical but still funny ways of revealing the great absurdities in the WC findings and in many of the efforts used to discredit him in his investigation. 

Garrison's metaphor of the cannon ball swallowing in referencing the "bull fighting ring" in New Orleans venture story and the ridiculous Key Stone Cops failed effort at trying to frame him in a homosexual sting operation in an airport bathroom are just hilarious.

We even have our own "in house" forum comedian here with Cliff Varnell who often makes me laugh.

Obviously, we can tolerate "some" JFK assassination humor here on the forum if it isn't too dark and graphic about the actual brutal and bloody act.

Another JFK writer who makes me laugh heartily is Walt Brown who is hilariously self-deprecating in that New "Joisy" thing way.  His humor is light-hearted though.

7 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

You know something Kirk, sometimes I wonder why you are here.

Do you know anything about these cases wider than what is on this board?

Because some of us actually do.  And we work on them and we interact with people who are actually in the arena trying to do something about them in a political and/or legal way.  That's because we think something went seriously wrong with America after Bobby Kennedy was murdered.  That tolled the bell for the sixties, which was a decade I really liked.  This is what I wrote about in my introduction to Lisa Pease's fine book, A Lie too Big to Fail.  Have you read it?  I doubt it.  If you had you would not write such stilly stuff as above.

Kamala Harris was the AG of California when Bill Pepper and Laurie Dusek presented their application for an evidentiary hearing to reopen the RFK case.  She did not need to oppose the motion.  She could have granted it and let the evidence be heard in court and let it stand or fail on its merits.  She did not do that.  She vigorously opposed the motion before the court.

But she actually did something even worse than that.  She did not know the facts of the case very well.  So she got some help in writing it.  I will not divulge all the details of that exercise.  Its all there is Lisa's book, which you should read sometime.  (pp. 501-02)  

Now, if you think that playing a prominent role in the cover up of Bobby Kennedy's murder is an attractive attribute for someone to lead America and the Democratic party forward after the Clintons and Obama, then I guess we have some severe differences about what that party should be about.  I don't think we need any more cover up artists in the White House, or someone who does not understand what happened to America in 1968.

And BTW, if you like Bill Maher, then that is another difference.  I much preferred this guy:

 

Never heard of nor seen this fellow before.

Was he performing outside of the United States in this video?

Liked his "Sixth Floor Museum" routine and especially his take on how visitors might react if they could actually get close enough to the "snipers nest" window to see how low to the floor it was.

NO WAY DUDE!

I mentioned this "low to the floor" fact in a post just a few days ago after seeing the inside view of the sixth floor windows in a documentary.

Even a small framed person would have to uncomfortably squat or get on their knees to the floor to be able to get their upper body in any kind of square facing and securely stable shooting position out that very low to the floor window and to then face a difficult sharp downward shooting angle ... and at a moving target to boot?

Wonder if any of the investigation re-enactment shooters were placed in such a physically constrained confine exactly as the sixth floor shooter dealt with?

On 2/21/2019 at 11:34 PM, Rob Couteau said:

Indeed. I  thought he wiped the floor with her. And rightly so. In his very diplomatic way as well, minus all the smarmy talk and sneers of his opponent. Nothing personal, just the facts. The problem is the populace doesn't read books, has next to nothing of a serious political education, and worst of all gets all their "information" from the media. So someone like Bernie has to cram in all sorts of information into 60-second bytes, and even when he does such a spectaular job people either don't believe it or it flies too fast over their heads like a cruise missile. (Same could be said for getting the information out on the JFK case.) They will gang up on him in the debate and the meme will be "I'm not a socialist. I'm a capitalist." So far that has been said by Beto, Kamala Harris, and Elizabeth Warren, almost word for word, and

Warren stood up and gave Trump a standing ovation during the SOTU address when he said America is not a socialist country and never will be one.

It's pretty pathetic - and it's only February. lol.

Again, is this true about Warren?

What is going on here?

Are we Bernie platform backers being played here by the likes of Warren, Beto and Harris?

Are they "not" the Bernie policies leaning champions of the middle and poorer classes as they promote themselves to be? 

Rob, so true about the lack of informed knowledge and even interest in the true social, economic and political historical areas of study both nationally and internationally regarding the large majority percentage of our general populace.

I am not close at all to being adequately informed in this way myself, except to the point of at least recognizing and admitting this uninformed reality personally and the dangerous consequences of so many millions of my fellow Americans being "even less informed" and totally oblivious to their ignorance and of their manipulation by the largest funded propaganda machines so deeply embedded in our daily life, society and culture.

Rush Limbaugh gets into the heads of what ... 50 million Americans who listen to his obsessive 24/7  Democrat/Liberal = Boogie Man radio broadcast rants almost daily?

In Limbaugh's 30+ years of mass audience brainwashing with this one main message, he ( more than any other Republican party/policy promoting national audience propagandist ) has been so successful in this endeavor, that in most of rural America the words "Liberal",  "Democrat" and "Leftist" bring instant and extreme fear based revulsion, scorn and even hate in the minds of the majority of people in this geographic part of America towards those they feel have been infected with this liberal Democrat "Walking Dead" zombie level threatening virus.

At my youngest voting age way back during the 1972 presidential election, I remember sensing even then a mass manipulation going on with the Republicans constantly and hugely broadcasting this scary extreme message that "they" were the "Law & Order" party versus the young radicals rioting in the streets party with their almost commie ( with slightly longer side burns) candidate George McGovern portrayed as ready to unleash his violent law disrespecting and free love hippie horde base into the innocent home towns of America to rape, pillage and plunder!

I knew that Nixon and Mafia backed Agnew were the real crooked and corrupt law breakers (which was born out IN SPADES before their terms were even finished  )  and McGovern was the true law respecting and war hero candidate,  yet the huge Republican propaganda machine was so successful in imbuing this extremely scary and frightening alternate reality about the Democrats as dangerous law breaking and unpatriotic radicals, the election reflected this Democratic party boogie man fear with one of the greatest vote sweep disparities ever in a presidential election.

That many Americans were successfully duped into buying into the Nixon and Agnew as the more patriotic and law and order saviors myth ...  versus the true war hero and law abiding McGovern and Sargent Shriver reality.

I still to this day wonder if "any" of those who voted for Nixon and Agnew, mainly because of their self-promoted image as the "Law And Order" candidates, ever reflected on how duped and manipulated they were in believing this false image reality when the truth of Nixon's and Agnew's true deep corruption was exposed and proven beyond doubt.

I recently took a close look at the 2016 Presidential election voting tallies in Michigan by counties.

Out of 83 counties in the state of Michigan, Hillary Clinton won just ... 9 !!!

74 counties went for Trump by huge margins! 

But those 74 counties were all the smaller population and more rural ones.

Hillary took all the more populated counties with large black voter bases and those of the state capital and a few University towns.

I am mentioning this 2016 election vote reality in Michigan because to me it reflects similarities to the 1972 election in people voting their same 1972 type bias's, angers and fears which the likes of Republican party propagandist Rush Limbaugh incessantly keeps feeding them in our current times.

Sadly, we haven't changed much since 1972 in this regards imo.

38 minutes ago, Andrew Prutsok said:

He may be her mentor, but he actively advises Trump, in and out of White House all the time.

Is this claim by Andrew Prutsok true?

If so, how can someone give Trump a thumbs up and Hillary Clinton a thumbs down for the same thing?

Sandy, I want to keep the main thread point pure but hard not to discuss a couple of other related areas in so doing.

I am not a student of the Z-film and it's reported alteration.

So I can't add anything deep research worthy in this specific debate. Just some novice observations.

But what we all see in the scores of Z-film footage shown on the internet ( altered or not ) does show some indisputable facts imo.

JFK's head explodes violently and massively from the inside out, obviously indicating being hit by a high velocity missile.

JFK's skull was blown out in the parietal/ occipital area according to the public video.  We see skull bone exploding outward in that area and a huge pink blood and brain matter cloud spraying up and all around from what seems like that specific area at the same time.

Wouldn't the brain blood and matter cloud spray frames ( showing it's direction, extension and scope ) have to be altered as well to hide a farther back skull blowout? 

The spray cloud we see "seems to fit"  in point of origin with the frames showing the above ear flap blowout.

On 2/19/2019 at 4:05 AM, Micah Mileto said:

And then they say truthers have psychological problems. What's the medical term for poor research and stupidity? "Dunning-kruger effect" is overused to the point where idiots just use it to sound smart.

Micah, I just viewed the "Dunning-Kruger Effect" definition and I was immediately struck by it's clear application toward and regards Donald Trump.

He constantly refers to himself as brilliant and that he knows more than everyone else in almost every area of knowledge and study.

He is totally oblivious to his own true level lack of understanding and informed knowledge especially relative to those who are on a higher level with proven credibility.

And this is mixed with a professional wrestlers addiction to outrageous public boasting and cheering crowd approval.   

God help us through his presidency!

On 8/22/2017 at 9:15 AM, Douglas Caddy said:

I am posting my legal file on this subject in the JFK Assassination Topic of the Forum because the events described within it initially came about when Roger Stone contacted me in 2012. He requested any information that I might have on LBJ, which I was pleased to provide. In 2013 Stone published his book, The Man Who Killed Kennedy: The Case Against LBJ, which became a best-seller. In his book Stone credits me as a primary source for information, as is disclosed in the file. Thus, in a roundabout way JFK five decades after his murder is providing from the grave a nexus of how the 2016 presidential election was rigged. Don’t you think he is pleased at doing this?

 

                                                                                                        ************************************

 

 

DOUGLAS CADDY

ATTORNEY-AT-LAW

HOUSTON, TEXAS

Member, Texas Bar since 1979 and

District of Columbia Bar since 1970

 

 

MEMORANDUM TO THE LEGAL FILE

Subject: Roger Stone, Lyndon LaRouche and Russia influencing the 2016 Presidential election

Date: August 22, 2017

 

     This memo to the file brings up to date what has occurred since I sent my letter of December 10, 2016, to FBI Director James Comey and my subsequent letter of June 27, 2017, to Special Counsel Robert Mueller in regard to the above subject.

 

     In my letter to FBI Director Comey I stated that “I knew Roger Stone of the Trump presidential campaign forty years ago in Washington. Because of this Harley Schlanger of the LaRouche organization, whom I also knew, earlier this year asked me to arrange a meeting between him and Stone. I agreed to do so. Such a meeting took place in February [2016]. I was not present at the meeting.

 

     “It is my impression that as a result of that February meeting the LaRouche organization agreed to use its extensive Russian contacts to open up a back channel for the Trump campaign to communicate directly to Russian intelligence. This ultimately led to Russian intelligence hacking the emails of the Democratic National Committee, which became a major issue in the presidential campaign and continues to do so to this day. Stone may have played a role in Wikileaks being given the hacked emails for distribution to the public.

 

     “Harley Schlanger and other LaRouche leaders interviewed Stone on a LaRouche radio program on a number of occasions during the course of the presidential campaign.”

 

     With my letter to Director Comey I attached a number of emails that I had received from Schlanger and Stone on this matter. Relevant quotations from some of these follow later in this memo. In addition I sent copies of my letter to Director Comey to President Obama and CIA Director Peter Goss as a safeguard that it would not be deep-sixth.

 

     After President Trump fired Director Comey in May 2017, which led to the appointment of Special Counsel Mueller, I wrote Mr. Mueller on June 27, 2017 in part as follows:

 

      “On December 10, 2016, I sent the enclosed letter with its email attachments to FBI Director James Comey about the above referenced matter. I never heard back from him and hence I am writing you. My motivation in doing so is because I fear that our democracy was severely endangered by Russian influence in the 2016 presidential election.  Alarmingly, this Russian threat is unabated. The continued existence of the United States as a free nation is at stake.

 

      “Here is a brief summary of my letter to Director Comey: In January 2016 Harley Schlanger of the LaRouche organization contacted me to request that I set up a meeting for him with Roger Stone of the Trump Campaign. Their meeting was held in Austin, Texas, in February 2016. I was unable to attend but my impression is that as a result of that meeting the LaRouche organization agreed to use its extensive Russian contacts to open up a back channel for the Trump campaign to communicate directly with Russian intelligence.

 

      “Since writing my December 10 letter to Director Comey I have uncovered the following information that may corroborate the contents of that letter:

 

     “A month before Schlanger contacted me to set up the meeting with Stone, a LaRouche delegation sympathetic to Russia attended the RT anniversary dinner in Moscow in December 2015 where Premier Putin was seated next to General Flynn. For confirmation see the bottom of page 15 and top of page 16 of the famous Christopher Steele British Dossier. Schlanger may have been among those who attended. There are essentially five persons who lead the LaRouche organization today: Lyndon LaRouche (age 94), his wife, Helga, Jeffrey Steinberg, Harley Schlanger and Anton Chaitkin.

 

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3259984-Trump-Intelligence-Allegations.html

 

       “Jeffrey Steinberg participated in an annual Economic Conference in Moscow in March 2016.

 

https://larouchepac.com/20160328/eir-participates-moscow-economic-forum

 

       “In November 2016, Roger Stone interviewed Lyndon LaRouche on his radio program.

 

https://larouchepac.com/20161121/lyndon-larouche-radio-interview-roger-stone

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QBx6uHA05gg

 

       “I am writing you because you possess the investigative power and authority to determine if any of the information provided in this letter and my prior letter to Director Comey merits further investigation. It may or may not. As a private citizen I am in no position to make that determination. However, I believe it is my solemn duty both as a private citizen and an attorney who is a member of the District of Columbia and Texas Bars to call this matter to your attention.”

 

     When I sent my letter to Mr. Mueller, I also sent copies of it to Senator Mark Warner of the Senate Intelligence Committee and Congressman Adam Schiff of the House Intelligence Committee.

 

ABOUT LAROUCHE

   

     Here is the link to obtain update viewpoints from the LaRouche organization:

 

      https://larouchepac.com/updates

 

      Three of the brightest and most knowledgeable persons I have ever met are Jeffrey Steinberg, Harley Schanger and Anton Chaikin. However, it is well known that Lyndon LaRouche is the ultimate decider on all policy matters and his word overrides those in the organization whose views may differ.

 

      The Houston Chronicle of November 7, 1982, published an article titled, “The man who ‘perfected’ Marx: LaRouche collects money, works at making folks over ‘in my own image.’”

 

     The article states that, “former members say LaRouche is omnipotent within the organization.” It further declares that, “According to his 1979 autobiography, The Power of Reason, LaRouche was born into a Quaker family in New Hampshire in 1922 and had only two friends until late in high school. He says the reason for his lack of friends was that his mental capabilities exceeded those of his peers….As a young man, he joined a socialist group where he ‘perfected’ the theories of Marx.’”

 

     I find myself in agreement with some of the policies espoused by the LaRouche organization, such as constructing a modern, transnational “silk road” and reform of the U.S. financial system, including Glass-Steagall reinstatement and creation of a national credit institution for infrastructure and manufacturing. Where I vehemently differ with the group is its alleged role in assisting Russia in influencing the 2016 presidential election.  This issue is paramount above all others.

 

ABOUT ROGER STONE

 

      I first met Roger Stone in 1975 soon after the National Conservative Political Action Committee (NCPAC) was created. Its chairman was Terry Dolan, a really nice guy who questioned the moral leadership of the conservative movement at the time. He was upset that republican Senator Jesse Helms of North Carolina was driving around Washington, D.C. in a convertible with a young blond woman at his side. Charles Black, a key leader in NCPAC, was from North Caroline and was a protégé of Senator Helms, a racist demagogue if there ever was one. Stone was another leader. Paul Manafort was on the scene but not prominent in the organization. I was the organization’s legal counsel.

 

      A short story will suffice in my finding out that Stone was a classic sociopath. On one occasion in 1975 Dolan, Stone and I had lunch together in the greater Washington area and had left the restaurant and were walking down the street. We noticed that on the opposite side of the street an elderly woman who suffered from severe curvature of the spine was walking with what appeared to be her two children, a man and a woman in their thirties. The poor woman’s agonizing bent over posture was such that her face was almost parallel with the sidewalk. When Stone saw her he immediately let out a yell of delight and began to walk and prance in the same way as the poor woman was doing. He did so while gesturing towards the trio on the other side of the street so as to attract their attention. I was so embarrassed and shocked at Stone’s gross behavior that I ran into a public garage in an attempt to distant myself from him. About twenty years ago I received a phone call from Fox commentator James Rosen (if my memory is correct) and who asked me what I thought of Stone. I told him about the above disturbing incident.

 

      Charles Black, Paul Manafort and Roger Stone went on to form the political lobbying firm of Black, Manafort and Stone and what they all had in common was being sociopaths. Their quest was for power, access and money and the thought of what was best for our country never entered the picture.

 

      In a sense I bear some responsibility for their rise to prominence. While an undergraduate at Georgetown University in 1958 I co-founded with a college friend, David Franke, the National Student Committee for the Loyalty Oath. We did this because there was no conservative movement in existence at the time and we thought we could start such a movement using college students. Senator Styles Bridges of New Hampshire brought us national exposure by endorsing our organization in a speech on the floor of the Senate. The following year, 1959, Franke and I founded Youth for Goldwater for Vice President, which was another major step toward building a conservative movement. Here is an account of what happened next from the book by Professor John A. Andrew III, The Other Side of the Sixties: Young Americans for Freedom and the Rise of Conservative Politics, (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1997), pp. 217-218:

 

“William F. Buckley and Marvin Liebman met Douglas Caddy and David Franke, both of whom attended as representatives of Youth for Goldwater for Vice President. Together, these four men would turn their disappointment in Goldwater’s loss [at the 1960 GOP convention in Chicago that nominated Nixon] into a national conservative youth movement. Impressed by the passion of Caddy and Franke and their attempts to organize conservative youth in the past, including the creation of the Student Committee for the Loyalty Oath in 1958, Buckley and Liebman decided to mentor them. The loss of Goldwater for the Vice Presidential nomination convinced Buckley that young conservatives in the GOP needed to be fostered from the top down. He believed that young conservatives, with his guidance, could change the American political discourse. Consequently, Buckley hired Franke to intern at the National Review and Caddy worked for Liebman in public relations. Their first major task was to organize a national youth group for conservatives funded by Buckley. In September of 1960, on the Buckley family estate in Sharon, Connecticut, over 100 students from 44 different colleges and universities across the country assembled to devise a plan to capitalize on the growing conservatism of American youth and turn it into an organized political movement. The result created the Young Americans for Freedom, officially chartered on September 11, 1960, and the adoption of the Sharon Statement at the conference. In the Sharon statement, YAF articulated its critique of American society and proclaimed, ‘In this time of moral and political crisis, it is the responsibility of the youth of America to affirm certain eternal truths.’”

 

 https://www.slideshare.net/ClaireViall/rebels-with-a-causethe-growth-and-appeal-of-the-young-americans-for-freedom-in-the-1960s

 

      The founding of YAF in 1960 led to the birth of the modern conservative movement which occurred in the wake of a fantastically successful rally of conservatives at Manhattan Center in New York City in March 1961.

 

      So Black and Manafort and Stone, sad to say, are ethically challenged by-products of the modern conservative movement which decades ago was taken over by opportunists and sociopaths. Stone was active in successfully rigging three presidential elections: In Florida in 2000 for G. W. Bush, in Ohio in 2004 for G. W. Bush and in 2016 for Trump. He has utter contempt for honest elections. Rigging is what he does.

 

      Prior to the creation of NCPAC in 1975, Stone was active in the Nixon 1972 presidential campaign.

 

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/nbc-news-exclusive-memo-shows-watergate-prosecutors-had-evidence-nixon-n773581

 

      I was the Original Attorney for the Watergate Seven but did not meet Stone until three years after the Watergate case broke.

 

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/21500-memoir-on-being-original-attorney-for-the-watergate-seven-by-douglas-caddy/

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5jKBlJQNtek

 

      Liberals rejoiced with Nixon being forced to resign the presidency but the immediate result was the rise of the radical right with Black, Manafort and Stone being formed as a lobbying/PR firm and the extreme right-wing oligarch Joseph Coors founding the Heritage Foundation, headed by Edwin Feulner, and the Committee for a Free Congress, headed by Paul Weyrich

 

     I left Washington, D.C. in 1979 and moved to Texas once I recognized the bizarre and dangerous direction that the conservative movement was coming to embrace.

 

    Thus, it came as a surprise three decades later when in 2012 I was contacted by Roger Stone who requested that I supply him with any material in my possession on President Lyndon Johnson. This came about because I had been the attorney for Billie Sol Estes, LBJ’s silent business and political partner, in Billie Sol’s quest in 1984 to obtain a grant of immunity from prosecution from the U.S. Department of Justice in order that he could tell what he knew about LBJ crimes that took place before and during his presidency.

 

     Stone’s praise-worthy best-selling book, The Man Who Killed Kennedy: The Case Against LBJ, was published in 2013.

 

https://www.amazon.com/Man-Who-Killed-Kennedy-Against/dp/1629144894/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1503279918&sr=8-1&keywords=the+man+who+killed+kennedy

 

     Stone’s book credits me as a primary source of information. For example, on page 214, he writes, “I did have access and the full cooperation of Billie Sol Estes’ personal attorney Douglas Caddy who supplied interviews, source materials and remembrances for this book.”

 

http://home.earthlink.net/~sixthfloor/estes.htm

 

     It was because of my contribution of information in 2012 to Stone’s JFK book that when Schlanger asked me in January 2016 to arrange for him to meet Stone I was able to do so.

 

SELECTED RELEVANT EMAILS

 

     I provided FBI Director Comey and Special Counsel Mueller with a large number of emails that accompanied my letters to them. Here are excerpts from a few of these:

 

     In an email of Feb. 20, 2016, Stone wrote me: “Thanks for connecting me with Harley Schlanger – he is a great guy and shares our goals. I think we hit it off. I have a back channel to Trump and we are fighting the globalists.”

 

     In email of May 5, 2016, Schlanger wrote me: “I have continued to work with Roger. He and I have done three radio interviews together, and I have set up several more for him, with my contacts. Obviously, he has played quite a brilliant role in the Trump campaign, outflanking completely the lead-footed GOP establishment. While I find some of what Trump says to be good, I’m still and not sure what a Trump presidency would mean.”

 

     In an email of July 25, 2016, to Schlanger, I wrote after the GOP presidential convention: “Well, you picked an exciting time in Germany to find a new home there. On the other hand, the U.S. as you can see from afar, is an exciting place, too, these days as both major parties are melting down. Neither candidate is worth a damn.

 

“After watching Trump's acceptance speech, I realized what a dangerous and hypocritical man he is. He plans to turn domestic and foreign policy over to his VP Pence and spend his time making ‘America Great Again,’ which means acting out his narcissism on steroids. I have lost all respect for Roger Stone and realize my belief that he had changed from his sociopathic past was misplaced.

 

“Roger and his business partner Paul Manafort will undergo minute media and governmental scrutiny in the coming weeks for their past political and business dealings. Manafort is increasingly linked to being a back door to Putin for the Trump campaign. The whole scandal will get radioactive if the Intelligence agencies produce evidence of a tie there.”

 

FINAL THOUGHTS

 

     I have no regrets in writing Comey and Mueller even though I have been regularly harassed for so doing by private detectives employed by an unknown person of interest:

 

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/24039-message-to-the-private-detectives-harassing-me/

 

     I had a duty to do so because the on-going investigation is into felonious criminal activity. Here is the definition of Misprision of a Felony, which is applicable in my situation and governs my actions:

 

18 U.S. Code § 4 - Misprision of felony

§ 4.  Misprision of felony

Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 684; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, § 330016(1)(G), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2147.)

 

      I do not know whether my two letters will lead or have already led to an investigation by Special Counsel Mueller. Only time will tell. However, this entire venture will merit an interesting chapter in my forthcoming autobiography:

 

https://www.amazon.com/Being-There-Eye-Witness-History/dp/1634241142/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1503340695&sr=1-1&keywords=Douglas+Caddy

[End]

 

 

 

 

 

This thread is so important and relevant.

Doug's prediction of the Stone / Manafort legal situation has come to fruition in spades:

“Roger and his business partner Paul Manafort will undergo minute media and governmental scrutiny in the coming weeks for their past political and business dealings. Manafort is increasingly linked to being a back door to Putin for the Trump campaign. The whole scandal will get radioactive if the Intelligence agencies produce evidence of a tie there.”

Can't read the "Editorial Board" Wall Street Journal article without becoming a member of that venue.

There clearly is a serious national debate ( more serious than any in my lifetime ) as to Donald Trump's mental, social and emotional states and whether these are so extreme in their abnormality versus normalcy, they and he constitutes a dangerous threat to our society, especially because of Trump's singular highest power position as President.

This unprecedented situation is a reality and as such can't be easily dismissed as simple and/or typical political bias.

This debate would not exist and be as hot and heavy for Trump's entire two years in office if there wasn't a real, large and solid fuel source ( much of it fact based ) to continually keep the issue aflame in the national discourse.

I am listing the link to the well known psychological analysis by mental health PHD'S who feel Trump is truly a dangerous man in the office of the Presidency. 

I agree with their consensus.

I know my personal feelings about Trump don't mean much in the larger society context, however, I do know one thing as sure as sugar; 

Trump's presidency with his super aggressive, combative, attacking and insulting leadership style and loud yelling-bragging professional wrestling demeanor ( on a daily basis !) has created more anxiety, anger, national divisiveness and polarization to such an unprecedented degree it is literally exhausting tens of millions of Americans.

Millions just can't watch the daily aggressive political conflict on TV or hear it on the radio any more.

This wide spread national stress situation is real.  I would call it almost a national mental health crisis.

Just seeing Trump in his most angry and attacking and insulting rally ranting state makes you nervous.  And the man just never lets up!

Trump is the opposite of a calm, reasoned, maturely thoughtful and uniting leader.

He is an inciting demagogue of the first degree, seemingly just for the sake of creating conflict energy which seems to stimulate him and that he is obviously addicted to.

Trump himself has said he likes to create conflict.

Especially among his advisers.

Think about this conflict loving mind set in the realm of Presidential leadership style and responsibility. It's alarmingly troubling to most rational people.

Lastly, I believe Trump has dealt with many unsavory groups and individuals in his decades of business dealings. I think this may be his biggest concern.  That the true extent of these dealings may someday be publicly exposed.

The ousting of crooked Nixon mid-term was inevitable for many reasons. Trump may experience the same fate.

Pamela Brown, do you believe the report that Oswald ( after he was arrested in NO on August 9th, 1963 after his fight with Carlos Bringuier ) asked to speak from someone from the FBI before he left the police station?

On August 9, 1963, Oswald was spotted by Celso Hernandez (a friend of Bringuier) handing out pro-Castro Fair Play for Cuba leaflets at the intersection of Canal Street and St. Charles. Hernandez told Bringuier of Oswald's leafleting and the two of them, along with another anti-Castro militant, Miguel Cruz, decided to confront Oswald over his duplicity. As the Cubans accosted Oswald, a crowd began to gather. Bringuier attempted to incite the crowd with his story that Oswald had tried to join his anti-Castro movement and that Oswald was actually a communist and supporter of Castro.^[5][7][8] Hernandez grabbed Oswald's leaflets and a fight broke out. Oswald and the three Cubans were arrested for disturbing the peace.^[5][9][10] After the arrest, Bringuier and his Cuban friends were able to post bail, whereas Oswald's bond was posted by supporters of the mob.^[2] Oswald was found guilty, fined $10, and released.^[11] Before leaving the police station, Oswald asked to speak with an FBI agent. Agent John Quigley arrived and spent over an hour talking to Oswald.^[8][9][12]

^{Oswald just wanted to shoot the breeze with someone from the NO FBI office?}

^{Quigley's WARREN COMMISSION testimony about this meeting with Oswald is ambiguous imo.}
Mr. STERN. Mr. Quigley, will you look, please, at Commission Exhibit No. for identification, at the fourth page from the end of that exhibit? Can you identify that page for us? 
Mr. QUIGLEY. Yes; I can. This is an affidavit that was prepared at the FBI office, Dallas, Tex., on February 17, 1964, which bears my signature as well as the signature of Miss Matty Havens, the notary public. 
Mr. STERN. What was the occasion for your making this affidavit, Mr. Quigley? 
Mr. QUIGLEY. I was instructed to proceed to our Dallas office to prepare such a document. This document relates to informant material. This is the general context of it. Did you care for me to read the document? 
Mr. STERN. No; we have it. Does informant mean to you only a person who gives information in return for money or some other valuable consideration, or does it have a broader meaning as far as you are concerned? 
Mr. QUIGLEY. It would have a broader meaning as far as I was concerned. 
Mr. STERN. What would that mean when you used the word in this affidavit? What did you mean by "informant"? 
Mr. QUIGLEY. One who furnishes information. 
Mr. STERN. For whatever reason? 
Mr. QUIGLEY. Whatever may be the reason; yes. 
Mr. STERN. And you did not, according to your affidavit, ask Mr. Oswald---- 
Mr. QUIGLEY. I did not ask or suggest that Mr. Oswald become an informant of the FBI nor did I offer him any money or any other inducements to become an informant. 
Mr. STERN. Did you say anything to him at all about getting in touch with you or the FBI again about any matter? 
Mr. QUIGLEY. I did not. 
The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Quigley, if you will, we will recall you if a document comes just for your identification. It will only take a few moments, I am sure. Thank you very much for your coming and helping us. 
Mr. QUIGLEY. Thank you very much, sir.

What a gift Rick.

Thank you so much.

I will never see Dealey Plaza in person in my lifetime.

Just don't have the time, money and health.

So it is real nice to see it through your photos.

A lot of neat and thought provoking angles and perspectives too.

Your photos made me feel like I was actually there.

Dealey Plaza will always be a soul wrenching place to me.

I think I would have the most profound thoughts and feelings if I could go there and stand and just contemplate what went on there on 11,22,1963.

It's definitely a shrine isn't it. 

Seeing pictures of it on 11,22,1963 always seems like a surreal dream to me.

Boy, they sure have let those Texas Live Oaks in the Plaza grow.

Too overgrown in my opinion.

Also, the grass there dies back in Winter I can see.

I watched a part of a documentary the other night, showing the interior side of the sixth floor windows in the TXSBD building. The ones facing West and looking down on the path of the JFK motorcade. 

What struck me was how low to the floor those windows were.

Oswald must have been either on his knees or laying down to have any visual sighting and firing ability and room imo. The part of the window he shot from was the open lower half.

So low. 

The arched windows also were low to the floor. Any 6 ft. man standing behind those low windows would be impossible to see in his entire height.

Thanks again Rick.

Appreciatively, Joe B.

Yes Robert.   

Mrs. Harvey reveals not only how deeply despising her husband was of both JFK and RFK but also his incredible closeness to a ranking member of the American Mafia whose standing was in the same highest level circle as Giancana, Trafficanti, Marcello, etc.

All JFK haters to a murderous degree.

Mrs. Harvey calls Johnny Roselli a true patriot..and the Kennedys "scum." ! ?

Dear God ... how nefariously disturbing, perverse and crazy is that loyalty dichotomy?

You can't help but consider the suggestive importance of this reality regards who might possibly have had motive in at least some area of the JFK event, especially someone of William Harvey's career background and standing and his own personal hatred of the Kennedy's.

Clearly Mrs. Harvey was oblivious to the astounding revealing of her husband's incredible closeness to a high ranking member of the Kennedy hating Mafia and the seriously ominous implications this opens up.

Mrs. Harvey implies that JFK's philandering, and maybe Jackie's too helps justify her labeling them "scum?"  Well then, using this same standard shouldn't we also include in her "Scum Club" the likes of LBJ, Allen Dulles, E.Howard Hunt and countless other "patriots" and even her hero Johnny Roselli and in today's world Donald Trump? 

Wonder what Mrs. Harvey thought of J.Edgar Hoover's standing on the patriot scale knowing of his sexual preference proclivities? Hoover was another one who didn't feel the Mafia was too bad.

This video is so compelling to me. It should be viewed every few years imo.

The level of vitriol expressed by Mrs. Harvey towards the Kennedys and yet the level of loving respect expressed toward Mafia big shot Johnny Roselli is perversely shocking, disturbing and telling of W. Harvey's true mind set regards  JFK and RFK versus his admiration of at least one main Mafia figure.

I imagine the Harveys felt about JFK's brutal slaying as the Mafia did.

Good riddance.

What was so cold blooded sounding was Mrs. Harvey having no empathy for Jackie Kennedy losing her husband and in such a traumatic way. 

You'd think a woman would have some compassion for a young mother in that situation. And you would also think that in someone's older age, they might lose some of their personal anger and hate towards another human being that they have carried most of their adult life.

Not Mrs. Harvey.

If the person standing in the back of the OR where Dr. Crenshaw and Doctor Shires were working on a dying Lee Harvey Oswald the afternoon of 11,24,1963 and whom Dr. Crenshaw described as looking like Oliver Hardy was truly Harvey, any speculations about the purpose of Harvey's presence there and right at that time?

Was Harvey there to make sure Oswald didn't talk? Too perhaps help Oswald into the afterlife if Ruby's close up blast didn't do this?

Or if Oswald did talk, to make sure whatever he said would not be passed on by Crenshaw and whoever else was present in that room and who may have heard Oswald speak?

10 hours ago, Ron Bulman said:

I guess there's a method to their madness but I don't understand it.  Just glancing at the sheet the concentration of birth dates seemed odd.  The great majority of them coming from the 1890's to early 1900's. Only one from the 1920's (1921) and one from the 1940's (1940).  But eight from the 1930's including Oswald, at age 16.  Why so many 50-60 year old's getting a number?  Approaching retirement age?  But if they didn't already have one, not already contributing to the system under it, could they draw anything?

A web search tells me they started issuing SS #'s in November 1935, 25 million in 3 months.

It may well all mean nothing but Oswald being the only one on the page getting his in 1955, with all the rest in 1954 seems odd.

Yes Ron, it is odd to see " one" issue year date different than every other one on that entire list.

Guess it's just another oddity to add to the already huge stack of other's regards Oswald.

20 hours ago, Denny Zartman said:

If Oswald wanted to be connected to that rifle (as the backyard photos would seem to indicate), he could have ordered it under his own name. He could have carved his initials into the wood. Instead, he didn't even bother to leave prints on it until after he was dead.

If Oswald didn't want to be connected to that rifle, he could have purchased in person with cash and left no paper trail whatsoever. He also could have, y' know, avoided posing for photos with it, too. That might have helped a little bit.

We're talking about an assassin that had it so together he was able to dash upstairs, use his misaligned rifle to fire two accurate shots (and one shot that missed both the limo and the street surrounding it) at a moving target, wipe the rifle of prints, run a maze of boxes to hide the rifle, dash downstairs past at least one law officer, get outside, board at least two vehicles, and make a clean getaway... but who was so disorganized he drops one of his three wallets at the scene of the Tippit murder, carries around an ID with the alias he used to order a rifle that he plans on denying he owns, and can't think of anywhere better to escape to than a movie theater.

Denny, exactly.

There are so many incongruous and illogical actions, words, findings, time lines and other facts and testimonies ( usually involving Oswald more so than Marina, Ruby and others ) that contradict or make no sense that the whole thing together often becomes a murky mind twisting mess.

If this state of illogical and confusing contradictions is the result of a planned truth obfuscating format, I'd say the planners were incredibly successful, almost genius.

Sometimes I am stopped just by pondering the scenario which says Oswald did the shooting of JFK and then Tippit and then tried to shoot and kill DPD officer Nick McDonald in the Texas Theater...knowing that if he was successful in killing McDonald it would have been a last gasp suicide mission initiating a full bore fusilage firing toward him by the other officers present.

What a desperate murder/suicide mad run!

If Oswald really blew JFK's head apart inches from his young wife's face, then just 45 minutes later pumped more bullets up close into Tippit than necessary to kill him and then aggressively tried to blow a hole into officer McDonald in the Texas Theater just one half hour after over-wasting Tippit ... what does one make of Oswald's brutal murder spree and mental state?

The morning of 11,22,1963 Oswald seems calm with Buell Wesley Frazier on his way to work. He doesn't show any anxious behavior during his morning work hours according to those co-workers who say they saw him that morning, and he casually walks ( no mention of his running ) away from the TXSBD and catches a bus and then departs the bus and hails a cab to his apartment after the motorcade shooting chaos.

He changes clothes there and apparently picked up his pistol.

Within minutes of walking away from his rooming house, Oswald is blasting 4 bullets into Tippit and minutes later life and death battling with DPD officers in the Texas Theater.

I am always wondering ( again if this scenario as described by the WC is true ) about the sheer brutality of Oswald's wildly desperate actions that day.

It would take someone seriously pathologically violent and murderous to perform the deeds assigned to Oswald that day.

Was Oswald this cold blooded and violent? Did his personal history reflect this?

Oswald was the husband of a young bride. He was the father of two babies. He loved his children.

He didn't lose his cool after being physically assaulted by Carlos Bringuier in New Orleans just months before 11,22,1963.

Whoever lined up a rifle shot and was willing to blast JFK's head and brains to bloody bits just inches from his wife's face...had to have a true murderer mentality, if not a professional hit man one.

To be able to cut off the normal empathetic feelings of common bond humanity by brutally murdering someone who is not immediately threatening you takes the mind of a cold blooded killer.

Was Oswald this stone cold killer? Had he ever killed anyone before JFK? Blew a hole in their head when they were not an immediate threat to him personally? 

I know, the Walker attempt will be used to paint Oswald this way.

Could Oswald have been programmed to be this brutally violent after a lifetime of not being this way?

Hard to believe Oswald was willing to ruin his children's lives with the actions he took that day. He knew that they might have to grow up and live with the taunting of their being the children of a beloved world leader murderer.  He was willing to have them suffer like this?

Roscoe White allegedly confessed in private to his church pastor that he had killed men in his life. Both on foreign soil and here in the states. White "was" a trained assassin if this confessional story was true.

But was Oswald one as well?

If Oswald killed Tippit, he must have decided that he was going to be killed himself at any minute imo.

Same with DPD officer Nick McDonald.

If Oswald hadn't been shot/lynched in the DPD basement less than two days later, maybe some expert interrogators could have eventually learned the truth about his murder spree and why he was so motivated to kill that afternoon.

But, it's the brutality of Oswald in this killing spree scenario on 11,22,1963 that throws me.  It was so extreme.

Like he had completely snapped!

BLIND RAGE type stuff.  

Yet, Oswald's demeanor once under arrest and under questioning was always described as noticeably calm. He did get angry, defiant and offended in tone at times, but nothing like someone who was out of their mind with killing rage.

Just more conflicting things to ponder regards Oswald and others in this at times surreal story.

deleted

Oswald's quick murder right inside the DPD building just two days after 11,22,1963 was a huge relief to many.

A question worth contemplating ... a relief from what?

They got rid of JFK, and less than 48 hours later they got rid of his national media touted lone nut killer.

One of the most efficient high level murder "Cased Closed" conclusions ever.