Joe Bauer

I watched Trump's press appearance yesterday where he discussed the Wall and nothing else.

I sensed he has made this topic his number one diversionary hideaway from being asked any questions regards his massive legal problems.

I have never seen Trump look so unsure, nervous and missing of cockiness.

I thought I saw sweat on his upper lip. His eyes seemed bloodshot and his worried eye wrinkles have become much more pronounced in the last few weeks.

I believe you have assessed the Mueller investigation direction in regards to Stone and Trumps connections to him and others correctly Doug.

Could the protective shell ( wall? ) of silence and denial be seriously cracking?

What a film Bolden's story would make...but the society shaking truths it would expose are way too threatening to the powers to be.

There should also have been a major A list movie star motion picture made of Dorothy Kilgallen as well. But this has always been blocked for similar reasons.

Hopefully justice can be done, even if it happens under the most unqualified and even dangerous President ever.

Hope it happens before Trump is possibly forced to resign.

Doug, this article by Caro is fascinating.

As you may know I am extremely interested in LBJ's history of corruption ( as well as all our highest position leaders ) as I believe that when you learn who was corrupting "them" and for what reasons, you often find the real culprits behind major society effecting actions .....who's really running the show.

I have to run after reading the beginnings of this article but can' wait to finish it when I arrive back home.

I wanted to copy and paste this one paragraph however.

When Caro describes Timmy Corcoran as "totally amoral" this struck me as exactly what I see in Trump and his closest associates ( his fixers, funders, etc. ) for most of his adult life and into his presidency.

When one reads about "Brown and Root"and "Big Texas Oil" as the first financiers of LBJ...I think of  Sheldon Adelson ( 100 million dollar donor to the Republican party )  and many like him that obviously own many chits on Trump's account as current versions of Brown and Root.  

When you see Trump placing the "Medal Of Freedom" on Sheldon Adelson's wife "Miriam" you can't help but ponder the motivation behind such an honor.

 One member of this circle was Thomas G. Corcoran, a pixieish, ebullient, accordion-playing Irishman known as Tommy the Cork, who had been an aide to Franklin Roosevelt and had since become a legend in Washington as a political fixer and a fund-raiser nonpareil. I just loved interviewing Tommy the Cork. He was at that time in his late seventies, but if he came into the lobby of his K Street office building while I was waiting for the elevator, he would say, “See you upstairs, kid,” as he opened the door to the stairwell. And often, when I reached the eleventh floor, where his office was situated, he would be standing there grinning at me when the elevator door opened. He was, in the best sense of the word (truly the best to an interviewer anxious to learn the innermost secrets of political maneuverings), totally amoral. He cared for nothing. Once, on a morning that we had an interview scheduled, I picked up the Washington Post over breakfast in my hotel room to see his name in big headlines and read a huge story about his role in a truly sordid Washington scandal. I expected to find a broken, or at least a dejected, man when I was ushered into his office. Instead, he gave me a big grin—he had the most infectious grin—and, when I didn’t bring up the subject of the story but he could tell it was on my mind, he said, “It’s just free advertising, kid, free advertising. Just as long as they spell my name right.”

Was Jim Garrison ever invited to appear on Buckley's Firing Line?

When I was young, I was drawn to TV shows that featured well spoken intellectuals, especially in debate with each other regards any number of subjects.

I'd actually keep a dictionary handy to quickly reference some of the higher planed verbiage to try to keep up with the discussions.

Some intellectuals are less than good or even bad speakers.  

However, some are as stylishly interesting and charismatic in their speaking as top Shakespearean actors like John Gielgud, Lawrence Olivier, Guinness, Coward, Richard Burton.

Orson Wells was a favorite and entertaining in this way.

But over a lifetime, one learns to separate what's really important regards the so-called eloquence of a speaker in polished stage actor style and manner versus the honest and moral value content and truth of what they present in their speaking engagements.

I know, the interpretation of such is highly subjective. 

However, in regards to the JFK event and any input and evaluations of such by intellectuals, I find at least as much value listening to the comments expressed in interviews of common working class and often less articulate men and women who shared their JFK event witness observations, feelings and views when asked despite perhaps many having some self-conscious insecurities about doing this in a publicly shared format.

Being honest in such an endeavor would seem to make it easier to risk sounding less than articulate.

Buell Wesley Frazier, Sam Holland, James Simmons, Lee Bowers, Richard Dodd, Roger Craig, some of Ruby's dancers and others like them come to mind. Even deaf mute witness Ed Hoffman!

The greater eloquence in speaking is simply telling the honest truth.

Regards Robert Harper's original thread questions about who was telling the truth about EHH and his end of life JFK assassination claims...Buckley's contradictions and omissions regards his great friend's taped JFK "Big Event" comments just adds to the suspicion of truth prevarication.

And again, if the " FIRING LINE" television audience knew of Buckley's agency employment history ahead of his interviews with Mark Lane, Liddy and Hunt and who knows what other JFK and Watergate connected characters they would have known that Buckley was seriously biased by his true biographical background activity.

When you watch the Liddy and Hunt interviews you can so easily see this bias in Buckley's framing his comments and questions to them in a way that gave these two convicted criminals a podium to redeem themselves and actually present themselves as true patriots who were wronged by weak politically motivated cowards or even traitors.

I have to remind myself when reading about and discussing Lee Harvey Oswald and Marina how young they were through all the craziness of the JFK event.

Oswald just turned 24 one month before 11,22,1963. He was 22 when he returned from Russia with Marina and Baby June.

Marina was just 20 when she came to America and 22 when JFK was killed.

I am so old now that I sometimes forget how naive, unsophisticated and unwise to the ways of the world I was at their ages back in the early 60's.

I was also very poor with no education or family support and only qualified for minimum wage jobs myself until I was closer to 25 to 30.

It was all I could do to barely pay rent on cheap apartments and drive the cheapest junk cars.

It was a fairly deprived and at times depressing existence.  My young age and decent youthful health and energy carried me with hope for the future.

However, if I had fathered a child and had a stay-at-home wife with baby to support during those hard times...I simply couldn't have made it.

I purposely avoided marriage and kids until I got at least to a level of providing that would allow my family to live in safer areas versus the poorest. 

This financially struggling everyday life reality of Lee Oswald and Marina ( which I experienced myself ) and their very young ages at the time ( when I think about it ) does weigh on my speculations regards L.O. and Marina in at least a few areas of suspicion about their supposed secret and nefarious behavior and roles.

17 hours ago, Roy Wieselquist said:

I got on Coast to Coast last night around 4:45 AM.  I was surprised they took me so late; I hardly had to wait to get on.  Ian Punnett was the guest host (what an apparent oxymoron, ey?).  IP was very receptive to me telling about this historic petition/statement.  And he gave me a good lead.  He said he periodically checks on the Daily Mail websites, both the American and British versions, because they tend to be a good barometer of popular preferences.

Good for you Roy.

Roy, the two Presidents I had in mind were Carter & Clinton.

Obama seemed to not want to veer too far into anything that would taint his legacy, especially things too controversial and anything that many might label as conspiracy loony like JFK, 9-11, UFO'S.

I think Obama knew ahead of time that the most important legacy he needed to create and leave as the first black President for future generations, was that a person of this racial type could do ( and did ) a steady and generally good job in the highest and most important leadership position in our society.

No big or even moderate risk taking to jeopardize that main historical legacy goal.

Obama surely didn't want to do something that black race haters could say was a horrible job and that you would expect.

Questions for DVP.

David, you speculate about Oswald luckily picking the TXSBD sixth floor to do his deed. and how as luck again would have it, all the workers on this floor that morning ( including Bonnie Ray Williams ) left before JFK's motorcade arrived, giving Oswald ample time and privacy to build a wall of books behind him, walk to and retrieve his gun from it's hiding place, assemble it, load it ( unless it had been pre-loaded ) sight it's scope, set up an arm and rifle rest and with still enough minutes of time left before JFK's limo passing underneath, for him to be seen with the rifle in the window by 4 to 5 bystanders on the streets below.

That is a lot of ample left alone time, privacy and activity luck.

Lucky also that Oswald just happened to have found the time when he first arrived at the Depository building to immediately go up to the 6th floor to hide his rifle package so it was available to him minutes before JFK'S motorcade came by. Oswald obviously made this 6th floor package hiding visit and action when he first arrived because this was the only time he could have done this as no one who saw Oswald the rest of the morning reported seeing him carrying a brown paper wrapped package around with him when they did.

Oswald reportedly immediately took off on his own after arriving at the TSBD that day, leaving Buell Frazier behind and alone to do whatever he did to his car such as revving his engine to give his battery a little extra charge for later starting. Could it be that Oswald wanted to get up to that 6th floor quickly before punching in on the lower floors just minutes later? Leaving Frazier behind as soon as possible would have been imperative.

If Bonnie Ray or any other workers had stayed on the 6th floor during the motorcade drive by, would Oswald have left his "package" in it's hiding place? With the risky possibility that some other Depository worker moving boxes of books on the 6th floor that day or soon after, may have come across it?

When would he have retrieved this? Would he have found, again luckily, the time to sneak up to the 6th floor at the very end of the work day and rushed down via the elevator to the back ground floor exit and taken it back to his room via the Bus line?

Here's another lucky scenario for Oswald.

Just 10 to 12 feet "directly underneath Oswald" as he allegedly fired his loud rifle shots were three co-workers. Harold Norman, James Jarman Jr. and Bonnie Ray Williams.

Think about that ...just 10 to 12 feet away from the person doing the shooting!

Harold Norman testified under oath, that he obviously heard the shots ( who wouldn't 12 feet away? ) but also heard the clip re-loading sounds of the rifle and even the sounds of ejected shells hitting the floor above him.

The shock waves of the rifle shots were so strong they were displacing small bits of plaster from the ceiling above these three workers as they all testified that these plaster bits and dust had fallen into James Jarman Jr's hair!

Here is the extra luck I mention for Oswald.

For whatever reason ( shock, frozen by fear of confronting an armed wild man, fear of being considered suspects themselves) even though these three fellow Depository workers knew immediately that shots had been fired right above them and they knew by seeing what was unfolding right beneath them in the Plaza that there had been a shooting which was causing frantic running and yelling among several dozens of bystanders, they decided to stay put for several minutes all during this chaos?

If that were me, I would have immediately run down to the lower floors and reported what I saw and heard just minutes before during all the shooting right above me.

These three witnesses could have brought officers to the shooting location much sooner than they arrived. They maybe even could have seen Oswald running from the floor above them in their own retreat which would have ruined Oswald's story of being on the lower floors when the shooting occurred.

Lucky for whoever was firing just feet above depository workers Norman, Jarman and Williams that these three decided to stay put for several minutes in their 5th floor location right after the shooting.

I believe the petition and movement are both incredibly important and valid.

"Anything" that keeps these monumentally unjust capital criminal acts and the incalculable damage they caused (not just to our own society but others as well ) and the importance of identifying the perpetrators of them from disappearing completely from the minds of future generations, no matter how small scale, is worthy beyond debate.

Everyone knows that the Jewish people spend much time and resources in a similar effort to keep their near extermination story alive in the minds and historical record of future generations for the same human rights defending and protecting lesson reasons.

If just one person made it their life's mission to stand on one centrally located Washington D.C. government body corner daily for years with a sign that read "JFK-MLK-RFK- MACOLM X ... THE TRUTH STILL MATTERS" this one individual action would make an important and worthy contribution difference versus it never happening.

I want to share the following, not to distract from the thread at all, but to mention a truism in how things work in our often corrupt and truth hiding world. 

I just viewed a late 1980's Canadian interview of the well known American expose author "Kitty Kelley" where she discusses and answers questions about her book on Frank Sinatra titled "His Way."

At about the 4:50 mark the interviewer asks Kitty Kelley about Sinatra's extensive life time involvement with American Organized Crime and especially how and why ( when everyone knew this reality ) there was never any meaningful government investigative action with criminal charges filed against Sinatra?

Kelley's answer to this question is quite enlightening and very relevant to the subject of this thread.

Kelley explains how Sinatra's immunity was enhanced by his ability to keep a closeness to and garner favor among our Presidents and other heads of state.

Kelley described well the power of our Presidents to influence such things and actually protect people like Sinatra from serious institutional investigative and criminal charges consequences. One of Sinatra's most favored relationships like this was with Ronald Reagan.

Most Presidents since JFK would never allow any real re-opening of the murder cases of our mentioned victims. Yes, we had the HSCA and ARRB, but these were greatly stymied by you know who - the real secret holders.

And the only two Presidents who may have wanted to facilitate such investigations were limited or compromised in their ability to fully embolden these endeavors against the forces who wanted to keep these investigations from going too far.

Until we have "a President" who believes the truths we seek should be properly investigated, and who may not be so compromised, that level of commitment will always be an extremely difficult challenge to achieve.

In the mean time, this truth finding effort will be left to courageous individuals who are willing to sacrifice huge time, work and financial commitments to keep this mission alive. 

Love how in one page that Simkin provides in his initial post you can access hundreds of witnesses involvements and testimonies just by clicking on their names.

Kitty Kelley : Midday Interview about Frank Sinatra Book 1986 "His Way"

Can't access the article Doug unless you register with the Times.

I watched the first episode of "Project Blue Book."

It seemed quite hokey and the characters and their lines stereotypical stiff and unreal.

I am not sure regards the true agenda of creating this series. Perhaps it's simply a money making one as there is for sure a huge audience of the UFO / ET SUBJECT.

Will watch the show a couple of times more to see if it gets better.

Leslie Kean

Just a gut feeling that she is a planted disinformation person.  I may be wrong...who knows.

On 1/16/2019 at 7:46 PM, James DiEugenio said:

 

As we later discovered, the DPD was the most compromised, corrupt, and rogue police department in any major city in America.  In fact, numerically speaking, Dallas outdid some states as far as framing innocent defendants.  They had it down to an art form. (DiEugenio, The JFK Assassination, pgs. 196-99)   If it had not been for the election of DA Craig Watkins, we might not have known just how bad it was.  And the cases that are exposed were mostly under the Wade/Fritz regime. Now considering the make up of the DPD, many Klansmen etc, and considering the statements of people like Alexander and Leavelle, there was no reason to suspect that technique would be suspended in this case.   And, as Pat Speer shows above,  there is ample evidence it was not.

Secondly, as I also discuss in my book, the antics of J. Edgar Hoover were also not exposed until too late. (ibid, pgs. 234-240)  Need I add that Hoover did not have any great love for the Kennedys?  He strongly suspected they would fire him in a second administration, which they were going to do. Therefore, as I show in my book--pages 240-70--the FBI was sometimes as bad as the DPD.  To me the outstanding example being the falsification of Ruby's polygraph, which not only the WC bought but many years later, Von Pein's heroine Jean Davison, bought into.  And this was years after the HSCA exposed it as a hoax.

The American system of justice relies upon the adversary system.  Whether one likes or not,  that is the case.  When the defendant has no one to represent him, then the DA knows that the rules of evidence and testimony will not apply.  This is how one gets rogue prosecutions and miscarriages of justice.

The one commissioner who was on to this early was Richard Russell.  That is why he did his own inquiry and stopped going to most of the executive session hearings.  He realized it was a dog and pony show. He did his own inquiry and came to different conclusions.  Dulles, McCloy, and Ford knew he would be a problem at the last meeting.  They made sure his objections did not get into the record.  There was a fake stenographer at the last meeting playing her crossword puzzle instead of taking notes.  When Weisberg told Russell what happened, that was the beginning of the commissioners jumping ship.  

This ended  with Boggs saying that Hoover lied about everything.  

Which he did.

 

 

 

68 year old DPD Captain John Will Fritz knew he had ( with Oswald ) the most important criminal suspect in not just his career and Dallas PD history, but probably in America's history and whose initial interrogations would be of monumental importance beyond anything he had ever been professionally involved with.

And under these hugely obvious circumstances Fritz still chose not to have a stenographer or tape recorder present during these?

How many other criminal suspects in Fritz's career were subjected to his interrogations without such recorded oversight and without an attorney present like Oswald?

Fritz had a career long reputation as an expert interrogator?

Under those conditions and techniques?

The following is a just one example of Fritz's expert interrogation skills:

I want to address what I now see as a possible contradiction in my first post where I stated my assumption that Marina might very well have wanted to come to America because of it's attraction as a materially wealthy and more glamorous society than the relatively more drab Soviet one.

I have been reading Marina's testimony to the HSCA in 1978.

Among Marina's answers to questions about her wanting to come to the U.S., she states if she knew Lee was wanting to come back to the U.S. she "would not have married him."  !!!

Marina states that coming to the U.S. was not the reason she married Lee.

She seems to indicate in her HSCA testimony she was ambivalent about coming to America.

Marina then makes a comment about "hating the U.S." which I really couldn't make out the context of.

I really should have done at least a minimum of further reading of Marina's testimonies in their entirety before expressing my assumptions about her feelings and motivations during her life here with Lee.

Marina becomes even more of a mystery when I do so.

Can't wait.

The entire Lee and Marina relationship, especially their time together back here in the States, is such a crazy poverty stricken and stressed enigma that Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's Sherlock Holmes would have a tough time figuring it out.

Much of Marina and Lee's time together here was so financially desperate and dependent on others and their personal relationship so strained and stressed and even chaotic.

And imagine a young wife being told by a sweating and harried husband late one evening he just took a rifle shot at a major political figure trying to kill him? 

How shook up, confused and scared would a normal young mother have been knowing her husband was that violence prone crazy?

She would rationally be fearing what would happen to her and their child if her husband were arrested for this most serious crime.  Throw in Lee's plan to hijack a plane to get to Cuba?

Marina was so depressed in her relationship with Lee she made an attempt to kill herself ( feeble as it may have been ) and which resulted in an angry Oswald chastising her and maybe even slapping her for this.

What other covert agenda Marina may have been assigned must have been very hard to implement for this young mother in a foreign land considering the chaos of her married life with Lee.

I believe Marina did not love Lee. Especially the more their times together became more and more stressed financially and personally. And the more she was interacting with the Dallas White Russians, the more she realized she had to eventually break from Lee.

I don't think Marina liked Ruth Paine either, but she had no other living arrangement options at the time.

And Lee's mother must have seemed even more unpleasant for her as well.

Wonder what would have happened to Marina if 11,22,1963 had never happened?

As it was, incredibly, she came into significant financial gain and a very good life relative to the chaos of her life with Lee.

Marina was further manipulated by P.J. McMillan which just adds another crazy aspect to this incredible story.

Who was Marina Prusakova Oswald Porter?

She is a true mystery.

On 1/12/2019 at 9:24 AM, Douglas Caddy said:

Retired NYPD Detective James Rothstein, who had access to intelligence files, told me that the brilliant and patriotic Forrestal was a pederast (the term employed in those days.) This was used by the Alpha Males in the top levels of government to destroy him. It was an era different from today. Since then there has been a successor who was also a fiercely patriotic U.S. Secretary of Defense who has the same sexual inclination. In his case he was appointed because having been compromised he could be controlled to do the bidding of the elite of the elite in government, especially as to the awarding of lucrative Defense Department contracts, primarily no-bid contracts. Today it is all about compromise and control of the victim afterwards (President Trump comes to mind.) The FBI arranged for Robert Merritt to have gay sex with over 100 prominent targets/victims at the Dupont Plaza Hotel in Washington in the 1970s in a room that was wired so that the events could be recorded.

This particular firm is not precisely relevant but is an eye-opener nevertheless. Here is a perceptive comment by one viewer: "Please notice the BACKGROUND, which Kubrick also directs..... -Two old well dressed men are discussing a teddy bear. then -The Hartford's girl child walks toward the men, looks back one last time, to be sure she is doing the correct thing, and walks further toward the old men. -Mommy and Daddy do not even know where she has gone. -Daughter is simply one more female captured or groomed and used by the wealthy elite."

Kubrick died suddenly before the film was finished. Cruise and Kidman not long afterwards divorced. This whole subject is untouchable. Just think of the current Epstein scandal that involves the names of the elite of the elite. It has been alleged that this was a Mossad compromise operation. Bill  Clinton once said that he would gladly die for Israel. He has never said that he would gladly die for the United States.

 

Oh wow!

I just recently watched "Eyes Wide Shut" for the first time.

Yes, it was disturbing.  

Deep Freudian bad dream stuff.

The Epstein scandal does seem to possibly fit into the kind of scenario the film depicts.

So many high profile partakers of Epstein's social invites.

We live in a world often manipulated and controlled through temptation and compromise, especially among the highest echelons of elitist power, wealth and influence and the never ending obsession and agenda of maintaining and increasing such by it's most immoral and corrupted members.

For sure, it will always be a great struggle to find our human rights common good and moral way through it all.

I have always wondered who came up with the open limo motorcade itinerary travel plans for JFK in late 1963?

Tampa ( Santos Trafficanti's home turf ) Chicago ( Sam Giancana's home turf )  Miami ( hot headed JFK hating Cubans turf ) Dallas ( JFK and RFK hating Carlos Marcello, big Texas oil and the most extremist right wing nut and segregationist group's turf )  ???

Talk about the travel plan from hell! 

Dangerously exposing JFK to some of his worst and most viciously hating enemies! 

Doug,  if even "half" the Chicago JFK assassination attempt plot is true as you outlined, this on it's own almost proves that the Dallas/Dealey Plaza plot was just one of others almost identical in structure ... which shouts a conspiracy.

Having two ( and maybe a third lone nut in Miami) in just a matter of weeks setting up a tall building rifle shooting at JFK is way, WAY beyond coincidence.

Was there an arrest of Valee? Was Valee's background as you say? Was Valee actually recently employed in a warehouse which had a higher unobstructed view of JFK's limo in the mortorcade had it happened? Did they find that high powered rifle with a scope in Vallee's trunk. Was Vallee's car license plate registered under the name Oswald?

Did they arrest some anti-Castro Cubans in a motel in Chicago in those two days?

Was Lee Oswald an FBI informant and was it really him that called in the Chicago warning?

How much of Abe Bolden's recountings have been proven to be true?

If half of all this is true...it opens up a monstrously real and large realm of multiple JFK assassination groups...all with the same MO and all operating in a condensed 4 week period.

The picture of Milteer on the sidewalk on Houston street as JFK's limo passes by is (to me) Milteer.

And notice the meanest, most hateful and spiteful expression on anyone's face in the Houston Street crowd photo as JFK is passing in front of them is "by far"  that on the face of the man I believe was Milteer.

Americans mostly could never truly believe that members of our own ruling elite could ever order the assassination of one of our sitting Presidents. 

The idea was/is too scary to even contemplate.

Yet, when people like General LeMay thought of JFK as a traitor, Bill Harvey ( according to his wife) considered JFK "scum" and mafioso Johnny Roselli a "got your back" stand up patriot, and Dulles saying JFK "thought he was little God" and on and on and on with similar JFK hating sentiments ( LBJ and Hoover of course in spades )   when are the history books ever going to be able to report these truths?

35 minutes ago, Douglas Caddy said:

Forrestal was a mentor to JFK and told him about the Alien Presence as much as he could without violating classified material. I do think JFK was a member of Naval Intelligence.

The researcher who spoke in the above video about Forrestal's life mentioned how Forrestal was a troubled person his whole life and how his marriage was a strain on both him and his wife. The researcher in his talk mentioned how on one occasion Stuart Symington confronted Forrestal in a private conversation in a public arena and how visibly shaken and upset Forrestal was afterwards. Forrestal carried two immense burdens: early knowledge that the Alien Presence was interacting with Planet Earth and being blackmailed by those who had proof of what bothered him all his life. It was a different era and certain conduct was condemned if uncovered and the person destroyed.

Doug, what do you think Forrestal's "second" immense burden was?

You mentioned his first immense burden being his knowledge of the alien ET presence.

Was it Forrestal's sexual orientation? Did he have a great affair while married?

I think knowing what this 2nd immense burden might have been is important in understanding more of the truth about Forrestal's end of life mental breakdown and perhaps even murder.

Just thought I would share the part of this You Tube video that shows JFK in his more youthfully awkward,  skin and bones and wilder hair days. 

It's really a charmingly fun early JFK pic worth seeing imo.

And the speaker also adds an intriguing speculation comment regards his suspicion that JFK was in Naval Intelligence.

You don't have to watch the entire video.  Just start watching at the 9:00 minute mark and the next couple of minutes thereafter.

You would think RFK's family might have sued different entities regards the grossly negligent security failingly provided for RFK.

Nazi leaning Thane Eugene Cesar ... OMG...now there's a qualified candidate for an assignment like RFK's security in a super tight place like the pantry.

Cesar should have never been given any assignments more challenging than a MacDonald's evening parking lot patrol.

The L.A. police department back then was heavily RFK hating on racial grounds.

I heard a tape once of an Ambassador Hotel employee ( a woman manager of some sort)  calling in the first reporting of the shooting in their hotel to the police that evening.

The woman reported the shooting and then mentioned to this L.A.P.D. dispatcher that RFK was staying at the hotel.

This gruff sounding dispatcher ( male ) immediately responded to the caller's mention of RFK with this comment ..."BIG DEAL" ... in the most disparaging tone one could imagine.

It was sickening to hear this years later knowing that at least this L.A.P.D. employee could be so coldly unsympathetic to such a horrific and tragic crime against RFK.

Listened to you again on the Dave Emory show out of Cupertino, CA. Jim Di.

Twice this week.

I'm reading Mailer's essay David, after you cited this in your post.

Mailer can be very intoxicating to many who find his writings to be intellectually stimulating and provocative.  

 I enjoy reading him for the same reason I enjoy reading other intellectuals.

They open up my greater thought processes which 95 % of the time are locked into a daily routine numbness.  Much of this is due to their writing style as much as the content of their work.

Yet,  these great writers often don't have all the answers. They often miss great truths.

They themselves can be greatly flawed, even weak in character and not brave when called on to be so.

I can be truth and goodness finding inspired by a child's finger paint creation, a crippled or homeless person's actions or words or any number of other non-intellectual human interaction as much, or even more at times, than great writer expositions.

When one compares Mailer's life, personal character and efforts of assuming great responsibility for the welfare of many others besides himself - especially in confrontation with super aggressive powerful forces, groups and individuals who would like to see you dead for those efforts - to that of JFK ... what can one say?

Mailer's critiques of JFK seem almost meaningless in this context ... to me anyway.

The "Wall " issue is a super hyped and built up wag-the-dog charade to redirect American's thoughts and concerns from the real issue...

The Mueller, Southern District of New York and now Congressional investigations into Trump's criminal activities of not just the 2016 election, but of his decades of corrupt business dealings and practices. 

So easy to see this.

This essay on JFK is something I am going to save and return to many times.

It articulates so well how special JFK was as a leader of men and why JFK's death in his young prime was such a loss to us all.

2 hours ago, Andrew Prutsok said:

Don’t you think the president’s initial instinct would be to find a way to personally profit from something like this? I do not think he possesses the capacity to think beyond that.

Agree Andrew.