Joe Bauer

She never mentioned seeing any bullet on any stretcher as she is reported to have stated in the original thread. I wonder, did Ms. Hall just not mention this in the interview? Or, did she perhaps mention this and it was edited out of the public record of this interview? Ms. Hall didn't think JFK's wounds were caused by just one gunman. The woman had worked in the ER for many years previous to 11,22,1963 and one must assume that she viewed many gun shot wounds in that time. That fact does give her JFK wounds observations more credibility than not IMO. She said she saw discrepancies in the published autopsy reports on JFK after Bethesda and the findings regarding the wounds did not match what she was aware of and saw on 11,22,1963. She is quite clear that she doesn't buy the WC findings. Nurse Hall said she was "very conservative" as a coded answer when asked if she had voted for JFK, meaning she did not? Interesting a woman of this political mind set ( obviously not liking JFK and at least one or more of his policies) taking what many would assume is a conspiratorial view of JFK's killing and alterations to his body once JFK was removed from Parkland. That is an interesting, uncommon and intriguing dichotomy in my thinking.

Wow! So curious what our resident researchers in this particular area have to say about Nurse Phyllis Hall's intriguing recollection comments ( regarding seeing a bullet on JFK's stretcher ) in this video interview. Ms Hall sure sounds and looks clear minded and together in this video. And she recounts many details in her time and presence in the ER entrance scene and near JFK's body without hesitancy that should be easy to verify for accuracy when compared to statements made by so many others also present. I am not sure when this Nurse Hall video was made, but with such an important observation stated by her regarding seeing a bullet on JFK's stretcher, I must ask, has any serious researcher been able to have a thorough sit down interview with her since?

25:37 Richard Diamond S03E01 The Sport ( aka “The Larry Forsythe Case") Media Mix • 6K views1 year ago I thought the above text was the link. Not sure how to do this. Maybe clicking on the picture of the newspaper will take you there? 3.01 [35] Richard Diamond: THE SPORT ( aka “The Larry Forsythe Case”) 15Feb59 written by Richard Carr directed by Alvin ...

Richard Diamond S03E01 The Sport ( aka “The Larry Forsythe Case") Jim, here is a link to the Richard Diamond/Mort Sahl TV episode on You Tube. The Mort Sahl record breaking incident is about 18 minutes in. Since you asked, there is a short scene with Mary Tyler Moore as "Sam" Diamond's business telephone operator. Unlike so many other Moore appearances in these episodes, in this one you can actually see just enough profile outline of Moore's face to recognize her. A young Barbara Bain also plays a role in this episode. After just viewing this episode myself, I noticed two minor errors in my recounting. One was Tony Gino ( played by actor Ross Martin ) saying Mort Sahl's record was "really funny" versus "a gas." The other was Martin not pulling a gun after Diamond smashed his Sahl record. But he did immediately become outraged and threatening toward Diamond. I edited my original post to correct these This episode is from February, 1959.

Want to weigh in on the original thread topic specifically, but before I do I wanted to share a funny little bit about Mort Sahl. I pull up and watch a certain amount of old TV show episodes on You Tube that hold me with their main stars and themes. Almost all from the 1950's and 1960's. Perry Mason, The Fugitive, The Invaders, What's My Line, Firing Line, Twilight Zone and so many others. I was recently watching another TV show from the 1950's titled "Richard Diamond - Private Detective" The caper led Richard Diamond ( David Janssen from the "Fugitive " TV show fame ) to a night club where Mort Sahl was performing his stand up comedy act. Sahl's real name was used in the show story. There is actually some dialogue in the nightclub between Sahl and Diamond. Diamond has a murder suspect in mind "Tony Gino" ( played by the actor Ross Martin ) who hangs out at this club and who is a big fan of Sahl's. After the show Diamond follows and confronts this suspect in his home attempting to feel him out. In their cat and mouse game banter the bad guy starts distracting by talking to Diamond about what a great comedic talent Sahl is. Diamond is uninterested but the suspect won't change the subject of Sahl and even pulls out a record of Sahl's and tells Diamond..."you just gotta hear this guy's take on our foreign policy. Its really funny." Diamond is so irritated by this silly Mort Sahl diversionary talk by the suspect he walks over to the record player and jerks Sahl's record off the player and breaks it in two and angrily throws it down. Guess you don't mess with the bad guy's Mort Sahl's records. This infuriates the suspect. As it turns out however, this Mort Sahl loving bad guy is NOT the guilty person involved in the murder case Diamond was investigation. Diamond smashed that Sahl record needlessly and thoughtlessly! I hope he reimbursed the mistaken bad guy for this injustice. And it was a slight toward Sahl in the script in my opinion as well. Just kidding. Just another funny episode in Sahl's life and it shows he was talking foreign policy in his comedic act that far back as well and popular enough to be on national TV.

Thank you Jim.

I have searched many of your past postings but cannot find the Witherspoon interview. Could you direct me to this? Thanks.

Was Tippit sleeping with another woman or women in the months before he was killed? If so, how do we know this? And if so, were there any connections to Jack Ruby with these women? We do know that some Dallas police officers ( married and single ) had sex with at least a few of Jack Ruby's girls. Forget the deli sandwiches and free booze, Ruby's most powerful angle of influence over any police or other officials would clearly be the sex one. Ruby researcher Seth Kantor bluntly described Ruby as a pimp. One can imagine the favors certain police and officials might feel obligated to perform for Ruby in return for his providing them with the most powerful temptation known to man.

Was the RFK interview with Charlie Rose video buried? Was it even shown on Rose's national TV show? If the interview was dumped, who was the decision power maker behind this? "They" STILL felt that the things RFK Jr. had to say in that interview was still a threat to their control?

Really interesting pic of Dealey Rick. Thank you so much for posting this and the personal compliment as well. Your picture brings to my mind the reality of how much closer JFK's limo really was to everything in DP when he was hit. It appears to be a "tighter" scene than photos taken from the limo's side show of more open grass areas such as the knoll and the area where Mary Moorman is standing. The rifle shots must have been very loud in that "bowl" layout. Heck, Roger Craig and his sheriff co-officers heard the shots and they weren't even in Dealey Plaza but slightly around the corner on Main street when they occurred. Even Lee Bowers heard them and he was tucked back into the rail yard and in an enclosed structure!

Gene, I think JM was referring to Gladys Johnson as being guarded and suspicious. I've never been to Dealey Plaza let alone Texas. However, I've read many times how first time visitors to the JFK murder scene are surprised as to it's smaller scale size. How the motorcade planners with Secret Service approval could not see the potential danger of having JFK's limo take two 90% turns in such a short distance into and through that tight area just sickens you.

S. Jaffe. Any general personal thoughts on the JFK assassination? Where were you when you heard the news of JFK dying on 11,22,1963?

Yes, welcome to the forum.

Kennedy had many times the amount of extremely powerful groups and individuals against him and who hated him and his brother on a "murderous rage" level versus Trump. Killing Kennedy to these people was a real and welcomed agenda. The KKK's race mentality was shared by "millions" of Americans during JFK's time and he was considered an absolute traitor and threat to the cause and culture of segregation. And there was great monies available to these people and their cause. This was a huge monster of JFK hate when you combined their common sentiments, mentality and numbers. Contrary to JFK however, Trump is loved by these race minded people, who are still here, but not as transparent and bold in making themselves and their beliefs known in public discourse. Another massive machine of JFK/RFK murderous hate was U.S. organized crime. Does anyone here even need to be reminded how wealthy, powerful and influential this group was in 1963. American organized crime has morphed into something less than it was back in 1963. Still wealthy and powerful, but more sophisticated and elevated into the white crime area. But this group doesn't feel Trump is anywhere near the threat to them as JFK & RFK were back in 1963. It is even speculated by some that Trump is considered a friend to this group. American oil barons ( the world's wealthiest men back in 1963) also looked at JFK as perhaps their greatest threat. Today, the biggest oil companies and those that own the most interest in them like ( love? ) Trump. Same with all the highest level corporate wealth of this country. Trump just gave them a bigger gift than they have ever seen in one action by an American president. Their taxes went from 35% to 20%. The estate tax has been "removed" for those who have millions to pass on to their children. Warren Buffet stated that Trump's wealthy class tax cut increased his corporate assets by 23 BILLION dollars. The military feels the same way about Trump as our most wealthy. Trump will always give them whatever they want.. JFK on the other hand, stood up to our military hierarchy over many major policies. Many in that group in 1963 hated JFK and RFK and considered them the enemy as much as their commander in chief. Then of course we had the numbered agencies in 1963 who felt JFK was a serious adversary at times. Not so with Trump at all. I believe these agencies have grown ( numbers and sizes) into enormous entities with much more influence and mind boggling budgets since 1963. However, I don't think they feel Trump is a serious threat. I think they view Trump as not much more than a deluded, simple minded, and egomaniacal yet harmless dupe who is hugely corrupted personally and has been for decades. There is no need for them to deal with Trump any more than they are doing. I believe they feel he will bring himself down before he causes too much damage without much extra influence on their part. The JFK hate group machine was huge in it's combined wealth, power, influence and numbers back in 1963. Trump doesn't have anything close to the power holding and wielding hate movement and pressure JFK had. Middle and lower income class and liberals generally don't have the "killer instinct" and mind set that the wealthy and right wing and racist groups have. They are not as powerful, corrupted, aggressive and fanatical in their causes as the later. Just my take on this thread question.

Is there any "book" that focuses on Oswald that is 100% free from some interpretative content that could be debated as biased from the writer's perspective? A compilation of nothing but recorded documentation on Oswald would be free of this. Aren't there JFK/Oswald research internet sites which are much more ( if not all ) documentation based? A study of both realms of JFK/Oswald research seems the most rational direction IMO. And yes, I am biased in certain ways in my take of the JFK assassination ( and RFK 's ) due to my great personal admiration for JFK and RFK and what they seemed to stand for in my perception of such. I can see this. However, I believe the opposite feeling bias balances out my own on the truth seeking scales of Lady Justice.

Spelling error corrected.

Just mind blowing. It sounds as if Lee Harvey Oswald himself wasn't put through this level of rough interrogation. Yes, almost like torture. All to break down Ms. Serrano to get her to accept a different reality other than what she stated and described over and over and over about what she saw and heard that night on the stairs outside the Ambassador hotel. How could any reasonable person who cared even a little about the truth of the RFK murder, hear this audio tape and not have the most serious doubts about the L.A.P.D. investigation of it? This one specific audio tape should be used as a nationwide police and law school training tool to demonstrate the most egregious, badgering, intimidating, threatening and yes, even torturous form of interrogation of a crime scene witness. The audio tape does rattle you and is extremely disturbing. Not just in it's incredible aggressiveness and unethicalness , but in it's suggested agenda which you can't help but feel is ominously trying to create a false investigative finding. I wish Ethel Kennedy "could" hear this interrogation audio tape. I am sure she would feel that the truth about who killed her husband was something other than the one Hernandez was trying so hard to create.

Robert, where can one find an audio playback of that interview of Serrano by Hernandez Is this available on You Tube? Thanks, Joe B.

And if it were JM Wave with a military sniper imported into the team, are we expected to believe that they were able to pull off not just the murder of our highest elected official ( in broad daylight in a crowded public place in front of hundreds of witnesses ) but also the avoidance of detection and punishment? That the combined massive investigative resources of our entire military and secret agencies and police agencies (FBI) could not find these killers? For a relatively small group of conspirators to defeat the huge and mammoth financed apparatus I just mentioned in not being detected and dealt with is just unbelievable to me. Unless that apparatus at the highest levels "didn't really want" to find the killers of JFK? We have created secret government entities that are truly above the law ( as we average citizens understand the law ) all in the name of national security with the catch phrase defense that this is necessary to protect us from the evil forces of the world that would do us great harm if we didn't allow this. That is the reality of our world.

M.Haggar. Respect everyone's own opinion about most everything. Would like to express my own regards the subject M. Haggar addresses. I am not an educated presidential historian. However, I feel compelled to debate your post stating Americans have been fed a lot of drivel regarding JFK and your other comments such as JFK being an image without substance who created one heck of a mess-just like his brothers and just like their father. Also Jackie and her self perpetuated myth. I was only 9 when JFK was elected President. Just a kid. But I have been able to observe every presidency since JFK. That's 15 presidencies! I was very precocious in being interested in JFK even at my young age of 9 through 12. I couldn't get enough of watching JFK speak on TV, and would read anything I could find JFK related in our local newspaper and even in our school weekly reader. I remember reading about the Peace Corps, JFK's inspired message of space exploration and his challenge for our young people to become public duty minded and more physically fit, etc. I had two older brothers actually take on JFK's challenge of 50 mile hikes. One made it. The other collapsed at the 35 mile mark and had to be thrown moaning and semi-conscious onto a flat bed truck to be brought back and unceremoniously dumped at the starting point. There was absolutely a very real inspired energy and excitement among young people in this country while JFK was president. His more youthful and fit appearance and his equally energized and inspiring speeches truly made young people feel something special and more hopeful about their future as Americans. Eisenhower was respected, but much more in a grandfatherly way. The fact that both JFK and Jackie Kennedy looked like beautiful and glamorous movie stars just added to this real excitement about them . We also saw other countrie's citizens go bananas with similar enthusiasm when our young President and First Lady visited them. We could see how JFK was inspiring them as well. We knew we had something very special with JFK and Jackie and felt a sense of showing off pride when they traveled abroad and encountered these massive wildly adoring receptions and crowds. I grew up in California. Perhaps in racially divided areas of the country JFK was portrayed as a very bad person and American due to the growing perception of his stance on racial equality. Maybe my youthful memories of JFK were only regional. However, my guess is that my take on JFK as a young American was much more widely held than hateful racially biased ones. My point here though is that I believe JFK and Jackie's iconic images were much more created by just who they were ( their inborn character and talents ) versus some self-perpetuated myth as you suggest. And one of the easiest ways to measure John F. Kennedy's true abilities and image is simply to look at the 15 successive presidents and their own images and achievements in comparison. Talk about a self-perpetuated overblown presidential image myth? Ronald Reagan and Nancy were poster stars for this kind of fluff. To this day, much of our media "still" portrays the great Gipper/Napper RR as some kind of heroic savior. And astrology addicted, "my Ronnie" fawning and "Just Say No" Nancy as the real class of First Ladydom. Please. Now there's a self-perpetuated myth. And compare G.W.Bush and now Trump to JFK. Dear God! And as far as JFKs policy achievements, how much would you expect to see the final fruits from in just the first 3 years of any presidential term? It's during and after those second four years where anything could be truly defined as successes and failures.

Such an important and revealing post. Thank you Eddie. Harvey's stated mind set for justifying executive action against "anyone" who falls into "his" criteria for the most serious and threatening treason clearly and ominously echoed those of David Morales, Frank Sturgis, G. Gordon Liddy and countless others in this story including military. Tragically, the Kennedys didn't have a strong enough clue as to how pervasive, widespread and serious minded this shared view of them as treasonous was throughout the real MIC power structure as Eisenhower described. The Dallas "JFK Wanted For Treason" flyer and newspaper ad perfectly reflected this mind set and how seriously advanced and publicly promoted and progressed it was by 11,22,1963. Wikimedia Commons.

Number 9 is the one of the most obvious KGB/Castro did it contradictions. And who was behind RFK's and MLK's assassinations? Did the KGB and Castro organize these also? Seems they picked the wrong leaders to knock off if they did. And if the KGB and or Castro didn't whack RFK and King...who did? Some other foreign power? JFK, RFK, King...the only leaders who could actually garner more support and influence and effect "real" change within our entire society than the usual powers to be. Those kinds of leaders are the biggest threats. And obviously, the only way you could stop their momentum ( the electoral process was in their favor ) was by... executive action.