Ron Bulman

Opinion: Is it finally game over for Donald Trump? (msn.com)

Yes. They must be confronted now.

W, this is a great diagram of Dealy Plaza regarding angles. I had to chuckle at the Marcello theory. I believe there may have been another shooter along the picket fence line much closer to the railroad overpass. A good bit closer to a straight on shot. As well as one in close to or beyond the corner of the fence for the first shot, to the throat. I have not read Mantik, Chesser or Horne in great depth though a good bit. The only radiologist and neurologist to examine the x-rays and photographs in the National Archives scientifically. But I think Mantik and Chesser agree if I remember right, please correct me. A bullet entry over but slightly in front of the right ear in the hair line. Another one over the right eye in the hairline. Perfect shots, coordinated. With one from the rear, the clean half-moon in the otherwise rear blow out? A spit second before that happened? Someone here recently commented on high powered rifle bullets entering a brain did not explode on impact with bone but pierced it. Then dispersing, causing a pressure release amongst the bones closest to it? E.G. the Occipital and the Parietal, splitting them apart? Maybe affecting one more than the other?

What Tim Walz’s favourite song reveals about him – according to a Bob Dylan expert (msn.com) Skip to about 1:20.

I can't dispute any of this. It's a great question, worthy of discussion. For example, if Litwin genuinely did not know Oswald was not the only building employee unaccounted for, that's okay. It's sort of a big error by someone trying to represent themselves as an expert on the subject, but whatever. Everyone makes mistakes. Litwin's refusal to acknowledge and correct it is another matter. As a result, it appears that his is less a quest for truth and more about pushing an agenda despite what the evidence shows.

I knew I'd read something along these lines before. Didn't remember where. Let's do the math. 75 - 5 = 70. - 48 = 22 left inside. One of whom would be Oswald. So of the 21 left none saw Oswald, or anyone else suspicious at the time of the assassination or immediately afterwards.

Steve will be happy to know that's what I was trying to do by replying to Jean's question in a PM, where to find what he was looking for, that I didn't want to stir the pot on the open forum further. But Steve says it won't go away. Ok. Steve is still likely upset for me waring him, including a two-day suspension from posting for calling Jim DiEugenio's work that of a whacky/crackpot. When he got back, he formally reported Jim over his hang our heads comment on behalf of Litwin. Mark happened to look in on the forum and agreed with Steve giving Jim a 10-point warning/one day suspension. Which he seems to have gotten over. Mark did the same to Brian Kelly for calling Litwin a nitwit. He says mea culpa. Steve seems to be gloating over Mark suspending Jim and Brian. Prodding, aggressive, provocative maybe a little hostile himself as he suggested such. Willy nilly? Is that stalking, taunting, harassing a member/moderator? Treating an admin disrespectfully?

From At The Cold Shoulder of History by USN Bethesda Corpsman William C. Jenkins with William Matson Law, page 16. Dr. Pierre A Fink and Dr. Humes started examining the head wounds. They found a small wound on the right side of the head in the temporal area just forward and slightly above the right ear. the small hole (wound) was rounded and about the size ot the tip of one's little finger. There appeared to be graying around the margins of the wound, but it was difficult to see because the wound was in the hair line. Dr. Fink speculated that the grey material might have come from a bullet. During the examination of the temple wound, Dr. Humes was called to the gallery to talk to one of the people who had come into the morgue with him and who seemed to be directing the autopsy. I was later told this was Dr. George G. Burkley (Admiral), the president's personal physician. Dr. Humes returned to the table and immediately directed Dr. Fink away from the small wound in the temple to the large posterior head wound. The temple wound was abandoned and never returned to that night.

Trump’s Latest Falsehood Is a Huge Tell (msn.com)

Not a favored source. But is this what you're talking about? Not just a broken plate, hamburger/ketchup on the wall. Trump’s Anger Out of Control as Poll Numbers Keep Cratering (msn.com)

I'm running behind here, just catching up. I somehow missed part III. Just found and read it. Very enlightening. It seems Strauss kind of gave the movement wings so to speak. In case anyone else missed it: JFK and the Neocons, Pt. 3 - by James Anthony DiEugenio (substack.com)

Here's Jim's review to contrast whatever Griffith said with. America’s Last President, by Monika Wiesak (kennedysandking.com)

JFK put 15,000 advisors in Vietnam to placate Joint Chiefs of Staff among others urging combat troops. He authorized the Bay of Pigs under false pretenses perpetuated by Allen Dulles and Richard Bissell of the CIA, among others. Under pressure from them and some of the JCS less than three months into his new presidency. "How could I ever have been so stupid" I believe is a close approximation of a statement by him afterwards.

Hi Johnny. As no one has responded I thought I'd do so though I can't speak for others. I wonder if many of us are not a little stunned at the thought. Not of Oswald being acquitted, at a fair trial. But that he would get one in Dallas or anywhere in Texas or the rest of the United States at the time. I mean, he was convicted in the media within hours. Further, even if they, however we define "them", had to abort the basement for any reason would have let him get to trial. If he would have made it to the county jail, I don't trust Decker to protect him. He was crooked himself from way back. I also believe "they" would have continued to discouraged any attorney giving him "fair' representation from representing him. They would have never let him talk publicly.

Hey, even I passed that one, with a B if I remember right. But you might have to go back to the Physics things (which I never took, but logic is involved there as well). Like a bullet on a downward trajectory going in a back at T-3, without hitting bone does not suddenly turn up inside the body and go out the bottom of the throat. Nor would it then again, in mid-air turn downward again. Creating seven wounds, ending up in pristine condition. Physically impossible. You might have to go back to the basics. As in Costner portraying Garrison in JFK. Back and to the Left, Back and to the Left, Back and to the Left.

Great post Denny.

This thread was not intended to be solely about Batchelor escorting Ruby down the elevator. Tatro's article deserves a thread of its own. Batchelor may well have done so, four sources. Vaughn later implies Dean may have opened the back door for Ruby. Maybe why he implicated Vaughn strenuously and argued with Warren about it? Failed the lie detector test he requested and created questions for, while Vaughn passed his? The thing is, Ruby didn't go down the ramp. Vaughn told the truth. Verified by another officer and his test. So, Ruby went in by another route, almost exclusively limited to the back door of the city hall annex. A direct walk from Western Union through a parking lot. Somebody met him there and escorted him further to make sure he got to his appointment next to Blackie Harrison on time.

Bump.

Bump for Angleton reference.

Still defending Fred? Look for yourself.

Go back and re read the comment Fred. You've left out part of it in it's current state. Mark Knight dealt with this over a day ago now.

You're a day late Steve. If you had reviewed the post you find offensive you should have noted Mark addressed your "reported content" complaint now over 24 hours ago. Nearly 24 hours before the above post in which you publicly asked him to do so. Regarding my "high adoration for DiEugenio", about the only people I adore in this world are my wife, children and grandchildren. I do admire Jim's pushing of the subject over the now many years, I respect his research, writings, commitment and accomplishments, agree with the great majority of them. Nobody here walks on water. Myself included. This is not a job. I volunteered when asked. The only pay I get is occasional kind comments from a few members and a little satisfaction learning more myself and helping others to do so occasionally. I'm here because I believe John Simkin and others created something outstanding 20 years ago which should be continued. Back to adoration. You note Fred should not be insulted because he is a member here. Why does he need you to defend him?

That's a great video Cliff. Thanks for sharing.

That's great.

The problem is over 60% of people in the USA still believe Oswald did not act alone. Not too long ago it was still over 70%, several years ago over 80%. I'd guess 85-90% or more of forum members over the years believe it was a conspiracy. Thus, to them Oswald did it is a waste of time. It's about who, how and why. Pushing the debunked warren omission theory is seen as knowingly spreading disinformation, gullibility or ignorance.