Cory Santos

I agree. Some people were saying today that he should have really confronted Putin. 1) How do they know what happened behind closed doors? 2) We should jump into war? CNN commentary aside, I think if Clinton won we would be at war already. To think of war with Russia-Soviet states is very scary. Can't imagine how terrible it was during JFK's presidency. Had LBJ or Nixon won? I don't know what would have happened. But considering the records are still not being released, it makes one wonder what is happening in the U.S. within his own administration.

Because, legally, if the theory is scientifically disproven to a point where no scientist can defend it, then, the calls for a new investigation can be done. Why? Because it is evidence. So, legally, it is important to show it was not just bad science but by building on that, simply not true legally.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/video/news/video-1035608/French-betting-ad-mocks-JFK-assassination.html

Interesting list of speakers. Roger Stone??? I note he is tentative. I wonder why. https://jfkdallasconference.com/

Wow, so basically, while they could not confirm the President knew of the plot or authorized it, it is clear that Bissell and Dulles were behind it. The MSM has not said a word on this. Great find. I am going to read it again.

The questions asked him were not looking for the truth. But, a lawyer rarely allows a witness to ramble for many reasons. So I am surprised they allowed him to just go on and on. But there was no significant cross examination here.

Good to see him pushing this, but, notice how at the end, the propaganda piece has to put in that RFK, Jr. has been linked to other conspiracy theories. The subliminal propaganda we seen in the press is so obvious now they do not even try to hide it. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/05/27/robert-f-kennedy-jr-says-s-not-convinced-sirhan-sirhan-killed-his-dad.html

Vince, a good friend of mine is retired SS. We debate JFK all the time. I have found your site useful, he however will not look at it. Just a thanks for the good work you have done.

More like Larry

Hi Steve, I meant what was the original departure route and plans to Love Field. Did the motorcade change in any way? What route were they going to use. If there was a pre November 22 ride through Dallas and Dealey, certainly, the drive would have also included from the Trade Mart back to Love Field.

Couple of points I would like to get clarification on. First, what were LBJ's connections with the Trade Mart, board, etc. Second, Vince, do we have any information on the plans on how JFK would enter and leave the luncheon? Was he to be walked through a kitchen pantry? How did the motorcade return to Love Field? Third, do we have a complete list of all attendees and all employees at the luncheon that day? Again, did the SS review the entire list and do checks on all employees and attendees? If so, where is that information? If not, why? Would it not be amazing if we found out Mac Wallace was on the guest list. Lol. Fourth, this is at a Trade Mart. What were the connections to The Trade Mart in New Orleans and Clay Shaw. Certainly, there must have been connections between Shaw and the people at the Dallas Trade Mart. Jim, did Garrison ever consider this. If so, what did he think of it? I find it strange, maybe just a "strange coincidence", that Clay Shaw is charged by Garrison and there clearly was a push from LBJ's camp to have the luncheon at the Trade Mart. These are the points I would like to know as they would help clear up any "strange coincidences".

I was discussing JFK recently and a thought occurred to me. If someone who actually knew could answer fully one question, but you can only know: 1) Who (assuming more than one person) was behind it, or 2) Why (regardless if it was a conspiracy) it happened, or 3) How it was done (regardless if it was a conspiracy). Which one answer would you choose? Why?

Cheers.

Let me add one thing for people to look into, Has anyone looked at LHO's Mexican Government Card #82408? Was anyone else issued this number? Research on that and get back to me with what you find.

Thank you for the kind words. I notice Merv has not responded to the fact that I answered his question point blank about evidence but rather focuses on trying to antagonize or demean others. At first I assumed it was just a cultural difference, however, I see now it a personality flaw. To answer you question Jeffrey, I spoke at the OLLI institute at at the Univ. of Nevada, Reno in 2016, along with some private lectures. Coming out on this subject is not easy because it is quickly dismissed. It is not really considered polite dinner conversation if you will. I have had to deal with that since college but, in law school I had a well known professor who encouraged me to write a original paper on Jim Garrison as my professor saw my thesis as an angle that had not been written about or analyzed up to that point. So if you are in Nevada, feel free to come to let me know and we can sit down and talk over a coke. PM me. Being in the entertainment industry as an actor and lawyer, I am flirting with high quality youtube videos or alternatively a high quality documentary which could be sold to a potential platform like Netflix or Prime. Aw Bolivia..... Apparently, there is a rumor (could be false-I don't know) that there are files there in the government's possession which have not really been reviewed by U.S. researchers. I find the documents in the new release regarding Bolivia and Che very interesting. It is unfortunate that they are redacted. I do not want to get into much here, but, if anyone else is familiar with what I am talking about feel free to chime in. Also, feel free to chime in about Belize and LHO. But perhaps we are all chasing straws, for it is only the likes of Merv and others who have discovered the real truth. Thank you for your interest.

Google him. His Facebook is easily found. He has also written a few notes here and there on the net, even apologized for some mistakes in his writings. I fail to see how someone can come here, literally insult everyone, and then act like he was the one being attacked. What a waste of time. He expects us to research who he is??? LOL. Ok.

Well your reason for joining appears to be to argue with people. You failed to address any of my points in my comments.

Regardless of why you are here, tact is the best method when dealing with others.

I would like to know why British intelligence would have any interest in LHO prior to the assassination. Also, are you providing a suggestion that British intelligence could have been involved in the assassination? If so, lets hear it. I fail at this point to see the motive but I would listen to fact based evidence. If you are no longer commenting feel free to message me. Again, as I stated earlier, the fact that James Earl Ray somehow escaped America and went to Europe seems very strange. Lastly, are you aware that Bolivia has a potential gold mine of information on LHO that has never been really reviewed? To address your query point blank, the problem with wanting evidence provable in court that Oswald assassinated JFK or that someone else did is a very difficult thing. Feel free to google search my credentials. The problem with looking at only the evidence provable in court is that most of it would never be admissible. Chain of custody for bullets, the rifle, all a problem. The limo was immediately cleaned and repaired. This is destruction of evidence. As such, any evidence from the limo would not come into court- of course the person who ordered this would be considered for prosecution but that is another issue. The witness testimony is all over the place. The crime scene was not even cut off and evidence was destroyed, mutilated, etc. The snipers nest was rearranged. People walked all over Dealey Plaza, touching something in the grass, etc. Booking records were not consistent. Where is the list of cars parked behind the TSBD that were allowed to leave later in the day? Why were the cars not first inventoried and examined closely? This is not to mention the amazing way that LHO was interrogated. No transcript or recording? No attorney present although he had asked for one? Then, we start to look at the cover up which occurred. Yes, the CIA historian confirmed this is a true statement. Evidence was destroyed, mutilated, lost, just not provided, etc. So, when someone asks me to just talk about the evidence that would be admissible in court, I tend to smile a bit, because in this case, it barely exists. The Warren Commission did a huge disservice to this country-intentionally or negligently, although, to suggest Earl Warren was not aware of criminal procedure standards seems rather strange. So that begs the question, why was evidence destroyed, mutilated, lost. Why were witnesses harassed? Asked to change their testimony? Why were questions asked by the Warren Commission so lacking in actually trying to find the truth that any seasoned trial attorney would have said "wait a minute, you have to ask this question"? If you want evidence, I suggest that many researchers have placed themselves out there for scrutiny to get the evidence we have now. Some is ridiculous and has rightly been criticized. Others have provided solid research. Yet you demean them with your comments. In the last 50 years, we know the following: 1) LHO was not who the Warren Commission said he was 2) LBJ assisted in a cover up, regardless of motivation, of the true facts 3) there was a cover up after the fact which the CIA historian acknowledges 4) evidence was destroyed, mutilated and/or lost 5) the files are still not fully released which is odd if LHO acted alone 6) that the FBI taped a man who discussed a plot before Dallas 7) that many individuals involved who claimed no connection to intelligence agencies or who never acknowledged that they had connections did in fact have connections (some with LHO) and finally, 8 ) that Gerald Posner's book was so filled with so many holes that my law school paper was rather easy to write over two years. Now there are other things too that we now know. Plenty. I do not have time to enlighten you as to all that has been discovered, you need to attend one of my lectures for that. But, I do want to address one other point, I understand what you say about JFK worship and to an extent can agree that academically this can prevent a researcher from approaching the subject neutrally (of course the opposite is true if you are hostile to him which by your comments, you appear to be), but, your logic in your above statements appears to be faulty. Not all researchers engage in JFK worship. I certainly think the Bay of Pigs was terrible and certainly my background-feel free to google-comes from the opposite side of the political aisle. But, you suggest that for this forum, it is filled with JFK worshipers and therefore their research is faulty. That is faulty logic. Moreover, bias when researching a historical subject occurs in the historical field daily. Sometimes this allows us to consider two opposite points of view on a subject. That can be a good thing. Perhaps, if you had more tact in dealing with Americans, that is, instead of being aggressive, dismissive and, forgive my observation but, rather rude when commenting to others (not me), the discussions might be more advantageous and you might enjoy the forum more? Just a thought. But since you will not be commenting further, I suppose this is an unnecessary request. Either way, I think the LHO in England research is interesting and wish you the best with it.

Kirk, are you with the Warriors or a fan?

After reading the comments I am trying to stop laughing. . . except its really sad people believe some of this stuff. Are you suggesting that there was a conspiracy for Trump to beat Bush in the primary (strange, everyone seems to think his dad was behind the JFK plot lol), then to beat Hillary? If so, the comment show you with little to no connection, knowledge, or understanding of the federal intelligence agencies or how Washington works. Consider, you are an insider, why would you not support an insider like Cruz, Bush or Hillary? Makes no sense to go with a wild card like President Trump. But, interestingly enough, you then talk about a massive GOP purge which swung close states apparently. I assume you have gone to the appropriate authorities with the proof. No? Ok CNN then? No offense but really, people voted, some did not. Ultimately things affected votes, but this vote was not rigged in the voting booth. Come on! To Robert's first post, sure there appear to be connections which go from the JFK assassination and Watergate. Many people have stated that, including, Hunt. But for anyone to imply that the powers that be wanted Trump over Bush and Hillary and helped him win, that theory has no evidence at this point. It is just speculation. Hillary probably had her enemies in the intelligence community and sure they probably did not want her to win. But Trump was a wild card for them. As for JFK being hated, well, that goes beyond the government. Lots of people hated him. Business people, oil, most importantly, anti-Castro Cubans who did feel betrayed by him. Some of the ones I know who were at the Bay of Pigs could not even speak about the event because of how terrible it was. Few history books really explain what really happened over those couple of days.

I concur with Kirk.

Yeah, I read Khruschev Remembers studying history in college. I gained a lot of respect for what JFK had done. We were so close to war and his actions clearly saved this planet from a war where some thought there were justifiable odds to nuclear warfare. Scary. So when you discuss his policies, as Jim said what exactly are you referring to. Bay of Pigs? Yes, terrible. Missile Crisis, he saved everyone. Vietnam, clearly he was going to get us out, I am amazed people claim otherwise. I think President Reagan did a great job as well. Media is presenting what many people believe now. Was it happening then? Sure. But, JFK had some accomplishments. Some of those appear to have upset the wrong people. . . Do you mean he created a "mess" as you said, with his assassination?

Mervyn interesting points. I cannot agree on your comments about the KGB or MI6 because I need more facts to support that, but I realize you are just giving your opinion which is why we are here. Similarly, I find it odd that James Earl Ray was able to escape the country and get to Europe so easily apparently. I would like to know more about that and I think what you said about LHO being in England is worth a look.

Well, I take 3 things away, 1) Hoover told RFK about JFK in a cold voice, no emotion. 2) RFK thought "they" would go after him 3) There was a conspiracy to protect the bureaucracy. It would be nice to ask, based on the new records, did you know A? or B? or C? Does that change your mind about if there was a conspiracy? https://abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=131457&page=1