Benjamin Cole

This is 2nd district court judge Sarah Wallace of Colorado. Thanks to her, Trump will be on the ballot in Colorado.

I also wonder where Trump finds his lawyers. But, as it stands, the Trump lawyers did secure Trump's right to be on the ballot in Colorado. If you are a Colorado resident, you will have the exquisite pleasure of voting against Trump in November. Or, so has ruled 2nd district court judge Sarah Walters of Colorado. Woo-woo! Democracy on the march.

Egads. This is like watching a multi-shot loose cannon roll around on deck. Yes, it is possible, perhaps even likely, Joannides was monitoring or supervising LHO in New Orleans, summer of '63. That is why Jeff Morley wants to open the CIA files on Joannides work in New Orleans. The same files now six-feet-under due to President Biden's snuff job. Biden is covering up what may be vital information leading to the true culprits in the JFKA. But as we cannot see the Joannides files, and Joannides is dead (and he might lie anyway)...we are left guessing. Reiner's powers of perception are decidedly dubious.

I have heard of non-jury trials, I guess where a defendant for some reason waves his or her right to have the case heard before a jury. I assume this usually happens when defendants have "copped a plea" or looked at the legal bills, and decided to go with the quickest route possible through a ponderous court system. In Illinois, maybe the defendants have an "arrangement" with the judge. I gather the judge in Colorado is what we in Californria call a "state district court judge." That is a local judge, one level below the state appeals court, which is, of course, a level below the state Supreme Court. And all state courts can be appealed into the federal system, meaning even a state Supreme Court can be overruled by the federal courts, or the US Supreme Court. BTW, a quick read is that the local judge in Colorado ruled Trump cannot be held off the ballot in Colorado for the national presidential election. "The suit was filed by the watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington on behalf of six Colorado voters in Denver District Court. They asked the court to order Secretary of State Jena Griswold to bar Trump from the Colorado presidential ballot." I understand the local Colorado judge, named Sarah Wallace, was appointed to her position by the Democratic Governor of Colorado, Jared Polis. We live in hyper-partisan times. Seems like the six Colorado voters were on a Quixotic mission. I wonder if other pols in other states will try to prevent national political candidates from appearing on ballots, after a local judge issues a "finding of fact." That could get frantic and ugly. Let us hope these kinds of efforts are stillborn, on both sides of the aisle.

Verily, me too. I am not offended by foul language, just weary, while the person using foul language is undercutting their own arguments, and lowering their perceived IQ by a few dozen points. But so it goes.

The English schoolmarm in me wants to lecture people that the English language is a beautiful rapier when skillfully used, with infinite nuance and hues, having borrowed words from seemingly every other language on the planet. But then I am the sort of old fogie who think tattoos on the face are a bad idea.

Uses "f" and "s" words constantly, has visible tattoos on neck.

PS- I still wonder if a WCC 6.5 copper-jacketed slug would explode, upon hitting a human skull, even an an angle. "Bone struck by bullets may not only fragment the bone, but also split the bullet. Lead round nose bullets can penetrate deeply and strike bone at relatively high velocity and can be cleanly cut in half or shaved vertically. Full metal jacketed round nose bullets are less affected, but are often irregularly flattened upon striking bone." https://webpath.med.utah.edu/TUTORIAL/GUNS/GUNLAB.html#:~:text=Full metal jacketed round nose,striking bone are often intact.

Excellent points. Yes, the Mannlicher-Carcano was said to have fired Western Cartridge Company copper-jacketed 6.5 rounds. Full copper jacket on lead slug. The "CIA assassination" manual mentions the use of under-charged or subsonic bullets in assassinations: https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB4/docs/doc02.pdf cleaner copy https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB4/ciaguat2.html If the rounds were undercharged, one would expect even less fragmenting. This undercharging of rounds may explain JFK's shallow back wound. A missile from another weapon may have struck JFK's head.

I kind of like "John DeAngelo." We all should have alter egos somewhere.

Butterfield was in fact former CIA (if the word "former" ever applies) And it was Butterfield who revealed the existence of the taping system to the Watergate committee. James Hougan's work has only gotten stronger over the years as new info has come out. It sure looks like the CIA-Pentagon torpedoed Nixon.

SL- Thanks for your comment. I think my review of what a state judge did stands. I am uncomfortable with a legal system, even if only a local-court judge in the state of Colorado, that issues a "finding of fact" that any individual, including Trump, engaged in an insurrection, unless that individual has been found guilty in a court of law before peers, while having adequate defense counsel. Remember, there was a large investigation into LHO, called the WC. But that lengthy proceeding of the WC's, packed full of legal and criminal experts, lacked the adversarial process, that is the investigators aggressively hunting for exculpatory or contrary evidence, or presenting more-compelling but alternative narratives. As it stands, the polls seem to show Trump will be the GOP nominee. I guess Biden also. This is what your two major parties think you deserve. I hope people are pondering alternatives for casting their vote for president.

You know, you can tell the difference between amateurs, cranks and serious researchers in the JFKA, and probably most other serious endeavors too. Serious people tell you what they don't know, and also when evidence is hearsay, or sketchy. A researcher like Larry Hancock constantly counsels the reader on the limitations of the evidence at hand, and is circumspect in his findings. Jeff Morley, James DiEugenio, Tink Thompson and a few others fall into this category. Others make outlandish claims, with widening nets of hundreds of suspects, based on the flimsiest shards of "evidence" or even secret documents unavailable for review by the public. Reiner is coming perilously close to falling into this latter and unfortunate category. LHO was a CIA asset from age 13? It may be LHO took intelligence tests and was put on some sort of intel-list when he joined the Marines, and then given intel-related work at Atsugi airbase. In fact, that seems like a good guess. Why does Reiner float off into mere speculation? I don't know.

BN- Thanks for your reply. After briefly reviewing the tangled snarl that is US jurisprudence, I can't say I am comforted. OK, we have a state judge in Colorado, not a federal judge, hearing a case against Trump. "In Colorado, a judge heard arguments this month in a trial stemming from a lawsuit brought by voters in the state who argue that Mr. Trump is ineligible to hold office under the 14th Amendment of the Constitution because of his actions before and during the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol." Th state judge unilaterally issued a "finding of fact" that Trump had engaged in an insurrection on Jan. 6. "Judge Sarah B. Wallace said she found that Trump did in fact "engage in insurrection" on Jan. 6 and rejected his attorneys' arguments that he was simply engaging in free speech" So, despite the fact the "insurrection" is a federal charge, that has not been even brought against Trump in court, let alone Trump having being convicted of such a charge, a state judge in Colorado has issued a "finding of fact" that Trump engaged in an insurrection. I can't say that is a pretty picture. A judge in Colorado issuing a finding of fact---based on what? Newspaper headlines? Blogs? Hearsay evidence? Did the judge hear exculpatory evidence presented by competent defense attorneys? If you separate partisan sentiments from the scene...what are you left with? A judge issuing a "finding of fact," based on thin air, regarding insurrection. Well, I have said many times, if Trump is re-elected, I shrug my shoulders. If he goes to prison, I shrug my shoulders, if he skates, so be it. It won't be TEOTWAWKI. Personally, I hope RFK2 is elected. If he lives.

"That (June Cobb) manuscript is controlled in high secrecy by somebody unknown whose identity Leslie is not disposed to disclose. Leslie has resolutely refused to either confirm or deny she is that person herself.---GD Oh, this is rich. I wonder how many more manuscripts, with thrilling revelations regarding the JFKA there are, but which cannot be authenticated, or even touched and seen, by outsiders? Evidently, even to ask why such manuscripts are permanently unauthenticated is considered offensive. I wonder what my ol' detective buddy, Mr. Bogus Ersatzi, would have to say.

I confess to not being an authority on Colorado law. I would prefer before anyone is convicted of being an insurrectionist, that they be found guilty beyond reasonable doubt by a jury of peers, in an open court, when provided with adequate counsel. If they have a different standard in Colorado, so be it.

SA--You are framing the question properly, IMHO. Nixon had lost institutional backing, even the Pentagon was illegally spying on Nixon (see the Moorer-Radford Affair.) The legacy media turned on Nixon. None of this makes Nixon admirable or a nice guy. I regard him as a war criminal. But the "Nixon is bad" theme allowed the true explanation of Watergate to be lost amid a lot of self-righteous preening in media and the D-Party. (The same sort of self-righteous preening we saw in R-Party circles during the Clinton impeachment). Party politics is effectively exploited by the Deep State. To the present day.

Here is the problem that many have backwards. When a claim is made about the JFKA (in general) the onus is on the people making the claim to show that the claim is true, at least somewhere near beyond reasonable doubt. The onus is not on skeptics and observers to disprove all claims. Indeed, proving a negative is often impossible (a fact well known to rank fraudsters). Side note: At this point, I plan a small book, steadily shrinking, on "people not involved in the JFKA." Right now, it is down to a couple of pages. Just for fun, here is a list of ethnicities that had JFK assassinated: 1. Italians (Mafia) 2. Jews (J-mob and Israelis) 3. Latins (Cubans) 4. French (various assassins related to French right-wing) 5. Germans (Nazis brought into the CIA post WWII) 6. WASPs (the old East Coast power structure) 7. Americans (LHO or right-wingers like Milteer) 8. Russians (through LHO). AFAIK, Africans and Asians are considered innocent of the JFKA. Although I think I read once that Catholics related to Diem did the deed, so maybe we can bring Asians into the mix.

It does seem to be a huge intel failure on the part of Israelis. Intentional? Or hubris? Israel is small country, and tightly knit through universal military conscription, religious institutions, education, industry, family. Everybody knows everybody. For that reason, I doubt there was a deliberate plan to let Hamas perform atrocities on the highest holy day of the year. Just IMHO.

It is hard to tell if Nixon was paranoid...or correctly sensing somebody was out to axe him. The adversarial climate is permanent in DC-=-it is partisan politics, fanned by media minions and exploited by the Deep State and globalists. Lately this sickness of partisanship has become rank polarization, with a poisonous dose of ID politics. In this climate, it is very easy to turn members of one party against the other...as it was during Watergate.

And people wonder why I do not trust official, partisan or popular narratives of some recent events.... See JFKA. See Watergate.

I, for one, will look forward to your perspective.

Gil-- The Watergate story is strange. The CIA was the break-in, including McCord, Hunt and the Cuban exiles---the whole team except possibly for Liddy. The Watergate tale (and McCord appeared to want to be caught) was then seized on the D-Party, which used weaponized Congressional hearings and Justice Dep't, and media, to "assassinate" Nixon. (BTW, I am no fan of Nixon, and regard him as a war criminal for his actions in Laos, let alone all of SE Asia. He should have been impeached and convicted for what he did in SE Asia). I have long wondered if Nixon's insistence at wanting to see the "BoP files" played a role in his demise. Also, Nixon's rapprochement with Russia and China. It is known the Pentagon was spying on Nixon, and the hawks were not pleased with Nixon's peace-mongering. Understanding Watergate provides a lot of leavening to hyper-partisan takes on history and current events. The party-approved headlines are not "the rest of the story."

https://jfkfacts.substack.com/p/the-jfk-facts-podcast-talks-to-rob?utm_medium=reader2 JD- This is the podcast of Morley interviewing Reiner. I have been meaning to write a review, but I am swamped with work and family obligations. (You know you have to make money in order to be a JFKA junkie). At one point Reiner appears to speak approvingly of CIA directors. Journalists taken "into the confidence" of authority and intel figures can fall under the sway. Reiner is now cozy with Brennan. I also suspect Reiner has let current partisan politics warp his judgement. Just because a CIA'er self-IDs as "against Trump" does not make the CIA a great outfit. In short, Reiner may be getting used, and was gently encouraged to run with his Tosh Plumlee tale. Listen to the podcast. If you want to review it here, I will back off.

Are you stating there is not a lot of fertilizer in the Pugibet and Lafitte datebooks?