The Real Ruth and Michael Paine

[Paul Trejo]

Paul Trejo,

You have talked with Ruth Paine recently? Today is February 22, 2016.

Paul, may I ask Ruth three questions.

The questions are:

1. Did Ruth take the pictures of June in New Orleans?

End of questions.

Good question, Jon. I'll send Ruth Paine an email right away. I'll let you know the result on this FORUM.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

[Sandy Larsen]

Ruth Paine told me that she's closely following the work of JFK researcher, Max Holland, at present.

That figures. Holland also works to deflect suspicion from the CIA.

[Jon G. Tidd]

Thanks, Paul.

I do have two other questions.

2. What did Ruth think of Marina's husband before the assassination?

3. Did Ruth talk with Michael by telephone on 11/23 or 11/22 about who killed JFK?

Many thanks to you and Ruth.

[David Von Pein]

In 2003, Ruth Paine talks briefly about the accusation that she is a wicked, evil, patsy-framing CIA operative....

http://ftpcontent.worldnow.com/kdfw/projects/JFKvideo/video/jfk001.html

Edited February 23, 2016 by David Von Pein

[Paul Trejo]

Thanks, Paul.

I do have two other questions.

2. What did Ruth think of Marina's husband before the assassination?

3. Did Ruth talk with Michael by telephone on 11/23 or 11/22 about who killed JFK?

Many thanks to you and Ruth.

Jon, I don't need to ask Ruth Paine again about those two questions, because I already asked her last December, and here is what she conveyed to me in a variety of ways:

(2) Ruth went through three phases with regard to opinion about LHO.

(2.1) Phase One: (March 1963 - May 1963) -- Very negative opinion based on Marina Oswald's complaints about him. Marina's main complaint that outraged Ruth Paine was that LHO was threatening to send her back to the USSR without him. Ruth took this as a desire to abandon his family responsibilities -- which is how Marina framed it. This included (but was not limited to) LHO's forcing Marina to write to the USSR asking for a Visa to return, and forcing her to sign it. Marina insisted -- frantically -- to Ruth Paine, that she never wanted to leave the USA, and she asked Ruth Paine for help.

When Ruth Paine came to visit Marina on April 23, 1963, she was stunned to find LHO packed up an ready to leave for New Orleans by bus, asking for Ruth Paine to drive his luggage to the Greyhound terminal. LHO had lost his job. He was going to leave Marina Oswald alone in Dallas -- with $10, with a bus ticket, but without rent money, without a telephone, with baby June, not speaking a word of English -- so that when he mailed her a LETTER when he finally found a job, Marina (three months pregnant) would pack up all her clothes and all the baby things and get them to the Greyhound terminal and get herself to New Orleans.

Marina was afraid, because she had no assurance that LHO wasn't going to abandon her. Ruth picked up on this, and deftly, without causing strife between them, politely asked LHO if it would be all right to take Marina home with her, so that Marina would have company, and also a telephone, and help in packing -- and also -- Ruth would personally DRIVE Marina and baby June to New Orleans. Part of her motivation was that if LHO really did abandon Marina, Ruth would be a step ahead.

LHO grabbed at her offer. LHO cashed in Marina's Greyhound bus ticket, kept half of the money, gave Marina the other half, and then helped Ruth pack up her station wagon with Marina and June's belongings. Ruth and Marina waited 17 days for LHO to call. (And lucky, too, because the landlord at the old apartment would have been complaining to Marina that the rent was due for TEN SOLID DAYS).

So, although Ruth Paine originally became interested in Marina Oswald because of her education and Russian language conversational skills, Ruth quickly changed her motivation for being interested in Marina Oswald -- it was to save her from the irresponsibility of LHO. This is what Ruth told her family and friends throughout her long summer vacation of 1963 back East.

(2.2) Phase Two. (September 23, 1963 - October 31, 1963) - After Ruth drove back West after her summer vacation, she stopped off at New Orleans to visit Marina Oswald. The two had been writing to each other for the summer, and Marina was reporting that she was getting along much better with LHO. So, maybe it was all a false alarm.

However, when Ruth arrived in New Orleans, she again found LHO had lost his job. Again, he was going to travel to look for another job -- to "Houston" he said. By this time, though, Marina was eight months pregnant, and waddling.

Ruth quickly stepped in to help again -- she offered to take Marina Oswald to Dallas so that she could register at Parkland Hospital for pre-natal care -- and to let Marina live with her until she had the baby -- perhaps into January.

Again, LHO grabbed at the relief. LHO suddenly became the perfect gentleman. He did all the shopping, all the chores, and when Ruth invited some Church lady and her daughters to come to speak Russian with Marina, LHO was (according to Ruth) extra polite to their company (though one of the daughters said that LHO was too flirty when the women weren't looking, said Greg Parker).

At this point Ruth began to change her opinion about LHO. Maybe he was learning, and he wasn't making trouble for Ruth who wanted very much to ensure that Marina Oswald had proper medical care for her upcoming childbirth.

So, LHO fully packed Ruth Paine's station wagon with all their stuff (except for his rifle) and Ruth Paine and Marina and their kids drove to Irving Texas, where they unpacked, with the help of Michael Paine.

They waited 11 days or so, and then LHO appeared again around October 4th. He found his own room, and was earnest about finding work in Dallas. Ruth let him visit on weekends (her charity was for Marina, not for LHO). While he visited, he was extra polite, helpful around the house, did extra chores, planed a stuck door, and played with Ruth's children. Ruth wrote to her worried mother around this time that LHO had "changed" and was not such a bad guy after all.

(2.3) Phase Three (November 1 - November 22, 1963) -- Things took a sour turn in early November when the FBI came around Ruth's house multiple times looking for LHO and Marina. They really wanted to talk to LHO, but he was never home when they showed up, so they talked to Marina, but also to Ruth and Michael.

Ruth didn't like that. Then, on Veterans' Day weekend, LHO borrowed Ruth's typewriter to write the EMBASSY LETTER to the USSR, and left a handwritten draft on her veranda -- for two solid days. Ruth's curiosity got the better of her, and she read it, and she didn't like what she read. She thought it was mainly fiction, but it included an INSULT to the FBI, and Ruth's heart sunk. Here was LHO acting like a tough guy again, with his secret little world. Ruth really didn't like this. She made her own copy of this letter just in case the FBI came around again (and in case LHO came looking for his missing draft). LHO mailed it on November 12th, and the FBI intercepted it, so we have the typewritten letter as CE 834.

Ruth really hated CE 834, and it really soured her attitude toward LHO after that -- she didn't fear LHO would be violent, but she did fear that LHO wouldn't remain responsible to his family, behaving so erratic -- and that he would disappoint Marina and fail to take care of his family again.

(3) Did Ruth and Michael Paine talk to each other on 11/22/1963?

Ruth told me point blank that the answer is YES. She is disturbed that somebody heard it, or her home phone was wire-tapped as early as 11/22/1963, because nobody has ever come forward to claim responsibility for taping that phone call.

In any case, she admitted that Michael called her, and that he said words to this effect: "Most likely LHO will be blamed for the JFK assassination, but we both know who is really responsible."

I asked Ruth point blank about this, and I asked her -- WHO DID YOU KNOW WAS REALLY RESPONSIBLE?

Ruth Paine told me: "The ones we meant when we said we "know" who is really responsible were those who had published the WANTED FOR TREASON: JFK handbill, and the WELCOME MISTER KENNEDY TO DALLAS black-bordered ad in the Dallas Morning News that morning -- whoever they turned out to be.

IMHO, Ruth and Michael Paine were 100% right.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited February 23, 2016 by Paul Trejo

[James DiEugenio]

Now, go ahead and compare that with what they said at the time.

http://www.ctka.net/2015/JeffCarterBYP5.html

Scroll to the bottom section.

Nice to have 40- 50 years to come up with a story.

Edited February 24, 2016 by James DiEugenio

[Paul Trejo]

Now, go ahead and compare that with what they said at the time.

http://www.ctka.net/2015/JeffCarterBYP5.html

Scroll to the bottom section.

Nice to have 40- 50 years to come up with a story.

James, that screed you shared begins with errors and proceeds shamelessly with inventions and made up stuff.

There is no respect for the truth in that article -- and only a wish to write pulp fiction for public consumption (with hopes for profit).

Actually -- Ruth Paine testified that she had no thought at all that LHO was involved when she first heard of the JFK shooting.

Actually -- Michael Paine called Ruth Paine after LHO was already arrested to give his opinion that "LHO would be *blamed* for the JFK murder, but that he didn't believe LHO was responsible."

So, Jeff Carter is just making stuff up, mixing up dates and events in a flippant manner, and invents dialogue within quotation marks whenever he feels like it.

Evidently, he looks up to your writing as his example.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited February 24, 2016 by Paul Trejo

[James DiEugenio]

Yeah, yeah Paul.

Of all people on this site to talk about screeds!

The man who prostrates himself under the shadow of Ruth Paine.

[Paul Trejo]

Yeah, yeah Paul.

Of all people on this site to talk about screeds!

The man who prostrates himself under the shadow of Ruth Paine.

James, your attacks on Ruth Paine have NO SUBSTANCE.

You cite others like Carol Hewett, but her attacks on Ruth Paine likewise have NO SUBSTANCE.

Now you're citing Jeff Carter, but his attacks on Ruth Paine likewise have NO SUBSTANCE, and in fact it appears that Jeff is only imitating you and Carol.

You can try to make eerie sounds about Ruth Paine, but it's all theater, man. You've got nothing to show, because it's been DECADES now, and if you had anything, you would have shown it by now. You keep threatening to expose something, BUT YOU NEVER DELIVER.

Your work on Ruth Paine is pathetic.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited February 24, 2016 by Paul Trejo

[David G. Healy]

Yeah, yeah Paul.

Of all people on this site to talk about screeds!

The man who prostrates himself under the shadow of Ruth Paine.

James, your attacks on Ruth Paine have NO SUBSTANCE.

You cite others like Carol Hewett, but her attacks on Ruth Paine likewise have NO SUBSTANCE.

Now you're citing Jeff Carter, but his attacks on Ruth Paine likewise have NO SUBSTANCE, and in fact it appears that Jeff is only imitating you and Carol.

You can try to make eerie sounds about Ruth Paine, but it's all theater, man. You've got nothing to show, because it's been DECADES now, and if you had anything, you would have shown it by now. You keep threatening to expose something, BUT YOU NEVER DELIVER.

Your work on Ruth Paine is pathetic.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Paul, first it's Harry Dean, second Edwin Walker, third Ruth Paine... So, whose 4th? Guy Bannister, Earl Warren? The latter will probably get you passed 150,000 views...

Edited February 24, 2016 by David G. Healy

[Paul Trejo]

Paul, first it's Harry Dean, second Edwin Walker, third Ruth Paine... So, whose 4th? Guy Bannister, Earl Warren? The latter will probably get you passed 150,000 views...

Well, David, I'm not alone in my suspicions of the Resigned General Edwin Walker as the mastermind of the JFK assassination. General Walker was the only US General to resign in the 20th century, thereby forfeiting his 30-year Army Pension.

All the three characters you named -- Harry Dean, Edwin Walker, Ruth Paine -- are all part and parcel of a SINGLE THEORY, namely, that the Resigned General Edwin Walker was the mastermind of the JFK assassination.

1. Harry Dean is relevant because he claims that he personally heard Edwin Walker in Southern California addressing a group of John Birch Society and Minutemen volunteers in September, 1963, telling them that their Patsy had been selected, and his name was Lee Harvey Oswald.

2. Edwin Walker, of course, is the principal suspect.

3. Ruth Paine is relevant for a negative reason, i.e. in the prevailing CIA-did-it CT, Ruth Paine is often a suspect because her mother-in-law had a childhood friend, Mary Bancroft, who was Allen Dulles' lover during WW2 -- therefore Ruth Paine "must have been" in the CIA, according to James DiEugenio and his sources and followers.

My point with Ruth Paine -- as with any consistent Walker-did-it CT -- is that Ruth Paine had zero connection with General Walker, and actually her politics were the OPPOSITE of Walker's, and so the CIA-did-it CTers are barking up the wrong tree.

The attacks on Ruth Paine coming from James, Carol and Jeff are paper-thin -- pathetic, really. If James had anything solid to show, don't you think he would have shown it by now?

But my point to you is that I've always had one and only one theory since 2010 when I joined this FORUM, namely: Walker-did-it.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited February 24, 2016 by Paul Trejo

[Paul Trejo]

Now, go ahead and compare that with what they said at the time.

http://www.ctka.net/2015/JeffCarterBYP5.html

Scroll to the bottom section.

Nice to have 40- 50 years to come up with a story.

So, James, you want specifics on the errors of Jeff Carter? Here's just one among many:

------------ BEGIN EXTRACT OF JEFF CARTER'S 2015 article on RUTH AND MICHAEL PAINE --------

During a phone call placed at one pm November 22, 1963, Michael Paine calling from his office at Bell Helicopter to Ruth at home in Irving, this assumption receives a qualification: “the male voice was heard to comment that he felt sure LEE HARVEY OSWALD had killed the President, but did not feel OSWALD was responsible, and further stated, “We both know who is responsible.” Whoever it is Michael Paine believed “responsible” for the assassination it has remained closely held, as neither he or Ruth Paine have faced official scrutiny since 1968.

------------ END EXTRACT OF JEFF CARTER'S 2015 article on RUTH AND MICHAEL PAINE --------

Here's what wrong with Jeff Carter's paragraph:

* Jeff reports from an FBI report which they got from the DPD who claimed to get it from a telephone lineman.

* DPD Captain Paul Barger told the FBI that Michael Paine said that he: "felt sure LEE HARVEY OSWALD had killed the President, but did not feel OSWALD was responsible, and further stated, 'We both know who is responsible.'”

* HOWEVER, those were not the actual words that were spoken. When the FBI later pressed Paul Barger to give the "actual" words reported, Barger got out his original, handwritten notes and read the following as the actual words spoken by Michael Paine to Ruth Paine: "“Oswald wouldn’t have any reason to do it, but when you get right down to it, the only guilty person is that bastard himself.”

* THEREFORE, when Michael Paine was asked if he had said what Paul Barger first reported to the FBI that he said -- Michael Paine told the absolute TRUTH when he said, "No, I never said that."

* In fact, we can't really be sure that Barger's handwritten notes are themselves accurate, since they are second-hand.

I should point out here that this data confirms the new book by Dr. Jeff Caufield, because even though LHO was a Patsy in the JFK murder, still, he got himself deeply involved with the JFK conspirators -- deep enough to hand over his rifle to the conspirators, and to rely on them to, "come forward and give me legal assistance."

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited February 24, 2016 by Paul Trejo

[James DiEugenio]

HA HA HA

Paul, you are as bad as Wesley Liebeler.

Wesley wanted to get the Paines off by referring to the wrong date.

You want to get them off by saying , well it was not an exact transcription

Nice company you keep.

And Caufield's book proves absolutely nothing. And I will demonstrate that soon. In fact, I am on about page 700 now. That book has now fallen in on itself, and has become almost a combination of high camp and self-parody. Caufield is like the guy who cries "Wolf" too many times. He builds up, with drumbeat obbligato, some great and stunning disclosure and, time after time, its a dud. Sort of like Chaplin loading up his cannon, running behind it and covering his ears--then there is no explosion, and the cannonball simply falls out of the lip of the cannon a few inches away. As I said, its the worst book since Ultimate Sacrifice. And there are some worthy comparisons to note between the two as to how they got that bad.

OMG, you actually bought the Hemming story?

Paul, did you know about this bridge in Arizona? Its for sale. Call your bank, soon.

Edited February 24, 2016 by James DiEugenio

[James DiEugenio]

Here is the end of Jeff Carter's fine article:

Michael Paine denied the content of the call during an interview conducted December 23, 1963 by FBI Special Agent Bardwell Odum. “Mr. PAINE advised that on November 23, 1963, he did not make any statement to anyone that he felt sure LEE HARVEY OSWALD had killed the President but did not feel OSWALD was responsible ... Mr. PAINE advised that what he did say, in fact, in a conversation with his wife, was that he was not sure that OSWALD had killed the President because at that time he had no facts at his command ... Mr PAINE flatly denied at any time saying that he felt he knew who was responsible for the President’s death other than OSWALD.” (CD 206, p. 67)²⁰

Paine’s Warren Commission testimony to Liebeler – that he did not know the “who is responsible” conversation was associated with his telephone numbers – is challenged by this report.²¹

Paul Barger’s 1976 story of a telephone repairman, as well as his initial stories of being so busy on the assassination weekend that he could not recall either the source of the information or when it arrived to him, do not seem credible in the absence of cross-examination. The January 7 Gemberling identification of Confidential Informant Dallas T-4 is probably not referring to Barger, since Barger had been identified by name in an FBI report from weeks earlier, and there was no confidential necessity to that interview. Barger’s handwritten note presented on January 17 is unconvincing, and was not pursued. The Warren Commission was apparently unaware that telephone records established the phone conversation in question occurred on November 22 instead of the following day. These unsatisfactory efforts suggest that the Paine telephone conversation was indeed captured through a wiretap on the Paine’s residential phone, that Paul Barger assisted in covering up the source of the information by fudging his recollection and attributing an incorrect date to the phone call in question, and that Gemberling revealed the true source (Dallas T-4) for internal FBI use.

Michael Paine has yet to be asked directly who he thought, at one pm on November 22, 1963, “was responsible” for the assassination.

​Two other points, unlike what PT Cruiser would have you think, Jeff notes the Barger alleged transcription in his article.

​Second, if the time was 1:00 PM, then the salient point becomes: How did the Paines know the assassination was going to be pinned on Oswald before he was arrested?

​This last reminds me of the story about Ruth when, first hearing about the assassination on TV, knowing it had occurred outside where Lee worked. But she thought he worked at the warehouse, a few blocks away from Dealey Plaza. (Destiny Betrayed, first edition, p. 343)

Edited February 24, 2016 by James DiEugenio

[Paul Trejo]

Well, James, if all you can do is make jokes, then you're basically admitting you have no strong arguments to offer.

If you had any, you'd surely point them out.

The FBI report that provides the source of this alleged remark by Michael Paine was full of holes, and Wesley Liebeler could see that. The FBI got their report from a DPD Captain, who got it from a telephone lineman. The words were imprecise and second-hand from the start.

Jeff Carter claims that this was a wire-tap, and not a telephone lineman, because Captain Paul Barger refused to identify the lineman. But Barger was asked about that, and he said, "If it was an FBI wire-tap, then why would the FBI need me to tell them what the speaker said?"

That's a good question, and Jeff Carter fails to answer it.

The problem is that this was all second and third-hand information.

Luckily, Ruth Paine has been willing to talk about it - although she herself still wishes to know, to this very day, WHO will claim responsibility for eavesdropping on her private telephone line? After 52 years, NOBODY but NOBODY will admit to being the eavesdropper.

Anyway, Ruth Paine admits that Michael Paine called her in the afternoon of 11/22/1963 (IIRC, the Phone Log doesn't give the hour of the day), after LHO was already in custody, and Michael said words to the effect, "LHO had no reason to do this, yet LHO will probably be blamed, though you and I know who is really responsible." And Ruth agreed.

Ruth Paine explained that by "those really responsible" they meant the publishers of the WANTED FOR TREASON:JFK handbills, and the WELCOME MISTER KENNEDY TO DALLAS black-bordered ad that came out that very morning.

Jeff Carter, however, prefers to print his a falsehood -- that Michael Paine said that he "felt sure that LHO was the killer of JFK."

That happens to be a lie. Michael Paine never said any such thing. But Jeff Carter and his ilk never hesitate to put words into people's mouths, if it will sell articles.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

,

Edited February 24, 2016 by Paul Trejo