Martin Hay Reviews Bugliosi Jr.

[James DiEugenio]

Martin Hay does his usual thorough and analytical job on Bugliosi admirer, Robert A. Wagner.  

Wagner sat at the defense table during the Houston mock trial, and his book came on screen several times. 

Here is a guy who unlike his mentor VB does not buy the SBT, but thinks Oswald did it alone anyway.  Hmm?

 

Read on to figure out how: https://kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-reviews/robert-a-wagner-the-assassination-of-jfk-perspectives-half-a-century-later

 

[Cliff Varnell]

9 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

Martin Hay does his usual thorough and analytical job on Bugliosi admirer, Robert A. Wagner.  

Wagner sat at the defense table during the Houston mock trial, and his book came on screen several times. 

Here is a guy who unlike his mentor VB does not buy the SBT, but thinks Oswald did it alone anyway.  Hmm?

Vince Bugliosi and Martin Hay both put the back wound at T1.

Hmm?

JFK's T3 back wound is an unchallenged fact.

Jim, how many people under the age of 40 read Hay's article from beginning to end?

The Mock Trial lost, folks.  The micro-analytical approach to the case is a failure outside the bubble of JFK Master Class complexity fetishists.

9 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

 

Read on to figure out how: https://kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-reviews/robert-a-wagner-the-assassination-of-jfk-perspectives-half-a-century-later

 

 

 

 

[James DiEugenio]

Thanks for that  expansive, insightful and totally unpredictable  comment Cliff.

 

[James DiEugenio]

To get back to Martin's review, what I find interesting is that Wagner DOES NOT back the SBT, even though he openly admires Bugliosi's RH.

But if you throw over the SBT, then what do yo have in relation to the Tague hit?

If its a fragment, then a fragment from what?  CE 399 is virtually intact, and the center of the head an tail of the head shot is allegedly embedded in JFK's skull if you go by the HSCA and the Clark Panel. Are we really to buy that whatever tiny fragment was left, could dislodge a chuck of curb at that distance and eject it upward five feet with enough torque to cut Tague's face?

Hmm.

The other alternative is its a missed shot.  The problem here is that there was no copper found on the curb by the FBI.  If you have ever seen the copper coated CE 399 bullets, you will understand how that is impossible to fathom.  And the excuses that Posner and Bugliosi have offered in that regard are simply fruity.  The former says that the twigs in the tree completely stripped the coating from the bullet, the latter says that the bullet rotated off the street and while rotating the concrete unsheathed the copper coating uniformly.  I don't know which of those are nuttier.  But I will say this:  I would like to try each one all day long just to prove it could not be done.

This all goes back of course to the WC being trapped by the alleged three shells on the sixth floor.  Once they embraced that, then they were limited to  the three shot scenario no matter how much damage was done to JBC and JFK.  Everything worked backwards to that.

But then there was the problem of the dented shell CE 543.  As TInk Thompson, Howard Donahue and Chris Mills have shown, that shell could not have been dented like that in normal firing. Mills could only get that kind of effect when he used empty shells, and then only one in sixty.  CE 543 is not used enough by our  side I think. But it wrecks Wagner, along with about forty other things brought up by Martin.

Edited February 2, 2018 by James DiEugenio

[Cliff Varnell]

2 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

Thanks for that  expansive, insightful and totally unpredictable  comment Cliff.

 

Your hostility to the simple case for conspiracy is well noted.

The Oswald Mock Trial returned a 6 - 5 - 1 conviction of Oswald, no millennials on the side of the angels.

No thanks to the JFK Master Class.

[Paul Brancato]

Cliff - honestly I don't think it's hostility on Jim's part to the simple case for conspiracy. I think it's to your unerring tendency to reduce everything to the back wound location. Would you consider varying your approach a bit? 

[James DiEugenio]

Thanks Paul, that is what I meant.

And let us not ever forget:  Hoover was so confounded by the Tague hit that he literally tried to make it disappear!  I mean literally.

He carved it out and then cemented it over and in his three hit scenario, there was no Tague hit.  And there was no SBT.

This is one of the key reasons that the FBI report was not included in the hearings and exhibits.  Can you imagine the impact that would have had if it was included?

 

Edited February 2, 2018 by James DiEugenio

[Robert Harper]

•  

  , 

  38 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

  This is one of the key reasons that the FBI report was not included in the hearings

• Today, I left the following on the comments section of the Wall Street Journal of the story headlined below. Unlike the NYTimes, they let different voices speak:

• House Releases GOP Surveillance Memo

• There are only two FBI memos that interest me. Everything else is distraction.

  Both were written by J. Edgar Hoover.

  One, in 1960 he wrote of "someone else  using Lee Harvey Oswald's birth certificate". (we were told they never heard of him until November 1963). The other was written by Hoover, the day after JFK's murder. It said that he "informed George Bush of the CIA" about the activities of anti-Castro  groups.

  Now each was discovered by researchers, but never really discussed in the media. This latest one pales next to those two I think. Ever since I learned that the FBI took all the evidence from Dallas to Washington, and then returned,"officially" with more than they picked, and took it back toe Washington.    

  Until that gets squared, all FBI stuff is held at bay by this wsj reader.

Edited February 2, 2018 by Robert Harper
grammar

[Cliff Varnell]

1 hour ago, Paul Brancato said:

Cliff - honestly I don't think it's hostility on Jim's part to the simple case for conspiracy.

Oh no, he's been quite open in his contempt for the clothing evidence.  He seems to think it was first promoted by Ed Epstein but all Epstein did was present Vincent Salandria's research.  Epstein promised to give Salandria credit in Inquest, but didn't.

Quote

 

 

I think it's to your unerring tendency to reduce everything to the back wound location.

The only provable fact in the case, which further proves that the throat wound was an entrance, the Fox 5 autopsy photo a fake, the autopsy report a sham.

Highly under-rated.

Quote

 

 

Would you consider varying your approach a bit? 

No, I'm not into "proving conspiracy" across many contexts -- I'm into carrying the fact of conspiracy as a subtext.

Edited February 2, 2018 by Cliff Varnell

[James DiEugenio]

And that is that and we should all go home.

I like people who do not have agendas and are open to other people's good work like Martin's.

Edited February 2, 2018 by James DiEugenio

[Pat Speer]

Wagner contacted me about a year ago, and asked me if I would be interested in reading his book. He said he'd read some of my writings and was anxious to share his work with me, even though he knew I would probably not be swayed much as a result. He told me he'd rejected the single-bullet theory. I found that refreshing, and told him to go ahead and ship me the book.

Upon receipt of the book, I looked through it, and saw how reliant it was on Bugliosi's book, and how, at times, it greatly overstates the case for Oswald's guilt. So I stopped reading. Since then I've picked through it at times, but have found it mostly more of the same stuff you see on the forums.

But there's a difference. Wagner is not just a bystander. He went to the mock trial at his own expense and is anxious to be involved in more public discussions re the assassination.

I see this as good news for the research community. A decade ago Mark Fuhrman wrote a best-selling Oswald did it book in which he rejected the SBT. And now comes Wagner.

If those advocating the LN position gradually give in and admit the SBT is malarkey, IMO, it will only be a matter of time before the mainstream media follows suit.

And that will open the door for a more honest public discussion of the case, IMO.

[Joe Bauer]

20 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

Thanks Paul, that is what I meant.

And let us not ever forget:  Hoover was so confounded by the Tague hit that he literally tried to make it disappear!  I mean literally.

He carved it out and then cemented it over and in his three hit scenario, there was no Tague hit.  And there was no SBT.

This is one of the key reasons that the FBI report was not included in the hearings and exhibits.  Can you imagine the impact that would have had if it was included?

 

So, considering Hoover's strongly wanting the Tague hit to disappear,  wouldn't it be logical to wonder whether the F.B.I. "no copper on the cement" finding might have been a purposeful false finding? 

"Something" caused solid material to fly up and hit Tague's face with enough velocity force to cause bleeding. And right during the heard gun firing six second interval. 

 

 

  

[James DiEugenio]

Joe, if you assume it was a projectile, what that means--if you have ever seen a WCC Carcano bullet is that it was from a another weapon.

That is the reason I think it was covered up for decades.

[James DiEugenio]

So Pat, what do you think this means then if these two guys dumped the SBT?

But yet still side with the WC verdict.

[Joe Bauer]

On 2/2/2018 at 1:08 PM, Robert Harper said:

•  

  , 

• Today, I left the following on the comments section of the Wall Street Journal of the story headlined below. Unlike the NYTimes, they let different voices speak:

• House Releases GOP Surveillance Memo

• There are only two FBI memos that interest me. Everything else is distraction.

  Both were written by J. Edgar Hoover.

•  

   

  One, in 1960 he wrote of "someone else  using Lee Harvey Oswald's birth certificate". (we were told they never heard of him until November 1963). The other was written by Hoover, the day after JFK's murder. It said that he "informed George Bush of the CIA" about the activities of anti-Castro  groups.

•  

   

  Now each was discovered by researchers, but never really discussed in the media. This latest one pales next to those two I think. Ever since I learned that the FBI took all the evidence from Dallas to Washington, and then returned,"officially" with more than they picked, and took it back toe Washington.    

  Until that gets squared, all FBI stuff is held at bay by this wsj reader.

Totally agree Robert.

Just frustratingly crazy that these mind blowing important documented proof memo's were basically just ignored by our media.

Since they became known one would have expected 60 Minutes or many other so-called highest bar and integrity truth seeking  investigative T.V. productions to have gone after these factual memos as they reveal a reality that is far from the one we have been led to know, believe and accept.