Ruth Paine on "The Assassination & Mrs. Paine" film: "Well done, but powerfully awful"

[Ron Bulman]

On 10/13/2022 at 3:28 AM, Matt Allison said:

Wow, that was absolutely fantastic; super well made. I will likely watch it again in a few weeks.

There's a ton that should be discussed about this movie. Tons. Because it really does address so much more than just the Paines.

A few comments real quick:

I don't see how people can try to nail Ruth for LHO getting the TSBD job and then just let LInnie Mae Randle slide by untouched. 

Since I believe there was nothing nefarious done there by either one, I have never given Ms. Randle a second thought.

As I said before, if you're gonna roll with the idea that Ruth was a witting CIA asset, you have got to also agree with the idea that she has done one of the world's best acting jobs; like ever. In the history of acting.

Posner needs to lay off the plastic surgery. 

There is a shot of evidence taken from the Paine home on 11/22/63 that says it was taken with the permission of Ruth and Marina. I've never seen that photo before; is there an evidence list to go with it and if so do the two match?

Again, I believe Ruth was Marina's unwitting baby sitter. But I fail to see how either her or Michael could have been tasked with such a job for LHO; simply because he was in Dallas and the Paines were in Irving. How the hell could true surveillance have been accurately done with that arrangement?

I think she was a witting babysitter, but not to an assassination plot.  Given hers and Michaels family connections, in particular Ruths to the CIA, it's not unreasonable to think they were used by Dulles given his connection to her.

Michael was likely observing Castro supporters given his cafeteria by SMU Sunday lunch, attending a (?) meeting with Lee, and the files found in their garage.  Documented by DPD and Dallas Sheriff's Office reports.  Disappeared.

Ruth was likely told by Callas CIA agent in charge J Walton Moore (who first connected the Oswald's to De Mohrenschildt) or one of his employees to befriend Marina.  To observe her as a recent Russian immigrant, with an uncle in the KGB for contact with any other suspicious Russians in the area, if she was told that much.  A ruse on the part of Dulles?

Of course, she and Michael knew who was responsible as soon as the assassination happened.  Thus, the phone call.  Then she became the WC's most favored witness, or far and away most questioned one.  Given her cooperative nature.

Never questioned by the HSCA or ARRB.  Michael either.  

[Jonathan Cohen]

7 hours ago, Ron Bulman said:

I think she was a witting babysitter, but not to an assassination plot.

At least Ron Bulman couches this post in "I think," because there's no actual evidence to support his claim, as Kirk Gallaway's earlier post summarizes so nicely.

7 hours ago, Ron Bulman said:

Of course, she and Michael knew who was responsible as soon as the assassination happened.  Thus, the phone call.  Then she became the WC's most favored witness, or far and away most questioned one.  Given her cooperative nature.

They were referring to Oswald as the one who was responsible, not some nefarious government force! Why is it that you have a problem with her being "cooperative," when she was in perhaps the best position of anyone to testify to Oswald's attributes and behavior in the months prior to the assassination?

[Sandy Larsen]

Anybody who believes that Oswald was a planned (not coincidental) patsy, must accept the fact that he was placed at the TSBD by the plotters. And that therefore, whoever was involved in getting him to work there must have been controlled by the plotters.

Because if you don't accept that fact, then you believe that Oswald was at the right place at the right time by accident. Which is a ridiculous idea.

 

[Joe Bauer]

30 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Because if you don't accept that fact, then you believe that Oswald was at the right place at the right time by accident. 

You also have to conclude that Oswald knew his shooting of JFK was a suicidal act.

That without anyone to help him run from the TXSBD and get far away fast...there was no way he was not going to be caught and very possibly shot himself.

Did Oswald become suicidal after being rejected by Marina the night before?

Killing JFK was more important to Oswald than his kid's future lives which as the children of such a surely vilified killer would have brought them shame and heart ache beyond measure?

 

Edited October 15, 2022 by Joe Bauer

[Kirk Gallaway]

16 hours ago, Matt Allison said:

C'mon guys. Let's be real here- the TSBD job was as a result of Linnie Mae Randle.

Trying to pin that exclusively on Ruth Paine is intellectually dishonest.

Which does no favors for anybody.

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=38#relPageId=255

 

[Tom Gram]

43 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Anybody who believes that Oswald was a planned (not coincidental) patsy, must accept the fact that he was placed at the TSBD by the plotters. And that therefore, whoever was involved in getting him to work there must have been controlled by the plotters.

Because if you don't accept that fact, then you believe that Oswald was at the right place at the right time by accident. Which is a ridiculous idea.

 

Not necessarily. It could have been purely opportunistic, like “hey there’s this commie symp who defected to the Reds a few years back working in downtown Dallas along the motorcade route, let’s whack Kennedy in Dallas and frame this guy -  no one will suspect a thing”, or something like that. Just sayin’. 

[Sandy Larsen]

37 minutes ago, Tom Gram said:

1 hour ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Anybody who believes that Oswald was a planned (not coincidental) patsy, must accept the fact that he was placed at the TSBD by the plotters.

Expand  

37 minutes ago, Tom Gram said:

Not necessarily. It could have been purely opportunistic,

 

If it were purely opportunistic, then it wouldn't have been planned. Which is what I stipulated.

 

[Matt Allison]

That motorcade was miles and miles of unguarded opportunities to commit the deed. IMO, if it hadn't happened to be convenient to do it at the TSBD, then somewhere else on the route would have just gotten used instead.

[Sandy Larsen]

10 minutes ago, Matt Allison said:

That motorcade was miles and miles of unguarded opportunities to commit the deed. IMO, if it hadn't happened to be convenient to do it at the TSBD, then somewhere else on the route would have just gotten used instead.

 

Matt,

If those flexible assassins of yours had chosen a patsy to take the blame, how would they get their patsy in the building and prepare him to look guilty? It would be a seat-of-the-pants operation, no?

 

[Matt Allison]

4 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

If those flexible assassins of yours had chosen a patsy to take the blame, how would they get their patsy in the building and prepare him to look guilty? It would be a seat-of-the-pants operation, no?

 

Well, if assuming their patsy was completely oblivious, it would be near impossible.

But I've never thought LHO was oblivious to what happened that day; his actions after the shooting show that he knew there was trouble afoot.

[Allen Lowe]

15 hours ago, Jonathan Cohen said:

At least Ron Bulman couches this post in "I think," because there's no actual evidence to support his claim, as Kirk Gallaway's earlier post summarizes so nicely.

They were referring to Oswald as the one who was responsible, not some nefarious government force! Why is it that you have a problem with her being "cooperative," when she was in perhaps the best position of anyone to testify to Oswald's attributes and behavior in the months prior to the assassination?

The Ruth supporters among you have missed everything here. You need to read Jim DiEugenio s work, as Ruth was far more than just a witness; after the assassination when more evidence was needed she invariably found it, like little notes and other incriminating things. Not to mention how she clearly ignored the employment commissions suggestion of a different job for Lee. No I don’t think she was a witting supporter of the assassination plot, she was a handler, like many CIA agents,  on a need to know basis. You guys need to get real and read the literature. Not to mention that whichever way you look on her family tree, the branches say “CIA.” Please get real. How many CIA agents are in your family?

Edited October 16, 2022 by Allen Lowe

[Matt Allison]

That subject has already been debated by you and others on the below thread, correct?

 

Adams called for Oswald on the 14th, the day Oswald applied at TSBD. Ruth Paine said she'd pass along the call.

There would be no way for her or Adams to know that a TSBD job would pay less that a Trans Texas job.

And when he called again the next day, Paine let him know Oswald had already started his new job that day.

Robert Adams was not Lee Oswald's personal employment agent. He was not a head hunter. He worked for the state of Texas, and once he found out Oswald was employed, he moved on to the other people on his list that needed employment.

Edit: Additionally, if Ruth Paine was trying to hide jobs from Oswald, then why did she pass along the other offers from Adams the previous week? Which Oswald did indeed apply for?

Weak sauce.

Edited October 16, 2022 by Matt Allison

[James DiEugenio]

Matt, I refer you to page 172 of JFK and the Unspeakable.

As Jim summarizes, Ruth first denied she knew anything about the Air line job, then she recalled it vaguely, and finally said she knew about it from Lee.

Jim then quotes the WC transcript to back this up.

[Kirk Gallaway]

Jim, How do you know, by the time she was asked, she just didn't forget? She already spent a considerable amount of time getting Lee a job. And she had just got him a job, right?

Why would she even  be told the wage? You have no proof she was.

For example, Why couldn't she just have been tired of trying to find Lee a job, and then be relieved she no longer has to find this guy a job, and lose interest, and not pursue it?

Or lose interest, Then months later, after hours of intense questioning , she gets defensive and fumbles when she finds that her neglect was being turned into a motive when confronted?

There's a lot of possibilities.

[David Von Pein]

41 minutes ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

Why would she even be told the wage? You have no proof she was.

Exactly.

http://jfk-archives/dvp-vs-dieugenio-part-87.html#The-Higher-Paying-Job

 

Edited October 16, 2022 by David Von Pein