David Lifton's latter-day claims

[Jamey Flanagan]

Yes, I listened to the entire video yesterday while at work and there were many statements that made my ears perk up and wonder if I had heard what I thought I had heard. Maybe it's best for his legacy if the book doesn't come out. Some of the theories are quite outlandish yet I've heard Mr. Lifton scoff at theories like Harvey and Lee or Morningstar's theory about Tippit being a body double for JFK which aren't anymore out of the realm of possibility than some of the things he mentioned. I really do hope that his research papers do see the light of day though cause some things could ring true. He didn't mention it in that video but on Night Fright a few years back I know he said that a lady came forward saying she was giving LHO change for a dollar for the Coke machine at the time of the shooting. But then he says more recently that LHO is in the window firing blanks. So did he come to disbelieve that lady or what over the years? Who knows?

[Ron Bulman]

3 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

I am really kind of stunned by this.

Ready jumped in the limo and shot JBC?

And JBC and his wife never noticed it?

I guess stunned was my reaction, maybe flabbergasted was more appropriate for me.  I wasn't going to post anything in this thread because I do value Best Evidence and David's confrontation of Dulles in particular among a few other things I've read or seen.  But wow.

The first of the six videos in order Vince posted in the tribute thread he started starts with this, Ready.  A witness from Canada, standing close enough to kick the tires on the presidential limo sees Ready, when the limo stops, come running up, open the door and says he's dead.  Reported to a Canadian newspaper, then supposedly in the NYT the next day.  Then another witness on an upper floor of the courthouse saw Ready run up beside the presidential limo and dive in.  Connally, not knowing what's going on or who is attacking them fights with him.  Whew.

The video was already queued at 8:33 for some reason and Ready is what he is talking about when it starts.  After close to five minutes of this I was blown away and paused it thinking I'll come back after I digest this.  I've not done so yet.

Watch just the five minutes.  It left me shaking my head wondering what is he talking about?  I've never read about any of this.  It doesn't make sense.  All of this was eliminated from the Z film and others, photographs?  No other witnesses to any of it?

[David Von Pein]

54 minutes ago, Jamey Flanagan said:

...on Night Fright a few years back I know he [Lifton] said that a lady came forward saying she was giving LHO change for a dollar for the Coke machine at the time of the shooting. But then he says more recently that LHO is in the window firing blanks. So did he come to disbelieve that lady or what over the years? Who knows?

You're mixing up your conspiracy theorists. The "Giving Change To Oswald" theory belongs to Robert Groden, not David Lifton.

From a 2016 discussion:

 

For more about Lifton's "Oswald And The Fishing Pole" story, CLICK HERE.

 

Edited December 11, 2022 by David Von Pein

[Joseph McBride]

The odd Ready theory cries out for some kind

of evidence, if any exists. I will note that Senator

Yarborough told me when the limo "almost came to a halt," Secret

Service agents (plural) jumped out of the Queen Mary and ran

to the limo, which we don't see in the extant Zapruder film. So Ready

could have been one of them. The story

about the "fight" and shooting of Connally

in the car seems bizarre.

On the other hand, the first time I read BEST EVIDENCE I found it hard

to believe or follow entirely, but then I read it

again and found it convincing in most respects.

It's hard for people to accept a radical departure

from an official story. So the psychological

tendency is to rule it out without considering

the contrary evidence to the official story.

We need to have Lifton's text of FINAL CHARADE,

in whatever form it exists, and his supporting notes

for his later claims.

I looked into Similas and couldn't find corroborating

evidence of his claims, although the available

information doesn't rule them out, either.

Edited December 11, 2022 by Joseph McBride

[Pat Speer]

It gets worse, people. My understanding is that the "Ready shooting Connally" theory is just the tip of the iceberg. 

P.S. I write this not to badmouth, David, with whom I was quite friendly, and regularly defended. But to warn people not to hold out hope that his latter-day theories were well-thought out, and corroborated by evidence.

Sadly, they were not. 

Edited December 11, 2022 by Pat Speer

[Vince Palamara]

2 hours ago, Jamey Flanagan said:

Maybe it's best for his legacy if the book doesn't come out. 

I am starting to think you are correct. A lot of people on Facebook are acting like it is the Holy Grail. Perhaps it will end up the Holy Fail (ouch). Seriously, though- if it comes out, fine- I will take a look. If it doesn't, so be it at this point.

[Micah Mileto]

22 minutes ago, Vince Palamara said:

I am starting to think you are correct. A lot of people on Facebook are acting like it is the Holy Grail. Perhaps it will end up the Holy Fail (ouch). Seriously, though- if it comes out, fine- I will take a look. If it doesn't, so be it at this point.

Oswald needs the best legal defense, and such a defense would include the exploration of every possible theory.

[Ron Bulman]

At this point we can only hope Final Charade still exists in some form, a manuscript, on a hard drive.  Further that the storage unit full of files depicted in Robbie's video are preserved.  That maybe Charade will come out in book form, the files eventually scanned for public perusal.

[David Andrews]

I listened to the 14 videos while doing other tasks.  At one or two points, Lifton mentions that another SS agent, and not Greer, drove the limo "from Dealey to Parkland."  Did anyone better catch how that supposedly went down?

[Jamey Flanagan]

3 hours ago, David Von Pein said:

You're mixing up your conspiracy theorists. The "Giving Change To Oswald" theory belongs to Robert Groden, not David Lifton.

From a 2016 discussion:

 

For more about Lifton's "Oswald And The Fishing Pole" story, CLICK HERE.

 

Thanks DVP! Now that I think about it I guess it was Groden! And DSL acted like that was an outrageous theory? 😂😂😂

[Jamey Flanagan]

15 minutes ago, David Andrews said:

I listened to the 14 videos while doing other tasks.  At one or two points, Lifton mentions that another SS agent, and not Greer, drove the limo "from Dealey to Parkland."  Did anyone better catch how that supposedly went down?

Yeah, I heard that too but never heard just how it went down. I know in the past DSL had said he interviewed witnesses who said that the limo stopped up on the overpass and Jackie was once again trying to get out of the vehicle. That's the only thing I can think of is that maybe then, while stopped, that driver's were switched. Who knows?

[Richard Booth]

10 hours ago, Vince Palamara said:

The 14-part series all in one place in order: 

 

Thanks for posting this.  I watched it the other day after hearing about his passing.

I strongly disagree with some things he presents (such as the notion Oswald was communicating with Angleton via letters to his brother, or that Oswald was working for the Attorney General, RFK) however, that's okay, I think it's okay to have disagreements on matters.

Lifton made some excellent contributions to the case and he did a lot of wonderful work, and it was great to hear him talk about that work in an extended piece. Wish there were more like this (2.5-3 hours)

Honestly, his last book should have been about his search for the truth as a researcher, like Barry Ernest's book. A memoir. I think he picked the wrong subject (Lee Harvey Oswald) 

[Richard Booth]

8 minutes ago, Miles Massicotte said:

For example, is the idea that Oswald's letters to his brother and mother are actually coded messages so far-fetched?

I think that the examples he gave as supporting evidence for that were threadbare and weak. On it's face, however, the notion is absolutely not far-fetched. In fact it would be a smart way to do something like that if you're an agent in a denied territory.

So the idea itself, sure there could be something there. But was Oswald communicating with Angleton? We can't say that, and certainly not based on the arguments Lifton presents for that. 

He also said, I believe, that he thinks Oswald was met on that boat by George DeMohrenshildt. That was interesting, but again lacked any evidentiary substance. I think the notion that he met with someone who dictated some things to him is probable if he were some kind of returning agent, that would be routine and expected. Was it Andy Anderson? Remember the doc Newman found "Andy Anderson OO on Oswald" and how Helms flipped his story for PBS Frontline when he was told "wouldn't it be normal to debrief a returning defector?"

Ultimately though we don't have that final book with the "evidence" that Lifton alludes to, so maybe he had something more substantial that wasn't uttered in the interview that he's basing these things on. We may never know unless that manuscript leaks or something, or appears in his papers if those end up going somewhere.

[David Von Pein]

1 hour ago, David Andrews said:

I listened to the 14 videos while doing other tasks.  At one or two points, Lifton mentions that another SS agent, and not Greer, drove the limo "from Dealey to Parkland."  Did anyone better catch how that supposedly went down?

Yeah, that's another one of the too-numerous-to-count crackpot theories proposed by Mr. Lifton in his 2013 video interview series.

Lifton wants us to take seriously the idea that SS agent Paul Landis ran from the SS follow-up car and took the place of Bill Greer as the driver of the SS-100-X limousine immediately after JFK was shot, and that it was Landis (and not Greer) who actually drove the limo most of the way from Dealey Plaza to Parkland Hospital.

The question would then be: Why in heaven's name would there be a need to change limo drivers, especially at that critical point in time when every second counts in trying to get the wounded President to a hospital in an attempt to save his life? It makes no sense at all.

Another of Lifton's dozens of unprovable make-believe cloak-and-dagger episodes is the one about how the wounded JFK was supposed to be transferred to an ambulance at the Trade Mart. Lifton says this transfer to the ambulance was going to be done in order to get JFK's body away from Jackie and other members of the Kennedy party. But this "ambulance" part of the plot didn't go off as planned (although I don't think Lifton, in his 2013 video interview, ever explains why it didn't).

Also: Lifton thinks Connally was shot THREE separate times (by Agent Ready, of course).

And: At the very beginning of Part 4 of Lifton's 14-part interview (see my full playlist below), we hear the interviewer say: "So the original plan was not to have the driver shoot the President...", which (I guess) means that Lifton turned into a "Greer Shot Kennedy" CTer. It sure sounds that way to me, based on the interviewer's remark at the start of Part 4.

 

Edited December 11, 2022 by David Von Pein

[Richard Booth]

10 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

As but one example, he told me that the plot involved JFK's corpse being transferred to an ambulance after the shooting--so his wounds could be altered before reaching Parkland--but that Connally's being wounded made them go straight to the hospital. Now, as I remember it he called this a "breakthrough". So I asked him what evidentiary support he'd obtained that this was the original plot--did he have witnesses who saw an ambulance standing by or anything. As I recall, he said it would all be in his book. But as he spoke enthusiastically about this "breakthrough" it occurred to me that he considered the possibility itself a "breakthrough"--whether or not he ever found any support. 

Lifton goes into this in the compilation video Vince posted (the 2.55 hour one). He talks about transcripts of DPD recording tapes, witnesses referring to the ambulance, and a newspaper article that ran talking about the ambulance the next day. He did have a few things, of those things he presented in that long video the "an ambulance was going to be used" theory was one of the few he did mention some things to back it up. FWIW.

I think we need to go easy on him because he never had a chance to put out something written with citations to back up these things, and as a general policy I like to go easy on disagreements to maintain collegiality.