Thankyou, Tucker Carlson!!

[Leslie Sharp]

1 hour ago, Lawrence Schnapf said:

MSNBC and NBC reported in the morning after the record dump but they have not followed up despite efforts by the MFF team. And I dont remember any in-depth segments during the evening broadcast and I searched for them. a 30 second segment is not covering the issue. 

When I interviewed Alec Baldwin in 2017, I asked him why Rachel Maddow, Chris Matthews and others on progressive channels supported the Oswald as lone gunman narrative. He then told of his experience when he had a show on NBC and they cancelled a program he was going to air for the 50th anniversary. He said he was told by a senior producer that it was the policy of the network to support the official conclusion.

and this is the network that refused to turn over assassination records to the ARRB and declines to allow the Darnall film to be studies using modern forensic techniques.

Hence, my comments about NBC and MSNBC are based on their own actions or obstructions, and not some ring wing paranoia (P.S  I do not consider myself right wing in case you were grouping me into that category).    

Larry, are you at liberty to share whether Carlson's producer(s) contacted you and/or someone on your team, or vice versa? 

[Benjamin Cole]

1 hour ago, Leslie Sharp said:

As it is, the EF might have a readership in the dozens. . .

Ben, you've repeated that a couple of times just since I joined the forum last week, so I assume you've said it in the past as well.  I admonished you recently that you have no idea who is following the JFK EF deliberations. Within a day or so , the complete now infamous EF thread had been disseminated on two websites with respectable readership numbers. The ripple effect would be difficult to calculate, but I do think you underestimate the moccasin telegraph.

LS--

Well-stated, and you may be right.

But---imagine how much larger our first-round readership would be, and subsequent ripples, if we took a "big tent" attitude towards new participants and media allies. 

If there are Trump supporters interested in the JFKA and Tucker Carlson's treatment of the JFKA Records act...and they want to join the EF (and pay, if they can afford it!) then I contend the Trump supporters should be welcomed with open arms, and treated extra-civilly.

Bad-mouthing nearly one-half the political spectrum may not be best move to get the JFKA records opened, and the additional records you want opened (for which I salute your efforts). 

 

[Leslie Sharp]

20 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said:

LS--

Well-stated, and you may be right.

But---imagine how much larger our first-round readership would be, and subsequent ripples, if we took a "big tent" attitude towards new participants and media allies. 

If there are Trump supporters interested in the JFKA and Tucker Carlson's treatment of the JFKA Records act...and they want to join the EF (and pay, if they can afford it!) then I contend the Trump supporters should be welcomed with open arms, and treated extra-civilly.

Bad-mouthing nearly one-half the political spectrum may not be best move to get the JFKA records opened, and the additional records you want opened (for which I salute your efforts). 

 

I agree about the big tent, and have always advocated for a healthy two, or better yet, three +, party system similar to a number of international democracies. It would be messy, but it would be representative democracy.

Yes, I have a problem when bad actors infiltrate any tent, and I'm pretty defensive of this one (the Royal) as you no doubt recognize.  You'll ask what constitutes infiltration, and I could be glib and say "you'll know them when you see them," but kidding aside, I've concluded based on Hank's investigation and our additional research, the assassination of Kennedy — a president whose platform is polar opposite of the platform Trump ran on — was ideologically driven by etremists from the right on an international scale. And MAGA, led by Trump is simply the latest iteration (think JBS, Buchanan's "America First," the Tea Party) of the big tent that housed those extremists in 1963.

MAGA is anathema to all that Kennedy stood for. So, when Carlson promoted propaganda designed to please MAGA, and along with Trump coopted the term "deep state" and spun it to suggest that Trump and Kennedy had something in common, or when Trump attempted a coup using lies about the 2020 election,  those who believed the lies rolled into Kennedy assassination research tents in a multi-pronged attack and promoted the lie that Trump was the reincarnation>

 

I think we're looking at the hammer that will nail the coffin of democracy constructed in Dallas in 1963.

 

and, fyi, you likely have no way of knowing what some have experienced in the past several years on Facebook and other assassination discussion platforms. Vile defense of the same fascism that eroded democracy in the 1930s as reported by Rachel Maddow recently in the podcast ULTRA, "gender-ism," racism, anti-Semitism, violent attitudes toward the OTHER.  I've been in the trenches since 2013 and most particularly since our book was published.  I know of what I speak.

And there are hundreds who've contributed to EF over the years who've been through a good deal more.

Edited March 16, 2023 by Leslie Sharp

[Ron Bulman]

21 minutes ago, Leslie Sharp said:

"gender-ism," racism, anti-Semitism,

bagisim, shagisim, dragisim, madisim, ragisim, tagisim ... narcissism, this isim, that isim, all we are saying

 

[Benjamin Cole]

54 minutes ago, Leslie Sharp said:

I agree about the big tent, and have always advocated for a healthy two, or better yet, three +, party system similar to a number of international democracies. It would be messy, but it would be representative democracy.

Yes, I have a problem when bad actors infiltrate any tent, and I'm pretty defensive of this one (the Royal) as you no doubt recognize.  You'll ask what constitutes infiltration, and I could be glib and say "you'll know them when you see them," but kidding aside, I've concluded based on Hank's investigation and our additional research, the assassination of Kennedy — a president whose platform is polar opposite of the platform Trump ran on — was ideologically driven by etremists from the right on an international scale. And MAGA, led by Trump is simply the latest iteration (think JBS, Buchanan's "America First," the Tea Party) of the big tent that housed those extremists in 1963.

MAGA is anathema to all that Kennedy stood for. So, when Carlson promoted propaganda designed to please MAGA, and along with Trump coopted the term "deep state" and spun it to suggest that Trump and Kennedy had something in common, or when Trump attempted a coup using lies about the 2020 election,  those who believed the lies rolled into Kennedy assassination research tents in a multi-pronged attack and promoted the lie that Trump was the reincarnation>

 

I think we're looking at the hammer that will nail the coffin of democracy constructed in Dallas in 1963.

 

and, fyi, you likely have no way of knowing what some have experienced in the past several years on Facebook and other assassination discussion platforms. Vile defense of the same fascism that eroded democracy in the 1930s as reported by Rachel Maddow recently in the podcast ULTRA, "gender-ism," racism, anti-Semitism, violent attitudes toward the OTHER.  I've been in the trenches since 2013 and most particularly since our book was published.  I know of what I speak.

And there are hundreds who've contributed to EF over the years who've been through a good deal more.

I welcome your views, if different from mine. 

Someday I may author a speculative piece:

"The Hard Coup, The Soft Coup, and the Regime Change Op: JFK, Nixon and Trump"

There are certainly clues that the deep state deposed all three.

That is probably not your view. 

We may be worlds apart in our perspectives. 

So be it. 

[Leslie Sharp]

4 hours ago, Benjamin Cole said:

I welcome your views, if different from mine. 

Someday I may author a speculative piece:

"The Hard Coup, The Soft Coup, and the Regime Change Op: JFK, Nixon and Trump"

There are certainly clues that the deep state deposed all three.

That is probably not your view. 

We may be worlds apart in our perspectives. 

So be it. 

I concur that the presidency is the target. Weaken the executive branch, one leg of the barstool, and democratic government collapses.  So it's possible our views coalesce in that the presidency was under attack by elements within the Military Industrial Complex in Dealey Plaza in Dallas (in concert with an international cabal), and the Watergate in D.C. Our "views" diverge when you suggest Trump was victim of regime change.  It is Trump who attacked the presidency likely as early as the day Roger Stone coined the term "Stop the Steal." 

Georgia grand jury heard another Trump call recording
https://www.stltoday.com/news/national/georgia-grand-jury-heard-another-trump-call-recording/article_115923b8-2ff1-5e53-b50d-ed9c9ea00d7d.html

Edited March 16, 2023 by Leslie Sharp

[Benjamin Cole]

3 hours ago, Leslie Sharp said:

I concur that the presidency is the target. Weaken the executive branch, one leg of the barstool, and democratic government collapses.  So it's possible our views coalesce in that the presidency was under attack by elements within the Military Industrial Complex in Dealey Plaza in Dallas (in concert with an international cabal), and the Watergate in D.C. Our "views" diverge when you suggest Trump was victim of regime change.  It is Trump who attacked the presidency likely as early as the day Roger Stone coined the term "Stop the Steal." 

Georgia grand jury heard another Trump call recording
https://www.stltoday.com/news/national/georgia-grand-jury-heard-another-trump-call-recording/article_115923b8-2ff1-5e53-b50d-ed9c9ea00d7d.html

To say Trump is a divisive and controversial topic vastly understands the case, and I understand many highly intelligent people are revolted at Trump. 

But, as with Nixon, a President can have deep flaws...and also be deposed from office not through clean, democratic means. 

I happen to regard Nixon as a war criminal, and books have been written about 200 million cluster bombs left in Laos, Agent Orange, Operation Phoenix and so on.

But the CIA withheld the Bay of Pigs (JFK) files from Nixon (he had asked to see them) and shortly thereafter five CIA guys get arrested at the Watergate---and Nixon gets the blame. (I am short-handing everything, obviously).

Even the guy who revealed the White House had a taping system was former CIA, and Bob Woodward was former ONI. 

In the usual party politics, the D-Party was happy to go on the warpath against Nixon. Nixon was out. 

I understand if I say "Russiagate was a hoax" that the walls will fall in. Nevertheless, an impeachment proceeding followed, just like after Watergate. The D-Party was happy to engage in party warfare, as both parties always are. A replay. 

Just keep an open mind---there was JFK, then Nixon, and then Trump.

A hard coup, a soft coup, and then a regime-change op? 

So who runs the USA?

Interesting topic. 

My views may differ from yours, and I look forward to learning more about your views. 

 

 

 

[Lawrence Schnapf]

we are covering lots of topics in this thread!

Geoff Shepard has written a couple of books discussing how Siricia, the special watergate prosecutor and the senate select committee engaged in sanctionable conduct during the investigation such as ex parte communications. CSPAN recently aired a program on this topic titled "Watergate Prosecutorial Documents Revisited". it is thought provoking. 

I still believe that Watergate scandal was related to JFK assassination. Nixon tried to pressure Helms to cut off the FBI investigation by suggesting that it could rip the scab off the "Bay of Pigs thing" which Halderman said was Nixon's code for the JFK assassination. I think intelligence community took this as a threat. Once Ford was elevated to Veep, Nixon became expendable. Jeff Morley has also reported on a October 8, 1971 recorded discussion between Nixon and Helms where Nixon raises the "Who killed John" issue.  

“The whole ‘who shot John’ [JFK] thing, is Eisenhower to blame? Is Johnson to blame? Is Kennedy to blame? Is Nixon to blame? Etcetera, etcetera, etcetera, may become, may become, not by me, but may become a very, very vigorous issue.”

Nixon continued, “If it does, uh, I need to know what is necessary to protect our inquiries, the intelligence gathering, and the ‘Dirty Tricks Department.’ And I will protect it. Hey listen, I’ve done more than my share of lying to protect it. I will go, I believe it’s totally right to do it.”

Apparently there remains  over 500 hours of Nixon recordings that are still redacted and unreleased.  

[Lawrence Schnapf]

13 hours ago, Leslie Sharp said:

Larry, are you at liberty to share whether Carlson's producer(s) contacted you and/or someone on your team, or vice versa? 

Fox reached out to us after our press conference. 

[Joe Bauer]

Readership numbers?

I am guessing the number of "visitors" to the forum site may be well over 100...maybe even over two hundred?

They read everything here.

I have seen the actively queued in visitor numbers vary from 10 to as high as 35 at times.

Yet, those numbers are from a much larger total pool. Correct?

Some pop in one day. Others the next.

I am sure many of our visitors come from other JFK forums.

Remember too that several of our members and their research and published works often cross over into much broader media venues. Huge audience ones. 

National audience "Coast To Coast AM" talk radio show and many other more regional audience ones. Well known podcasts. Occasional magazine and newspaper articles. Even internet news venues.

Major book publishing deals for a few.

Our own Jim Di working hand in hand with Oliver Stone himself! On a nationally and even internationally distributed film?

Having lunch one on one with Stone and the great film writer David Mamet!

Remember also, all the other JFKA forums know this one is the highest bar one with the highest esteem contributors.

The small readership claim is misleading.

Maybe a better analogy is that this forum is like an elite membership private country club with strict vetting rules. Only the most respected and intelligent are allowed in?

It was never intended to be a Jerry Springer/Maury Povich/Pit Bulls And Parolees TV show fan drop in venue.

 

 

 

 

Edited March 16, 2023 by Joe Bauer

[Leslie Sharp]

6 hours ago, Benjamin Cole said:

To say Trump is a divisive and controversial topic vastly understands the case, and I understand many highly intelligent people are revolted at Trump. 

But, as with Nixon, a President can have deep flaws...and also be deposed from office not through clean, democratic means. 

I happen to regard Nixon as a war criminal, and books have been written about 200 million cluster bombs left in Laos, Agent Orange, Operation Phoenix and so on.

But the CIA withheld the Bay of Pigs (JFK) files from Nixon (he had asked to see them) and shortly thereafter five CIA guys get arrested at the Watergate---and Nixon gets the blame. (I am short-handing everything, obviously).

Even the guy who revealed the White House had a taping system was former CIA, and Bob Woodward was former ONI. 

In the usual party politics, the D-Party was happy to go on the warpath against Nixon. Nixon was out. 

I understand if I say "Russiagate was a hoax" that the walls will fall in. Nevertheless, an impeachment proceeding followed, just like after Watergate. The D-Party was happy to engage in party warfare, as both parties always are. A replay. 

Just keep an open mind---there was JFK, then Nixon, and then Trump.

A hard coup, a soft coup, and then a regime-change op? 

So who runs the USA?

Interesting topic. 

My views may differ from yours, and I look forward to learning more about your views. 

 

 

 

and then a regime-change op? 

To be taken seriously, views are generally informed. Perpetuating the lie does not reflect well on yours. 

[Benjamin Cole]

7 hours ago, Lawrence Schnapf said:

we are covering lots of topics in this thread!

Geoff Shepard has written a couple of books discussing how Siricia, the special watergate prosecutor and the senate select committee engaged in sanctionable conduct during the investigation such as ex parte communications. CSPAN recently aired a program on this topic titled "Watergate Prosecutorial Documents Revisited". it is thought provoking. 

I still believe that Watergate scandal was related to JFK assassination. Nixon tried to pressure Helms to cut off the FBI investigation by suggesting that it could rip the scab off the "Bay of Pigs thing" which Halderman said was Nixon's code for the JFK assassination. I think intelligence community took this as a threat. Once Ford was elevated to Veep, Nixon became expendable. Jeff Morley has also reported on a October 8, 1971 recorded discussion between Nixon and Helms where Nixon raises the "Who killed John" issue.  

“The whole ‘who shot John’ [JFK] thing, is Eisenhower to blame? Is Johnson to blame? Is Kennedy to blame? Is Nixon to blame? Etcetera, etcetera, etcetera, may become, may become, not by me, but may become a very, very vigorous issue.”

Nixon continued, “If it does, uh, I need to know what is necessary to protect our inquiries, the intelligence gathering, and the ‘Dirty Tricks Department.’ And I will protect it. Hey listen, I’ve done more than my share of lying to protect it. I will go, I believe it’s totally right to do it.”

Apparently there remains  over 500 hours of Nixon recordings that are still redacted and unreleased.  

Fascinating. 

I will say it again: One can be appalled at Nixon's conduct of the Vietnam War, and be a true-blue liberal (that defines me, btw)....and still wonder what the heck really happened to Nixon?

And jeez, Ford (not Agnew, another disagreeable fellow) ends up President? 

For me, like freedom of speech, it is the principle that matters, not whether I concur with the deposed leaders or speechmakers. 

I prefer democratic elections to assassinations and secret regime-change ops. 

I prefer free speech. 

 

 

 

 

Edited March 17, 2023 by Benjamin Cole

[Benjamin Cole]

2 hours ago, Leslie Sharp said:

and then a regime-change op? 

To be taken seriously, views are generally informed. Perpetuating the lie does not reflect well on yours. 

We disagree on recent events.

I do not accuse you of perpetuating a falsehood, only that you have a different point of view than mine. 

 

[Benjamin Cole]

4 hours ago, Joe Bauer said:

Readership numbers?

I am guessing the number of "visitors" to the forum site may be well over 100...maybe even over two hundred?

They read everything here.

I have seen the actively queued in visitor numbers vary from 10 to as high as 35 at times.

Yet, those numbers are from a much larger total pool. Correct?

Some pop in one day. Others the next.

I am sure many of our visitors come from other JFK forums.

Remember too that several of our members and their research and published works often cross over into much broader media venues. Huge audience ones. 

National audience "Coast To Coast AM" talk radio show and many other more regional audience ones. Well known podcasts. Occasional magazine and newspaper articles. Even internet news venues.

Major book publishing deals for a few.

Our own Jim Di working hand in hand with Oliver Stone himself! On a nationally and even internationally distributed film?

Having lunch one on one with Stone and the great film writer David Mamet!

Remember also, all the other JFKA forums know this one is the highest bar one with the highest esteem contributors.

The small readership claim is misleading.

Maybe a better analogy is that this forum is like an elite membership private country club with strict vetting rules. Only the most respected and intelligent are allowed in?

It was never intended to be a Jerry Springer/Maury Povich/Pit Bulls And Parolees TV show fan drop in venue.

 

 

 

 

Even so, we should treat all posters civilly, and embrace all political spectrums and viewpoints (other than overt hate speech). The bigger the EF tent, the more influence we will likely have. 

Telling participants "they are perpetuating a lie" as they have different viewpoint...is something bound to chase off earnest participants. 

I wonder how many possible paying members and participants have departed as they encountered not civil conversation, but accusations---just for being a Trump supporter or a Biden fan. 

Of course, that is hardly the worst of it. The ad hominem attacks are beneath contempt. 

I happen to think there are parallels between the JFK, Nixon and Trump departures from office. 

Some people think the CIA, right up to and including Dulles, assassinated JFK.

I suspect elements within the CIA were involved.

Others think LHO was alone and demented. 

I say read and respect, and keep your own counsel. 

 

[Matt Allison]

Ben- those that deal in facts rather than opinion/speculation are likely to be considered more valuable contributors in pretty much any societal scenario you can think of.