Rob Reiner And Soledad O'Brien Aim To Reveal JFK's Real Killers

[Benjamin Cole]

1 hour ago, James DiEugenio said:

Ben:

I did not know that about Rob meeting with the likes of Brennan.

Whew.

I guess I should write about all this later on after the show has concluded.

 

 

https://jfkfacts.substack.com/p/the-jfk-facts-podcast-talks-to-rob?utm_medium=reader2

JD-

 

This is the podcast of Morley interviewing Reiner. 

I have been meaning to write a review, but I am swamped with work and family obligations.  (You know you have to make money in order to be a JFKA junkie). 

At one point Reiner appears to speak approvingly of CIA directors. Journalists taken "into the confidence" of authority and intel figures can fall under the sway. Reiner is now cozy with Brennan. 

I also suspect Reiner has let current partisan politics warp his judgement. Just because a CIA'er self-IDs as "against Trump" does not make the CIA a great outfit. 

In short, Reiner may be getting used, and was gently encouraged to run with his Tosh Plumlee tale. 

Listen to the podcast. If you want to review it here, I will back off. 

 

[Leslie Sharp]

Just now, Leslie Sharp said:

@Roger Odisio I think we're on parallel paths then. I must have misunderstood.. identifying the shooters is essential to identification of who hired them, and from there . . .

I believe someone at the Duquesne conference said 11 shots fired?  

@Pat Speer I respectfully disagree. The community failed to coalesce to methodically pursue the shooters from the  outset, ignoring best investigative practices.  Competition -- that green-eyed monster -- took hold and remains alive and well.

An example of that failure and interference was the HSCA's luke warm pursuit of the French nationals deported from Dallas. The  record will soon be set straight by unraveling in the specifics how decades later respected researchers fell victim to the orchestrated operation meant to conceal their role. Sometimes the way forward is backward.

 

[Jonathan Cohen]

13 hours ago, Leslie Sharp said:

The  record will soon be set straight by unraveling in the specifics how decades later respected researchers fell victim to the orchestrated operation meant to conceal their role.

Sigh. An “orchestrated operation” ? By whom, exactly? You are aware that the claims about French involvement first widely aired in “The Men Who Killed Kennedy” were so wildly incorrect (and libelous) that the episode was retracted, right ?

[Bill Fite]

2 hours ago, Jonathan Cohen said:

Sigh. An “orchestrated operation” ? By whom, exactly? You are aware that the claims about French involvement first widely aired in “The Men Who Killed Kennedy” were so wildly incorrect (and libelous) that the episode was retracted, right ?

I think you are confused.

IIRC, the episode the history channel retracted was one of the last ones - concerning LBJ.

Would you happen to have a link about a retraction for the 'French' episode?  It was a completely different one from the LBJ one.

[Roger Odisio]

16 hours ago, Leslie Sharp said:

@Roger Odisio I think we're on parallel paths then. I must have misunderstood.. identifying the shooters is essential to identification of who hired them, and from there . . .

I believe someone at the Duquesne conference said 11 shots fired?  

Not exactly, The best case scenario has the research into the planners and the shooters eventually feeding one another and converging at some point.

 

But I don't think identifying the shooters is the essential starting point, as you may have gathered.

 

I plan to go back through the videos of speakers at Duquesne when they are made available. I have only a vague recollection of discussions of multiple shots.  The Tink Thompson group did argue there were more than three shots, which there must have been if there was two head shots, That's all that's necessary to debunk the WR. 

[William Paris]

One of the highlights of Ep 4 is the line drawn from LHO early troubled youth to MK Ultra.  Russel interviews are brought to life.  It’s brought up as a possibility….

[Richard Booth]

17 hours ago, Leslie Sharp said:

The  record will soon be set straight by unraveling in the specifics how decades later respected researchers fell victim to the orchestrated operation meant to conceal their role.

This is interesting. Is someone going write about this at some point soon?

Always been interested about Souetre, moreso after Hunt's "confession"

Did not buy the Rivele stuff in The Men Who Killed Kennedy, but was persuaded by others regarding Souetre specifically. 

My own opinion, which is just a "hunch" -- is that perhaps someone was travelling under Souetre's identity. I say that because it's just too pat that there are records naming this guy as being expelled from the country and in Dallas that day. He was a professional and those who ran this operation were professionals and surely they would have arranged in advance an exfiltration plan, identity papers, etc. So it seems to me that if we have Soetre arrested, or otherwise taken into custody and a paper trail created--that has to be intentional. Perhaps a false trail of sorts.

[Richard Booth]

On 11/29/2023 at 4:08 PM, Leslie Sharp said:

@Richard Booth you can anticipate Col. Jack Canon will be identified. Much of this material relies on Dick Russell’s original breakthroughs in the investigation published in 1992, The Man Who Knew Too Much.  It was Richard Case Nagell who first revealed Canon’s role in Dealey. 
 

Over a decade later, Hank Albarelli secured access to private records that, among other explosive revelations, confirm Jack Canon was in Dallas as a key element in the assassination as was Col. Charles Askins — renowned sharpshooter since the 1930s.

 

I'm going to have to re-read TMWKTM.  I read it in 1998, it's been a very long time since I looked at it and I just do not remember "Col. Jack Canon"

[James DiEugenio]

The Rivele stuff from Christian David blew up on Turner.  

This is why Turner then turned to Barr McClellan and his LBJ did it scenario in the second run through.

[Jonathan Cohen]

3 hours ago, Bill Fite said:

I think you are confused.

IIRC, the episode the history channel retracted was one of the last ones - concerning LBJ.

Would you happen to have a link about a retraction for the 'French' episode?  It was a completely different one from the LBJ one.

Per Wiki: The episodes identified three men as the assassins of Kennedy: deceased drug trafficker Lucien Sarti and two living men (Roger Bocagnani and Sauveur Pironti). All three were later revealed to have strong alibis: Sarti was undergoing medical treatment in France, another was in prison at the time, and the third had been in the French Navy. One of the two living men threatened to sue, and Central Television's own subsequent investigation into the allegations revealed they were "total nonsense". Turner justified his failure to interview one of the accused on the grounds that the individual was "too dangerous". Turner was censured by the British Parliament. The Independent Broadcasting Authority forced Central Television to produce a third episode dedicated to the false allegations, which aired on November 16, 1988, which was later referred to as a "studio crucifixion" of Turner and his inaccuracies.

[Bill Fite]

55 minutes ago, Jonathan Cohen said:

Per Wiki: The episodes identified three men as the assassins of Kennedy: deceased drug trafficker Lucien Sarti and two living men (Roger Bocagnani and Sauveur Pironti). All three were later revealed to have strong alibis: Sarti was undergoing medical treatment in France, another was in prison at the time, and the third had been in the French Navy. One of the two living men threatened to sue, and Central Television's own subsequent investigation into the allegations revealed they were "total nonsense". Turner justified his failure to interview one of the accused on the grounds that the individual was "too dangerous". Turner was censured by the British Parliament. The Independent Broadcasting Authority forced Central Television to produce a third episode dedicated to the false allegations, which aired on November 16, 1988, which was later referred to as a "studio crucifixion" of Turner and his inaccuracies.

Thanks - I only remembered the LBJ one.

[Roger Odisio]

3 hours ago, Richard Booth said:

This is interesting. Is someone going write about this at some point soon?

Always been interested about Souetre, moreso after Hunt's "confession"

Did not buy the Rivele stuff in The Men Who Killed Kennedy, but was persuaded by others regarding Souetre specifically. 

My own opinion, which is just a "hunch" -- is that perhaps someone was travelling under Souetre's identity. I say that because it's just too pat that there are records naming this guy as being expelled from the country and in Dallas that day. He was a professional and those who ran this operation were professionals and surely they would have arranged in advance an exfiltration plan, identity papers, etc. So it seems to me that if we have Soetre arrested, or otherwise taken into custody and a paper trail created--that has to be intentional. Perhaps a false trail of sorts.

You're right that those who planned the murder would have made sure there were no expulsion records on the killers they used.  And there are none that I'm aware of.  Not of Souetre or anybody.

 

Could you be thinking of the article in early '64 in an obscure French newspaper in which the author claimed to have met with a drunken Frenchman who said he had  been expelled from Dallas?  The French thought he may have been talking about Souetre and set off a brief inquiry of the FBI and CIA as to what they knew.

 

I concluded, back in April in a couple of posts, that the reporter made up the story of the encounter.  It never happened.  The whole inquiry lasted only a few days and provided no information of Souetre's whereabouts.   

 

In a recent podcast with Jeff Morley and Larry Schnapf, Reiner briefly named Souetre as one the shooters.  https://jfkfacts.substack.com/p/the-jfk-facts-podcast-talks-to-rob.   I assume that claim will come up again in more detail later.  I will be surprised if he can really put Souetre in Dealey Plaza with a gun.

[Richard Booth]

38 minutes ago, Roger Odisio said:

Could you be thinking of the article in early '64 in an obscure French newspaper in which the author claimed to have met with a drunken Frenchman who said he had  been expelled from Dallas?  The French thought he may have been talking about Souetre and set off a brief inquiry of the FBI and CIA as to what they knew.

 

I concluded, back in April in a couple of posts, that the reporter made up the story of the encounter.  It never happened.  The whole inquiry lasted only a few days and provided no information of Souetre's whereabouts.   

 

I'm referencing work done by J. Gary Shaw. I'm not familiar with any made-up story by a reporter.

Below is a document referencing the FBI's CIA liaison, Sam Papich, with commentsd concerning how Souetre had been expelled from the U.S.

More recent writing about this has been undertaken by Carmine Savastano.

[Richard Booth]

6 minutes ago, Richard Booth said:

 

I'm referencing work done by J. Gary Shaw. I'm not familiar with any made-up story by a reporter.

Below is a document referencing the FBI's CIA liaison, Sam Papich, with commentsd concerning how Souetre had been expelled from the U.S.

More recent writing about this has been undertaken by Carmine Savastano.

 

Savastano makes a pretty good argument against Souetre having had any involvement:

https://www.tpaak.com/the-french-deception

[Richard Booth]

4 minutes ago, Richard Booth said:

 

Savastano makes a pretty good argument against Souetre having had any involvement:

https://www.tpaak.com/the-french-deception

Savastano's piece is also useful in that it links to most of the known documents relative to Souetre, the one I posted above is evidently from Oswald's 201 file [unusual place to put this, I think]

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=95892&#relPageId=3