The comment about liberals not being so smart was not directed towards anyone who disputes the facts, but those of the ilk of Mark Lane and Oliver Stone who question the intelligence of conservatives while misrepresenting facts themselves.
Finally, Connelly’s wounds are only possible if the bullet hit JFK first.
>> Finally, Connelly’s wounds are only possible if the bullet hit JFK first.
Circular argument. This conclusion is only reached by assuming the conclusion is true to begin with.
You’re assuming the Single Bullet Theory is true, therefore the trajectory shoehorned into the scenario is the only way Connally was hit.
There are problems with the SBT trajectory and timing. Like I said before, the SBT would not even exist if it wasn’t for the Tague wounding, which has a number of silly explanations from Warren Commission/Posner/Bugliosi crowd.
>> The bullet path was not straight, because the shot went through Connelly first, but it did NOT make magical contortions per the likes of Oliver Stone.
I have not used Oliver Stone as a reliable source, nor do I intend to.
>> The jump seat in which Connelly sat was neither in a straight line, nor the same elevation, nor were the two bodies facing directly forward as often shown.
I have stated that no one takes the straight seating diagram seriously, so any attempts at guilt by association fall flat.
Dale Myers put together a well measured CGI reconstruction of the Single Bullet Theory, up to a point. However, he still had to manipulate the images to hide flaws in the trajectory so the wounds match the ones on JFK and Connally.
Also, I think you mean the bullet went through JFK first. If it went through Connally first, that would be evidence of a front-shooter.