Posted on 12/16/2022 5:16:38 AM PST by Red Badger
Tucker Carlson generally deals with topics that are pertinent to news today. When he dives into historical events, you know it’s because it’s a bombshell and tonight’s episode of Tucker Carlson Tonight delivered.
The assassination of President John F. Kennedy marked the launch of the modern conspiracy theory movement. Six decades later, we’re still getting new information and it doesn’t look good for the CIA. They were clearly involved in multiple ways, from the use of a “mind-control expert” to gaslight the world about Jack Ruby to the ongoing coverup that ties the CIA directly to the assassination. Even former CIA Director Mike Pompeo, who pressured Donald Trump to keep information hidden, declined an invitation to talk about it.
Trump had promised to release all the JFK files as scheduled for 2017. But Pompeo pressured him to hold back much of the release, assumably the most important parts that would implicate the CIA then and now. In doing so, he compelled President Trump to have one of his few broken promises of his first term.
That move alone should preclude any Republicans from even considering Pompeo for the GOP nomination for president in 2024.
According to the Gateway Pundit:
As reported earlier today – On Thursday the National Archives released thousands of the JFK documents.
But the FBI-CIA would not allow the release of all of the documents. Around 3% of the JFK documents are still being withheld from release to the public — more than 50 years after the assassination. What are they hiding?
Carlson spoke to someone with direct knowledge of the assassination and asked if the CIA was involved. The reply: “The answer is yes. I believe they were involved.”
Many of us have suspected this for a long time. It makes sense when we consider that they were the ones who started demonizing the idea of “conspiracy theories” in the first place. Today’s stigma against “conspiracy theorists” is a direct result of the CIA’s propaganda and control agenda with the initial sole purpose of covering up their involvement in the assassination.
What does all this mean? According to Carlson, the implications extend from before the assassination all they way to now because of what it means about our system of government.
“It means that within the U.S. government there are forces wholly beyond democratic control,” he said. “These forces are more powerful than the elected officials that supposedly oversee them. These forces can affect election outcomes. They can even hide their complicity in the murder of an American president. In other words, they can do pretty much whatever they want. They constitute a government within a government mocking by their very existence the idea of democracy.”
Watch:
VIDEO AT LINK................
At this point it would be more shocking to find out the CIA wasn’t involved than proving that they were. It prompts the question of what else they’ve done to America over the decades to maintain their power at the detriment of the people.
What did Ruby save America from? Truth?
Vietnam ramped up after 11/22/63
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs: He won't talk. The President is a good kid. Stand-up guy, just like his old man. That's the way I see it.
Director of the CIA: I agree. He's solid. A f*ckin' Marine.
Director of the FBI: He's okay. He always was. Remo, what do you think?
Director of the NSA: Look... why take a chance? At least, that's the way I feel about it.
Regards,
Why would Jackie be a target?
> Why did he miss an easy shot? (pg. 692)—“the double window through which the bullet was fired had a wooden frame running horizontally in the middle of it. The police saw that the bullet had struck the upper portion of the window frame near the center of the locking mechanism… thus deflecting the bullet”
as if the shooter could not see the window frame and adjust by shifting his position slightly along the fence? especially if the window frame were to obstruct his line of sight to the intended target? ...does not say much for the ability of the shooter, does it?
either LHO is an expert marksman or he is not. you can’t have it both ways and retain your credibility.
> Also: Walker realized later (in considering how LHO missed) that the glare of the light in the room would have blurred the window sash. This is especially true in using a telescope, the sash would not have been visible to the shooter.
So Walker is suddenly an expert on optics? Why is walker cited... but not an actual optics expert? might it be because Walker’s claim is in fact relatively weak and does not bear closer consideration?
> Ballistics – Robert Frazier, FBI ballistics export examined both the slug found at the Walker house and those taken from the rifle used by LHO. His testimony (694) was not definitive due to the poor shape of the Walker slug. He did say the rifling marks were identical to those of a Manicher-Carcano rifle (“Four lands and grooves with a right twist”). He could not definitively say it came from the same gun.
“... not definitive...” “...not definitely...” is not the same as direct evidence justifying the hard WR conclusion, unless the WR objective is in fact propaganda and not an honest investigation.
> Marina Oswald statement — Marina described the day of the event and days after. LHO told her he did it. She also found a notebook with maps, bus schedules, drawings and photographs of Walker’s house. LHO was going to keep it. She told him to burn it, which he did (pg. 693-694).
I’ve read elsewhere that Marina was held in isolation by the authorities for two full months of questioning. I’ve replied before that none of what she allegedly claimed can be regarded as above suspicion in contrast to being potentially influenced by her interrogators. Marina was not an eyewitness to the shooter at the scene (no one was).
For Bugliosi: What is the DIRECT evidence linking LHO to the Walker shooting?’ (I know, he can’t answer because he passed away.)
For those seeking honesty, the honest truth is that Bugliosi and Posner remain unconvincing to many if not most people. Why do these high powered lawyer-authors even bother trying? Could it be that many if not most people find the WR unconvincing? And there are any number of minor “writers” and “reporters” who continue to publish 8 paragraph articles all the time purporting that LHO was the shooter. Why? because what’s out there is not enough to prove LHO guilty of the Walker shooting (or anything else for that matter).
It is well known that lawyers have issues with morals. Before and at trial, the job of lawyers is not to find the truth, but to convince the jury and public at large that their client is innocent— or that someone other than their client is guilty. What better candidate for a propaganda piece could the CIA find than a lawyer (or two)?
Have you heard the theory of the SS agent in the trailing limo shot JFK by accident after Oswald fired the first two shots?
What do you think of that?
True. You cannot order a new Lincoln or other vehicle that use chip/chips as they are back logged. Even my Dell I-5 laptop that is only six months old, has been out since mid-October. The problem is another backlog in a hard drive made in India. In short, we are not the USA we were as Biden and pals are selling more and more to India and China. We do not even make our own antibiotics. Biden is a jerk as even our Patriot missiles have very new software for command and control that is not for enemy use. Our government is run by idiots. Our politicians are mostly attorneys who know zip about economics or business. We are in deep s.
True. You cannot order a new Lincoln or other vehicle that use chip/chips as they are back logged. Even my Dell I-5 laptop that is only six months old, has been out since mid-October. The problem is another backlog in a hard drive made in India. In short, we are not the USA we were as Biden and pals are selling more and more to India and China. We do not even make our own antibiotics. Biden is a jerk as even our Patriot missiles have very new software for command and control that is not for enemy use. Our government is run by idiots. Our politicians are mostly attorneys who know zip about economics or business. We are in deep s.
> Why is walker cited... but not an actual optics expert?
not only was walker not an optics expert, but he was also the victim of the shooting.
i am not a lawyer but i would imagine that any good lawyer should be able to forsee a potential conflict of interest based dismissal if walker were called as an expert witness in a criminal case against his alleged shooter. (a desperate lawyer, or a corrupted lawyer, not so much.)
When you wade through all the B.S. and look at JFK objectively, you might wonder why the CIA would even bother with him. The guy was a thoroughly mediocre president with almost no accomplishments of note.
Did you read Bugliosi’s book?
1) None of the other people in that car or on the running boards said that a shot came from Hickey's AR-15.
2) The man standing next to Hickey said the rifle was definitely not fired.
3) Hickey himself testified that that after hearing three shots, he reached down, picked up the gun and was ready to engage. By that time, Kennedy had already been shot, the Lincoln was in the underpass, and Hickey's car was speeding up to follow it. He said he never fired.
4) No witness in Dealey Plaza said that heard a shot coming from that car. One witness stated that his eyes were on Hickey, he saw the rifle, but said the rifle was not fired.
My conspiracy has the CIA killing M. Monroe and the Mafia killing JFK.
the thread is about cia-jfk bombshells. not about me.
I have read six of his books. He was able to change my mind and I too believed for decades that LHO did not act alone. I think you would enjoy the information.
ok, thanks
You’ve obviously never shot a deer.
That’s a great quote.
Have shot many.
Most recent was two weeks ago. Your point?
Let me guess, you’re a Lee Harvey did it guy.
The carcano FMJ round is designed to pierce a body. Point of impact is the diameter of the round. If the bullet hits bone it distorts or flattens and causes a larger exit wound.
If JFK was hit from the back of his skull his body would have went forward and a large hole would have been blown through his face.
The exact opposite happened. The round that hit JFK was likely a Pointed Soft point that entered his forehead and blew out the back of his skull, which landed on the trunk lid and Jackie tried to retrieve.
It’s too hard to play stupid on these facts after almost 60 years. Wise up a bit.
I was a young kid, not a Kennedy fan, but his assassination had a disturbing ‘adulting’ effect on me. Made me realize that there were more monsters than good guys, and has ever been thus.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.