Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Nov. 23, 2023 - Jim Fetzer

01:51:20

The Raw Deal (22 November 2023) with Donald Jeffries

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	This is Jim Fetzer, your host on The Raw Deal right here on Revolution Radio, this 22nd day of November, 2023, the 60th observance of the assassination of JFK.
	I don't call events that are tragic anniversaries when they roll around again, but rather observances.
	And we're hoping that we're going out. - Okay.
	I'm checking with Mitchell right now.
	Can you hear me, Mitchell?
	Well, in any case, today is going to be a slightly unusual day.
	I want to begin with some reflections about the state of the world today from Colonel Douglas MacGregor, and then some observations about the situation in Rand and Hamas, especially With Scott Ritter.
	And then I want to pick up on revelations about the medical evidence and clarify what's going on there.
	Before I have this, my wonderful guest, Donald Jeffries, join me.
	He began researching the JFK assassination as a teenage volunteer for Mark Lane Citizen's Committee of Inquiry in the mid-1970s.
	He is the author of nine books, and his work has been lauded by Ron Paul, Naomi Wolf, Roger Stone, Jesse Ventura, Cindy Sheehan, Cynthia McKinney, and many others.
	He spoke at my conference on false flags and conspiracies last year, and I was very favorably impressed.
	So I've invited him back for this, which will be on the 16th and the 17th of December.
	Mark your calendar.
	Let me bring up, then, my first report here from General Douglas MacGregor.
	Listen to what he has to say.
	What do you have to say, Colonel, about all the emotions out there on both sides?
	People wanting retribution for the civilians killed.
	I know you've talked about the notion of collective punishment and how that can breed new enemies.
	So what should people know?
	Gosh, what should people know?
	We could go back over the history and there's plenty of blame on each side for the current tragedy.
	But if you go back to the Camp David Accords, which some of your viewers will remember, There was a discussion between Menachem Begin, who at the time was the Prime Minister in Israel, and President Sadat of Egypt.
	And Menachem Begin actually offered control of Gaza to Egypt.
	He said, you're Muslim Arabs, why don't you take control of it?
	We don't want it.
	It's a tinderbox.
	In other words, it's a catalyst for conflict.
	And President Sadat said, not on your life.
	We don't want Gaza.
	Now, why would he say that?
	For two reasons.
	Number one, his own society was fragile, let's be frank.
	And he was not comfortable with suddenly admitting a couple of million more people who might come in and destabilize his own population.
	That's not unusual in the Arab world.
	You can find the same attitude in Saudi Arabia, the Emirates, Jordan, and so forth.
	But then there's another dimension to this that needs to be understood.
	If, in fact, he had taken The Muslim Arabs off Menachem Begin's hands during the Camp David Accords, that would have weakened the argument for a Palestinian state.
	And it has been in the interest of the Arabs in the region to keep this dream of a Palestinian state alive, because it's a way in order to contain Israel, to weaken Israel, and to suppress Israel as a major power in the region.
	So that's what you have to have in the background.
	Now, in the meantime, living in Gaza has been no picnic.
	It is being referred to as the largest open-air prison or concentration camp in the world.
	That's a pretty grim description, but it's not entirely wrong.
	The other thing that people don't understand is there are many Arab Christians also living in Gaza.
	Orthodox and Roman Catholic for the most part.
	They too have become targets and many of them have also been killed.
	And they certainly are not seen as Hamas terrorists.
	But Israel is not in a position at this point to conduct what we would call discretionary warfare.
	They're determined to root out and destroy Hamas, and if the population doesn't get out of the way, then they're going to die right along with Hamas.
	So that brings us back to where we were.
	We are not doing anything to stop this.
	Mr. Netanyahu has more control over his destiny and ours than we do.
	This has never been true in the past.
	In the past, the President of the United States was always the more powerful of the two figures.
	Today, given the influence that Israel has gained over many years on the Hill and inside American politics, they now hold the Trump cards, not the President.
	So, I don't expect anything to change until Mr. Netanyahu decides he's finished.
	That opens the door to the regional war that we're discussing.
	America certainly isn't that superpower that it was once so known for.
	And I actually want to turn a little bit to our global economic status.
	I want to read to you one of my favorite quotes from John Quincy Adams.
	"Wherever the standard of freedom and independence has been or shall be unfurled, there will her heart, her benedictions, and her prayers be, but she goes not abroad in search of monsters to destroy." Now, I believe that great nations are really built on strong economies, but they can destroy themselves pursuing this seduction of a foreign empire.
	And I think that's what's happened with the US.
	Our economy and prosperity Once represented this powerful idea of the American dream.
	We were the beacon of hope around the world.
	That was really our strength and our national security.
	So can you share how our economic demise has contributed to what's happening in the world?
	Let's keep in mind that George Washington and Alexander Hamilton both said that America's mission in the world was to be its engine of economic prosperity.
	They thought that if you built up our economy and demonstrated how successful we were, that others would want to emulate us.
	We threw that away during the Second World War and in the 50, 60, 70 years since the Second World War.
	We effectively became an imperial state after World War II.
	Now, we spent a lot of time explaining why.
	Much of that had to do with the terrible destruction during the Second World War that left, essentially, the Soviet Union as the principal winner of the war in terms of territory and power and influence.
	We then had to fill the vacuum for Japan and Germany and this ballooned over many decades into a global presence with 800 bases and so forth.
	When you look at our economy, at the same time as we were growing in imperial terms, we were hollowing out our economy.
	We were shipping our manufacturing base overseas.
	When I say we, I'm talking about the ruling elites who saw money to be made, frankly, by shipping it over to countries like China with cheap labor.
	The interesting part is that now China's in a lot of trouble economically.
	And in part, that's because cheap labor doesn't exist in China anymore.
	And some of the manufacturing corporations and bases have moved from China into other parts of Southeast Asia.
	Now, as far as we're concerned, we've also destroyed our energy sector.
	And if you look at our trump cards in economic terms, number one was always the energy sector.
	Our ability to extract, refine, outperform everyone in the energy sector.
	Secondly, I would argue agriculturally.
	We have a very productive agrarian sector and I think we've let that down quite a bit.
	And then finally high-tech manufacturing.
	All of that was once again stupidly exported elsewhere so that now It sits in Taiwan, for instance, as opposed to sitting in the United States.
	Those things have to be reversed, and that was part of what Donald Trump wanted to do.
	This particular administration has followed the opposite path and actually doubled down on those bad decisions and reversed things, made things actually worse.
	Let's look at the war, though, and its potential impact.
	Let's worst case it.
	If Iran is dragged into this war, and I think it could happen, and I can't predict how or where or what, but we have sent a lot of naval power over to the Persian Gulf and the Indian Ocean.
	That's an opportunity.
	Then you have the naval power in the Mediterranean.
	If they are dragged into the war, I think you can say with absolute certainty that the Straits of Hormuz will be shut down.
	Then you have to consider the possibility that if Egypt finally throws in its lot or casts its lot with the rest of the Arab states against Israel, thus far it has not done that.
	It has condemned Israel.
	But it is worked very hard to avoid being dragged into war.
	Especially if the Turks come in because I think the Egyptians would come in if they received guarantees from the Turks.
	Then you lose the Suez Canal.
	We haven't even talked about the other oil pipelines coming through Azerbaijan and down through Turkey and into Israel or the offshore drilling in the Mediterranean and exports from Libya and Egypt.
	That's catastrophic.
	Then you're looking at $200 a barrel of oil, which is far worse than everybody's anticipating, perhaps $100 a barrel now.
	If those things happen, it's $200 a barrel.
	Then all bets are off.
	Just pick your scenario, whatever you want to find.
	This is also why I have invested in digital currency.
	But we don't need to go into that right now.
	But the bottom line is that's worth casing it, but it's not impossible.
	Which is again, anyone who is sober minded and looks at the global situation doesn't want this war.
	I would tell you the Chinese absolutely don't want it.
	They're almost entirely dependent on food and a large part of their energy coming from Africa and the Middle East.
	How do they get it there?
	They've got to move it by sea.
	If there's a major war in the area and the U.S.
	Navy is involved, it's going to be very hard to get that through to China.
	So then China sits on the sidelines and says, we've got to have a negotiated settlement, gets into arguments with the Israelis over what they're doing.
	There was a huge argument very recently within the last few hours in the United Nations and the public arena saying, look, there are rules in war.
	You're not following any of them.
	You've disregarded all the rules that we have tried to adhere to.
	Let's be honest.
	War is war.
	And rules don't count for much once you get into an existential fight.
	And for the Israelis, it's an existential fight.
	But making it an existential fight for them, tends to make the fight elsewhere, for the Arabs, Turks and Iranians, also existential.
	And that's the problem.
	I know we're seeing so many cracks around the edges, what you talked about with the price of oil, how that could be impacted.
	America has enjoyed such a privilege being the global reserve currency, essentially being able to print oil with the petrodollar, but that's changing.
	And you recently made a series of very unprecedented predictions.
	You've said that Biden may not complete his term, but you also said that you think that we will wake up one day very soon and have a bank holiday where we won't be able to access any of our accounts.
	And you mentioned digital currency.
	So I want you to expand a little bit on that forecast of yours, because knowing that you are an advocate for Bitcoin, for this freedom technology, could that be an escape hatch?
	Yes, particularly.
	If it turns out that our fiat currency at some point is called into question.
	Again, we can come up with many scenarios, but you've got Lynn Alden, Alistair McLeod, a host of others who are far better informed than I am, are talking about the fragility of our banking system.
	And we continue to see problems.
	If you look at the top 10 banks in the United States that are critically weak, they include some of the largest banks in the world.
	If any of those for any reason run into a critical situation, the world economy is in serious trouble.
	We even had Jamie Dimon has talked about the fragility of the system and the dangers that are lurking out there.
	I can't predict when, how or what.
	All I can do is look at triggers.
	And my point is, Ukraine was bad.
	But effectively, everybody lied to everyone else in the West and said that was going to be a big success.
	That's a total failure.
	That's vanishing from the screen right now.
	We're pouring money into it to maintain the facade that the Ukrainian state is viable and not a total failure.
	That's for political cover in Washington and Western capitals.
	But the war there is effectively over.
	The Russians are advancing.
	They will determine Ukraine's future, not us.
	And it's certainly not going to be in NATO.
	Or the EU, I rather suspect.
	So now we've shifted to the Middle East.
	Totally different arena.
	But I would argue the stakes there are even higher.
	And the consequences for the global economy are far more grave.
	The trigger is, quite frankly, if Iran and or the Turks become involved.
	And I think the longer this lasts, the more likely that is.
	Every conceivable scenario that crashes the global economy, and particularly our economy in the West, is very likely.
	The BRICS will probably survive this more easily.
	Russia is flourishing at this point.
	And in fact, in many respects, it would be in its interest to dump fiat currency entirely and go to the gold standard.
	We'll see what they do.
	We still have Chinese that are shedding treasuries, U.S.
	treasuries, but they haven't gone to the fire sale and essentially dumped everything.
	If we get a fire sale overseas from Saudi Arabia and China regarding U.S.
	treasuries, I think we're in a lot of trouble.
	What is this bank holiday that you mentioned?
	Like, how would that actually play out?
	I think you're referring to something where I said the banks could close for a couple of weeks, or are you talking about the debt holiday I discussed?
	We could go into both.
	I thought that you mentioned that you thought that one day people wouldn't be able to access their accounts.
	And that is that censorship, that financial censorship we have seen in other countries, including Western countries like Canada, obviously Cyprus and others.
	People literally can't access their own money that they think is in the bank.
	Can you touch on that?
	Remember, during the Depression, we shut down the nation's banks for two weeks because the runs on the banks threatened to destroy the whole system.
	I think we could see something similar.
	Just as we shut down trading on Wall Street, we can push a button and simply halt all trading to prevent another total crash.
	I think you could see something similar happen in the banking system again.
	What's the trigger for it?
	I can't predict when the Black Swan will take flight, to put it bluntly.
	But I think James Ricards and others have all mentioned these kinds of things.
	Now when it comes to Dead Holiday, this is something that I think deserved some time ago a lot of attention and never got it.
	In the Middle Ages and during the Renaissance, when everyone was burdened with debt that they could not possibly retire under any circumstances, the King Emperor, the Emperor of the Holy Roman Empire, or the King of the Polish-Lithuanian Congress, could simply say, debt holiday.
	All debts are forgiven.
	In other words, the clock goes to zero, we start over.
	But bankers are utterly opposed to that, because it would ruin them.
	They would go out of business.
	And that brings us to digital currency.
	When it becomes clear that the banks are not solvent, when it becomes clear that we have debt that is so large that it cannot be retired, then you begin to question, how much is your cash worth?
	Now, initially, I think we're going to see the dollar very strong, which is obviously not too good for our economy.
	It will go on that way, maybe six months, maybe a year, maybe longer.
	And then suddenly, I think it will tank.
	Again, these are prognostications based on previous history.
	If that happens, and I think it could, digital currency becomes an option, a better option as a store of wealth.
	Again, the banks hate this, want nothing to do with it, but they may not have much control.
	The whole central banking system has reached a point where it is corrupted by borrowing, Well, I think that was very, very thoughtful on the part of Colonel McGregor.
	It's a mess.
	I wouldn't want to be in the Federal Reserve or on its board for anything in the world right now. - Well, I think that was very, very thoughtful on part of Colonel McGregor.
	Now listen to Scott Britter. - I hope and pray that someday there's a Nuremberg Tribunal for these Israeli officers.
	And I want to see the look in their eyes as they're led up to the gallows, wondering in their mind, what's going on is the neck, is there, feel the noose around their neck, knowing they only have seconds to live before the execution pushes a button back on their neck and snap, 'cause that's all they deserve.
	They don't deserve our adulation.
	They don't deserve our admiration.
	They don't deserve our sympathy.
	They deserve our mass condemnation for the criminals that they are.
	It's disgusting what's happening right now in Palestine.
	And this has nothing to do with Hamas.
	Nothing to do with Hamas.
	It has everything to do with Israel's national decision-making cycle, which mainstreams collective punishment, which singles out every single civilian in Gaza as an extension of Hamas, and that is a crime, a crime, a crime.
	And if you're a pro-Israeli person in the streets demonstrating for them, shame on you.
	Because this isn't about protesting against anti-Semitism.
	If it was about protesting against anti-Semitism, I'd be marching alongside.
	Because there's no room for anti-Semitism.
	Especially now.
	This is not a Jewish problem.
	The Jews are not to blame.
	Stop pointing fingers at the Jews.
	This is about Zionism.
	Political Zionism.
	This is about people who have taken political Zionism and they've turned it into this expression of a greater Israel.
	Eretz Israel.
	Show me anywhere, anywhere in international law where the global community has greenlighted greater Israel.
	Nobody has.
	It's only in the sick fantasy of the Israeli leaders who govern Israel today.
	And if you're an Israeli fighting for Israel, you're not fighting for the defense of Israel as defined by the United Nations, as defined by 1948 or even 1967.
	You are fighting for a greater Israel, which means that you are saying we encourage a war of aggression against all of our neighbors, not just the Palestinians.
	This is a criminal regime.
	This is a sick regime, and it has to go.
	That doesn't mean that Israel has to go, but Eretz Israel is finished.
	It needs to be finished.
	It needs to be killed, and the whole world needs to rally around this cause.
	I'm ashamed of the Arab world right now.
	I'm ashamed of the Muslim world.
	They had an opportunity.
	They had that joint extraordinary meeting in Riyadh last Saturday, where they had a chance to squeeze Israel dead with an oil embargo, and they chose not to, which means that they have chosen money and profit.
	Over Palestinian blood.
	So yeah, this condemnation is across the board.
	For the leaders in Saudi Arabia.
	For the leaders in Turkey.
	Erdogan may be out there saying the right thing, but he's allowing Turkey to transport Azeri oil over a pipeline onto ships in Turkish ports where they're sent to Israel to fuel the war machine.
	So Erdogan, you're a hypocrite.
	Shut the oil and I'll listen to you.
	Sisi, you better mobilize all your divisions and put them on the border with Israel and tell them that you are marching to Jerusalem if this doesn't stop.
	The King of Jordan, the same.
	Make Jerusalem yours again.
	Reverse 1967.
	Syria, take the Golan Heights.
	It's time for Israel to be terminated as a political Zionist state.
	Because until it is, these crimes will continue.
	The Palestinians mean nothing.
	Their lives mean nothing.
	We're at the point now where numbers mean nothing.
	Because they become so big, you can't really attach a human face to them.
	It's just a figure on a piece of paper.
	When you step back and look at October 7th, what was the reality of that day?
	Well, let's start with the name of the operation.
	Al-Aqsa Flood.
	Why does there have to be an Al-Aqsa flood?
	What is Al-Aqsa?
	It's a holy place in Jerusalem, the Al-Aqsa Mosque.
	The third holiest place in Islam.
	Why would Hamas have to name an operation Al-Aqsa Flood?
	Could it be because the Israelis had, for the past months, years, been desecrating the third holiest shrine in Islam?
	Could it be that the Israelis were disrupting Islamic worshippers?
	Throwing tear gas into a mosque?
	Beating up women?
	bullying men
	I'll be back at the commercials.
	I'll be back at the end.
	We need the support of the people.
	It is the people like you, yes, you, that keeps the station in the front lines of the battle against tyranny and oppression.
	Please help support Revolution Radio so that free speech will not be silenced in a world that seems to be going deaf to the real truth.
	With your support, we will be able to become an even bigger pillar of light from dark Hey everyone!
	It's Barbara Jean Lindsay, the Cosmic Oracle.
	If you have questions about your past lives or future plans, need answers from the cosmos about your love life or career, or just want to keep your finger on the pulse of the planet, check out my show!
	the cosmic oracle here on revolution radio at freedomslips.com
	oh join
	revolution radio every wednesday 8 p.m eastern
	The opinions expressed on this radio station, its programs, and its website by the hosts, guests, and call-in listeners, Shatters are solely the opinions of the original source who expressed them.
	They do not necessarily represent the opinions of Revolution Radio and FreedomSlips.com, its staff, or affiliates.
	You're listening to Revolution Radio, freedomslips.com, 100% listener-supported radio, and now we return you to your host.
	Well, I think Colonel McGregor and Scott Ritter sum it up very well.
	I agree with every single word Scott Ritter said, condemning Israel and the cowardice of the Arab nations, and that at their summit in Riyadh, they could have decided to cut off Israel from gas and oil and left it high and dry and had some leverage.
	They've not done that.
	But, as I indicated then, my special guest has a background with regard to JFK, and I want to turn to a new development.
	Remember the doctors who were present in Trauma Room No.
	1 at Parkland Hospital when his morbid body was brought in and broken their silence?
	As Chuck Crenshaw explains in his book, Conspiracy of Silence, the doctors were all threatened with loss of their careers if they talk about what they witnessed at Parkland Hospital.
	This is ultimately because LBJ was behind it.
	He was going to shut down any inquiry.
	He was using J. Edgar Hoover and the FBI to launder the evidence to make sure it came out right.
	What I want to comment upon here especially is that while there were virtues to this revelation, and you can easily access it, They weren't very thoroughgoing.
	They weren't really very adequate.
	The best physicians, well, with one or two exceptions, were not among the group of seven or eight doctors they had there.
	So I want to go forward and explain what we know about the medical evidence, where I've been specializing in the medical evidence in 1992, when I began collaborating with David W. Mandik, MD, PhD, who is the leading expert on the medical evidence in the world today.
	Just for a little background, we all know the official narrative, three shots on the sixth floor window, what some may not know, Is that the FBI and the Secret Service initially concluded the day of the assassination, in the evening, that there had been three shots and three hits.
	That Jack had been hit in the back, about five and a half inches down below the collar, just to the right of the spinal column, by a shallow shot that only went in about as far as the second knuckle on your little finger.
	That Connelly had been hit in the back.
	And that jack had been hit in the back of the head, killing him.
	There was no magic bullet.
	That only became appropriate after it turned out a shot had missed and injured a distant bystander by the name of James Tay.
	They thus had to subtract one from the three they declared to have been the only shots fired and were having to be very creative in order to figure out how to accommodate for all the wounds in the body on the basis of only two bullets.
	Now, They'd like, the government would like everyone to forget what Malcolm Kilduff said when he explained that JFK was dead.
	He pointed to his right temple and said it was a simple matter of a bullet right through the head, attributing that to Admiral George Berkeley, the present personal physician.
	You get confirmation from these doctors, these, let me call them residual, because it's not all of them, Many of them are now deceased.
	There was a blowout at the back of the head, which was caused by this shot, but they don't talk about the entry at the right temple.
	They do talk about the throat having a clear entry wound, and some even seem to hit that a bullet went in the throat and then came out the back of his head, which frankly is anatomically absurd.
	What did we have, however, on radio and television that afternoon?
	Major networks like NBC.
	Five hours worth of continuous garbage.
	Chet Huntley, among others, was involved.
	They were reporting two wounds the president had sustained.
	The first was a small clean puncture wound to the throat.
	Malcolm Perry, M.D., had explained at a press conference held at Parkland that afternoon, three different times, he said it was a wound of entry that a bullet was coming at him.
	There was no ambiguity, no doubt about it.
	These guys at Parkland were very experienced with gunshot wounds.
	Dallas at the time may have been the homicide capital of the universe.
	Unlike, for example, the Bethesda physicians who have never performed an autopsy on a gunshot victim before.
	In fact, part of the report about the doctors, the video, is a little sloppy because it insinuates they hadn't done very many.
	Well, the answer is they hadn't done any.
	They had done none.
	It was because of their ignorance and their incompetence that they were going to be amenable to control by the Surgeon General of the U.S.
	Navy and other high-ranking officers.
	Curtis LeMay was even there in Bethesda giving directions as to what they could or could not do.
	They were selected for their compliance.
	The other shot that was widely broadcast was that Entry in the right temple, that blew his brains out the back of the head.
	So we have two shots repeatedly reported again and again over radio and television now.
	As the day dragged on later, the reports began to trickle in that the FBI and the Secret Service had concluded that Jack had been shot.
	Uh, that there'd been only three shots and they'd been from above and behind.
	Well, Frank McGee, very astute guy, nobody's fool, says, this is incongruous!
	How can a man have been shot from in front and from behind?
	Well, if you put together that you shot from in front, a shot to the throat, which was actually fired from inside the triple under vest, And the shot to the right nipple that was fired from the intersection of the Triple Underpass and the vacant fence at above-ground sewer opening.
	With the shot to the back and the shot to the back of the head that the FBI and the Secret Service had initially reported, then you do have four of what appear to have been maximally five hits to JFK, because David Mannich believes there may have been yet another shot to the side of the head fired from the vicinity of the Pergola.
	But there you have basically four hits when you combine what was reported on radio and television that day with what the Secret Service and the FBI were reporting had happened at JFK.
	Remember, they said three shots, three hits, shot to the back as shown here, which it turns out was fired from the top of the county records building.
	And the shot to the back of the head, which took place after the driver William Greer bowed the limousine to the left into a hall to make sure the president would be killed, fired from the Daltax.
	Here you have the mortician who prepared the body, said there's a large gaping hole in the back of the head, perhaps by stretching a piece of rubber over it.
	He thinks the skull was filled with plaster of Paris.
	There was a smaller wound in the right pebble.
	That, of course, was the entry.
	Then he mentions a crescent-shaped flap down three inches.
	This is a skull flap on the right that was still attached to the skull that appears to have been caused by that third shot.
	He mentions approximately two small shrapnel wounds to the face.
	Thomas Evan Robinson, who was the mortician, observed that embalming fluid was leaking out of these small wounds in the face, where David Mannock brilliantly inferred they had been caused by shards of glass that had been released when the bullet to the throat passed through the windshield.
	Meanwhile, he had the wound in the back, five to six inches below the shoulder, just to the right of the back, known as the scrotch.
	The adrenaline gland and the brain had been removed.
	Other organs had been removed and put back, and get this.
	No swelling or discoloration to the face, meaning he died instantly.
	How long do you think you can last if you had half your brains blown out in Dealey Plaza?
	This is another matter on which the Parkland video is inconclusive.
	A little vague.
	It's like they were pretending he was still alive.
	When he was dead.
	Meanwhile, as Charles Crenshaw, among the most courageous and outspoken of all the Parkland physicians, When I put together my first edited book on the assassination, bringing together the best experts, including a world authority on the human brain who is also an expert on wound ballistics, having supervised an emergency medical hospital for injured Okinawans and Japanese prisoners of war during the Battle of Okinawa,
	Mantic with a Ph.D.
	in physics from Wisconsin, M.D.
	from Michigan, board certified in radiation oncology.
	So he's an expert in the interpretation of x-rays.
	Charles Crenshaw.
	Who not only was in trauma room number one when JFK's moribund body was brought in, but two days later was responsible for the care and treatment of his alleged assassin, Lee Oswald.
	Jack White, a brilliant student of the photos and photographs in the assassination of JFK, and John B. Costello, another PhD that's time with expertise in
	Motions of light and the motion of moving objects, especially in relation to video, where he did an internal study of the Zapruder film and discovered that, well, it was actually closer to 98% technically flawless.
	The other 2% gave away that it was actually a fabrication from authentic footage.
	that had then been altered using the sophisticated techniques of off-peakle printing and special effects.
	Well, John would come into play later, but when I did the first book, I asked Charles Crenshaw if he would give me sketches of what the wounds looked like before and after the simple tracheostomy and scissioning.
	And you see here on the left, a simple clean entry wound, no doubt about it.
	And I performed a simple straight tracheostomy incision right through the wound.
	Thanks to Charles Crenshaw.
	There is a photograph from the autopsy.
	We know on several bases that this does not actually appear to be JFK.
	But notice in particular, because Crenshaw told me how he had closed JFK's eyes when he was helping to wrap him in sheets to put him in the bronze ceremonial casket.
	He had closed his eyes.
	Well, here his eyes are open.
	Some have suggested that J.D.
	Tippet looked a lot like Jack, and that Tippet's body had been used to impersonate Jack.
	In place of Jack, but Dennis David, who was the NCO in charge of access to the morgue at Bethesda, told me they had a casket brought in.
	He was directed not to log in of a party described as the major, and I believe this is the major, After all, if you got everyone in the military to choose between, you're bound to find somebody who looks like someone else.
	And I think they thought this guy looked a whole lot like JFK.
	Notice now the throat wound has been enlarged.
	I mentioned the world authority on the human brain is named Bob Livingston.
	He had heard the reports of the small puncture wound.
	He recognized that to be a wound of entry.
	So he had called over to Bethesda Naval Hospital to speak to Commander Hoomes, who would be conducting the autopsy.
	And he explained that the neck had to be dissected very carefully because, and this is also ironic in retrospect, if there were any evidence of shot from behind, then there had to be at least two shooters and therefore a conspiracy.
	At that point, they were cut off.
	Which always troubled Bob.
	Why the Secret Service would cut him off from a conversation between two physicians, where Bob himself was the Scientific Director of two of the National Institutes of Health located across the street from Bethesda Naval Hospital for blindness and for neurological diseases.
	Meanwhile, here's Dr. McClellan's sketch, a diagram he approved of the blowout to the back of the head.
	Very substantial wound.
	Here you have Dr. Crenshaw giving me the diagram both from the side and from the back.
	There are a number of discussions of this wound in this video that are accurate discussions.
	Crenshaw actually did an interview talking about how the bullet had entered the vicinity of the right temple in this ear And it was a tangential, meaning to the side of the head, rather going directly through the center of the head, a tangential wound that had blown out his brains out the back of his head.
	Again, here we had Thomas Evan Robinson talking about what happened there.
	Well, David Mantic went into the National Archives in 1992 with permission of the Kennedy family to study the autopsy x-rays.
	He told me going in that he thought he'd discover evidence of a second shot to the head, but also that there had been alteration of the x-rays.
	Because we were both contemplating that the autopsy had been altered, faked, fudged, in order to conceal the true causes of death.
	I told him that was great, because that's just what we were looking for.
	In fact, he found both.
	Now, this is the lateral cranial right side x-ray.
	He said the contrast was way too great to be a bona fide x-ray.
	Here's a technique from physics known as optical densitometry, which enables you to calculate the relative density of the objects whose exposure to radiation create the images, and to find an area here, area P for patch, That was far too dense to be human bone.
	In other words, this was not a naturally occurring phenomenon.
	So unless JFK's head were nothing but solid bone, unless JFK were a bonehead, this had been fabricated or fake.
	Although it's not visible in earlier frames where it was blacked out, I conjecture that it might be possible the wound would be visible in later frames.
	And I found here in frame 374, just as Jackie is climbing out on the trunk for a chunk of JFK's skull and brains, which he held in her hand, all the way to Parkland, which is accurately portrayed in this Parkland Doctor documentary.
	You can actually see the blowout.
	You know how brains are often called gray matter.
	It's this bluish gray here.
	That skull flap I mentioned that Robinson described is here.
	That's a pinkish, a brain blowout right there.
	Here you can see in frame 312 before In a frame after they blacked out the back of the head, they created a blob, I think in part, that was moving something from the back of the head, with a blowout now, very conspicuous.
	And if you compare it with the Area B of David's determination of the part that had been passed, You can see that there's a very close approximation, except that in the video frame, the film frame, his hair extends over.
	It's like a cashew on its side.
	So we know definitively about a blowout.
	When the House Select Committee on Assassination reinvestigated the case in 1977-78, If medical panel concluded the entry wound, this was the wound to the back of the head that actually hit Jack low down.
	Roughly around here.
	It actually hit higher above.
	They have it in a diagram, but you notice in the photograph it's not there because it was fabricated.
	The entry wound actually four inches above the entry previously specified, depicted in diagrams right, not visible in photographs left.
	But look at this!
	The whole back of his head!
	Where's that blowout?
	Where's that fist side blowout for the back of the head?
	Indeed, it's not even consistent with what's known as the Harper Fragment, this rather substantial triangular shape from the back of the head.
	Saturday afternoon, 23 November 1963, a medical student named Billy Harper found a fragment of skull bone on the grass opposite a knoll.
	He took it to his uncle, Jack Harper, M.D., on the staff at Methodist Hospital, who shot with a chief pathologist, A.B.
	Corns.
	He and three others identified it as occipital bone from the back of a human crania.
	They took photographs of the piece of bone, known as the Harper Fragment, before turning it over to the FBI, which was a good thing, because like other evidence in this case, it was misplaced.
	David W. Mandick, MD, PhD, has identified the location on the back of the president's skull from which it was blown out as murder in Dealey Plaza, 2000, the second of my first three books, has explained.
	Not all of the evidence in this case was altered, fabricated, or otherwise fake.
	Some of it was simply lost.
	Now here, and you're going to be astonished to learn, you have the fifth side blowout observed at Parkland.
	Now at Bethesda, it was greatly enlarged.
	How did that happen?
	Commander Humes took a craniosaw to the skull of JFK to greatly enlarge the wound, so it might have been something that had JFK been leaned over sufficiently far.
	A bullet wound on a trajectory, an upward trajectory, roughly, as I'm indicating with the cursor here, might have blown it open.
	But he did this in front of two observers, one of whom was Thomas Abbott Robinson.
	Would spend more time with the body than anyone else preparing it for the state funeral.
	So that when the Assassination Records Review Board came to depose him and showed him a sketch, that Hume's assistant, But Boswell had drawn, J. Thornton Boswell, he said, oh no, the doctors did that because they'd actually witnessed the enlargement.
	But now look how absurd it is for the HSCA to have closed it up.
	Just outrageous.
	Anyone who has any doubts about the existence of a cover-up of the medical evidence should just ponder what we have here.
	And by the way, we have those diagrams from the physician, but this enormous cavity is described with mathematical precision in the Bethesda autopsy report, which I included in Assassination Science, And that these would be succeeded by the third of the three, the great Zubruder, Phil Monks, in 2003.
	Now just know it's how witness after witness, whether you're in Dealey Plaza, whether you're at Parkland, even at Bethesda, describe that fizz-eyed blowout at the back of the head, one after another, after another, after another.
	David Bandic, by the way, who, as I mentioned, is board certified in radiation oncology, took a CAT scan of a patient with neck and chest dimensions similar to those at JFK and plotted the official trajectory.
	It turned out to be anatomically impossible because cervical vertebrae intervened.
	Now, my dear friend, Don, I want you to comment on any of the above.
	You may be familiar with all, though I probably spent more time on the medical evidence than anybody.
	Douglas Horn was a senior analyst for the military records for the assassination record review board and David Manning himself, because this is a focal point of my first three books.
	I'd just like your comments, your reaction before we turn to your experiences in the early days.
	Don.
	Okay, well, I think, you know, when you look at the autopsy evidence, the medical evidence, it all really boils down to one essential problem for the official story.
	And that is that, as you note, and point out many times, every single medical personnel at Parkland Hospital in Dallas, all the nurses, all the doctors, everyone described the same kind of autopsy.
	You don't have to be an expert to understand that.
	And they obviously, that looks like an exit wound.
	Exit wounds are larger than entrance wounds.
	So that would indicate a frontal shot.
	Basic, you know, just kind of basic gunshot evidence.
	But once the body gets to Bethesda, And suddenly the doctors there describe something they didn't describe that.
	And then, more importantly, what you're showing, the official X-rays and photos don't show.
	They show an intact back of the head.
	So that's the problem for the defenders.
	They have to either believe that all of those doctors, all of those nurses were wrong in the exact same way.
	They all reported a giant hole in the back of the head that wasn't there.
	Or the photos and the x-rays are illegitimate.
	So, it boils down to that.
	I mean, you don't even have to really go into the complexities of the medical evidence.
	Obviously, something happened between Parkland and Bethesda.
	Now, of course, you have people like David Lifton that invented the body alteration theory that, you know, because to try to explain the differences, you don't have to accept that.
	Doug Horn, I think, believes that as well.
	William Law, my friend and researcher who co-wrote the book with me that we're talking about, is, I think, you know, I'm an expert on the medical evidence right now, and that's the problem.
	It's the essentials.
	So when people, a lot of the people, what I call neo-con researchers, and they dominate the assassination research community now.
	They claim to believe in conspiracy, but everything they do and everything they say minimizes the case for conspiracy.
	Always try to discredit a conspiracy witness, say that no, nothing.
	So many of them actually will vouch for the validity These photos and x-rays and they'll just somehow slip off.
	Well, the doctors didn't really say, yes, the doctors did.
	Did you point out McClellan's drawing?
	I mean, it couldn't be clearer.
	That's a huge hole.
	I mean, how do you mistake that?
	That's impossible.
	So I like to put it in layman terms.
	And I think everyone can understand that when you have a condition of the body, the back of the head, the fatal shot was in one very specific way.
	The scene of the crime, as it were, in Dallas, and it looks completely different, supposedly, or we're told it was different, when it arrives at the scene of the autopsy of Bethesda Hospital.
	As you know, Bethesda Hospital has quite a It's a place, you know, you don't necessarily want to go to.
	Forrestal, James Forrestal, probably pushed out of a window there.
	He had the secretary of war.
	Joe McCarthy went in there with a knee problem and died two days later.
	No autopsy performed.
	So it's a place you don't necessarily want to go to.
	So I think there's enough medical witnesses out there, Jim Jenkins, Dennis David, people over the years that have talked about it, Gerald Custer, Lloyd Reby, all these people that have come out and give interviews.
	My friend William, we know something seriously wrong was going at Bethesda, but I think it all boils down to what you see.
	You see those drawings, you see those early accounts of the Dallas Stockers and nurses.
	They weren't imagining it.
	There was a big blow out of their head, which indicates the front.
	This is all the eyewitness testimony, the photographic evidence, everything indicates.
	So that's what we have to, that's what they have to explain.
	Now they managed to explain it because, you know, they can explain a lot of things.
	You know, they can explain Well, then collapsing without being hit by anything.
	You know, they can play whatever they want because they have the media on their side, but I think it all boils down to that.
	Yeah, I was fortunate to have a conversation with Dennis David and Paul O'Connor and Jim Jenkins and extensive correspondence with Gerald Custer, who explained that they had an acting radiation officer on duty that day.
	And when he went through his testimony, I asked him to send it to me and underline what he said that was false.
	And it came to me just covered with red ink, which I passed along to David Bantig.
	Isn't it just outrageous what's happened here?
	We're about to hit a break, Donald, and when we return, I'd like you to tell us what you think the country needs to understand about the death of JFK.
	We'll be right back with Donald Jafferys.
	Listen to Revolution Radio at freedomslips.com.
	We'll be right back after this message.
	Was it a conspiracy?
	Did you know that the police in Boston were broadcasting, this is a drill, this is a drill, on bullhorns during the marathon?
	That the Boston Globe was tweeting that a demonstration bomb would be set off during the marathon for the benefit of bomb squad activities.
	And that one would be set off in one minute in front of a library, which happened as the Globe had announced.
	Peering through the smoke, you could see bodies with missing arms and legs, but there was no blood.
	The blood only showed up later and came out of a tube.
	They used amputee actors and a studio-quality smoke machine.
	Don't let yourself be played.
	Check out And Nobody Died in Boston, either.
	Available at moonrockbooks.com.
	That's moonrockbooks.com.
	If you think for one second that the Capitol will ever treat us fairly, you are lying to yourself. - Oh!
	Because we know who they are and what they do.
	This is what they do, and we must fight back.
	You can torture us and bomb us Fire is catching.
	And if we burn, you burn with us!
	- Good evening. - Are you awake yet?
	I hope.
	We've tried and we've tried for years and years to use passive resistance and loud voices to make a change.
	But time is over.
	Your governments around the world have no other goal than to decimate your entire existence at the hands of the bankers and the elites.
	The war is coming and it's your choice to decide if you want to be a warrior or a victim.
	Denial is not a choice anymore.
	Revolution Radio, freedomslips.com, the number one listener-supported radio station on the planet.
	Not giving up.
	Revolution Radio. Radio, Radio, Radio, Radio, Radio, Radio.
	Radio.
	Countless news stories are either totally ignored or spun with half-truths.
	And because of this, essential facts and vital information are often compromised.
	Join Dr. OTT every Friday night on Studio B at 10 p.m.
	Eastern and learn why the story behind the story was nominated for a Peabody Award in its second year of producing Unparalleled Broadcasting Excellence in 1997.
	That is, if you really care about learning the truth.
	The opinions expressed on this radio station, its programs, and its website by the hosts, guests, and call-in listeners or chatters are solely the opinions of the original source who expressed them.
	They do not necessarily represent the opinions of Revolution Radio and freedomslips.com, its staff, or affiliates.
	You're listening to Revolution Radio, free slips.com, 100% listener, supporter, radio, and now we return you to your host.
	Thank you.
	Well, my guest is a man of formidable intellect.
	He's been doing research on JFK for quite some time.
	Indeed, I'd say the larger portion of his life altogether.
	He's worked with many other experts.
	I'm thus inviting him to take as much time as he would like to lay out what he thinks the public needs to understand about the assassination of JFK.
	Donald Jeffries, the floor is yours.
	Well, thanks for having me, Jim.
	It's, you know, this is obviously the 60th anniversary, or you prefer to call it something else, but it's 60 years ago today.
	I think that America, you know, I write about crimes and cover-ups before that.
	I mean, corruption existed before then.
	There were false flags before then.
	But I think by any impartial standard, on November 22nd, 1963, America was at the peak of its culture, civilization, financially, culturally, economically, we have a roaring economy.
	We're on top of the world.
	We're the enemy of the world, especially after JFK's idealistic presidency.
	The world loves us, you know.
	Latin American countries, the Alliance for Progress, America was looked at as a shining light.
	I think it's not cliche to say that our innocence really was shattered on that day.
	Americans, you know, people don't realize how different the world was.
	There were no conspiracies here, in fact.
	You had some people that talked about things, but it was a very, very small group.
	This overriding patriotism that existed in America, where we trusted these institutions.
	Americans, by and large, had trusted the police.
	They didn't know much about the CIA, but they certainly trusted the generals.
	I mean, look at all those 1950s sci-fi movies where it was the military.
	Wonderful movies, but the military that always had to be called out to spave the day against the giant bugs.
	Everybody went to a very trusting, naive place.
	That was all shattered.
	And I think you can lay the blame to that, not so much in the assassination, but the fact that two days later, and I remember as a seven-year-old child, to me it was obvious when Lee Harvey Oswald was shot live on TV that they were silencing him.
	They didn't want him to talk.
	A seven-year-old mind could grasp that.
	And most Americans, from the beginning, Unlike all these other issues that have come to, you know, even though we're not as naive anymore, 9-11 and all that, there have never been polls on any subject other than the JFK assassination show, an overwhelming majority of people doubting the official story from the very beginning.
	And so people were, it was a big cultural sea change with that.
	I think that what came after that We would have had an entirely different country.
	I don't know that you would have had a counterculture.
	We wouldn't have had a Vietnam War because JFK was in the process of withdrawing from Vietnam.
	RFK would have never been assassinated because JFK had to be.
	MLK probably wouldn't have either.
	He might have had an entirely different world.
	History would have definitely been completely different.
	So I think the importance of that event, one man, and the more I study history and the more I look at all these other figures who are supposedly heroic that turn out to be more villainous than heroic when I study them and look at the research, JFK, he holds up well.
	He, to me, he's, I think we need to have some heroes.
	I think JFK is a hero in my eyes.
	Maybe I'm a bit of a Kennedy fanboy, but he holds up really well.
	And you look at that American University speech in June, I think it's the greatest speech by any American president ever.
	And I think that you look at that and nothing before that was ever uttered by an American president, nothing since then.
	Probably signed his death warrant with that.
	But at the time of his death, that's why we say, well, who did it?
	You know, I think Oliver Stone probably Got it right, where I think it was kind of a consortium of forces, you know, the people in the Pentagon wanted him gone, people at the top of the CIA wanted him gone.
	You know, you can even look at the Israel, especially now it's more appropriate what's going on there, because behind the scenes it took us decades to find out that JFK was the last president to stand up to Israel.
	On the scenes he was involved with a really battle with David Ben-Gurion over them developing nuclear weapons.
	Nope, he was the last president to stand up to Israel.
	He was the last president who thought he was really in charge.
	And he was the last president to say no to war.
	He said it over and over again.
	He had the rug pulled out for him at the Bay of Pigs, and he said no to going to war with Cuba.
	He was in the process of withdrawing from Vietnam, nuclear test ban treaty, all that.
	The only peace president we probably had in our history.
	So I think it's important.
	But look at what happened, not only to him, but what happened afterwards.
	What an entirely different world.
	That set the tone.
	You know, you might not have had the riots in the 60s, the anti-war demonstrations and all that.
	Who knows what our history would have been?
	So I think it's important to know, you know, to have people like Noam Chomsky and people like that on the left that don't believe his death was important.
	And it was vitally important because it was because of what he was and what he represented, the threats he represented to people.
	So I don't think we can I don't want to spend too much time talking about it, because it's, this is a very important, for the modern era, for the baby boomer generation, that was 9-11.
	And it really set the tone for everything that followed.
	The term conspiracy theorists pretty much was invented by the CIA in their 1967 memo countering criticism of the Warren Report.
	And now all of us, when we talk about any of these subjects, are barred with basically, conspiracy theorists has come to mean a doubter of authority.
	I'm skeptical of something you told me.
	You're a conspiracy theorist.
	I'm not theorizing anything.
	I'm telling you what you just said is not true, and here's the facts.
	So that's where we are now, and it all came with JFK assassination, because there really weren't... You had some people downing Pearl Harbor back in the day, but nothing like this.
	And with the JFK assassination, a whole industry was born from people like my hero, and mentor Mark Lane and Harold Weisberg, another hero of mine, and Sylvia Marr, all these people.
	And notice there are no professional journalists.
	There was not a single professional journalist with the exception of later Jim Marr and Dorothy Kilgallen who was going to write a book about the exact same.
	She became one of the many, you know, JFK body counts.
	Yes.
	So it's always been left to people like you and me, people who aren't professional journalists.
	And we have to investigate and research these things on our own dime with whatever resources we have.
	And so that's why I, you know, my hat's still off to the original critics, because they're the ones that took the 26 volumes of hearings and exhibits and pay the expense to go through them.
	And go through all the, you know, 90% meaningless morass of trivia and nonsense to find those little nuggets.
	And that's where, you know, Jim Garretson found the testimony of Dean Andrews Jr., which brings to the topic of my new book written with William Law, which is based in large measure on Dean Andrews Jr., and more importantly, his son, Dean Andrews III, who, through my brother, has become a close friend of my family.
	This is wonderful, Don.
	Yeah, wonderful.
	You gotta tell us more.
	Give us your take, for example, on JFK.
	I agree with you.
	That's the most accurate, complete, and comprehensive presentation of what actually happened in Dealey Plaza on 22 November 1963 ever presented to the public through the mass media.
	I take it to be flawed in three respects, and I attribute this largely to Robert Grodin being taken as an advisor.
	Drive out at Groton on multiple counts.
	He did not know that Lee was in the doorway when the motorcade passed by, and therefore not only cannot have been the lone demanded gunman, but cannot have been one of the multiple shooters.
	Number two, he did not know that the Zapruder film had been massively edited.
	Actually, they removed around 100 frames turning from Houston onto Elm because the driver, William Grim, mistook the frontage road for Elm Street.
	Swung out too widely, nearly hit a concrete abutment, had to pause, get back in line.
	That would have shaken the American confidence in the Secret Service, so he took it out.
	And then the limo stopped.
	I initially thought it had lasted only six to eight seconds, but From interviews with the four motorcycle escort officers and their supervisor, Stavis Ellis, Fred Newcomb recorded what Larry Rivera has transcribed, all the events that took place.
	Officer Hargis, who'd been hit so hard with the debris when Jack was shot, he thought he himself had been hit.
	Parked his bike and ran between the two limousines up to the grassy knoll from which he believed shots had been fired.
	Douglas Jackson on the opposite side motored up the grassy knoll until his bike fell over and then proceeded on foot.
	Five agents dismounted, surrounded the presidential limo, one took a chunk of skull, which I believe was the harbor fragment, and threw it into the vehicle before they took off for Parkland.
	I can't see this taking less than 20 seconds, so it's another 400 frames.
	What we have, of course, is 487, but that means the original would have been about 1,000.
	We're missing more frames than we have left together today.
	And then third and finally, he posited three shooters, or three hit teams.
	I've actually been able to identify Eight different shooters in Dealey Plaza, and it may sound like a large number, but I've been able to identify them by name, rank, serial number, the shots they took, the effects they had for seven of the eight cases.
	I initially identified six, only the seventh, and now the eighth is at the South Knoll, where there's a single tree.
	You wouldn't even think there'd be a place for an assassin to hide.
	I've seen two photographs in a possession of two different experts showing him standing with his rifle and he's there for a certainty because each of the sponsors had their own shooter.
	I have isolated him as having been the shooter for the Eastern Establishment, the Fed, but I've yet to identify him.
	Continue.
	Your thoughts.
	Well, I think, you know, everything you're describing is certainly I'm all familiar with, and it's, you know, the speculation has continued because of the very central fact that the crime was never investigated.
	We know that, because the people investigating it were the perpetrators, or some portion of them were.
	So here was the fox guarding the Channels, but a lot of the stuff that was being altered, the fact that we had to rely on home videos, Now, people don't realize, again, and Vince Calamaro has done great work on this in terms of studying previous motorcades and the Bress, and he verified that with me before I wrote my book Hidden History.
	The Bress car was hugely stationed right in front of the President's limousine, so they were hugely photographing him face forward and from a very close angle.
	For whatever reason.
	On this day, they were six, seven cars back in a bus.
	That's why there was no professional footage from the time they left Love Field.
	And you see what I believe is agent Henry Ripka.
	Vince believes it's Don Long.
	I think it was Henry Ripka, who died very young, like a lot of these guys, who was shrugging his shoulders and throwing his hands up in exasperation when Embry-Roberts waved him off.
	He was going to jog alongside the limousine as these people had done at all the motorcades.
	And you can see he's not in on it.
	I mean, it's very telling video.
	And that's the last professional video we get.
	At that point, it cuts off.
	And then we have lots of, you know, video from home.
	Home movies, from people that are in the audience.
	Otherwise, we wouldn't have any evidence that anything even happened to JFK.
	So, people, I think, need to question that.
	And that's why we have questions all the things you're talking about.
	The missing frames in Zapruder, what was Zapruder's background?
	I mean, all these things.
	What happened to the Bochega lady?
	Where is she?
	Why has she never been identified?
	Is it Beverly Oliver?
	What happened to her horrible mixes, missing frames, and so forth?
	We shouldn't have to depend on that.
	They've had professional footage.
	If you look at the rest of JFK's trip, I mean, he visited throughout Texas.
	He visited the Houston Space Center.
	I mean, they videoed everything that he's walking through, and they're pointing out things to him.
	Every part of his trip was documented, except for the final motorcade.
	I don't think that's accidental.
	So, because of that, two things.
	I think that is very telling, and makes it harder, really, to tell exactly what happened.
	And the other thing is the Secret Service.
	In the previous interview I did earlier today, I always concentrate on the Secret Service.
	I think they're the most obvious example of, for whatever reason, they may have been told that it was a drill.
	A lot of people believe that.
	That's why they stood down.
	They were told they were going to teach the FK a lesson or whatever.
	Or the President knows about it.
	Who knows what they were told?
	But for whatever reason, they didn't do their job.
	There's no innocent explanation for none of them reacting at all.
	Six, seven seconds they had.
	Bill Grier, as you noted, stopped the limousine, or almost stopped it.
	You have 59 witnesses testifying to that.
	They didn't all, independently of each other, believe that this happened.
	Obviously something like that happened.
	Pulled the limit to the left or whatever, hit the brakes, and then turns and looks over his head and watches the president get his head blown off.
	Obviously violating all his training.
	You're supposed to accelerate out of there.
	Now he was not the, he probably wouldn't have been the driver that day.
	And I'll talk about in my next book, The American Emerald, but the first JFK body count death happened before the attack.
	That was Thomas Schiff.
	The young agent, who was the driver, left at the time.
	Yeah, and he died of a heart attack at a young age at Camp David.
	Now, you know, at Secret Service age, dying at Camp David is unprecedented.
	Very little media coverage.
	Vince had to do a lot of research to get that, so that's pretty strange.
	And, you know, later, Vince interviewed Greer's son about it, and he just asked him, what did your dad think of JFK?
	And he just told him, he hesitated, and he goes, well, He was a Catholic, we're Protestants.
	What kind of an answer is that?
	I mean, that's kind of an incriminating answer.
	So, I don't know to what extent these agents were told anything, but regardless, they didn't do their job.
	And that includes Clint Hill, who belatedly jumped up in the sound, making a bunch of money with his much younger wife that wrote the books for him.
	And Paul Landis, who just, you know, earlier this year, inexplicably talked about finding a bulwark.
	magic bullet on top of the backseat of the limo, how it could have gotten there, I don't know.
	But again, he's being accepted unquestioned.
	Like nobody says, you know how bad that makes you look, man?
	You took a bullet and you didn't mark it with your initials and start the chain of possession.
	You stuck it in your pocket and then you went and planted it on JFK's stretcher?
	So it wasn't Jack Rubin, it was you?
	I mean, so what is the, I don't know what that says, but these are the questions and it's all because, Jim, the crime was never investigated.
	You mentioned the secret service.
	We have photos of the, we know what happened.
	The crime scene was compromised in the very beginning.
	They watched it out, you can see the bucket of water next to the limo.
	They didn't, nothing should have been passed.
	The limo was sent back to Washington.
	The windshield, which, as you alluded to, had a bullet hole in it.
	Several witnesses said, replaced, so we could never determine.
	So this is the problem.
	The evidence was destroyed.
	The seven three-way sign, you know, we learned later, was replaced immediately.
	Probably had a bullet hole in it, almost certainly.
	And nobody, again, nobody investigated.
	So I look at it like all the other stuff.
	I think it's rather the central point is that the crime of the century was never investigated properly.
	But even the cover-up, the phony investigation of the Warren Report and the FBI and the Dallas police, they inadvertently proved one thing.
	And that's that whoever killed Kennedy, it wasn't Lee Harvey Oswald.
	So the inadvertently exonerated Lee Harvey Oswald.
	Now, you can argue about who did it, who the actual gunmen were, who, but I mean, it's pretty obvious.
	I think when we're still talking about it 60 years later in Time Magazine, all these, they're still running lies about it.
	They're still covering up.
	That tells me that it's not the mafia, a rogue element of the CIA that are certainly not Lee Harvey Oswald.
	Why would they be covering it itself?
	Why would there be anything withheld, still classified?
	It's pretty obvious that there were very powerful forces involved.
	I don't think that, you know, they're never going to admit who did it, but I think you and I, you know, just by investigating this long can, you know, pretty much guess who they were and who they represented.
	Well, of course, I agree with all of that.
	When Nigel Turner did his Men Who Killed Kennedy, the Sabbath episode, he interviewed David Mandig and me and others in the group that I'd put together.
	In the episode known as the Smoking Guns.
	Yes.
	And he had me enumerate 15 indications I discovered a Secret Service complicity in setting him up for the hit and then covering it up, which included leaving the two Secret Service agents who would have ridden behind or walked beside the limousine behind at Love Hill, Henry Brimcoe among one of the two.
	The fact that the manhole covers weren't welded shut, windows were left open, that the crowd was allowed to spill into the street, the 110th Military Intelligence Unit was ordered to stand down when they would have provided crowd security.
	I even have a photograph of a bus on the route where people are coming out like 15 deep or an assassin with a handgun could have taken Jack out.
	They of course changed the motorcade route four days in advance.
	Connolly had to do with that.
	It was originally going to go straight up Main Street to get to the trademark, which would have been just fine, but instead they had to turn from Main onto Houston in order to bring it in front of the Book Depository into Dealey Plaza in a manner that facilitated fire by multiple assassins.
	There's more, including, of course, what you talk about is taking a bucket of spun and washing the brain and bloods out of a limousine at Parkland, and then having it sent back to Ford to be stripped down to bare metal and rebuilt, including removing the windshield, which, as you correctly observe, had it through and through a bullet hole.
	In fact, at Parkland, an officer actually stuck a pencil through it, and that's when they moved the limousine.
	But you may not know this, I reported it over a year and a half, maybe two years ago, but Sam Kinney, who was a driver of the Secret Service Cadillac, confided in a friend that he had found that whole bullet and left it on a stretcher, but he asked his friend not to reveal it until after his death.
	So what's going on with Paul Landis is very unclear to me, because I believe Sam Kinney is the one who actually found it.
	It appears to have been, of course, the shot to the back that was shallow that worked its way out, but also the Secret Service collected the autopsy photographs and x-rays, and the next time we see them, they've been altered or faked.
	I mean, it's stunning, the role of the Secret Service, but they were not acting on their own.
	And it's very clear to me, and it may be to you and William Law as well, LBJ was a principle behind the assassination.
	This wasn't the case all the way with LBJ, where the plot originated in Los Angeles when Jack beat him out for the Democrat nomination.
	Yeah, I think certainly LBJ.
	I don't think these politicians... I mean, JFK found that out.
	He didn't have the power.
	I don't think LBJ could have made something like that happen if great powers behind him didn't want it to happen.
	So he certainly, he wanted it.
	I mean, this guy was, you know, he may have ordered a hit on his own sister, Josefa, you know.
	That's the rumor.
	Yeah, so he's certainly not going to hesitate to kill somebody.
	And this guy goes back, I talk about it, he was a sycophant to, frankly, Roosevelt.
	He used to go and eat breakfast with him in bed in the White House and kiss his butt.
	He was a brown noser from the way back.
	He was groomed to be what he became.
	I think he obviously was part of the conspiracy and knew about it in advance and his behavior that day.
	That's really when the RFK and LBJ feud took off, was because of his behavior.
	And that is what initially got me interested in the JFK assassination as a teenager.
	I was reading the book Johnny, We Hardly Knew You.
	It's a great memoir.
	I've been a very Kennedy fanboy, but I'm a Kennedy fanboy.
	So it appealed to me by Kenneth O'Connell and David Powers.
	And the way he behaved that day, his behavior was just beyond uncouth.
	And then, you know, Eldon Lincoln, who I really would have loved to have known too, which is by far the most talkative and important associate of Kennedy's, his private secretary.
	You know, she put out, you know, a list of the people she thought were the conspirators, which included LBJ early on.
	But she told Penn Jones way back in the day that LBJ's entourage It's really whooping it up, celebrating, on Air Force One on the way back to Dallas.
	And we know now, through William Law, he talked to the Air Force One steward, who validated that.
	They said, yeah, OBJ, he consumed almost a whole bottle of Cutty Sark, and it was such a drunken celebration that he had to go watch and make sure Mrs. Kennedy's room was completely closed, because he didn't want her to be offended by it.
	"I don't know what that means." And then later we found out when OBJ went in the hospital for a gallbladder removed, that we have information that his entourage acted like rock stars and tore up the room and so forth.
	I don't know what that means, but apparently he had a lot of people around and weren't very professional, but the idea that you couldn't, and you could see that in Lady Bird's smile, especially the wink to Albert Thomas, you know, the wink that was caught, Albert Thomas wicking at OBJ on the plane.
	I mean, Lady Bird Johnson has such an inappropriate smile on her face.
	I mean, they should have all looked passionate and forlorn.
	And LBJ kind of did here and there, but he can't help himself.
	And the people, Lady Bird just looks goofy.
	Yeah, we're just about to hit a break.
	So I'm really very, very pleased with this all.
	she just slapped that smile off her face.
	That was so inappropriate and so impolite.
	But so that's what got me started on that.
	Go ahead.
	Yeah, we're just about to hit a break.
	So I'm really very, very pleased with this all.
	Yeah.
	In fact, you can go ahead and keep it until the music drives us out and Maybe because we're having trouble with the connection, it won't even happen.
	Continue.
	Again, so before I even read the first conspiracy book on it, I was predisposed.
	I mean, I never believed Oswald did it, but Lyndon Johnson was my first suspect, and that's because as a child, I heard my very Catholic family, my dad and all the other relatives, none of them believed Oswald did it.
	So I heard that as a little kid.
	And most of the talk, most of them suspected Johnson because most of them hated Johnson.
	And, you know, for whatever reason, he was a crude southerner.
	He was easy to hate, I guess.
	So I was, you know, I was ready to go there.
	Anyhow, so I think, again, that needs to be looked at.
	And you mentioned the Guilty Man episode of Nigel Turner's great series, which used to be shown all the time on the History Channel.
	It certainly would have been shown today.
	But after that episode, Jack Mulaney was still alive.
	Lady McNaughton was still alive.
	They got it yanked because they talked about the hit on his sister and all the others, the ugly stuff, Henry Wallace and all these things.
	And it hasn't been seen since.
	None of the series.
	That's power there.
	And that series was important because it was the only pro-conspiracy type of documentary that was ever aired on Network Television that I know of.
	Here we go, Don, to the break, and we'll be right back with Donald Jeffries.
	Listen to Revolution Radio at freedomslips.com.
	We'll be right back.
	Thank you. - Management would like
	to take a moment to thank the listeners and hosts for all their support that has made Revolution Radio one of the biggest platforms for free speech in an ever-growing dark world of censorship.
	Unfortunately, this platform for free speech has never been free.
	We need the support of the people.
	It is the people like you, yes, you, that keeps the station in the front lines of the battle against tyranny and oppression.
	Please help support Revolution Radio so free speech will not be silenced in a world that seems to be going deaf to the real truth.
	With your support, we will be able to become an even bigger pillar of light in a dark world.
	RevolutionRadio.com, the number one listener support radio station on the planet.
	revolution yes and she's uh I mean, like, that's what she wants.
	I don't know what she wants to do.
	What's going on?
	He's coming down to look at David.
	He's coming down to look at David.
	he's coming down he's coming down revolution radio at wednesday 8 p.m
	eastern time on studio b for momentary zen with host zen garcia at freedom six dot com the people station even the government admits that 9-11 was a conspiracy But did you know that it was an inside job?
	That Osama had nothing to do with it?
	That the Twin Towers were blown apart by a sophisticated arrangement of mini or micro nukes?
	That Building 7 collapsed seven hours later because of explosives planted in the building?
	Barry Jennings was there.
	He heard them go off and felt himself stepping over dead people.
	The U.S.
	Geological Survey conducted studies of dust gathered from 35 locations in Lower Manhattan and found elements that would not have been there had this not been a nuclear event.
	Ironically, that means the government's own evidence contradicts the government's official position.
	9-11 was brought to us compliments of the CIA, the neocons in the Department of Defense, and the Mossad.
	Don't let yourself be played.
	Read American Newt on 9-11.
	Available at moonrockbooks.com.
	That's moonrockbooks.com.
	The opinions expressed on this radio station, its programs, and its website by the hosts, guests, and call-in listeners, or chatters, are solely the opinions of the original source who expressed them.
	They do not necessarily represent the opinions of Revolution Radio and freedomslips.com.
	It's for Philips.
	You're listening to Revolution Radio, freedomflips.com, 100% listener, supporter radio.
	And now we return you to your host.
	Well, I'm sorry to say because of technical issues, we don't appear to be able to take calls.
	I'm going to double check with Mitchell as we proceed.
	Yeah, his internet is dropping off and on so he can't handle it.
	I find the most useful way to approach the assassination doll is by drawing a distinction between the sponsors, the facilitators, and the mechanics, who of course were the shooters on the ground, their supervisors, who included George H.W.
	Bush.
	He was actually in the Dow tax.
	Supervised in an anti-Castro cube when I was using a man-licker Carcano, the only unsilenced weapon, to fire three shots.
	A great acoustical impression of only three shots having been fired.
	He was actually arrested coming out of the Daltex.
	And Edward Lansdale, who of course was responsible for assassination around the world, and who appears to have positioned the shooters and determined the sequence of shots.
	Among the sponsors, I have the CIA, the Joint Chiefs, the Mafia, the anti-Castro Cubans, the Texas Soilmen, the Eastern establishment surrounding the Fed, and Israel, as well as LBJ himself.
	With it, he and Edgar were the facilitators, JFK, of the assassination, roughly by Getting the whole thing working from a global scale.
	But mind you, since he was going to become president, he could guarantee that no one would ever be punished, even if it came down to having to exercise his powers of pardon.
	And by creating the Warren Commission, he preempted about a half dozen inquiries, some of which were actually making progress right off the bat, even in Texas.
	And then Edgar would give him information that he used to, you know, defeat Symington as Jack's VP and make himself the preferred choice, lest he sabotage Jack on the campaign trail and tie up any proposals that would come down from the White House, which would be DOA in his position as a powerful majority leader of the Senate.
	That we had the whole thing evolve from there.
	I just welcome your further thoughts.
	Edgar would actually, when they transferred the evidence from Dallas to Washington, make substitutions like the Mandlick or Carcano found in the book depository for the one that was actually used and which had fired the bullet that was actually implanted on Jack's back by the
	There's more and more and more, but I'm just wondering how you feel about approaching the assassination by drawing that threefold distinction.
	Sponsors, facilitators, and mechanics.
	Well, you know, I usually don't go into details like that because I don't know for sure.
	You know, I mean, I do know, obviously, that they lied to us.
	Very powerful forces involved.
	I believe, like Jim Garrison did, that Lee Harvey Oswald was some kind of an agent, FBI and CIA, probably both.
	And one of those agencies, maybe both, was assigned him at the time of the assassination to infiltrate a plot to kill the president.
	That's what he was told, I believe, personally, after writing the book.
	Like the Memo in Red, which has just been released, that talks about the ground-level plot.
	There are layers to this, and the people in New Orleans, I think, except for Clay Shaw, I think Clay Shaw was a conduit between those players, the anti-Castro Cubans, David Ferry, Oswald, Ruby, they were all being manipulated themselves.
	Most of them were government assets, too.
	Jack Rubin's an FBI informant, Ferry had CIA-Mafia connections, Jack Martin, all these people So, I think they could have all been told the same thing as Oswald.
	I go beyond Garrison.
	Maybe they all were told to infiltrate a plot and they were used against each other, although I think they always intended to.
	Oswald to be the Patsy, but in our book we found so many incredible connections to Clay Shaw going back to World War II.
	Herman Dex and all that stuff.
	He really had lots of intriguing connections.
	He had a strong connection to Alvin Ochsner at the Ochsner Clinic in New Orleans, where Lee Harvey Oswald's best friend in high school, Ed Vogel, He was murdered, almost certainly, and I was the first one to talk to his family.
	His sisters had some very interesting things to say that you'll see in the book.
	And, you know, so these are the connections.
	They were in New Orleans.
	But again, I think that so many researchers get distracted, especially by the Cubans.
	I've always said Cuba was a smokescreen.
	Because, let's face it, if JFK was killed because he wanted to have a rapprochement with Castro and wouldn't have another Bay of Pigs, He failed miserably because after the assassination, Cuba died as a political issue in America.
	It was never mentioned again.
	OBJ didn't try any second bad pigs.
	Nixon never did.
	The CIA stopped trying to assassinate Castro and he lived on, outlived them all.
	So I think that's a smokescreen, much as the mafia is.
	And I think if you look at The logistics of it.
	I don't know, people tell me, when people want, I'm only willing to say that I believe that the Secret Service was complicit in whatever way.
	I think you can look at Emery Roberts.
	Emery Roberts waved Henry Ripke off, and Emery Roberts also stopped John Rennie from jumping.
	He was the only one on the depot that tried to jump down and do his job.
	He stopped him.
	So, to me, that indicates some kind of foreknowledge.
	I think you would look at the, and if a real investigation had occurred, you would question him.
	I would look at, you want an insider up top?
	I think you look at somebody like McGeorge Bundy.
	McGeorge Bundy was a National Security Advisor.
	He wrote National Security Action Memorandum 273.
	The day before the assassination, and it completely turned the new policy around that was a delineated NSAM 263, where JFK delineated he wanted all troops out by 1965.
	So, he had to have known JFK would never have signed it and would probably have fired him on the spot.
	And so, to me, that implicates him and further implicates him because he was in the White House situation on the day of the assassination, and he told the President, And all of them in the air, going to Hawaii, very conveniently all, you know, in the air at the same time.
	He assured them in the afternoon before anything was known about Lee Harvey Oswald, that there was no conspiracy and they had the right suspect.
	So to me, those two things implicate him.
	I think, yeah, I'm going to say it for who, interestingly enough, my friend, John Barber, I don't know if you know John Barber or not, one of my most cherished friends, just turned 90, former host of Real People, the only man that Jim Garrison gave an interview to.
	In the years after the Clay Shock trial, and it's produced wonderful documentaries on the JFK assassination, the American media, and the second assassination of JFK.
	He's completely under-recognized by the horrible research community, which has become a neocon influence to me.
	This guy should be the dean of the research community.
	But he told me that Jim Garrison told him in private that the trigger man, the one individual who signed off on the assassination and said it's a go,
	W. Averill Harriman, which is kind of surprising, but if you look at his history, he had a really strong background with, I don't know, Garrison, that's what Garrison said, whether he knew that for sure, whether there was one person, I don't know, but I think that it's pretty obvious that a consortium of forces wanted him dead, and you've mentioned a lot of people, so if
	Again, a lot of people believe there's an Illuminati type of something above it all.
	There's some kind of group that's so secret, we really don't know much about it.
	If that's the case, then they use Curtis LeMay and the people of the Pentagon that wanted him killed.
	They use Alan Dulles and people associated with the CIA that wanted him killed.
	They use J. Edgar Hoover and the FBI who aided him.
	They use David Ben-Gurion in Israel.
	You know, they would use mafia deans, LBJ himself.
	All of those people had reasons.
	H.L.
	Hunt, the oil guy, they hated him over the oil depletion allowance.
	All these people had reasons to despise JFK and want him dead.
	So they could have all been used and put together.
	And then I think what happened is you had the deep dipping of Oswald and you had all these people at the ground level.
	Who were manipulated into, I don't know what they had on Ruby, if he was a Manchurian candidate or what, I don't know how they talked him into shooting Oswald and then he was going to be able to get off or something, but I think that's a case maybe of a Manchurian candidate.
	You had the, you know, we know he was visited by Dalian West.
	who, you know, the main programmers, mind control guys in the CIA.
	And we know that if you watch the murder of Oswald by Ruby, you hear that little tit-tat of the horn, of the car horn, which strangely happens right as Ruby suddenly emerges out of the crowd.
	So was that, you know, we've seen the movie The Man-Trained Candidate.
	Was that the triggering signal?
	I don't know.
	It's very, very strange, though.
	You might find some recent research by Ralph Sincay on the shooting in the basement where he has, to my satisfaction, action provide convincing evidence that they subbed in an FBI agent by the name of James Bookout wearing Ruby's clothing while Ruby was upstairs in his underwear.
	They couldn't count on Jack to shoot loose.
	So they subbed in Bookout.
	It's fascinating stuff.
	I've heard.
	Yeah, it's stunning and surprising because we all saw it on live on television, but the haircut and various other factors.
	I think he nails it, but it's surprising in the extreme.
	I mean, we all thought we saw.
	Sure.
	Ruby should leave right on television!
	And then they all grab him, the one who's supposed to be Ruby, and they cover him up, they put a sack over his head so no one can get a clear view, but that's obfuscate his identity.
	I mean, I just suggest, Donald, you might find this a surprising aspect.
	Well, I have to.
	I mean, I'm aware of it, Jim.
	I'll have to look.
	I know about Ralph, and I admire the fact that he is, because again, one of the Worst aspects of the neocon community is how they continue to debunk, or they say they debunk, they're not debunking it, but they claim, like the establishment, that they're debunking conspiracy evidence.
	And one of those, as you mentioned, is Oswald in the doorway of the Alkins photograph, which is mother Marguerite Oswald.
	By the way, in the American Memory Hall coming up, I will have a lot on Marguerite Oswald.
	And she has been horribly treated by history.
	She was the first person to look into this, the first person By the way, Ralph, I've done a huge amount on Oswald in the doorway.
	Ralph was key because he's a chiropractor.
	He's used to dealing with people who want their clothes to fit better.
	And he pointed out that we can tell it was Lee from the height, the weight, the build, the shirt, and the t-shirt.
	Which are the same as the way to build a shirt and the t-shirt when he was arrested.
	And the Dallas Cop was so self-conscious they had to take out his over shirt to just be mug shot in his t-shirt.
	Where Larry Rivera has been able to do facial superpositions and confirm Oswald's facial features too.
	Which I've explained in any number of my presentations, but where Larry did this brilliant work.
	You might love his book, the JFK Horseman at Moonrock Books, Doug, because he transcribed the interviews Fred Newcomb had done with a four Uh, motorcycle escort officers and their supervisor.
	And there's there's no question whatsoever about the limo stop.
	In fact, I know.
	A half a dozen who have seen what they call the other film.
	Which they all confirm the limo stop everyone being thrown forward in advance that I've been describing, you know, as to what happened there.
	Well, there's so much here, and I certainly think that, unfortunately, what happens is that, to the evidence, Jim Marsh said that, you know, Marguerite Oswald would bring that up to him every time he met her.
	Said, that's my son in the doorway.
	And there's no, I mean, I can't say for sure that was him, but Harold Bysberg made a convincing case in White Watch 2, I think, that it was, that it was Oswald, but the critical community just says it's a love lady now.
	They just say, and it's ridiculous.
	I argue just like I got arguments with Tink Thompson, you know, I feel stupid calling somebody Tink, apparently that's what Josiah Thompson's calling him.
	I know, but he lied.
	Yeah, yeah, and he, you know, over things like the Umbrella Man and the bullet hole in the windshield I mean, these guys are, and he's a perfect example of the neocon.
	He wrote Six Seconds of Dalmatia, one of the lesser early books, but it had a lot of good photographic evidence and good statements.
	It was valuable, but he's, you know, he's a neocon supreme.
	I asked him, what do you think is the evidence for conspiracy?
	And I asked all these people, okay, so what do you, if you think the autopsy photos and X-rays are genuine?
	If you think the umbrella man wasn't a signal man, I don't know who you think he was.
	He was pumping his umbrella because he was protesting for Kenny Seniors.
	As long as he's pumping that signal to all the shooters, he's still alive.
	Keep shooting.
	Of course, of course.
	That's the obvious thing.
	Gary Mack, before he died, and he died before his time.
	Nice guy, but you know, he sold out.
	And he used to email me every time I posted on the forum and try to correct me.
	And he was trying to tell me, oh, the babushka lady wasn't really filming, it was a camera.
	I know, Beverly, we've talked about this.
	She's as sincere and genuine as the day is long.
	Gary Mack, alas, is not.
	He did early work with Jack White.
	That was pretty good.
	But when he went to the CM, he sold out completely.
	Robert Grodin and Josiah Thompson and Gary Mack as a big three of limited hangout, you know.
	And that's what it is.
	I mean, and what I do is I always said, look, you know, I come at like, I'm not in it.
	You know, but I know as much about this case as anyone just having studied it, but there are still so many inconsistencies.
	So, like, right now you have a lot of the critical community, while they diminish the case for, they dismiss the figure in the doorway.
	Oh, that's lovely.
	It's been proven.
	And I don't even argue with it that much.
	It has been proven.
	But there's another figure.
	He was in the doorway.
	Billy was there.
	He had his hands up.
	Billy Lovely was a black home man.
	He had his hands up there.
	He was interviewed by the FBI on the 29th of February, 1964, wearing the clothing he wore at the time, which was a blue, dark-sleeved, red and white, vertically-striped shirt.
	He was there, but he was not the Lee Oswald figure.
	I mean, they were both there.
	And people, again, when you go down the rabbit hole, is it a riddle wrapped up in a mystery or whatever, but you go down the rabbit hole because, Billy, I don't know about you, but I've never worked at a place where somebody looked enough like me that they fooled my family.
	Supposedly, Love Lady fooled Oswald's family.
	He looked like that.
	That's very strange.
	And then you throw in Michael Payne.
	Michael Payne looks very much like Oswald.
	He himself, Billy Lovelady himself thought it was odd because he was two or three inches shorter and 15 to 20 pounds, 30 pounds heavier.
	Yeah, you would think.
	Yeah, I don't think it's that much like him.
	There's no way.
	There's no way.
	But you have the critical community, the so-called critical community, the ones that don't invite people like you and me to conferences.
	I don't know what they're talking about, but they're debating how many angels can dance on the head of a pin or something.
	There's an indistinct figure in the background of the doorway, which is interesting, but you can't tell what it is, the prayer man thing.
	I'm sure you've heard of that.
	And you have a whole bunch of people that, oh, it is Oswald, and Bart Kemp just wrote a book about it.
	It's interesting, and certainly, if you can't tell if it's a male or woman, it's not distinct enough, but those same people will go crazy.
	Oh, that's Lovelady.
	That's not Oswald.
	So that's the problem.
	As you run into these people, they're so enamored of... I don't claim to be certain about anything other than the fact that I know 100% certainty that Lee Harvey Oswald didn't shoot anybody that day, as he said, and that there was a huge conspiracy.
	Well, it's not a benign cover-up.
	This involved very nefarious forces, and the anti-Castro Cubans were behind the Mafia.
	The Mafia is pretty much dead as an institution, and the anti-Castro Cubans, obviously.
	Castro's not around, so they're irrelevant.
	So why would we be covering up for them at this point?
	The CIA is still around.
	The Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Pentagon's still around, the Mossad's still around, all those very powerful forces, the deep state, if you will.
	So for lack of a better term, I think that, you know, I think deep state is a pretty interesting term.
	I pretty much say that JFK was one of the first and most notable visible victims of the deep state.
	Have you had any encounters with James Files?
	Have you assessed his story of being the second shooter?
	No, I don't know that.
	I'm more interested in Roscoe White.
	Oh, Roscoe was most certainly.
	Yeah, because all the people just died around him.
	Jack White talked about the Kurtz.
	Ricky White's still around.
	Yeah.
	Ricky just gave a presentation.
	In fact, tonight, Donald, Larry Rivera and I and Gary King are doing a show about the Ricky White presentation, which was really stunning.
	Yeah.
	You know, he found his dad's diary, which CIA agents are required to keep so that if they have to make up a fake alibi to get him out of a fix, they can do it by knowing where he actually was, which he mistakenly gave to the FBI and then disappeared.
	But he has a huge amount to say.
	I believe Roscoe killed as many as 50 witnesses.
	He was a body stand-in for the Backyard Photographs.
	We've been able to prove that.
	Much more robust in build than Lee, who was diminutive by comparison.
	So when Lee told Prince that was his face based on someone else's body, and he knew something about photography, eventually he'd be able to prove it.
	We have proven, Lee of course, Didn't have the chance.
	But it's just one of the multiple ways in which they fake this whole case against an innocent man.
	Oh, absolutely.
	We need to look at the institutions involved.
	That's why you can see the CIA.
	Trump said he was going to release the CIA document.
	Somehow he didn't.
	I mean, I don't think there's anything there, but the fact that they're still withholding anything, and who's withholding?
	The Secret Service destroyed documents during the 90s when the ARB wanted them.
	They were still destroying evidence then, and nobody said anything.
	Well, actually, Donald, the more recent releases have been rewarding.
	While they didn't give them in a digital form so they could be searched, Larry Rivera went through the documents about Mexico City and was able to establish it was a complete fabrication, and that among the CIA assets in Mexico were three presidents of Mexico.
	And now, finally, they belatedly released Lee's passport, Just to demonstrate the absurdity, it says not valid for travel to Cuba.
	Yeah, well, I think these document releases are important to people like us.
	No, but I think for the general public, the general public is thinking of, they're going to have some memo that delineates, this is how we're going to assassinate President Kennedy.
	And you know, that's something that they can, and so they're, Mexico City, that was, we already knew, suspect those things, when a couple of years ago, it's an interesting relief, what we already suspected, where the mayor of Dallas, Cabell, the brother of General Charles Cabell, was a CIA asset.
	And so, I mean, we could have predicted that.
	Earl joined the CIA in 1956.
	Yeah.
	So he just happened to be the mayor in Dallas at that time.
	I think somebody said it back, I think the Russians or something said that if you, you know, if you, if it was any other area of the world and the guys, you know, the, the, the president was, was assassinated in the home city of his, of his next in command.
	So, yeah, I mean, so it's pretty, so I think sometimes it's his, It gets as simple as that.
	But we know that there's not going to be, other than platforms like this, podcasts like this, as long as they allow them to exist.
	And we know they're trying to get rid of us.
	We know they're doing everything they can to shut things down.
	Ever since the internet was born, they've been chomping at the bit to get an FCC type of thing in here to control the internet.
	And you see it with nutsy Nikki Haley recently saying, you know, everybody ought to verify they're on the internet.
	They want that.
	They can't stand the fact that people like you and me, and especially Substack.
	Substack is the only place where I'm not shadowbanned.
	The only place my presence is growing.
	And they can't stand the fact that a community college dropped out like me.
	And a former blue collar worker at one time, unwashed masses, common riffraff, that I can get on there.
	And just with my common sense and intellect, I can give people a different view on things that thousands of people can relate to.
	They hate that because there's no filter There's nobody talking to my head.
	There's no talking, well, he really meant this.
	And there's so many of us out there like that.
	So Substack is the last big platform that allows free speech.
	They don't tell me I can write about anything there.
	They haven't stopped me yet.
	But everywhere else, they are stopping it.
	And it's a shame because we didn't, you know, when Alex Jones was the first one, There was the platform.
	So many people hated Alex Jones, including in our world.
	And I said at the time, look, I don't care what you think about him.
	It's irrelevant.
	They're going to use it just like, I don't care what you think about Trump.
	Trump being prosecuted for, you know.
	We're complaining about an election.
	That's a crime.
	Or even more as a real estate agent, he's being prosecuted for exaggerating the value of his property.
	Every homeowner I've ever met exaggerated the value of his property.
	How absurd can you get?
	But that's so that's the symbol.
	He's a symbol and it's being used against us.
	And so we all recognize that it doesn't matter what we think of these individuals, or what their, you know, their limited hangouts or their assets themselves doesn't matter.
	It matters to us because they're going to use that against us.
	So maybe you or I, somebody complains about the next election and points out, oh, you know, we're using this president, you know, we prosecuted the former president of the United States for that.
	You can't do that anymore.
	That threatens democracy to complain about the validity of elections.
	So we're, we're in a very dark time.
	The JFK assassination is only part of it, but we're, we're, I'm as black-tailed as they get.
	I wish I wasn't, but I just don't see any, any, any silver lining out there.
	Donald Jeffries, where can people go to get your books?
	Are they available on Amazon?
	Yes, they're available everywhere.
	And my Substack is Donald Jeffries at Substack.com.
	It's called I Protest, like my weekly live streaming show.
	You can find me on Amazon and elsewhere.
	My books, it's my ninth book, Tempt the Bimbo in Red, Dean Andrews, Jim Garrison, and the Conspiracy to Kill JFK.
	It's just that it has an interesting, you know, personal story as well, my connection with Andrews.
	And lots of new information on the New Orleans player, Clay Sean, everything.
	Perfect for the 60th anniversary.
	Well, I'm just thrilled to have you here, Donald, and I'm so glad you're going to be speaking at my fourth annual Volkswagen Conspiracies Conference on the 16th and the 17th of December, which is going to be free and available to the public.
	I'm going to have 20 or more speakers, including this wonderful guy.
	Donald, I can't thank you enough for joining me today.
	Excellent.
	Well, thanks for having me, Jim.
	I appreciate it.

▲