Their "evidence" is that Michael Paine's mother knew Mary Bancroft who was a mistress of Dulles. But the actual evidence that Ruth or Michael knew Dulles is zero. White mice? I don't know-maybe Talbot thinks they were experiments that Dulles was running? Again-no evidence.
Thanks. Garrison's "propinquity" without any connection or proximity between/among the individuals. In other words, nothing.
Didn't Paine's mother know Bancroft in college
before she (Bancroft) became Dulles's mistress? Did she know Bancroft at the time of this affair? As if that matters. And how the heck would Michael Paine know that a friend of his mother's knew Dulles? Again, as if that matters. In any case, as you point out, there's no evidence that Dulles knew Michael or Ruth Paine much less they were "well-known" to him.
This is a classic example of how some (too many noted ones) conspiracists need to expand their conspiracy when new evidence is found. Does it fit? It doesn't matter, it's just more kindling for the conspiracy bonfire, a fire they just need to keep burning decade after decade. It's not about resolving what happened (although they think they have); it's now a game to keep things going. On and on....
Just to add: Talbot also says RFK was murdered by the assassins of JFK to prevent him from revealing the conspiracy. But of course.