A hole in Bledsoe's story?

[Martin Weidmann]

You left out: “conduct its own investigation, and take the testimony of witnesses in Washington.”

Regarding the witnesses already questioned, there are some important distinctions that I think a lot of people are fully aware of.

From “History Will Prove Us Right” by Howard Willens, Page 70:

The process of taking testimony under oath necessarily meant that we went back over ground that had been covered through interviews by the FBI or another federal agency. But these [FBI] agents were not authorized to take testimony under oath recorded by an independent court reporter. The important difference is that only sworn testimony is subject to a perjury charge if the witness lied. We planned to take sworn testimony in two ways: at hearings attended by the members and governed by its procedures and the powers granted by Congress; and in depositions by our lawyers under generally applicable court rules. In both instances, the testimony would be recorded verbatim by an authorized court reporter.


Plus the Warren Commission’s independent investigation provided additional clarifications from the witnesses due to the additional questions asked by the WC. All of this is more evidence that the Warren Commission did not rubber stamp the FBI’s reports but conducted its own investigation.

From “History Will Prove Us Right” by Howard Willens, Page 70:

The process of taking testimony under oath necessarily meant that we went back over ground that had been covered through interviews by the FBI or another federal agency. But these [FBI] agents were not authorized to take testimony under oath recorded by an independent court reporter. The important difference is that only sworn testimony is subject to a perjury charge if the witness lied. We planned to take sworn testimony in two ways: at hearings attended by the members and governed by its procedures and the powers granted by Congress; and in depositions by our lawyers under generally applicable court rules. In both instances, the testimony would be recorded verbatim by an authorized court reporter.



And there go all the FBI's FD 302's... 

[John Mytton]

I always love a list that goes to 17.  It's laughable that CTers believe all this was faked for such a limited purpose.  It's even internally inconsistent if the CTers believe the conspirators had the willingness and ability to manipulate the evidence to their desired purpose.  But logic is wasted on the contrarian/CTer "mind."  They would not be CTers to begin with if they understood and could apply logic to this case.

Yeah, right!

I see Martin brought up the rifle, which requires probably even more steps, here's a quick summary;

1) Like forging the mail order.
2) Forging the envelope
3) Forging the Money order.
4) Getting the mail order onto Kleins microfilm
5) Getting the money order into the Federal reserve.
6) Forging internal Kleins paperwork.
7) Forging the backyard photos or at least have Oswald pose with an identical rifle with a unique identical mark on the forestock.
8] Have Marina lie about the rifle at Neely street
9) Have De Mohrenschildt lie about seeing the rifle at Neely street.
10) Have Marina lie about the rifle in the blanket and fake looking pale when the rifle wasn't there.
11) Plant the rifle in the Depository.
12) Have Wesley lie about where in his car he saw the long package.
13) Have Fritz lie when he says Oswald told him he he only had his lunch.
14) Plant the fibers on the rifle
15) Plant the prints on the rifle.
16) Have Day lie about recovering a palm print.
17) Plant Carcano bullet fragments in Kennedy's Limo.
18) Plant Carcano shells in the sniper's nest.
19) Have multiple Police Officers lie about the brown sack in the Sniper's nest
20) Manufacture the appropriate sized Rifle paper bag.
21) Plant Oswald's prints on the bag
I could go on but why bother?

Every aspect of this case which involves conspiracy, of which there are apparently many, requires lies, forgery, planting evidence and ETC but also requires pliable unrelated witnesses at every stage and for each of these witnesses to recall with deceptive pinpoint accuracy their exact role in the entire scheme.

Like I said, in the Real World the one that the CT's don't concern themselves with, for their JFKA conspiracy narrative to work requires a gargantuan conspiratorial effort at every corner and when you add them ALL together the difficulty expands exponentially, which frankly isn't only impossible but complete nonsense!

JohnM

[Martin Weidmann]

Yeah, right!

I see Martin brought up the rifle, which requires probably even more steps, here's a quick summary;

1) Like forging the mail order.
2) Forging the envelope
3) Forging the Money order.
4) Getting the mail order onto Kleins microfilm
5) Getting the money order into the Federal reserve.
6) Forging internal Kleins paperwork.
7) Forging the backyard photos or at least have Oswald pose with an identical rifle with a unique identical mark on the forestock.
8] Have Marina lie about the rifle at Neely street
9) Have De Mohrenschildt lie about seeing the rifle at Neely street.
10) Have Marina lie about the rifle in the blanket and fake looking pale when the rifle wasn't there.
11) Plant the rifle in the Depository.
12) Have Wesley lie about where in his car he saw the long package.
13) Have Fritz lie when he says Oswald told him he he only had his lunch.
14) Plant the fibers on the rifle
15) Plant the prints on the rifle.
16) Have Day lie about recovering a palm print.
17) Plant Carcano bullet fragments in Kennedy's Limo.
18) Plant Carcano shells in the sniper's nest.
19) Have multiple Police Officers lie about the brown sack in the Sniper's nest
20) Manufacture the appropriate sized Rifle paper bag.
21) Plant Oswald's prints on the bag
I could go on but why bother?

Every aspect of this case which involves conspiracy, of which there are apparently many, requires lies, forgery, planting evidence and ETC but also requires pliable unrelated witnesses at every stage and for each of these witnesses to recall with deceptive pinpoint accuracy their exact role in the entire scheme.

Like I said, in the Real World the one that the CT's don't concern themselves with, for their JFKA conspiracy narrative to work requires a gargantuan conspiratorial effort at every corner and when you add them ALL together the difficulty expands exponentially, which frankly isn't only impossible but complete nonsense!

JohnM

I could go on but why bother?

Indeed. It's all strawman nonsense anyway.

There was a time that some of your posts actually made sense, but not anymore. You're slipping! What happened?

[Michael Capasse]

You left out: “conduct its own investigation, and take the testimony of witnesses in Washington.”

Regarding the witnesses already questioned, there are some important distinctions that I think a lot of people are fully aware of.

From “History Will Prove Us Right” by Howard Willens, Page 70:

The process of taking testimony under oath necessarily meant that we went back over ground that had been covered through interviews by the FBI or another federal agency. But these [FBI] agents were not authorized to take testimony under oath recorded by an independent court reporter. The important difference is that only sworn testimony is subject to a perjury charge if the witness lied. We planned to take sworn testimony in two ways: at hearings attended by the members and governed by its procedures and the powers granted by Congress; and in depositions by our lawyers under generally applicable court rules. In both instances, the testimony would be recorded verbatim by an authorized court reporter.


Plus the Warren Commission’s independent investigation provided additional clarifications from the witnesses due to the additional questions asked by the WC. All of this is more evidence that the Warren Commission did not rubber stamp the FBI’s reports but conducted its own investigation.

Jan. 22, 1964
Rankin: They found the man. There is nothing more to do. The Commission supports their conclusions, and we can go on home and that is the end of it.

[John Mytton]

I could go on but why bother?

Indeed. It's all strawman nonsense anyway.

There was a time that some of your posts actually made sense, but not anymore. You're slipping! What happened?

This is the second time you've responded to one of my extensive lists exposing the contrarian/conspiratorial mindset, and essentially you are saying the same thing each time, my posts are "a fairytale", "superficial", "ridiculous", "strawman", "nonsense", make no sense, I'm slipping, ETC!

Yeah I get it, we aren't on the same page, so why on Earth take the time to respond, what are you trying to prove with this barrage of insults?

Could it be because you realize the truth of my criticism of the absurd untenable thought processes which drives the CT's extreme paranoia?

JohnM

[Martin Weidmann]

This is the second time you've responded to one of my extensive lists exposing the contrarian/conspiratorial mindset, and essentially you are saying the same thing each time, my posts are "a fairytale", "superficial", "ridiculous", "strawman", "nonsense", make no sense, I'm slipping, ETC!

Yeah I get it, we aren't on the same page, so why on Earth take the time to respond, what are you trying to prove with this barrage of insults?

Could it be because you realize the truth of my criticism of the absurd untenable thought processes which drives the CT's extreme paranoia?

JohnM

This is the second time you've responded to one of my extensive lists exposing the contrarian/conspiratorial mindset,

Only in your paranoid mind! Nonsense is nonsense, no matter how many lists you post.

and essentially you are saying the same thing each time, my posts are "a fairytale", "superficial", "ridiculous", "strawman", "nonsense", make no sense, I'm slipping, ETC!

Well, I may have used some of those words, but the mere fact that I use them should make you think. But it won't, right?

Yeah I get it, we aren't on the same page, so why on Earth take the time to respond,

Because there might be new members here who don't know who they are dealing with. Your disinformation and strawman arguments are worth a little bit of time to debunk them.

what are you trying to prove with this barrage of insults?

I know that you like to play the victum (while constantly insulting others) but what insults are you talking about?
If I am trying to prove anything it will be that there are people like you on this forum who have as their sole purpose to spread disinformation and misrepresent evidence.

Could it be because you realize the truth of my criticism of the absurd untenable thought processes which drives the CT's extreme paranoia?

No, not really. That's just the imagination of your feeble mind

Perhaps you should try to actually have an evidence based discussion instead of blindly parroting the WC and your hero Bugs as well as making up strawman arguments for the purpose of boosting your insecure ego by trying to score cheap points!

[Charles Collins]

More information regarding how the Warren Commission prepared for their independent investigation. From “History Will Prove Us Right” by Howard Willens, page 70


Rankin never wavered in his determination that each team should assess everything that was currently known, from every source, before marching into the field to do further investigating. At the staff meeting a few days later, Rankin set a deadline of February 10 for the comprehensive memo from each team that would summarize the known facts in its area. Redlich complained it wasn’t enough time, citing the voluminous investigative reports from the FBI and other agencies. Redlich had probably read more of these reports than the rest of us because he had been assigned to prepare for Marina Oswald’s testimony. He made the point that future critics would not excuse any failings by the commission on the grounds that it hadn’t had sufficient time to do the job. Most on the staff agreed. Rankin pushed the target date back to February 18.  23

23. Author, memorandum for the record, January 29, 1964, “Staff Meeting-January 28, 1964”, Author’s personal files.


Again, the Warren Commission did not just rubber-stamp the FBI’s reports but conducted their own independent investigation.