Arlen Specter's SBT Notebook

[Lance Payette]

Dear Fancy Pants Lance,

You're quite the hoot!

-- Tom

Thank you, I try. It's nice to be appreciated. Had you never heard the word "hoot" before - you seem to have become obsessed with it? I believe I originally said I found The Donald to be a hoot, which I do, so perhaps this explains why it has resonated so strongly with you.

[Tom Graves]

Thank you, I try. It's nice to be appreciated. Had you never heard the word "hoot" before - you seem to have become obsessed with it? I believe I originally said I found The Donald to be a hoot, which I do, so perhaps this explains why it has resonated so strongly with you.

No, because it rhymes with "coot," as in zombified by sixty-six years of KGB* disinformation, "active measures," and mole-based strategic deception counterintelligence operations waged against us and our NATO allies "old coot."

*Today's SVR and FSB

[Andrew Mason]

....I do like Andrew's explanation, since a non-SBT LN narrative always appeals to me. Toss in a fragment from the head wound and I have my New Favorite Theory, thereby supplanting the Phantom Shot, which is hereby demoted to my Alternative Favorite Theory.

I can't take credit for the three shot, three hit, one shooter explanation.  That was determined by and maintained by the FBI until Arlen Specter came up with the SBT.   

So the question is: on what basis was the original 3 shot, 3 hit, one shooter explanation rejected?  It appears to me that it was rejected because everyone assumed JBC was struck by only one bullet and the bullet exiting JFK's neck was likely travelling too fast to have missed anyone and struck the car without leaving noticeable damage.  All I have done is just question the first assumption by showing that the path through JFK's midline was to the left side of JBC.