JFK Assassination Forum

General Discussion & Debate => General Discussion & Debate => Topic started by: Ben Beeching on January 19, 2019, 08:22:25 PM

Title: Matthew Smith The Second Plot
Post by: Ben Beeching on January 19, 2019, 08:22:25 PM
Hi folks, I've just finished reading Matthew Smith's The Second Plot. For me it did a great job of tying up the evidence into a coherent picture, and especially some of the detail around Lee's movements on the 22nd November and how he was completely played.

Does anyone else have views good or bad on this book?
Title: Re: Matthew Smith The Second Plot
Post by: Steve Logan on January 19, 2019, 09:14:00 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Hi folks, I've just finished reading Matthew Smith's The Second Plot. For me it did a great job of tying up the evidence into a coherent picture, and especially some of the detail around Lee's movements on the 22nd November and how he was completely played.

Does anyone else have views good or bad on this book?
Suppressed shots and multiple Oswalds will tie up all the loose ends. You don't need no stinkin kook book.
Title: Re: Matthew Smith The Second Plot
Post by: Ben Beeching on January 20, 2019, 07:04:18 PM
Yes thanks for that, unsurprisingly a little more detail than that is provided in the book which makes for more interesting reading.
Title: Re: Matthew Smith The Second Plot
Post by: Bill Chapman on January 20, 2019, 09:49:02 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Hi folks, I've just finished reading Matthew Smith's The Second Plot. For me it did a great job of tying up the evidence into a coherent picture, and especially some of the detail around Lee's movements on the 22nd November and how he was completely played.

Does anyone else have views good or bad on this book?

So now there's a second plot? Wow, I was unaware that there was even a first.
Title: Re: Matthew Smith The Second Plot
Post by: Jerry Freeman on January 21, 2019, 02:21:24 AM
Quote
I-Team has discovered not just one, but two plots to cut down JFK in Chicago in early November, 1963, and an intriguing backstory of bungling by the government agencies protecting him. President John F. Kennedy was never supposed to make it to Texas, never supposed to take this ride, and never supposed to die in Dallas. According to this Chicagoan and former JFK bodyguard-- and from these FBI and Secret Service reports obtained by the I-Team-- it is clear there were two plans by different groups intent on killing the president in Chicago weeks before Dallas. 
  https://abc7chicago.com/archive/9315215/
Quote
Gerry Patrick Hemming: The Miami Plot----Researcher Greg Burnham--- Gerry Patrick Hemming discusses the details of the Military Intelligence briefing he attended with his team on November 17th in preparation for the President?s visit to Miami the next day. They were asked to provide additional Executive Protection as a supplement to the Secret Service. Hemming was wary because many of the normal routine procedures were not followed, including, the absence of Secret Service lapel pins (boutonnieres) for his team. More important still was the presence of known CIA operatives in this briefing. These operatives were neither there to conduct the briefing nor were they there to receive instructions from it. Hemming remained very angry by their presence as evidenced in this conversation, which took place in 1998, 35 years after the fact. 
http://assassinationofjfk.net/gerry-patrick-hemming-on-the-miami-plot/
 
Title: Re: Matthew Smith The Second Plot
Post by: Jerry Freeman on January 21, 2019, 02:55:56 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
  ...I was unaware... 
I've noticed that you really have no flair for awareness anyway ;)
Title: Re: Matthew Smith The Second Plot
Post by: Walt Cakebread on January 21, 2019, 03:49:53 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I've noticed that you really have no flair for awareness anyway ;)

Hmmmm...I've noticed that same  unawareness in drunks, druggies, and people with cranialrectalitis...   I wonder where Chappie fits in....
Title: Re: Matthew Smith The Second Plot
Post by: Oscar Navarro on January 21, 2019, 04:37:28 PM
I have not read the book and don't intend too as I have better things to spend my money on. But why don't you give us LNers a brief review of the book and maybe some of us will be impressed with the evidence. (not holding my breath)
Title: Re: Matthew Smith The Second Plot
Post by: Bill Chapman on January 21, 2019, 08:12:24 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
  https://abc7chicago.com/archive/9315215/ http://assassinationofjfk.net/gerry-patrick-hemming-on-the-miami-plot/

Not that you're deflecting
The book is about the Dallas assassination
 
Title: Re: Matthew Smith The Second Plot
Post by: Bill Chapman on January 21, 2019, 08:23:47 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Hmmmm...I've noticed that same  unawareness in drunks, druggies, and people with cranialrectalitis...   I wonder where Chappie fits in....

'Drunks, druggies...' so you live in the lowlife section of town
Why am I not surprised..

I fit in here, and I'm aware that you disappear when faced with supporting your claims.

Now take your nap and eat your jello
And don't forget your meds, Wallyburger
Title: Re: Matthew Smith The Second Plot
Post by: Bill Chapman on January 21, 2019, 08:37:11 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I've noticed that you really have no flair for awareness anyway ;)

I'm aware that no one has yet to name a shooter to supplant the current prime suspect

Additionally, perhaps you can help me arrive at a state of complete and everlasting awareness by providing the names of those who knew there was to be an attempt made on Kennedy that day.
Title: Re: Matthew Smith The Second Plot
Post by: Jerry Freeman on January 22, 2019, 12:53:27 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I'm aware that no one has yet to name a shooter to supplant the current prime suspect Additionally, perhaps you can help me arrive at a state of complete and everlasting awareness by providing the names of those who knew there was to be an attempt made on Kennedy that day.
...perhaps you can help me arrive at a state of complete and everlasting awareness...
"Complete and everlasting"? I really don't think that's possible. I'll leave that to a higher authority. I predict that perhaps someday..you might fall for an even bigger lie.
 
 
Title: Re: Matthew Smith The Second Plot
Post by: Bill Chapman on January 22, 2019, 03:22:47 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
...perhaps you can help me arrive at a state of complete and everlasting awareness...
"Complete and everlasting"? I really don't think that's possible. I'll leave that to a higher authority. I predict that perhaps someday..you might fall for an even bigger lie.

Blahblahblah

In the meantime, I await confirmation that anyone other than the shooter knew an attempt was going to be made on Kennedy that day.

Until then, you lot are just screwin' the pooch.

Dirty Harvey: Smith, Wesson... and Lee.  ;) Dirty Harvey: Smith, Wesson... and Lee.  ;)  Dirty Harvey: Smith, Wesson... and Lee.  ;)   Dirty Harvey: Smith, Wesson... and Lee.  ;)  Dirty Harvey: Smith, Wesson... and Lee.  ;) 


Inspiration: Dirty Harry

Title: Re: Matthew Smith The Second Plot
Post by: Jerry Freeman on February 09, 2019, 08:44:22 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
In the meantime, I await confirmation that anyone other than the shooter knew an attempt was going to be made on Kennedy that day. 
I still don't see any conformation that Oswald the sole assassin. El Chappo is a lost cause so this is for those with collective wits..........
From ERRORS AND OMISSIONS IN GUS RUSSO'S BOOK LIVE BY THE SWORD Michael T. Griffith

Quote
Russo says that at least once in all the series in the various "Oswald" rifle tests, at least one rifleman was able to score two hits (p. 477). This is incorrect. In the CBS rifle test, not one of the eleven expert shooters scored two hits on the first attempt, and seven of them failed to do so on any attempt. This is especially revealing because the CBS test was the most realistic to date. The test used a moving target sled and a 60-foot tower. The test fairly closely simulated the conditions under which Oswald would have had to fire. And, as mentioned, not one of the expert riflemen in the test scored two hits on his first attempt, and seven of them failed to do so on any attempt, even though, unlike Oswald, the CBS shooters fired nine practice rounds prior to the test and were not required to fire through a half-open window in a cramped area.

  Russo says the marksmen in the Warren Commission's (WC) rifle tests "came close" to duplicating the WC's version of Oswald's feat, i.e., two hits out of three shots in 5.6 seconds (p. 476). One wonders how Russo is defining "close" here. The three Master-rated riflemen who took part in the tests missed the head and neck area of the target boards 20 out of 21 times! And this, even though the target boards were stationary, even though the riflemen were firing from only a 30-foot elevation, and even though two of the riflemen took longer than 6 seconds to fire. None of the WC's rifle tests involved moving targets or firing from the same elevation from which Oswald supposedly fired.

  Russo says "the most impressive" Oswald rifle simulation was the one performed in 1994 by Todd Wayne Vaughan (p. 476). But Vaughan didn't use a moving target and not once did he get off three shots in less than 6 seconds. Furthermore, on the day of the test, Vaughan fired fourteen shots prior to starting the test, a luxury Oswald would not have had. Nor did Vaughan fire from an elevation, as Oswald would have had to do. 
Full report here.....   http://www.miketgriffith.com/files/russo.htm
If people stop their ears and shut their eyes..then no-- they won't discover the rumors of any plot.
 
 
Title: Re: Matthew Smith The Second Plot
Post by: Peter Kleinschmidt on February 10, 2019, 03:14:59 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Blahblahblah

In the meantime, I await confirmation that anyone other than the shooter knew an attempt was going to be made on Kennedy that day.

Until then, you lot are just screwin' the pooch.

Dirty Harvey: Smith, Wesson... and Lee.  ;) Dirty Harvey: Smith, Wesson... and Lee.  ;)  Dirty Harvey: Smith, Wesson... and Lee.  ;)   Dirty Harvey: Smith, Wesson... and Lee.  ;)  Dirty Harvey: Smith, Wesson... and Lee.  ;) 


Inspiration: Dirty Harry
Ok, now you think LHO used a Smith and Wesson? What is wrong with you?
Title: Re: Matthew Smith The Second Plot
Post by: Bill Chapman on February 10, 2019, 09:38:19 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Ok, now you think LHO used a Smith and Wesson? What is wrong with you?

Poor dumb cop..
Title: Re: Matthew Smith The Second Plot
Post by: Ray Mitcham on February 10, 2019, 10:10:25 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Poor dumb cop..

Poor dumb Chap.
Title: Re: Matthew Smith The Second Plot
Post by: Rob Caprio on February 10, 2019, 10:23:36 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I'm aware that no one has yet to name a shooter to supplant the current prime suspect

Additionally, perhaps you can help me arrive at a state of complete and everlasting awareness by providing the names of those who knew there was to be an attempt made on Kennedy that day.

No one has to name a shooter. You have to show with evidence that it was LHO as you claim. Well?
Title: Re: Matthew Smith The Second Plot
Post by: Peter Kleinschmidt on February 10, 2019, 10:30:37 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Poor dumb cop..
Billy, try to say something intelligent instead of trying to become the world record holder of changing the subject
Title: Re: Matthew Smith The Second Plot
Post by: Denis Pointing on February 10, 2019, 11:49:17 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Ok, now you think LHO used a Smith and Wesson? What is wrong with you?

" Lee Harvey Oswald was carrying a re-chambered Victory Model when he was apprehended on November 22, 1963"

"Lee Harvey Oswald was arrested as a suspect in the Tippit shooting shortly before 2 p.m., (16) November 22. Apprehended after a scuffle in the Texas theater, he was carrying a Smith and Wesson revolver modified to fire .38 special caliber ammunition."

"The snub-nosed Smith & Wesson "Victory" Model .38 Special revolver, serial number V510210, that Oswald had in his hand when he was arrested in a movie theater eighty minutes after the assassination"
Title: Re: Matthew Smith The Second Plot
Post by: Peter Kleinschmidt on February 11, 2019, 12:36:45 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
" Lee Harvey Oswald was carrying a re-chambered Victory Model when he was apprehended on November 22, 1963"

"Lee Harvey Oswald was arrested as a suspect in the Tippit shooting shortly before 2 p.m., (16) November 22. Apprehended after a scuffle in the Texas theater, he was carrying a Smith and Wesson revolver modified to fire .38 special caliber ammunition."

"The snub-nosed Smith & Wesson "Victory" Model .38 Special revolver, serial number V510210, that Oswald had in his hand when he was arrested in a movie theater eighty minutes after the assassination"
I start from the beginning of the case and move forward as far as evidence will allow, there is not any evidence that shows anything more than LHO went to work on that Friday. Everything else is nonsense
Title: Re: Matthew Smith The Second Plot
Post by: Jerry Freeman on February 11, 2019, 12:46:23 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Billy, try to say something intelligent  .....
Not likely.
Title: Re: Matthew Smith The Second Plot
Post by: Denis Pointing on February 11, 2019, 12:55:31 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I start from the beginning of the case and move forward as far as evidence will allow, there is not any evidence that shows anything more than LHO went to work on that Friday. Everything else is nonsense

It's post's like the above that really emphasise how low the debating quality on this forum has become. It's a crying shame to see such a formerly great forum sink like this. No reply required.
Title: Re: Matthew Smith The Second Plot
Post by: Peter Kleinschmidt on February 11, 2019, 03:08:39 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
It's post's like the above that really emphasise how low the debating quality on this forum has become. It's a crying shame to see such a formerly great forum sink like this. No reply required.
First things first, not last things first. It is that simple. You can't even explain the rifle, why in the hell would you expect someone to listen   
Title: Re: Matthew Smith The Second Plot
Post by: Jerry Freeman on February 11, 2019, 04:21:00 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
"The snub-nosed Smith & Wesson "Victory" Model .38 Special revolver, serial number V510210, that Oswald had in his hand when he was arrested in a movie theater eighty minutes after the assassination"
So the police say. I posted this in another related topic...
Quote
according to the story...A guy who was supposed to have the jump on Tippit..firing devil may care into a cop's belly just gives the next cop who came along a bitch slap [and] then the cop slaps [him] back.
Doesn't the report say-- Oswald supposedly pulled the trigger and the pistol misfired? Ostensibly, the firing pin went coincidentally out of whack. Does all this make any sense?
 Avowedly there have been all these committees and inquiries and commissions and they have just passed the buck to the next investigation. I am not a conspiracy theorist. I am just a skeptic of the official story which is nothing short of a far fetched theory.
 
Title: Re: Matthew Smith The Second Plot
Post by: Bill Chapman on February 11, 2019, 07:44:04 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I still don't see any conformation that Oswald the sole assassin. El Chappo is a lost cause so this is for those with collective wits..........
From ERRORS AND OMISSIONS IN GUS RUSSO'S BOOK LIVE BY THE SWORD Michael T. Griffith
 Full report here.....   http://www.miketgriffith.com/files/russo.htm
If people stop their ears and shut their eyes..then no-- they won't discover the rumors of any plot.
 

"they won't discover the rumors of any plot"

Show me where I asked for rumours. I clearly asked for proof that anyone besides the shooter knew that an attempt was going to made on Kennedy that day.

Well?
Title: Re: Matthew Smith The Second Plot
Post by: Bill Chapman on February 11, 2019, 08:00:27 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
So the police say. I posted this in another related topic... Doesn't the report say-- Oswald supposedly pulled the trigger and the pistol misfired? Ostensibly, the firing pin went coincidentally out of whack. Does all this make any sense?
 Avowedly there have been all these committees and inquiries and commissions and they have just passed the buck to the next investigation. I am not a conspiracy theorist. I am just a skeptic of the official story which is nothing short of a far fetched theory.

The hammer hit the web of skin on MacDonald's hand between his
thumb and forefinger.
Title: Re: Matthew Smith The Second Plot
Post by: Jerry Freeman on February 11, 2019, 09:11:25 PM
 
 
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The hammer hit the web of skin on MacDonald's hand between his
thumb and forefinger.
   So he said. Let's get that out of the way. McDonald first told the Dallas papers that the revolver 'misfired'..no mention of his thumb..... McDonald lied. 'Oh really?' Yeah.
Yeah he did. One example- McDonald claimed that Oswald stood up and said ''This is it". However in testimony his own police buddy reported that it was in fact McDonald who said it......
***********************************************************************
Quote
Mr. HAWKINS. I had my Service .38 revolver.
Mr. BALL. Did you have it out or was it in your holster?
Mr. HAWKINS. I believe I had it out.
Mr. BALL. What did you do with it?
Mr. HAWKINS. At that time, after he pointed out the person, Officer McDonald had started up the left aisle and he stopped and talked to two boys who were sitting about three rows in front of where Oswald was sitting. I continued up the north aisle or the left aisle as you would walk toward the screen, and then Officer McDonald had walked on back to this person who was seated back there.
Mr. BALL. He was--he walked over to the right aisle, did he?
Mr. HAWKINS. He walked from the right aisle and came in from the person's right. I was about three rows from--still in the same aisle, on the left aisle and about three rows from McDonald and Oswald when I heard him say, "I've got him," or "This is it," or some words to that effect.
Mr. BALL. Did you hear Oswald say anything?
Mr. HAWKINS. Not at that time; no, sir; I did not.
 
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/hawkins.htm
There were other McDonald 'irregularities'. 
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Show me where I asked for rumours. I clearly asked for proof that anyone besides the shooter knew that an attempt was going to made on Kennedy that day.  Well?
'Well' is a deep subject for such a shallow mind as yours.
Rumor...."a currently circulating story or report of uncertain or doubtful truth."
 I wonder why you would really care anyway. JFK was not your president. I do not know who the shooters were, but feel some day it will be revealed.
 
Title: Re: Matthew Smith The Second Plot
Post by: Bill Chapman on February 11, 2019, 09:51:36 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

     So he said. Let's get that out of the way. McDonald first told the Dallas papers that the revolver 'misfired'..no mention of his thumb..... McDonald lied. 'Oh really?' Yeah.
Yeah he did. One example- McDonald claimed that Oswald stood up and said ''This is it". However in testimony his own police buddy reported that it was in fact McDonald who said it......
*********************************************************************** 
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/hawkins.htm
There were other McDonald 'irregularities'.  'Well' is a deep subject for such a shallow mind as yours.
Rumor...."a currently circulating story or report of uncertain or doubtful truth."
 I wonder why you would really care anyway. JFK was not your president. I do not know who the shooters were, but feel some day it will be revealed.

However in testimony his own police buddy reported that it was in fact McDonald who said it......

Is Ray Dawkins the 'police buddy' you're talking about?

Mr. HAWKINS. He walked from the right aisle and came in from the person's right. I was about three rows from--still in the same aisle, on the left aisle and about three rows from McDonald and Oswald when I heard him say, "I've got him," or "This is it," or some words to that effect.

--------------------------------------------
Maybe McDonald said I've got him
Maybe Oswald said this is it

Seems Dawkins heard both
Title: Re: Matthew Smith The Second Plot
Post by: Walt Cakebread on February 11, 2019, 11:46:45 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
It's post's like the above that really emphasise how low the debating quality on this forum has become. It's a crying shame to see such a formerly great forum sink like this. No reply required.

It's post's like the above that really emphasise how low the debating quality on this forum has become.

Apparently the fact that you contribute NOTHING to this forum escapes you.....
Title: Re: Matthew Smith The Second Plot
Post by: Peter Kleinschmidt on February 11, 2019, 11:53:14 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
"they won't discover the rumors of any plot"

Show me where I asked for rumours. I clearly asked for proof that anyone besides the shooter knew that an attempt was going to made on Kennedy that day.

Well?
Another shooter would know
Title: Re: Matthew Smith The Second Plot
Post by: Bill Chapman on February 12, 2019, 06:40:08 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Another shooter would know

You missed the part where I said prove someone other than the shooter knew there was to be an attempt made on Kennedy that day.

You're rather dim, aren't you...
Title: Re: Matthew Smith The Second Plot
Post by: John Iacoletti on February 12, 2019, 11:23:33 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The hammer hit the web of skin on MacDonald's hand between his
thumb and forefinger.

And amazingly it also hit Paul Bentley's hand at the same time.  Were McDonald and Bentley holding hands?
Title: Re: Matthew Smith The Second Plot
Post by: Jerry Freeman on February 13, 2019, 01:49:45 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Maybe Oswald said this is it
 Seems Dawkins heard both
Quote
Mr. BALL. Did you hear Oswald say anything?
Mr. HAWKINS. Not at that time; no, sir; I did not.
You might go learn how to read.
Quote
You're rather dim, aren't you...
Says one with a subdued mind of it's own. Pay no attention to Silly Willy.
 
Title: Re: Matthew Smith The Second Plot
Post by: Peter Kleinschmidt on February 13, 2019, 06:45:59 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You missed the part where I said prove someone other than the shooter knew there was to be an attempt made on Kennedy that day.

You're rather dim, aren't you...
Oops! I forgot something.
You said "someone other than the shooter" Where do you believe  "the shooter" was positioned?
Title: Re: Matthew Smith The Second Plot
Post by: Bill Chapman on February 13, 2019, 09:09:27 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
And amazingly it also hit Paul Bentley's hand at the same time.  Were McDonald and Bentley holding hands?

Nah, grabbing for the gun.

Title: Re: Matthew Smith The Second Plot
Post by: Bill Chapman on February 13, 2019, 09:29:42 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Oops! I forgot something.
You said "someone other than the shooter" Where do you believe  "the shooter" was positioned?


That has nothing to do with my ask. Until you lot can confirm that the shooter had help, you are all up the creek with no method of locomotion.
Title: Re: Matthew Smith The Second Plot
Post by: John Iacoletti on February 14, 2019, 12:09:07 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Nah, grabbing for the gun.

LOL.  How did the hammer hit both of their hands simultaneously?
Title: Re: Matthew Smith The Second Plot
Post by: Peter Kleinschmidt on February 14, 2019, 02:58:48 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login


That has nothing to do with my ask. Until you lot can confirm that the shooter had help, you are all up the creek with no method of locomotion.
[/quot]
You should know the answer. you already proved there was someone else. Because your own version of "the shooter" did not shoot Kennedy and could not have even if so desired.  So someone else did. Stupid question and an easy answer
Title: Re: Matthew Smith The Second Plot
Post by: Bill Chapman on February 14, 2019, 07:18:30 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
And amazingly it also hit Paul Bentley's hand at the same time.  Were McDonald and Bentley holding hands?


Where does Bentley say he held the gun at the same time as McDonald.
He clearly said he and officers were grabbing Oswald and he himself had Oswald by the arm
He said he didn't know if it was a thumb finger or hand that got in the way of the hammer

If you have testimony that shows Bentley claiming that it was the webbing of his hand that stopped the hammer, let's see it
Title: Re: Matthew Smith The Second Plot
Post by: Bill Chapman on February 14, 2019, 08:02:07 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login


That has nothing to do with my ask. Until you lot can confirm that the shooter had help, you are all up the creek with no method of locomotion.
[/quot]
You should know the answer. you already proved there was someone else. Because your own version of "the shooter" did not shoot Kennedy and could not have even if so desired.  So someone else did. Stupid question and an easy answer

Your reading comprehension is muddled. You appear to misunderstand my ask. You seem to want to argue about who the shooter was but all I'm asking for is proof that someone else other than the killer knew there was going to be an attempt made on Kennedy that day.

Title: Re: Matthew Smith The Second Plot
Post by: Jerry Freeman on February 14, 2019, 09:56:47 PM
On October 15 1962 there was an apparent plot idea and a possible reward of $100,000.00 was offered to kill JFK.......
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=217730#relPageId=5&tab=page
Nothing came of an investigation to this rumor.
Title: Re: Matthew Smith The Second Plot
Post by: John Iacoletti on February 19, 2019, 07:54:30 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
If you have testimony that shows Bentley claiming that it was the webbing of his hand that stopped the hammer, let's see it

"You say you put your thumb or your finger in?"

"I don't know, it was in the scuffle there. We don't know whether thumb, finger, or hand.  I got a bruised hand from it"
Title: Re: Matthew Smith The Second Plot
Post by: Bill Chapman on February 19, 2019, 09:14:13 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
"You say you put your thumb or your finger in?"

"I don't know, it was in the scuffle there. We don't know whether thumb, finger, or hand.  I got a bruised hand from it"

Well they knew later, didn't they. Did Bentley claim it was the webbing of his hand at any point? He had a golden opportunity to demonstrate that in the interview.
Title: Re: Matthew Smith The Second Plot
Post by: Peter Kleinschmidt on February 19, 2019, 10:56:00 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Your reading comprehension is muddled. You appear to misunderstand my ask. You seem to want to argue about who the shooter was but all I'm asking for is proof that someone else other than the killer knew there was going to be an attempt made on Kennedy that day.
Have you been smoking the wacky tobacky? You are the one who brought up "the shooter", what shooter? There was a shooter? Like a "pool shooter"? First, you need to explain what you mean by "the shooter"? Guess what? There are different stories here, and yours is just one of them imagine that!
Title: Re: Matthew Smith The Second Plot
Post by: John Iacoletti on February 19, 2019, 11:35:09 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Well they knew later, didn't they. Did Bentley claim it was the webbing of his hand at any point? He had a golden opportunity to demonstrate that in the interview.

They knew what later?

He also had a golden opportunity to mention McDonald's name even once with regard to this thumb, finger, hand story.
Title: Re: Matthew Smith The Second Plot
Post by: Bill Chapman on February 20, 2019, 10:52:02 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Have you been smoking the wacky tobacky? You are the one who brought up "the shooter", what shooter? There was a shooter? Like a "pool shooter"? First, you need to explain what you mean by "the shooter"? Guess what? There are different stories here, and yours is just one of them imagine that!

Fck you're stupid



 
Title: Re: Matthew Smith The Second Plot
Post by: Bill Chapman on February 20, 2019, 10:59:50 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
They knew what later?

He also had a golden opportunity to mention McDonald's name even once with regard to this thumb, finger, hand story.

They knew what later?

That the hammer hit the webbing of McDonald's hand
Title: Re: Matthew Smith The Second Plot
Post by: John Iacoletti on February 20, 2019, 11:40:49 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
They knew what later?

That the hammer hit the webbing of McDonald's hand

Who's "they", and how did they know that?

Either Bentley felt it hit his hand or he did not.
Title: Re: Matthew Smith The Second Plot
Post by: Bill Chapman on February 21, 2019, 01:55:14 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Who's "they", and how did they know that?

Either Bentley felt it hit his hand or he did not.

McDonald knew

The gun knocked Bentley's hand in the scuffle. Show us where he identified the exact part of his hand that the gun hit.
Title: Re: Matthew Smith The Second Plot
Post by: Peter Kleinschmidt on February 21, 2019, 06:20:40 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Fck you're stupid
It's the original question, stupid, you should know the answer is yes but based on what you believe, you're just wrong again. No big deal Einstein, you're used to it. Yes indeed there is someone else
Title: Re: Matthew Smith The Second Plot
Post by: John Iacoletti on February 21, 2019, 07:25:19 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
McDonald knew

The gun knocked Bentley's hand in the scuffle. Show us where he identified the exact part of his hand that the gun hit.

Q: Who did he aim the gun at?

Bentley: The gun wasn't necessarily aimed, it was started, he started to pull it up to aim and Officer McDonald had a hold of his, of his gun, I had a hold of his right arm, we got a thumb or something in between the hammer and the firing pin so that [illegible] the firing, it just snapped slightly and kept it from going off.

Q: It didn't misfire. In other words you prevented it from firing?

Bentley: Yes. My hand was across it preventing it from firing.