JFK Assassination Forum

You've read the "Cliff Notes" summary of "their" findings?

Are you referring to William Barr's four-page "summary" or his specious twenty-page memo to Trump?

Wikipedia's article on the Mueller Report?

Have you read it?

Here's an excerpt. I know you agree with the first sentence up to the [4] [5] & [6] footnotes, but what about the rest of the paragraph?

While the report concludes that the investigation "did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities,"[4][5][6] investigators had an incomplete picture of what happened due in part to some communications that were encrypted, deleted, or not saved, as well as testimony that was false, incomplete, or declined.[7][8][9] The report states that Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election was illegal and occurred "in sweeping and systematic fashion,"[10][11][12] and was welcomed by the Trump campaign as it expected to benefit from such efforts.[13][14][15] It also identifies multiple links between the Trump campaign and Russian officials,[16] about which several persons connected to the campaign made false statements and obstructed investigations.[4] Mueller later stated that his investigation's findings of Russian interference "deserves the attention of every American."[17]

You keep insisting I disagreed with the Mueller report. I have already stated and didn't disagree with their finding that there was no evidence the Trump campaign conspired with the Russians to influence the 2016 election. If Mueller found no such evidence, why should I believe there is such evidence. I did state that congressional committees are not infallible, and pointed to the HSCA of a probable conspiracy to assassinate JFK as one example of that. I was making a general observation about congressional committees and you read far more into that than you should have.

I have not read the full Mueller report and if I did I might or might not find things I disagree with. I have read the Cliff Notes summary of their findings. They found evidence that the Russians had worked to influence the outcome of our elections. I would be amazed if they hadn't since they had always done that in the past. In 2016 they had more tools in their toolbox due to the prevalence of social media, especially among younger voters. The Mueller report also found no evidence that Trump campaign had conspired with the Russians to influence the outcome. Of course, the Trump campaign was trying to influence the election. That's what campaigns are all about. There is no evidence the Trump campaign was working with the Russians and Mueller's report stated so.

Now tell us where I have said I disagree with the Mueller Report or the Senate investigating committee.

    Let me get this straight. After 62+ years, NO MOTORCYCLE COP, (including Haygood), has EVER identified themselves as being the "One Glove Cop" filmed by Darnell? And you want to cavalierly describe this as being a mere "anomaly"? Again, Haygood was the ONLY MOTORCYCLE COP back inside the  railroad yard immediately after the kill shot. That makes this "One Glove Cop" filmed by Darnell an impostor. And, when we last see this out-of-uniform, no motorcycle cop, he is heading Directly toward the TSBD. 1+1 = Conspiracy.   

What's the false premise?

Do you think Republican Mueller and/or the Republican-controlled Senate Select Committee on Intelligence made stuff up to "get" Trump?

It appears to me at the time this photo was taken, TUM was standing on the far edge of the sidewalk. TUM's leg shadow is being cast on the lawns concrete edge.



This photo taken relatively not long after, shows a cameraman on the sidewalk and by the angle of the shadow we can see that TUM was only inches away from the concrete edge.



BTW, if TUM was part of the conspiracy and was either waving his umbrella or firing a poison dart, there is no way he would hang around and let himself be photographed.

JohnM