Good Luck in your being seated on any jury involving a Shooting of any kind.

I already have been. The prosecution never attempted to recreate the shooting and the defense never demanded that they do that. We found the accused guilty anyway.

I have always distance myself from the MAGA supporters who tried to reverse the results of the 2020 election. Just as many Democrat dispute the legitimacy of the 2000 and 2004 elections, MAGA has the right to their opinion as well. However, once the Congress certified the electoral college result, the game was over. The result was official and nothing was going to change it.

This past weekend, there was a very controversial ending to the Western Michigan/Michigan football game and many people, myself included, think Western Michigan got screwed. I didn't buy the Big 10's defense of how the replay was handled and it appears the replay officials did not follow established protocols when they decided to put one more second back on the clock. This gave Michigan one more play which they used to throw a game winning TD pass.

Yesterday, the Mid-American Conference appealed to the NCAA to reverse the outcome of the game. As much as I believe the wrong decision was made and the wrong team won, the outcome cannot be reversed. By rule, once the referee declares the game over, it's over. Whether we are talking about sports or politics, even if you think your side got screwed, once the outcome has been decided, there is no reversing it. When Congress certified the electoral college count in January 2021, the result was official and there was no legal means to reverse it. At some point you simply have to accept the outcome, no matter how much you believe it was wrong. From that point on, I think Trump and his followers, of which I am one, should have put it in the rearview mirror and moved on.

    Maybe you missed it, but they also announced that the TIME CLOCK displayed on the stadium scoreboard and on TV is NOT THE OFFICIAL TIME CLOCK. The OFFICIAL TIME CLOCK is kept inna bunker somewhere. With Sports Gambling extending well down into the college ranks, This Revelation of a Star Chamber Time Clock is a major problem.

my thinking is if you can somehow tie current events to the events of ‘that day’, well…
beats a lot of other silly threads people post around here, and the comments therein.

I have always distance myself from the MAGA supporters who tried to reverse the results of the 2020 election. Just as many Democrat dispute the legitimacy of the 2000 and 2004 elections, MAGA has the right to their opinion as well. However, once the Congress certified the electoral college result, the game was over. The result was official and nothing was going to change it.

This past weekend, there was a very controversial ending to the Western Michigan/Michigan football game and many people, myself included, think Western Michigan got screwed. I didn't buy the Big 10's defense of how the replay was handled and it appears the replay officials did not follow established protocols when they decided to put one more second back on the clock. This gave Michigan one more play which they used to throw a game winning TD pass.

Yesterday, the Mid-American Conference appealed to the NCAA to reverse the outcome of the game. As much as I believe the wrong decision was made and the wrong team won, the outcome cannot be reversed. By rule, once the referee declares the game over, it's over. Whether we are talking about sports or politics, even if you think your side got screwed, once the outcome has been decided, there is no reversing it. When Congress certified the electoral college count in January 2021, the result was official and there was no legal means to reverse it. At some point you simply have to accept the outcome, no matter how much you believe it was wrong. From that point on, I think Trump and his followers, of which I am one, should have put it in the rearview mirror and moved on.

It's time for another recap in response to the feeble, inane, square-peg-in-round-hole excuses being offered by WC apologists for their refusal to accept Dr. Young's account. 

-- First and foremost, we need to understand that if WC apologists are correct, we must believe the following:

* That Dr. Young lied when he said that he phoned Chief Mills to verify his recollection, and that Chief Mills verified his recollection:

Now just to reassure myself, Chief Martinell unfortunately has died. Chief Mills had become a Lieutenant Commander in a Medical Service Corps and retired from the Navy.

However, I found him living in Johnson City, Texas, where he had been working for the Johnson family on the ranch and whatnot. But he had retired in Johnson City. I picked up the phone and I called him. He confirmed exactly what I had put down in my notes, that there was a bent brass slug that they had brought out that they had picked up off the floor. . . ."

As we should all know by now, when Dr. Young mentioned "what I had put down in my notes," he was referring to his 11/23/63 essay "What Price a Rose?"

* That Dr. Young did not really read from his 11/23/63 essay during his 2001 Navy oral history interviews, even though both of the 2013 Navy articles on Dr. Young's interviews state that he did, and even though the transcript of the third interview says he did.

* That Dr. Young lied when he said that Chiefs Mills and Martinell brought the limo bullet to him at the autopsy.

* That Dr. Young lied when he said the bullet was brass in color, half a centimeter in diameter, deformed/misshapen, and "slightly bent on the end."

Needless to say, there was no bullet fragment at the autopsy that Dr. Young could have mistaken for a deformed brass-colored bullet that was "slightly bent on the end."

* That Dr. Young was only pretending to have seen the bullet when he described its color, diameter, and deformation, and when he said it did not "look like" a copper-jacketed military bullet.

He could not have honestly said these things if he had not seen the bullet.

Needless to say, the existence of a whole bullet having been delivered to the autopsy team at Bethesda rests entirely on the accuracy of things Young said. There is no record of Mills saying a whole bullet was delivered to Bethesda. Contrary to what MTG earlier claimed in earlier posts in this thread, Captain John Stover DENIED he had seen a whole bullet at autopsy. Gerald Ford and Arlen Specter were unaware of any evidence of such a bullet. Neither Humes, Boswell, nor Finck is on record as having seen this bullet. If Young erroneously claimed that he saw such a bullet, it doesn't mean he lied. It could mean he was mistaken. Young might have been under the mistaken impression that a bullet had been delivered to Bethesda with the bone fragments. It's easy to see how he would have been expecting both a bullet and bone fragments to be delivered to Bethesda based on what he was told before he sent Mills and Martinell to the White House garage. He might well have written that mistaken impression in his notes and over the years formed a false memory of having seen such a bullet. False memories are a real and recognized phenomenon. I believe that Young honestly believed a bullet had been delivered to Bethesda and I believe he was dead wrong about that. The lack of corroboration from others who would have known about it seems to indicate that to be the case.

* That Dr. Young was carrying out some kind of enormous fraud or grand delusion when he described the bullet in a letter to President Gerald Ford, in his conversation with Arlen Specter, and in his third 2001 oral history interview.

I haven't seen anyone accuse Young of perpetrating a fraud. Everyone who doubts his story has given him the benefit of the doubt and simply said he was mistaken. Why does MTG keep putting the most hyperbolic spin on things other people have written?

-- I agree that there may well have been phone contact between the White House garage and the Bethesda morgue. If so, this makes Dr. Young's account all the more plausible, since we have abundant testimony from autopsy witnesses that the autopsy doctors were anxiously looking for the back-wound bullet and were distraught that they could not find it. If Humes had found out that a bullet had been found in the limo, he would have wanted it brought to the autopsy right away so he could compare it with the back wound.

Of course there had been contact between the White House garage and Bethesda. Why else would Young have sent Mills and Martinell to the garage. I haven't seen evidence that anybody except Young was EXPECTING a bullet to be delivered to Bethesda. If MTG has such evidence, could he please post that. I can believe Young told Mills and Martinell that they were being sent to the garage to pick up bone fragments AND a bullet, but there is no evidence they picked up anything other than the bone fragments.

When Dr. Young handed the skull fragments and bullet over to Humes, Humes either realized the bullet was problematic for the single-assassin scenario (which he was already being fed) or he was ordered to discard the bullet for this reason.

So MTG thinks Humes was already scheming to misrepresent the autopsy findings to support the lone gunman scenario. What evidence does he have that Humes was even aware there was a lone gunman scenario. The investigation was in the early stages when the autopsy began in the early evening. Oswald had not even been formally charge with the murder of JFK. Who would have told Humes, Boswell, and Finck that they had to support the lone gunman narrative and what is MTG's evidence that was done. Once again, MTG seems to have assumed something for which he has provided zero evidence.

-- I notice that WC apologists are citing selected portions of Sibert and O'Neill's ARRB testimony regarding the missile receipt. Humm, well, now this is curious because WC apologists routinely reject pro-conspiracy ARRB testimony with the argument that "oh, they were talking about things that happened 34-35 years earlier," as if no one can remember things that happened 35 years ago. This is literally Fred Litwin's main argument against most of the historic ARRB disclosures, such as autopsy photographer James Stringer's bombshell ARRB testimony about the autopsy photos.

Maybe someday MTG will explain what the items Sibert and O'Neill received at Bethesda has anything to do with Young's claim that a whole bullet was delivered to Bethesda. Those are two unrelated issues.

Even in this thread, WC apologists have attacked Dr. Young's account because it was supposedly given "38 years after the fact," ignoring the fact that most people can remember important events that happened 30-plus years ago, and ignoring the fact that Dr. Young's 11/23/63 account was written less than 24 hours after the fact.

Heck, my dad is 90 years old, and he can remember all kinds of things that happened 40-50 years ago with remarkable accuracy.

I'm glad MTG's dad seems to be in such good shape mentally. Age is only one factor in people's ability to remember things. I'm 74 and I can remember details from sporting events from the 1960s but I keep forgetting where I put down the TV remote.

-- I again point out that Sibert and O'Neill did not mention the missile receipt in their 11/26/63 report on the autopsy. This is a very strange omission. They mentioned the 7x2 mm and 3x1 mm bullet fragments but said nothing about signing for those fragments. That was a major piece of information to leave out. This could logically be viewed as an indication that they were troubled about having signed the "missile" receipt. Sibert made it clear in his HSCA interview that he had serious misgivings about having signed the receipt. 

-- WC apologists are still peddling the Loeffler memo as their one alleged example of the term "bullet/missile" being used to describe bullet fragments. This is really a stretch, not to mention the hundreds of examples that I documented of the terms "bullet" and "missile" being distinguished from the terms "fragments," "bullet fragments," and "missile fragments" in the Warren Report, in the WC hearings, in Sibert and O'Neill's 11/26/63 report, in Sibert and O'Neill's HSCA testimony, and in the HSCA FPP's report. The Loeffler memo was part of the documentation relating to the chain of evidence for the alleged stretcher bullet, CE 399. At this very time, the FBI was trying to find out about the bullet that had been reportedly found on a stretcher at Parkland Hospital in Dallas. Keep in mind that this memo was written on 11/22/63.

Loeffler begins the one-page memo by noting that O.P. Wright was contacted regarding "the present location of the bullet that was taken from the body of Governor Connally." Now, come on, folks. This is clearly, undeniably a reference to the stretcher bullet. This becomes even more obvious with Loeffler's next sentence: "Mr. Wright said he had given instructions to his supervising nurse to preserve the bullet."

Then, Loeffler mentions that Wright advised that some fragments were found in Connally's wrist and were turned over to Texas highway patrolman Nolan. Loeffler next says that Wright assumed that Nolan would take the bullet to the state lab in Austin.

So, we can either believe that Loeffler somehow thought the stretcher bullet was really just the wrist fragments, even though he had just referred to "the bullet" twice, or we can make the more logical assumption that Loeffler simply reverted to referring to the stretcher bullet when he said Nolan would take the bullet to the state lab. The focus of the memo was the location of the stretcher bullet, not the wrist fragments.

If Loeffler thought "the bullet" was the wrist fragments, why did he use the term "bullet" at all in the memo? Why didn't he simply explain that "we thought that a bullet had been removed from Connally's body, but it turns out that only some fragments were removed from his wrist"?

-- WC apologists are so caught up in the cover story for the missile receipt that they don't seem to stop and think about how implausible it is.

I mean, think about it. You're an FBI agent at the autopsy of the president of the United States in the crime of the century. You understand the importance of ballistic evidence and ensuring a proper chain of possession for it. You have a Navy hospital corpsman hand you a receipt that says you're signing for a "missile," but you look at the evidence bottle and see there's no bullet in it, not even close. You see that the bottle only contains two small fragments that make up only a tiny fraction of the mass of a bullet. Are you going to sign such a severely inaccurate receipt? Wouldn't you insist that the corpsman retype the receipt so that it accurately described the contents of the evidence bottle? Of course you would -- unless, that is, you were ordered or pressured to sign the receipt.

MTG continues to be oblivious to the fact that what Sibert and O'Neill received from the autopsy team at Bethesda has zero to do with establishing whether or not Dr. Young's recollection of a bullet being delivered to Bethesda is an accurate one. It's a mystery as to why he even brought this up when he is the one who started this thread and it was all about Young's claim of a bullet being delivered to the autopsy team at Bethesda, NOT what the autopsy team found and gave to Sibert and O'Neill.

-- Everyone now admits that Dr. Young was telling the truth when he said he sent Mills and Martinell to the White House garage to search JFK's limo,

I don't recall anyone ever disputing that.

but we're supposed to believe that he lied through his teeth or experienced a remarkable hallucination when he wrote on 11/23/63, less than 24 hours after the autopsy, that Mills and Martinell brought back some skull fragments and a misshapen bullet from the limo.

It was neither a lie nor a hallucination but a misunderstanding which falls somewhere between those two extremes.

-- In his 11/23/63 essay, Dr. Young not only described the bullet but he also described the three skull fragments:

The envelope contained three pieces of skull bone, one about three inches in diameter, another two inches in diameter and the third about one to one and a half inches in diameter. It also contained a brass slug about half a centimeter in diameter and distorted. These were found on the floor of the blood-spattered convertible.

There is corroboration for the bone fragments. There is no corroboration for the brass slug.

-- By even the most critical, narrow analysis of Jan Herman's statements to Dr. Robertson about his phone call with Chief Mills, at the very least Chief Mills confirmed that Dr. Young later called him to verify his recollection. This alone confirms a key part of Dr. Young's account and shows that Dr. Young wanted to ensure that his recollection was correct.

Tim Nickerson and I have discussed whether MTG's blatant misstatements of facts are deliberate lies or simply gaffes. It seems clear to me this one is a deliberate lie because he has been corrected on it numerous times and he continues to repeat this falsehood. Mills absolutely did not confirm Young's story. When contacted by Herman about it, he refused to comment. That is not confirmation.

Moreover, the fact that Mills did not deny the finding of the bullet is clear tacit confirmation that a bullet was found. As Dr. Robertson notes, if no bullet had been found in the limo, Mills surely would have immediately made this clear to Herman. If Mills had done this, it would be strong evidence that Young was wrong about receiving the limo bullet -- but Mills gave no indication whatsoever that Dr. Young was mistaken on this issue.

There is no such thing as tacit confirmation. Either Mills explicitly confirmed Young's story or he did not. Based on what Herman reported about his conversation with Mills, he did not.

-- At every point, Dr. Young behaved exactly like we would expect him to behave if he had actually received the limo bullet from Mills and Martinell at the autopsy. At every turn, his actions indicate sincerity and truthfulness. He had no motive or reason to lie, and there was no fragment at the autopsy that he could have mistaken for a bullet.

Wrong again. Young acted like a man who BELIEVED a bullet had been delivered to Bethesda. There is no evidence, other than what Young has said, that such a bullet was ever delivered to Bethesda. There are very good reasons to doubt what Young said. First of all there are many people who would have known about such a bullet who have no recollection of such a bullet. Second, it makes no sense that the Secret Service detail that collected the evidence from the limo would send bullet fragments to the FBI but send a whole bullet to Bethesda. 

-- Finally, I haven't brought this up yet, but there are many doubtful claims, discrepancies, and suspicious omissions in the official story (or stories) about the skull fragments, what they looked like, and when and how they arrived at the autopsy. And then we have the fact that two autopsy witnesses, including one of the morticians, saw Humes sawing JFK's skull before the official autopsy began, and the mortician insisted that the damage to the top of the head seen in the autopsy photos was done by the autopsy doctors and was not present when the body first arrived.

First of all, none of this has a thing to do with whether or not Young saw an actual bullet that had been delivered to Bethesda. Second, the only people who find any of this suspicious are the ones who have bought into the myths surrounding the JFK assassination. Not only has MTG bought into these myths hook, line, and sinker, he has swallowed the pole.