JFK Assassination Forum

same with voter fraud or any other dopey generalization MAGits make.

California:

Prior to 2013, a voter had to be ill or disabled for someone else to return their ballot for them. Plus, that person had to be a family member or a member of the same household.

After 2013, the law was changed. Being ill or disabled was no longer required. A family member or a member of one’s household could return ballots.

In 2016, the law changed again thanks to Assembly Bill 1921. Now, anyone could return another person’s ballot and there was no limit on how many ballots a person could return.

Goodish wordage re Donahue.

And dont forget the goodish book by McLaren extending the goodish work of Donahue.

Yes, Donahue does have his defenders. McLaren is a former Australian police detective. His book and documentary JFK: The Smoking Gun defends Donahue's core conclusions.

We now know that jfk woz hit on the back of the head by lead splatter from Oswald's shot-1 at about pseudo Z105-Z110, which ricocheted offa the overhead signal arm & left 2 halves of the jacket in the limo,

This goes far beyond Donahue's conclusions about the back-of-head fragments and the limo fragments. He put the pavement shot at no earlier than Z145. A shot at pseudo-Z105-110 from the sixth-floor window is wildly problematic and implausible.

& we know that the remnant main slug made a hole throo the floor of the limo.

I don't think we know any such thing. This is pure speculation.

We now know that Hickey fired an accidental auto-burst of at least 4 shots at about Z300-Z312, the first injuring Tague, the last hitting jfk in the head, the 2nd last denting the chrome trim.

No gunfire burst from Hickey from Z300-312 could have caused Tague's wound. Tague was hit long before the head shot.

Now, the chrome dent is very interesting. If we had any evidence that Hickey did fire an auto-burst, it would be entirely plausible to posit that one of his shots caused the deep chrome dent.

The lone-gunman theory has no way to explain the chrome dent. There is no plausible trajectory from JFK's head wounds to the chrome dent--not even close. The WC floated the false claim that the chrome was dented before the assassination, but footage of the limo before the Dallas motorcade refutes this claim. Yet, we still see some WC apologists repeating it.

We now know that Oswald fired just 2 shots, at about pseudo Z105-Z110 & at about Z218.5, & had 1 non-fired bullet remaining.

I don't think we know any such thing. The Zapruder film shows JFK reacting to a wound starting at Z200, as even the HSCA's Photographic Evidence Panel acknowledged, which is part of the reason the panel put the first hit at around Z188-190. This was a crucial, historic admission because the sixth-floor gunman's view of the limo would have been obstructed by the oak tree from Z166-210, which means the first hit did not come from the sixth-floor window.

If Oswald allegedly fired his supposed second shot at Z218, and if his first alleged shot came at pseudo-Z105-110, what shot, pray tell, hit JFK at Z188-190? This just does not work.

And how do you account for JFK's dramatic Z226-232 reaction? His torso is visibly jolted forward and his hands and elbows are flung upward. This is clearly a different hit than the Z188-190 hit.

I am actually open to the idea of a shot occurring during the suspicious break in the Zapruder film that was supposedly caused when Zapruder allegedly temporarily stopped filming at around Z132. Zapruder indicated he did not stop filming the motorcade until after it passed under the triple underpass. It would have made no sense for him to stop filming at Z132 when he could see the limo was only seconds away from turning onto Elm Street. I suspect this portion of the film was removed because it showed reactions to gunfire.

As a side note, I suggest you look at the evidence that Oswald was not on the sixth floor during the shooting. Ideologically, I would have no problem assuming Oswald was one of the shooters, but I think the weight of the evidence shows he was not on the sixth floor when the shots were fired.   

...because he said he could.
How many more days in Iran?

Wow.  Imagine someone making a campaign promise and not being able to fulfill it.  I bet that never happened with Biden or Obama.  LOL.  Trump speaks figuratively and in absolutes.  There was no way that he or anyone could end that war in 24 hours.  Taking that statement literally is a product of some type of TDS that results from the endless media propaganda.  Trump did try to fulfill that promise.  He made a concerted effort to get Putin to end the war.  It hasn't worked.  In contrast, Biden did absolutely nothing.  He made no effort to find a solution.  He just sent our money to a corrupt government and hoped for the best.  Obama refused to send Ukraine any weapons.  They were both weak and emboldened Putin to invade.  Trump is supposed to clean up that mess is one day?  Get a grip.  Try to think for yourself about how this situation developed, who is at fault, and the realistic options for ending it.

Several Republican politicians, party officials, and political figures have been arrested, charged, or sentenced for crimes against children. These instances cross various levels of government and party infrastructure, ranging from state legislators to local party chairs.

There are plenty of perverts across the political spectrum. John Wayne Gacy was active in Illinois Democrat politics and even had his picture taken with Rosalyn Carter.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d9/John_Wayne_Gacy_Rosalynn_Carter_1978.jpg

For either party to assert this is only a problem with the other side is absurd.

A couple follow-up points: First and foremost, we should remember that Connally himself, the guy who actually experienced the wounding, insisted he was not hit before Z229-230. After viewing the Zapruder film a few times for the WC, Connally said he was not hit before Z230. Two years later, in 1966, he was given the opportunity by LIFE magazine to study high-quality color prints of the Zapruder film under high magnification, frame by frame, and to take as much time as he felt he needed. After doing so, Connally insisted he was certain he was not hit before Z229, and he selected Z234 as the moment of the bullet's impact.

JBC remembered how he reacted to being shot by doubling over and dipping to his right. What he didn't remember was his involuntary reflexive arm flip beginning at Z226 which came a split second after being shot and a split second before he began to dip to his right. JBC looked at the Z-frames and saw what he remembered doing and decided he was hit at about Z230. He was only off by less than half a second. I'll give him an A-minus for his effort.

Like most CTs, you have no explanation for why JBC would suddenly flip his arm upward at Z-226, the same frame JFK suddenly flipped both of his arms up. Instead you choose to pretend that didn't happen.

As you noted, in Z230 Connally is still holding the hat. The hat is not pinned or wedged involuntarily against his thigh but is being held by his right hand. This proves his wrist could not have been hit yet, but the SBT requires that he was hit no later than Z224, and the Zapruder film shows he was clearly hit well before Z224.

This proves you have very poor analytical skills. The claim that JBC could not have held onto his hat after being shot in the wrist is a bogus one based on assumptions by laymen who have no idea what they are talking about. People do not automatically drop things when they are shot. To illustrate this, Michael Baden pointed to the assassination of mob boss Carmine Gallante who was shot and killed while eating lunch at a sidewalk cafe in Brooklyn. His lifeless body still had his cigar clenched in his teeth as shown below.

https://nypost.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2019/03/galante4.jpg?quality=75&strip=all&w=1488

It is revealing that even the HSCA FPP majority disagreed among themselves about how long Connally could have held onto his hat after the supposed SBT hit at Z188-190 (there was a Z188-190 hit, but it was not the alleged magic bullet). They fell back on the royal dodge that there was "little empirical data" to determine "with confidence what specific reaction should be expected from this type of wound (7 HSCA 180)."

IOW, there is no proof JBC would have dropped his hat after being shot.

 

Well, yeah, unless they had film of someone being shot in the right wrist ala Connally's wrist wound, or unless they actually watched someone incurring such a wound, there was indeed little empirical data, i.e., data verified by observation or experience; however, there was plenty of scientific medical data that said there was no way a person could continue to hold onto a hat with their hand after the distal end of the radius bone was shattered and after part of the radial nerve was severed, and the FPP majority surely knew it.

Please cite such data.

It is also rather revealing that in the FPP majority's reply to Dr. Wecht's dissent, they made no effort to explain how Connally could have continued to grip his hat--not one word. Wecht mocked the majority's waffling on this key point:

Wecht exhibit 6 shows JBC firmly clutching his hat. This is approximately 1.5 seconds after he is alleged to have been shot through the chest, right wrist, and into his left thigh. Indeed, the FPPR [forensic pathology panel report] states that they were surprised that although he had suffered the injury to his wrist, he did not drop his hat. The panel should not only be surprised, but incredulous. If they were not so slavishly dedicated to defending the Warren Commission report (WCR), and the previous opinions submitted by two of the panel members, Dr. James Weston and Dr. Werner Spitz, they would have interpreted this picture correctly and accepted it for what it obviously and clearly demonstrates-namely, that JBC was not struck in the chest, wrist, or thigh by CE 399, and the SBT is, therefore, indefensible. (7 HSCA 199)

The burden of proof belongs to the person(s) making a claim. The claim is that JBC could not have held his hat after being shot in the wrist, an assertion for which there is no evidence.

Quote

In his HSCA testimony, Wecht explained why Z230 poses such a severe problem for the SBT:

Mr. PURDY. Dr. Wecht, in your opinion, could Governor Connally have incurred the damage to his wrist which is described in the medical reports and still be holding the hat as shown in this photograph?

Dr. WECHT. No, absolutely not. In F-245, which is a blowup of Zapruder frame 230, we are told under the single-bullet theory that Gov. John Connally, for a period of approximately one and a half seconds, has already been shot through the right chest with the right lung pierced and collapsed, through the right wrist, with the distal end of the radius comminuted and the radial nerve partially
severed.

Z230 is actually only about a half second after JBC was shot. The HSCA timing of the shots was completely FUBAR based on bogus junk science. It really doesn't matter because JBC continued to hold his hat well after he began his gyrations in reaction to having been shot.

Quote

I heard some vague reference to a nerve in the prior testimony, but I didn't hear the follow through discussion that I was waiting for about nerve damage. There was nerve damage, yes, to the radial nerve. And the thumb which holds this large Texas white Stetson that is required for it to be in apposition with the index or index and middle fingers to hold that hat is innervated by the radial nerve. Note in F-245 that the hat is still being held and Governor Connally is not reacting. (1 HSCA 342)[/font]

Finally, it is worth remembering that Dr. Werner Spitz, one of the FPP majority, admitted in 1975 that the back-wound bullet "penetrated the skin in a sharply upward direction" and that the bullet "traveled upwards within the body." He admitted this in his report to the Rockefeller Commission, adding that there was "no doubt" about it:

There is no doubt that the bullet which struck the President’s back penetrated the skin in a sharply upward direction, as is evident from the width of the abrasion at the lower half of the bullet wound of entrance. The term "sharply upward direction" is used because it is evident from this injury that the missile traveled upwards within the body. (Report of Werner Spitz, 4/24/75, p. 1, Rockefeller Commission papers, see https://websites.umich.edu/~ahaq/correspondence.pdf)

One of the favorite ploys of CTs is to quote people out of context. The statement that the bullet went through JFK on an upward trajectory was in relaton to the anatomical position, i.e. flat on his back. JFK was not in an anatomical position when shot in the back. The picture below, taken shortly before the shooting, replicates the JFK's approximate position at the time of the shooting, with his right elbow on the side of the car and turned toward the spectators to his right. This position raises his right shoulder while lowering the position of his necktie in the front which is where the bullet exited.
https://media.cnn.com/api/v1/images/stellar/prod/231116124910-lead-image-jfk-assassination.jpg?q=w_3000,c_fill

The HSCA FPP UNANIMOUSLY concluded that a bullet entered JFK's back and exited from his throat. If that bullet had passed through JFK on an upward trajectory, it would have to have been fired from below and behind JFK. Of course that is a ludicrous proposition.

Quote

The wound's abrasion collar alone makes this clear, so clear that this was something Baden could not sweep under the rug, and so the FPP report acknowledges the upward trajectory of the bullet as it entered the skin and allegedly transited the neck. Baden attempted to explain this devastating fact by assuming that JFK was leaning nearly 60 degrees forward when the bullet struck (oddly, the WC's trajectory experts had to make the same erroneous assumption about the forward lean of JFK's head to make the head-shot trajectory "work").

Once again, an amateur sleuth like MTG tries to substitute his FUBAR analysis of the medical evidence for the unaninous conclusion of a panel of some of the most respected forensic medical examiners of their day. It's a very easy call as to whom we should believe.