Amazing what an LN will do to twist and turn something to benefit his case.
Frazier is (and has always been) adamant about his description of the bag and he doesn't know if there was a rifle in it or not.
It is a simple as that. Everything else is just your bias at work.
It's 58 years after the fact and an LN is still struggling to somehow increase the size of the bag so that a rifle can fit in it. 
Your struggle is not against LNers but reality. The bag was found. It had Oswald's prints on it. It has been measured. No one has to rely on an estimate of its size made at a glance with no particular cause to take note of it. Here is where you go into the song and dance about proving this is the bag Oswald carried that morning. Spare us. No bag matching Frazier's description was ever found in the building. Oswald himself denied carrying any bag other than his ordinary lunch bag (i.e. not one matching Frazier's estimate). So he is either lying or Frazier is lying about him carrying a much longer bag that morning. And who has the incentive to lie about that? Obviously Oswald if it contained the rifle. If Old Lee simply had a shorter bag that contained some nonincriminating item like curtain rods he not only admits to that but directs the police to that bag. Instead he denies it.
No other person who worked on that floor ever accounted for the bag that was found. It had no apparent work-related purpose to be there and no other person who had access to the floor ever claimed that bag or offered any explanation for its presence there. The claim that this large bag was made to carry some other evidence out of the building like a window sill is laughable. If there is an object inside the bag, the cops are holding that object. You don't make a large bag to protect evidence for prints, but then hold the evidence getting your prints all over it. LOL. It's obvious that if there is an object in the bag its being used to avoid touching the bag. Thus, the bag is the evidence and not any object inside the bag.
