Burchett is a good example of how far behind the average American is on the facts of the case, thanks to our thoroughly corrupt Mockingbird media, but he's open to hearing the truth, and I commend him for that and his active participation on the committee. The Dems have been a complete zero. They show little to no interest in the murder of maybe the greatest Dem president of all.
Shocking and sad to think that the Democrats have not supported this investigation.
My guess is they want nothing to do with Trump, and RFK Jr taking the lead on this. As a Democrat myself, I can’t help but think that political differences should be pushed aside for the greater good here.
Understanding the true history regarding the political violence of the 1960s, and also the origins of the Vietnam War, benefit all Americans.
As far as greatest Democratic Presidents, I would have to say that title should go to FDR first, Truman second, and JFK third.
Maybe FDR for the programs and agencies he created, but he didn't have the world vision JFK had IMO. Truman, ugh. He dropped two atomic bombs on civilian populations and signed the CIA into law, creating the monstrous national security state which usurped the power of our elected government and oppresses us to this very day.
Well, considering that FDR made a Herculean effort to get this country out of the Depression, and in the process put millions of Americans back to work, I’d say this achievement was significant.
Add to that his being elected to four terms in office-unprecedented. And then leading the US into a successful wartime posture-truly amazing.
As far as his global vision-sadly we’ll never know. His death at 62 was a tremendous loss.
But I believe he was an intelligent, fair minded man, who respected the working class, and cherished democracy.
Truman-give ‘em hell Harry!
He was feisty, and pushed back hard against his enemies. He spoke his mind clearly and forcibly.
I admired his plain spoken, but firm convictions. And his ability to make decisions that he considered in the best interests of the US.
I agree that his decision to drop the atomic bombs was utterly tragic.
I also believe other military locations should have been used.
That would have been a tough decision to make for any president.
JFK had many inherent gifts.
He was an intelligent, and quick witted communicator. With a magnetic, charming personality. He clearly sought out the best policies for the US, its citizens, and our allies. He understood the dangers facing the world with nuclear armaments piling up between the US and Soviet Union.
Yet, he was an idealist at heart.
And a very resourceful and shrewd politician.
His pushing and maneuvering of the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty through Congress, and sidestepping the State Department and JCS was an epic moment in his administration.
Few people thought he could get it passed.
But he did.
Kennedy had all the earmarks of a great president in play.
He pushed the US to examine its commitment to civil rights.
Far more than any president before him. It would have been great to see JFK gain more success with his civil rights legislation during a second term.
Sadly, we’ll never know how a second term would have evolved.
I’d like to think our involvement in Vietnam would have wound down without us sending combat troops.
And countless Vietnamese and US troops spared a horrible war.
I think John Kennedy’s presidency may have unfolded quite differently if he had not locked horns immediately with the CIA so early in his presidency. He had justifiable reasons to not trust Dulles and the people around him. I believe Dulles’ team were not honest with JFK about their intentions regarding landing a relatively small assault force into Cuba.
The Bay of Pigs was a huge mistake.
But Kennedy approved it.
As much as I admired him as president, I believe there was some naïveté on his part to confront the CIA, after this colossal blunder, when his presidency had not solidified more steadfast allies in government.
And it’s arguable, that the Bay of Pigs fiasco led to the Soviet Union’s decision to install Nuclear Missiles in October of 1962.
JFK handled the Missile Crisis admirably.
Tragically though, one could argue rationally that President Kennedy’s mistake with the Bay of Pigs brought the US to this nuclear confrontation, 18 months later.
Let's see. FDR finagled us into WWII. Truman recognized the state of Israel in a heartbeat. JFK kept the peace and kept us out of the worst foreign entanglement. I think you can eliminate the first two guys.
And as much as I truly admired JFK, in all fairness, his presidency sadly lasted 1,000 days. He accomplished a good deal in that time. And had the potential to be a very consequential president if he had lived, and won reelection.
But as we all know a second term was denied him. And America lost out on the potential he offered.
Here we are 62 years later bitterly debating the reasons why and how he died.
With all due respect, I believe to judge a president’s time in office, historians have to focus on concrete facts and accomplishments on record.
Anything else can be construed as conjecture, and personal bias.
Surely, he will update the other two congressman on this testimony. Then, this group may write Trump again on how to further uncover the Truth. Next steps need to occur.
And where are the Dems on genocide? It's #DemExit for me and the pundits I listen to (Dore, Mate, Blumenthal, Weiss, Salvati, Halper, etc). We need a new party.
The four concluding words in Dan Hardway's opening statement, delivered with that special eloquence peculiar to succinct expression, posed the same question that I have asked verbosely in print, on social media, and from conference podiums.
My version: "How can we define and effect justice for JFK and the untold millions of souls collaterally damaged by his assassins?"
Mr. Hardway's question to committee members and, indeed, to all of us: "What will you do?"
CD, throughout the 400 years of European settlement and 249 years as a Nation, the list of indiscretions is long. If we were the “Greatest Democracy,” we would have a thorough, independent investigation, identify the falsehoods that have been perpetuated for 61 years and legislate solutions intended to prevent a reoccurrence. Just not sure our current selection of elected representatives have any interest in becoming that great democracy?!
The U.S. Constitution is best understood as what is known today in Hollywood as a "treatment" -- a film/series plot overview presented as the foundational element of a "pitch" to prospective producers.
The project was greenlighted. Its profit potential continues to exceed all expectations.
Well, there is more than a shred of evidence that LHO "fired anything that day."
He left the TSBD immediately after the assassination. He went to his boarding house and retrieved a revolver. He walked to the scene of the Tippett shooting and was indentified by several witnesses as the shooter. He walked a few more blocks to the Texas Theatre, where he was arrested, in posession of the revolver used in the Tippet murder. And he tested positive for nitrites on his hands (but not on his cheeks) after his arrest.
I would be confident that I could convict him, in 1963, for the Tippet murder in Dallas (but NOT for the JFK assassination).
There were other witnesses to the Tippit murder who contradicted that story. There may have been two assassins. Allegedly, two types of shell casings were found at the scene, one set being for a semi-auto. All of them were confiscated by the FBI IIRC.
Don't start with the "nitrates on hands of a warehouse worker" bit, that leads nowhere, and he wasn't ever at the site of the Tippit shooting, the revolver wasn't tied to the murder, read the above synthesis by Jim DiEuegnio.
I am glad you found the DeEugenio article on this topic. I was wondering if DPD ever performed ballistics testing on the bullets which struck Off. Tippit, and what they revealed.
According to DeEugenio, the .38 Smith & Wesson revolver recovered at theTexas Theater had been reconfigured by a third party gunsmith company to accomodate .38 automatic ammo, resulting in a barrel gap that made standard ballistic testing impossible. Furthermore, the bullet fragment sent by DPD to the FBI was found to be too small to permit an admissible ballistics match to the Oswald handgun.
As to the nitrites found on paraffin testing, I would remind you that the "warehouse exposure" defense would be admissible at trial, but would not be sufficient to exclude the results of the paraffin test. (BTW, I argued this point with the late John McAdams. He was unaware that the paraffin test was, and still IS, admissible in Texas state courts. He awarded me with his highest honor: "A sceptic, but not a buff.")
DeEugenio admits that at least two of the purported four eyewitnesses identified LHO as the suspect they saw at 10th & Patton at the time of the killing.
J.M. McCarthy said there was "not a shred of evidence that LHO fired anything that day." That assertion is demonstrably false. LHO would have been convicted by a 1964 Texas jury for the Tippit murder. Probably for the assassination too, but in 1964, not today.
No uncoerced "eyewitnesses" identified Oswald as being at 10th & Patton so still no legally viable i.d. That fits with LHO at the TSBD, no credible witnesses there either. There's still no credible evidence Oswald fired anything that day, certainly nothing found in Jim's article. Besides, there were indeed eyewitnesses who identified other suspects in the Tippit killing, what about them?! The case, such as it was, wouldn't even have made it to trial.
IMO, Republicans like Burchett, Luna, Rand Paul, and Johnson lead on JFK, UFOs/UAPs, mass surveillance, and Covid vaccine injuries and policy. The Dems are AWOL. #DemExit.
Burchett is a good example of how far behind the average American is on the facts of the case, thanks to our thoroughly corrupt Mockingbird media, but he's open to hearing the truth, and I commend him for that and his active participation on the committee. The Dems have been a complete zero. They show little to no interest in the murder of maybe the greatest Dem president of all.
Shocking and sad to think that the Democrats have not supported this investigation.
My guess is they want nothing to do with Trump, and RFK Jr taking the lead on this. As a Democrat myself, I can’t help but think that political differences should be pushed aside for the greater good here.
Understanding the true history regarding the political violence of the 1960s, and also the origins of the Vietnam War, benefit all Americans.
As far as greatest Democratic Presidents, I would have to say that title should go to FDR first, Truman second, and JFK third.
IMHOP.
Maybe FDR for the programs and agencies he created, but he didn't have the world vision JFK had IMO. Truman, ugh. He dropped two atomic bombs on civilian populations and signed the CIA into law, creating the monstrous national security state which usurped the power of our elected government and oppresses us to this very day.
Well, considering that FDR made a Herculean effort to get this country out of the Depression, and in the process put millions of Americans back to work, I’d say this achievement was significant.
Add to that his being elected to four terms in office-unprecedented. And then leading the US into a successful wartime posture-truly amazing.
As far as his global vision-sadly we’ll never know. His death at 62 was a tremendous loss.
But I believe he was an intelligent, fair minded man, who respected the working class, and cherished democracy.
Truman-give ‘em hell Harry!
He was feisty, and pushed back hard against his enemies. He spoke his mind clearly and forcibly.
I admired his plain spoken, but firm convictions. And his ability to make decisions that he considered in the best interests of the US.
I agree that his decision to drop the atomic bombs was utterly tragic.
I also believe other military locations should have been used.
That would have been a tough decision to make for any president.
JFK had many inherent gifts.
He was an intelligent, and quick witted communicator. With a magnetic, charming personality. He clearly sought out the best policies for the US, its citizens, and our allies. He understood the dangers facing the world with nuclear armaments piling up between the US and Soviet Union.
Yet, he was an idealist at heart.
And a very resourceful and shrewd politician.
His pushing and maneuvering of the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty through Congress, and sidestepping the State Department and JCS was an epic moment in his administration.
Few people thought he could get it passed.
But he did.
Kennedy had all the earmarks of a great president in play.
He pushed the US to examine its commitment to civil rights.
Far more than any president before him. It would have been great to see JFK gain more success with his civil rights legislation during a second term.
Sadly, we’ll never know how a second term would have evolved.
I’d like to think our involvement in Vietnam would have wound down without us sending combat troops.
And countless Vietnamese and US troops spared a horrible war.
I think John Kennedy’s presidency may have unfolded quite differently if he had not locked horns immediately with the CIA so early in his presidency. He had justifiable reasons to not trust Dulles and the people around him. I believe Dulles’ team were not honest with JFK about their intentions regarding landing a relatively small assault force into Cuba.
The Bay of Pigs was a huge mistake.
But Kennedy approved it.
As much as I admired him as president, I believe there was some naïveté on his part to confront the CIA, after this colossal blunder, when his presidency had not solidified more steadfast allies in government.
And it’s arguable, that the Bay of Pigs fiasco led to the Soviet Union’s decision to install Nuclear Missiles in October of 1962.
JFK handled the Missile Crisis admirably.
Tragically though, one could argue rationally that President Kennedy’s mistake with the Bay of Pigs brought the US to this nuclear confrontation, 18 months later.
Let's see. FDR finagled us into WWII. Truman recognized the state of Israel in a heartbeat. JFK kept the peace and kept us out of the worst foreign entanglement. I think you can eliminate the first two guys.
I believe Hitler's multiple invasions of Europe, and Japan's attacks first on China and then on Pearl Harbor would not be considered "finagling."
I agree probably FDR #1, then JFK #2...but Truman #2?!!
Where would you put Truman, if not #2 ?…..
IMHOP he was the most underrated President since WWII.
He inherited the presidency from FDR during the most consequential war the world has ever seen.
Under his leadership, he brought that war swiftly to an end.
He was responsible for the successful implementation of the Berlin Airlift, The Marshall Plan, and NATO.
He pushed back hard against the spread of communism.
He was responsible for the US taking the lead in the Korean War.
And Truman also fired General MacArthur-a popular war hero-for his overstepping and insubordinate attitude.
That was a huge decision to make on Truman’s part.
Truman was also responsible for the desegregation of the US Military.
Truman’s life story is truly incredible. From his humble beginnings, to combat experience in WWI, he was a proven man of integrity.
And consequential President in US History.
Just my opinion, but I think Harry Truman has been seriously overlooked by scholars and political pundits.
Heck, everyone wrote him off in 1948!!
And as much as I truly admired JFK, in all fairness, his presidency sadly lasted 1,000 days. He accomplished a good deal in that time. And had the potential to be a very consequential president if he had lived, and won reelection.
But as we all know a second term was denied him. And America lost out on the potential he offered.
Here we are 62 years later bitterly debating the reasons why and how he died.
With all due respect, I believe to judge a president’s time in office, historians have to focus on concrete facts and accomplishments on record.
Anything else can be construed as conjecture, and personal bias.
Burchett has been proactive ..... Maybe he'll now add more next steps to the letter that he sent Trump. https://cohen.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/congressmen-cohen-schweikert-and-burchett-write-trump-seeking-release
I agree Burchett is great. He could have been an equally good chair of the committee.
Surely, he will update the other two congressman on this testimony. Then, this group may write Trump again on how to further uncover the Truth. Next steps need to occur.
Declassify and unredact #1 on the 693-page list of the CIA's "Family Jewels."
Yes, that totally shocks me! WTF, Dems?!!! Steve Cohen from (D. TN) used to be very outspoken on the JFKA. Where is he?
And where are the Dems on genocide? It's #DemExit for me and the pundits I listen to (Dore, Mate, Blumenthal, Weiss, Salvati, Halper, etc). We need a new party.
That's a good point, couldn't agree more.
For the average American I suppose if you were born after let's say 1965-70,
the murder of JFK in 1963 must seem quite ancient.
The four concluding words in Dan Hardway's opening statement, delivered with that special eloquence peculiar to succinct expression, posed the same question that I have asked verbosely in print, on social media, and from conference podiums.
My version: "How can we define and effect justice for JFK and the untold millions of souls collaterally damaged by his assassins?"
Mr. Hardway's question to committee members and, indeed, to all of us: "What will you do?"
CD, throughout the 400 years of European settlement and 249 years as a Nation, the list of indiscretions is long. If we were the “Greatest Democracy,” we would have a thorough, independent investigation, identify the falsehoods that have been perpetuated for 61 years and legislate solutions intended to prevent a reoccurrence. Just not sure our current selection of elected representatives have any interest in becoming that great democracy?!
Not just "current", of course.
The U.S. Constitution is best understood as what is known today in Hollywood as a "treatment" -- a film/series plot overview presented as the foundational element of a "pitch" to prospective producers.
The project was greenlighted. Its profit potential continues to exceed all expectations.
Kudos to Burchett. Although I don’t believe there is a SHRED of evidence that Oswald fired anything that day.
Well, there is more than a shred of evidence that LHO "fired anything that day."
He left the TSBD immediately after the assassination. He went to his boarding house and retrieved a revolver. He walked to the scene of the Tippett shooting and was indentified by several witnesses as the shooter. He walked a few more blocks to the Texas Theatre, where he was arrested, in posession of the revolver used in the Tippet murder. And he tested positive for nitrites on his hands (but not on his cheeks) after his arrest.
I would be confident that I could convict him, in 1963, for the Tippet murder in Dallas (but NOT for the JFK assassination).
I disagree with the witness identification, because there was a woman who identified two other men involved that ambushed Tippitt.
Right there you have a conflict of witness testimonies.
Yes, and Acquilla was threatened to keep her mouth shut about the 2 men!
There were other witnesses to the Tippit murder who contradicted that story. There may have been two assassins. Allegedly, two types of shell casings were found at the scene, one set being for a semi-auto. All of them were confiscated by the FBI IIRC.
https://www.kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-articles/the-tippit-case-in-the-new-millennium
Don't start with the "nitrates on hands of a warehouse worker" bit, that leads nowhere, and he wasn't ever at the site of the Tippit shooting, the revolver wasn't tied to the murder, read the above synthesis by Jim DiEuegnio.
Richard:
I am glad you found the DeEugenio article on this topic. I was wondering if DPD ever performed ballistics testing on the bullets which struck Off. Tippit, and what they revealed.
According to DeEugenio, the .38 Smith & Wesson revolver recovered at theTexas Theater had been reconfigured by a third party gunsmith company to accomodate .38 automatic ammo, resulting in a barrel gap that made standard ballistic testing impossible. Furthermore, the bullet fragment sent by DPD to the FBI was found to be too small to permit an admissible ballistics match to the Oswald handgun.
As to the nitrites found on paraffin testing, I would remind you that the "warehouse exposure" defense would be admissible at trial, but would not be sufficient to exclude the results of the paraffin test. (BTW, I argued this point with the late John McAdams. He was unaware that the paraffin test was, and still IS, admissible in Texas state courts. He awarded me with his highest honor: "A sceptic, but not a buff.")
DeEugenio admits that at least two of the purported four eyewitnesses identified LHO as the suspect they saw at 10th & Patton at the time of the killing.
J.M. McCarthy said there was "not a shred of evidence that LHO fired anything that day." That assertion is demonstrably false. LHO would have been convicted by a 1964 Texas jury for the Tippit murder. Probably for the assassination too, but in 1964, not today.
No uncoerced "eyewitnesses" identified Oswald as being at 10th & Patton so still no legally viable i.d. That fits with LHO at the TSBD, no credible witnesses there either. There's still no credible evidence Oswald fired anything that day, certainly nothing found in Jim's article. Besides, there were indeed eyewitnesses who identified other suspects in the Tippit killing, what about them?! The case, such as it was, wouldn't even have made it to trial.
I'm a Dem...but DADGUMMIT! When it comes to the JFK stuff, I LOVE Tim Burchett! LOL!
IMO, Republicans like Burchett, Luna, Rand Paul, and Johnson lead on JFK, UFOs/UAPs, mass surveillance, and Covid vaccine injuries and policy. The Dems are AWOL. #DemExit.
And Luna.
Burchett asked some great questions. Democrats need to wake up and get back on the right side of history