Well, the JFK documents are out ... 80,000? ... does that include the 2,400 "new ones"? Oh well, we'll see

… my money is still on “Nothing New” … but I could be wrong … accidents happen … not all the MK Ultra documents were destroyed … maybe something important was overlooked here as well … Maybe DJ will point out the RFK trap documents on Friday.

Link to the JFK documents in this article … in case you, like Trump previously, have time to read all 80,000 documents. It still leaves him with a problem … from a previous post … THE PROBLEM FOR TRUMP THAT I HAVE NOT SEEN ADDRESSED …

Who, What, When, Where, and How …
Mr Trump on exactly what day (or days) and time (or times) did you see the unreleased JFK documents? How long did it take you to read through the roughly 5000 (NYT figure of 4684 docs - still unclear whether doc = page) pages? (NOW WE FIND OUT THERE ARE 80,000 +/- THE RECENTLY FOUND 2400) What is/are the name/names of the person/persons who brought and handed you the documents? What agency/agencies were/are they from? In what physical location/locations did you see and read the documents? Did you read 5000 pages of ORIGINAL / PRIMARY DOCUMENTS? Did you actually read ALL 5000 pages (NOW 80,000)? If so how long do you estimate that it took you to read the documents? Given your previous claims concerning your IQ (you seem to be a fan of psychometrics) what are your reading speed and comprehension / content retention / recall measures? When was the last time they were measured? Were ALL 5000 pages (NOW 80,000) completely un-redacted? If the documents are released and they contain nothing of relevance what are we to make of your comments to Napolitano? (paraphrase) “If you saw what was in those documents Andrew you couldn’t release them either” (as reported by Daniel Liszt) If nothing is to be found in the remaining documents then either you lied to Napolitano about what you claim to have read and understood or he lied about the fact that you told him such. If you did in fact speak to him about what you had read then he either lied about what you said to him or grossly misunderstood and misinterpreted what you told him.

… I’ll brave another prediction … there will be NO-thing of any consequence if we are actually able to see them … OR … we will see what Stanton F. used to show at his talks … sheet after sheet with a readable Date and possibly a page number at the top followed by lines and lines and lines of black redactions.

This situation does put Trump in a slight bind. If the documents are released and there is nothing of consequence there, then he has to answer for what he “allegedly” said to Andrew Napolitano. Trump has to either deny saying anything along those lines to Napolitano or he has to say that Napolitano “misunderstood” him.

but … Hope springs eternal.- from an Essay on Man, a poem by Alexander Pope

or if you prefer Latin … Dum spiro spero.

The above comments were from a previous post

3 Likes

… Just for grins and giggles I’m going to randomly look around in the “documents”. I started looking through the documents and on the First document listed (104-10003-10041.pdf) there is a handwritten note (clipping not retained) in reference to the newspaper article referenced.
Here is a follow up on a question concerning WCD - CD - 971. It isn’t clear that this Warren Commission Document has been de-classified.

So, given that the very first document listed has a piece “not retained” and it is unclear that related documents to files have been de-classsified … Why should we feel that ANY released document listed is “complete”? What if there are other documents that should be attached (i.e. should be part of the document that one is looking at) that “weren’t retained” but not noted as in the above case? Is there no record of what “originally was included” or “should be included” in a specific file? Enough specific information concerning the “unretained” article in this case should make it able to be located. But … others ???

I do believe the church recognizes both sins of commission and omission.

Dark Journalist has a special vid right now.

https://www.youtube.com/live/oVeGdrqdA7E?si=L24VVeo4Ge0yVcT-

2 Likes

If reading docs this website is for decoding all the abbreviations…,

https://www.maryferrell.org/php/cryptdb.php?id=KUBARK

If you search for the acronyms this site may pop up.

2 Likes

… this interesting bit in relation to the mention of Gary Underhill (J. Garrett Underhill) document/memo in the JFK drop …

“The friends whom Underhill visited say he was sober but badly shook. They say he attributed the Kennedy murder to a CIA clique which was carrying on a lucrative racket in gun-running, narcotics, and other contraband and manipulating political intrigue to serve its own ends,” the memo alleges.

… just a thought if possible … since there were / are supposedly members of the CIA unjustly enriching themselves … is there anyway to check past tax returns for those in the CIA that Underhill might have known? Did any of those whom Underhill might have known leave “unusually large” estates given their pay grade and retirement? I know that the FBI have caught several of their own by “noticing” that their standard of living was well above the expected for their pay grade. Just trying to think of unusual ways to check out reports.

1 Like

Anyone looked into Jackie Kennedy possibly been Mossad? Or a Mossad plant at least ?

Here’s a call between her and LBJ a month after her husbands death. Not revealing her involvement in anything, but still a weird call.

https://x.com/Aku_700/status/1903634220808912930

Martin Sandler on the Ben Gurion/Kennedy feud.

https://x.com/satch_omega/status/1903643640733331460

And did Kennedy Jr call Biden a “traitor” in 94?

1 Like

JFK autopsy pictures.




image