Ted Or Has His Or Her Case Dismissed, The Defendant Is Entitled, As A: Fill & Download for Free

I found this source:Japanese Americans incarcerated during World War II could still vote, kind ofDenshoThursday, October 20, 2016 - 11:30amBy Natasha VarnerOriginal caption from the War Relocation Authority: San Bruno, California. Here a line is seen waiting to enter the building where they will cast their votes for Councilman from their precinct. A general election for five members of the Tanforan Assembly center Advisory Council is being held on this day. This is the first time Issei have ever been able to vote because of American Naturalization laws. June 16, 1942.Credit:Dorothea Lange/National Archives and Records AdministrationNearly 75 years ago, 120,000 Americans of Japanese descent were stripped of their rights and property under the guise of national security.They were packed into trains and buses and moved from their West Coast homes — to temporary holding stations at fairgrounds and racing tracks, and then to permanent camps in remote parts of Idaho, California, Utah, Arizona, Wyoming, Colorado, Texas and Arkansas. Though several cases challenging the legality of this imprisonment made it all the way to the Supreme Court, only a single ruling favored the Japanese American petitioners.It might come as a surprise, then, that they retained a key tenet of citizenship for the duration of their incarceration: the right to vote. However, between racially motivated interventions and inadequate voter education, this right was only nominally intact.Absentee voting had existed in some form since 1652, but World War II marked the first and only time in US history that states had to make large-scale arrangements for an incarcerated civilian population to cast votes in absentia. The result was a hodgepodge of rules and regulations that effectively disenfranchised the Japanese American electorate.One of the first questions to confound wartime voting planners was where exactly the civilian incarcerees should vote. In California, the state with the highest population of displaced Japanese Americans, the constitution stipulated that residence had to be “of choice” in order to qualify for voter registration. It was plain to all that the prison camps were anything but residences of choice. As a result, Japanese Americans were instructed to vote in the precincts where they’d lived prior to incarceration. Other states with camps, fearful of the influence these “enemy aliens” might have on local elections, enacted similar regulations.By August 1942, the Wartime Civil Control Administration released a policy statement announcing that “qualified citizen evacuees” — the people held in camps — were entitled to the same absentee voting rights as any other citizen who was unable to be present at his or her registered polling place. But states and counties were left to grapple with what exactly those absentee voting rights were in this unprecedented scenario.Alice Fujinaga of Seattle and other incarcerees at Tule Lake concentration camp have their absentee ballots notarized, November 2, 1942.Credit:Francis Stewart/National Archives and Records AdministrationEven as the logistics of voting and other basic facets of civilian incarceration were being sorted out, an editorial in the newly minted Tanforan Totalizer urged residents, many of whom were living in old horse stalls at that race track-turned-prison, not to let their “civic consciousness atrophy”:“As citizens who hope to return eventually to normal roles in the American scene, it is highly important that we exercise all such rights and privileges of citizenship as will make our return seem less another abrupt transition than a continuation of accustomed practices.”Civic duty aside, many Japanese Americans felt that they had no choice but to cast a ballot. Election laws stipulated that voter registration would automatically expire if an individual failed to vote in even a single election cycle. However, as incarcerees prepared for the impending midterm elections, they had limited awareness of the issues and candidates due to lack of access to news sources. To make matters worse, new voting regulations prohibited electioneering in the camps.From Utah’s Topaz concentration camp in November 1942, Doris Hayashi wrote in her diary, “I haven’t been able to do any reading on these issues so it was rather blind voting for me.” A fellow prisoner, Charles Kikuchi, had a similar experience: “I did not know much about the local issues, so I left most of them blank. … California politics are so distant to me now. I wonder how my interest in such things will be with the passage of time.”Japanese Americans enter the Recreational Hall at Tanforan Assembly Center on June 16, 1942.Credit:Dorothea Lange/National Archives and Records AdministrationThough 2,000 absentee ballots were sent to voters in multiple relocation centers in the fall of 1942, Kikuchi wrote, “A Los Angeles report claimed that less than 100 Nisei voted in that city, but this figure seems much too low. There must have been over 100 L.A. Nisei voters in this camp alone that cast their ballots.”The discrepancy that Kikuchi noted points to yet another impediment to voting rights for wartime incarcerees. At least one report mentioned poll watchers challenging “every ballot sent in by anyone with a Japanese name” on the false grounds that Japanese Americans held dual citizenship with Japan and therefore could not vote in US elections. It’s impossible to know how many ballots sent from the camps were thrown out due to race-based meddling at the polling stations. But what is clear is that the opposition was colored by the same currents of racism and bigotry that led to Japanese American incarceration in the first place.Ballot box interventions were likely influenced by the Native Sons of the Golden West, a group that sought to strip all non-white Americans of their citizenship. This white supremacist organization had stoked anti-Japanese American sentiment in the decades leading up to World War II, and was a major proponent of mass incarceration after Pearl Harbor.In 1942 and '43 the Native Sons joined forces with the American Legion to sue San Francisco County’s registrar of voters, Cameron H. King, in an attempt to remove Nisei names from the voter rolls and to prevent them from voting for the duration of the war. As reported in the Rohwer concentration camp newspaper, they contended that “dishonesty, deceit, and hypocrisy are racial characteristics of the Japanese” and that this made them “unfit for American citizenship.”The parties argued their case, Regan v. King, in California’s Federal District Court. Representing the Native Sons, former California Attorney General U.S. Webb made the brazenly bigoted argument that the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution were made entirely “by and for white people.” The federal district judge rejected the Native Sons’ plea, but the case moved up to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. There it was quickly dismissed on the precedent of the 1898 Wong Kim Ark Supreme Court decision that had determined US citizenship for all American-born individuals. Relentless in his efforts to advance the case, Webb attempted to bring it before the Supreme Court, but they refused to hear it.The American Civil Liberties Union saw parallels between this case of racist nativism and their own fight for black voting rights. In response, they lent support to the defense and spurred the Japanese American Citizens League (JACL) into action once the case reached the 9th Circuit. African American lawyers also served as counsel to the JACL in their drafting of the amicus brief that helped overturn the case. This alliance would carry over into post-World War II civil rights advocacy that eventually led to the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.Also: Despite history, Japanese Americans and African Americans are working together to claim their rightsThe landmark case also firmly established the rights of all Americans to birthright citizenship. As defendant Cameron King later wrote, “Japanese ancestry is immaterial” when it comes to citizenship rights and “they are entitled to exactly the same rights as all other citizens.” King went on to note that “the law makes no discrimination against any citizen because of ancestry."By the time of the 1944 presidential election, Japanese Americans had been imprisoned for a full two years. Once again, questions arose about where the incarcerees ought to register to vote. The Wyoming Attorney General issued a statement announcing that his state’s voting rights would not be extended to those incarcerated at Heart Mountain. With other states sharing his view, it was ultimately determined that all incarcerees should again register in their precincts of origin since they did not meet the legal requirements for establishing domesticity in the states where they were imprisoned. But once again, complicated rules would have made it inordinately difficult to cast a ballot.Among other regulations added in 1944, The Poston Chronicle reported that in applying for an absentee ballot, individuals needed to “make clear that the voter means to keep the state of California as his permanent home and will return when able.” Voters were also required to return ballots within a narrow window — “not more than 20 and not less than 5 days before election day.” Considering that California was not hospitable to returning Japanese Americans and the inconsistency of mail service, these rules would have stacked the odds against those wanting to vote.California’s Attorney General Ted Hass also acknowledged that the voting law might be enforced arbitrarily. As reported in The Gila News-Courier, “probably the different county clerks will act in different ways upon receipt of such applications [for voter registration]. Some may take the mistaken view that the evacuees are no longer legal residents of the state.”Though the courts had struck down the overtly racist appeals to deny Japanese Americans the right to vote, restrictive rules like these quietly excluded them from fair participation in the electoral process.While the circumstances of Japanese American incarceration were unique, this type of race-based voter disenfranchisement echoed throughout marginalized communities in America, most notably in the Jim Crow South where black citizens were routinely kept off the voting rolls. The desire to obtain fair and equal access to voting rights was central to the Civil Rights Movement. And activists like Yuri Kochiyama and William Marutani drew upon their own experiences of injustice during the war years to support the struggle for black civil rights.African American demonstrators outside the White House, with signs “We demand the right to vote, everywhere” and signs protesting police brutality. March 12, 1965.Credit:Warren K. Leffler/Library of CongressIn one of the crowning achievements of the Civil Rights Movement, Congress passed the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Author Ari Berman notes that the act “quickly became known as the most important piece of civil rights legislation in the twentieth century and one of the most transformational laws ever passed by Congress.” Theact ended some of the most egregious forms of discrimination that had plagued black voters, and improved voting equity for other minority groups through amendments enacted a decade later. But even that did not eradicate the practice of voter discrimination in its entirety. Congress renewed the act in 2006 (and several times before then in 1970, 1975, and 1982) after hearing testimonies that proved the continued, widespread presence of racial discrimination at the polls.Even so, the Supreme Court decided to invalidate key parts of the Voting Rights Act in 2013 on the grounds that, as Chief Justice John Roberts wrote, it was “based on 40-year-old facts having no logical relationship to the present day.” Though voting discrimination might not be as overt as it was during World War II incarceration or in the Jim Crow South — though the case has been made that, indeed, it is that bad — the threat of widespread race-based voter disenfranchisement is once again a reality.

As another contributor commented, this is indeed exactly the sort of question appreciated by the real conspirators in Pres. Kennedy’s assassination.Lee Oswald almost certainly never even fired a rifle on Nov. 22, 1963. That was the implication of the Dallas PD's paraffin test, which showed no nitrates on his cheek from blowback. It's unlikely he fired a pistol, either, given the bent firing pin on his revolver and the non-matching semi-auto ammo found at the scene of Officer Tippett's murder.Before dismissing me as a "conspiracy theorist" in favor of the Warren Commission's Lone Nut narrative, understand that other "conspiracy theorists" were Gov. John Connally and his wife Nellie, Attorney General Robert Kennedy and FLOTUS Jackie Kennedy, French Intelligence, the Kremlin, several members of the Warren Commission, the U.S. Congress, up to 85 percent of the American public, and Lyndon Johnson. Yeah, LBJ was a "tinfoil hat" type recorded at least twice as saying he suspected a conspiracy in JFK's assassination. And, as one of the conspirators, he was in a position to know.I suggest you do some honest research. Certainly don't believe what you read on Quora or what they say in the corporate-owned press. Don’t believe the government. It is still largely under the control of those who assassinated our president. And don’t believe me. Do the research. A lot of startling new information has surfaced in recent years, though almost never covered by the Mockingbird media. Then, if you find the evidence at variance with ANY of what I am saying, do come back and challenge me.The evidence was not enough to convict Lee Oswald had he been given the due process of law guaranteed every citizen under the U.S. Constitution.Oswald had no motive, means or opportunity. Oswald was a gung-ho Marine who enlisted at the earliest possible age, served in sensitive position as a radar operator for U-2 flights over the USSR—and, now we know, China—volunteered to become a double agent for the USG, and then pretended to defect to the USSR as part of a phony defector program concocted by the CIA. When, despite his desperate efforts, he failed to get recruited by the KGB, Oswald returned to the United States on a State Department repatriation loan. He never technically gave up his U.S. citizenship.Then, despite having "defected" to the USSR, as soon as he returned to the United States, Oswald walked into a job with a graphic arts firm that did Top Secret work for the USG, producing maps from the U-2 overflights, and the FBI hired him at $200/month to pretend to be a Communist sympathizer in order to help it identify pro-Castro Cubans.As Sen. Richard Schweiker (R-PA) of the U.S. Senate Intelligence Committee once put it: “We do know Oswald had intelligence connections. Everywhere you look with him, there are fingerprints of intelligence." U.S. intelligence, just to be clear.We know from the confessions of his mistress Judyth Vary Baker that Oswald worked with her and others on a plot to assassinate Fidel Castro. In one of his last conversations with her, he said he was trying to foil a plot against JFK's life. In fact, he admired Kennedy and may have been the FBI informant, named "Lee," who Secret Service Agent Abraham Boldin said had tipped off the government to the plot against Kennedy's life in Chicago two weeks before Dallas.No reliable evidence connected Oswald to the purported murder weapon, a Mannlicher-Carcano, including the doctored backyard photos and the highly dubious shipment of the mail order gun to a post office box addressed to one "A. Hidell."Reliable eyewitness testimony would show Oswald wasn't even on the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository at the time of the shooting. Only after FBI agents had an hour alone with Oswald’s body at the funeral home did his palm print newly appear on the previously dusted rifle.In the same way, a wallet with identification for A. Hidell magically appeared at the J.D. Tippit crime scene an hour after the area had already been combed by spectators and police. Now, how’s THAT for an orgy of evidence! (Sorta like finding a wallet with ID from one of the hijackers at Ground Zero immediately after 9/11, isn’t it? But I digress.) Oswald was carrying a different wallet when arrested. He didn’t have a lot of money, and credit cards and loyalty cards were not very widely used at that time, so it isn’t plausible that Oswald carried two wallets.The caliber of the Carcano didn’t match that used in the shooting at the home of Gen. Edwin Walker. An eyewitness had seen two men fleeing in separate cars, neither matching Oswald’s description. And, in any case, Oswald didn’t drive. Walker and Kennedy were at opposite ends of the political spectrum, so for them both to be the target of the same assassin seems a bit incongruous. It also seems unlikely for an assassin, while kneeling and firing feverishly with a bolt action rifle, to be able to lay, within moments, several wounds and a mortal head shot on the POTUS in a moving car and yet, from a much nearer distance and with plenty of time to line up his shot, miss a man seated at his desk.Oswald was never given due process or a day in court. The single prison phone call to which he was entitled--he tried to call a retired Army intelligence officer--was deliberately prevented by the government from being connected. Dallas PD claimed it kept no record of his interrogation. Neither did any of the other agencies that questioned him, supposedly.The police lineup for the witness identification of Oswald was a travesty, with everyone else dressed in suits, and he alone disheveled in a tee-shirt with a black eye and complaining that the line-up was unfair. An eyewitness who couldn’t recognize him as the perpetrator only changed his mind after barely surviving a murder attempt.CIA and the Mob, which collaborated so closely on so many different fronts at this time as to be nearly interchangeable, both worked with Oswald, framed him for JFK's murder, and ordered Ruby to silence him before Oswald could speak in his own defense. Oswald was never supposed to be given a chance, and he wasn't.For those of us who weren’t at Dealey Plaza, Oswald's murder by Jack Ruby was surely our first strong indication of conspiracy. Of course, what looked like a gangland hit to silence a potentially problematic witness was quickly explained away as the misguided but well-meaning act of yet another Lone Nut. Mobster Jack Ruby murdered Oswald in a room full of police detectives to prevent Oswald from telling what he knew.By some accounts, Ruby had known Oswald for a considerable time, likely meeting him while running guns to anti-Castro elements in Cuba. A dozen witnesses saw the two together on various occasions, but the Warren Commission concluded they all must have been mistaken. One of Ruby’s strippers testified that her boss had introduced Oswald to her, not long before the assassination, with the words “this is my friend, Lee, from the CIA.” Silvia Odio claimed she'd met Oswald with two anti-Castro Cubans some weeks before the assassination, but she, too, must have "been mistaken," even though she never sought publicity, her sister confirmed the visit, and she'd written to her father of the meeting shortly afterward, before the assassination.It is now painfully evident that Lyndon B. Johnson conspired with several others to assassinate President John F. Kennedy. Johnson’s long-time mistress Madeleine Brown stated that she thought LBJ began hatching the plot as early as 1961. Johnson was one of many individuals who appeared to have foreknowledge of the coming assassination. Brown related the story of how she was surprised to meet LBJ at a party at the home of Texas oil tycoon Clint Murchison on the eve of the assassination. She claimed he had just emerged from a large closed-door meeting when he noticed her and paused to speak with her. Instead of whispering sweet nothings, he told her: “Darling, after tomorrow those SOB Kennedy’s are never gonna embarrass me again. That’s not a threat, that’s a promise!” She claims he repeated a nearly identical statement to her in a phone call the next morning. A month after the assassination, Brown confronted Johnson about the murder. He told her the real people behind it were her fat cat Texas oil friends and “those spooks” in Washington.At the time of the assassination, the ruthless, corrupt and ambitious Johnson was in desperate straits, just one step away from political humiliation and criminal charges. Life Magazine, fed dirt on Johnson by Robert Kennedy’s Justice Department, was about to publish an exposé of Johnson’s incriminating ties to the Bobby Baker corruption scandal in its December 1 edition. JFK appeared poised to use the scandal to ditch Johnson from the Democratic Party ticket in 1964 in favor of Gov. Terry Sanford of North Carolina.JFK seemed likely to coast to a second term as president, Robert “Bobby” Kennedy was in a strong position to succeed him. Youngest brother Sen. Edward “Ted” Kennedy might follow Bobby. The White House might be in Kennedy hands for another 21 years.Anti-Soviet military hawks seeing JFK as an appeaser, defense contractors seeking war in Vietnam, Texas oil tycoons fearful of losing the oil depletion allowance, Central Intelligence Agency officials fired by Kennedy over the Bay of Pigs debacle, Mafiosi angered by Kennedy’s war on crime, Secret Service agents scandalized by Kennedy’s reckless private behavior, jealous husbands cuckolded by Kennedy, etc. — Johnson knew Kennedy’s many enemies in and outside the government and presented himself as a much better alternative.I believe LBJ set the plot in motion, then left its execution largely in the hands of CIA agent Cord Meyer, probably on the recommendation of ex-CIA Director Allen Dulles, fired by JFK after the Bay of Pigs debacle. Meyer was a natural choice. He had been cuckolded by JFK. Indeed, his wife, Mary Pinchot Meyer, was one of JFK’s favorite mistresses. She was assassinated on a footpath in Georgetown a year later, with no one ever convicted for the murder.LBJ probably used his personal attorney Ed Clark and assistant Cliff Carter as his conduits to those, like retiring USAF BG Edward Lansdale, who were most involved in planning the operation. The mainly CIA plotters called on embittered Bay of Pigs veterans—including Frank Sturgis, E. Howard Hunt, and George H.W. “Poppy” Bush—and Mafia allies to carry out the “Big Event.” Research Bush's activities and whereabouts on Nov. 22, 1963. You'll find he was staying at the Sheraton in Dallas. Just who do you suppose was the "independent Houston-area oil operator" briefly detained by Dallas sheriff's deputies as a suspicious person leaving the Dal-Tex Building moments after the shooting? He claimed he'd just ducked into the building to borrow a phone (just in time to miss the presidential motorcade?!). Moments later known Mafioso James Brading, a/k/a Braden, was detained as a suspicious person leaving the Dal-Tex, too. He, too, had supposedly just ducked in to borrow a phone.The Mafia pulled in various elements, including, possibly, French Corsican assassins recruited out of Marseilles with the help of CIA’s William Harvey in Rome. Hired killer Lucien Sarti is often mentioned.LBJ’s personal hit man Malcolm “Mac” Wallace was evidently one of the shooters in the Texas School Book Depository Building. Billie Sol Estes’ 1983 affidavit swore Wallace carried out several political murders for LBJ, including the assassination of JFK. His description matched that given by an eyewitness at Dealey Plaza of a man in a TSBD sixth floor window. Years after the crime, Wallace’s fingerprints were identified as matching a previously unidentified set on file at the National Archives. The set had been lifted from boxes at the TSBD sniper’s nest within an hour of the shooting.The conspirators created a kill zone clearly demarcated by bright yellow hash marks painted on the Elm Street curb. They used timed triangulated fire, but their first shots failed to kill the president. Upon seeing the frantic signalling by “Umbrella Man” and others that tipped him off that Kennedy still lived, Secret Service Agent William Greer momentarily stopped the limo between the hash marks, where JFK was struck in the head by at least one frangible round, possibly fired from the above ground sewer opening at precisely that location. Greer’s stopping of the limo was the first tip-off to Jackie Kennedy that the murder was an inside job.The government altered the Zapruder Film to minimize the duration of the limo stop. Several facts prove the film was altered. The FBI claimed Abraham Zapruder filmed at a slower speed than the camera’s fastest speed he remembered using, thereby allowing the government to excise nearly a quarter of the frames. The portion of the film showing the president’s limo sharply turning onto Elm Street, even jumping the curb, is removed. Spectators spliced into the foreground remain unusually motionless as the presidential limo passes. Other spectators, however, move at super-human speeds. Mary Poppins-era animation blots out some of the president’s head wound. Emergency lights flash at erratic periodicity. Most interestingly, a lens reflection in the margins of the film, along the sprocket holes, seen over the course of several frames, reveals the silhouette of an assassin repeatedly aiming and firing down on the motorcade from atop the Dallas PD-controlled County Records Building.Secret Service agents immediately set about destroying the crime scene, washing out the limo and illegally seizing and transporting the president’s body to Washington. They sent the death limo to Ford Motor Company to be stripped down to bare metal and reupholstered. The bullet-stricken windshield was destroyed completely and replaced by another manually cracked in order to explain away the hole seen by witnesses at Parkland.These were law enforcement agents trained to understand the importance of preserving evidence. Yet they deliberately destroyed the evidence, obstructing justice. Surely they were under orders from higher up. No agents were ever punished.LBJ insisted JFK’s widow, Jackie Kennedy, join him in his swearing-in ceremony aboard Air Force One. This allowed the removal of JFK’s body to Air Force Two on a farther tarmac while the bronze ceremonial casket was loaded aboard Air Force One. When the district judge called by LBJ to swear him in as president could not locate an Oath of Office, LBJ reportedly adduced one from his own coat pocket. Immediately after the ceremony, he shared a smile and wink with trusted Congressman Albert Thomas (D-TX).A mortuary specialist worked on Kennedy’s cadaver during the flight to Washington in an attempt to hide evidence of a second gunman. CDR James Humes did also, before leading the official autopsy, the original notes from which he burned. His was a rigged autopsy overseen by top brass, including Kennedy nemesis Gen. Curtis LeMay, who merrily hummed and smoked one of his trademark cigars while looking on from the gallery.Hoover then led the FBI in framing hapless U.S. double agent Lee Oswald for the crime, declaring the crime “solved” within hours.Johnson created his handpicked Warren Commission in order to forestall an independent Congressional investigation. His first pick for the Commission was Kennedy hater Allen Dulles, fired by Kennedy a year before. The Warren Commission relied wholly on the FBI investigation for its own conclusions. The primary purpose of the Commission was to reassure the American people that no conspiracy was afoot, despite the evidence of our eyes. It was to cherry-pick the evidence and ignore, manipulate, discard, alter, replace, plant, or otherwise suppress any evidence that didn't fit the desired narrative -- i.e., a Procrustean Bed, where the truth is stretched or cut away as much as editorial license requires in order to make the pieces of the fairy tale fit, out of "patriotic duty." After all, what are a few white lies if they help to prevent World War III — or so LBJ told some of the commissioners. Some of them later disavowed the Commission’s conclusions.The CIA strategy designed to defend the Warren Report, and laid out in Document 1035-960, still seeks to discredit skeptics of the Commission’s reports as “conspiracy theorists.” Thanks to the penetration of our media by the CIA, via Operation Mockingbird, and CIA's penetration and discrediting of New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison’s investigation, this strategy succeeded to such a degree that the Kennedy Assassination is now regarded as the Third Rail of American Journalism.The press never told us anything. Influential columnist Drew Pearson withheld a scathing column about LBJ’s corruption. Life Magazine immediately dropped its exposé. No one reported that Ruby had been a boy courier for Al Capone or that he’d been running guns to Cuba, from where he'd helped spring Mob boss Santos Trafficante from prison — not newsworthy enough, apparently. Ruby hinted repeatedly that Johnson was behind the crime, but the media didn’t mention it. The media can dote on every morsel of trivia about the Kardashians, but what network ever told us that Ruby had once worked on the staff of then-Congressman Richard Nixon, according to a sworn statement by another of Nixon’s staffers in 1947? Nixon advisor Roger Stone claims that Nixon had told him the hiring had been at the behest of Lyndon Johnson!Are you still waiting for the nightly news to inform you that Dallas was a coup? Do you really expect the corporate-owned media to connect the dots leading from treason to their corporate owners and sponsors?To quote Shakespeare: “None dare call it treason if it doth prosper.”Supplementing CIA’s disinformation program was a ruthless domestic campaign of intimidation and murder that succeeded in silencing many material witnesses. Former Special Forces Colonel Dan Marvin has related how CIA men once solicited his assassination of William Bruce Pitzer, who Marvin only learned much later was one of many witnesses in the assassination who had died under highly suspicious circumstances. The London Sunday Times hired an actuarial to calculate the odds against so many material witnesses dying of unnatural causes in the three years following the Assassination. The actuarial calculated the odds against it at 100,000 trillion to one.Although I believe LBJ had a leading role in initiating and covering up the plot, I also believe the conspiracy chiefly centered on elements of the CIA, the least accountable arm of that Military-Industrial Complex of which President Eisenhower had warned Americans in his Farewell Address in 1961. The MIC became what we today term the "Deep State" when it seized power on November 22, 1963 — for the conspirators not only got away with murder, they got away with the government, too.Most of the conspirators have since died, but the influence of the Deep State continues to be perpetuated institutionally through their agencies, corporations, families, and appointees. They continue cynically to bank on the apathy and laziness of the American public, the services of professional and well-meaning "debunkers" and misinformation agents, and the cupidity and craven cowardice of their corporate-controlled media to allow the lie of Oswald's guilt to dominate the historical narrative.The brazenness of the assassination and the continuing honors given its perpetrators, despite the gradual exposure of their crimes, serve to demonstrate to the American people and our elected leaders that these Deep State traitors can deal as they wish with anyone with utter impunity.I can well understand why the Lone Nut theorists cling to the findings of the Warren Commission that a malcontent killed JFK acting alone. Having spent most of my life in the Federal government myself, I certainly don't relish the idea that the government would lie to us about the murder of our president. After all, what does that say about "our" government? What would it say about us?Most members of the “Shadow Government” — i.e., the intel agencies and related defense contractors — undoubtedly are essentially honest and very patriotic Americans dedicated to the defense of our Constitution and way of life. The compartmentalization of secrets can permit a situation to arise, however, where a small coterie of highly placed individuals can leverage, unchecked, vast resources in the pursuit of an unconstitutional or even treasonous agenda. In the age before the Internet, a Vice President who succeeded to the presidency through such plotting, could—and, I believe, did—orchestrate a far-reaching and effective coverup of the crime with the knowing support of just the FBI Director, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, leading elements of the CIA and Secret Service, and a few others.Many repeat the patronizing argument that those who question the Warren Report have a psychological inability to accept the notion that a great hero like JFK could be slain by a "maladjusted loser" like Oswald. That's ridiculous. I accepted the notion of Oswald's lone guilt for many years, as did most Americans. Later, when the pieces no longer fit, I first suspected the Mob. Only when I began to research the case more deeply in recent years did I finally realize LBJ's central role in the conspiracy.Kennedy was murdered by elements of his own government. It was, essentially, a palace coup. I’m ashamed that my naïveté blinded me from realizing it sooner. I am repulsed by my memory of greeting LBJ in person in 1964.The sad truth is that the government appears to have been stolen from us, and with it, the media. We now have fake news from a fake media serving the interests of those behind our fake government. Part of the proof is the fact that with the first opportunity in over a generation, investigating the reported ties to Cuba of the alleged assassin of the POTUS isn't even part of Washington's agenda. Oswald was supposed to be a Castro agent or sympathizer, remember? Murder and treason have no statute of limitations, Castro is dead, the USSR collapsed nearly 30 years ago, diplomatic relations with Cuba are fully normalized, and yet following up on the murder of the POTUS by an alleged Castro agent or sympathizer isn't even on the bilateral agenda?! A potential Cuban agent murders our POTUS, and the USG doesn't even want to follow up on any investigative leads?! Anyone who's ever worked for the USG should find that telling, very telling indeed.The last remaining Kennedy assassination records still under seal at the National Archives were finally supposed to be released in October 2017. But CIA pressured President Trump into blocking the release, using the threadbare excuse of “national security,” as if the sources and methods we used against the USSR over half a century ago still outweigh the public’s interest in knowing the truth about whether Dallas was, in fact, a coup. Pres. Trump allowed some files to be released but withheld others until 2021.No doubt the most incriminating records have long since been destroyed, but enough might remain to help even the more gullible among us finally come to see the true dimensions of the crime. Even long-time Warren Commission apologist Gerald Posner agrees that the records should be released.Whatever one thinks of the man or his policies, Donald Trump is the first overtly anti-Deep State president the United States has had since Kennedy. Perhaps it isn’t coincidental that 2021 would be the first year of a second Trump presidency. Let’s encourage him to release the records. Let the chips fall where they may. Are not truth and justice supposed to be part of the American Way? This may be our last, best chance to root out the treasonous influence of the Deep State, restore constitutional government, and bring the last surviving perpetrators of the assassination to justice. Follow me on Quora to be alerted to more such postings, and join me in demanding that American justice be done though the heavens fall.

The only thing true to a socialist is what advances the cause, and only for as long as it advances the cause and no longer than that. Since when did clarity have anything to do with advancing the cause?—Quoran Marco Fuxa to me, 1 October 2018We have passed the point at which the Democratic Party should be RICO’d.Before My TimeTwice, presidents have nominated a candidate for the Supreme Court in a presidential-election year who were confirmed. Yes, there once was comity.Republican Herbert Hoover, as a courtesy, nominated Democrat Benjamin Cardozo despite a Republican Senate majority, albeit narrow.Republican Dwight Eisenhower nominated Democrat William Brennan (what he would later call one of his biggest mistakes) in 1956, when the Democrats had a one-seat Senate margin.Democrat Franklin Roosevelt also made a nomination in 1940, of a Democrat, but then he was a shoo-in for reelection and the Senate was overwhelmingly Democratic.Past PracticeI remember Miguel Estrada, an imminently qualified jurist appointed by George W. Bush in 2001 to the DC Circuit. After 28 months, his wife’s miscarriage and death by mixing alcohol and drugs, he withdrew himself from consideration. The Democrats had filibustered his nomination primarily because an Hispanic law group had urged not allowing the Republicans to set up the first Hispanic jurist likely to be nominated to the Supreme Court.When he was later mentioned as a possible nominee for solicitor general, he cut off speculation, saying, “I would never accept a job that requires Senate confirmation or, for that matter, willingly place myself in any situation in which convention requires that I be civil to Chuck Schumer.”We have the American slang verb to Bork,meaning to attack or defeat (a nominee or candidate for public office) unfairly through an organized campaign of harsh public criticism or vilification [Merriam Webster]. Robert Bork a nominee of Ronald Reagan in 1987 fell victim to a perfectly gratuitous “straw man” speech from Ted Kennedy:Robert Bork's America is a land in which women would be forced into back-alley abortions, blacks would sit at segregated lunch counters, rogue police could break down citizens' doors in midnight raids, schoolchildren could not be taught about evolution, writers and artists could be censored at the whim of the Government, and the doors of the Federal courts would be shut on the fingers of millions of citizens for whom the judiciary is—and is often the only—protector of the individual rights that are the heart of our democracy ... President Reagan is still our president. But he should not be able to reach out from the muck of Irangate, reach into the muck of Watergate and impose his reactionary vision of the Constitution on the Supreme Court and the next generation of Americans. No justice would be better than this injustice.Bork’s reply: “There was not a line in that speech that was accurate.”The Economist editorialized that Bork may well have been correct, “but it worked.” The reason it worked is because the Democrats had, in advance, worked out a “rapid response” game plan to push Kennedy’s points through the media.To bork became a thing with the nomination of Clarence Thomas to the Supreme Court by George H. W. Bush in 1991. at a conference of the National Organization for Women in New York City. Feminist Florynce Kennedy addressed the New York City conference of the National Organization for Women promising to defeat the nomination and saying, “We're going to bork him. We're going to kill him politically ... This little creep, where did he come from?”Thomas was subsequently confirmed after one of the most divisive confirmation hearings in Supreme Court history. Anita Hill, his accuser in an actual “he said/she said” bout, received a $1.1M advance from Doubleday on a two-book deal. [It will be disconcerting if Ford also seeks to monetize her allegations.]I could go on, but suffice it to say that, in contrast to the predictable Democratic performance, Senate Republicans confirmed Clinton nominees (Ginsburg and Breyer) and Obama nominees (Sotomayor and Kagan) with no such histrionics.Giving Substance to the UnsubstantiatableWhen the questioner for the Senate Judiciary Committee asked Ford if she showed her therapist's notes to the Washington Post reporter, Dr Ford said she couldn’t remember if she did or if she just related from memory what the notes said. If she had in fact showed the notes, she would have lost her doctor-patient privilege and could be forced to turn over the notes to the committee. If she showed the notes and said she didn't, that's perjury. So, she “can't recall.”That is a prime example of lawyered testimony. We’ve seen it before.Likewise, Ford changed her story repeatedly. The year of party changed from mid-80s to 1982. Her age changed from late teens to 15. Number of people at the party changed multiple times. Both the location and layout of the party house changed multiple times. Critically, each change came when the story didn't make sense. This strongly suggests coaching from her attorney team. Even so, there were a number of inconsistencies, such as a Safeway built in 1986 being claimed to be present in 1982.In the end, on penalty of perjury, each of the people she named as being able to corroborate her story instead refuted it.Finally, Ford’s recollection is a “recovered memory.” Recovered memories are not admissible in court for obvious reasons.And who were Ford’s attorneys? Debra Katz, recommended by Senator Feinstein, is a Democratic activist affiliated with the #MeToo movement. And Michael Bromwich is a Democratic go-to attorney in a crisis.And the two women who just happened to be in the elevator with Senator Flake?Maria Archila is an executive director of the Center for Popular Democracy; she had spent the previous week in Washington engaged in protests against Kavanaugh. Maggie Gallagher is a 23-year-old activist with the group. The Center is a left-wing group that is heavily funded by George Soros’s Open Society Foundations. Indeed, as of 2014, the Open Society was one of the three largest donors to the group.The Plot from HereDemocrats do not make it up as they go along. If Senator Feinstein needs to hold onto Ford’s letter until the last couple of day’s, a plausible cover story is devised. There’s no chance meeting on an elevator. That’s planned and a deal is already consummated.Just imagine the Democrats’ strategies in such character-assassination plots as a pitcher plant. The setup is to funnel the Republicans downward to their doom with no chance of turning back owing to the carefully placed barbs. If you watch one of these hearings unflold, you begin to marvel at the intricacy and timing. Everyone has a role—finding and lining up the victims (we had an embarrassing surplus this time around), coordinating congressional strategy, breadth and timing of media reports.With the seven-day FBI investigation resumption agreed to Friday, I enjoyed browsing for the predictable spate of articles that followed—something for each target segment with several memes ready to push on social media.And what were the topics? He was more emotional than she was. He has a drinking problem. He shouldn’t be allowed coach girl’s basketball anymore. Why only a week? Why not allow the FBI to seek out new people to interview? Graham and Kavanaugh were so angry (well, duh, you try working with Democrats).“A drunken frat boy never remembers - an assaulted young woman never forgets (except, obviously she does, very much). How we know he’s lying. Matt Damon plays a repugnant Brett Kavanaugh on the season premier of SNL. Jimmy Kimmel advises cutting Kavanaugh’s penis off if he’s confirmed. Why Kavanaugh is not entitled to a presumption of innocence. #pos #liar #predator #pig #stepdown. He defended Sea World when a killer whale drowned a trainer.And on… and on… little barbs arrayed to keep the intended victims trudging steadily toward the pool of digestive juices awaiting them at the bottom. A full 96 percent of media coverage is pro-Democrat/anti-Kavanaugh. Trouble is, that’s not enough to do the job. Most Americans long ago tuned out our mass media or even use them as reverse barometers.If we want to put an end to Democrat character assassination and power plays, it has to be about not letting them have power. Losing Missouri and other key races is the only thing that will get Democrats to stop:RealClearPolitics - Election 2018 - Missouri Senate - Hawley vs. McCaskill…when their plot backfires.Also, the latest news in the North Dakota Senate race is good news:Meanwhile, is this the Democratic low point in all this?How low will they stoop? Have they, at long last, no shame?Prosecutor Details 12 Huge Inconsistencies In Kavanaugh Accuser’s StoryDemocrats Have Ensured Brett Kavanaugh Will Never Get A Fair HearingThe Ridiculous Obstruction Of Trump NomineesRachel Mitchell's memo is damaging to Christine Blasey Ford's case against Brett KavanaughKavanaugh’s hearings are a national disaster — and the worst is yet to comeThe Kavanaugh Battle Is The Culmination Of Leftist KulturkampfProsecutor: 'He Said, She Said' Case Incredibly Difficult to Prove, Kavanaugh Allegation Even Weaker Than ThatIn the Kavanaugh Hearings, Democrats Break Norms to Gain PowerHeap big BUSTED: Did Elizabeth Warren MEAN to admit Dems are using FBI investigation just to stall Kavanaugh? (video)Lindsey Graham promises 'full scale' probe into Democrats' handling of Ford-Kavanaugh allegationKavanaugh's Hearings are Identity Politics Run AmokWhy it will be difficult to assess Ford’s credibilityThe End Of A Trusting SocietyAn Age Divided by SexMany women line up in support of KavanaughMany more women line up in support of KavanaughDianne Feinstein Blames Brett Kavanaugh For Mess She Created [VIDEO]Why the Brett Kavanaugh Smear?Accusers coming out of the woodworkWhy There's A Good Case For Sanctioning Christine Ford’s LawyersAnita Hill's Case Proves Christine Blasey Ford Has a Lot to GainMaryland Law in 1980s Viewed Sexual Assault as a MisdemeanorWho Was behind the Flake Set-Up?Juanita Broaddrick: Feinstein had no interest rape allegation against Bill ClintonRecords Raise Questions About Ford's Double-Door StoryHarvard CAPS/Harris Poll: 60% Want Kavanaugh Confirmed if FBI Dismisses Allegations.Plus: “69 percent agree with Kavanaugh’s pronouncement and Sen. Lindsey Graham’s (R-S.C.) statement that the proceedings have been a national disgrace.”Red-state Dems face nightmare scenario on KavanaughRead prosecutor Rachel Mitchell's memo about the Kavanaugh-Ford hearingThis one’s interesting:Report: Christine Blasey Ford's ex-boyfriend says she coached a friend on taking a polygraph, moreLast, but not least, what Ford’s body language reveals:The Democrat’s patented “Wrap-up Smear” explained by a party spokesperson: