Joe Borelli on Out Of The Blank Podcast

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:32):
Welcome back to another episode of Out of the Blank podcast. Joe,
it is a pleasure to have you on the show.
It's the other half of the Lone Gunman podcast. Joe. Welcome,
and please introduce yourself to everyone out there listening.

Speaker 2 (00:44):
Sure, thank you for having me, Robbie, and my name
is Joe BURRELLI I am a JFK researcher, although I
prefer student of the assassination and history in general. I
am a co host of the Lone Gunman Podcast with
my partner Rob Clark, who I know you've had on
here before.

Speaker 3 (01:01):
And I actually have a background in finance.

Speaker 2 (01:05):
I was in wealth management as a financial advisor for
a big financial firm for over five years, and most
recently in working for a fintech firm doing some consulting
on data and pattern analysis.

Speaker 3 (01:21):
And you might think, how does that dive with the
JFK thing. Well, when I was in wealth management, I would.

Speaker 2 (01:27):
Of course go through all financial documents, quarterly reports and
look for little tidbits, almost like you look for in documents. Right,
did they have a one off sale that maybe boosted
their earnings that might skew some of the actual financials.
Did they do something in depreciation or accounting, and then

(01:51):
in fintech I do I analyze vast data sets and
look for patterns that from customer behavior that the algorithm
can then enhance to better assess the customer they are analyzing.
And it's I think that is going through a ton

(02:11):
of numbers documents or financial documents.

Speaker 3 (02:14):
And I didn't know how it would correlate to the
JFK assassination.

Speaker 2 (02:19):
But I a few years ago started doing my own
document research and I found out I was pretty good
at it, or decent at it, let's put it.

Speaker 1 (02:28):
That way, working with the riff numbers or working with
specific information in the documents.

Speaker 3 (02:33):
Riff numbers usually targeted specific keyword searching, either through PDF
books or Mary Ferrell of course other like the Harold
Weisberg archives, the Malcolm blown archives and.

Speaker 2 (02:48):
Also ancestry dot com that is an underutilized resource in
my opinion, to kind of get other context that might
not be available on some of the document sites. But
you know, it correlated a lot, and like much like
what I do for fintech and looking for patterns I
do with documents, and in the past year it resulted

(03:14):
in a couple cool fines that we'll get into soon.

Speaker 1 (03:17):
Now with your JFK research, can you take me through
when it started at least went besides like how he
actually got interested. Did you always have an interest in
the JFK assassination or was this just something that sparked
up six years ago when you saw something or heard
a video.

Speaker 2 (03:33):
Yeah, pretty much. So I've always been a student of
history pretty much. I've been a World War Two. I've
had a lot of interest in World War Two. My
grandfather was Norman Dy plus ten about and the reason
he was plus ten he was actually going to be
in the first day or two was because his mother died,

(03:54):
my great grandmother, and he was allowed to go back
to the States to go to her funeral, and therefore
was moved back.

Speaker 3 (04:00):
And that's probably why I'm here talking to you today.

Speaker 2 (04:05):
So it's always fascinated me, and I kind of worked
my way up through history a little bit.

Speaker 3 (04:11):
And yeah, I watched I joke.

Speaker 2 (04:14):
I got my initial associates from YouTube university, right, So
I watched a lot of JFK documentaries, the Men Who
and I think it was the men who killed Kennedy
When I was like, wow, what is going on here?
And that was about yeah, twenty eighteen, and I've been
hooked ever since. So after consuming pretty much every YouTube

(04:39):
and a YouTube video and documentary, I then moved to podcasts.
And I was very lucky to find good podcasts because
as you know, if you find the wrong one, you
can get led down a lot of rabbit holes. And
I credit me finding the right ones for probably saving
me about a decade of nonsense.

Speaker 3 (05:01):
And I searched, I was looking at a few.

Speaker 2 (05:05):
I searched, actually Lee Harvey Oswald and Rob's The Lone
Gunman came up and it was a image of Lee
Harvey Oswald with a kind of podcast headset on. And
started listening to Rob like loved his style, loved his
attention to the documents, and then through him got introduced

(05:29):
to other researchers, you know, Larry Hancock, Bill Simpitt, Carmines
Abastano document researchers, and many others.

Speaker 3 (05:39):
That's just a few.

Speaker 2 (05:41):
So about twenty twenty two, I started emailing Quick Hits,
which is a podcast that Rob does with Doug Campbell,
who was another JFK researcher and good friend of mine,
and started going back and forth on some things I
found interesting and then started doing my own document research

(06:04):
and I started messaging with Rob on the side. I
had a little theory about or a question.

Speaker 3 (06:11):
Really, it's like, what's up with all these Martins coming
up in the assassination story.

Speaker 2 (06:16):
We started messaging you back about it. We then started
doing our own research. We had no idea. It was
kind of like a fun, kind of lighthearted project. We
had no idea where it was going to lead us.
And I think the best type of research journeys start
that way.

Speaker 3 (06:33):
And we ended up discovering some really cool things.

Speaker 2 (06:37):
And now I am the co host of the Lone
Government podcast. We presented at Lancer last year twenty twenty
three for the sixtieth anniversary on our Martin alias theory.
And little did I know the things that I wasn't

(06:58):
even paying attention to would become the most significant.

Speaker 1 (07:01):
So yeah, before we get into Martin, I just wanted
to discuss a few things, obviously, to clear up some
just where you stand all in the JFK assassination. Now,
as a student of history and a fan of history,
did you buy the official narrative when you initially heard it?

Speaker 2 (07:19):
I don't think so, you know, I can't remember when
I like, I can't remember, like back in high school
of reading this about in the history books like Lee
Harvey Oswell did it and had any.

Speaker 3 (07:33):
I don't really have any memories of that.

Speaker 2 (07:36):
But definitely when I started paying attention, I realized the
official narrative definitely didn't add up. And I think that's
the case with a lot of commissions, right when you
have the government kind of investigating itself, you're not going
to get all all the truth. And so yeah, I
had my major doubts obviously about the Warrant Commission, and

(08:00):
and I you know, I keep adjusting my working theory,
that's what I call it, because it's very there's so much,
as you know, Robbie, to this case, so many different
aspects the tip It situation, the medical evidence, the New Orleans,
the period of Oswalt and the Marines. I mean, there's

(08:23):
so many different places you could focus on that it
really took me years and years to really build a
working theory. And I don't I don't claim to even
have a close to figure it out. I think I
had a good idea, but I think one of the things,
I'm very objective, like I don't have a certain pause.

Speaker 3 (08:44):
I subscribe to.

Speaker 2 (08:45):
I don't say this person did it, see I did it,
LBJ did it. I'm very open and I'm open to everything.
I mean, if if irrefutable evidence came out that Malcolm
Wallace was on.

Speaker 3 (08:55):
The sixth floor, I'd be like, oh damn me. You know,
I'd accept it.

Speaker 2 (09:03):
But I try to view this from a very objective,
almost intentions analysis type of way, and like, what is
the intention here?

Speaker 3 (09:13):
And in all different aspects of the assassination?

Speaker 1 (09:16):
Do you stand on or Oswald didn't fire any shots,
either a JFK or Tippet. And then where did you
first start diving into the JFK case. Obviously everyone picks
a certain aspect of it. I mean, you could try
and cover the globe, summarize it when it comes to
the medical evidence and all this. But there's one thing
that attracts each researcher. Some people focus on tipp it.

(09:36):
I initially did in the beginning. So I just thought
it was weird. There's a cop that gets killed that
really never gets talked about, especially in the assassination unless
you're actually learning about it. But basic history, Oswald was
the accused assassin of JFK, and that word accused. Just recently,
in like the past year maybe year and a half,
start seeing that more media articles using the word accused

(09:59):
or less asass But it was always one loan assassin
killed JFK. That's it. Nobody ever heard about the cop
that was also killed on that day. So I'm curious
if you think Oswald fired a shot from the sixth
floor or either killed Kennedy or killed Tippett. And then
where did you start to dive into in the beginning
compared to obviously where you're at now looking at documentation

(10:20):
and dealing with more of the not anomalies. They are
important stuff, but there things that go a little bit
deeper than what most people will probably go for.

Speaker 3 (10:33):
Sure. So I do think a shot was fired from
the sixth floor.

Speaker 2 (10:41):
I think there's a lot of evidence to support that
from eyewitnesses and as well as people on the sixth
floor and in some cases two people on the sixth floor.
I do not think Oswald fired a shot at the TSBD.
I I'm not sure where he was. I think, you know,

(11:04):
when you analyze the girls on the stairs and how
and especially some of the African American employees on the
sixth floor that were part of the floor crew that
were working that were up there, you know, fifteen minutes
and that's ballpark before and then kind of went down.

Speaker 3 (11:25):
There's no evidence to support that he was up there
waiting for his chance.

Speaker 2 (11:29):
Oswalt is a very non conformist type of person, so
to me, and I'm not saying he was prayer man,
but it would be very consistent with Oswalt's character to
not get involved in Oh, the President's coming, let me
go outside and get a good spot.

Speaker 3 (11:50):
He would.

Speaker 2 (11:52):
Very Oswalt to kind of walk out towards the end
and kind of look and walk back in. I do
think he knew very shortly after the shots were fired,
oh crap type of thing. And in terms of tipp It,

(12:13):
I don't think he shot Tippitt either. I think he
was going to the Texas Theater of course, probably to
me a contact. But I think there's a lot of
evidence and witness testimony that there was more than one
shooter at the tip of scene.

Speaker 3 (12:31):
You have two different shells, So I.

Speaker 2 (12:36):
Don't think he fired a shot that day as my
personal opinion, but I reserve the right to be corrected.

Speaker 3 (12:45):
On further evidence coming out.

Speaker 1 (12:46):
For sure, Well, you're entitled to your opinion as well too.
I probably would agree with you. Like I said, I
try and stay away from I'm not going to ask
you who do you think did it? Obviously it's a
dumb question. I learned that after a year of asking
people that. I was like, yeah, let's just stick to
something that's the base facts of things and what people
can verifyably say. This is in my mind. But with Oswald,
what makes you think about his character? Obviously we've both

(13:06):
spoken to Larry Hancock and we know he's got a
new book coming out about Oswald. But the Warren commissioned
version doesn't match a lot of either the actions or
a lot of what the witnesses stated about Oswald. You know,
I always found it very suspicious that apparently he went
up to the guys on the fifth floor and asked
what everybody was looking out the window for. They said, well,

(13:29):
the President's coming to town. It's like, if you everyone
knows there's not like a whole lot of news going
on in Dallas. There's no self phones come on now.
So I'm just trying to think, why would an assassin
do that more himself? And also it's really weird to
take a shot from your work. That's like kind of
crapping where you eat, So obviously my opinion on that. Yeah,

(13:49):
and to.

Speaker 3 (13:49):
Bring the gun in that same morning, right, that's kind
of silly do.

Speaker 1 (13:53):
With the day before. I mean, apparently there's rifles going
all in and out of the TSBD. Roy truly said
there was a guy that brought in two of them.
He's going to hide him in his office, and he's like, oh,
you know, just it's common against gun enthusiasts. You know,
they like to share their guns. I'm like, you do
it at your work. That's crazy. That would not happen today.

Speaker 2 (14:11):
Yeah, for sure, it's it would be extremely low level
planning to do so. And I feel like people can
use different parts of Oswalt to make him this great
spy or use him to be this dumb pass scene.
It's like, whatever your leaf is, you could pick certain

(14:32):
pieces of this story and make it fit your narrative.
The whole premise that Oswald as as a Marxist, and
I do believe that he had genuine left leaning beliefs.
I really do that, and I've looked into it recently.

(14:52):
Some of the relooked into some of the marine buddies
of his statements. And there's a guy Nelson Delgado who.

Speaker 3 (15:04):
Who served with Lee before he.

Speaker 2 (15:06):
Went to Japan actually who not only said he was
a terrible shot, but said he was He was Hispanic,
and Lee would try to speak Spanish to him, and
he said he had interest in Cuba and cashtro back.
Lee was fifty nine, might have been fifty eight, and
was keeping up with his kind of fight and in
the mountains there. So he was interested in Cuba before

(15:28):
he even went and affected to Russia, before he did
his stint in in the our Pacific there. So it's
I really do believe he had genuine left leanings. So
if that's the case, why would you shoot probably the

(15:49):
most one of the most liberal presidents up to that point,
right it built That whole premise makes makes no sense.

Speaker 1 (15:58):
So it makes more sense to in line with the
Walker shooting. But the only issue for me with the
Walker shooting is that that there was a little boy
that was apparently watched two people leave the scene, which
when I asked that about Posner, when I really didn't
know the name of the child or anything, he was like,
there's no little boy that saw it happen. I was like,

(16:19):
I'm pretty sure I've read the document, but much like
you know, with all the documentation out there, if you
don't screenshot or like save a link to anything, try
finding it again is like almost damn near impossible. It's
like it disappears.

Speaker 3 (16:32):
Oh yeah, I have folders upon folders. How did this
get in that folder?

Speaker 2 (16:37):
It's uh, But I I agree with you. I think
you know proverbial gone to my head. Did Oswald to
a shot at Kennedy or Walker? And I can't say
none of the above. I would say Walker just based
on what we know about him.

Speaker 3 (16:53):
But I agree with you.

Speaker 2 (16:54):
I you know, every part of this case is such
a rabbit hole in a mystery. But I don't think
he took a shot at Walker either, although I think
it's more probable than Kennedy. And you know, you have
the whole George de Moronshield testimony of oh you took
a pop shot at Walker? Han Lee smiled and didn't
say anything. It's all very bizarre. And of course George

(17:18):
Morinshield and Lee Lee left for New Orleans. George Morrishfield too,
or till Prince Haiti left very shortly after the Walker
incident which is interesting.

Speaker 1 (17:29):
As well when we talk about the lone assassin narrative,
have you ever had something where a case lasts sixty
years or can you ever think of anything where a
case would last sixty years? And government investigations that have
all gone through it, and there's still not a definitive conclusion.
People can say there is, but there really isn't. I mean,

(17:49):
there's a lot of up in the air stuff that
goes on in this whole JFK matter is probably like
the best fairy tale out there. It's got mob figures,
cia figures, everything you could possibly think of, all wrapped
into one. But it's not that people can't get over
the death of a president that could be murdered by
a lone assassin or some nobody. It's just that nobody

(18:09):
factor doesn't make sense. And through all the depictions of Oswald,
I don't know if he was a silent type, that's
what I think, But also you hear people him shooting
at other people's targets at a range, doing things that
just don't seem to align anything with the Oswald that
we would think would be the silent type. It doesn't

(18:30):
really talk to him anyway. Look at the number of
people of the TSBD that talked about never engaging with Oswald,
not even seeing him in the building the day of
the assassination. So to me, he just seemed like a
guy that flew under the radar. But then you have
accounts and video of him going on air and talking
about Cuba or communist views and all this Marxism, So

(18:51):
you get this kind of weird depiction where it's like,
who is he? Did he go to Mexico City or not?
I have no clue, ugh, that.

Speaker 3 (18:59):
Is that is one of the most mysterious aspects of
this case. For sure. I think that Oswalt was a
loaner or he kept to himself, right, if you were
friendly with him, he would be friendly with you, as
you know, And.

Speaker 2 (19:17):
If you look at a lot of the Marine Buddy statements,
they're all very consistent. He kept to himself. Most of
the people that were interviewed were like, yeah, can kind
of remember him, Not really, I can't really remember anything specific.
He was very kind of nondescript, kept to himself. Of course,
he did get court martialled twice in the Marines, one

(19:39):
for having an unauthorized gun and shooting himself or grazing
himself in the elbow in the Pacific.

Speaker 3 (19:47):
I believe it was Indonesia, could be wrong.

Speaker 2 (19:49):
And the other one was him pouring a beer on
a sergeant's head at a bar, and those are in
the documents before or the assassination way before, So there's
no way that that type of information is like stage.

Speaker 3 (20:07):
To set up this later on. I think he didn't
like to take.

Speaker 2 (20:12):
Orders from anyone, which is why I pushed back now.

Speaker 3 (20:16):
And I didn't I wouldn't have a couple years ago
that he was.

Speaker 2 (20:22):
Really under the control of certain either intelligence agencies or people.
I mean, he was maneuvered from place to place in
certain ways, for sure, but he wasn't He doesn't want
to take orders from anyone, and he was very anti authority,
is from what from what I've read, and it's very consistent.

Speaker 1 (20:43):
Do you believe that's because he had a rebellious youth
or do you believe that was because he had some
type of clearance when it came to being involved in
either the YouTube program or something that had more of
a deeper level of military intelligence compared to maybe the
average person. I mean that gives you a sense of entitlement.

Speaker 2 (21:01):
Yeah, I one hundred percent agreed had something to do
with his youth and moving around a ton. I think
I heard twenty times. I'm not an expert at his
early movements, but he moved around a lot, went from
school to school, right, probably got the lead in a
sense in a little bit. Of course, we know about

(21:22):
his truancy in New York City, right when he would
go to the Bronx Zoo. By the way, I grew
up near the Bronx Zoo, so I can respect that
a great place to go, especially as a truant and
personally me myself, I was like that as a kid,
and I was sent to military academy for four years,

(21:45):
and it's I could understand that anti authority, I'm not
gonna kind of adhere to the system type of thing.
And I think I think he kind of kept that.

Speaker 3 (21:58):
That mindset for his most of his life.

Speaker 1 (22:02):
You think that's what attracted him to the whole communist
and type of ideas or ideologies that were out there.
I'm not gonna use the word communist when we say Marxist.

Speaker 3 (22:12):
Yeah, I think so.

Speaker 2 (22:13):
I think he was probably in some ways disillusioned with capitalism,
and you know, you have to think kids in those days.
They're not TikTok looking at dance videos and they're talking.
And a lot of his marine friends say this too.
They're debating political ideologies. If you talk about someone like

(22:36):
Kerry Thornley, who came up with his own Discordianism religion.
We did a couple of shows on that, and they're
all kind of going back and forth in their own views.

Speaker 3 (22:47):
This system works, the system doesn't. And yeah, I really
think that he was just a young kid trying to
figure out what his beliefs were at that point.

Speaker 1 (23:00):
You know, when do you think he was contacted by
either the FBI or the CIA or became some type
of deeper figure than just someone that was being maneuvered
all around. Do you think it was early up in
his career or do you think it was at certain
moments in Russia, Like I believe the John Fayne interview,
which I would call being a low level FBI informant
mostly on information to his wife doing a patriotic duty

(23:23):
would be a better example. But he was interviewed in
his car by John Fayne for two hours and John
Fayne stated that that's when he dropped the case on
Oswald closed it because he didn't seem like a threat.
He seemed like he was just generally defensive over his
family than what questions are being his family being bothered
with anything. But he just was curious about Marina if

(23:44):
she was ever going to be contacted by KGB people,
would he let John Fayne know or the FBI know?
And he said he would, So I was like, I
think that's when he was contacted as like a low
level like hey, which would explain kind of the payments
back to the state department for them hang for his
chapel back because I believe him tearing up a US
citizenship or whatever that is, that's a national incident that

(24:06):
state departments gonna be like, we need to get him
back over here. I don't think it was a whole
maneuver thing. People can get more conspiratorial if they want,
but I think it's pretty probably basic on that front.
But I'm wondering if you think he was CIA, FBI
and when do you think he was contacted.

Speaker 2 (24:21):
So, and that's the thing about being on this crazy
jfk Ernie because I've kind of like changed my toomb
to it semi recently. I think when he was in Japan,
and he was, you know, going to the Queen Bee
and having certain Marxist and left leaning sympathies. Definitely for

(24:44):
the time. I think that some intelligence agency, probably the
CIA at Sugi realized because in terms of the false
defector program, a lot of those false defectors were killed
or never came back. You know, you have like Robert
Webster and a couple of things. But if you have
someone who is generally has these type of like curiosity

(25:08):
about the Russian or Marxist communist system and wants to go,
and they could kind of dangle him in a sense
to see how they the Russians react to his defection.
You could make an argument that of course he had
help getting there when you think about the hell Sinki

(25:28):
how he got in a Russian through the Helsinki instant
visa route.

Speaker 3 (25:33):
And Bill Simpach wrote a lot on this. It was.

Speaker 2 (25:38):
A route that was opened like a few days before
by the CIA chief in Finland. I believe his name
was William Castile, who was procuring women and talking with
his AGB counterpart Gregory Golub, and Golub said, if they
if you have someone they want to go through Usia,

(26:00):
make sure they book it through a local travel agency
and they'll go right over. And incidentally, Lee Harvey Oswald
uses that exact tactic, it goes over a few days later. Right,
So at first I'm like, okay, ci for sure, Like
how could you even argue that? But what if he
was just kind of being maneuvered to right for the

(26:21):
dangle to see how Russians react? All right, this guy
wants to go over there anyway, one less marine or
someone in the military.

Speaker 3 (26:28):
We have to convince the false effect. And you also
have an aspect of plausible deniability there too, if you're
the CIA. So that's I've been leaning and like kind
of thinking that that might be more of a possibility recently.
So my guess would be in Japan, he was started

(26:49):
to get approached based on either his his beliefs and
or his his desire to go there, and they just
used him to do that for their wrong purposes. Right,
And then you have, of course over and you know,
talking about setting that memo that his birth certificates is
being you. So I think his name was used, and

(27:11):
I think he was very aware of the help he
got and affecting, right, But I'm not.

Speaker 2 (27:18):
Sure if he was like a full on Egypt. I
think he had to make certain Okay, I'll tell you
about this. I'll tell you about this, right, like certain
certain things he had to agree to. But and that's
just a recent kind of thought I've had that I've
been leading to. And you know, you go back and

(27:39):
forth on this crazy journey, right.

Speaker 1 (27:41):
You mentioned recent. But in the beginning, when you first
started researching this, did you ever think that, I mean,
would you ever get to the point of being on
the level of like someone mentioned to you Oswald was
a CIA agent or FBI agent. My initial reaction would
have been, like, that's the super conspiracy people of the
flat earthers that you want to stay away from, because

(28:02):
there was nothing ever being reported about it. But it's
within the last year, maybe two years, we're seeing classified
documents that Oswald was monitored by the agencies. There was
the two oh one file that apparently didn't exist, and
then later it came out that it did exist. But
all the agencies pulled their files on Oswald, so obviously
he's being monitored. There's each investigative I wouldn't say intelligence agency, CIA,

(28:27):
NFBI had files on them, but that's not information that
was well publicly known until maybe a year and a
half ago. I think ever since Tucker Carlson went on
air and said all that stuff about the government killing
JFK or there's evidence Jack Ruby stuff that I was
really interested in.

Speaker 2 (28:45):
Why didn't they bring him to Why didn't they bring
him to d C.

Speaker 3 (28:49):
I think that is what he said, right, he went
off on that recently.

Speaker 2 (28:54):
I think it is very possible that he was a
paid FBI informant. And you know, I've been thinking about
this recently.

Speaker 3 (29:06):
I think there were two ways to to kind of
manipulate Oswalt, and that would have either been with money
or ideology. And he could be like, okay, thanks captain
obvious Joe. But you know, obviously his his financial situation
and his trouble getting a job is significant, moving around,

(29:28):
leaving his family right in different cities. Of course, when
he gets arrested on the fracas, he requests an FBI agent,
very weird activity.

Speaker 2 (29:42):
I think it's very possible that he could have been
a paid f beyond format in terms of I mean,
I think he could have been involved with the CIA
as much as like double defectors, right, you don't get
them very often and when you have someone that comes
back from from Russia, it's it's a very unique situation.

(30:08):
So I think CIA could have had their own interest
in him too, And I think he would have been
opportunistic with any way he could have.

Speaker 3 (30:15):
Made money, uh when he got back I'm talking. So
I think both are possibilities.

Speaker 1 (30:23):
Have respect that you're trying to stay middle ground on
a lot of this stuff, because obviously there's so much
you could you can get your mind changed the next
day on some things. But when you mentioned the family aspect,
through the work of Larry Hancock, you get a different
depiction of Oswald, mostly a guy who obviously cared about
his family. The Warren Commission would pain him out to
be a wife beater, but obviously that relationship with Marine

(30:45):
Oswald was kind of both sides, uh were at fault there,
but he obviously he obviously cared about his kids. And
to mention what Rob Clark said to me, either not
his last episode, maybe the episode before that, but you know,
you take a shot from a building a month after
you just had a baby, Like, as a parent, why
would you do that? Like he doesn't have kids, at

(31:07):
least that I know of, But you know, that's just
not something that a guy who cares about his family
would do. But then you mentioned the money aspect, which
I think was for his family. I mean, you got
to think he's living in a boarding house, seeing his
kids every now and again, or trying to at least.
But the woman Marine is living with doesn't want him there,

(31:27):
even though she let him spend the night Thursday night,
which is, you know, strange. But there's a lot of
things where he just wanted his family back together and
out of kind of the Ruth Pain situation that I've
started to pick up. I don't know if you've noticed
that or if you've kind of seen things where obviously
would give more creedence to doing something for money, not
killing the president, but doing something where it's low level

(31:49):
activities for someone that's offering here's four hundred dollars for this,
here's five hundred dollars for this. Hey, let me know
if the CAGB contacts your wife give you a couple
hundred bucks. You know, it's important for us to monitor
any type of you know, communist threat.

Speaker 2 (32:06):
For sure, And I think when you look at something
like his handing out of pro castro leaflets, right, it
could be It could be both. It doesn't have to
be mutually exclusive.

Speaker 3 (32:16):
He could have had left leanings and then taken money
to do that assignment, right, So, I mean that's something
I try to reevaluate all the time. And I said
this on the podcast recently.

Speaker 2 (32:31):
I was like, I'm trying to like redefine my biases
and like, what have I assumed in the past years
of studying this that might not be true?

Speaker 3 (32:40):
And what does that assumption?

Speaker 2 (32:41):
What has that assumption done to all my other subsequent beliefs.
And I think any good objective researcher has to kind
of go back and kind of take stock and be like,
what did I possibly have wrong? And it's you know,
it's an ongoing process. I don't know if we'll ever

(33:03):
be done with it, but I hope new documents come
out someday.

Speaker 3 (33:07):
They haven't had one in a long time, but about
a year.

Speaker 1 (33:11):
Yeah, what are your biases and also what have you
changed your opinion on or tune on. Obviously you can
get married to certain theories, but how much do you
base in speculation because you're not going to have a
document that says, hey, here's an order to kill JFK
based on the CIA or the FBI is just not
going to happen. That won't be written down. But a
lot of stuff you do have to lend credence to

(33:33):
some speculation. But where's that line for you on that speculation.
Because some people like the Clinton Murchison meeting now not
in my head I like talking about I think it's interesting,
but I just think that it checks off too many boxes.
And there's only one person that I've been able to find,
and maybe another person that I can't find their statement

(33:54):
up when it happened. But when it's a Commo.

Speaker 3 (33:57):
Party party before the night.

Speaker 1 (34:00):
Yeah, the alleged meeting that LBJ said after tonight, those
goddamn Kennedy's will never bother me again. But it fits great.
If you're an LBJ guy, let me tell you that's
everything you could possibly need. You got big oil money
in there. But I did dive down to the oilman's
power in Dallas, Texas back then. There is a lot
of that. As much as you could say that the
West Virginia primary was funded by Sam g and Kanna

(34:24):
or whoever, there is a little bit of evidence to
support that there was money transaction getting passed and a
lot of money was getting funded towards Kennedy's campaign, but
that's through every politician's campaign. Richard Nixon both times, Howard
Hughes funded both his campaign runs and also funded Kennedy,
So he added up just in case one of the

(34:44):
horses lost. He still had a horse in the race,
which is a smart business move.

Speaker 2 (34:50):
Yeah, and a lot of people like that will donate
to both sides because whoever wins, you're going to have
some a card to.

Speaker 3 (34:58):
Pull in.

Speaker 2 (34:59):
And in terms of the yeah, the merchants and party
you mentioned, you know, Nixon was allegedly there too. I've
read and I've been done like a ton of research
into us that like Nixon left pretty early or left
that day or that night and wasn't really there. And
yet you're right, it checks all the boxes. That type

(35:21):
of comment you would never make to a mistress. Right,
you knew we made the comment to And in terms
of my own biases, I think I like one of
the ones I mentioned before, because I think.

Speaker 3 (35:37):
Everyone can use there's so much conflicting evidence in this
case that you could almost you can back up your
theory with all these different with whatever information you how
you decide to let splice it up. So I think
one of the ones that I'm trying to deal with is, okay,

(36:00):
need to be consistent. Is Oswalt a super double spy, right,
and therefore he's doing all these advanced spy things the
whole time or is he just or is he not?
And some of the points I mentioned earlier, And that's
a good example of the type of bias I'm trying

(36:22):
to like double check.

Speaker 2 (36:25):
Of course, there are a lot of other examples I
can't think of right now, but yeah, I think I
think it's just a healthy exercise in general.

Speaker 3 (36:33):
Right if if you want, if you want to be
objective about it, and not all people want to be
objective about it, and that's fine.

Speaker 1 (36:39):
You know what about speculation giving any credence to certain
areas of speculation?

Speaker 2 (36:48):
Oh, I mean I I speculate a ton and almost
in every way. I might sometimes take the the middle
ground on on some things, but that's just because I
don't know. But I speculate a ton. And we'll get
into some of the speculations that I did with are
Lancer of presentation last year. And I speculate almost every

(37:12):
possible option and possibility for sure, So I'm definitely there
on the speculation.

Speaker 3 (37:18):
I just might not talk about every you know, every.

Speaker 1 (37:23):
Aspect of it before we get into the Martin stuff.
I just got a few more for you just to
cover the base kind of obviously assassination research for anybody
that's new and he's wondering the many aspects of it.
But the investigative arm with the Warrant Commission and then
the investigative compared with the HSCA, do you think any
investigation has done it right or do you think that

(37:43):
they were all kind of set up to fail or
have a determined conclusion.

Speaker 2 (37:51):
I definitely think the War Commission was set up to
have that conclusion for sure. I think the HSCA was
a lot more open with some of their areas that
they went down. I think they were also kind of
they kind of subscribed to a certain In the HCA's case,

(38:13):
they focused a lot in the mafia, right, So they
definitely highlighted those aspects.

Speaker 3 (38:18):
And you know, I think there's there's context to be
gained in both of them.

Speaker 2 (38:27):
And what was the general political environment at the time.
The late seventies was a very different time than nineteen
sixty three, right, you had and I actually agree with
LBJ in a sense like if you have people coming

(38:48):
up and saying it's it's Cuba or it's Russia at
least what he felt or worn, that's going to create
a public outrage and that's going to probably result in
Old three at the time. So there was a I
think a genuine, like a legitimate concern, that's a we
can't really go down this road because who knows where

(39:10):
it's going to lead us type of thing. HCA obviously
was more was more open, but I don't think any
of them really were designed to get to the truth.
You know, we had briefly before, we had talked about
Richard Sprague, who was kind of outed for for blaky
and uh from what I've heard, you know, Richard Spray

(39:32):
was much more open to the seeing where things were
going to lead, and obviously he wasn't given that opportunity.

Speaker 1 (39:40):
Well, it can't be surprised there was a mob kind
of conclusion when it came to conspiracy with the HSCA
because Plaquey was all in charge of RICO and every
thing like that. It's kind of like, you know, you
spent your whole life looking into one aspect of things
and someone tells you, hey, I have this, do you
mind researching it? You're only going to look for the
cool mob connections and all that type of stuff. Every

(40:00):
rock you're going to overturn. So that just fits why
it ended up that way. But how much when you
examine obviously the dysfunction of agencies and the dysfunction of
just secret Service everything when it came to that day
in Dallas, Obviously there's a lot of covering up, and
it doesn't necessarily need to be covering up a grand conspiracy,

(40:21):
but covering up the fact that a lot of people
weren't doing their job effectively. I mean, a secret Service
should not have been out drinking un till wee hours
of the morning the day they're supposed to be protecting
the president. There's a lot of things that just seemed
like the government was not running what everyone thought it was,
and to cover their ass, they really kind of either
hit documentation hit evidence, which made the conspiracy and this

(40:44):
big kind of thing over. So now you're finding out
secrets that Secret Service destroyed documents two weeks after being
requested from the ARRB. It's like, why would they do that? Well,
they're covering their own ass. Because they obviously had a
lot of things that would probably make them look really,
really bad.

Speaker 3 (41:01):
For sure.

Speaker 2 (41:01):
And I think that's one of the things that I
really learned in the last few years is that the
conspiracy and the cover up, in my opinion, are two
different things. And because Alan Dallas was on the warrant Commission,
doesn't mean that he was necessarily covering up for the
CIA is a complicity in the assassination.

Speaker 3 (41:23):
It could have been to tech the secrets like the
Castro assassination plots and the Mexico City wire taps and
the photo taking operation and many others. Right. So I
think that's one of the big things that and it
goes back to my other point.

Speaker 2 (41:43):
It's like you can make that point. Look, Alan Doles
did that, he suppressed this, so it was a CIA,
but not necessarily right. Everyone was in cover your ass
mode every agency. We talk about this a lot on
the logo and the inter agency rivalry. Uh, there's a
lot of it, right, especially back then for information for assets.

Speaker 3 (42:07):
Uh. And at this point, just because.

Speaker 2 (42:12):
You know Hosty burned that letter right which Oswald allegedly
wrote to him saying stop following me, doesn't necessarily mean
that he was an FBI informant, but he was. They
were trying to cover their own ass that they had
contact with Oswald and they knew about him. And I

(42:32):
think that's that's pretty consistent with all all the other agencies,
you know, CIA, Secret Service. I think everyone was trying
to cover their own ass and get out of this
without without scarring type of thing.

Speaker 1 (42:45):
How much do you lend to eyewitnesses or ear witnesses,
obviously in Daily Plaza when it comes to a number
of shots grass you know all this because if you
are document based, which I do believe you're like Robbie
go kind of what the document says, you can you
can get a lot of information. But there's obviously things
that much like you mentioned with Richard Sprague when we

(43:06):
talked about off air, there are things that you will
hear from people, or you will get from someone who
has no connection to the JFK assassination that might enhance
your thoughts. And do you lend that, Like I've interviewed
people who are JFK researchers and they'll say something that
they interviewed this person and this is what they told them.
Do they have it on video? Well, some do but

(43:29):
sometimes it's just a conversation they had. It's a great story.
Do I use that as evidence as or do I
just say that's a cool little tidbit to add in there.
And I'll give you an example. I was talking to
a guy about I I swear this is one hundred
percent sure it's about male mental health, but really it
was the whole conversation. He's a researcher in Florida University,
professor who studies testicular cancer. I swear my show covers all,

(43:53):
you know, all the whole wide range. And we were
talking about it, and he goes, I got to tell
you a story about our own inspector. And I go,
what he go? I used to be a waiter at
a bar and he would always come in at this
bar and get a martini glass, you know, whatever drink
that he ordered, but he would want three olives on
a toothpick, placed perfectly in the center on top. It

(44:15):
had it like that, and he wanted it carried over
on a giant tray, just a single drink and placed
directly in front of him, not off to the side,
directly in front of him. And he just gave me
that as an aside, and I was like, I don't
know what that is, but that makes that dude even
fucking weirder for me, and I don't trust him, And like,
that's a lot, you know, like there's interesting tidbits to
hear about that. You'll hear or see an account from

(44:36):
a witness that talked about seeing this or this at
a certain instance that happens to do with the assassination.
You're like, I don't you know, you can't really use
that as like that's kind of hearsay, but you can
still keep it in the back of your mind as
to give you, like I said, that's the speculation part,
but give you motive to kind of draw your own
conclusions personally. Doesn't have to be publicly.

Speaker 3 (44:57):
I agree, And I love those type of off hand
statements from someone that might have known someone involved in
the case that we study that isn't a JFK researcher
that had that say, random experience with SPECTR and I
think that gives a lot of insight into character.

Speaker 2 (45:13):
Of course, it is hearsay and you can't really use
it to formulate your theory, but it adds context and
to your question about witness statements. Oof I mean, we've
done a lot of this, and analyzing witness statements, especially
around the TSPD and Deleete Plaza, is a never ending

(45:35):
kind of circle of contradicting information. Our general rule is
Rob's and I is kind of like the earliest witness
statement the day of the initial FBI report is much
more significant than the one they give to a documentary
in nineteen eighty something, of course, So and then we

(45:57):
also have to look at what's their motive, right, have
they made money on it?

Speaker 3 (46:02):
Do they or do they want fame? It's some people
just and then some people come.

Speaker 2 (46:08):
Out decades after with something and you're like, what what
do I do with this? I think, uh, it's it's
not an exact clience, of course, And I think you
just got to do the best in in kind of
evaluating intentions and and I think, you know, we try

(46:30):
to go to the earliest ones and then link that
up with some of their how much of their story
has changed over.

Speaker 3 (46:37):
Time type of thing.

Speaker 2 (46:39):
And I think that's one of the few things you
could do right because because we weren't there, a lot
of these people aren't alive anymore. If they are, and
sometimes like their kids or their spouses will will make
statements about them, come up with this, and that's a.

Speaker 3 (46:56):
Whole other can of worms. It's it's extremely confusing.

Speaker 1 (47:03):
Now you mentioned that when you spoke at Lancer, he
talked about the number of Martins in the case, we
can start going into some of your work on the
Martins real quick. Was Martin Short one of them? Or
is it like this have to be a last name.

Speaker 3 (47:18):
It doesn't have to be a last name. Martin Short
was not one of them?

Speaker 1 (47:21):
Dam and Martin Short is you know what?

Speaker 3 (47:26):
I heard the name, but I don't. I'm gonna be
honest there.

Speaker 1 (47:30):
Steve, Well, Steve Martin one of them, even better.

Speaker 3 (47:34):
The actor?

Speaker 1 (47:35):
Yeah, well, Martin Short was on what does that show?
Arrested Development? But he's he's Jimminy Glick. He wears the
fat suit and interviews people and he's a famous comedian.

Speaker 3 (47:44):
It's fine or Dean Martin.

Speaker 1 (47:48):
There you go, I would believe it, to be honest
with you.

Speaker 2 (47:53):
Well, yeah, so, and as we segue into the Martins here,
I you know, as just at this point in my
JFK journey, I'm listening to podcasts, I'm watching everything that
comes out in the JFK assassination, and I thought to myself,
what's up with all the Martins coming up, because I mean,
there's a few Smiths in here in the assassination as well,

(48:16):
but they're not even close to the amount of Martins.
And I'm going to read off this list in a second.
And what we did was we didn't just compile Martin names.

Speaker 3 (48:25):
We have J.

Speaker 2 (48:27):
Martins as in their first or in one or two cases,
middle name were J. So one of the most popular
Martins was, of course Jack S. Martin, which was the
private investigator working under a Guy Banister who famously got
pistol whipped in one of the opening scenes of JFK.

(48:50):
And he had three different Martin aliases, and his real
name was Edward Suggs. He was a pilot and work
too who was injured in and out of different mental
institutions in the fifties. He kind of a grifter, but
he finds himself in a very prominent situation when it

(49:13):
comes to this case in terms of working under Guy Banister,
and when the FBI talked to him on November twenty third,
nineteen sixty three, he was the one that dropped the
dime on David Ferry. So I'm gonna name off a
couple of Martins here that aren't as popular.

Speaker 3 (49:34):
You have John C. Martin, who is the head of
security at the International Trademark in nineteen sixty three. You
have John Martin Junior, who was the postal worker, worked
with Harry Holmes and who filmed at a de Lee
Plaza film.

Speaker 2 (49:52):
Speaking of films, and we'll get into this Martin in
a second, John Thomas Martin, who took the famous and
mysteri video of Walker's House, being inside Walker's House and
then catching Lee Harvey Oswalt's street fracas with the Cuban
exiles and Carlo Sprenier on the same role of film.

(50:16):
And you have another John Martin. This guy is Johnny Martin.
He was involved and that's a PG. Thirteen word with
Serena Odio, who is Sylvia Odio's younger sister, and offered
her arms for her anti Castro movement. And of course
her father, their father was in jail in Cuba at

(50:38):
the time, and that's where you get that hole.

Speaker 1 (50:41):
Wait, he was shacking up and then also selling firearms
while he was doing it.

Speaker 3 (50:46):
So he shocked up with her and then offered her arms.
Very subtly damn. So this kind of could have been
like a first attempt at the odios, which is very interesting.
You have Jean Martin, which was the New Orleans alias
of Pierre Lafitte, which was the subject of Coop in

(51:10):
Dallas by Hank al Borelli. No relation there to me.

Speaker 2 (51:17):
John Martin Thorne who was Marina's lawyer during the warrant commission,
and he was introduced to Marina by James Herbert Martin,
who we were going to get into, and that was
Marina's business manager and agent. And she moved into his
house with her two kids on November twenty ninth sixty three,

(51:38):
about five days after Lee was shot in the basement
by Jack Ruby. And speaking of Ruby, one of Ruby's
lawyers was named James Wilford Jim Martin, And there was
a famous meeting at Ruby's apartment between a bunch of people,

(51:59):
George Under, Jim Martin was there, Phil Munter, Jim Canty.

Speaker 3 (52:04):
Yeah, and all of them except this Jim Martin did
not survive last a couple of years. Jim Martin was
the only one.

Speaker 1 (52:14):
Yeah. Bill Hunter had a heart attack and then Jim
Cothy was stepping out of the shower and had blunt
force trauma, which was considered a karate chop to the throat.
I'm talking about Larry after I speak with you. I'm
talking to him about that because he interviewed Jim Coty's
wife and stated that, yeah, it was a karate chop.
And that's the only clip of mine that got me

(52:34):
a flag on YouTube about the JFK stuff because they're like,
it's a harmful conspiracy. I was like, I have the autopsy.
It says karate chop. Blame it on the doctor. That's
his fault for putting that there.

Speaker 3 (52:48):
Yeah, that is.

Speaker 2 (52:50):
It's a very interesting how this how this guy was
really and some of them I'm not saying all of
those deaths were suspicious. Some of them definitely are, which
is interesting that Jim Martin was the.

Speaker 3 (53:02):
Survivor of that. You have a Jack W. Martin.

Speaker 2 (53:07):
I know I'm confusing you guys here. Believe me, Rob
and I spent months trying to figure out this.

Speaker 3 (53:13):
Jack W. Martin was a secret service suspect who had
an APB put out on him on November twenty second,
sixty three, even before Lee was arrested. We have that document.
All this is backed up by documents on everyone.

Speaker 2 (53:29):
Billy Joe Martin was a DPD motorcycle cop behind JFK's motorcade.
There's a Joseph James Martin who's CIA from fifty to
fifty eight Intel assistant. We thought he was the same
as Jack S. Martin from New Orleans. He's not. We
wanted to make that connection, but he couldn't. Well, you

(53:53):
have a Jolly Joe Martin.

Speaker 3 (53:55):
Who was a radio DJ and Omaha actually sung and
the Republican National Committee. I can't remember which year.

Speaker 2 (54:06):
I think it was sixty eight, tod be wrong, but
he shielded Thomas Edward Beckham from extradition to New Orleans
during the Garrison trial and was later kidnapped by the
CIA himself. And there's a lot of impi ultra type
of things that were going on there. He was found
cowering in the corner on a not making sense. But

(54:27):
next we have a Roland Jay Martin. I mean this
doesn't end. He was the owner of Martin's Cafe, appropriately enough.

Speaker 3 (54:35):
In New Orleans, where Lee.

Speaker 2 (54:37):
Harvey Oswald cast nine of his checks from Riley Coffee Company.
You have Lewis J. Martin, an alias of Lewis McWillie,
a close friend of Ruby Gunrunner, a friend of Trafficante
mob associate in general. And that is just some of them.

(54:59):
I skipped a a few of them in the interest
of time, but that was like our initition and we
didn't know. We didn't find a lot of these until
later on. But our thing is is this an alias?
Is this what's going on here? Eugenio Martinez also had

(55:21):
who of Watergate fame but was also an active Cuban
exile in nineteen sixty three, had two.

Speaker 3 (55:28):
Jay Martin aliases. I believe it was John P. And
John W. You had James McCord, also of Watergate fame,
who had an Edward J. Martin alias when he was
arrested and during the Watergate hearings told him that I
Howard Hunt distributed this Martin alias to him.

Speaker 2 (55:51):
So it's it's fascinating, and that was the kind of
premise of our initial research journey, and it's you know,
it's kind.

Speaker 3 (56:04):
Of light and fun. Was this analis? Was it not?
But it evolved into something more and it was kind
of a really ended up being a really detail study
on to Martin's specifically, And I'm going to start with
John T. Martin, who, as I mentioned earlier, was.

Speaker 2 (56:23):
The student who's a seventeen year old student at the
time who filmed inside General Walker's house and then caught
the lee Harvey Oswald Fractice on the same role of film.
I know Gary Schoener has talked about this on your
show in the past. I've corresponded with Gary last year.
Very nice guy, very helpful to me.

Speaker 3 (56:46):
And so John, I'll back up a little bit.

Speaker 2 (56:51):
John Martin gave his video to the FBI in December
of sixty three. They returned it. He later claimed it
was edited. And then when Harold Wiseberg and Gary Schoener
in nineteen sixty eight were in Minnesota doing I think
they did, like a ten hour radio show like this
guy called up and this was John T. Martin, and

(57:14):
he said, I have a film related to the assassination
I think you'd like.

Speaker 3 (57:19):
So they actually met up with him after the show
and he gave them Wiseberg and Schooner this film. And
they end up contacting someone else. And you're gonna laugh
at this. His name is Mike Patsy.

Speaker 1 (57:39):
Bernie made Off. Bernie made Off. Is that what we're
doing here?

Speaker 3 (57:42):
I see, Yeah, I know that's funny, and he helped
with the technical video aspect of it. And so this.

Speaker 2 (57:59):
Video kind of was under the radar for a long time.
It kind of came out in the early two thousands
to the research community.

Speaker 3 (58:07):
It actually was submitted to the HCA as well, but
further inspection reveals that the film is not the original,
but a copy of a copy, which may account for
the poor quality of the images. Martin says. The film now.

Speaker 2 (58:28):
In the six to floor Museum's collection is the film
returned by the FBI in sixty four, but later inspection
shows the film's daycode shows in nineteen seventy seven, so
that the film was borrowed during the HCA in the
late seventies, and that's the daycode on the current Martin
film that we had, which makes me think the copy

(58:51):
was made at the HCA, which is the one we're
seeing now, which is very interesting, but just a backup
from the film. It does start with this student in
a plane filming the clouds. It then goes to New
Orleans to General Walker's house. He's filming from inside the

(59:12):
house the bullet hole and the outside of the house
the mailbox, and then cuts to another.

Speaker 3 (59:24):
Image of John.

Speaker 2 (59:27):
Martin in the plane, and then he's in New Orleans
and it goes through a bunch of New Orleans sites,
the City Hall, the Big Horse statue there. I believe
it's of Andrew Jackson in Jackson Square, and then captures
Lee Harvey Oswaldt fighting with the Cuban exiles.

Speaker 4 (59:49):
So how does this kid capture this film, captured this
video in one reel of film all these occurrences.

Speaker 3 (01:00:00):
Is it coincidence or is there something more? That's what
Rob and I try to figure it out, figure out,
and Gary Schooner was a big help with this, and
this is the working theory that we have right now.

Speaker 2 (01:00:16):
So we figured out because John Thomas Martin was never identified,
No one knew who he was.

Speaker 3 (01:00:22):
He was very mysterious. It's actually called the.

Speaker 2 (01:00:24):
Jack Martin video for a while, which makes it even
more confusing. He is nowhere to be found, and of
course is giving his film to the sixth Floor, the HCA,
the Weisberg and Schooner.

Speaker 3 (01:00:39):
So why our best Let me back up. So the
initial thought was because Thomas Martin was a middle Minute
Men Right, which was an extreme right organization that was
very very.

Speaker 2 (01:00:58):
Conservative, and that's why we think he sought out General Walker, right,
that makes sense. So no one knew who he was.
The initial thought was that he served under Walker in
Germany and then served with him when he got back,
but we figured out that he did not. He was
actually seventeen years old in nineteen sixty three, which would

(01:01:20):
have made him like fourteen or fifteen when Walker was
serving in Germany, which is impossible. And that was the
community consensus for a long time. Right, this guy was
serving under Walker made this video, but we proved he
wasn't because not only did we find his.

Speaker 3 (01:01:43):
Military school high school picture.

Speaker 2 (01:01:45):
So this is another thing that I think it's confusing
because in his high school picture he's pictured in a
uniform and it says Sergeant John Martin. So everyone saw
that and was like, oh, look he was in the military.

Speaker 3 (01:01:58):
Well he wasn't.

Speaker 2 (01:01:59):
He was actually in military school. And I noticed that because,
like I mentioned, I went to military school.

Speaker 3 (01:02:06):
And his bio on his.

Speaker 2 (01:02:14):
Senior military school was a very conservative Republican wants to
abolish the Supreme Court.

Speaker 3 (01:02:20):
Which I guess was a far right stance at the time.
Chess club, blah blah blah.

Speaker 2 (01:02:27):
We found not we have this Minuteman card has been
available to the community for a while, but we dult
deep and we found his University of Minnesota student directory
where we went and found his name graduating in nineteen
sixty seven with the same address seventeen fifty two. Iigelheart

(01:02:50):
that was on his minute card minute man card, So boom,
this is the same guy. And his minute man card
puts hobbies as chess and other things that correlate to
his high school bio. So now we identified the John T.

Speaker 3 (01:03:08):
Martin.

Speaker 2 (01:03:09):
So the way we saw it, there are three possibilities.
It's either a huge coincidence that this guy who was
on a family trip by the way, in the summer
of nineteen sixty three, he goes to Dallas, he visits
his hero's house, which is General Edward Walker, or someone
he looked up to.

Speaker 3 (01:03:28):
General Walker invited him in, he took some the video
of the.

Speaker 2 (01:03:35):
Slides from of the bullet hole from inside the house,
and then goes to New Orleans. Well, Rob and I
and mister Schooner actually agreed with this as the most
plausible theory. Probably went to New Orleans on General Walker's
Perhaps he might have gone and said, like, how can
I help sir, right, he goes, well, you might have

(01:03:57):
seen he had a video camera, right, not super popular
for her sixty three? Right, why don't you go to
New Orleans and contact someone over there? Now we speculated,
we're speculating that that person could have been Guy Banister
or someone of this sort. And then Guy Banister or

(01:04:20):
someone else connected to the right wing told him to
go film this event in New Orleans.

Speaker 3 (01:04:26):
This this practice, which.

Speaker 2 (01:04:28):
A lot of people have said was kind of a
fake practice. I'm not sure, but either way, he was
sent there and he got it on tape. Which is
the odds of that happening and visiting Walker's house on
the same real film a few days before, the odds
are astronomical, or the third it was placed in later right,

(01:04:54):
the film is not it was screen recorded. I talked
about the nineteen seventy seven daycot, not sixty three ecode.
So there's really only those three things. It's a coincidence.
It's he went to New Orleans, talked to Walker, Walker
told him to go. If you want to help, go
to New Orleans, contact this guy, or it's it's an edited,

(01:05:17):
spliced film.

Speaker 3 (01:05:19):
It is the only three rational.

Speaker 1 (01:05:22):
Possibilities, which one you leaning more towards I like to
see a lot.

Speaker 3 (01:05:32):
That that that is is U is my favorite. I
think I think it's just that it's just the most likely. Right.

Speaker 2 (01:05:40):
This kid is a fan of General Walker. He goes
to his house, he films Walker's house and then how
can I help sir? He's a military school. He's going
to be a minuteman.

Speaker 3 (01:05:51):
Shortly after, It's very possible that Walker told.

Speaker 2 (01:05:56):
Him to do that. But then that brings up the
point did Walker have pre jfk assassination knowledge of Oswald?
And you know, he later claimed that his connects at
the DPD told him that Ruby and Oswald were detained
in connection with the Walker shooting.

Speaker 1 (01:06:16):
At some point, I don't believe in association between Jack
Ruby and Oswald. And honestly, it was getting me upset
reading all the Carousel girls and making video format for
them because all of them are like there had to
be some type of homosexual relationship or someone like, where
are you guys getting this? I don't see any other evidence.

(01:06:38):
But then with General Walker, I believe he knew a
lot more than obviously people. I believe that he didn't
come out about Oswald taking the shot at him until
after Oswald shot JFK. I believe he was using that
as like an association to be like, hey, if you
think Kennedy was great, you know Oswald tried to shoot
me too, so obviously we must be in a line somewhere.

Speaker 3 (01:07:00):
But yeah, it was political. I think it was taking
advantage of that situation. It was like, well, well that
was the guy that shot at me. I think that's
most likely.

Speaker 1 (01:07:09):
But Walker wrote letters when either to the FBI or
to someone when he was incarcerated for something. I guess
he was doing some type of tour where he was
going making all his speeching engagements, and he happened inside
a riot or something like that that happened, he ended
up getting arrested. But the letters state, and it's apparently

(01:07:30):
they're from Walker, but they sound like they're from somebody else,
like a fan or a friend. They're like, while he's incarcerated,
don't let anybody perform any psychiatric evaluations on him. And
then they kind of go into the whole MK ultra
style things in the letter, and I go, is this
more well known? Because I'm pretty sure we didn't find

(01:07:51):
out about this until like the Watergate stuff. So he's
saying this in like sixty four or sixty three. So
it's not making sense to me how he's aware of
that information unless he had inside knowledge or it was
just something of the times back then. And I've spoken
to private historians not about that's focus into JFK stuff,
but just focused into the Cold War that was not

(01:08:11):
well known knowledge at all about LSD and all that
stuff that was being used that came out way after
the fact. So he had inside knowledge from somewhere on
certain things. And I just don't think. I don't think
he was involved in killing Kennedy. I just think there
was a lot of aspects of he probably knew what
was going on, or had some inside information, or knew

(01:08:33):
someone who did maybe perform or manipulate the act, whether
if it came to a certain agency or whether it
came to a certain individual.

Speaker 2 (01:08:41):
Yeah, I think i'd probably agree with that. You know,
General Halalker was actually in New Orleans on November twentieth,
sixty three meeting with Judge Leander Perez, which is also
a very far right wing character, and I think it's
possible he didn't know of this Oswald doing these overt

(01:09:07):
communist activity and kind of put put it together really
quickly where he was able to come out pretty close
after the assassination and say, oh, he tried to shoot
at me too. I think that's probably the most likely.

Speaker 1 (01:09:24):
Yeah, because RFK got a hold of that information at
some point and then requested the FBI do an investigation
into that as well. He wanted to know if the
same person that shot his brother happened to take a
shot at or take a shot at Walker, mostly because
it didn't make sense to him. I forgot there's a

(01:09:45):
report to that, but I don't remember what the document
number to that report is. Like I said, you end
up missing things if you don't screenshot it. But Walker
was another interesting aspect with the Tippet murder for me.
In the beginning, it's another one of those things where
it's like, damn, this guy's how is he getting away
with all this stuff? Then he buries his rifle apparently
in a backyard somewhere on the basis of what Marina said,

(01:10:07):
and then you get into that whole mess of her.
I mean, do you trust her as a witness at all?
I mean I kind of like to think that she
was obviously fearful that she was going to lose her
kids or be deported. And I believe that she was
kind of strong armed or bullied by some of the
presence of the police force and Secret Service, but I

(01:10:28):
don't know. I was like, if you got to just
not touch your testimony with a ten foot pole, if
you're trying to stay even ground, whether it's low nut
or conspiracy. Because Posner used her in the beginning for
the Warren Commission, but then when I had them on
and I showed him what the HSCA got out of
her that she didn't know the difference between a rifle
and a shotgun, he didn't want to agree with it.
I was like, well, then you just drop it. You

(01:10:49):
can't use her as a reliable person anymore. She's flipped
too many times.

Speaker 3 (01:10:55):
Yeah, it's another one of those crazy enigma and rabbit
holes in this assassination is Marina. And I think one
of the things that's so frustrating is he's obviously still alive.
She has interacted with a lot of the community decades ago, not.

Speaker 2 (01:11:12):
Not recently, and I think one of your recent guests
was like, oh, I talked to Marina three times.

Speaker 3 (01:11:17):
In the nineties, and I was just like, oh, I got.

Speaker 2 (01:11:20):
So jealous because I was like, it's a perfect segue
round because I would ask her not about her testimony
or this or Russia. I'd be like, what's up with
James Herbert Martin and James Herbert Martin? And that's why
I said it's a great segue. Is the other Martin
that that we found a ton of new information on?

(01:11:44):
And James Heberber Martin is not like a common name
when you think of the assassination. I think a lot
of people that are like just interested and assassination enthusiasts
might not know who he is.

Speaker 3 (01:11:57):
So I'll start from the beginning.

Speaker 1 (01:11:58):
He's got three First James, that's suspicious as hell.

Speaker 3 (01:12:02):
Yeah, right, I thought that was only resolved for like assassins. Right.
But James Herbert Martin.

Speaker 2 (01:12:14):
Was Marina's business manager, agent and pretty much R. Eighty sitter,
And he worked as a manager at the six Flags
in which was a motel in Dallas, and that's where
the Secret Service took the Oswalt family. And that is Marina, Marguerite, Robert,

(01:12:36):
Marina's kids. On the night Ruby shot Oswalt, that would
be November twenty fourth, sixty three. So Martin also admitted
and his warrant commission testimony to knowing Jack Ruby because
they were both in the club business, which, of course
everyone seemed to know Jack Ruby, so that's not particularly nefarious.

(01:12:57):
But he invited the Oswalt family to Thanksgiving dinner in
sixty three, and this is like what a couple days,
maybe a day or two after Lee was shot, right,
and then offered Marina and her two kids to move
into their home with his wife, Wanda, and their three kids.

(01:13:21):
At the time, it was fourteen and twelve year old boys,
two boys and a six year old daughter. So you
have James and Wanda Martin, you have their three kids,
inviting Marina to live with them and their two kids.
And in the warrant commission testimony, they asked, did you
consult your wife before making this before reaching out and

(01:13:44):
giving this invitation to Marina? And he goes, no, I
don't know if that's a nineteen sixty three thing. We'll
get into Wanda Martin and his wife a little bit.
There's a document we found on her in the releases
in the twenty twenty three JFK releases in April that
is going to blow people's minds. But James Herbert Martin

(01:14:08):
was working in the hotel industry. Previously, he was from
Saint Louis, the Hilton hotel chain. He later became a
credit card salesman for the cart Blanche credit card company
and then kind of disappeared for a couple of years.
There's no mention from him from July of fifty nine
until about mid.

Speaker 3 (01:14:29):
Sixty two, which is very interesting. We'll get into that.

Speaker 2 (01:14:32):
But Rob and I found a document from the DPD
Criminal Intelligence Division. This was a document on November December two,
I'm sorry, nineteen sixty three, and it's pretty much giving
the details of who James and Wanda Martin are, right,

(01:14:56):
this subject was born here.

Speaker 3 (01:14:59):
But the most.

Speaker 2 (01:15:00):
Interesting part of this document is hand written on the
bottom of it. It says a straight line and installed
December third, sixty three, so that's a day after the
document with the number to the White House Communication Staff.
So essentially, James ver Martin in his house, the house

(01:15:25):
that Marina was living in, had a direct federal lease
line circuit directly to White House Communications written on top
of a DPD memo found in the DPD archives on
their site, and no one had ever found it and
if they did, they didn't talk about it. Larry Hancock

(01:15:46):
was blown away by this. He actually used to work
for a phone company and was like this is crazy,
and gave a ton of context on how that line
would have been installed and the circuit breakers.

Speaker 3 (01:15:58):
And like, oh it would have gone to And that
was one of the two.

Speaker 1 (01:16:04):
I think i've heard it before. I realized if you
might look back on McBride's first episode on my show,
I think he mentioned it. It's either that or Gary
Schoener's the only two names I could possibly think of
that might have mentioned it. I don't think McBride ever
published it, though I know I've heard it before about

(01:16:24):
a line in the house, but I thought it was
when the Secret Service were monitoring Marina for like the
first couple was a week or so after the assassination.
I have a yeah, I mean it's been a long time.
Like I said, if it's the if it's McBride's first time,
that would have been three years ago, almost that he
would have mentioned that to me. But I think you

(01:16:46):
guys definitely probably expanded more on whatever that is or
initially founded. If I'm mistaken, but you hear these things
and it's so hard because, like especially with McBride, he'll
say a bunch of things and then you're like, shit,
what are we on? And it's like he's about George
Bush and you're like, what the how the hell did
we get here? But I love I love that, Like
I said that they got all these knowledge in their

(01:17:07):
head and stuff, you end up missing out on half
this stuff, especially like with Wacked. I spoke to Wacked,
I just never published this episode, so it's like they
got a lot of good stuff in there. But then
you're trying to fucking like, you know, there's too much time,
there's so.

Speaker 3 (01:17:20):
Much information and a lot and sometimes good information like
this can get lost. But it's significant, you know. And
if mccride to talk about it, like kudos to him.
It's it's very interesting because you could take it from
the LBJ standpoint, is okay, or just the the general
secret service standpoint. Okay, we're tired of guarding Marina and

(01:17:42):
her family. Let's get her somewhere else. Okay.

Speaker 2 (01:17:46):
If you're going to move in with this guy, James
Erver Martin, you better pick up the phone if something
comes up.

Speaker 3 (01:17:52):
Type of thing.

Speaker 2 (01:17:53):
It's very plausible, right, It doesn't have to be an
LBJ ordered thing, although the LBJ people could differently use that.

Speaker 3 (01:18:02):
And.

Speaker 2 (01:18:05):
It's and Wanda, his wife is a very, very even
more interesting thing. And this is what I'm going to
get into next. So his wife, Wanda, a very kind
of mysterious figure. No one really talks about her whatsoever.
But in April of last year, as I briefly mentioned,
there was a document released on NARRA. I have it

(01:18:29):
screenshotted Robbie just in case it disappeared, and file on
missus James Herbert Martin and undated. But there's a cursive
letter written that we've done our best to decipher, and
a lot of the words are kind of it's hard

(01:18:51):
to read, but it says not your typical wife. Whire intercept.
She could be, she could have plausible deniability wire intercept.
The case could be made either way. And what we

(01:19:11):
found was James Robert Martin's wife was under oral contract
by none other than the Central Intelligence Agency in nineteen
sixty four. And this was under Operation Die circuit. And

(01:19:32):
Die is actually a Czechoslovakian prefix that dealt with that
kind of that part of Europe circuit. I think makes
sense with the federal lease line circuit, which is what
it would have been. But the document we have is
two is from the Chief of Base Berlin, right Berlin,

(01:19:57):
that Germany, and the subject is engagement of spouse blah
blah blah or redacted as redacted.

Speaker 3 (01:20:07):
So we got this document and we're like, Wow, the
person who.

Speaker 2 (01:20:14):
Was living in a house with Marina five days after
the assassination was under oral contract by the CIA. Now
was she CIA before this?

Speaker 3 (01:20:22):
Was she?

Speaker 2 (01:20:22):
Cid the CIA try to take advantage and recruit her
after Marina moved in possible since it's an oral contract.
It says the effective day of the oral contract extension
is June sixty four and that shall continue there after

(01:20:42):
intul termination of tour of duty.

Speaker 3 (01:20:47):
So we got a lot of weird.

Speaker 1 (01:20:50):
I got two questions. I got two questions here. One,
how active is you notice that there's so many CIA
like connections with a lot of these people, Like it
seems like everybody's cousin or like step brother or somebody
is connected to the CIA. And two, how do I
get a part of this where I could just be see,
I'll stop talking shit if they just let me be
part of CIA, Like I will, I swear just tell

(01:21:13):
me who killed JFK. I'll keep it private. I promised
I won't post it on Twitter or anything. I'll post
it on Twitter one hundred percent, just just asn't aside.
But no, like that's crazy. I mean there's a lot
of people have you noticed that have some type of
connection to a CIA or something like that which made
me try and understand the context of like was the

(01:21:34):
CIA actively recruiting more than they've maybe done it today?
Obviously it's been a good span of time difference, but
there's a lot of stuff where I'm reading memos and
things of that sort with this person has background connections
with this military industrial complex idea or some type of
weapons manufacturer, or someone has a connection with an FBI

(01:21:55):
agent or a CIA agent, where I'm like, damn, dude,
it's like everywhere you look and look with an event
like the Kennedy assassination, it's been handpicked by a lot
of people with a lot of varying perspectives for sixty
years and various aspects. You're going to come across a
lot of things that just seem like is that real?
Like just because people are digging so much, But have
you ever wondered why there was so many people with

(01:22:17):
CIA contacts or information or something that had some type
of connection to an intelligence agency throughout.

Speaker 3 (01:22:22):
This Well, that's very interesting because I think as we
evaluate this sixty is years after, it's very easy to
make connections. Right.

Speaker 2 (01:22:37):
So you could have someone that went to school or
was friends with someone who was in an agency later
right went to college, there was a roommate, this person
was later maybe a lawyer for the WARM and you
can make that connection, right, this person was connected to
him because this person was CIA and this person roomed

(01:23:01):
with him, or you know, in the case of like
Ruth Pain, although that's more of a direct.

Speaker 3 (01:23:08):
Example of her sister and her father.

Speaker 2 (01:23:13):
Working for whatever company front he was working for, it
doesn't necessarily prove that they're connected.

Speaker 3 (01:23:23):
And we can make that connection. We can we could
make it fit the narrative our personal narratives want to.

Speaker 2 (01:23:31):
So I think there's a lot of connections and things
like that that happened that might not necessarily be as
relevant as we want them to believe and we want
to believe. But in the case of James Martin, his
wife being under oral contract with the CIA, that's really
a direct, direct connection and Rob and I have have

(01:23:55):
deorized and I don't want to say argue, but just
healthy conversation back and forth.

Speaker 3 (01:24:00):
Or who was this guy working for? Was he working
for the Secret Service? Was he working for the FBI?
Was he working for the CIA?

Speaker 2 (01:24:07):
Was he just and Larry Hancock thinks he is just
like a great opportunist, which is possible too, and we
don't know. My guess I'm gonna lean see this is
where it gets difficult. You could be like, was he CIA?
What does that mean? Was he an informant? Was he

(01:24:27):
paid at some point? It's it's almost like we could
make as much connections to that as we want right
and speculate on those type of things.

Speaker 3 (01:24:39):
It's it's extremely hard.

Speaker 2 (01:24:40):
I think that's one of the reasons we have such
a hard time kind of deciphering.

Speaker 3 (01:24:45):
This whole mess.

Speaker 1 (01:24:46):
What do you leaning towards.

Speaker 3 (01:24:49):
James erber Martin.

Speaker 2 (01:24:52):
I think I think just based on the fact that
his wife was involved in some type of wire intercept
for the CIA, that you would have to think he
is somewhat connected with that. I'm not saying he was
an agent, but the last thing I'll say on him,
So when Oswald came back to Russia, right, and Marina

(01:25:13):
and June they were on the ss mas Dam. Okay,
Robin high and I went crazy in our search. Here
we're going through the mas Dam manifest.

Speaker 1 (01:25:27):
It's connected to the Titanic. Who would a fucking and
I'm kidding, And we found j H.

Speaker 3 (01:25:35):
Martin's name with four.

Speaker 2 (01:25:40):
Guests and his party Aka has three kids and his
wife on the manifest with Lee Harvey Oswold from France
to New York City.

Speaker 3 (01:25:52):
I believe it was.

Speaker 2 (01:25:54):
And of course we can't prove that James Martin was
on the the mass Dam.

Speaker 3 (01:26:01):
It would be an extra.

Speaker 2 (01:26:03):
It would be speculating a lot to say they were
activated in Europe and then brought back with the Oswaltz,
because that'd be a risk because then if you're gonna
have Marina move in with him later, she might notice him.
But of course Lee was dead at the time. But
then again you have that eye circuit memo going to Berlin.
The chief of base Berlin, which was kind of a

(01:26:26):
similar to the Mexico city in Europe, right, kind of
was like the main station. It's it's fascinating and I'm
I'm not gonna I'm kind of staying in the middle
here because I don't know.

Speaker 3 (01:26:41):
I have my suspicions, but.

Speaker 2 (01:26:44):
There are a lot of crazy things going on with
James River Martin and the two. Like I said, this
Martin thing, whether you think it's an anlias, If it's not,
it's a coincidence.

Speaker 3 (01:26:52):
It's kind of irrelevant to this because James River.

Speaker 2 (01:26:55):
Martin a direct line in his house the White House
was an oral contract by the CAA.

Speaker 3 (01:27:02):
That alone makes.

Speaker 2 (01:27:06):
Gives more context to the surveillance that Marina was under
directly after and possibly did the CIA kind of pull
rank and.

Speaker 3 (01:27:16):
Get their guy in there, or there's a ton of
possibilities where we're still theorizing. We're still doing more research
on the subject, on the number on the building that
the White House that those communications were going to, and
larryus helped a lot with them as well. So it's
it's interesting and it's not we're not done researching.

Speaker 2 (01:27:37):
But this, like I said, the silly Martin project turned
into finding out some really cool things. A on the
guy took the mysterious video, John T. Martin and of
course James Herbert Martin, and those are the real names
for both those guys. By the way, so those are
not aliases?

Speaker 1 (01:27:57):
How hard was it to deal with aliases when trying
to find documentation on certain individuals? Obviously you come across
names and you go try and search up those names.
They don't pop up if you're looking at Mary Ferrell's
site or if you're using anything when it comes to
National Archives, and then you find out like a really
dumb example is Jack Ruby. There's a lot of documentation

(01:28:17):
or Jacob Rubinstein, so you can find a lot of
interesting stuff about that. But for me, it was difficult
because you come across things like T one or T two,
and then you come across some who is this special informant?
Or who is this person? Are you referencing this person
or you're referencing somebody else? And then he ended up
coming across his name's not Bob Jackson. It's god damn

(01:28:38):
Whatody Harrelson's Dad's not over there? What are you talking like?
You know, you just come across something that's like okay,
so it's a complete op. I mean, it's difficult. It
makes it difficult as a researcher to try and get documentation,
especially if you have to think about it not being
released yet, and then someone filing a Freedom of Information
Act request and filing under a name where they go
nothing came back, and you're like, well, I know there's

(01:29:00):
a file that exists on this person, but we don't
have a file. Okay, so you're lying to me. Well,
they're not lying to you, they're just it's under a
different name.

Speaker 3 (01:29:11):
Yeah. So actually, thank you for that question because that
reminded me.

Speaker 2 (01:29:15):
So when I'm gonna answer your question, I was going
to back up when James herber Martin, He's very important because.

Speaker 3 (01:29:23):
He kind of molds you have to take.

Speaker 2 (01:29:27):
Marina from a grieving widow as much as you know
she may have grieved, and I think she did grieve
a certain amount to testifying in front of the Warren
Commission two months later and completely throwing him under the bus, right,
you have to have someone helping make that transition for
her in terms of what she says. And James herber

(01:29:50):
Martin I ironically ends up having an affair with Marina
at the Willard Hotel in DC, which is where he
was staying with Marina and the lawyer John Martin Thorne
and make it up, who ironically had applied to be
an FBI agent in nineteen fifty one and was recommended unfavorably,

(01:30:13):
So he was making movies that weren't above board in
these times. And I was going through a bunch of
the Willard documents and it was like DLT one, DLT
two said this, said that they moved into this room then,
and I was looking through all these documents, I was like,
who is this informant?

Speaker 3 (01:30:34):
And one of the documents.

Speaker 2 (01:30:37):
Like the very bottom is said DLT one is the
hotel manager at the Willard. So then you kind of
have to work back and insert that and go back
and reread those what did DLT one say, did that
at the Willard hotel where they were staying and how
does that kind of correlate to and then use that
to fill in other documents where DLT one in the

(01:31:00):
Willard it's kind of specific to that specific informing operation.
But you kind of have to work backwards just I
guess my long answer to that, and it is somewhere
you could definitely do process of elimination to figure out, Okay,
if I don't know the name, it's either him or him,
because only those people could be in the situation to

(01:31:24):
give that type of information, and then kind of fill
in the blanks and see which one makes the most sense.

Speaker 3 (01:31:32):
Right, So I didn't know.

Speaker 2 (01:31:33):
That thelt one was the Willard Hotel manager. Which makes
sense that you have someone in charge of that hotel
that's informing on.

Speaker 3 (01:31:44):
Marina and James Martin and John Martin Thorne, her lawyer,
but also other people that would have stayed there.

Speaker 1 (01:31:50):
Right, Well, it's the Hoover strategy. It's how Hoover got
into politics in the first place. Was he was standing
out in front of motels, interviewing prostitutes and watching people
politicians go in there, and he was getting dirt on people.

Speaker 3 (01:32:04):
Yeah, exactly.

Speaker 2 (01:32:06):
So you know, then you can kind of go back
and see, you know, and maybe places not regarding relating
to JFK and that hotel was their informants, and you
could maybe make that connection, Well, this was the guy
that was informing in this situation.

Speaker 3 (01:32:20):
So it's most likely he was informing in that situation.

Speaker 2 (01:32:23):
Maybe it was a foreign leader staying at the Willard
for whatever, Washington, DC, events of state visit whatever. Right,
So that's kind of the way I look I go
about it. I don't know if that makes sense, but
it's you could sometimes fill in different parts of documents
by entering the riff number, and some parts of documents

(01:32:44):
will different parts will be redacted, so you can almost
like fill in the blank. So this sentence is redacted
in this document, but isn't redacted in this document.

Speaker 3 (01:32:52):
But it's a it's a big puzzle really.

Speaker 1 (01:32:57):
Through all the years you've researched. Obviously, you can sit
there and beat the bush on the same story, rehashing
the same facts even though it might be new to
a lot of people who just obviously a large amount
of people do not have an interest in caring about
the assassination. So surprisingly that's a wide accepted view amongst
a lot of people. But for the people that want

(01:33:18):
to go a little bit further is why I appreciate
the own gumm And podcast and the work that you
and Rob do also quick hits as well to Doug's
work on a lot of things, because you guys kind
of go for people who are already know the story
or have an idea and a good understanding and want
to know specific details. We have a source to go
to or at least something to listen to that kind

(01:33:39):
of covers the global and those types of things. But
for you did you get tired of looking at the
basic story and the plots and the very simplistic or
kind of easy cut cover up or shenanigans that were
going on. Where you go, I want to go a
little bit deeper. I want to get into specific names.
I want to hear testimonies. I want to go down

(01:34:00):
and try and find a new avenue, which obviously, like
I said, it's been picked for sixty years, but there
is still probably a lot of meat left on the
bone as it comes to new information that can possibly
be coming out because we still have documents withheld. There's
still giant questions where you ask somebody about where's Kennedy's brain.
It's a kind of unsolvable one. I've gotten it down

(01:34:22):
to a point where I'm like, I know Robert Kennedy
had something to do with it, because there's a lot
of transferring of fucking materials, and I followed that whole process.
But Berkeley is the last person I can really kind
of get it placed to.

Speaker 3 (01:34:35):
I heard recently that it was because they didn't want
them doing the type of toxicology and seeing how much
drugs it was on.

Speaker 2 (01:34:47):
Just something I heard about that. But to your point,
and It's funny you bring up the medical evidence, because, yeah,
I this case has obviously been researched to death, right
two thousand books. It's hard to find in air that
isn't good research to death. Somehow we found one, but uh,
something like the medical evidence. I am not a medical

(01:35:08):
evidence guy. I mean I know the basics right from
listening to podcasts and listening to other people who know
much more about it and could do better work than
I ever could.

Speaker 3 (01:35:17):
So I kind of put that part aside, right, things
like acoustics or I think I just don't. It's not
my focus my expertise. I do like to look into
some of the things that weren't that aren't researched as much.
And granted, I'll admit, you know, what we found on

(01:35:38):
James Urber Morton not intentional, right. We didn't go into
this saying like we got to prove this guy with
CIA right or his wife was CIA. The document just
happened to come out while we were researching at Narrow,
so we were like wow, So yeah, I think it's
just kind of recognizing.

Speaker 2 (01:35:58):
Someone's like strength or passions, you know, for me, I
don't really have passion, and like the medical evidence stuff,
and I know a ton of people have done a
good work, like you know, sure what, Like what am
I gonna How am I going to add value to
that conversation? I probably can't. So I just ended up

(01:36:19):
focusing on other things and I got lucky with this,
And you know, I'm working on something for Lancer this
year with I'm not gonna say anymore because we're in
very early stages, but it's a similar situation where we
kind of have a hypothesis.

Speaker 3 (01:36:36):
We don't know exactly where it's going to go. But
when you have that.

Speaker 2 (01:36:41):
Type of open mind and you don't have a gent
like you don't have a predestined kind of theory to
back up or to prove, and you just follow the evidence.
I think that's where really good things can still be found.

Speaker 3 (01:36:56):
Like you said, there's a ton of meat on the bone.

Speaker 2 (01:36:57):
Still so many documents, but you really have to have
the context too when you go through the documents to recognize, oh,
that's that doesn't make sense. This is big, right. And
so my brother is funny. He jokes about me. He's
like kind of interested in the JFK thing because of me,
and he goes, I can't listen to your podcast and

(01:37:19):
it just goes too deep for me.

Speaker 3 (01:37:23):
And it's kind of true because you know, we don't
take it from like step one, and because there's a
million thing podcasts and documentaries that do that. But yeah,
it gets when you get to that point where you
can understand the context, then you can really start doing
document research. Like I said, I probably did five years

(01:37:44):
of just listening before I opened the document or went
to Mary Farrel.

Speaker 2 (01:37:50):
So you know, I I didn't think that I'd never
find any interesting tidbits of documents, and in this case
never when I started listening to it, even years into
it wasn't even a thought of mine, but something and
a light bulb went off and I was like, oh,

(01:38:10):
let me look into this a little bit. And Rob,
to his credit, help me look into it. We think
very differently, Rob and I. I think that's one of
the reasons why we have really good conversations and back
and forth is because you know, he's been in this
over thirty five years, me obviously a fraction in that
we just come from completely different points of view, and

(01:38:33):
I think that type of mindset will put people in
the in the position to discover new things and come
up with new tidbits and give more context to this case.

Speaker 1 (01:38:47):
Right, well, Joe, I appreciate the time you're able to
give me a talk on my show. I'm happy we
were able to do this. Hopefully I can get you
and rob On on together and we can have a
full discussion, but the full Loan Gunment podcast. But for now,
where can people find your links? Joe?

Speaker 3 (01:39:04):
Sure?

Speaker 2 (01:39:04):
Well, we are on the Lone Gunman podcast on YouTube.
Also lone Coman podcast on Twitter. If you'd like to
email us, It's the lone Goment podcast at gmail dot com.

Speaker 3 (01:39:18):
I'm Joe Underscore Barelli. But because I'm still wanting to
be somewhat employable in the future, not I don't tweet
a bunchwat a bunch about this stuff. Yeah, I would say,
you know, the Lone Guman is definitely the place to
find us. We go live at seven pm Eastern Time

(01:39:39):
every Friday night, and it's very cool. You know, some
shows are just like hanging out on a Friday night
talking JFK. We laugh a lot, we joke a lot,
and some some segments.

Speaker 2 (01:39:49):
Are more serious depending on the topic, and you know,
you got to laugh about some of the things in
this case because it's it's crazy and we have a
good time every Friday night.

Speaker 3 (01:40:01):
And yeah, if you're ever chilling up you want to
talk to GfK. In order to find.

Speaker 1 (01:40:06):
Us, We'll make sure I link all your links in
the description. It's been a pleasure chatting and thanks everybody
for listening this episode about the Blank. Stay tuned for
our next episode.