The Ochelli Effect 7-10-2025 TRIBUTE Joan Mellen 1

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:18):
July ten, twenty twenty five, allegedly according to that thing
we call a calendar, and this is probably one of
the last Ocelli effects that'll be live broadcast and all that,
but I will put it on repeat, unlike the Friday
show that I have not released and all that. This week,

(00:40):
still attempting to battle PayPal and all that. And I
may do a separate show in tonight's proceedings or tomorrow
night about that. But I have something else to focus
on here. Why because you know, in twenty fifteen, early
twenty fifteen, as a matter of fact, it was the

(01:03):
fifteenth day of February twenty fifteen, the Ocelli Peck went
live for the first time. Now, I had done some
podcasts in twenty thirteen, but I released and went live
on a little online radio network called ucy dot TV
back then because Jack Blood had hooked me up with

(01:23):
them so I could do my first live talk show.
Previous to that, I pre recorded stuff, I used sound clips,
I did interesting news stuff. I didn't have guests, so
I picked a guest from my group of friends that
I had, and it was a friend that I had
had for quite some time. Her name was Joan Mellon.

(01:45):
She passed away this week, and we only got a
belated announcement from people to let us know that she
had passed away here in twenty twenty five. So, you know,
eleven years ago, in twenty five fourteen, I had around
as the first guest for this very radio show that
has continued on past different networks. Became the Chuck Ocelli Show,

(02:10):
briefly on an international network, you know. I was on
the Mike Adams radio network. I was on American Freedom Radio.
I was on a blog talk radio network. I have
been on a lot of different networks and done this
through my own site for over a decade as well.
That's not serious longevity, because I studied the JFK case

(02:32):
for a long time before that. I started in like
nineteen eighty eight, when I was like, geez, let me
think about it, fifteen or sixteen years old, and I
was in high school, and I just wanted to debunk
the conspiracy stuff. Really, I thought, most logically, the simplest explanation,
Oswald probably did it, and these conspiracy people are probably crazy.

(02:55):
And then I actually dug into the evidence, actually spoke
to people. The more I did it, the more I
learned I was on the conspiracy side, not because I
chose it, not because I set out with that idea
in the first place, but because that's where the evidence
led me. Anyway, maybe ten years later, ten years deep,

(03:15):
because nobody took me seriously. First I was a high
school kid. Then I was a heavy metal musician. Then
I was a bouncer. Then I was nobody. I was
even homeless at one point. But you know, one way
or another, I kept up on my JFK studies. Somewhere
in the late nineties, and I don't remember exactly when
it was. I started to make friends. Why because I
had been part of mailing lists, and now I was

(03:38):
part of email lists in the late nineties that allowed
me to interact with and write to back and forth,
and then eventually share phone numbers with people that were
JFK researchers, authors that were working on books, people that
were working on documentaries, et cetera, et cetera. They dug
into the community that was very similar to the thing

(03:59):
that Vince Silandry, an adult in my house, had gotten
on Vince Landria's mailing list. I took over for them,
and we used to staple things together and literally send
paper to one another in the mail. But anyway, later
on in the email convention that went down and I
had a completely different email address, was not called the

(04:19):
blind JFK researcher just yet, although people used to joke
and refer to me as that, because anytime I had
been seen, I was always seen with magnifying glasses, hanging
off my neck, out of my pockets, you name it.
So I was the blind guy examining documents and contributing
to different group efforts. And I was in New Jersey mostly,

(04:40):
although I did move to Connecticut at one point, to
New York, and a couple of points I moved to
California briefly, etc. Etc.

Speaker 2 (04:50):
Etc.

Speaker 1 (04:52):
But in Jersey there was a small group of people
that eventually you would wind up getting in contact with
because you were in Jersey, you got in touch with
people in New York. And then people came to New York.
Sometimes they came to New York to study Malcolm X,
and they ran into JFK people and we got together.
Sometimes we discussed watergates. Sometimes we discussed deep politics in

(05:13):
America in general, the corrupt system, the gangster state, you
name it. Mostly left wing type people to be honest
with you back then. But the strange thing was I
was suddenly kind of taken seriously by certain authors who
would talk to me about things, ask me questions, ask
me for advice, get contact information, and I freely shared

(05:36):
things with a lot of people. Joan Mellon was one
of those people, and she didn't ask for much from me.
She would get rather short with me. She was kind
of rude, really, but after a little while we started
to get friendly on the phone. I think she liked
my voice. And everybody that had contact with me back

(05:57):
in the late nineties in the early two thous they
all had these weird ideas about who I was, even
if they had seen me at different get togethers like
in two thousand and three when I went to the
WET conference and whatnot, or when I went to Dallas,
Texas in the nineties. I didn't go to daily Plaza,
by the way, but just went around to talk to

(06:18):
the people that I had painstakingly arranged appointments with to
interview them, including Henry Wade and other people that were
witnesses that were part of the case, that were players
that were participants. Anyway, put all of that aside. In
the late nineties, I did start to get friendly with
Joan Mellon, and then in the early two thousands it

(06:40):
intensified a bit. Now Walt Brown thought I was some
kind of old man because he had always heard about
my poor vision and assumed it was a matter of age.
And I didn't meet him until about two thousand and
two or something like that, just before the WET conference, which,
by the way, Walt went to the WEC conference, and
so did Joan, but I only went for one day,

(07:01):
and they didn't know me that well. Though they had
seen me. People saw me, but they didn't know exactly
who I was, because I only worked with certain people. Anyway.
That's a discussion for another day. But talking to Joan
on the phone, she had an idea about me. Walt
thought I was some sort of old man because of
the magnifying glasses and the idea that I was kind

(07:22):
of becoming known as the blind JFK researcher guy. And
Joan had a different impression. And I've never said this
publicly before, but Joan, I think, was kind of hitting
on me a little bit because she thought somehow in
her mind, I was probably age appropriate and one of
her contemporaries. By the way I spoke, other people thought

(07:45):
that I was a much deeper seasoned investigator, researcher, academic, etc.
Until they actually got to know me and found out
that I was nothing more than a high school graduate
from New Jersey who had some street smarts and not
much else. But the maturity levels to people were open
to interpretation. And to be clear, I mean, you know,

(08:07):
in nineteen ninety two, I turned twenty, right, so I
was less than thirty years old, and Joan was already
in advanced age by then. You know, she was old
enough to be my mother, right. Anyway, she started kind
of hitting on me until the one day a weird

(08:27):
conversation took place and she kind of did the whole
year nothing but a baby.

Speaker 2 (08:32):
Because of my age.

Speaker 1 (08:35):
Thing came out of her mouth, and her attitude and
mood changed with me. She was no longer slyly, almost
kind of hitting on me in a weird way. And
I think she was hitting on me oddly because she
sort of liked guys that were a little oddballish, that
were a little unconventional, it seemed to me. And she

(08:58):
kept her personal life pretty well shielded when she did
JFK research stuff, So you'd have to know her personally,
and I did because I didn't live too far away
from a Remember New Jersey is a very small state,
so she lived in the western part of the state.
I lived in the eastern part of the state. And
again in a small state, it was a skinny small state. Nonetheless,

(09:19):
you could drive across the entire state in certain parts
in forty five minutes, in some places in an hour,
and then I think the deepest part of Jersey you
could go from the Atlantic Ocean to the western border
in probably an hour and twenty Anyway, small state, but
we didn't get together. I think I screwed that up

(09:40):
by letting her know exactly how old I was at
one point, inadvertently, not intentionally, but anyhow, her attitude changed
with me about the personal part of it. But she
was still respectful of me, asked me questions, sometimes asked
advice when she was in the midst of figuring out
what to include what not to include. This is how

(10:00):
I know. She conducted twelve hundred interviews before releasing that
Garrison book, and she knew the guy kind of now.
There of other people have said that she had a
more personal relationship with him, and I don't know that
for a fact. She never quite copped to that with me.

(10:21):
But anyhow, she copped to a lot of interesting things
over the years, and she was always kind of a
fascinating character. In fact, in a private conversation with another
well known author in the JFK community, when I kind
of informed them that Joan had passed, they called her

(10:42):
a quote colorful personageship. And she was that loud dress
that she wore at the WET conference in two thousand
and three and in other presentations. She loved crazy looking dresses.
And she was like the angry creative writing teacher at

(11:04):
a private school somewhere. Except here's the real facts. She
was a Temple University professor. And you know, she was
the author of twenty four books that I know of
now there's a handful of them that relate directly to
the stuff that I was into, but also books on cinema,

(11:28):
you know, politics, different things in the culture, it doesn't matter.
In nineteen seventy two, she was awarded the Mansini, a
Shimbun newspaper organization in Japan. This led to her to
write five books about Japan including the waves of Genji's
Door Japan through its cinema. Again, an expert on cinema,

(11:50):
an expert on literature, and an expert on creative writing,
and somebody who did not suffer fools very well, and
yet this friendship with him. I was very proud of
her when she first released A Farewell to Justice, but
then there were issues with the editing of it, and
she was very angry because it didn't quite come out

(12:11):
the way she wanted it to. She got to upgrade it.
And she was in an area of New Jersey called Pennington,
which is not far from Pennsauken, which is where that
crazy g Willaker's story happened. Anyway, it doesn't matter. In
two thousand and four, she was awarded one of Temple

(12:32):
University's a coveted Great Teacher Awards for outstanding achievement, in
particular in the graduate program in creative writing. Okay, anyway,
she had been given various awards. Her husband, Ralph I
can never remember his last name, but she had a
husband at one point and they had divorced years earlier,

(12:53):
and he died of I believe Parkinson's probably twenty years
ago now. Anyway, she wrote a book called The Battle
of Algiers, Okay, which has been you know, quoted about
in lots of ways about nine to eleven and the situations

(13:14):
referring to that. She wrote Blood in the Water about
the USS liberty, and I interviewed her about many of
these things, mainly focusing on the JFK stuff, mainly focusing
on the deep politics. But I proudly did that, and
like I said, I selected her to be the first
live interview, so I had somebody who's material I was
familiar with and I was comfortable with, and I knew

(13:36):
would be a serious first punch throne in the ring
from my media experiment, somebody that was going to present
real information studied from an independent point of view. Was
a rare woman in the field of conspiracy type writing,
and I thought, perfect, this is who I need. Anyway,

(14:03):
our relationship continued on for many years, and we were friends,
and I advised her and had little arguments with her
over the years and this and that, and even at
one point I think, now I'm a little uncertain on
the timeline here, but I do know that at one
point she was asking me my opinion about how to
handle Walt Brown regarding getting a hold of some materials

(14:26):
she needed for that book. Faustian bargain about you know
Mac Wallace, and she went in with the intent of
laying out once and for all, here's Mac Wallace, the
unknown JFK Assassin, because people had gotten her to take
that idea seriously, and when she studied it and found
that the fingerprint was bogus and been published it, it

(14:48):
outraged the community to a degree that people just do
not want to hear. I even brought that up with
Billy Celestie's grandson on the show, right, and I swe
whereby a whole majority of what Joan has written on
the case, she's been absolutely accurate, correct, and perfectly notable.

(15:13):
If you want to get into the serious study of
the facts, the case, the history, the people. This woman
did the work and I appreciated it for it. Anyway,
cutting to the chase and getting to more recent years,
twenty twenty comes around and I'm still in contact with
Joan off and on. I had had her on the

(15:34):
show every time she published a book. I would tell her,
I gotta have you on. I want to promote it.
Don't care what it's about. I would love to read
it first, but let's talk about it, and I would.
I would get a book, I'd get it from her publisher,
I would buy it, I would acquire it. It didn't matter.
Sometimes she would send them to me, and sometimes she forgot.

(15:57):
And that was just Joan. She was busy, and she
only wanted to talk to people that wanted to be
serious about things. Even when she participated in that thing
with John Barber regarding the jfk assassination and Jim Garrison,
she got angry because she felt that people were misrepresenting

(16:17):
things in Garrison's history. So she wound up writing a
whole book on that too, by the way, his life
and times, you know, the sequel to Farewell to Justice,
where she feels, you know, Garrison was kind of screwed
by a lot of things that happened there In the case,
she also turned around and decided to give people a
full history of Jim Garrison in a biographer's way. By

(16:42):
the way, Joan was an excellent biographer. And I always said,
if I could get anybody in the world to write
the biography about me, it would have been Joan Mellon.
If I could have, you know, afforded her and who knows.
Maybe I could have commissioned her for free, but I
never asked. I didn't ask much of Joan. I did
ask one though, for a book, because I had bought

(17:03):
it three four times and people had either stolen it
or it had been lost three four times already. And
she said something one day to me when I was
producing a show for somebody else about don't you have
all my books? And I said, I have had all
your books, but I'm missing one, and I would like
it if I had one from you that was autographed,
because she was willing to send to the host of

(17:26):
the show a couple of books. So I said, you know, John,
we've known each other for years. I'd love to get
a book from you, but I got to give you
my new address. She started to question me, and she
was a skilled interrogator in a civilian way. When it
came to getting.

Speaker 2 (17:44):
Facts out of people.

Speaker 1 (17:45):
When it came to really drilling down and instinctively digging
in just the right spot to get out a piece
of information, even if somebody was trying to hold it
back a little bit, she was pretty good at it.
She dug on me, and I tried to deflect, and
I tried to defer, and I tried to kinds of
things to find out if I was willing to take
the vaccine to it. I said no, and also told

(18:11):
her that I wasn't going to, and nor was anyone
in my family going to. She flipped out on me.
This was an extreme thing in her mind, that it
was like an evil thing that people were not being
vaccinated because the vaccine had just become available. In fact,
she had a personal thing that occurred which people did
wind up hearing about, where she called up I don't know,

(18:31):
a congressman, state representative, something, freaking out, literally threatening to
kill herself if somebody didn't come and give her a vaccine.
I'm not saying that Joan was one hundred percent right
about everything in the world, and I disagreed with her
politically and socially and in a lot of different ways
about a lot of different things. But when it came
to the stuff she worked on in research, she was

(18:53):
usually pretty good. But we disagreed about people's personal freedoms
and vaccination. So she swore, I will never send you
a book unless you send me your vaccination certificate. So
I told her, I guess I'm not getting a book
and that's the way that sat. Anyway, she even requested

(19:17):
that I help when she wanted to do a Lancer
presentation and she was going to record remotely, because going
back to twenty fourteen, even I had to help her
with her Skype. She didn't know how to operate her
Skype at all. I mean I barely knew what I
was doing with the technology, but I knew how to
use Skype in twenty fourteen, and she was nervous about it,
didn't want to use it, didn't know how to use it,
And several times I ended up interviewing her over the

(19:38):
phone on the show, but the first interview I did
was on Skype. Anyhow, her issues with technology and her
issues with you know, understanding some complex things grew into
something else. But during a certain time after the vaccination fiasco,
and even before it, she had asked that I help

(20:01):
her do her Lancer recorded presentation via zoom, and I did.
I showed up the one time and did one with her.
I'm sure it can be found out there, or if not,
Lancer might release it, you know, or whatever, but I
know it's available. And then a couple of years later

(20:22):
she was going to do another one, and that was
the same year that the QA non people flooded Daly
Plaza and we're holding up signs waiting for JFK Junior
to return. Anyway, Joan had postponed and canceled, and this
was something that she did sometimes too, especially when she
was nervous about using technology. This was commonplace. And then

(20:44):
we me and Gabby were waiting around for her to
show up to record her presentation for Lancer a couple
of months before Lancer, and we got a message, I
am not showing up. I am sick of the people
in the community. I see these idiots on the lawn
and QA Noon and all this, and I've had it
with all of you. Conferences are garbage. Anybody who participates

(21:07):
in them are garbage. And I'm done with it now.
Joan had presented at Lancer, had presented at many places.
In fact, I offered to be her bodyguard when she
was petrified over the threats made to her by Roger
Stone via email mostly but he threatened to do some
pretty serious harm to the woman. Told her I would
be her personal bodyguard in Dallas, Texas if she required it.

(21:32):
But anyway, that didn't come to pass. Roger Stone didn't
actually injure her. She did report him to the FBI
and they did nothing about it. But anyway, roger Stone
usually seemed to get out of things even when he
seemed to do them.

Speaker 2 (21:48):
Isn't that amazing?

Speaker 1 (21:49):
But that's not what this show is about today. Back
to the situation with the Lancer recording, I'm done with you,
all of you people of the community. JFK. Everything gone
because the QA non being on the lawn at Daily
Plaza that year, and she was still maintaining this angry
retort with me about I'll give you a book when

(22:10):
I see your vaccination certificate. And I produced a couple
of shows and then left it alone for a little while.
Then I started to notice that Joan was acting a
bit erradically problematically. She needed help. She was clearly declining
a little bit. And the last interview I did with

(22:30):
her was over this catfishing book she did Sherlock gets
catfished or whatever, and it's about her getting sucked into
some online relationship with somebody, and she writes about it
in that book. And I have that book, and I
did a show on that book on this network or
on my little network anyway, put it out there as

(22:51):
I would for any Joan Mellon book, because you know what,
even if I don't agree with all of her conclusions,
always stuff is so well written and deeply researched. Always. Anyhow,
I had her on for that she would get angry
at me and then vacillate back to not being angry
at me. And then she sent me the wrong book.

(23:15):
After finally acquiescing and not getting my vaccination certificates, she
sent me the wrong book. I'll let that go. And
then I wanted to interview her again, and I called
her up and talked to her a little bit, and
I decided I didn't want to bring her on the air,
just like there was a time period with Jordan Maxwell
where I could have brought him back on for one

(23:37):
of his last interviews, and I didn't want to do
it because Jordan didn't sound right and Joan wouldn't have
sounded right, and she was easily set off. She got
angry the last time she was on my show because
I asked her a question from the chat room. She
took it the wrong way and got angry and basically
gave me all kinds of crap. Buy email messages for

(23:58):
a couple of days, angry me. How dare your people
even challenge me? She had clearly changed. She wasn't the
friend of mine that was willing to make jokes and
talk to me about the Mets. She wasn't the friend
of mine I checked on to make sure that she
was okay after bad storms rolled through Jersey or floods

(24:21):
happened in her area. She was no longer the same person,
but I still cared about her. I'll always respect her,
and I'll always be happy that I got to know her. Now. Normally,
when I do a tribute show, I bring on other
people to talk, and I played a couple of clips
of the person that I'm talking about. And I've only

(24:43):
done a handful of tribute shows, but people that were
meaningful to me, I do a tribute show to them.
And I'm sad that maybe this tribute show was coming
at a time when the o'celli effect is in danger
of ending. But I'll always be able to say that
I knew Joan. My life was improved for it. My

(25:06):
base of knowledge and my ideas about efficacy when it
came to writing were raised by her. The bar in
general was raised by her, and anybody who was blessed
to have worked with her understood her, recognized when she
talked about Malcolm Blunt, it meant something. And look, I

(25:32):
don't necessarily agreed with her that mister Beckham is so reliable.
I don't necessarily agree with some of her characterizations of
some people that she got to know and others that
she maybe got to know. And I think an incredible
cachet of information might remain sitting in Pennington, New Jersey,

(25:59):
where she lived and continue to live and had trouble
getting up and down the steps, and had trouble remembering
appointments and everything else. Toward the end, I hope that
she went peacefully and pleased with herself. And I will

(26:20):
likely never meet another person who will be similar to
Joan Mellon. And I say that with the deepest sincerity
and putting all of my problems aside, et cetera, et cetera.
But with this caveat in mind, I'm going to play
part of, if not the whole thing. I'll make a

(26:43):
determination of the very first interview that was conducted live
on The Ocelli Effect with Joan Mellon on February fifteen,
twenty fourteen, and maybe I'll pause it and make commentary.
Maybe I won't know. I'm gonna just play this by here.
I've got another piece of another interview that I selected randomly,

(27:08):
But it's an interesting treasure trove of stuff that I
talked to Joan Mellon about over the years on this show.
And it makes me regret not having recorded all of
my phone calls with her and stuff, because man, I
would have some wild stuff there. Matter of fact, I'll
never forget the first time when the Judy Baker story

(27:31):
was like catching fire in the JFK community and I
brought it to Joan and I said, jump, this Judy
Baker thing is such bs. What in the hell can't
you say something about it? I won't even dignify that
with a response. You know, I interviewed twelve hundred people
involved in the New Orleans situation, and I've got to
tell you not one of them ever mentioned her because

(27:55):
she wasn't there. I said, well, that's a good way
to put it in any but yeah, she doesn't exist
because it's fan fiction. I get it. But Joe didn't
even want to dignify it with a response. For years
and years and years that I kind of held against
her a little, but I hold nothing against her now.

(28:21):
Kind of wish she had a longer lifespan and sort
of regret that I wasn't more age appropriate for because
she had one of the most intelligent and creative minds
that I'd ever encountered. Among all the authors I've spoken to, men, women,
any topic, you name it, she was unique and I

(28:44):
appreciate unique, and, like to quote another great wordsmith, a
colorful personage is no longer among us. So with that
in mind, I'm going to play at least part of
the interview from the beginning of February twenty twenty fourteen.

(29:08):
Excuse me, February fifteen of twenty fourteen, the day after
Valentine's Day, the first time the Ocell Effect went live
on ucy dot TV. And the funny thing is I
had no idea what I was doing, barely understood how
to use Skype, didn't know how to do a broadcast
or make my own recordings or anything. I mean, I
knew how to make recordings, but believe me, nothing like

(29:32):
the level I understand today, and the technology existed then
to do everything I do now, I just didn't know
how to do it. So I got on a network
like my other friends did, one of the alternative media networks,
a small one, but I was proud. I was happy,
and I was only doing my show once a week
on Saturdays. Anyway, all of that aside. This is the

(29:56):
first live broadcast of The Ocelli Effect from ucy dot
TV on February fifteen of twenty fourteen, with Joan Mellon,
the author of Faustian Bargain, the author of a Farewell
to Justice, Blood in the Water, and a great many
books which you're going to see on the graphic for

(30:17):
this podcast. And who knows, maybe I'll just release the
raw interview again from twenty fourteen, or maybe I'll do parts.
Maybe I'll do a second part to a tribute, because
I don't want to make these too long. But I've
already talked at you for a half hour. Let's hear
what it sounded like. Eleven years and.

Speaker 3 (30:36):
A couple of months ago, at the age of nineteen,
she was an intern.

Speaker 4 (30:57):
At the White House.

Speaker 2 (31:00):
Kick.

Speaker 1 (31:04):
By the way, here's a funny note. Just really quickly,
I recorded and mixed a whole intro, and it took
me like hours to do and I sent a couple
of versions to the network to be played automatically before
my show aired. This was the wrong version of my intro.

(31:28):
This was the early mix that I made to give
them an idea what I was gonna do before I
actually gave him the finished intro. That's me on guitar.
That's a guy named Jay Batistoni on drums. That's from
nineteen ninety two. That recording mixed with one of my
YouTube videos, audios and some other mess that I just

(31:49):
threw together to give them an idea what I wanted
to do, and they played the rough version of my
intro instead of the whole intro. Anyway, here it is
as it was in twenty fifteen. Again twenty fourteen, excuse me.
Trebulary fifteen of twenty fourteen, with author Joe.

Speaker 4 (32:08):
Getting a little look at Jackie's bedroom. Particularly was supposed
to be a baby due league, and she had been
and you retind during the three definition stuff there and
that's where they had sex one time they had sex,
and the swimming pool and they had sex, and you
there in the third plays and oh, she thinks she
was special. I'm very sure that he was good to
say he was white and all. But I was special,

(32:29):
you know, you know, I was whatever, and I wasn't
the kind of girl.

Speaker 1 (32:33):
Was a bad girl, but I became a bad girl.

Speaker 4 (32:35):
Jamething influenced me. Deear deear wood with a dirty thirty
old man.

Speaker 1 (32:41):
You know.

Speaker 4 (32:43):
At one point she says that I see I think
in the game she was introduced to him like eight
powers kind of you know, put the introduction together and
had go swimming with him. And then later on.

Speaker 1 (32:56):
She tells a story about half Kennedy wants sort of
day power.

Speaker 4 (33:00):
She was, you know, this more straight laced specialist system.
You know, Hey, don't help my friend relax this constuff.
This was pretty interesting viewing. And you know, we have
all these situations. I'd love to know why it takes fifteen.

Speaker 1 (33:17):
Years, you know, for.

Speaker 4 (33:21):
There were nineteen year old girl to events beget introduction.
Should these things out?

Speaker 1 (33:37):
All right? And we are live.

Speaker 5 (33:39):
This is the O'Kelly effect. I am Chuck o'chelly, also
known as the blind JFK researcher in some circles. And
this is the first live broadcast of my show. Happy
Susan B. Anthony data all of you out there, uh
so for our first episode. I have decided to bring
on one of the best authors I've ever been in

(33:59):
contact with in any way, shape or form, to expound
upon somebody that did what most of us really are
trying to do in our own personal lives on a
daily basis. We all fight the system in some way
or other.

Speaker 1 (34:18):
Damn, there is a big difference in microphones from back then.
I'll tell you I did the best I could with
something that cost me about seven bucks and a laptop
that I barely knew how to turn on. Oof. Boy,
that sounds grating to me at this point. I have
not listened to this, by the way, I'm listening to
this with you guys for the first time in a

(34:40):
long time. So anyway, this is the original version of
it too. This is not that I put out a
refined re release a couple of years ago with better sound.
I improved the sound, I worked on it everything, But
this is the original, raw, rough cut thing. Anyway. Sorry
to keep breaking into twenty fourteen with twenty but man,

(35:01):
this is funny, Okay, please enjoy.

Speaker 5 (35:06):
We all have our arguments with the system, and we
often focus on the officers of many courts who are
doing the misdeeds that cause all types of malfeasance to
be present throughout the criminal justice system. But today my

(35:26):
focus is going to be more on someone who is
a true patriot, a gentleman that many many people, unfortunately
have only learned about through people like Oliver Stone and
the movie JFK, which was based on the life and
times in some measure of Jim Garrison, who was the

(35:46):
District Attorney of New Orleans at the time of the assassination.
It's a great story. And although you see that film
panned in many places as a fictional trail and a
fantasy and everything else, very much of that film was
real and Jim Garrison was a real person.

Speaker 1 (36:08):
Man, I talked too much, all right, I'm sorry about that, guys,
but I'm playing it uncut, so apologies. Joan. It might
not even be on the line yet. I might literally,
because I'm live. I might be waiting for Joan to
join and filling time for a moment we shall see.

Speaker 5 (36:29):
Anyway, in his position stood up to the system and
the reason why, well, we're going to learn a lot
about that today with again one of my favorite authors,
Joan Mellon, who recently released a re released excuse me.
It's a reissue, but it's an updated version of one

(36:49):
of my favorite books that she authored, called A Farewell
to Justice, which was all about Garrison and his attempt
and his actual accomplished of bringing the only criminal prosecution
ever for the assassination of our thirty fifth president. Joan,
thank you very much for joining me today.

Speaker 6 (37:09):
How are you hi, Chuck, good to hear you. Good
luck on your show, and I'm glad to be on
to talk about Jim Garrison. I wonder if he really
thought that he was fighting the system. He knew he was,
but the only thing he wanted was to find out
the truth about what happened to President Kennedy. That was
his mission. It wasn't that this was an example or

(37:32):
an aspect of how he felt about the system. He
learned about the system through trying to find out the
truth about what happened when President Kennedy was murdered.

Speaker 5 (37:43):
Yeah, he was a true believer in the system. As
a matter of fact. Prior to that, he was someone
who had served in wartime in a very dangerous position
during World War Two. He was really a patriotic individual
that believed in this country, the principles that it was
founded on absolutely completely, and he was definitely not the

(38:07):
man that they have attempted to slander in the mainstream media,
especially at the time Stones film was released. And I
think that that's what I mean by he was a
guy who was fighting the system, because when he found
the truth, he had found that there was a big
problem in the system, and he stood up with a
lot of courage despite the fact that he was often threatened.

(38:29):
He went out there and publicly and in his own
capacity again as the District attorney there in New Orleans,
did what he could to bring about the truth and
justice in this case.

Speaker 6 (38:42):
He did a lot. And one of the I think
the best document that I discovered after the publication of
A Farewell to Justice was one from the CIA's History
Group History Review Group, which was an internal document not
meant for shown to anyone outside the agency, which admitted

(39:04):
that what Garrison surmised but couldn't prove was in fact true,
and it says that the records reveal that clay Shaw
was a highly paid CIA contract source. Highly paid CIA
contract source. Now the sentence adds until nineteen fifty six.

(39:28):
But there's another CIA document that is more honest and
traces Shaw's service to nineteen seventy two, which is much more.

Speaker 1 (39:37):
To the point.

Speaker 6 (39:39):
And I think that Garrett what Garrison struggled to prove
unfortunately came years after his death, but it shows that
he certainly deserves a kind of respect that he still
hasn't gotten, not in the so called research community, certainly
not in the media, mass media, any kind of media.
And I think you'd very rarely hear his name on

(40:01):
cable television or network television or at assassination meetings unless
I'm there, or all of the stone is there, or
the few people who support the Garrison were like Dick Russell,
Jim Mars. Very few people even want to talk about Garrison.

Speaker 5 (40:21):
Yeah, and you know, the fascinating thing to me has
always been that. And by the way, for those who
don't know out there, just because you know, I'm not
sure the level of awareness people have or if they've
watched the film, you know, in my audience right now,
But just to get catch you guys up to speed
a little bit, Clay Shaw was the individual that was

(40:42):
played by Tommy Lee Jones in the JFK movie, and
he was the suspect that Garrison ended up with and
actually took to trial. And many of the mainstream historians
and even people in the research community who claim that
they are in search of the truth often cite the
fact that Shaw was acquitted for the murder for the conspiracy.

(41:08):
But the fact is that even in the CIA's own
documents as they exist, and those documents were a lot
of them made public after the outcry from the JFK
film just in case our listeners aren't aware of this,
those documents themselves, in some cases prove that the Central
Intelligence Agency and other agencies within our own government directly

(41:33):
interfered in the investigation, in the trial so that the
guy was hamstrung by the government that was supposed to
be there protecting our president, was supposed to be there,
and claiming that it was just this loan nud Oswalt
who had gone off and done it by himself. And

(41:54):
it's almost fifty years now since the Warren Commission report
was issued. It's been fifty year and a just went
by the assassination. But fifty years after that lie was published,
they are still in denial over the truth about what happened,
and Garrison came very close to it, despite the fact

(42:15):
that he had been hindered by the very government he
was attempting to serve.

Speaker 6 (42:23):
Well, he was attempting to serve the truth about what
happened to President Kennedy. I don't think he felt that
he was serving the government. He was serving his constituents,
he was serving the people of Orleans Parish, and he
was serving the truth about what happened here to President Kennedy.
I don't think there was an early, very early on
that he you know, he made a joke of law enforcement,

(42:44):
because what happened to his investigators in New Orleans was
that well, they in the previous cases, in most of
their cases, they had help from other agencies of law enforcement, such.

Speaker 4 (42:54):
As the FBI.

Speaker 6 (42:55):
In the case of the Kennedy assassination, the BI obstructed
them and did surveillance on their office, followed their investigators,
and generally put general put out the view, as Hoover
put it down to the special agents at the field offices,
that Garrison was quote a nut. This was Hoover's standard

(43:18):
procedure for inconvenient witnesses. He said the same thing about
Sylvia Odio, who witnessed whom Oswoald visited, calling himself Leon
Oswald with Angelo Morgato and Bernardo de Torres at the
end of September in nineteen sixty three, And just to
refresh the audience memory if you don't know about the incident,

(43:39):
these three people, two of them were Cuban and they
came there supposedly collecting funds for their organization or whatever.
And then a day or two later, one of them,
Bernardo de Torres, called himself Leopoldo told Sylvia Odio, you
know that Leon Oswald. He keeps talking about how some
Cuban should kill President Kennedy because of what he did,

(44:02):
his abandonment of the people at the Bay of Pigs,
which which he did do.

Speaker 5 (44:06):
He did abandon the people at the Bay of Pigs.

Speaker 6 (44:08):
And so Sylvia Odeo, who was so terrified, she did
testify that she saw Oswald, but was very reluctant and never,
I think, I think she's still alone, never has identified
the two Cubans who came to her door. But that
was very hard work that I did.

Speaker 4 (44:26):
I did that.

Speaker 6 (44:27):
Nobody wants to believe me. I think it's very funny
that Chuck, you should mention that today is Susan B.
Anthony Day, because I think I never think about this,
but some lately I've been thinking about whether a woman
researcher in this field gets the same level of respect
and has taken as seriously as the men. No matter

(44:48):
what the what the research is, no matter what you've done,
there's a there's that shadow, that cloud over being a woman,
because I can't understand why people have not race this research,
in particular about who visited Sylvia Odio. And I'm absolutely
positive because I met one of them. That's Angelo Morgado,
and he told me that it was Bernardo Detores who

(45:12):
was with him. And he looked at me and he
was staring into the middle distance, sort of as if
he were talking to himself, and he was trying to blame.
He loved the Kennedys. He changed his name even to
Angelo Kennedy. He loved the Kennedys. And here he is,
somehow participating in a frame up and a lead up
to the assassination of President Kennedy was horrified by this

(45:34):
and he just sat there looking as years and years later,
after all, this was in the nineteen nineties, it was
in the two thousands. I can't recall when that interview was.
It's in the book. But he just stood and stared
into the middle distance and said, but his brother was
running for mayor of Miami, meaning that Bernardo de Torres
was respectable, that there was no reason to doubt him

(45:58):
that he would be involved in something so heinous a
crime as the assassination of President Kennedy. And I first
heard that, I didn't believe it. I heard it in
nineteen ninety nine when I was interviewing a soldier of fortune.
It was very close to these events, named Gerald Patrick Hemming.
And of course Heny mixed the truth with the lies,
and so you know, you can't take anything. I didn't

(46:19):
take anything that he said at face value without verifying
it with others. In the first minute, I walked into
his house. It was in Fayetteville, North Carolina, and he said,
you know, the only person I fear now, of course
you never fear anyway. The only person I fear is Bernie.
He didn't even give me his own name, Bernie. And
then he said, and then there was also Angelo, And

(46:41):
I said, at that point, this is several years before
I met Angela and Morgano, I said, he said, and Angela,
I said, Angelo? Who just Angelo? He said, And he
dropped those truths in the midst of all sorts of
other conversation about his own deal, his own problems with

(47:02):
the Drug Enforcement Agency, which is, of course, I have
learned since is a pseudonym for CIA and other things.
And then years later I discovered and he introduced me
to Angelo and Magana. I got into his house, I
had dinner there and we talked, and that was very
big for me because Angelo told me, and this is

(47:22):
sort of a little digression, but it talks to how
the research is done on these how difficult the research is.
So Angelo told me that he had been sent with
a group of Cubans to New Orleans during the summer
of nineteen sixty three, and they and since Oswald, who
was in New Orleans during the summer of nineteen sixty three,

(47:43):
was training at Lake ponta train with anti Castro Cubans. Naturally,
Angelo and his group became aware of Oswald, and they
went back to Bobby Kennedy and they said, you know,
there's this Oswald, And they also discovered Oswald's relationship with
the Orleans Field Office of the FBI in New Orleans,
and Oswald's handler was Warren to Brewis whom I got

(48:07):
to know quite well, also died just a few weeks ago,
and Bobby Kennedy said, well, if the FBI has him
under control, we don't have to worry.

Speaker 7 (48:19):
Now.

Speaker 1 (48:19):
That's a.

Speaker 6 (48:21):
Quite understandable mistake, and it just shows the lack of
communication between the agencies and how close Bobby Kennedy came
to the plot regarding his brother, because this business at
Sylvia Odios, after all, was a part of the framing
of Oswald.

Speaker 5 (48:41):
And in September, right and a couple of little catchups
for our audience here, Sylvia Odio, to put her in
proper context, was the daughter of a Cuban person who
her father. Let me restate that her father was at
the time that this was occurring in prison, and I
believe in Cuba because he had stood up in some

(49:05):
way or had been considered a subversive by Castro's government.
And these guys that you're talking about approaching her were
the two Cubans and this Oswald character, which to this day,
in my mind, it's very difficult to discern because I
didn't get to speak to these guys that you're talking
about myself, but it's very difficult to discern whether it

(49:25):
was actually Oswald, or if it was simply part of
a cover story where somebody was using the name Oswald.
I had trouble with that myself. You might be able
to shed some light on it, Noll.

Speaker 6 (49:36):
I think, Chuck that you have to. I'm going to
go by Sylvia Odio's own identification that when Oswald was
arrested in Dallas for the murder of President Kennedy and
she saw him on television, she actually faked it. And
that's the man, that's the person who came to see you. Right,
What better identification, what more could you need? It was Oswald,

(49:58):
all right? And it and if the very fact that
Angelo Morgato had known him already before in the summer
of nineteen sixty three in New Orleans also suggests it
was os Well. Bernardo de Torres was a person who
was going to be at daily plausas. And this, of
course I can't prove because I couldn't talk to Bernardo Detoris.
He had been out of the country and then he

(50:19):
has returned to Miami. But I was told that he
requires money to talk to researchers or interviewers, and that's
just against the principle of independent research is to pay
people for talking, and so I'm not a single person.
I interviewed more than a thousand people over these seventy
eight years that I did a farewell to justice, and

(50:42):
I didn't give a nickel to one of them, because
that's just not what you're supposed to do.

Speaker 8 (50:47):
See.

Speaker 1 (50:48):
I'm nervous here because a lot of times in private conversations,
Joan would correct me if I misspoke. And this is
a little rough because she she would correct me if
I misspoke. So I'm being very careful about the way
I'm wording things, and yet I'm trying to strategically set
her up for different lines and different things that are

(51:12):
happening here. So we're almost an hour into this, and
I think I'm gonna have to make a two part
Joan Mellon tribute and I'm going to continue to play
this stuff in a few minutes. But it's a very
big long track. And so there's been some skipping and

(51:33):
stuff in the MP three that I have here. It's
because of the player I'm using. It's having trouble with it.
But like I said, I have a more cleaned up,
modernized MP three version of this somewhere in my archive,
but this is the original and it was a very
lightweight MP three and all that. And man, I'm talking

(51:57):
too much, but I'm trying to direct the interview because
i want to hit certain points. And even though I've
got two hours with Joan, I'll tell you now that
I can have conversations with her off air that were
longer than two hours. Okay, So anyway, there's still a
lot of time left on this interview, and I'm going

(52:19):
to take a little break here on the show right now,
in twenty twenty five, and we'll get back to Joan
Mellen in twenty fifteen after this.

Speaker 6 (52:26):
So it might have had dinner here and there, but
nobody was ever paid.

Speaker 2 (52:30):
So do you like history, real history that you were
never taught in schools? Why the Vietnam War Nuclear Bombs
in Nation Building in Southeast Asia.

Speaker 9 (52:41):
By author Mike Swanson, with new documentation never seen before
that'll open your eyes to events that led up to this.
Why the Vietnam War Nuclear Bombs in Nation Building in
Southeast Asia nineteen forty five through nineteen sixty one. Get
your copy today at Amazon dot com. Why the Vietnam

(53:03):
War by author Mike Swants.

Speaker 2 (53:05):
Revelation through conversation.

Speaker 1 (53:25):
Under rule of brass, Ralph Bulls beast smash fire flew
through every.

Speaker 7 (53:31):
Faith in the truth about the JAFA assassination.

Speaker 1 (53:37):
Right, well, what do you want to know Judy.

Speaker 5 (53:39):
Baker's wild claim Oswald girlfriends you knew?

Speaker 1 (53:41):
Ruby and Barry answer weapons? Really, I imagine I could
claim I have four wheels. It doesn't make me a wagon.

Speaker 7 (53:47):
But okay, Oswald was on the building and trying to
prevent the murder of John Kennedy.

Speaker 5 (53:51):
Come on now, has a real effort on the Dafay
assassination into claim.

Speaker 1 (53:55):
Go to Amazon dot com enter Judith Baker in her
own words. You'll get the results for a digital copy
of a book where Walt Brown utilizes her own words
and the known evidence in the case to get at
well a different perspective. Let's say you can get Judith
Barry Baker in her own words from the author himself,

(54:16):
signed if you request it by contacting doctor Brown at
kias jfk at aol dot com. It's a fun book
and it actually dissects the many, many fantastic claims Judith
Vary Baker in her own words. Thank you Information Shelley
dot com radio network.

Speaker 8 (54:35):
The War State by Michael Swanson explains the great national
transformation that took place and put the Kennedy presidency in
the context of the times and reveals never before published
information about the Cuban missile crisis. President Kennedy would not
have been assassinated if he had been president two hundred
years ago. His assassination took place in the context of
the Cold War and the rise of the national security state.

(54:58):
Before World War II, the United States was a continental republic.
In the decade that followed, it became an imperial superpower.
Generals such as Curtis LeMay not only wanted to invade Cuba,
but knew that there were short range missiles on the
island aren't with nuclear warheads that they could not destroy
because they were on mobile launchers. Their invasion could have
led to a Third World War, and they wanted to

(55:20):
go to war anyway. The War State by Michael Swanson
reveals why, and we'll show you what President Kennedy was
up against. For more information, the War State dot com.

Speaker 1 (55:30):
Oh Yo.

Speaker 10 (55:31):
This Doug Campbell, host of the Dallas Action podcast presented
by Wall Street Window, and you are listening to the
o'chile effect revelation through conversation, the.

Speaker 1 (55:42):
Use expressed like Coller storms, there anyone else who happens
to get on the air of Jelly dot com do
not necessarily reflect heews little Jelly dot com or Jeff o'chilli,
and we are not responsible for getting stupidity which might ensued.

Speaker 2 (55:51):
Thank you, Chili dot Com.

Speaker 7 (56:20):
In Denial Secret Wars with air Strikes and Tanks by
Larry Hancock. Secret wars became a staple of US covert
operations and are still happening today. Larry Hancock's book In
Denial rips the cover off many of them, using new files.

Speaker 11 (56:37):
It exposes things about the Bay and Pigs that no
one has ever written about before. It shows why it
really failed and why the United States did not learn
from it. It also shows why other countries today are
doing secret operations with more success. This is the book
that puts what some want to deny into the light.
In Denial, Secret Wars with air Strikes and Tanks Larry Hancock.

(57:03):
For more information, go to Larry hyphen Hancock dot com.
Pick up your copy of In Denial at Amazon dot
com in digital or physical dot.

Speaker 2 (57:13):
Com Radio Network revel.

Speaker 7 (57:16):
Leg through Colm Sage.

Speaker 2 (57:25):
Here, Yeah, revel.

Speaker 7 (57:45):
Through car.

Speaker 2 (57:57):
So Chili dot com.

Speaker 1 (58:12):
So after that short break, we will return you to
because today, as I speak, it is the you know,
tenth day of July twenty twenty five, but this is
from February fifteen of twenty fourteen, and Joan Mellon is
talking to me about Jim Garrison. I interrupted, but anyway,

(58:34):
I'll try and interrupt less as we go. And I'm
going to break this into a second part. So if
you're hearing the podcast later, which most of you will
guess what, there is a part two to the Joan
Mellon tribute on the o'celli effect, and there you go.

Speaker 6 (58:51):
Oh and of course Tour has never talked to anyone,
and when he talked to by the way, he did
talk to the House Select Committee on Assassination and the
most marvelous commentary came from the chief investigator out of
Miami for the House Select Committee, Gayton Phonsie. And I
love Phonzie's remark because he was sitting in and the

(59:12):
background for Detrres's testimony before the HSCA was that the
FBI came in in the morning and mentioned certain dates
about which they were not to talk to They were
not to ask him questions, and then the CIA came
in and gave their dates for one period of time
when the lawyers of the House Select Committee were not

(59:34):
to ask Bernardo Datoris any questions. And so Gayton Phonsie
listening to all this, what Bernardo Detoris finally said, to
listen to him, you would never think that of all
one hundred thousand ors whatever Cubans that were in Miami,
why they should pick this guy to question. And I
thought that was really so succinct and so marvelous, and

(59:57):
I recommend, By the way, there's a new reissue of
Who Finds This book The Last Investigations, And I just
wanted to call that to people's attention. I believe it
was published by the Mary Ferrell Foundation under the auspices
of the marvelous leader of that group, Rex Bradford, Right.

(01:00:18):
And I've read the original version of the book myself.
I haven't read the updated version, but I've got to
tell you that a couple of points I want to
make to my listeners here. First of all, listen to
what Jonah is saying about doing the independent research. She's
not trusting mere hearsay. She went out and spoke to
people directly. When you want to know someone's perspective, you

(01:00:39):
have to go to them find out from them directly.
You can't simply accept hearsay evidence. And also, even though
she was speaking to someone, she didn't absolutely take their
word for it. She found other corroboration for these things.

Speaker 5 (01:00:53):
And I think that this is something to be taken
note of by many many people who don't follow this
type of ethical sort of pattern when it comes to
their own writings and things, and they allow a lot
of speculation to interfere with the very good facts that
they could uncover.

Speaker 6 (01:01:09):
That's one I make if I might mention, underlining your point,
I might mention a recent book about the Kennedy assassination
by Roger Stone. And this is one of the chain
of books. Is there been book, a book after book,
year after year saying that Lyndon Johnson was really the
organizer and plotter of the Kennedy assassination with his lawyer

(01:01:31):
or his factotum on the Groundcliffe, Carter, and so forth.
And if you look at that book, you will not
find a shred of evidence for any of its assertions.

Speaker 5 (01:01:40):
And I'm so glad that you're mentioning that, because I
was going to bring it up with you and ask
you to just expound upon this entire, you know, genre
of LBJ did it stuff that I started to see
come to fruition really with the first airing of a
very poorly done The Men Who Killed Kennedy episode which

(01:02:03):
featured bar McClellan, and that's where that stuff really started
to blossom. There had always been the idea floating around
that Lyndon Johnson had something to do with the assassination,
and the idea that he might have been informed of
ahead of time is very possible. But there are books
out there that literally describe him as a mastermind behind it.

(01:02:25):
And these books are in some cases getting a lot
of airplay in the alternative media and elsewhere, and they
don't deserve it, because once you pull a few assertions
out of them, the entire house of cards collapses. They're
no better than the official lies that are out there
and the househouse.

Speaker 1 (01:02:45):
Now there is proof right there, by the way, I'm interrupting.
In twenty twenty five, again, there's proof right there. Because
some people said, oh, you just listen to what Joe
Millen said about you know LBJ doing it, and you
don't understand. You know what, I already had information that
pulled apart most of the LBJ stuff. I just didn't
have the fingerprint beat. All I knew is that the

(01:03:10):
examination that was done, which Walt Brown paid for. By
the way, Walt Brown is the guy wrote the check
to the guy that you see out there, you're oh no.
And I've done this for many years, and I know
how I was right. He wasn't even certified at the time.
That was the only thing that wasn't beat. But I
knew that evidence was not solid. And guess what. Unofficially

(01:03:35):
people had examined it and said, this is insane that
Darby thinks that this is mac Wallace's fingerprint. So what
I was going on was unofficial off the book stuff
and my own study pulling apart the LBJ did it thing.
Madeline Brown was full of crap, except she did mother
or child of his. But she was not the mistress.

(01:03:58):
She was one of many chicks he man whenever he traveled,
and she happened to get knocked up. And I do
believe she had a son, but that never got proved
in court either. Here's the deal, though she made up
a bunch of crap. And I know that because of
interviews conducted by friends of mine. I didn't even need
to chase down Madeline Brown, who wanted to get paid

(01:04:18):
and was also you know, writing bad checks towards the
end of her life and all that. Didn't need that.
Most of the LBJ stuff fell apart when you checked timelines,
when you checked solid information, when you checked all kinds
of things. This guy is not the mastermind or the
leader of the pack. When it came to the assassination
of John F. Kennedy, did he and was he directly

(01:04:39):
involved in other murders?

Speaker 2 (01:04:41):
Yep?

Speaker 1 (01:04:43):
Was he also a slimy and completely corrupt politician? Yep?
Was he getting bags of cash sent to him all
the time? Yep? Did he cheat on elections? Yep? Welcome
to Texas. Anyway, back to Joan, I just wanted to

(01:05:05):
point out that for people who have said over the years,
are you just de showed that when Joe Noon wrote
a book and you just know she right there, Joan
had not written Faustian Bargain yet, had not dug into
mac Wallace. She was doing some of it. Some of
the work was done already obviously, because she takes years
to write these things. So I talked to her during
part of it, and yeah, part of that stuff that

(01:05:26):
I knew from her, the fingerprint she held on to
for a while. I knew about it before the book
was published. And in fact, she was sitting there saying,
I don't know what to do because I know I'm
going to get attacked, and I know people are going
to come after me, and I know they're going to
say I'm wrong, and Roger Stone hates me already, and
and I said, well, Joan, can you publish it in

(01:05:49):
an appendix? Yes, I can, and that's what I'm thinking
of doing. I said, great, I will love cone that book.
The next thing I knew is Vastian Bargin came out
with the appendix that shows you the fingerprint evidence. But hey,
you know, keep doing the LBJ thing.

Speaker 5 (01:06:11):
Right.

Speaker 1 (01:06:11):
Rogers Stan.

Speaker 5 (01:06:14):
Committee, by the way, in case people don't know, that
was the congressional body that was put together in the
mid nineteen seventies and did investigate the Kennedy assassination and
in addition to the Martin Luther King Junior assassination, and
both of them found at the end regardless of the
controversy and the troubles with their investigations. Both of them

(01:06:37):
actually found that there was a likely conspiracy in both
of these cases. So understand that when they point to
the Warrant Commission, by the way, and they say to you, look,
it's just the loan nut, it's just the Loane nut.
Even the HSTA, which there are many problems with, including
the fact that they claim that Oswald was certainly an

(01:06:57):
assassin that day, they also do reflect the idea that
there was a conspiracy. Now, I want to go further
on this Lyndon Johnson thing, and I'm again so glad
you brought it up. But there was one other thought,
and I didn't want to lose it on Garrison, that
even outside of the Kennedy assassination, he had won a

(01:07:19):
decision in the United States Supreme Court where he had
been given he had actually had to take this before
many judges, before many bodies when he was criticizing public officials,
and they tried to pillary him for this in the
media and in the court system, and he won that

(01:07:41):
case in the US Supreme Court.

Speaker 6 (01:07:43):
Well, to give some background about that, let me give
a little background to that. It wasn't. What happened was
that the judges of the criminal Court in Orleans Parish
were very annoyed with Garrison because he was using money
from the fees that were people defaulting on bail and
so forth, and he was using that money to fix

(01:08:04):
up his office and so forth. And so Garrison was furious,
and he went and said that the judges on the
criminal court were like the sacred cows of India, and
that they were never at work. They celebrated all kinds
of holidays, including he made up a few like Huey
Long's birthday, in Saint winter Bottom's Day and so forth.

(01:08:25):
And he also said that they were mafia connected. So
for all those people that are still saying, like Peter
Dale Scott that Garrison it was fronting for the mafia,
here's Garrison in court saying, well, not yet in court,
but in public, saying that the judges and they were,
and he could prove it. Frank Costello was involved in
one of them connected to the mafia. So the judges

(01:08:47):
got very angry at this, and they met on bank
that means all of them together, and they sued Garrison
in court for criminal libel, and Garrison had to defend himself.
He got a wonderful lawyer named dot organ And who
didn't charge a cent. And Garrison lost. The judges won,
and then he went on appeal and he lost again,

(01:09:09):
and then his lawyer took him. They went to the
United States Supreme Court, and they were very fortunate because
New York Times versus Sullivan had already been passed and
that gave newspapers the right to criticize unless you could
show malice. And the Garrison case, which was Garrison versus Louisiana,

(01:09:31):
was addendum to that and said that you have the
freedom and underlined the freedom to criticize public officials. The
opinion was written by William Brennan, Justice Brennan, who was,
of course we know, the most liberal member of the
Supreme Court, and there are no William Brennan's today, not
even a shadow of the word.

Speaker 1 (01:09:49):
Yeah.

Speaker 6 (01:09:50):
And so Garrison won that case. It was a great
victory for him. And this is all before anything about
Kennedy assassination. It hadn't there was I think that, uh,
I think it was the earlier so uh. The other
thing is that Garrison was very concerned about civil liberties
throughout his years as District Attorney of Orleans Parish, and

(01:10:13):
he often said the freedom of speech needs to be
in an oxygen tent, that it always needs to be
fortified because you can always lose it. And he fought
against the police in in uh, New Orleans censored a
book by which name was it another country? Now I

(01:10:38):
can't remember, that was confiscated from the double bookstore. And
now you'll and uh and uh he scares and opposed that.
He and also he fought against the prevalent racism, and
there were clanned bombings throughout New Orleans of his uh
in the early years that he was uh just a attorney,

(01:11:00):
and he pursued them most of He also refused to
prosecute homosexuals who were regularly arrested and on what they
called crimes against nature, and Garrison said, the only crimes
against nature are hurricanes, cyclones and all this and made

(01:11:22):
a joke of it, and nobody was allowed to prosecute.
But none of his assistants were allowed to prosecute people
on so called crimes against nature. And in fact, when
Garrison put Clay Shaw on trial for participation in the
conspiracy to murder President Kennedy, and that doesn't mean that
that was the conspiracy that ultimately resulted in the assassination,

(01:11:43):
but that Shaw was part of a conspiracy to murder
President Kennedy and one that involved Oswald, the person who
was allegedly the killer. Garrison was made sure that Shaw's
homosexuality was never mentioned in court during the trial or
any of the pre trial hearings. And not only that,

(01:12:05):
he didn't call to testify any of the homosexual friends
of Shaw. People, Well, why not, Raymond Brocheers, and why
not and so on, and Garrison just just would would
not do that. I thought he took a principal stand. Also,
by the way, as a side note, at this trial
of Clay Shaw, he also refused to call anyone with
a criminal record, and that was a problem for like

(01:12:29):
take Daego Garner and others who knew a lot about
Certainly the relationship between Lee, Harvey Oswald and Jack Ruby
would have been good witnesses, but he was determined that
that the that the witnesses not the have the undermined
or by Shaw's defense on the ground that they had

(01:12:49):
committed felonies.

Speaker 5 (01:12:51):
Right, He didn't want the character of the witnesses to
to be brought to issue in the courtroom, uh, you know,
during a time when the content of what they had
to say was the most important thing. He didn't want
the jury, the public, or even the record to be
sort of distracted from the real issues and the idea here.

(01:13:11):
The reason why I brought it up is because I
wanted to add a little bit more texture to the
idea of who this guy is, because so often you
see authors all the way from then, which was in
the late sixties, when when the Shaw trial ended in
nineteen sixty nine, all the way from then till now,
people have discussed how the guy was compromised, and he

(01:13:32):
was crazy, and he had no principles, and he was
just a publicity hound that really didn't have and all
these terrible, nasty criticisms of the guy who was a
completely legitimate stand up person, who was by no means
a screaming radical of any kind. He was just a

(01:13:53):
fair minded person who was in search of the truth
and in search of justice. And I think that these
types of things that we're talking about here are worth
mentioning for that reason. You know, I don't know what
you think about that, but I'm pretty sure you agree
with me.

Speaker 6 (01:14:09):
Here. Well, yeah, of course I think that Garrison is
an impeccable record on civil liberties, on racism, he often said.
Somebody asked him, I think Richard Billings was from Life Magazine,
came down to the office and Billings asked Garrison, this
is something for Northerners and us in the East hard

(01:14:30):
to understand. What is the Sovereignty Commission. The Sovereignty Commission
was a state organization set up by this state, Louisiana
and Mississippi to prevent integration. And so Garrison would joke
and he said, well, what the Sovereignty Commission means? They
don't want black people to walk on Royal Street, which
he was joking. But there's a marvelous documentary, by the way,

(01:14:55):
about the Sovereignty Commission that PBS put out this year,
and you can really see how they were infilt, how
they infiltrated the civil rights movement, and especially how the
people who were Schwerner, Goodman and Cheney who were murdered
in during Mississippi summer in nineteen sixty four, how their

(01:15:15):
movements were charted by spies from the Sovereignty Commission that
infiltrated the movement. There were also spies from the NAACP.

Speaker 5 (01:15:24):
That was the story that was dramatized in the movie
Mississippi Burning. That was that's where a lot of people
might might recall those names in case they had not
studied the struggle of Dove.

Speaker 1 (01:15:35):
Though.

Speaker 6 (01:15:36):
I agree that people you should look and see the
people who are involved in these cases and in all
this history. You want to see if they look for notoriety,
and if they do look for notoriety, you tend to
look at their testimony and perhaps hesitate before accepting it.
And one of the people about in a Farewell to
Justice who was a ciass that was involved here as

(01:16:01):
a possible patsy Thomas Edward Beckham and oh boy, and
also of course his handler, Jack Martin, he was He's
c I A. I think I proved in the update,
the new update to my book that Jack Martin was
certainly was certainly connected to CIA. But Thomas Edward Beckham,
oh boy, because he gave such frank testimony to me

(01:16:23):
when I interviewed him in Louisville. And Thomas Edward Beckham
had been years a few years earlier represented when he
was a lawyer by a judge in Alabama called Charles McKnight,
who befriended Beckham, and when he read my book, he
was very interested because he said to me, you know,
the guy was so intelligent without an education, was no education,

(01:16:45):
I mean, not even in elementary school, and so smart.
And he liked him so much and he wanted to
And then when he represented him, suddenly his office was
robbed and all the files were taken and he the
FBI said would you find this guy for me? Because
Beckham had disappeared into the hinterland, and the FBI agent

(01:17:06):
came back and said, he doesn't exist. I can't find
anything about him. This was already in the nineteen eighties.
And after my just a year or so ago, Charlie
McKnight called me and he said, do you have Beckham's
phone number? Because he's still all these years later. It
just kind of had an affectionate feeling for Beckham, and
so I did. I managed to find his phone number miracle,

(01:17:28):
and McKnight called him up and Beckham answered and he said,
you have the wrong number. I don't know anybody by him.
There's nobody here by that name. So he didn't want
he doesn't want, he didn't want any attention He was terrified,
really of being of the consequences of having been so
close a witness to the Kennedy assassination. And when I

(01:17:51):
first called him, the first the question that he asked
me was is Jack Martin still alive? That fright Jack
Martin frightened him. So to those who think that Jack
Martin was just a hope, a drunk who hung around
Guy Banister's office, we can talk about Guy Banister if
you like in a minute, and really was a hapless figure.
It was a religious fanatic belonging to these extraterrestrial churches,

(01:18:15):
and not of and of no consequence.

Speaker 1 (01:18:19):
That was.

Speaker 6 (01:18:19):
It was very interesting to hear Thomas Edward Beckham saying
that it weren't fearing even these years later Jack Martin.
Jack Martin was dead, and luckily for me, that allowed
Beckham really to talk to me, and so I went
to Louisville and talked to him. There were so many
and put some update in the update to a Farewell

(01:18:41):
to Justice, I put some more information about Beckham and
also about another of his handlers, whose name was fred
Lee Chrisman, and who also appeared before the Orleans Parish
Grand Jury. But by that time Garrison was exhausted, it
was almost time for the Shaw trial, and and Chrispin

(01:19:01):
just talked his way out of it. These are people
who have no scruples about lying to a grand jury.
The idea that you don't like to the grand jury
is some fantasy out of the nineteenth century. I think
we see also just as a slight digression, because he
brought it up. And that is in the case with
the Lyndon Johnson story of Billy Solestes, who is the

(01:19:23):
only witness who says anything about Lyndon Johnson and a
young man named mac Wallace being involved in murders and
Billy clesties. When he got out of prison, a second
stretch of in prison went before the grand jury in
Robertson County and started accusing Johnson and mac Wallace and

(01:19:44):
so forth about planning murders and whatnot. And the idea
and that you mentioned that episode of the Men Who
Killed Kennedy which had to do with the Lyndon Johnson story.
Fatuous comment by one of the so called researchers whose said, well,
there's no reason why a Billity Celestes would line except
for the.

Speaker 5 (01:20:04):
Fact that he was an admitted con man, and he
admitted he was a liar.

Speaker 6 (01:20:08):
He went in on the second trial, he stood before
the jury and he said, I'm a liar, and I
exaggerate and I brag. Those were the thing. And he admitted,
you know, as if he were trying to disarm the
jury with all of that and to use him as
a witness for anything. I mean, he would not. This
would not work a hold up in any court of law,

(01:20:29):
and it shouldn't hold up in the court of history.
Now history allows hearsay if you have to have it,
uh in a way that a court of law doesn't.

Speaker 8 (01:20:39):
Uh.

Speaker 6 (01:20:40):
And but but it has to be presented I think
with a caveat, and the caveat is this is this
is here say we only such and such witness set
it so and so claims. But in the case of
Bility Celestes, I also have come to believe that he
himself was implicated in one or more of the murders
that he accuses mac Wallace of having committed.

Speaker 1 (01:20:59):
Right.

Speaker 6 (01:21:00):
So it's a mess. And this is the only evidence.
Getting back to what we were talking about before about
the Lyndon Johnson did it a story. This is the
only evidence. And if you quote, and it's not evidence,
the only thing that they could point to. And I
want to go back, if I may, to the whole
issue how this happened this Lyndon Johnson did it book

(01:21:21):
after book, year after year, whether it's Bara McClellan, whether
it's Roger Stone, whether it's The Men on the Sixth Floor,
whether the whole bunch of those books, and Phil Nelson
is another one, many of.

Speaker 5 (01:21:33):
Them, right, And it's a great study and how quite
often these distractions are sort of propagated by certain individuals
who really just want to give you something to keep
you away from the truth. And I think the lynchpin
and all of those terrible stories that have come out
that are just absolutely based in nothing, the lynchpin has

(01:21:57):
been for these people that well mac Wallace was there
that day, and the reason is they have this particular
piece of evidence. And you and I had discussed this
nowhere on the air anywhere, but I know what it
is that we're talking about here, and I really would
love to have you talk about that as well. So please,

(01:22:19):
let's let's not forget to mention that one piece of
evidence and.

Speaker 6 (01:22:22):
What it is I want to talk about where this
comes from. In general. That is the historical overview of
the Lennon Johnson did it, and I think that what
will you have found? Jim Garrison of course set us
on the path to looking at CIA in particular, but
also other intelligence agencies cooperating in plotting the assassination. And Garrison,

(01:22:43):
of course this has been said many times by me
and others, didn't care who the shoots were. What he
cared about was whose idea this was? Who is the plotter?
And CIA, as I've said many times, others have seen it,
put out a document in April nineteen six six which
was directed to the CIA's media assets directing on how

(01:23:05):
to how to counter the criticisms of various critics. Mark
Lane was one and Jim Garrison, whose name is not
in the document, was really the main subject because that
document was issued at the time of the Garrison investigation
in nineteen sixty seven. And so let me just so,

(01:23:29):
what did CIA do in order to instruct its media assets.
One thing was to accuse Garrison of being the dupe
of the KGB out of the Moscow and in that
case they particularly set their media assets onto the Piasa Sarah,
which is an Italian newspaper that just at the time
that Clay Show was arrested in March nineteen sixty seven,

(01:23:51):
March first, Piaja Sarah put out a series of articles
about a CIA front organization in Europe called permandex with
a special sidebar organization in Rome called Centro Commercial on Monday.
I think I have that right anyway, So Playshaw was
a director of that organization. So here he is being

(01:24:14):
the director of a CIA front organization at the time
on the board of directors at the time that Garrison
is looking into exactly what Shaw's CIA connections were. Well,
what was CIA then going to do and tell its
media assets? After this little bit of time went by,
they decided to put forth the view that the mafia

(01:24:35):
did it. It was really a mafia a plan and
not at all CIA. And in that respect, they had
several writers. One of them was John Davis who published
a book called Mafia Kingfish. He was a cousin of
Jacqueline Kennedy. And another book was the book that was
published by Robert Blakey co authored with Richard Billings.

Speaker 4 (01:24:55):
Now.

Speaker 6 (01:24:56):
Blake was the head of the Chief Counsel of the
House Select Committee on Assassinations and CIA was deeply involved
in manipulating and controlling the House to Let Committee, and
I haven't a farewell to justice all a lot of
the correspondence between Scott Breckinridge of CIA and Blake Ee
as CIA looked at the questions that were being asked,
if people edited the report that HHSCA wrote and so forth. Okay,

(01:25:20):
So the years went by, and we have another of
those books called Ultimate Sacrifice, and that book came out
very coincidentally, exactly at the same moment that my book
came out. So if I was going to say that
Garrison was right and the CIA was behind the assassination
in some way, here's the book by Lamar Waldron and
a radio personality named Tom Hartman saying, no, No, here's

(01:25:43):
the mafia right there. Well, years went by and this
mafia had done it idea sort of warrants worth sin,
and people began to ask how could the mafia have
orchestrated the cover up? They might have been involved. They
were involved with CIA, my goodness, since nineteen forty six
and forty seven, when they involved themselves in Operation Gladio
in Italy, before even the ink was drawn on CI

(01:26:05):
a charter we could talk about that, because to know
history of ci A is essential to understanding these issues.
So then came the Lyndon Johnson. Well, if it wasn't
the mafia, we need an alternate sponsor. How about Lyndon Johnson.
And after all, Quibono, who he profited from the event.
He was power hungry all his life. He wanted to

(01:26:26):
be President of the United States. Wouldn't he be he'd
be wouldn't he be a great sponsor? And so if
you look at all these books of which I mentioned
the Roger Stone, Laura McClelland been on the sixth floor.
If you look at all these books, one thing that
they have in common, in addition to blaming Lyndon Johnson,
is that they never mentioned any involvement for knowledge or
cover up by ci A. CIA is not mentioned in

(01:26:49):
these books. Look at the Roger Stone and so there.
So it's obvious, isn't it that this is that these
people must be CIA assets. If they're not, they're they're
they're saving the CIA money. These communists, they used to say,
if you're not a member, then they're you know, they're
deuced cheaters because they might as well be members of
the Communist Party for what they're saying, and they're not

(01:27:12):
paying their dues. So here I think we have every
one of these books have that in common that it's
and one of them on one a video by a
Frenchman named William Ramon. He said it says the assassination
of President Kennedy was an example of Texas justice and
nobody at Texas mafia and nobody but Texas Texas and

(01:27:34):
Texas was involved in the Kennedy assassination. There's your ultimate
sponsor and that's the one that we have at this moment.
So that brings us up today. Now I want to
add one on a point because my book, I'm writing
a book about Lyndon Johnson and mac Wallace. Well, who's Macwallace.
Mac Wallace was a young man who, among other young
men recruited by Lyndon Johnson, and there were many. One

(01:27:56):
of them was that Governor Connolly, another one was called
Horace Busby and Johnson gathered under usually they were presidents
of the University of Texas and Macwallas had been a
student at the University of Texas, was president of the
student body in nineteen forty four and he was and
after he fell on hard times. Lyndon Johnson scooped him
up and took him to Washington, and he became he

(01:28:18):
came under the umbrella of Lyndon Johnson. Now mcwallas did
commit a murder for which he was tried and convicted,
and that was the murder of somebody that was having
a love affair with both Mike Wallace's wife and simultaneously
it was named John Douglas Kinser, and he was having
an affair not only with macwallas's wife, whose name was Andre,

(01:28:41):
but with Johnson's sisters, Josepha, Josepha. So here goes Mack Wallace.
I think he later himself told people it was a
crime of passion. He goes in and he shoots John
Douglas Kinser at his golf course. Kinzer was trying to
set up a golf course nine holes and shoots him
in cold blunt right there in broad daylight, with witnesses around.

(01:29:05):
And to make a law, I won't go through the
whole thing, but he was tried and he was convicted
of murder with malice that when we call first degree murder.
And then for various mass reasons not necessarily related to
Lyndon Johnson, I have to say, but jury tampering. He
was given a suspended sentence and didn't serve a day

(01:29:27):
in jail, And so he was a murderer. So wouldn't
he be just the one to blame for a whole
bunch of murders connected with Billy Clestes and his crimes
and felonies and scams and all these murders were blamed
on mac Wallace only if we have only the word
for this of Billy Clestes. Now, that may not be

(01:29:48):
enough to say that Roy Johnson was the mastermind of
the Kennedy assassination. But then we put that we need
another detail out of this, and that is there was
a fingerprint, one fingerprint up there on the sixth floor
of the Texas school Book Depository, from which probably no
one fired any shots, But there was a fingerprint that

(01:30:09):
the Warrant Commission had among its exhibits that was unidentified.
They identified all the fingerprints up there, including police, but
one was they could not identify, and it sits, and
they weren't exhibits, And so various researchers, not necessarily with
bad will, decided tested and so and concluded that this

(01:30:34):
was Macwallace's fingerprint. Well, if Macwallace's fingerprint was up there
and he was associated with Lyndon Johnson, as indeed he was,
then surely this proves, by this contorted reasoning that Lyndon
Johnson must have planned the Kennedy assassination. Take away the
fingerprint and you have nothing really connecting Lyndon Johnson with

(01:30:58):
the mechanics of the Kennedy necessities.

Speaker 5 (01:31:01):
And that was the lynchpin that I was mentioning before,
because the thing is that it is, you know, a contentious,
uh you know, possibility that Johnson had exerted some influence
possibly when it came to the Kinser trial, and certainly
mac Wallace was involved with Lyndon Johnson, and Lyndon Johnson

(01:31:22):
was involved. By by the way, it's not to say
that Lyndon Johnson was an innocent or a clean uh
you know individual when it came to you know, various
There's been various accusations, some of them founded, some of
them not well founded, about all kinds of things that
Johnson did. Even publicly at that time, there were scandals

(01:31:42):
about Johnson when he was vice president, being involved in
various underhanded dealings and bribery type scandals and things like this,
and it's a possibility. This is why it was very
easy when you put that supposed fingerprint along with the
fact that this guy was obviously like to put it

(01:32:03):
another way, it's almost like he's a Johnson stooge that
you know, at least that's the way he was represented.
And if you imagine that he was involved in all
these criminal activities, he was a murderer, as you just
laid out, Uh, you know, clearly was a murderer in
fact of kinser, then it would it was so much
easier to take that tie it all together. But there
is a problem here. Isn't their job.

Speaker 6 (01:32:24):
The problem is that it wasn't his print, And it
wasn't and I did the I hired people and did
the We did the most modern scientific analysis of the print,
and it wasn't him.

Speaker 5 (01:32:39):
Right now, you could do it.

Speaker 6 (01:32:41):
They can swing from the rafters. It just wasn't his print.
Now you're gonna have to make Now as far as
Johnson's crimes, I'm really looking into Johnson's career. One of
the most telling aspects of Johnson, and of course it's
not it's kept out of the biographies Robert A. Carow,
Robert Dallak, these people do. They leave Billy Solestes out,

(01:33:07):
and they leave Madeline Brown out, who's a lawyer herself anyway,
and they leave out a lot of They can't leave
out everything. For example, Huh. They certainly couldn't leave out
the fact that Johnson had no business being in the
United States Senate because he subverted the election. And that
was called Box thirteen. And I found new information about

(01:33:28):
Box thirteen. But it certainly is mentioned in Robert Carroll's
book The Billy Solestes Crimes that Johnson was involved in
proffiting from the scams of Billy Solestes. You know, when
people looked in, Johnson could keep his name out of everything.
He could get involved in all sorts of criminal activity
and his name would not appear. You could not pin

(01:33:49):
any of it on him. People had a hard time
everybody's looking and I could understand. But nonetheless, it seems
pretty apparent that what Johnson did was to sell public
office for no profit. And so all the contracts that
went to Texas, he got a cut out of everything
that Brown and Route that he started out helping them

(01:34:09):
in the late nineteen thirties. The minute he got into
the House of Representatives, and in the second phase of
the Marshall Ford damn, not the first, but the second phase,
they would this is what made Brown and root. They
were nothing to for that. And to top it off
of Brown and through Johnson's efforts, Johnson got on the
Naval Service Committee, Naval Affairs Committee the minute he got

(01:34:32):
to the House, with the help of Roosevelt. Franklin Roosevelt,
who Johnson managed to tell convinced was that Johnson presented
himself as a new dealer, and so Roosevelt liked it.
The fact is Johnson believed that nothing, had no principles,
had no morality, was a liar, but he managed to

(01:34:53):
I don't know that flattery, tremendous amount of flattery and
what some people call it the Texas charm. I don't
find the Texas charm very charming. I find it chilling,
but some find it charming, and they liked the flattery
and whatever, And Sir Johnson got on the Naval Affairs Committee,
and the first thing that he did there was to
make sure that the Corpus Christie Naval Station, which was

(01:35:15):
just this is at the turn of World War II
was awarded to primarily, not totally, but primarily to Brown
and Route. They had never built the military. Now after
that they built many, many military bases, but that was
They never had built a naval base. They never had
built a ship. They suddenly became shipbuilders after World War Two.
They bought from the government the pipelines that the government

(01:35:37):
no longer needed gas pipelines, big inch and a little inch,
and that became Texas Eastern, one of the biggest subsidiaries
of Brown and Room and so forth. Now we cannot
prove that Johnson was given a cut. We certainly can
prove that illegal campaign contributions came to Johnson from Brown
and Route because they were brought before the Internal Revenue

(01:35:57):
Service for it, and Rosela had got them off with
a very small fun and that was in the nineteen
forty one election. Johnson had run for the United States
Senate in nineteen forty one.

Speaker 4 (01:36:08):
And n one.

Speaker 1 (01:36:10):
Okay, So Joan just detailed a whole bunch of LBJ
horror story, okay, and gave you some serious facts. Now
I disagree with her about some of the stuff she said.
But Brown and Root later on gets folded into a
little thing called Haliburton, and they're profiteering over Vietnam. I

(01:36:32):
didn't even mention it here, but check it out. There's
the stuff she's talking about.

Speaker 6 (01:36:37):
Now.

Speaker 1 (01:36:37):
She thinks Johnson just sold political office, but he had
some serious, just you know, straight up criminal enterprises going on,
and if people got in away or look to make
some noise or actually could effectively throw things off, they
were gotten rid of for very small amounts of cash.
Now I'm not saying that mac Wallace was a hitman,

(01:37:00):
but he did kill Kenser got off on that weird,
you know, only in Texas law kind of thing, and
looks like Johnson might have had a little something to
do with that. But anyway, lots of stuff to dig
into there. And see how packed an interview is with Joan.
I'm trying to talk to her about Garrison. It goes

(01:37:21):
into I mentioned something she tears off on because I
knew the work she was doing. She hadn't published Faustian
Bargain yet, but she had done she did research. Matter
of fact, there's probably five six books worth of research
and interviews and things easily that like a horrible author

(01:37:42):
could dump into a program that Joan put together that
could be solid historical records of various things. The extra
stuff that wasn't included in the manuscripts to some of
these other books. There's more stuff on mac Wallace that
wasn't included in Faustian Bargain. There's more stuff that wasn't

(01:38:03):
included in Farewell to Justice. I gotta tell you I
had knowledge of some of it, so, you know, breaking
down the fourth wall here. I was revealing and getting
her to reveal stuff, and I didn't think she was
going to go in certain directions because books hadn't been
published yet. A bunch of them had not been published yet.

(01:38:25):
It was crazy, crazy time. Anyway, I'm going to continue
this tribute in a part two coming up, so I'm
going to ask you to continue to listen to the
Ocelli effect. I think I'm going to continue to play
this interview in part two, and I'm going to play
a piece at least from another one on a completely

(01:38:47):
different subject, and we'll see where that goes. There are
some years apart here, and like I said, only a
couple of years back I had interviewed her about her
cat Fishing book two. And maybe I'll figure out a.

Speaker 11 (01:38:59):
Way to dig that.

Speaker 1 (01:39:00):
I'm sure it's still probably available. If you go down
on the Speaker list, you might be able to find
that old Joan Mellon interview still up there, because I
try and keep the best stuff on that list as
long as I can until I run out of space
for the RSS feed on Spreaker, which is paid till
next year. So even if my show stops producing new stuff,
guess what, that Spreaker feed will still be there for

(01:39:22):
a year, So download and get what you can while
you can. Please. Anyway, I'm going to continue the o'celli
effect tribute to Joan Mellon after I take a quick
pause here and we go to break, and I'm going
to break the stream so that we break this into
separate files for people to get hold of. Maybe we'll

(01:39:45):
do three parts. I don't know, but at least two
parts tribute to Joan Mellon here on this July tenth
of twenty twenty five.

Speaker 2 (01:39:52):
People stick around

Speaker 4 (01:40:06):
Sh

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Stuff You Should Know

New Heights with Jason & Travis Kelce

24/7 News: The Latest

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}The Ochelli Effect 7-10-2025 TRIBUTE Joan Mellen 1

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

.css-r6mb8g{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:1;overflow:hidden;}Stuff You Should Know

New Heights with Jason & Travis Kelce

24/7 News: The Latest

All Episodes

The Ochelli Effect 7-10-2025 TRIBUTE Joan Mellen 1

Stuff You Should Know