Speaker 1: Get ready.
Speaker 2: February nineteen, twenty twenty five, allegedly according to that thing
Speaker 2: we call a calendar. And you know what's funny is
Speaker 2: I completely was unable to get the anniversary show on
Speaker 2: the fifteenth out. But that's okay. Sometimes it's better to
Speaker 2: not have certain things happen anyway. Wednesday Wednesday, and last
Speaker 2: week we did the show where we played the tape, right,
Speaker 2: and I've already heard back from a couple of you
Speaker 2: comparing you know, the Alex Jones version of what happened
Speaker 2: to what happened here with mister Stevens, and of course
Speaker 2: with mister Hancock, who was not on the Alex Jones show.
Speaker 2: You know, I kind of have double edged wishes for Larry.
Speaker 2: I'd love to see him on Alex Jones because it
Speaker 2: would raise his profile a bit, But then again, would
Speaker 2: it be a quality interview?
Speaker 3: There's the question anyway, not here to criticize AJ today,
Speaker 3: but maybe we'll.
Speaker 2: Criticize somebody else before we're done. We'll see what happens,
Speaker 2: and maybe we'll get into an addendum to the last show.
Speaker 2: Because I've got Larry Hancock with me, and I'm glad
Speaker 2: that I do. I urge you to get the Oswald Puzzle,
Speaker 2: which is also you know, Larry's co authored that. Okay,
Speaker 2: David Boylan is on there with him as well, and
Speaker 2: we did a couple of shows on that book, and
Speaker 2: who knows, we'll probably do another, but for now, I
Speaker 2: want to follow up on this Billy Celestie's story. We
Speaker 2: heard the audio last time. A few people had questions
Speaker 2: about the audio. Why was it cutting out? It's because
Speaker 2: it was played through Skype. And that's one of those
Speaker 2: quirks to Skype. That's technological issue. The actual tape does
Speaker 2: not have those silent cuts in it, just because some
Speaker 2: people said it sounded edited because of that. No, no, no,
Speaker 2: it's just because Steven played it through. Mister Stevens played
Speaker 2: it through Skype. Okay, Billy Celestie's grandson played it through Skype.
Speaker 2: And when you just have noise on Skype, sometimes you
Speaker 2: have a setting on there that cuts down on noise.
Speaker 2: That's what happened, so I wanted to clarify that, and
Speaker 2: who knows, maybe we'll clarify some other stuff. And again
Speaker 2: Larry Dashhandcock dot com. You can follow his blog, which
Speaker 2: I do, and take a look at his other works
Speaker 2: and all that stuff over at Larry hyphenhandcock or dash
Speaker 2: handcock dot com spelled just like it sounds, and the
Speaker 2: Oswald puzzle. Now I'm gonna shut up stop trying to
Speaker 2: plug things, cause Larry, it's been an interesting a couple
Speaker 2: of days for you too. So oh, I have to
Speaker 2: address the Pierce Morgan thing. Yeah, because guys are asking
Speaker 2: me about that. But before I do, why don't I
Speaker 2: let you do it? Larry?
Speaker 3: How you doing tonight?
Speaker 1: I'm doing fine despite the cold weather.
Speaker 4: If we survive the next couple of days with these
Speaker 4: minus twenty degree wind chill factors, you know, next week
Speaker 4: will be great.
Speaker 1: But the moment, we're in survival mode.
Speaker 4: And I was in survival mode, as we said check
Speaker 4: earlier this week, I had an opportunity. I was scheduled
Speaker 4: to be on the Piers Morgan show. Right there was
Speaker 4: a little confusion about the time. I was expecting the
Speaker 4: remote unit to be at my house at about four
Speaker 4: o'clock in the afternoon because they didn't want to take
Speaker 4: any chances. They wanted to do an actual remote unit,
Speaker 4: not just zoom and so my wife had a doctor's
Speaker 4: appointment in the morning. We're all set to get all
Speaker 4: of our stuff done and be back in place. And
Speaker 4: just as we were about to have a quick bite
Speaker 4: of lunch, I got a phone call that says, well,
Speaker 4: the remote units at your house and you're not there
Speaker 4: in the show starting.
Speaker 1: I'm going whoops, I said, but if you can.
Speaker 4: Get here quickly, like drive one hundred miles an hour,
Speaker 4: we can get you in the show.
Speaker 1: And so I did, and.
Speaker 4: I did drive radically outrageous speeds, got in, got in
Speaker 4: the got in the remote unit, and kind of set
Speaker 4: there for twenty minutes or so because unfortunately Pierce was
Speaker 4: not able to fit me in behind the other guests
Speaker 4: who sort of kept talking regardless of his trying to
Speaker 4: introduce me.
Speaker 1: So it was an exciting first part of the week.
Speaker 2: And then magically they had to go. And this is
Speaker 2: what everybody's asking me to comment on. Now, nobody knew
Speaker 2: that you were supposed to be on the show, because
Speaker 2: they did they like promo that you were coming up
Speaker 2: and then you didn't show up.
Speaker 1: Or what they did not They did not promo that
Speaker 1: I was coming up. I was.
Speaker 4: I think they had a slot for me because in
Speaker 4: the first you can see introducing and talking about four
Speaker 4: of the panelist, right, but he only introduced you only
Speaker 4: saw three people when it got to that, so I
Speaker 4: was not in the introduction, and then he did.
Speaker 1: I think it was added in that. You know, he'd
Speaker 1: also invited.
Speaker 4: Lee Harvey Oswall's girlfriend Judith, so Judith joined then, but
Speaker 4: she was not even listed on the pant le either.
Speaker 2: So so a bunch of surprises there, like where he's
Speaker 2: popping up people and you were supposed to be one
Speaker 2: of them, but they never got to you. And even
Speaker 2: though you're sitting in a remote van near your house
Speaker 2: or somewhat near your house.
Speaker 4: Yeah, out of the it was near the house and
Speaker 4: before the storm got here, So that was good.
Speaker 1: It was kind of interesting. Was that was kind of fun.
Speaker 1: The operator was great, We had a great chat.
Speaker 4: We actually even had her in after we didn't make
Speaker 4: it on the show and had had lunch with her,
Speaker 4: invited her in. So it was a fun experience. But
Speaker 4: I would have kind of liked to be on the show.
Speaker 2: Look, it would have been better for you to be
Speaker 2: on TV. But then again, I mean, look, I'm already
Speaker 2: getting these Can you.
Speaker 3: Believe Piers Morgan had Judy Baker And I'm like, of
Speaker 3: course I can believe that.
Speaker 2: And I told you you don't have to comment on this, Larry,
Speaker 2: but I told you in confidence. Some staffer turned around
Speaker 2: and said, Okay, who's big on Facebook? Who's got a book?
Speaker 3: All right?
Speaker 5: Now?
Speaker 3: Who does Simon and Schuster have? And that's how you
Speaker 3: came up.
Speaker 2: And then they went to YouTube and said who gets
Speaker 2: traffic on YouTube? Great, here we go. This is the
Speaker 2: panel JFK stuff. And they did it probably because there
Speaker 2: is talk about, you know, is there going to be
Speaker 2: a release of documents from the US government?
Speaker 3: And that was it. That's that was the whole premise
Speaker 3: of that set, because it makes no.
Speaker 2: Sense to invite you and Judy to the same panel,
Speaker 2: like if you not the subject at all.
Speaker 4: You could tell that Pierce was kind of working at
Speaker 4: juggling the people together to get something out of coherent
Speaker 4: out of you know, this group of people, because they
Speaker 4: were all in different spaces and you know.
Speaker 2: I mean, like, look, I am not a fan of
Speaker 2: Pierce Morgan's but you know, credit where credits d He
Speaker 2: has a talent which generally speaking, I have a decent
Speaker 2: ability to do this. Now, if you have me live
Speaker 2: on stage, you can't hand me a piece of paper
Speaker 2: to read from because of my bad eyesight. But I
Speaker 2: can improvisationally with a couple of facts, create bridges between
Speaker 2: people introductions, no problem. Even if I have no idea
Speaker 2: who's about to step on the stage, and you give
Speaker 2: me a heads up, like as I'm stepping to the mic,
Speaker 2: or you give me a couple of ideas about what's happening,
Speaker 2: I can put it together. And on this show, when
Speaker 2: I'm behind the mic, it's a lot easier because I
Speaker 2: have a computer screen in front of me and I
Speaker 2: can work it out real fast. And you don't usually
Speaker 2: hear me typing folks. But I mean sometimes I can
Speaker 2: pick up information even though I didn't have it in
Speaker 2: advance of the show, and fit it in and make
Speaker 2: it sound like I knew exactly what was going to
Speaker 2: happen next and I had no idea. I've had that
Speaker 2: happen more than once, where somebody's you know, had somebody
Speaker 2: else in the room while I.
Speaker 3: Was interviewing him, et cetera.
Speaker 2: Some people have the ability to do that, and other
Speaker 2: people require a script. Pierce Morgan is one of those
Speaker 2: people who can do it on the fly. He needs
Speaker 2: his teleprompter, but if you give him new stuff and
Speaker 2: his teleprompter that he's never seen before. You'll get it done.
Speaker 2: So that's what he was doing with you, is he had, Okay,
Speaker 2: give me JFK stuff. Don't worry, I don't even need
Speaker 2: to read it. And he was making it up as
Speaker 2: he was going along, and then somebody said in his ear,
Speaker 2: you have Lee Harvey Oswald's girlfriend on the line, you know,
Speaker 2: probably because she did her whole I'm in exile, I'm hiding,
Speaker 2: you know whatever, whatever her routine is lately. And it's
Speaker 2: funny that you got drawn in to that. And I
Speaker 2: would have loved to have seen you exposed anywhere. I mean,
Speaker 2: as I said before, even though I'm not a fan
Speaker 2: of Alex Jones, at this point, I would have loved
Speaker 2: to have seen you on there. And if you do
Speaker 2: get a chance to go on there, please do. But
Speaker 2: the point is that I'd love to see you everywhere.
Speaker 2: But the fact that you didn't make it there, I
Speaker 2: don't know. I can take a positive feeling from that too,
Speaker 2: because you didn't end up on a weird panel with
Speaker 2: a guy who couldn't shut up Judy Baker and god
Speaker 2: knows what else, you know what I.
Speaker 4: Mean, And I didn't kill myself driving one hundred miles
Speaker 4: an hour either, So there's an upside.
Speaker 3: But another positive.
Speaker 2: You didn't get injured or caught in a storm or
Speaker 2: you know, other problems. So look, it's a plus. Okay,
Speaker 2: you got to take the winds where you can get them.
Speaker 2: Real easy to show up with me. You just happen
Speaker 2: to you know, if you can get your skypeworking and
Speaker 2: your internet's up, you show up with me.
Speaker 3: It's easy.
Speaker 2: I don't make you drive one hundred miles an hour
Speaker 2: or freak out or give you the wrong time.
Speaker 3: Usually, you know.
Speaker 2: So anyway, Sorry, I'm making jokes because people wanted me
Speaker 2: to address the Judy Baker thing. I'm not surprised that
Speaker 2: that Pierce Morgan's staff put together this thing for him
Speaker 2: and he just went on the fly with it. It's
Speaker 2: it's normal. It speaks to his talent, and that's that's
Speaker 2: what I would expect of Pierce Morgan.
Speaker 3: Not an informed show.
Speaker 2: Not you know, like I know exactly what's going on
Speaker 2: with these guests, and you know I'm gonna ask hard questions. No,
Speaker 2: none of that. He was just working with what was
Speaker 2: assembled for him, and unfortunately I would have loved to
Speaker 2: have seen just you get the greater exposure. But then again,
Speaker 2: you know, like I said, sometimes you know I agree
Speaker 2: with pt Varnum, but other times, you know, not.
Speaker 3: All publicity is the best.
Speaker 2: Anyways, So back to serious work, just real quick again,
Speaker 2: Billy Celesti's so you've blogged about this. Have you gotten
Speaker 2: any feedback personally about doing the show with me? Which
Speaker 2: is a little different obviously again than some of these
Speaker 2: other shows that this guy did, because even he said
Speaker 2: at the end, he was like, Wow, this was weird.
Speaker 2: I was on with two people who knew, you know.
Speaker 3: A lot.
Speaker 2: Even though he thought Alex was rather well read on
Speaker 2: the subject, he was kind of, you know, felt that
Speaker 2: this was a different experience to be on with you
Speaker 2: and me. Did you get any feedback about about the
Speaker 2: podcast or anything?
Speaker 4: I did not, And I was kind of surprised that
Speaker 4: I did not, although Shane and I have had some
Speaker 4: additional background exchanges on Billy Saul and I mean, he
Speaker 4: knows him his grandfather, but he's not really familiar and
Speaker 4: and he knows he was a figure in Texas, but
Speaker 4: he's not familiar with a lot of the timeline, a
Speaker 4: lot of the details of his activities. So I'm gotten together.
Speaker 4: I managed to dig through my research notes back when
Speaker 4: you know, like twenty years ago, when this was a
Speaker 4: thing and when I was actually in communication with SD's
Speaker 4: and it's like okay, and so I'm going to copy
Speaker 4: some of that and get it off to him. That
Speaker 4: will help get him up to speed, because he's he's
Speaker 4: familiar with his grandfather, and he's certainly familiar with with
Speaker 4: the general problems his grandfather had and with relationship with
Speaker 4: Carter and Johnson. But I mean, if you really want
Speaker 4: to take this further and examine the issues, you know,
Speaker 4: why why was this recording made when it was made?
Speaker 4: When the when could the meeting have occurred? That that's
Speaker 4: described in there. Plus you have to add in what
Speaker 4: Billy saw ast he's actually had written in his own book,
Speaker 4: because he he commented on this subject twice. Well, he
Speaker 4: commented to me, and I have my notes, but I
Speaker 4: never wrote anything, but he did. He was interviewed by
Speaker 4: William Ramonde. We have copies of that interview transcript actually,
Speaker 4: and Ramon went on to make that into a book
Speaker 4: and said certain things that Billy Saw had told him.
Speaker 4: And then when that their agreement kind of came apart,
Speaker 4: and Estes did his own book. He had at a
Speaker 4: lot of details in there that he did not share
Speaker 4: with Ramond, and so there's a real mix of remarks
Speaker 4: in his in his own story about what e you
Speaker 4: win and Shane's going to have to to deal with that.
Speaker 4: So hopefully I can help him a bit there, because
Speaker 4: I had to wade through that all myself at one
Speaker 4: point in time, right.
Speaker 2: And I found it interesting that, you know, you presented
Speaker 2: me he reminded me of a book that I couldn't find,
Speaker 2: but I know I had a copy. I have a
Speaker 2: copy of it around here somewhere, but it's probably not
Speaker 2: at the front of my bookshelf anymore.
Speaker 3: Right, And it's.
Speaker 2: Kind of interesting because it was kind of a thing
Speaker 2: for a minute again, And I wonder if you wouldn't
Speaker 2: talk about that real fast, because you reminded me of this.
Speaker 3: Yeah, here we go. Active Treason is the name of
Speaker 3: the book. Yeah, go ahead.
Speaker 4: It's interesting because you wouldn't Active Treason was about Jay
Speaker 4: Edgar Hoover, and it was really an expose of Hoover
Speaker 4: and the illegal things that Hoover did, So you wouldn't
Speaker 4: really expect to find a detailed study of this of
Speaker 4: the SDS, of the of the murders and SDS, and
Speaker 4: his doings with the Johnson and and the you know,
Speaker 4: influence peddling.
Speaker 1: But it's in that book.
Speaker 4: I suspect because the FBI and the federal government did
Speaker 4: investigate STS and they investigated the scandals, which means they
Speaker 4: had to do a lot of digging into his connections
Speaker 4: to Yarborough, to Freeman, to Johnson to the Democratic National Committee. Well,
Speaker 4: I had that was in their investigation, and he just
Speaker 4: pulled it out and put it in a book, which
Speaker 4: is very handy.
Speaker 2: Yes, and I hate to cut into where you're talking here,
Speaker 2: but it does kind of make sense to me that
Speaker 2: this works out because if you remember a few years ago,
Speaker 2: there was a fairly popular series like they called it
Speaker 2: a documentary, but it wasn't. It was a compilation and
Speaker 2: they used footage and they did some creative things with
Speaker 2: the footage, and then they used all kinds of pieces
Speaker 2: of documentaries and they cut it all together and they
Speaker 2: called it Evidence of Revision.
Speaker 3: You ever see that online somewhere?
Speaker 1: No, I don't think I have.
Speaker 2: Well they have it in six parts now, But initially
Speaker 2: it was like jfk rfk MK Ultra and like, you know,
Speaker 2: and then they did a whole like section on Jim Jones.
Speaker 2: I forget what they called it, but you know, and
Speaker 2: they did a section on the you know, Kennedy assassination
Speaker 2: where it was like LBJ and j Edgar Hoover and
Speaker 2: he was part of the bridge, and they did this
Speaker 2: sort of series where again they cut stuff together, so
Speaker 2: it was like the relationship between LBJ and j Garoover
Speaker 2: because you know that was famously they were very friendly.
Speaker 2: You know, he was adversarial jay Gar Hooober to the Kennedys.
Speaker 2: But Johnson gets in there, he's his buddy. There were
Speaker 2: neighbors at one point. All this stuff right, So to
Speaker 2: me it makes perfect sense. And I remember seeing that
Speaker 2: years ago and saying that was a good encapsulation of
Speaker 2: a whole lot of literature that has sort of gone
Speaker 2: over this and Active Treason is probably one of the
Speaker 2: best collections where you could see this like he never
Speaker 2: states it out right in there, I think, but it's
Speaker 2: like it's very obvious that there is a collusion of
Speaker 2: sorts between the LBJ administration and jed Garhober right.
Speaker 3: Where jed Garhover is well protected all.
Speaker 2: The way into the Nixon administration when he finally dies, right,
Speaker 2: But maybe he wasn't so well protected while Kennedy was
Speaker 2: in office. And in fact, there was a whole school
Speaker 2: of thought well before you started writing on this, you know,
Speaker 2: through the Torbet document and all that, and I'm sure
Speaker 2: you went through that stuff at some point, right Larry,
Speaker 2: I mean.
Speaker 1: Oh, yes, yes.
Speaker 2: Where there was a collusion between you know, maybe the
Speaker 2: FBI was involved in the assassination. I don't buy that,
Speaker 2: you know, were they involved in a cover up? Clearly, obviously,
Speaker 2: but so was the whole of the federal government. It
Speaker 2: seemed like, you know what I mean. But anyway, enough
Speaker 2: of that. My point is that it does make sense
Speaker 2: that there is this weird place where law enforcement is
Speaker 2: swimming with the corrupt elements, and Jay gar Hoover has
Speaker 2: his own issues, and we know about cointelpro and all
Speaker 2: kinds of things going on here. Right, There's a lot
Speaker 2: of stuff happening. And when you look at the Billy
Speaker 2: Celestie stuff and you understand that that's the FBI, that
Speaker 2: you know, any of the LBJ stuff could have been
Speaker 2: happening under what was happening under you know what I mean,
Speaker 2: It kind of gives you a different lens. So it
Speaker 2: makes sense to go to something like this where you
Speaker 2: have to look at Jay Edgar Hoover to get an idea. Again,
Speaker 2: just like when we were talking to you know, to Shane,
Speaker 2: and it's like, look, you got to understand at the time,
Speaker 2: this was business being done. And sure some of it
Speaker 2: was shape and a lot and some of it was illegal,
Speaker 2: But is it really that bad compared to a lot
Speaker 2: of other things we learned about later, not necessarily some
Speaker 2: of it you know, it's it's not and you know,
Speaker 2: and again it's the misconceptions, right, because looking back at
Speaker 2: something is not the same as understanding the ecosystem in
Speaker 2: which it occurred. So that was important. Anyway, That's enough
Speaker 2: out of me. I just wanted to point that out.
Speaker 2: But I thought it was interesting that you pulled up
Speaker 2: this book that I kind of went, oh wow, yeah,
Speaker 2: I remember reading that and that was really interesting and useful.
Speaker 2: But did it make a case, you know, like, oh gee,
Speaker 2: now I have the uh, you know, the smoking gun
Speaker 2: in my hand about the assassination. No, you know, active treason.
Speaker 2: But it's an interesting read if you if you get
Speaker 2: a chance to pick it up used somewhere or whatever.
Speaker 2: I would I would not object to it, you know,
Speaker 2: I wouldn't. I wouldn't be like highly recommending it like
Speaker 2: I do your your book on Oswald. But but it
Speaker 2: is something that I would say, you know what, if
Speaker 2: you want to take the time to learn about that,
Speaker 2: please do right.
Speaker 3: Active Treason is a decent book. Mark North is the.
Speaker 6: Author so well.
Speaker 4: I think one of the things that brings out it's
Speaker 4: interesting because it really does highlight the influence peddling. I
Speaker 4: guess you would say, I mean, we haven't seen that
Speaker 4: with every administration. We didn't really even see it with
Speaker 4: the Kennedy administration at JFK's level. But with that Democratic administration,
Speaker 4: there was just just as one little slice here of
Speaker 4: how much influence peddling Johnson was doing. Of course, that's
Speaker 4: what Johnson was famous for. But I think Shane was
Speaker 4: perhaps surprised that, you know, he was wondering if his
Speaker 4: grandfather was as well positioned influential, if he had done
Speaker 4: all the things he claimed he'd done and in truth.
Speaker 4: By nineteen fifty eight, Billy saul ESTs was so entrenched
Speaker 4: with Ralph Yarborough that Yarborough was on record saying that
Speaker 4: he was actually asked to participate in a drive to
Speaker 4: run SD's for Texas governor, which might surprise a lot
Speaker 4: of people. It also documents the extent to which Johnson
Speaker 4: had essentially co opted the Agriculture Department and made the
Speaker 4: AGG Department available as a tool, and he was kind
Speaker 4: of farming out the AGG Department and Freeman. You know
Speaker 4: that there were people going along with this, bending.
Speaker 1: The rules a little bit.
Speaker 4: Henry Marshall, who got killed in the scandal, had approved
Speaker 4: some one hundred and thirty eight leases for SDS and
Speaker 4: there were lots of challenges to the leases at leases.
Speaker 1: Actually Yarborough had to go to Washington, d c.
Speaker 4: To testify for certain panels on ST's account, and so
Speaker 4: did Johnson. Johnson row that there were lots of controversies
Speaker 4: about these leases behind the scenes, and Marshall was whether
Speaker 4: he thought he was doing the right thing where there
Speaker 4: was walking the fence whatever. Marshall was quite aware that
Speaker 4: there were challenges and issues with a lot of these leases.
Speaker 4: But up until i mean through the Kennedy inauguration, you know,
Speaker 4: there's just a solid history of SD's having a great
Speaker 4: deal of influence on Johnson within the Kennedy administration, and
Speaker 4: you know the segments related to agriculture. Freeman supported SD's
Speaker 4: and some of these leases. So you can suddenly see
Speaker 4: when it hit the fan a couple of years later.
Speaker 4: This was we think of the Bobby Baker scandal as
Speaker 4: the scandal for Johnshnson. It was the second scandal. This
Speaker 4: scandal had the potential of being as hot and as
Speaker 4: damaging for Johnson as the Baker scandal would later. The
Speaker 4: interesting thing is that it got put to bed almost
Speaker 4: entirely by the death of Marshall. Once Marshall got killed,
Speaker 4: everything was fine. There were other murders, other deaths. None
Speaker 4: of those got exposed for years and years until a
Speaker 4: grand jury reinvestigated Marshall's death in the eighties. So everybody
Speaker 4: got away Scott free killing, killing Marshall and some of
Speaker 4: the other deaths really did take it off the plate.
Speaker 2: Now here's an interesting thing, because you said, did celesties
Speaker 2: do all the things?
Speaker 3: He claimed?
Speaker 2: I would temper that a little bit, and this is unusual.
Speaker 3: This is me tempering you. But the truth is all. Now,
Speaker 3: I wouldn't say all.
Speaker 2: All is not something that I would say you could
Speaker 2: reliably say that all the things he said he did
Speaker 2: is a good idea.
Speaker 4: Yeah, but I'm sorry I was talking politically. I mean,
Speaker 4: he bought he flew people to d C. Yeah, but
Speaker 4: even then this private plane, he hosted thousand plate dinners.
Speaker 1: But even there, Kennedy events, you know, those are the
Speaker 1: sorts of things he did.
Speaker 2: Right, But even there, I would still temper his claims
Speaker 2: against reality a little bit, because it seems as though
Speaker 2: they would evolve a bit. And I don't know if
Speaker 2: that's because he felt more comfortable because certain people had finally,
Speaker 2: you know, died, or you know, he didn't care because
Speaker 2: he's now old, or he's just you know, strategically, I
Speaker 2: don't know. I'm just saying that at any given moment,
Speaker 2: I wouldn't say that all of what he said is
Speaker 2: ever to be taken just at face value. I would
Speaker 2: say that a lot of the things, even the more
Speaker 2: extraordinary claims, are a little more true than less true.
Speaker 2: Like in other words, a lot of people just go, well,
Speaker 2: look he's con man, that's it. Don't even listen to him.
Speaker 2: I would never say that. I would say that a
Speaker 2: lot of his claims, even the more extraordinary, are to
Speaker 2: be taken seriously, a lot of them, the majority of them,
Speaker 2: even the ones that do seem to be like, well,
Speaker 2: how could you be involved in this?
Speaker 3: Yeah? He was.
Speaker 2: And that's part of the reality here, and that's why
Speaker 2: it's so hard to really sort out. I think, you know,
Speaker 2: because it wasn't known that, I mean, like a powerbroker
Speaker 2: like this, you know that exactly this guy is for
Speaker 2: years and years, and he would continue to influence things
Speaker 2: from administration to administration. But Billy Saul is a Johnson
Speaker 2: exclusive pretty much, right.
Speaker 4: Yeah, yeah, until well, let's put it this way, looking
Speaker 4: at my notes here in nineteen sixty one, and this
Speaker 4: is to show how much.
Speaker 1: Influence he had.
Speaker 4: Marshall gets killed, the Egg Department goes ahead with his investigation, okay,
Speaker 4: And in October of nineteen sixty one, this is months
Speaker 4: after Marshall is killed, they write one hundred and forty
Speaker 4: page internal report indicating there was no there's sds you know,
Speaker 4: did not do he didn't buy influence. His remark that
Speaker 4: he could get this thrown out by influencing people in
Speaker 4: the administration.
Speaker 1: Could not be supported.
Speaker 4: And in November nineteen sixty one, all of these people
Speaker 4: are attending Sam Rayburn's funeral, including Kennedy, Truman, Eisenhower, Johnson,
Speaker 4: and people like Cliff Carter, mac Wallace and Stes. You know,
Speaker 4: at that point in time after the Marshall killing, everybody
Speaker 4: is still free and clear. And that's what I was
Speaker 4: trying to really get across, is that he had contacts
Speaker 4: sufficient enough so that that did go away. Now, this
Speaker 4: has nothing to do with JFK and the tape about JFK,
Speaker 4: and you know that's a completely different story.
Speaker 2: No, but they mentioned Marshall on the tape, so it
Speaker 2: is significant to the tape that we listened to, you know,
Speaker 2: where it was like, oh, you know, and Henry Marshall
Speaker 2: got killed, you know, And I like the way it's
Speaker 2: so casual there where it's just like, you know, somebody
Speaker 2: just got killed, you know.
Speaker 3: And that's an odd.
Speaker 2: Phrase if you think about it. It's not like, well
Speaker 2: this person was murdered.
Speaker 3: It's just well, you know, they just got killed one
Speaker 3: way or another.
Speaker 2: I mean, you know, you could get killed driving around
Speaker 2: on a motorcycle and making a mistake, making a turn,
Speaker 2: you know what I mean, you could get killed that way.
Speaker 2: It almost seemed like that, right, I mean, it was weird.
Speaker 2: The attitude but then again, it was part of doing
Speaker 2: business apparently, you know, in this universe, so to.
Speaker 4: Speak, right in Johnson's universe, without a doubt. Yeah, but
Speaker 4: it even surprised me to think that they treated it
Speaker 4: casually enough. I mean, certainly you know everyone who And
Speaker 4: by the way, at this point in time, it's important
Speaker 4: for the timeline, the public was not aware of the scandal.
Speaker 4: The public wouldn't be aware of the scandal until later.
Speaker 1: That that's so at that point.
Speaker 4: In time, up until the you know, uh, for example,
Speaker 4: at the Kennedy administration's inaugural dinner, as Jesus buying one
Speaker 4: hundred seat tables at Johnson's section of the inauguration, and
Speaker 4: so this is all anything that happened if he, you know,
Speaker 4: assuming that he did tell Mac Johnson told Mac to
Speaker 4: kill Marshall, and that happened everything else, there's there's no
Speaker 4: public discord or no public impact that would come later.
Speaker 4: But up to that point in time, it's not really
Speaker 4: dangerous for these guys to be in each other's company.
Speaker 4: There's no reason they you know, can't talk with each other.
Speaker 4: Which I think it's important if we try to parse
Speaker 4: out the tape and say, is it possible that the
Speaker 4: tape is like does two different things, that the tape
Speaker 4: combines the Marshall killing and the SDS scandal related killings,
Speaker 4: and JFK was added on to it separately, because they
Speaker 4: are very much two different scandals and two different you know,
Speaker 4: sets of activities over like a.
Speaker 1: Three year period. You know, it didn't happen all at once.
Speaker 4: That there's no doubt in my mind that there was
Speaker 4: not a meeting where they sat down and initially discussed
Speaker 4: killing JFK along with Marshall. That doesn't make any sense
Speaker 4: from the timeline, right.
Speaker 3: Well, that's the interesting thing.
Speaker 2: I mean, look, it's all recorded far after according to
Speaker 2: the date that we understand here, right, So you know
Speaker 2: why mix these things together. They don't seem to really
Speaker 2: go together, except that some people would say, well, you
Speaker 2: know that's how he was able to control his thatituation
Speaker 2: is getting rid of JFK.
Speaker 3: Man.
Speaker 2: Nobody would investigate him, Bobby Kennedy wouldn't be going after him,
Speaker 2: The Justice Department wouldn't be going after anybody.
Speaker 4: Yeah, but the thing is, in nineteen sixty three he
Speaker 4: hit it all gone away, there was you know, I
Speaker 4: think that's what I'm trying to get through the timeline
Speaker 4: in nineteen sixty three, the danger to Lyndon Johnson was
Speaker 4: not the st scandal.
Speaker 1: It was the Baker scandal.
Speaker 4: Right when you get to nineteen seventy one, when this
Speaker 4: tape was made, there's an entirely other danger present. And
Speaker 4: I think Shane was right in that regard. We know
Speaker 4: that Johnson was descending into paranoia. You can go to
Speaker 4: his biographer, the young woman who's at the ranch with him.
Speaker 4: He's letting his hair go long. He's worried that people
Speaker 4: are trying to steal the ranch from him. He is
Speaker 4: descending into you know, he's becoming deconstructed. He left the
Speaker 4: present tency over the war and and you know, Macwallace dies,
Speaker 4: and then the tape is made.
Speaker 1: And I think there's a.
Speaker 4: Strong argument that can be made of whether right, wrong
Speaker 4: or indifferent. There certainly would be a motivate motivation for
Speaker 4: SD's and Carter to make a tape and let, you know,
Speaker 4: make copies and make Johnson aware of the fact that
Speaker 4: you know, whatever he might or might not have done
Speaker 4: to Macwallace, the darnwell better not do it to them.
Speaker 2: Well, there's that, and then there's the other issue where
Speaker 2: they could be dishing off things onto mac Wallace that
Speaker 2: don't belong on macwallis right.
Speaker 4: I would say that other than I think there's no
Speaker 4: time to deal with here. The case that Clint People's
Speaker 4: Texas Ranger Peoples made against Wallace and took to the
Speaker 4: grand jury.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean.
Speaker 4: It is rock solid against Wallace. I you might argue
Speaker 4: some of the other deaths that are mentioned in conjunction
Speaker 4: with it, the suicides, whatever, but there's a a very
Speaker 4: strong case that could be made that Wallace was indeed
Speaker 4: involved with the Marshall killing. That just there's a lot
Speaker 4: of secondary evidence there, and and quite frankly, while mac
Speaker 4: Wallace would be a really poor choice to just say,
Speaker 4: go kill the president, like that's sort of insane. Were
Speaker 4: your we're your skills and connections for that? Mac Wallace
Speaker 4: as a as someone who's killed Kinser, you know, who
Speaker 4: was in a relationship with Johnson's sister. Uh, that's a
Speaker 4: different type of crime that at least makes some sense. Well,
Speaker 4: you know that's kind of could you could depend on
Speaker 4: him for that, depending on him for killing the president?
Speaker 1: I still have a problem with.
Speaker 2: It's my mob argument all over again, which is, you
Speaker 2: know these guys would use pistols at close range to
Speaker 2: blow somebody's head off and put ten fifteen bullets in somebody.
Speaker 2: But trying to get him to shoot from a sniper's
Speaker 2: nest is a bad idea. Uh, you know, it's just
Speaker 2: that simple, right, Like mac Wallace, If you're sending him
Speaker 2: to go shoot somebody with a pistol or a rifle
Speaker 2: or anything at close range, just to gun somebody down
Speaker 2: face to face, then it makes sense.
Speaker 3: But yeah, to send Yeah.
Speaker 4: And in Marshall's case, in both cases, you're exactly that
Speaker 4: was that kind of crime. It was a close range
Speaker 4: it was you know, and in in Marshall's case, Marshall
Speaker 4: was strangle first, he was hitting the head, then.
Speaker 1: He was shot with it. This is like a clumsy
Speaker 1: close up killing.
Speaker 4: Nobody at the time could understand how how local law
Speaker 4: enforcement could buy the guy shooting himself multiple times in
Speaker 4: the stomach with a manual rifle.
Speaker 1: You know, you've got to.
Speaker 4: You've got to reach shoot yourself, retrigger a rechamber ashell,
Speaker 4: shoot yourself again.
Speaker 1: Yes, she do the same thing over and over.
Speaker 4: That's just insane, which is you know, no, obviously there
Speaker 4: was something fixed in that you know, it's just nobody
Speaker 4: could believe it well.
Speaker 2: And the remarkable thing to me when actually getting to
Speaker 2: look at some of the evidence was, how is it
Speaker 2: that you don't see that his head? I mean, what
Speaker 2: did he tried to kill himself first by bashing his
Speaker 2: own head up against the truck? I mean that's pretty
Speaker 2: wild because it's not like it's blood spatter from the gunshot.
Speaker 2: You know, it's clearly I mean, I don't see how
Speaker 2: anybody could have seen it as anything other than this
Speaker 2: guy's head was bashed up against the truck. In my mind,
Speaker 2: you know what I'm saying. Maybe you saw it differently,
Speaker 2: but I didn't know.
Speaker 4: That's and the strange thing and when the case was,
Speaker 4: when people took this and the grand jury reconsidered it,
Speaker 4: there was no doubt. So you know, it's like whoever
Speaker 4: looked at it first clearly was avoiding it. But when
Speaker 4: you looked at the actual evidence, you know, it was conclusive.
Speaker 1: There's just no doubt that it was not suicide.
Speaker 4: And by the way, it's important to remember that all
Speaker 4: of what we're talking about, yes from Billy saul SD's
Speaker 4: did not come out until that jet at grand jury case.
Speaker 4: That was when SDS surfaced all his remarks about having
Speaker 4: knowledge about having taps, and that was you know, that's
Speaker 4: not until nineteen eighty four, so it's important to keep
Speaker 4: that in mind. But yeah, when that was yeah, you're right, Jack, No,
Speaker 4: but there was not a clearly anybody that was looking
Speaker 4: at it where the situation was not fixed is.
Speaker 1: Going to see this is not suicide.
Speaker 2: Yeah, right, I mean, you know, and it's easy to
Speaker 2: bring up to think about the bull tax your rifle,
Speaker 2: but I mean, seriously, it's not just that, even if
Speaker 2: you could believe that by some miraculous coincidence, this guy
Speaker 2: really was that determined in recycling a rifle to keep
Speaker 2: shooting himself in the chest. Even if you could buy
Speaker 2: that somehow, there's more to it. Even that's just so
Speaker 2: ridiculous that obviously, And the one good thing he points
Speaker 2: out is that it did change the ruling with the
Speaker 2: insurance company for the family, you know, which.
Speaker 3: Was a good thing, right. I mean, you know, you got.
Speaker 2: To look at the positive and the negative results of
Speaker 2: what happened here, and then it's very reasonable to understand
Speaker 2: that if he couldn't come up with, look, give me immunity.
Speaker 2: Otherwise I'm not going any further, and he walked away.
Speaker 2: That's the kind of thing I hear about all the time,
Speaker 2: you know, in these cases where you know, they try
Speaker 2: to cut a deal and you can't clear somebody, they're
Speaker 2: not going to give you the testimony you want. And
Speaker 2: that happens all the time in courtrooms all over the country,
Speaker 2: you know, even in minor cases.
Speaker 1: Good, yeah, absolutely.
Speaker 2: So, all right, anyway, continuing on with the timeline though,
Speaker 2: I think it's interesting, and again I think it's great
Speaker 2: to go over this and try and keep it in context.
Speaker 2: So you know, I'm sorry I keep interrupting, but it's
Speaker 2: just some of the stuff is so obvious, you know
Speaker 2: that you gotta you gotta, you gotta make the points. Anyways,
Speaker 2: So what else would you say about this continuing forward?
Speaker 4: Well, I think again, this is where we can start
Speaker 4: parsing out at this point in time, we can parsing
Speaker 4: out the different statements that were made because during these
Speaker 4: grand jury hearings on the murder, Okay, that was when
Speaker 4: SDEs took the opportunity to bring him for self forth
Speaker 4: as a witness and talk about what he had in
Speaker 4: his possession. He had documents, he had many, many takes.
Speaker 1: Actually the letter.
Speaker 4: From his attorney to the grand jury talks about how
Speaker 4: I'm going to point to quote this. A short time
Speaker 4: after mister Estes was released from prison in nineteen seventy one,
Speaker 4: he met with Cliff Carter and they reminisced about matters Carter.
Speaker 4: Originally Carter himself had originally compiled a list of seventeen
Speaker 4: murders which have been committed, some of which mister Estes
Speaker 4: was familiar. A living witness was present and would be
Speaker 4: willing to testify about the conversation, and he names him
Speaker 4: as Kyle Brown. And then in this again letter to
Speaker 4: the Glenn jury, mister Estes states that Cliff Carter told
Speaker 4: them that mack Wallace had fired a shot from the
Speaker 4: Grassy Knoll in Dallas, which at JFK from the front.
Speaker 4: Mister Estes clears that Cliff Carter told him that on
Speaker 4: the day Kennedy was to be murdered, Fidelcaster was also
Speaker 4: supposed to be assassinated.
Speaker 1: Now how he would know that, I don't know.
Speaker 4: But then he goes on with some other remarks, but
Speaker 4: I thought it interesting at that point in nineteen eighty four,
Speaker 4: he is saying that Cliff Carter fired from the Grassy Knoll,
Speaker 4: which is the same thing that he told William Ramond.
Speaker 2: You meant to say mack Wallace. You meant to say
Speaker 2: mac Wallace by the way you said Cli Carter, but
Speaker 2: you meant to.
Speaker 1: Say he.
Speaker 4: Tell William Ramond in their interview, you know, twenty years
Speaker 4: or so later that it was basically the story was
Speaker 4: that mac Wallace had fired from the grassy Knoll, Lee
Speaker 4: Harvey Oswell had fired from the school book depository, Lee
Speaker 4: Harvey Oswell had been hired as a contract shooter by
Speaker 4: Jack Ruby. I mean, that was the basic story, and
Speaker 4: that is what he told Ramone, and that's what ended
Speaker 4: up in Ramone's book. Now, I will say that I
Speaker 4: had talked to SD's before that, and that was that's
Speaker 4: a bit different than what esd's was suggesting at that
Speaker 4: point in time. But I don't you know, Ramond published
Speaker 4: something so we can see what he was told, and
Speaker 4: that was in a personal interview. So you've got two
Speaker 4: statements that come out, one in an aficial shoal legal
Speaker 4: letter to the grand jury about Macwallace being a shooter
Speaker 4: from the front, Oswell's shooting from the rear, and then
Speaker 4: that's repeated again in two thousand and two. I think
Speaker 4: it is that is not at all the story that
Speaker 4: ultimately showed up in his own book, which ST's own
Speaker 4: book had a lot more details. It implied that he
Speaker 4: had for knowledge, It had implied that he had a
Speaker 4: lot of knowledge of a much more complex plot that
Speaker 4: involved Texas oil men, so on and so forth, that
Speaker 4: all came around later, which I think gets back to
Speaker 4: some of the point that you were talking about earlier,
Speaker 4: and that you know, I certainly wouldn't want to say that.
Speaker 4: You know, ST's story did evolve, and it did grow,
Speaker 4: and it certainly doesn't fit with the whole scenario of
Speaker 4: Macwallace's Prince being present in the Texas school book depository.
Speaker 4: That has kind of evolved over time, you know, with
Speaker 4: the whole fingerprint Oh yes, we can prove Johnson did
Speaker 4: it because Mike Wallace's prints were in the six floor
Speaker 4: window where the shooter was.
Speaker 3: See.
Speaker 2: Now, once again I point out something here that you
Speaker 2: know is unique to me usually, but if you look
Speaker 2: at what was available in the media in nineteen eighty four,
Speaker 2: generally publicly accessible, what was being discussed, and what changed
Speaker 2: in between those twenty almost twenty years later when the
Speaker 2: two thousand and two version comes out. Right of the story,
Speaker 2: there's a lot that happened here, including you know, the
Speaker 2: man who killed Kennedy, right the whole Johnson did it scenario,
Speaker 2: and a lot more awareness of the Texas oil men
Speaker 2: and all that stuff that was vaguely mentioned in the
Speaker 2: eighties but wasn't out there in great detail. So one
Speaker 2: could say that one way or another, for one purpose
Speaker 2: or another, even that Celesties could have borrowed some of
Speaker 2: what was publicly available and said, you know what, since
Speaker 2: the public knows about this and I have intimate knowledge
Speaker 2: of some of those characters, I'm going to adapt some
Speaker 2: of this into my story.
Speaker 3: To sell it better.
Speaker 2: You know, Because that was the point with the difference
Speaker 2: between the French journalist and him, is or the French
Speaker 2: author I should say in him is that you know what,
Speaker 2: he expected to make a lot of money off of
Speaker 2: that book and he didn't, right it was only published
Speaker 2: in France.
Speaker 1: He said, he said that, you know that was that
Speaker 1: was quite clear.
Speaker 4: He expected that that the French book was he expected
Speaker 4: to receive a really like a couple hundred thousand dollars
Speaker 4: out of that and that certainly did not happen, right.
Speaker 2: So maybe, in an effort to have a better selling book,
Speaker 2: even let's just go with that as an explanation, he
Speaker 2: could have added in things that were obviously public knowledge. Now,
Speaker 2: you know, it looks different when you write. And even
Speaker 2: if you think back to nineteen seventy one, the idea
Speaker 2: that Okay mack Wallace is shooting from the Grassy Knoll
Speaker 2: during that story, right during that time period, say in
Speaker 2: the Celesties timeline, that makes sense because that's just after
Speaker 2: people are just becoming aware of there might be a
Speaker 2: shooter on the knoll. They read rushed to judgment, they've
Speaker 2: heard from Mark Lane. He's tore it all over the place.
Speaker 2: Garrison Trials happened, Grassy Ol, Grassy Noole. Another shooter there
Speaker 2: is big enough that in seventy one it makes sense
Speaker 2: in that story. Now, trying to put him.
Speaker 3: On the Grassy Noll in eighty four, it's almost a
Speaker 3: joke in the media. So maybe, yeah, you see what
Speaker 3: I mean.
Speaker 4: Yeah, the real news in seventy one, everybody weren't Oh,
Speaker 4: there were two shooters, right, and there was a shot
Speaker 4: from the front. Now that's the real news. So if
Speaker 4: you can come up with the name for the shooter
Speaker 4: on the grassies. No, you've got a real story. You're
Speaker 4: absolutely true with that. That's two different stories. But later
Speaker 4: on it's like, Okay, wait a minute, you know now
Speaker 4: we don't think Oswald was a shooter.
Speaker 1: It's not just two shooters.
Speaker 4: It's kind of like, Okay, we need a more complex
Speaker 4: story than this, right, that's not enough to get any
Speaker 4: attention anymore.
Speaker 2: And also, people by then are definitely clearly saying how
Speaker 2: does Jack Ruby fit into this? A whole lot more,
Speaker 2: even though they were asking that question right away when
Speaker 2: he shot Oswald. But the thing is, that's an involved
Speaker 2: question in nineteen eighty four. It's not the same as
Speaker 2: it was in seventy one. That's my point about. You know,
Speaker 2: you can see the media's influence on some things people
Speaker 2: right when they claim to be a first hand witness.
Speaker 2: And it's not always for nefarious reasons, but sometimes it is,
Speaker 2: and sometimes it helps people completely invent things too. But
Speaker 2: I'm not saying Celestis is inventing everything. All I'm saying
Speaker 2: is it provides part of a spin and part of
Speaker 2: a reason why you see a spin and a change,
Speaker 2: and it's consistent through a lot of people's again, witness
Speaker 2: I'm holding up quotes. Witness accounts are often influenced by
Speaker 2: what is out there and publicly accessible, So you got
Speaker 2: to keep track of that when you're taking a look
Speaker 2: at when the story changes.
Speaker 3: I think so yeah.
Speaker 4: And in nineteen eighty four, I mean quite frankly, and
Speaker 4: you know, there was a point in time during the
Speaker 4: Marshall grand Jury and everything where murders in Texas were
Speaker 4: a national story, right, you know, Johnson and a lot
Speaker 4: of murders in Texas that all by itself, that's a
Speaker 4: national story. And I will say it's perfectly fair. The
Speaker 4: Justice Department contacted Billy Solilests about this.
Speaker 1: I mean, his.
Speaker 4: Information to the grand jury and his offering of information,
Speaker 4: including the fact that he wanted immunity and compensation for
Speaker 4: his materials, was a national news story.
Speaker 1: Justice became involved.
Speaker 4: Justice met with Billy Saul and was taking it seriously
Speaker 4: if he would hand over the evidence he claimed to have,
Speaker 4: and at the last minute he walked out on that
Speaker 4: meeting and nothing happened.
Speaker 1: But at that point in time, lots of murders in
Speaker 1: West Texas related to Lyndon Johnson and Billyoffs was a
Speaker 1: story in itself later on, twenty years later, Now the
Speaker 1: story is JFK.
Speaker 2: Right, because now we've been through this already. We've been
Speaker 2: through the oil men, We've been through the time when
Speaker 2: you know, Madeline Brown has been on Heraldo. Let's be honest, right,
Speaker 2: We've been through all this stuff already. So the public
Speaker 2: is not shocked anymore by Oh, well, Johnson was involved
Speaker 2: in all kinds of stuff, you know what I mean,
Speaker 2: you know, I mean except Caro in his books. I
Speaker 2: guess it would shock him. But other than that, you know,
Speaker 2: like we knew, okay, we knew, and we were still
Speaker 2: after what happened to JFK obviously so and he had
Speaker 2: to know that that was, you know, a big part
Speaker 2: of what was going to sell there. Anyway, the idea
Speaker 2: that there's more tapes, that's the other thing too. And
Speaker 2: I found it interesting the way Shane answered the question
Speaker 2: of like, you know, why now. I didn't interfere with
Speaker 2: his answer. I let him answer it exactly as he
Speaker 2: wanted to, you know. But anyway, it's an interesting point,
Speaker 2: and it's still a story and it's still something to
Speaker 2: be resolved. But anyway, please continue, you know, I don't
Speaker 2: want to interrupt you anymore.
Speaker 4: Here, but I think what's interesting is what we I
Speaker 4: think it's fascinating that things that were mysterious to me
Speaker 4: back at that time and dubious and debated, you know, like,
Speaker 4: did Estes have any tapes? Did that really happen? You know,
Speaker 4: how much did he tape? Did he get away with it?
Speaker 4: Did anybody make the remark that he claimed to make? Well,
Speaker 4: I think it's pretty safe now I had I had
Speaker 4: talked to people it said, oh yeah, I talked to.
Speaker 1: Somebody who heard it.
Speaker 7: You know.
Speaker 4: Yes, I think the question of whether or not tapes
Speaker 4: were made in even a lot of tapes. I mean,
Speaker 4: if if Shane really has a lot of tapes that
Speaker 4: talk about Johnson's crimes in Texas and Carter's you know,
Speaker 4: enabling them and that sort of thing, it's going to
Speaker 4: really be hard. You know, the next book on Lyndon
Speaker 4: Bangs Johnson is not going to be as pretty as
Speaker 4: Carol's books, right, you know. It's so there's a lot
Speaker 4: of history here to be had, and it certainly does
Speaker 4: confirm some of the things that were you know, is
Speaker 4: a question mark, you know, did Cliff Carter really say
Speaker 4: that are there lots of tapes?
Speaker 1: What else could have Lyndon Johnson?
Speaker 4: And is there is there's some Texas crime history that
Speaker 4: we don't know, And yeah, it might be in those takes.
Speaker 2: Right, And there could be an incredible amount of stuff
Speaker 2: there because look, in fairness to Shane Stevens, all right,
Speaker 2: and in Team Stevens and his website and his search
Speaker 2: for truth and everything. In fairness to him, he doesn't
Speaker 2: know all the details.
Speaker 3: He could be hearing. He could be.
Speaker 2: Hearing names and things that would jump out and me,
Speaker 2: you know, on other tapes that don't even really ring
Speaker 2: a bell with him, you know, or to other experts
Speaker 2: on this, people who are really deep into the Texas thing.
Speaker 2: I mean, in fairness, I mean you know more than
Speaker 2: I do. But again, there are people I would say,
Speaker 2: you know, like if you were to say, Okay, who's
Speaker 2: the best expert on this?
Speaker 3: I don't think you would select yourself first?
Speaker 1: Right, No, I would wouldn't write.
Speaker 4: And there are places in Texas, you know, and talking
Speaker 4: to Shane I should recommend him. You know, Texas Monthly.
Speaker 4: There are there Texas universities, Texas historians, Texas magazines that
Speaker 4: should be fascinated by what's in those other tapes, and
Speaker 4: they all be in a position to understand the names
Speaker 4: and places and what it really means. And as you say,
Speaker 4: I wouldn't be able to, but just just from what
Speaker 4: I've seen in my own notes, that would seem explosive.
Speaker 4: Knowing that those tapes exist, it's no longer a matter
Speaker 4: of are they exploded, it's how explosive are they? Because
Speaker 4: given his claims, if he did he'd tape the bulk
Speaker 4: of his calls related to Johnson and Carter and influence
Speaker 4: peddling in Texas for like four years, you can imagine
Speaker 4: what sort of stories that could generate.
Speaker 1: Well, and you say, the other monthly magazine should be
Speaker 1: talking to Shane exactly.
Speaker 2: And you know, here's the other scary thing is that
Speaker 2: somewhere in those tapes you could almost think, you know,
Speaker 2: because Johnson didn't die for a while, there could be
Speaker 2: a tape of Johnson saying God knows what to Billy
Speaker 2: Celesti's and he doesn't know he's being taped.
Speaker 4: You know what I and did say to the grand jury,
Speaker 4: he had tapes of his talks with Johnson, and it's
Speaker 4: clear and looking at his history he did meet with
Speaker 4: Johnson and they're actually in the book that we're talking
Speaker 4: about earlier, their quotes about specific telephone calls and so yeah,
Speaker 4: I there is no doubt that he had conversations with Johnson.
Speaker 4: And yeah, there, like I say, there there may well
Speaker 4: be another book in that series of.
Speaker 1: Johnson's career novels to come.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and it's and it's pretty wild.
Speaker 3: Who knows.
Speaker 2: And I'm just speculating here, but again, if the guy
Speaker 2: took the time to tape it, there could be all
Speaker 2: kinds of things on there, and like I said, they
Speaker 2: could mention stuff that really seems benign, you know, where
Speaker 2: they say, oh, you know, well there was Charlie in
Speaker 2: this group. Let's just say, well, you and I might
Speaker 2: know who Charlie is, but somebody else really knows who's
Speaker 2: connected to Charlie and that group, you know what I mean.
Speaker 2: Where it's like, wait a minute, I happen to know
Speaker 2: that he was a guy who was on you know,
Speaker 2: the Dixie Mafia phone tree, you know what I mean.
Speaker 3: And we don't know that necessarily.
Speaker 2: I'm just saying, uh, there's all kinds of possibilities here,
Speaker 2: and I'll tell you why. I leave it wide open
Speaker 2: with this speculation because every time I've visited with somebody
Speaker 2: from Texas, you ever notice that everybody's related to somebody
Speaker 2: And it's like you talk to Gail Knicks jack like, seriously,
Speaker 2: Gail Nick Jackson is one of the most fun people
Speaker 2: to talk to like this, but when you talk to her, right,
Speaker 2: it's like she runs into somebody who's related to somebody else,
Speaker 2: Like you don't you know, you figure, well, they just
Speaker 2: happened to go to Jack Ruby's club one time, but
Speaker 2: that's not all they're connected to. They actually knew at
Speaker 2: the bartender who was actually related to three of the cops.
Speaker 3: Who you know what I mean.
Speaker 2: Like in Texas, it seems like everybody's somebody's cousin, and
Speaker 2: they got plenty of family stories, and they got plenty
Speaker 2: of things where little bits of evidence, family secrets went on.
Speaker 2: All kinds of things go on, and it's wild. So
Speaker 2: you know, I don't claim to know what that ecosystem is.
Speaker 2: I'm not in it, neither of you, even though we've
Speaker 2: touched it. We've talked to some of those people, right,
Speaker 2: but it doesn't mean that we were intimately involved with it.
Speaker 2: There's a whole world of stuff there that again, like
Speaker 2: you said, could reveal Texas history, could reveal LBJ history.
Speaker 2: You know, a very uh uh, you know, rejected wing
Speaker 2: of the Johnson Library, the Johnson Presidential Library, a whole
Speaker 2: set of recordings that they claim they don't have, you know,
Speaker 2: that somebody disposed of years ago. Maybe, And Billy Saul
Speaker 2: has the other end of that conversation, you know what
Speaker 2: I mean, there's a whole possibility.
Speaker 4: Here, and even for national history, as much as I
Speaker 4: say it, it's sort of like there seemed to be
Speaker 4: pretty good evidence of the amount of contributions that SD's
Speaker 4: was actually making, not just to Johnson, but to the
Speaker 4: d n C. Right, you know, there's a lot of
Speaker 4: political history there also is. If this money was coming
Speaker 4: out of Texas from SD's that essentially jump started the DNC,
Speaker 4: which later jump started the RNs. You know, is our
Speaker 4: whole national political campaigns system of funding?
Speaker 1: Packs? Actually? Did it?
Speaker 4: Did it originate out of these scandals in Texas?
Speaker 1: Didn't make a great history book?
Speaker 3: Did it?
Speaker 5: Really?
Speaker 3: You know?
Speaker 2: Is your legitimate political world really based on organized crime?
Speaker 3: You know, because that's what this is. Okay, So the last.
Speaker 2: Thing I want to ask you, and then and then
Speaker 2: you know, wrap this up any which way you want
Speaker 2: after or you know or don't.
Speaker 3: If you want to continue.
Speaker 2: To elaborate, that's fine, But I think we're we're probably
Speaker 2: well through it. But the thing is, even if this
Speaker 2: doesn't significantly change what we know about the Kennedy assassination,
Speaker 2: if this was a strategic discussion meant to be held
Speaker 2: over somebody else's head, if this was recorded for other purposes,
Speaker 2: right to protect them from something that they knew they
Speaker 2: were vulnerable to, If this was god knows what this
Speaker 2: could have been, you know, for all sorts of different reasons.
Speaker 2: We don't necessarily know, because we can't cross examine the
Speaker 2: two most prominent voices on the tape, which, by the way,
Speaker 2: I hear somebody in the background there.
Speaker 3: I don't know if you do, but you do.
Speaker 4: Absolutely, Yeah, yeah, there are other people, just as he claimed,
Speaker 4: apparently in Chain says these are two of his relatives,
Speaker 4: you know, of ST's relatives.
Speaker 1: So yeah, there are other people listening to.
Speaker 2: This, Oh absolutely, I mean, and I hear them on
Speaker 2: the tape again, you know, And I don't know if
Speaker 2: anybody else noticed it, but I know that you would
Speaker 2: because you actually pay attention to audio but one run
Speaker 2: through and I already knew. And even with all the noise,
Speaker 2: the clip that was on the internet and the music
Speaker 2: under it and all that other stuff, I could hear
Speaker 2: people in the background. I'm going, oh, you know, this
Speaker 2: is not one witness talking to one other witness. This
Speaker 2: is more than that. And he claimed that, by the way,
Speaker 2: about his tapes, he said there were other people that
Speaker 2: had heard this go on, and the way he made
Speaker 2: it sound is it wasn't I played a tape for
Speaker 2: somebody later although he did say that too, didn't he
Speaker 2: where he had played tapes.
Speaker 1: From the Yes, yeah he did.
Speaker 3: But anyway, even if.
Speaker 2: This doesn't dramatically or significantly change anything regarding the solutions
Speaker 2: so to speak, for lack of a better word, on
Speaker 2: the JFK assassination, there are significant additions to a lot
Speaker 2: of history that can be made here. But do you
Speaker 2: think it could significantly change what we know about the
Speaker 2: solution on the Kennedy assassination in general? Other tapes, this tape, whatever,
Speaker 2: or you know, or really where I'm kind of starting
Speaker 2: to come down on it is that we got a
Speaker 2: hell of a lot of other history to get into here,
Speaker 2: and there's a lot of details that could be gleaned
Speaker 2: from people that are in the know regarding that ecosystem, again,
Speaker 2: regarding the inside story from the insiders and people that
Speaker 2: would be fully familiar with how that worked and everything
Speaker 2: that would have went on, and all the players could
Speaker 2: learn a great deal from access to these tapes. And
Speaker 2: like you said, you know Texas Monthly ought to be
Speaker 2: talking to Shane, But what are your thoughts on that
Speaker 2: of regarding the Kennedy assassination. And I mean, obviously I
Speaker 2: think you agree with me that there's a lot of
Speaker 2: other history that can be unlocked here, But what do
Speaker 2: you think about the Kennedy sem.
Speaker 4: Yeah, I think first of all, I hopefully Change will
Speaker 4: understand that these tapes are key to a lot of history,
Speaker 4: both Texas history and national history. Yes, that of that
Speaker 4: period that's really significant. Then he may not realize there
Speaker 4: are probably books to be written from this. I'm not
Speaker 4: gonna write one, but there are books and stories to
Speaker 4: be written from this if those other tapes exist about
Speaker 4: American politics, because this is a seminal period for American politics. Johnson,
Speaker 4: it's not just Johnson was there before Kennedy. Johnson was
Speaker 4: there with Kennedy and Johnson was there after Kennedy. If
Speaker 4: Johnson is this corrupt, if he was corrupt enough to participate.
Speaker 1: In the st scandals, if he was.
Speaker 4: Corrupt enough to participate in the Baker scandals, what can
Speaker 4: we say about the rest of his You know, what
Speaker 4: about the Gulf of Tonkin?
Speaker 1: Did he lie about that? It looks like he did.
Speaker 4: Yeah, what about you know, there's there's a real historical
Speaker 4: revisit to Lyndon Johnson if he's really as corrupt, fundamentally
Speaker 4: corrupt as these tapes could set him up to be.
Speaker 4: So that's a that's a big story, your respective.
Speaker 2: You know, something you just brought up here is something
Speaker 2: I was thinking during that interview several times, and I
Speaker 2: did not bring it up because I didn't want to
Speaker 2: confuse and I realized that Shane is not like an
Speaker 2: expert historian on this, you know what I mean. But
Speaker 2: I was thinking to myself, I wonder, if we take
Speaker 2: a look back in nineteen sixty four and excuse me,
Speaker 2: what's occurring during the Gulf of Tonkin incident? You know,
Speaker 2: is it possible we have a wag the dog situation
Speaker 2: that we don't know about, uh, you know, regarding the
Speaker 2: escalation into Vietnam.
Speaker 3: Is it not just simply well to move?
Speaker 2: You know, the whole concept military industrial complex basically pushes
Speaker 2: Johnson into it. They want a war, he wants a war.
Speaker 2: Is it possible we have a Hey, look, something else
Speaker 2: could blow up if I don't turn attention to this
Speaker 2: kind of situation. Yeah, I mean I was thinking that
Speaker 2: during that interview, and I'm saying to myself, you know,
Speaker 2: you could have some answers on one of these tapes
Speaker 2: about sixty four and you don't know it, you know
Speaker 2: what I mean?
Speaker 1: Yeah? Yeah, Let's take something as simple as let's.
Speaker 4: Say that jayegg Or Hoover, who's a smart guy but
Speaker 4: also a guy who goes along to get along, knows
Speaker 4: that there are things that Johnson is covering up, knows
Speaker 4: that Johnson had a reason to cover up the Kennedy assassination,
Speaker 4: knows that john that Johnson has other dirty laundry. What
Speaker 4: are the implications for American politics? You know what, what
Speaker 4: if people suspected what we now have good reason to suspect,
Speaker 4: and that Johnson is willing to cover up murders of
Speaker 4: any scale, right, you know what? What does that say
Speaker 4: about the stories that we have of him, uh, you know,
Speaker 4: being essentially told, yeah, Kennedy's going to be out of
Speaker 4: the way.
Speaker 1: Just make sure you're you'll be good.
Speaker 4: You know, the the Baker's scandal is not going to
Speaker 4: kill you and just you know, playball with us. You know,
Speaker 4: there are some real huge historical implications here, uh, irrespective,
Speaker 4: you know, if just this part of Johnson being part
Speaker 4: of a campaign that eliminates Henry Wallace and Johnson knows
Speaker 4: about it, Yeah, there's just some huge historical implications here.
Speaker 4: So I think that's absolutely one thing that that's maybe
Speaker 4: I won't say it's bigger than the Kennedy assassination, but
Speaker 4: it's on a par as far as national history is concerned.
Speaker 4: If you have a president in office that has this
Speaker 4: kind of background and people know about it, how how
Speaker 4: does that you know, does he any event?
Speaker 1: So that's one thing.
Speaker 4: But I think the other thing that comes along with
Speaker 4: this is that just and it brings real doubt if
Speaker 4: if Johnson was willing to involve himself in covering up
Speaker 4: the the kins Er murder, if Johnson really was involved
Speaker 4: himself in covering up the you know, murder of an
Speaker 4: ag agent, Marshall, would not Johnson argument, you know, be
Speaker 4: made that, Yeah, he's willing to sell out and cover
Speaker 4: up the Kennedy assass nation. Sure, anything that benefits him,
Speaker 4: he's willing to. Maybe he doesn't, you know, initiate things,
Speaker 4: but he's willing to go along. That's that's pretty damaging
Speaker 4: to his history too.
Speaker 1: So yeah, there are a lot of historical implications here that.
Speaker 4: That that may not that may be in those other tapes,
Speaker 4: not just the Kennedy thing. You know, how how complicit
Speaker 4: and how how how easy is it to get Johnson
Speaker 4: to go along?
Speaker 1: You know, is he willing to?
Speaker 3: Yeah?
Speaker 2: I mean services right, I'll give you a quick, quick
Speaker 2: hypothetical too, just to throw it in here, and and
Speaker 2: you know, to get people thinking Brown and Root is
Speaker 2: involved in you know, all kinds of construction stuff related
Speaker 2: to Vietnam.
Speaker 3: We know this, right, So here's the deal.
Speaker 2: What if Brown you know, the Texas part of that
Speaker 2: thing which later on you know it's folded into Haliburton. Right,
Speaker 2: But anyway, what about if they just have that leverage?
Speaker 2: You know, is that not a part of the story here?
Speaker 3: Maybe?
Speaker 2: Right?
Speaker 3: Why is it that Brown and Root ends up with
Speaker 3: that contract?
Speaker 2: Well, maybe it's not us that it was a Texas
Speaker 2: based company and you know George Brown, well maybe they.
Speaker 3: Had a little leverage. How about that?
Speaker 4: You know, that would change if anybody that knows Johnson
Speaker 4: will play is a player, you know, maybe not doer,
Speaker 4: but a player. Yeah, that that makes him accessible. I
Speaker 4: there's there's a story here that goes along with the
Speaker 4: Kennedy assassination. I suspect and it may be in the
Speaker 4: other tapes that that exists that that may not seem
Speaker 4: all that meaningful at the moment, But what in the
Speaker 4: world they could tell us about Texas politics and national
Speaker 4: politics is another story in itself.
Speaker 3: Exactly exactly.
Speaker 2: So would that be your final word on this, you think?
Speaker 2: I mean, that's a pretty good way to close down.
Speaker 4: There may be a more of a story here than
Speaker 4: simply whether or not the story that that.
Speaker 1: There.
Speaker 4: You know, the shooter from the Knowle and Lee Harvey oswell,
Speaker 4: we're both somehow contracted by Johnson's you know, political associate
Speaker 4: is a story. Yes, but yeah, that's may not be
Speaker 4: the only thing to discuss here, and eed of it
Speaker 4: if that's not true, there's a lot to uncover her
Speaker 4: about American history, right, There's.
Speaker 2: A whole lot of details left to be revealed here,
Speaker 2: and boy they're not pretty, but you know, reality often
Speaker 2: is not. Anyway, if you go over to larrydsh Handcock
Speaker 2: dot com and you follow Larry's blog, I think this
Speaker 2: is a good way to close out and really put
Speaker 2: a you know, an addendum to that discussion that we had,
Speaker 2: which I thought was a fair one.
Speaker 3: And I was really happy to have Shane on.
Speaker 2: And I'd love to have Shane on again, especially if
Speaker 2: he wants to, you know, reveal some more tape. But
Speaker 2: I would probably just have mon to discuss things again,
Speaker 2: even you know, not necessarily right away, but as he
Speaker 2: goes through and learns a little more and gets out
Speaker 2: a few more things. I love to hear what he's learned,
Speaker 2: you know, and what he sees in what he has
Speaker 2: even uh, And it's been a great trip with you.
Speaker 2: I know you were a little reluctant to get into.
Speaker 3: This at first, because you were like, oh, god, you
Speaker 3: know I've.
Speaker 1: Been here before. Wait a minute, did I not do
Speaker 1: this before?
Speaker 4: Hold on, it's what can I possibly did I throw
Speaker 4: all that stuff away or not?
Speaker 1: Turns out I didn't.
Speaker 2: Although we don't enjoy The Godfather Part three so much,
Speaker 2: everybody loves that line.
Speaker 7: You know.
Speaker 6: I try to get out, they pulled me back in.
Speaker 3: And this keeps happening to Larry. And I'm sorry, Larry.
Speaker 1: But that's pretty accurate actually in this case.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 2: And the sad thing is, look, I I almost feel guilty,
Speaker 2: like saying to you, Look, somebody's got to do this, Larry,
Speaker 2: And then somebody else told you basically the same thing,
Speaker 2: and you kind of went cramp.
Speaker 3: I have to do this because I.
Speaker 7: Did.
Speaker 1: I keep it.
Speaker 4: It's called out in the garage where the file cabinets are.
Speaker 2: But see, that's the amazing thing is that you don't
Speaker 2: even realize its necessarily that leads you chase down stuff
Speaker 2: that you chase down just to be able to write
Speaker 2: something or just to you know, close out you know,
Speaker 2: some issue or whatever in the past. Sometimes this stuff
Speaker 2: comes back up because a new piece of evidence emerges
Speaker 2: and nobody knows how to deal with it.
Speaker 3: You know, everybody was running around.
Speaker 2: With this, Oh this is sensational look at this, and
Speaker 2: I'm like, oh no, because we have to put this
Speaker 2: in context, you know.
Speaker 3: And sorry, but that's always the word I think of
Speaker 3: with you.
Speaker 2: So Larry Dashancock dot com check out his blog. Of
Speaker 2: course I recommend every one of his books, and the
Speaker 2: most recent one is The Oswald Puzzle. Anything you want
Speaker 2: to say in closing Larry at all.
Speaker 1: No, I think that pretty well covers it.
Speaker 4: I think I will like this is this is revisiting
Speaker 4: my pastor revisiting a story. I hope to to be
Speaker 4: able to help, you know, help him any further with
Speaker 4: this if he needs some assistance. So we are you know,
Speaker 4: I am providing him some of my notes and this
Speaker 4: sort of thing that we just talked about, and he
Speaker 4: can take it forward. But yeah, I sort of hope
Speaker 4: to go back to whatever it was I was working
Speaker 4: on before we got into this, were my notes?
Speaker 1: What was I doing?
Speaker 3: That's the thing, you know.
Speaker 2: And Larry has worked on UFO's National security state stuff,
Speaker 2: historical information comparisons. I mean, you know, you take a
Speaker 2: look at books like Surprise Tax, Shadow Warfare. He's co
Speaker 2: authored with some very interesting people, not just David Boylen
Speaker 2: on the recent book, but of course Stu Wexler, who
Speaker 2: is a guy I really wish I had more conversations with,
Speaker 2: and Miss Stu Wexler just quick shout out to you,
Speaker 2: and you know a lot of other people, and plus
Speaker 2: you know it's good. I guess you'll you'll still be
Speaker 2: volunteering to run say the Facebook group for lancer to
Speaker 2: this coming year. Is that what you're going to do
Speaker 2: or oh.
Speaker 4: Yeah, I still intend to do that. And of course,
Speaker 4: right at the moment, we are, we're really several of
Speaker 4: us are really actively engaged in trying to get across
Speaker 4: to the current administrations you know, document release commitment, you know,
Speaker 4: to the DNI, to the Congress people. You know, you
Speaker 4: guys want to release documents, you really should get some
Speaker 4: advice on where to look and what to get out.
Speaker 4: You know, don't don't start from scratch. So that's still
Speaker 4: a major major commitment at the moment, is to try
Speaker 4: to get some documents released if they're really serious about that.
Speaker 4: And supposedly the White House has had the plan for
Speaker 4: the JFK release for about a week now, I think
Speaker 4: at least, and we've heard nothing about it.
Speaker 2: Well, and that's the thing, look, just to get something straight.
Speaker 2: The reason why I'm not commenting on it very much
Speaker 2: is because I know that there are people that are
Speaker 2: responsible actively reaching out through the channels they have to,
Speaker 2: people like Tulsa Gabbard okay, and other people in the
Speaker 2: administration to try and get them to understand that. You know, listen,
Speaker 2: you can talk about you want to release everything, but
Speaker 2: you don't know what everything is. So we're willing to
Speaker 2: offer you for nothing, are you know, advice, let's say,
Speaker 2: And it's advice because we've been through this for decades already,
Speaker 2: and we'd like to show you what it is you
Speaker 2: really need to be getting after, which I think they
Speaker 2: would be smart to take. But that's still a work
Speaker 2: in progress. So I'm not commenting on it because I know,
Speaker 2: you know, Jeff Morley's obvious out there trying to you know,
Speaker 2: make statements to people and communicate, but there are others
Speaker 2: behind the scenes, not seeking any sort of publicity, just
Speaker 2: seeking to advise the Trump administration. And if they take
Speaker 2: it seriously and they do something productive with it, credit
Speaker 2: where credits?
Speaker 3: Do you know?
Speaker 2: I I So, I don't want to even make a
Speaker 2: remark about it just yet, except that I maintain my
Speaker 2: skepticism because the administrations in recent years have not been cooperative, okay,
Speaker 2: and that's including the first Trump administration. So that's the
Speaker 2: only comment I have on it, is, you know, hold
Speaker 2: off on celebrating or stating that we're not going to
Speaker 2: get anything. There's no definitive answer until we actually see
Speaker 2: what they're gonna do. That's that's where I'm at. Okay,
Speaker 2: I mean, do you think that's responsible.
Speaker 1: To keep asking me daily what have you seen?
Speaker 7: And they do?
Speaker 1: Documents?
Speaker 4: No, nothing, because we have none yet. Everybody I talk to, friends, family,
Speaker 4: everyone seems to think that we suddenly got them last
Speaker 4: week or something, and I like, no, we didn't.
Speaker 1: Honest, you misunderstood.
Speaker 3: Oh that's a funny.
Speaker 2: Let me share a quick story with you and then
Speaker 2: we'll get out of here and we'll shut off the
Speaker 2: recorder here because I've now taken you over the hour
Speaker 2: and I didn't mean to, but just really fast. A
Speaker 2: guy who delivers stuff to my house fairly regularly, right
Speaker 2: he you know, because I don't drive, so therefore you
Speaker 2: realize I use utilized services where people deliver things to
Speaker 2: the house. The guy I answered the door took something
Speaker 2: from him and he's just like, oh, what do you
Speaker 2: think of the new JFK documents? You know, because if
Speaker 2: you know me at all, you know that I'm interested
Speaker 2: in the subject. Right, So I'm like, there aren't any yet,
Speaker 2: well yeah, but and I'm like, yeah, I know, you
Speaker 2: read the headline.
Speaker 3: You understand. You read the headline.
Speaker 2: It doesn't mean anything happened yet because the EXE, you know,
Speaker 2: an executive order came out. If you read the executive order,
Speaker 2: I'm maintaining my skepticism. And I have to explain that
Speaker 2: to a delivery guy who thinks that something has happened.
Speaker 3: See, that's the thing. They don't read. A lot of
Speaker 3: people don't read. I'm sorry, you're good, Larry.
Speaker 1: You know, but it's like a daily occurrence. So what
Speaker 1: am I doing?
Speaker 4: That comes up with any any time I talk to
Speaker 4: somebody else at disappoint in time that seems to be
Speaker 4: they all know I do this. So that's a reasonal question,
Speaker 4: So what have we learned? It's like, well, I've learned.
Speaker 1: We're waiting.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I don't know if you have delivery guys come
Speaker 2: to your house. But if you did, and they knew
Speaker 2: you at all, this would have happened to you already.
Speaker 2: I'm just saying, oh yeah, yeah, Like if you have
Speaker 2: a service person that comes you, like, let's just say
Speaker 2: somebody cuts your grass.
Speaker 3: I don't know what goes on at your house, Larry,
Speaker 3: I never dig into that.
Speaker 2: But the thing is, if you have somebody who regularly
Speaker 2: comes to your house and just kind of knows you,
Speaker 2: they asked you this question, you know, and especially if
Speaker 2: they are Trump's, they're like.
Speaker 3: Oh, look good something, he did it.
Speaker 2: He did it, and it's like, no, it's not done yet.
Speaker 2: I'm not anti anything, I'm not. I'm just telling you
Speaker 2: the reality is nothing has happened yet.
Speaker 3: We're waiting to see what happens. And you are, too,
Speaker 3: believe it or.
Speaker 1: Not so eagerly waiting with bated breath as it were.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean it does, it does, just so happen.
Speaker 2: I know that there are people actively trying to influence
Speaker 2: you know, please look in all the places you need
Speaker 2: to look, and and you would agree with me on that, right.
Speaker 4: Oh yeah, there are lots of good intentions, lots of
Speaker 4: you know, we just at this point, I don't know,
Speaker 4: you know.
Speaker 3: You don't know how that's working.
Speaker 4: We know the good news is, and that's what I
Speaker 4: told somebody that just kind of like we know where
Speaker 4: to look and we know what to look for, and
Speaker 4: we know what's not going to be handed off unless
Speaker 4: somebody asks for it, right, So unless they ask our advice,
Speaker 4: they're probably not going to get what they need to
Speaker 4: be getting.
Speaker 2: Exactly, and that's where I'm going to leave it, you know,
Speaker 2: and we have to wait and see he stay tuned
Speaker 2: so to speak right, and again, stay tuned to Larry's
Speaker 2: blog over there, because you know what the moment it
Speaker 2: does happen, I'm sure you'll see a blog from Larry.
Speaker 2: You'll hear them on this show, you'll hear them in
Speaker 2: other places, talk about what happened, what came out, what didn't,
Speaker 2: et cetera. But that's where you're gonna get an informed
Speaker 2: look continuously because you are going to blog on this
Speaker 2: and talk about it when something happens.
Speaker 1: Yes, oh absolutely yeah.
Speaker 2: So Larrydashancock dot com go over there. And like I said,
Speaker 2: if you don't own all of Larry's books, what are
Speaker 2: you doing. You've got to have as many books on
Speaker 2: your shelf as I do, even if.
Speaker 3: It's a digital shelf. Go get it.
Speaker 2: And the oswall puzzle. I'll have links to all that,
Speaker 2: And I'm gonna repeat Shane's links in the show notes
Speaker 2: here just so you can go to his website hear
Speaker 2: the tape. Maybe I'll put the last podcast, although it'll
Speaker 2: be easy to find on the feed with Shane and everything.
Speaker 2: Follow up and study this for yourself and make up
Speaker 2: your own mind. Larry, thanks again for doing this with me.
Speaker 1: It's great to be back. We'll see in a couple
Speaker 1: of weeks. Exactly, it'll be warmer in a couple of weeks.
Speaker 3: Who knows, we might have something else to talk about. Anyway,
Speaker 3: We'll see how it goes. I am merely o'celly.
Speaker 2: All of you are indeed the effect.
Speaker 6: Revelation through conversation.
Speaker 8: Yo yo, This Doug Campbell, host of the Dallas Action
Speaker 8: podcast presented by Wall Street Window, and you are listening
Speaker 8: to the o'chill effect revelation through conversation.
Speaker 9: Go ahead, calin, I'm interested in the truth about the
Speaker 9: JAFA assassination.
Speaker 3: Right. Well, what do you want to know Judy.
Speaker 1: Baker's wild claim Oswald girlfriends he knew?
Speaker 2: Ruby and Barrie answer weapons?
Speaker 1: Really?
Speaker 2: I imagine I could claim I have four wheels. It
Speaker 2: doesn't make me a wagon.
Speaker 3: But okay, Oswald was on the building and trying to
Speaker 3: prevent the murder of John Kennedy.
Speaker 1: Come on now, has a real effort on the Dafay assassination.
Speaker 6: Book into her claim.
Speaker 2: Go to Amazon dot com enter Judith Baker in her
Speaker 2: own words. You'll get the results for a digital copy
Speaker 2: of a book where Walt Brown utilizes her own words
Speaker 2: and the known evidence in the case to get at
Speaker 2: well a different perspective. Let's say you can get Judithbary
Speaker 2: Baker in her own words from the author himself, signed
Speaker 2: if you request it by contacting doctor Brown at kias
Speaker 2: jfk at aol dot com. It's a fun book and
Speaker 2: it actually dissects the many, many fantastic claims.
Speaker 3: Judith Vary Baker in her own words. Thank you Information
Speaker 3: dot Com Radio Network.
Speaker 6: Do you like history? Real history that you were never
Speaker 6: taught in schools? Why the Vietnam War Nuclear Bombs in
Speaker 6: nation Building in Southeast Asia by author Mike Swanson, with
Speaker 6: new documentation never seen before that'll open your eyes to
Speaker 6: events that led up to this. Why the Vietnam War
Speaker 6: Nuclear Bombs in Nation Building in Southeast Asia nineteen forty
Speaker 6: five through nineteen sixty one. Get your copy today at
Speaker 6: Amazon dot com. Why the Vietnam War by author Mike Swanson.
Speaker 7: The War State by Michael Swantson explains the great national
Speaker 7: transformation that took place and put the Kennedy presidency in
Speaker 7: the context of the Times and reveals never before published
Speaker 7: information about the Cuban missile crisis. President Kennedy would not
Speaker 7: have been assassinated if he had been president two hundred
Speaker 7: years ago. His assassination took place in the context of
Speaker 7: the Cold War and the rise of the national security state.
Speaker 7: Before World War II, the United States was a continental republic.
Speaker 7: In the decade that followed, it became an imperial superpower.
Speaker 7: Generals such as Curtis LeMay not only wanted to invade Cuba,
Speaker 7: but knew that there were short range missiles on the
Speaker 7: island arn't with nuclear warheads that they could not destroy
Speaker 7: because they were on mobile launchers. Their invasion could have
Speaker 7: led to a Third World War, and they wanted to
Speaker 7: go to war anyway. The War State by Michael Swanson
Speaker 7: reveals why and will show you what President Kennedy was
Speaker 7: up against. For more information, the Warstate dot Com.
Speaker 9: In Denial Secret Wars with air strikes and Tanks by
Speaker 9: Larry Hancock. Secret wars became a staple of US covert
Speaker 9: operations and are still happening today. Larryhancock's book In Denial
Speaker 9: rips the cover off many of them using new files.
Speaker 9: It exposes things about the Bay of Pigs that no
Speaker 9: one has ever written about before. It shows why it
Speaker 9: really failed and why the United States did.
Speaker 5: Not learn from it. It also shows why other countries
Speaker 5: today are doing secret operations with more success. This is
Speaker 5: the book that puts what some want to deny into
Speaker 5: the light. In Denial secret wars with air strikes and
Speaker 5: tanks Larryhncock. For more information, go to Larry hyphen Hancock
Speaker 5: dot com. Pick up your copy of In Denial at
Speaker 5: Amazon dot com in digital or physical
Speaker 6: Flow, Chili dot com, sh