Oswald: No power lunch

[Jack Nessan]

Translation of Mr Nessan's verbiage above: I don't have a substantive rebuttal re. Mr Molina and Ms Davis, so I'm going to try to gaslight with more nonsense.

Renewed challenge to Mr Nessan! Kindly quote actual statements from Mr Molina and Ms Davis supportive of your timeline putting Ms Adams' arrival at the front entrance 5+ minutes after the assassination

Gaslighting? No I do not think so.
 
: to psychologically manipulate (a person) usually over an extended period of time so that the victim questions the validity of their own thoughts, perception of reality, or memories and experiences confusion, loss of confidence and self-esteem, and doubts concerning their own emotional or mental stability : to subject (someone) to gaslighting"

You are most definitely weak minded and easily manipulated if you think this is gaslighting. These are simple statements by the witnesses and should do you no harm. If you compare them with other witness statements they corroborate each other and give you the answer. The answer is Adams and Styles left the office later than they thought. If you think Molina and Davis are important then by all means explain why. Your original clai they immediately went back inside has proven to be false. You are the one who brought them into the discussion,  you explain why they are important. I do not see their importance and I don't have the time or the inclination to do your homework for you.

[Martin Weidmann]

Riddle? I don't think so. We are discussing the two minute long travel of two women with time stamps provided by the police. It is only complicated if you make it complicated.

The Stroud document is a non starter. It disproves itself by the recollections of Adams and Styles along the way.

There is no need to villainize the WC to make a point. They never told the witnesses they were mistaken or lying. They used other witnesses to help show what really happened or corroborate what they were stating. Rowland is a great example of that. They showed considerable restraint given the magnitude of what he was doing.

Riddle? I don't think so.

Try real hard and think again

We are discussing the two minute long travel of two women with time stamps provided by the police.

No we are not. We are discussing the bogus claims you made previously and now we can add this one. What "two minute long travel" are you on about?

The Stroud document is a non starter. It disproves itself by the recollections of Adams and Styles along the way.

Utter BS. You're just looking for an easy way to dismiss a crucial piece of evidence that you don't like

There is no need to villainize the WC to make a point. They never told the witnesses they were mistaken or lying. They used other witnesses to help show what really happened or corroborate what they were stating. Rowland is a great example of that. They showed considerable restraint given the magnitude of what he was doing.

This alone proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that you live in an alternate reality.

[Martin Weidmann]

Are you aware there is even more information on how the vaccinated are spreading covid to the unvaccinated and vaccinated alike. Acting as Typhoid Mary's.

This is concerning. The vaccine is waning and there seems to be no plan to re-vaccinate everyone. Booster? What keeps it from weakening over time too? There are now variants that are immune to the vaccine. Anyone in Agriculture could see that one coming from a mile away.

What is really concerning is that somebody can loose grip on reality as much as you seem to have done.

You claimed that; 

Avery Davis does not go back into the building and up to the fourth floor until Adams returns to the front of the bulding for the second time.

And when we ask what "second time" you are going on about, you start babbling about Covid.

[Martin Weidmann]

Gaslighting? No I do not think so.
 
: to psychologically manipulate (a person) usually over an extended period of time so that the victim questions the validity of their own thoughts, perception of reality, or memories and experiences confusion, loss of confidence and self-esteem, and doubts concerning their own emotional or mental stability : to subject (someone) to gaslighting"

You are most definitely weak minded and easily manipulated if you think this is gaslighting. These are simple statements by the witnesses and should do you no harm. If you compare them with other witness statements they corroborate each other and give you the answer. The answer is Adams and Styles left the office later than they thought. If you think Molina and Davis are important then by all means explain why. Your original clai they immediately went back inside has proven to be false. You are the one who brought them into the discussion,  you explain why they are important. I do not see their importance and I don't have the time or the inclination to do your homework for you.

These are simple statements by the witnesses and should do you no harm. If you compare them with other witness statements they corroborate each other and give you the answer. The answer is Adams and Styles left the office later than they thought.

In order to make this claim, you must have put a timeline together that actually works and includes all the known facts.

Why don't you surprise us all with your infinite wisdom by posting that timeline here?

[Jack Nessan]

Riddle? I don't think so.

Then try real hard and think again

We are discussing the two minute long travel of two women with time stamps provided by the police.

No we are not. We are discussing the bogus claims you made previously and now we can add this one. What "two minute long travel" are you on about?

The Stroud document is a non starter. It disproves itself by the recollections of Adams and Styles along the way.


Utter BS. You're just looking for an easy way to dismiss a crucial piece of evidence that you don't like

There is no need to villainize the WC to make a point. They never told the witnesses they were mistaken or lying. They used other witnesses to help show what really happened or corroborate what they were stating. Rowland is a great example of that. They showed considerable restraint given the magnitude of what he was doing.

This alone proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that you live in an alternate reality.

Explain where the riddle is. I don't see it in examining the movements of
these women and comparing it to others statements.

[Martin Weidmann]

Explain where the riddle is. I don't see it in examining the movements of
these women and comparing it to others statements.

The riddle is in your confused mind. Nobody has a clue what you are rambling on about.

Now, where's that timeline?

[Jack Nessan]

The riddle is in your confused mind. Nobody has a clue what you are rambling on about.

Now, where's that timeline?

It is the same one. It never has changed.

What riddle?