Flight of Lee Oswald - Brewer and McDonald testimonies on CBS 1964

[Ross Lidell]

Here's yet another video clip I made from the CBS special.

So what's your point?

It's self-evident.

Ok, then.

You denigrate the videos because statements "direct to camera" by Warren Commission witnesses are more difficult to dismiss than text.

Why don't you claim that Brewer and McDonald are liars. You have no evidence to prove that.

Oh I forgot: you consider "LOL" is evidence.

[Ross Lidell]

True.. it's not funny... it's hilarious!

If you can't explain what you are trying to say with those two video clips you are just making a fool of yourself.

Silly "smarty-Marty" statement that is devoid of any substance.

I don't need to explain anything. The testimonies of Brewer and McDonald support other evidence that Lee Harvey Oswald killed Officer J.D. Tippit. Your "one-liner" replies reveal that you cannot prove Oswald is innocent of the murder of J.D. Tippit in Oak Cliff on 22 November 1963.

[Ross Lidell]

McDonald didn't testify that Oswald attempted to shoot him.  Who did?

McDonald.

[John Iacoletti]

You denigrate the videos because statements "direct to camera" by Warren Commission witnesses are more difficult to dismiss than text.

I'm not denigrating the videos.  I'm just dismissing the guy who posted them and thought that they prove something that is "self-evident".

Why don't you claim that Brewer and McDonald are liars. You have no evidence to prove that.

I still have no idea what your point is.

Oh I forgot: you consider "LOL" is evidence.

LOL.

I never said "LOL" was evidence.  LOL is reserved for when people make ridiculous claims like "Oswald attempted to shoot McDonald".

[John Iacoletti]

McDonald.

Cite.

[Gary Craig]

[John Iacoletti]

Silly "smarty-Marty" statement that is devoid of any substance.

I don't need to explain anything. The testimonies of Brewer and McDonald support other evidence that Lee Harvey Oswald killed Officer J.D. Tippit.

Speaking of silly...

How would Brewer and McDonald know who shot Tippit?

[Ross Lidell]

And since when is concluding that there is zero evidence for something the same as a theory?

And since when is concluding that there is zero evidence for something the same as a theory?

There is evidence. When a contrarian concludes there is ZERO evidence it is an assertion. Concluding there is ZERO evidence "implies" a theory that is intentionally unstated. For a contrarian to put forward a theory would risk silly, unsubstantiated  guesswork to be attacked as nonsense. You of all people should know that.



Perhaps there is not even a theory.