And December three, twenty twenty four, allegedly according to that thing we call a calendar, This the O'Kelly effect. You listening there, if you're hearing us live, it's just after eight pm on a Teesday or a Tuesday, and all that good stuff. But you are more than likely hearing the podcast, because that's what most of you do. Anyway, I've got an interesting little recap regarding Lancer tonight. Who
do I have, Well, two ends of the spectrum. I've got Ken Zedeker with us along with his wife Gabby Gabrielle, Well, let's see Gabrielle Glenn Zedeker, Okay, depending on how you got the emails and all that. Anyway, husband and wife over there, plus Larry Hancock. So what do we have? The people running Lancer on the ground and the MC me and Larry who was well attending to people online running the Facebook group. I think a few other things were going on there. Oh and he did a remote
presentation as well. So kind of get all ends of the spectrum here regarding Lancer, And you guys don't have to hear too much from me because I already talked about my own personal experiences there and of course, bringing missus oh and Frankie along and all that good stuff. It was an odd year. It was an odd sort of year, a little slower and lower than I thought it was going to be as far as attendance and all that, but interesting nonetheless. So let's get into this first.
You know, Gabby, you haven't been on my show yet, have you live or no? Wait, you did one a long time ago, right.
It's been a while.
Yes, it's been a while, like three years ago. Maybe you did one when we were doing virtual conferences.
I think, yeah, that sounds about right.
That sounds right, and Can of course called in on a Friday night show and then surprise, had Bob grodin with him. So Ken, yeah, it's not been as long for you since you've been on.
But yeah, something been like a.
Like a month right right before the conference. So and of course, Larry, how are you doing tonight?
I'm doing fine. Winters kind of here and starting to do, you know, get through Thanksgiving into haven't got the Christmas decorations up. I hang in there with Thanksgiving as hard as I can.
Oh, yeah, well Thanksgiving. Immediately following the conference, I was like so exhausted. Still the next week. It was sort of like, oh yeah, right, that's coming up too. I let Thanksgiving go this time. Pretty much. It was sort of like, you know, quiet thing, just the three of us sitting here, and what are you gonna do? You know? But anyway, Christmas is coming. We are into December. But an honest recap, Oh, Larry, what did you think going
into the conference? And you know, how did it look online? I mean, give me some feedback about what you were seeing.
I think, yeah, one of the things. And Gabriella will say this as well. You know, we've all been we've all been talking, you know, since the fiftieth like, okay, would the fiftieth be the last conference? Is anybody going to be hanging in with this subject more than fifty years? Okay? And then we got the sixtieth, like oh wow, okay. So it really is an interesting question about expectations. How many people are really interested? How many people still want
to come to Dallas? You know, how many? So it's it's a question mark much more than it was when I started with Debra, you know, thirty years ago, But interestingly enough that the interest has not dropped off nearly as fast as I thought it would. So I did have people contacting me about the conference and you know, who was speaking and that sort of thing, so I knew there were still some interest. But the biggest challenge I think, I think Gabriellen and Ken will say, what
of our biggest challenges every year is is speakers? Who's doing what? You know? What do we have knew? What is going to interest people? You know? And you can check yourself what question you're going to ask is what is new? After sixty years at this has anybody got anything new? Because that's what people are going to want to hear. That's the first thing out of the bag. So I will say that that that combined with I was very pleased last year we've had a good showing
of international people. I had thought, actually, if anything, the international interest might drop off more quickly, but we had people in the Facebook group from Belgium and Germany and New Zealand and you know, of course they have to wrestle with time zones, so there was still a good international interest. I'll be I'm curious whether you and Gabby saw that, you know, in the in person attendees. But for me, my question was, you know, are we going
to be able to find something new. Uh, and are you know, are there still people wanting to come to Dallas? And I guess that's kind of a question for Gabby and Ken and you did you know, what do you see in terms of what did you see on the tour? I know you did a walking tour. I communicated with people online that very much wanted to get into a walking tour. Walking tour was still a major interest the people I talked with online.
Right and Matt Matt Dallasit actually wound up getting something together and doing a tour of the tippets site and areas separate. I go over to the Knowoll and there was actually weirdness going on at the Knowll on Friday, and so the people that said they were going to meet up with me, not too many of them made it. And there was actually a disruption of the moment of silence, believe it or not. So I mean, there was a lot of different things going on in Dallas this time
as far as international reach. I mean, I'm gonna turn to Gabby on this and Ken because they know better, like, say, what the international interest was online. I didn't really see it like we did last year in person. I think we had less of an international visitor situation. I think I noted a couple of people from Canada, but outside of that, I didn't see anybody from other countries this time.
But I'm willing to bet that in the post, you know, post coronavirus age of the Zoom generation here, we definitely had a lot more online people than we thought we were going to have. But Gabby and Ken could tell us a lot more about that. So Gabby, what about that though? Did you see more international interest online or what.
Online? We definitely did have a big international presence. We had a lot of viewers from Mike Larry said Belgium.
We had a few from Scotland.
Because we have a whole Daily Plaza UK group out there, and a lot of them came and viewed it virtually. Not as many joined the Facebook group. We had some people who in my email letting them know about the Facebook group, completely glanced over that fact. So they're slowly being added to the Facebook group still in asking questions and such. But last year we definitely I had a bigger international presence.
Yeah, I was gonna say there was a big Dealey Plaza UK contingent that actually showed up in Dallas last year on the tenth anniversaries, and we did notice some patterns this year too, which I want to ask both you and Ken about. We noticed some patterns, not just in the international but in the general sense, let's say, regarding things that happen in every ten years, there is a rise in interest, just like every twenty five years there is a rise in interest, even though we've only
had two intervals. There, you can see it. The media reacts bigger this year. I don't know, the media didn't react so much big on the sixty first anniversary as it did on the sixtieth. But you know, what are your thoughts there regarding the patterns we saw. Maybe you could give some people some insight there.
The round yere is like fifty five, sixty sixty five Round years are all definitely more attention grabbing. As with anything, it's always the round years anything, even like true crime related, it's the round years that all of a sudden, the media is like, hey, this is still happening, right, this is still.
There.
It still hasn't been solved, YadA, YadA, YadA.
Whether it's John Bay or JFK, it doesn't matter as long as there's a true crime aspect to it. It's the big anniversaries, right.
Yet the big years they tend to be their best turnout wise, the most interest in all that, we still do get some interest during the like off years that they tend to not be as as popular as the round.
Years, right, And we may be getting a little bit from the toddler peanut gallery there who was also present at the conference. I just want to say, that's Gabby's own private toddler peanut gallery. I just want to let people know that's what that noise was. It wasn't Ken,
but Kenny and I discussed at the conference. Actually another pattern that we took note of, which doesn't necessarily go with the round anniversary pattern, but something that I think is relevant because everybody thought this election, right is the big this is so warped, this is so weird, this is so big, et cetera, et cetera. But it was an election year, and well, I don't want to spoil it entirely, Ken, but you took notice of something we talked about at the conference a few times as well.
Yeah, it seems so every inflection year that's our lowest themes. So we noted that of pattern, but we're still trying to think of ways how to improve it.
Right, And that's the presidential election cycle that we see in the US. It seems to cause I don't know, reluctance for people to maybe come out for one reason or another. Yeah, a lot of them.
Is it's they don't want to spend money until they know how the election is going, because a lot of them do get fearful. And once they do know how the election is going, because the election happens two weeks before the conference, usually roughly two to three weeks, and by then the flights increase in price and it's just not feasible for people to come out in person. Yeah, but a lot of them did still attend virtually.
But it's a weird tough thing because it's almost like you know, when people look at Christmas shopping season, right, and it changes people's purchasing habits apparently presidential. And by the way, I checked with a couple of other different kinds the conferences. I didn't tell you guys this yet.
There was a financial conference that went on, a crypto conference that went on, and another like deep political sort of small little conference thing that went on around the same time, okay as the Lancer conference, and I was in contact with some of these people and finding out guess what, they experienced the same thing. So it's not a JFK exclusive effect, you know. I don't know if you guys were aware of.
That, something I would have, sorry, Jabby, something I would chat time in with. Though, is a lot of the people that are interested in JFK, and we all know this there tend to be politically either politically active or politically interested. You know that that politics does have some things to do with JFK. Many many people's ideas to really kill President Kennedy have political ideas of who did it.
Politics is entangled with it. And I think this year is something I felt myself and I saw on others. People with that kind of interest literally got burned out by the election. It's kind of like they were so emotionally involved in the election that when the election is over, oh conference, you know, I just I just need to rest,
I need to chill, you know. I think that I think for the JFK folks that had something to do with it, with that investment kind of going into the going into the election rather than the conference, right.
Yeah. You know what's weird about that too, is that, again, it's not a left or right paradigm issue because in the thirty plus years that i've sort of you know, I was in the contact circle with Vince Silandry at one point, I was in the group in New York and New Jersey at one point. I've now you know, been around you guys. So I've mixed in with lots of different people that believe me, that's a dynamic group
of individal jewels. Politically, I've seen it go from very very left wing sort of people all the way to individuals who you would count as right wing. No matter what time in our recent history. It is okay, So it doesn't matter the time period how those definitions have shifted left and right wing people, but politically active people
are usually interested, doesn't matter left or right. Although we can see trends, and I think there's been more of a trend to the right wing lately or the libertarian wing as well lately, but that's happened before. And at one time you could almost say that everybody there was a lefty. I mean, it just seemed like that's the
way it was, which is really weird. But I think you hit the nail on the head, Larry, that it's people that are politically conscious and you know, engaged in the American politics that are most concerned about this, and they do have political views on it. Obviously, some people think the right wing killed him. It's a communist conspiracy. It's uh, you know, it's a deep state thing. Uh, it's you know, deep politics, not deep state. Correct yourself,
you know, apologies to Peter Dale, Scott, et cetera. And it's just about people that are politically focused, have ideas about this and are concerned with it, which makes sense because we are talking about the assassination of the president after all. So yeah, I think that's exactly right, Larry. So, Gabby, any other trends that you noticed for this particular conference or ken either one on the ground that we could share with Larry. At this point, the only.
Other trend I could think of was we did have a lot more from Canada this year.
It seems how Lambster exclusively is getting the younger.
Also that he also notice that there were a lot more of the younger generation this year.
Well, yeah, we did pick up a few younger individuals that were presenters, and I think people were more interested and that's a good thing. I think we need to do a lot more to engage with younger people, because I still feel like we're still kind of behind regarding that. But I do see that Lancer made progress with engaging with younger people in their twenties and their teens, etc.
And you know, like Alex is great. Alex Harrison mentioned him first, I mean the teenager that was there all weekend this time, but he presented again this year, did a great job with the sync up thing, which by the way, Larry, were you able to watch the conference most of it or as it was happening or what?
No, I wasn't because I was really on the Facebook group. I mean I did watch vins and pieces, and I did watch part of Alex and listen to Alex, but uh, when I'm when I'm on the Facebook page, it's hard for me to pick up and do the online stream at the same time. So that was difficult, but I did. I didn't listen to parts of them even actually I listened to most of them even if I didn't watch them.
But uh, of course, I will say the one real challenge for the remote access which we you and I and Gabrielle, we all fight all the time, is you know, hearing the speaker versus seeing the video projection.
You know.
Uh so.
Sometimes I will say the remote viewers the one challenge for them, and part of it depends on what screen size they're using, and everything else is is getting as much of not so much the power points that are being projected, but the videos that are being projected. Uh those are hard to pick up sometimes that that requires even more contrast. But oh yeah, I did. I did
listen to Alex. Hell Alex. I love another great thing about Alex which we miss with some of our older presenters, including me, probably as Alex has this great way of saying if he doesn't have an answer for a question, he says, so yeah, oh I really haven't studied that. Oh okay, got it? Where you know, some some people who have been around for decades, I feel it's incumbent to come up with some kind of an answer Alex doesn't, right.
No, I appreciate that, and I think somebody mentioned there should be an award for that during the conference too, because you know, it was we had a couple of presenters that actually gave that honest answer. When they didn't know something, they said, look, I didn't study it, you know, so how do I know? And fair enough, we did have a couple of sound issues, but a lot less this year, Ken, wouldn't you say?
Yes?
Yes, definitely, I mean I know I was actively trying to make sure that things work, doubt. And also we do know for the future that we've got to come up with a slightly better way to handle the question and answer periods, because that became a little troublesome during
the conference. No matter how many times I tried to tell people, I swear this by the way I was telling them, look, try to repeat part of the question or the question, or put the question in your answer, do something so that the people at home hear it. And some people got the message, some people didn't, So I know it was a little hit or miss. Yeah, good, I know.
Even in the Facebook group, gayl Nicks Jackson had commented that people needed to realize that you and I were doing our best to remind the speakers that the speakers are just old and couldn't remember to do.
Thanks Gail, Larry, see you're now in that and you know you're in that category. Now, Larry that if you were there, you would have been one of the old guys that forgot right.
Absolutely, so I had to be very careful. It's kind of like I was presenting with David Boyle and who is there in press? In press, you know, in person. It's kind of like David, it's your responsibility to repeat the questions. Uh, you know, because I might not do this, but I will say it's difficult the presenters engage with the audience. You know, they're they're looking at the face
they're seeing in a person they want to respond. So they're just kind of in a personal engagement with whoever asked the question, and they don't see the people online, you know. Uh, that's they just they're they're committed to the people they're talking to and they want to immediately give them an answer, you know, just okay, don't pause, just I need to I need to get back to this person. And so it is challenging for the speakers to remember there are people that are that they're not looking.
At, you know, uh, in real time, you know, and look, it's not the easiest. And besides that, until you actually do something right, until we actually run the event, you're not going to learn a lot of these things, you know what I mean. It seemed to us that it would be easy to pick up on a lot of
the conversations. But then again, somebody's in the way back of the room, and we had one particular questioner, let's say, that had very long preambles to their questions, and it was very difficult for that one to be heard on the microphone, you know, from a distance. And also I could see the difficulty with repeating that because if I was standing there and I had to listen to two minutes of her go on and then had to repeat it, I would have forgotten what I was answering. So you know,
I understand that too. It's not the easiest thing to juggle. It's not natural conversation, you know, because, like you said, you're answering the question, you're engaging with that person right there, and you know, generally, what do you do when a camera's on you. It's best to forget the cameras on you, right so, you know, because it's seeing a guy in a movie staring at a camera. Yeah, kid, So.
I do want to boote that we have now solved both of those issues that you bring up about.
About hearing the audience's questions and the what is it?
The the the power points. Next year we are planning on doing a split screen so the people who were watching from home can actually see the actual power point instead of a projection of it. And a sound person wants to like the audience that way. Bearing the MQ and A, the people at home, we can also hear.
Right, and I think there's nothing wrong with it. We just get a mic, stand by the way and stand it up there.
You know. Yeah, I said the exact same thing, but with how many people this year and last year, especially because I was up front glass gear holding the mic for questions and everybody just kept wanting to spout it instead of go up to the front.
And it's like, well, I can't help.
Well no, But then then it becomes my job to tell them, no, no, no, you got to come up here. You know, I'll cut them off on the mike and be louder than them and say, hey, come on up here.
You got to do it that way.
My You know what, our audio person, I'm recky, uh. He's willing to make up the audience so way. During the m Q and A, the people at home, can hear what the questions are.
Yeah, we talked about that, and he's what he would have to do is probably fade that out during most of the time, so you're not picking up background noise in the park and you know, to hit he'd have to only bring it up during the Q and A. The background mike would have to be something he'd have to remember, so another another entire responsibility to him. So that's what he wants. Okay, Yeah, each.
Year we're growing better better it so, but as for the videos this year, I am currently working on embedding all the power point presentations.
To the videos right so that everyone can see what was on.
The power point. So that's why it's taking a bit longer to get all the videos up for the download portion right right, because I'm working on getting those power points into it right.
And if people want to do every presentation, sorry.
If people wanted to go ahead and even get the conference now as we speak, they could still go get it. But it's up there in three days worth of videos, like each day is up there as a single video, and what's going to eventually happen is you're going to break it down into presenters here and each one of the presenters will not only have their original video, but their actual power point will be up on the screen instead of it being shot through a camera to on screen.
So that's what you're doing right now and looking forward to that, you know.
And we already have some of them up now, okay, as the individual presentations with their power points in them and those who have given us their powerpoints. We have a few presenters who did not give us a copy of their powerpoints. So for those people, they're just you're just gonna have to.
Watch the string, right, understandable. And Also I did the presentation with Gail. I don't know if we ever quite got to the whole of her video that her daughter did. I know we were trying to, and I don't know if we ever played the whole thing. But either way, yeah, I know you'll be working on that one soon. So that's a work in progress. So if you go to Assassinationconference dot com and you do decide to purchase the online, eventually they'll be there in individual sets and you'll be
able to download them presenter by presenter. Probably. Also I noted that when I first came out, the first couple of minutes there had no sound, so hopefully that'll be a fixed too. I don't know if we got it or not correct, but there was a little bit yeah, like the whole thing I did at the beginning wasn't there and then swamp and started talking and there was
no sound too. But anyway, look, it was the way it was when it was shot that way, but you guys are able to work with it afterwards so people can get the good files for download. So that's coming up, Larry. Did you take any other notes of things that were like kind of comments from people at home, like what they thought of anything in particular. Was there a standout presentation according to people?
I think there were two that people especially and I think this is ingratulations to Gabriella and him for the sequencing. The two comments that I really were really positive comments about and that that book ended the conference were the opening presentation on JFK and Vietnam versus Cuba that that was one of the best political context presentation that I've
ever seen at a conference. That was just an excellent exploration of the the you know which one was most influential on Kennedy at the time, which was most you know, what was really what was in really in play the year of the assassination, and Mike Swanson did just an excellent job presenting that and opening the conference on a very textual basis rather than diving into details about who shot from where, you know this or that evidence. Uh
so that was a great opening. Everybody really thought that was online thought that was. And then Robert Groden's closing presentation. Uh, you know, I've seen Robert present before. I followed Robert for decades now, and you know, everybody not only did they enjoy comment on it, but I personally wanted to
comment to him. It's sort of like, after having gotten all his books and listen to him for so long, I really kind of thought that I had heard everything that Robert had to say, and that I had heard everything there was to say about the Supruterer film. But his his presentation on this suprutor film was awesome, kind of an insider's view of the history of the Supruder film alteration not alteration. So that was again another great bookmark to close the conference. Those two really stood out
for everybody. There were good comments about other presentations, but there were also questions, you know, like, what did these people In some cases they weren't sure where the speaker had gotten certain documents or information. They weren't sure if it was a you know, it's some of the newer folks are going this is this what everybody says about this subject?
Are there other views?
So there was dialogue like that, But the comments on the presentation that that really stood out were Swanson and Growden with the opening and closing right.
Well, not just because I'm Mike's friend, but I mean, I gotta honestly say that was one of the best table setters for a conference you know, that I've seen in uh, probably since two thousand and three, and it's really it was. It was exactly the right place to start. I thought that bit of context that work comes up a lot between you and me, Larry it.
Yes, it seems like that. It's one of my favorite words.
It sure is, and you often provide it during my my podcast, so I appreciate that. But yeah, no, I thought that was a great way to open things. And uh, that's another thing that just comes to my mind, Gabby. Are we going to see the presentations from the banquet?
Yes, I am.
Working on editing those and getting those up the audio recorded separate from the video, so it's not matching up. So I'm working on in that matched up and to upload it to this site as well.
Okay, because we did cover in memoriam during that part of the conference, and I think it's important, plus the awards and all that. I think all that's very important and I'd like people to see it for sure, and I think they should. We did have a minor miss though, because we did not realize that a week before, honestly, and the announcement came to my email late. If I had looked at the email over the weekend, I would have known it. But I think we were all so
busy we didn't realize it. Don Thomas has presented at Lancer before and he you know, passed, so we didn't note him. Not because we missed him, but he's on the top of the list for next year's in Memoriam section, right, Kebby, Yes, Yeah, I want to make sure people knew that, because you know, it almost looks like did we ignore him. No, we didn't ignore not at all. It was just that it was sort of unknown to us at the time, and there was sort of a late announcement from the family.
I think that was very close to that weekend. I think I might have received the email. I know I got it after I was on the road already, so I wasn't home for the email, you know, and I don't generally go through all my emails if I'm not home, and certainly I had my hands full at the conference, as we all did. So any funny stories or anything that you want to add here or any standout presentations in either one of your minds, Gabby and Ken, I know.
One standout presentation would be the one from the banquet that I hope to get on up because they had literally just gotten the information like the week before and put together a presentation just like that to share that the banquet.
So yeah, they asked, yes, they yesked the day.
Before the banquet if they would be able to present because it was very interesting information and it's a little insight to their presentation.
For next year.
So having missed the banquet, what was that about? Now I have a need to know, you know, I had to build up that desire to know you did.
It's about some documents that they had found when they went to the National Archives that were in a box miss marked and they were supposed to be released with all the other documents and weren't right, and so they were going over all that information and I.
Couldn't do it justice.
Like it's one of those that y'all will have to watch when it comes up onto the site.
But yeah, it is about.
Some documents that were miss marked.
They said there was something.
Like six thousand documents. So they're still going through them to figure out what exactly is in them, and I think some very interesting things can definitely come from it.
So, So, Ken, what a shocker it is that the uh you know, the the corporate media uh didn't report accurately when it said, oh, you know, there's nothing more to be released. Really, uh you know, it just so happens. There's a bunch of stuff we know they didn't release, and then there's a bunch of stuff that a couple of guys had to discover in a miss marked box. Uh you know that they didn't release, and maybe there's more stuff to be released. Ken, what do you think, Well, I know.
Robert found.
One twenty negatives of the Popsy that Wikness filed. Yeah, I mean, I mean, who knows where half of any of.
That stuff is? Well, maybe we're going to need some new terminology. It's not like this stuff was released, but they just didn't give it to us. I mean, yeah, it's kind of like the the the What's in the back room files? The What's we need a different name for. Yeah, somebody released it, but we haven't seen it and they forgot the show us.
You have to put two check marks on it, one for release and one for shared, right, because shared, unshared, unshared.
So I have a question for both of you.
So on Joe Rogan's though, he had President Trump on and he stated that one of the first things he's feeling within the first few months of his second UH presidency is he's going to the release a god of the Kennedy files. Now, certain things like names and addresses might still be hidden, but he wants to get everything out.
Did you to trust that that will happen?
Larry? Before you answer? Before you answer, Larry, I just want to say that Ken just stole my last question right that I was going to pay all of you.
I'm sorry, It's okay, but you know why because this kept coming up at the conference in one on one discussions UH, where you know, a couple of people ask me my opinion about a couple of things, and one of them, you know, the guy was a little mad at me that, you know, why is it that they're not sharing nobody's talking about the thing from the Secret Service agent who put the bullet on the stretcher last year. And I said, well, there might be a reason for that.
Maybe they don't put a lot of value in it, and that's why you're not hearing about it. And the guy didn't like that answer. But the consistent question that came at me all conference was don't you think this time, depending on who I'm talking to, either do you trust that Trump's going to do it? Or don't you feel better now that Trump is coming back in because he's going to release all this stuff. He's got Bobby Kennedy with him, et cetera. So Larry, I'll let you answer it first.
Well, the two or three aspects of that question. First, he can't just say that simply, okay, everybody, release everything, because that that leads to me, he's going to have to issue a presidential directive.
Oh wait, Larry, Wait a minute, Wait a minute, Larry. According to Fox News, he could just imagine that he released them in their release. I mean, that's what I thought.
That's the problem. Okay, what I was thinking of visualization does not work.
I mean, you know, uh, I just thought but as part of the what did they just call that the secret right positive visualization? And you could just right, sorry, I had to interrupt with that hypogis and then you say.
Well I did it, didn't I no, No, you just thought about doing that. But he's going to have to actually and hopefully he will have some people that can help him put some specifics to that statement. You know, release, it's kind of we were just joking about it, but released versus shared. You know, release means that all of the the federal agencies A. You know, they don't necessarily have boxes and folders setting around that say JFK assassination that are still there. You know, there's lots of us
been sent to DARA. So there's two questions, Uh, is NARA going to finally be compelled regardless of what the agency say? You know, National Archives, if you've got it, release it. And by the way, with no redactions and forget about the agency. Now I'm president, they don't get to complain, they don't have any say anymore. If you've got it, release it, that's one thing. Okay, release it and release it in a form where we can all
see it. You know, we're how don't They played a trick on us one time with document releases where they released hundreds and thousands of new documents and they just backfiled them in the same folders that were already out there, so you had no way to see what you already had and what was new. So, okay, the first question is is NARA itself going to be given the authority to release what they hold and how are they going
to do it? But the third question is can he write that directive as a national security authorization overwriting the agencies on protocols and procedures in terms of what is national security what is classified? Because I mean, truthfully, that's even from their perspective. They have a legal obligation in terms of classification and security, and they would not be
doing their job if they didn't do it. So if you want to see all that stuff, you've got to tell them that all their standard practices have been overridden, and you've got to tell them very specifically, not only okay for anything related to the JFK assassination that doesn't play, you've got to give it to the National Archives so they can release it. And and by the way, what defines what's a JFK record. The ORB tried to do
that with the agencies. And if every you know, okay, that's fine, But is Trump going to compel them to look for things that they don't have? And I will say I said there were three, So that's the third thing. There really is a fourth if you wanted to be honest about all of this, as there's a lot of JKFK related material that isn't directly held by the agency. Life Magazine has films, other people have control over information related. If we're just talking about records releases, that's not going
to bring that out. We're not going to see the originals of certain films. We're not going to see things that are privately held because they're legal controls over those things that still don't release them. So on trying to do with the statement is saying he may well visualize doing that, but it's going to have to be done in great deal with a lot of oversight, or it
won't be any different than what's happened before. Stuff will not get out just issue in a simple statement that says, give them all that stuff, is not going to do it.
Yeah. True. And here's the thing about it too, that the will he or longed he is only a very small part of the question because the enforcement arm of getting anything done. See that that act, you know, the JFK Records Collection Act was supposed to compel all this stuff to be released, right, public and private stuff was supposed to be released, but there's no enforcement arm. It's under the executive branch, but there's no enforcement arm. So it's kind of difficult to compel Life magazine or to
compel ABC, NBC, CBS, et cetera. Now, I know there's that lawsuit going on, which, by the way, that's against the Biden administration currently still but is that going to just simply be transposed to the Trump administration or was since.
I'm part of that, Since I'm part of that lawsuit, I can't speak to that. There you go, it's not
just against Biden, it's against the Biden and the National Archives. Yes, and the court throughout the presidential part but allowed the National Archives part to proceed, so that the claim, one of the claims is that the National Archives did not fulfill its obligation under the legislation that released the records because the National Archives, according to the legislation, was given a successor responsibility because the ARB only existed for a
certain period of time, but it knew that this problem was going to exist, so it said, okay, we're going away after a time, but National Archives you have the responsibility as our successor to keep collecting this stuff in a proactive fashion. It's like you don't just sit there and wait for a document to show up. You know, you have to go out and try to obtain it. And if somebody tells you about a document that exists,
gives you some proof it exists, work or anything. You know, if you're given notice of something, you have to try to collect it. NARA has not been doing that. So that's part of this whole process that if it were done correctly, the President Trump would have to to follow through on what our losses has been claiming and say, Nara, that is your responsibility. Now, I know you don't have enough people, you'll never have enough people in resources, it's
still your responsibility. But that the success or responsibility for NARA to follow the ARB is a big deal.
No fair enough. But it's just that the Biden administration is actually named on the document. So what you know on the lawsuit. So what I'm saying is, you know, does this transfer over to the Trump administration? Obviously Nara's NARA, but does it transfer over? I don't know.
Oh well, and I can tell you it will okay case it's still in court. It will be going on for months because the judge throughout the part relating to Biden and allowed the part. The claims against the National Archives are still legally in play and will be after the presidential succession.
Right as they should be. But now for the rest of it, And here's what my answer to the overall question is. I think that we're going to get at best a mixed situation here out of the second Trump administration. People keep pointing to RFK Junior is in the Trump circle, you know, so he's going to push for it. I don't know that. For certain, to be honest with you, is he going to push for these things?
I do not.
You know, I've heard things through different grapevines. I've obviously seen him make statements publicly about these things. But we all know that things get politically massaged. So will RFK Junior be politically massaged into maybe a different attitude about this than what he's shown in the past. I don't know will Trump do what he says he's going to do, you know, So I throw it open as the sort of I'm guessing we're going to get the mixed result
that we got in twenty seventeen. That would be my overall guess. But I wouldn't put money on any of it because literally, as I said, again, I don't know how it's going to turn out. So that's the way I look at it. Ken you know, I'm a little more skeptical than some people are of Trump. I'm a little more skeptical of RFK Junior than I ever wanted to be.
But nonetheless, one of the and I just saw this post on a forum. Well, what's amazing is the general public seems to have been convinced by the election campaign that Trump was going to release everything, yep, about everything. It's like total government transparency. We're going to know about what we did with every you know, we're going to
know about Afghanistan, We're going to know about that. Suddenly, we're gonna know all the things that the government is and then and you know how they arrived at that conclusion, I don't know, but I can pretty much guarantee that's not going to happen.
Yeah, I mean, you know, I don't foresee them declassifying the stuff from the Lincoln assassination or from Roswell at the same time they decided to drop this not gonna happen. Okay, but you know, transparency and Trump Mark me is a skeptic again, you know, just saying that's all I you know, I'm not saying that you won't get some of what you want out of this, but only if it.
Has to do with certain people. Situational one of my other favorite words.
There you go. And also we still have the issues over the tax documents and stuff, which I know there was some different legal wrangling regarding that. There's a lot of unanswered questions I think, Larry, you know, as far as what could be the directives even if he had a whole I don't know, a complete desire for transparency just on the JFK assassination. Could he indeed even be capable of releasing everything that people think that he can release,
I don't know. Again, Well, Chad, that's a real good question.
I made a post today on my blog about LBJ and DOJ and CY and Garrison investigation, and one of the things we have to have to accept this is a reality of the situation. President Johnson asked the CIA in nineteen sixty seven, started asking them for all the details about their castor assassination plots. They didn't share them all with them. Yeah, they felt that that was a national security issue too.
They pushed back.
So even if a president wants something, I mean, we all know that a couple of past presidents like Clinton, have raised the question of JFK records with various agencies and gotten bushback.
That's true.
The agencies have the ability to to I don't know if maybe office gate is the right word, but we we shouldn't think that just because the president says do it, it's all done. That's just that's unfortunately naive.
Right, right. And I like how you point out Clinton, because that's the first guy I remember taking, you know, positive action to seek releases you know, in my lifetime, was Clinton, and he had an honest desire for it because just you know, the political heritage there, you know, and there was some interest then that was you know, big, and he was all with it. He was with it before I think before the you know, Oliver Stones movie
came out and everything. I think he was still kind of on the idea that he'd like to know, you know. But anyway, Yeah, you get mixed results though with these guys, and I think that's what we're looking at again. So I promised an hour here and we're almost through a full hour, believe it or not, answering a couple of questions from each other and giving you guys an idea about what happened at Lancer and offsite. Gabby, is there anything we're leaving out here we should definitely include?
Well, I would like to include that we do still have the videos at for viewing and we are extending it through till December thirty first, So if anyone wants to get a virtual ticket to be able to watch the presentations or the virtual plus to be able to download them, it is still available for purchase on Assassination Conference dot com.
And if they use the code.
Of Jelly ten, they are still able to get that ten percent off.
Excellently, And I'll include the links with the show note. So if you're catching this podcast, go ahead and look in the show notes you'll see a link for Assassination Conference dot com. And indeed, please do use the code Ocelli ten and collect your ten percent off. You might as well, and if they're not already, when you sign up in their download forms, you can get each one.
They're on their way to getting there and they'll be there by December thirty first, one way or another, right, Kebby, Yes, excellent, So yeah, I'd.
Like to give a ploug to that. Also, I don't know we said it earlier, but quite frankly, if you didn't see mix presentation or Groden's presentation, especially Groden's videos which were amazing, I think his why helped them with those, I didn't think, Oh you did, okay, So I mean this could be worth the cost of the experience by itself. I mean that's just Groden's presentation is not to be missed, and I don't know that it will ever show up anywhere else.
Yeah. Absolutely, Look much like I said before the conference, I said he's worth the price of admission anyway. Uh, you know, so I knew that that was going to be the case. But also Alex was great we had, you know, a lot of great presentations. Matt Dalfit. Look, somebody's microphone just took a dive. But Matt Dalfit did a great presentation. Uh, you know, we we had some interesting thoughts from some people like Jacob Hornberger. Geez, who
else would be another like diversity? Uh kind of mentioned here Larry, who's another one to give him a diverse idea about the people that were there.
You know, there was a lot of diversity. I'm not sure that I'm the one gem I did and you know I did have This is one thing that did happen straightforward diversity wise. Fred Litwin made a presentation regarding richree Case Nagel, who's been a controversial figure in this forever. I've written about him. Dick and Dick Russell was there, and Dick Russell presented on on Nagel. It would so those of you who have never followed that story or might be interested to be very interested to listen to
Dick present and then compare it to Fred. If you want diversity, that's what maximum diversity. I even I know that. Uh, the remote aud audience was interested in that, and I answered some questions for them in real time with with my opinions on that. But that's one that really stands out. If you've ever come across Nagel and you don't know what to think about him, listen to Dick and listen to Fred and draw your own conclusions.
Right.
I also made a pot I also made blog about that during the conference as well, So it's on my WordPress blog.
There you go, Larry Dash Handcock dot com or the hyphen whatever, you know, Larry dash Hancock dot com. You go over there, you could check out all Larry's work and the blog and that link will be in the show notes as well. But yeah, no, that that's a great point I think that. You know, Gail Nick Jackson did did her talk about you know, quite a few interesting things there, starting with the Knicks film, and uh
kind of got a little emotional during her discussion. Uh but you know, I was on stage with her and I just tried to help lead the discussion a little bit and that's all I did there. And uh yeah, and like we said, I mean, Swanson's opener was was absolutely great. A lot of interesting people there though, And geez, let me let me think here, a bunch of the guys from choke holds and stuff. Gabby, who else would you mention here?
Let's see, I definitely the guys from so cult says were interesting present.
Paul Blow was one of those. Jeff Mee Yeah, and.
Then we had.
Uh, who else was it? And Andrew Ryle right, he is the one who spoke during the banquet.
Jeff Meek Jeff Meek award one of Paul's choke calls. I thought it was a fantastic point he made during his present taken choke calls. If you all have not heard about it has to do a lot with the the legal issues, the historical issues of why the problems with the official story, what is what has placed a
choke hold on getting the real story out. But Paul was very interesting in opening up his He he actually referred to the American historical side, these code of ethics and code of practices, and pointed out how the history
books and history professors are violating their own practices. And he he made a remark I think he said he called twenty some history professors asking what they teach in class about the assassination, and then he read them their their code of contact, then asking if they thought they were following.
It and they all said no, right right, And you know, also Sarah Jordan Hines did an interesting presentation on Dorothy Killgowan. Uh, you know, we we had let me think here, Joe Joe Burrelly and of course, uh, let me think Daniel Shehan. Joe Burrelly was there with Daniel she Ann was separate, but with was there with with Bob. Yeah, with when they had the Rob Clark thing that he had joined in on, but they had also done the thing with Doug Campbell and the two of them together was interesting.
Bob Nelson had something that was pretty personal uh to him that.
Was going on there.
Will o'holleran, Uh, you know, Casey Quinlan, uh, Andy Keel I think we mentioned already, I forget and Janet Rodin also presented separately from Bob Carmind Sabastano. There's a video that he had sent in. I think that was played on Sunday and it was originally scheduled for a different day, but thankfully we were able to shift it and make the schedule work better. Did we get to Brent Holland I forget if we got to that presentation? Did we No?
We did not.
Oh, we didn't, but will that be online.
It is online as well as the documentary that he led us air during the banquet.
Oh excellent, right, the documentary piece. That was another thing, so you guys didn't have to just put up with mine this year. And of course David boy Land, who presented with Larry and Larry was you know, remote and David was there, so that was interesting, and Larry mentioned Dick Russell. So I think I got into just about everybody on the list pretty much, and if I didn't,
then everybody else did. So with all that having been said, again, you can go to Assassination Conference dot com and sign up use o'celly ten get ten percent off and you can still get the conference and it'll be in a well a more friendly downloadable versions soon broken down into
each each presentation. Some of them already done, Gabby said, so some of them are up, but all of them will be up and you'll be able to get that all the way to December thirty first, so go ahead and get the link from the show notes here with the podcast. And with that, guys, I want to thank Gabby and Ken and of course Larry Hancock call for joining me tonight and I want to thank you guys for listening, because after all, I am merely o'celly, and all of you are the effect.
Chili dot com.
Go ahead in the Truth.
About the Day the assassinate right, Well, what do you want to know Ruby Baker's wild claim?
Oswell, girlfriends, you knew Ruby and Barry handser weapons.
Really, I imagine I could claim I have four. It doesn't make me a wagon, but okay, I'm the.
Building and trying to prevent the murder of John Kennedy.
Come on now has a real effort on the Davey assassination book claim.
Go to Amazon dot com enter Judith Baker in her own words.
You'll get the results for a digital copy of a book where Walt Brown utilizes her own words and the known evidence in the case to get at well a different perspective. Let's say you can.
Get Judith Barry Baker in her own words from the author himself, signed if you request it by contacting doctor Brown at kias jfk at aol dot com. It's a fun book and it actually dissects the many, many fantastic claims Judith very Baker in her own words.
Thank you for all the great information.
The War State by Michael Swanson explains the great national transformation that took place and put the Kennedy presidency in the context of the times, and reveals never before published information about the Cuban missile crisis. President Kennedy would not have been assassinated if he had been president two hundred years ago. His assassination took place in the context of the Cold War and the rise of the national security state.
Before World War II, the United States was a continental republic. In the decade that followed, it became an imperial superpower. Generals such as Curtis LeMay not only wanted to invade Cuba, but knew that there were short range missiles on the island armed with nuclear warheads that they could not destroy because they were on mobile launchers. Their invasion could have led to a Third World War, and they wanted to
go to war anyway. The War State by Michael Swanson reveals why and will show you what President Kennedy was up against. For more information, the Warstate dot com.
Yo Yolis Doug Campbell, host of the Dallas Action podcast presented by Wall Street Window, and you are listening to the o'chilly effect revelation through conversation.
In Denial of Secret Wars with air Strikes and Tanks by Larry Hancock. Wars became a staple of US covert operations and are still happening today. Larryhancock's book In Denial rips the cover off many of them, using new files.
It exposes things about the Bay of Pigs that no one has ever written about before. It shows why it really failed and why the United States did not earn from it. It also shows why other countries today are doing secret operations with more success. This is the book that puts what some want to deny into the light. In Denial, Secret Wars with air Strikes and Tanks Larryhancock. For more information, go to Larry hyphen Handcock dot com.
Pick up your copy of In Denial at Amazon dot com in digital or physical force.