Purcy said:Would you like to wager whether or not there is copious film footage, photographic and DNA evidence to substantiate the eyewitness reports that the President's public message is corrcect? A message that would destroy his chances for reelection if doubt could seriously be cast upon it. You have an overactive imagination and an underactive cerebrum.
Well now when we know he was shot at sight. There isn't going to be any good footage of him. And the only thing DNA proves is that they have his DNA. Military eyewitnesses? I wouldn't take very seriously.
Now if we had his body, and even better, could get an independent autopsy done. Now that would be great evidence. But it's kinda impossible now when they disposed of his body (how convenient). And disposing evidence is a pretty good sign of a cover up.
And Nixon took a chance when he ordered the democrats to be bugged too. Surely there are tons of other dirty examples like that, which we will never know of.
And no, it's not that I have an overactive imagination. It's that I am able to think critically without having someone spoon feed me propaganda. Sorry to see you and so many Americans lack that ability.