Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
My very special guest, happy to always happy to have
him on the show is Paul Morrow.
Speaker 2 (00:05):
Paul is an attorney.
Speaker 1 (00:08):
He is a former NYPD inspector. He is the proprietor
of the ups desk substack O P S D E
sk dot substack dot com, to which I am a
paying subscriber and I encourage you to do the same. Paul,
Good morning or good afternoon where you are, and it's good,
(00:28):
good to talk to you again, good to be here. So, uh,
I wanted to talk to you a bit today about
Donald Trump announcing that he's going to require the federal
government to release whatever information they have on the famous
assassinations of JFK, RFK and MLK. And I saw, I
(00:50):
saw the video on substack that that you posted some
really interesting stuff. So why don't we go through them
kind of in reverse order, because I think JFK will
be the most interesting. So let's save that for last
and talk about the other two. What if anything, do
you expect to learn from Martin Luther King files with King?
Speaker 3 (01:08):
You know, you've always heard the rumors that they were
spying on him, that they might have had unauthorized that
his illegal wiretaps or bugs in his room, etc.
Speaker 4 (01:19):
And that's part of the whole co intel pro.
Speaker 3 (01:22):
Over era of collecting files on anybody that he perceived
as his enemy or an enemy of America. I think
you may see some of that which is an embarrassment
to the FBI, which might be why it's never been released.
I also think you'll find out that some of the
people in his circle, maybe not quite his inner circle
although maybe, but people around him were FBI informants. Jesse
(01:48):
Jackson himself, who was very close to Martin Luther King
and was with him in fact when.
Speaker 4 (01:53):
He was shot, has said that there.
Speaker 3 (01:56):
Were people that were informants that were around King. But
I will say, and look, I'm not the world's leading
expert on this, but I have, whatever reason, always been
intrigued by these three actual cases, along with the Malcolm
X's case, the four big assassinations from that era. And
I don't think anybody but James Earl Ray submitted that crime.
(02:20):
You know, if you look at his history, attracts very
much with his ambitions and the way he lived his life.
And you know, people forget they caught him in London,
he had led and was trying to make his way
to Zimbabwe Rhodesia at the time because it was a
a racist state, so.
Speaker 4 (02:38):
That was very much part of his ideology.
Speaker 3 (02:40):
So I don't expect major There may be some embarrassments,
but I don't think there'll be major revelations relative to MLKA.
Speaker 2 (02:46):
All right, Yeah, that makes sense.
Speaker 1 (02:48):
And you know, all you and I are doing right
here is speculating.
Speaker 2 (02:52):
But it's kind of fun circulation.
Speaker 1 (02:55):
And one of the threads that ties through all of these,
although much more with JFK than the others, is there
some conspiracy theories around all of them, but obviously a
lot more a lot more with JFK.
Speaker 2 (03:08):
And and we will get to that.
Speaker 1 (03:10):
One thing I want to ask you also that will
tie into all of these a little bit. So, Uh,
it's the JFK files were ordered released by Congress in
the nineties, twenty five years later and then and then
Trump ordered it done in twenty seventeen, and it wasn't done.
And you were just talking about with MLK how there
could potentially be some some embarrassments to.
Speaker 2 (03:31):
To the FBI in there.
Speaker 1 (03:33):
What do you do you think that just you know,
embarrassments kind of kind of stuff is what's been keeping
this information from getting.
Speaker 3 (03:42):
Out so embarrassment, you know, stated that way would not
be enough. The term that they'll use sources and methods
that is the default of every intelligence agency everywhere when
they don't want stuff out. You're going to reveal who
we flipped, and you will. You're going to reveal who
was maybe an undercover, and by doing that, you're going
(04:03):
to reveal how we do what we do when it
alerts the bed guys to what could be going on now.
Speaker 4 (04:09):
And there is some credibility to that. I don't want
to undermine that.
Speaker 3 (04:12):
There is a reason that we do have a classification system,
but at this point, at this point, I suspect that
any methods are going to be very very you.
Speaker 4 (04:24):
Know, the old school.
Speaker 2 (04:26):
Yeah, you know what I mean.
Speaker 4 (04:27):
I think it'll be an anachronism at this place.
Speaker 3 (04:29):
So I think that you're probably going to see, like
I said, things about people being flipped, which we all
know the FBI used an informant.
Speaker 4 (04:37):
Look at that.
Speaker 3 (04:38):
You know, it's been all over the January sixth discussion,
So everybody knows that. Everybody knows police and the FBI
use undercovers, which is different from an informant. An undercover
is an actual gun carrier that went through the academy
and is a member of that agency. That's a cop
or an agent that you then build a legend and
put in undercover.
Speaker 4 (04:57):
So you know, you'll see maybe some of.
Speaker 3 (04:59):
Those kinds of things, But in terms of embarrassment, that probably.
Speaker 4 (05:02):
Was a lot of why they bore so strenuously.
Speaker 3 (05:05):
Now, if you're talking to members of Congress who aren't
steeped in this kind of tradecraft, it.
Speaker 4 (05:10):
Can be easy to snow them.
Speaker 3 (05:11):
You know, they don't know any better, and you're telling them, well,
we can't do this. It's going to really end up
mine our efforts. You know, you don't want to be
that person in Congress who takes away a tool to
keep this the country safe.
Speaker 4 (05:21):
And so there may be some of that as well.
Speaker 1 (05:24):
I have a feeling that Trump's not going to buy
those arguments very easily, and I have a feeling that
Ratcliffe won't won't either. Let's let's go through two others
real quick. So well one quick and then we'll take
a little more time on JFK.
Speaker 2 (05:36):
What about RFK with.
Speaker 1 (05:38):
With Sir Hans Herehand, who I think is like a
Palestinian radical who shot him.
Speaker 2 (05:42):
What do you expect in these files not much.
Speaker 3 (05:46):
Again, Surround himself said he kept trying to plead guilty.
He had a good attorney in the attorney kept trying
to fight the case, and he kept trying to say no.
And then the term that you always see attributed to
sirhiser And is that he did the shooting with quote
unquote teny twenty years of malice, a forethought, you know,
trying to make it very clear that he just ate Kennedy.
Speaker 4 (06:08):
When they tossed his room, you know, after they after
they arrested him, they went back to his where he
was living, he had a diary. In the diary he was.
Speaker 3 (06:15):
Talking about how he fixated on RFK because RFK looked
like at that point he had won the California primary,
looked like he was probably on his way to the presidency,
and he was a supporter of Israel. So Sir Sir
Han born into a Palestinian Christian family, unusually but nonetheless,
(06:35):
was very much motivated by anti Israel animus.
Speaker 4 (06:40):
And you know, the.
Speaker 3 (06:41):
Only only aspect of the RFK story that's even worth
considering is this idea of a second gunment. I've never
seen anybody credibly assert that Suran had nothing to.
Speaker 4 (06:51):
Do with it.
Speaker 3 (06:52):
But you do see arguments that there was a security
guard there who was in on it. And it all
comes down to was RFK shot in the back and RFK,
you know, some of the wounds apparently looked to be
rear wounds, and some of the witnesses that were there,
and there were a lot of witness witnesses. George Plimpton,
famous writer at the time, who actually met years ago,
(07:16):
very credible person.
Speaker 4 (07:18):
He never asserted that I saw that it was anybody
other than Sir In and he was with Kennedy at.
Speaker 3 (07:22):
The time, as were a number of journalists, and I
never saw anybody credibly say that Sir Han wasn't involved.
Speaker 4 (07:29):
But one or two people have come out.
Speaker 3 (07:31):
Who are around that story, who have said that they
believe a second shooter was there. They also have the
audio tape from I believe a Polish journalist if I recall,
and on the audio tape it's not right there, but
it's from the ballroom that's adjacent, and the argument there
is that you can hear more shots than Sir Hans
(07:52):
gun held. So you know, but then the bureau came back,
the FBI came back and said, no, it's an echo
or something like that. So I default realistically here to
sir Sirhan is the loan shooter, just as I do
the same with MLK. That doesn't mean there won't be
some revelations around it. I think more with MLK than
(08:13):
r OK. But I think that the action, as you say,
is going to be with JFK.
Speaker 2 (08:18):
All right, so let's talk about that one.
Speaker 1 (08:20):
And for those just joining, we're talking with Paul Morrow,
former NYPD inspector, Fox News contributor and proprietor of the
ops Desk, which you can find at opsdesk dot com
or opsdesk dot substack dot com and become a subscribers
as I am. So, this obviously has been the subject
of all kinds of theories. I feel like the term
(08:41):
conspiracy theory is used a little too much, but there's
all kinds of theories around this. There has been since
it happened the Oliver Stone movie whenever that came out
in the eighties or nineties, and everybody's still wondering. And
I so, just so you know, Paul, I am not
a person who is deeply fascinated by the JFK story.
I don't care that much, really, But but what really
(09:04):
has me so interested is the what are they trying
to hide?
Speaker 2 (09:08):
Thing?
Speaker 1 (09:09):
Since Trump tried to declassify this in twenty seventeen and
apparently either CIA or FBI or both went to him
and talked him out of declassifying all of it.
Speaker 2 (09:18):
So that's the part that has me interested.
Speaker 3 (09:21):
Yeah, So I think that is probably the main interest
at this point because it was so long ago, but
it was the execution of an American president. Yeah, And
you know, I just think that the story doesn't fully wash.
Who's generally considered to have written among this series of
them more authoritative books on this, I Ny Posner proser
(09:42):
really the bul City idea that the Warner Commission got
it right and that Ogwald was the loan shooter. And
so you do accept that idea. And by the way,
by Posner also has written on the other assassinations, and
I generally agree with him, but on this one, I
don't for us to accept the idea that Oswald was
the long shooter. We have to accept the idea that
(10:03):
Jack Ruby decided to spend the rest of his life
in prison to silence Oswald because he was such a
Kennedy fan that he felt like he had to exact revenge.
The idea that a two big gangster working in New Orleans,
that's Jack Ruby. The idea that he was somehow or
(10:24):
other motivated by patriotism in order to shoot Oswald and
knowing that it was all going to be on camera
and that he was going to be going to jail
is ludicrous to me. And in fact, he could have
been liable for the death penalty himself. This is Texas at
the time, and this is a you know, intentional murder.
I don't buy that, especially with Ruby's background. I did
(10:46):
it on the opstesk substiactee. Jacob Rubinstein was his original name.
He was a Jewish gangster who worked with the mafia.
And you know, this is the old not long after
the old Dutch Shultz stage and all that, and he
was out of Chicago. Actually Ruby ended up in New
Orleans working as a nightclub manager for Carlos Marcello was
(11:08):
the mafia boss of New Orleans.
Speaker 4 (11:10):
And the idea that reportedly Ruby had terminal.
Speaker 3 (11:14):
Cancer and so the idea was, you got to silence
this guy, We'll take care of your family, and you
go into jail and you know, just never give it up.
Speaker 4 (11:24):
And he never did.
Speaker 3 (11:25):
And at the time there were people who understood this
kind of thing more than I think the national media did.
Speaker 4 (11:32):
Senator moynihan here in New.
Speaker 3 (11:34):
York Democratic senator who now would be considered, like you know,
to the right of Donald Trump, because he was a
very moderate guy. I actually knew he's got worked for
his chief of staff for a while in a different job.
He was the first person to say, get Oswald out
of there, get him away from all of this, get
him out of there, get him up here.
Speaker 4 (11:53):
We can't protect them.
Speaker 3 (11:55):
So you know, the the idea that Ruby, we can't
protect them down, they get them up at the idea
that Ruby, who would have been Liabel in the Texas
or Louisiana if you able to shoot him either one
of them, he would have been facing the death penalty.
The identity did that out of patriotism, I find ludicrous,
especially when you consider it his mafia background, and.
Speaker 4 (12:15):
Especially when you consider all motives.
Speaker 3 (12:19):
You know, the presidential election that Kennedy won in was
very widely it is very widely accepted now to have
been fraudulent. I don't mean to, you know, be an
election DENI or here, but it's a matter of history.
Leg and Connor the mafia bosson Chicago, Illinois, and reportedly
(12:41):
he helped LBJ to live at Texas.
Speaker 1 (12:44):
Okay, So just to connect the last two dots then,
because you didn't say it explicitly, but what what you're
saying is that the mafia perhaps had something to do
with the assassination of Kennedy, with getting Lee Harvey Oswalld
to kill Kennedy, and in order to keep that story
from coming out, to keep Oswald from.
Speaker 2 (13:04):
Talking, they had Ruby kill Oswald. Is that what you're saying.
Speaker 4 (13:08):
Yeah, and look, pure speculation. And reportedly according to the.
Speaker 3 (13:14):
Archivists who has the Kennedy archives in the National Archives,
there are no quote unquote smoking guns, no pun intended.
So this could all be off and he's been saying
that for years. But I just you know, it just feels,
you know, like it is what the mafia does and
always did, which is you.
Speaker 4 (13:31):
Kill a killer.
Speaker 3 (13:32):
You know, when they had to take one of the
boss of the Columbo family here in New York, they
killed him in Columbus Circle in the late sixties early seventies,
when of that was because he was becoming too public.
They got a guy to shoot Colombo, and then they
got one of the guys to immediately kill a shooter,
and that all happened right at the scene in Columbus
Circle of a very famous sort of crime story here
in New York.
Speaker 4 (13:52):
It just has theirm all over it. They had too
much motivation.
Speaker 3 (13:55):
Marcello reportedly told an FBI informant, I saw the interview
in fact of the FBI agent who ran the informant.
He said, he told our informant, we got that SOB
meaning JFK. And he didn't have a whole lot of motive.
This was small talk in prison. Marcella was already in
jail and he was moment So I just put a
lot together and I feel like there was some mafia involvement.
(14:16):
Were they the only ones involved? No, But you remember the.
Speaker 4 (14:18):
CIA, The FBI used to work with the mafia.
Speaker 3 (14:21):
It's a matter of history that they employed the mafia
to try to get Castro. And it is a matter
of history in the Mississippi burning case that they got
a notorious mafioso to go down grabbed the guy that
they suspected had killed the civil rights workers in that case.
Speaker 4 (14:43):
Take him into the woods, put his gun in his
mouth and tell us the story.
Speaker 3 (14:46):
And the guy that had never confronted something like that,
and he did. And it was a guy named Greg Scarpa.
And this is the kind of sources of the method
stuff I'm talking about that came out later because Scarpa
died after a blood transfusion of AIDS. But Scarpa was
a murderous mafioso. They used him to break the Mississippi
burning case. Of course that never came out. They just
(15:07):
said that they solved it. But the reason that you
Scarpa was he was an informant. Okay, he was doing
the Whitey Bulger thing where he was playing both sides
of the defense.
Speaker 2 (15:15):
So we just we just have a few minutes left.
Speaker 1 (15:17):
What part of what troubles me about this is, if
your theory is right, I just feel like there would
be a little bit more evidence of it by now.
Speaker 2 (15:31):
Right.
Speaker 1 (15:31):
I know that the mafia is good at keeping secrets,
and if you're right, I mean they killed Lee Harvey
Oswald to keep a secret, and other people don't want
to meet that same fate, so they're going to keep
their mouth shut. But sixty years later, wouldn't you think
there would be just a little more evidence of mafia
involvement if it were true, or do you think that
kind of evidence is what's still being hidden.
Speaker 3 (15:54):
Yeah, I think that there's an impetus to keep that
stuff buried. And by the way I should carry out
this a Serten effect and a speculative. We may not
get his positive answers here because that's a whole trail.
And you know, I forget how the Scarpel story came out,
but the idea that you know, somebody here, whether it's
(16:15):
the CIA, FBI hoovers that FBI who decided to look,
we got to get rid of this guy, and you know,
we have these hired killers that'll do it to me.
And if you really read up on the history and
the way that the country was run at the time,
is not that fanciful. And I, again, I don't know,
and I have a feeling that we may never know.
But if you did this at the time, you bury
(16:36):
it as deep as possible. And I would be very
surprised that this anything about this on paper. You know,
we may find out that somebody was an informant, et cetera.
But I don't know that we're going to really find
out that Marcello had Ruby killed central trafficante in Florida,
might have been in contact with elements in Cuba or otherwise.
Speaker 4 (16:55):
They were heavily involved in Bay of Pigs.
Speaker 3 (16:57):
That's the gripe they had against Kennedy and then as
I said, Sam g and Conny Chicago, but was very
very involved with them and shared a girlfriend with JFK,
one of the Maguire sisters.
Speaker 4 (17:09):
So these they are all varying nested. It's undeniable that
they will all play and foot seet with each other.
And it's just you know, my spidery sense. We call
what you want.
Speaker 3 (17:18):
Maybe it's cynicism, but I just feel like this just
too much there, too much, and I'm conspiracy theorists. The
other two I think are as been has been reported
to maybe revelations.
Speaker 4 (17:29):
The JFK one, I'm not sure I'll.
Speaker 3 (17:31):
Ever believe that it is as as reported a single
shooter from that book repository.
Speaker 1 (17:37):
Well, very interesting and it'll it'll be also interesting, and
I don't know whether there will be any reporting that
leaks out about it, but if to find out whether
CIA or FBI tries to talk Trump out of releasing
the whole thing. I don't think John Ratcliffe will go along.
I'll tell you what, if John Ratcliffe says there's stuff
here we can't release that, that would be really interesting
(17:59):
because I think he wants it released.
Speaker 2 (18:01):
So.
Speaker 1 (18:03):
Hard for me to buy that sources and methods is
an important thing anymore. Sixty years later, all right, last
question for you, Paul, and I'm asking all my listeners
this today.
Speaker 2 (18:11):
What is the worst movie you've ever seen?
Speaker 4 (18:15):
Oh? My god? That? Oh god, let me think, Oh,
worst worst movie? I haven't been a movie. Yeah, here's
what comes to mind.
Speaker 3 (18:23):
The only movie I have all walked out of a
science fiction movie involving Mick Jagger as the lead.
Speaker 4 (18:30):
Let's just say that Mick Jagger cannot act and I'll
leave it at that.
Speaker 1 (18:35):
All right, I've been to I'm gonna have to look
up the name of that movie.
Speaker 4 (18:39):
I can't remember the name of it, but it is.
Speaker 3 (18:40):
If you imagine if you watched it now, it would
be as hysterical of so amateurish.
Speaker 1 (18:45):
Free Free Jacks. That's the movie from nineteen ninety.
Speaker 3 (18:48):
Guy went to it in the movie theater and walked out,
So I was stones fan.
Speaker 4 (18:52):
That's how bad it was.
Speaker 2 (18:53):
Paul Morrow is a former NYPD inspector.
Speaker 1 (18:55):
He's a Fox News contributor, he's an attorney, and he
runs the Ops Desksack. I encourage you to sign up
O P S D E s K dot substack dot com.
Speaker 2 (19:05):
Thanks. I'm always grateful for your time, Paul.
Speaker 4 (19:08):
Thank you, buddy. Always a pleasure
My very special guest, happy to always happy to have
him on the show is Paul Morrow.
Speaker 2 (00:05):
Paul is an attorney.
Speaker 1 (00:08):
He is a former NYPD inspector. He is the proprietor
of the ups desk substack O P S D E
sk dot substack dot com, to which I am a
paying subscriber and I encourage you to do the same. Paul,
Good morning or good afternoon where you are, and it's good,
(00:28):
good to talk to you again, good to be here. So, uh,
I wanted to talk to you a bit today about
Donald Trump announcing that he's going to require the federal
government to release whatever information they have on the famous
assassinations of JFK, RFK and MLK. And I saw, I
(00:50):
saw the video on substack that that you posted some
really interesting stuff. So why don't we go through them
kind of in reverse order, because I think JFK will
be the most interesting. So let's save that for last
and talk about the other two. What if anything, do
you expect to learn from Martin Luther King files with King?
Speaker 3 (01:08):
You know, you've always heard the rumors that they were
spying on him, that they might have had unauthorized that
his illegal wiretaps or bugs in his room, etc.
Speaker 4 (01:19):
And that's part of the whole co intel pro.
Speaker 3 (01:22):
Over era of collecting files on anybody that he perceived
as his enemy or an enemy of America. I think
you may see some of that which is an embarrassment
to the FBI, which might be why it's never been released.
I also think you'll find out that some of the
people in his circle, maybe not quite his inner circle
although maybe, but people around him were FBI informants. Jesse
(01:48):
Jackson himself, who was very close to Martin Luther King
and was with him in fact when.
Speaker 4 (01:53):
He was shot, has said that there.
Speaker 3 (01:56):
Were people that were informants that were around King. But
I will say, and look, I'm not the world's leading
expert on this, but I have, whatever reason, always been
intrigued by these three actual cases, along with the Malcolm
X's case, the four big assassinations from that era. And
I don't think anybody but James Earl Ray submitted that crime.
(02:20):
You know, if you look at his history, attracts very
much with his ambitions and the way he lived his life.
And you know, people forget they caught him in London,
he had led and was trying to make his way
to Zimbabwe Rhodesia at the time because it was a
a racist state, so.
Speaker 4 (02:38):
That was very much part of his ideology.
Speaker 3 (02:40):
So I don't expect major There may be some embarrassments,
but I don't think there'll be major revelations relative to MLKA.
Speaker 2 (02:46):
All right, Yeah, that makes sense.
Speaker 1 (02:48):
And you know, all you and I are doing right
here is speculating.
Speaker 2 (02:52):
But it's kind of fun circulation.
Speaker 1 (02:55):
And one of the threads that ties through all of these,
although much more with JFK than the others, is there
some conspiracy theories around all of them, but obviously a
lot more a lot more with JFK.
Speaker 2 (03:08):
And and we will get to that.
Speaker 1 (03:10):
One thing I want to ask you also that will
tie into all of these a little bit. So, Uh,
it's the JFK files were ordered released by Congress in
the nineties, twenty five years later and then and then
Trump ordered it done in twenty seventeen, and it wasn't done.
And you were just talking about with MLK how there
could potentially be some some embarrassments to.
Speaker 2 (03:31):
To the FBI in there.
Speaker 1 (03:33):
What do you do you think that just you know,
embarrassments kind of kind of stuff is what's been keeping
this information from getting.
Speaker 3 (03:42):
Out so embarrassment, you know, stated that way would not
be enough. The term that they'll use sources and methods
that is the default of every intelligence agency everywhere when
they don't want stuff out. You're going to reveal who
we flipped, and you will. You're going to reveal who
was maybe an undercover, and by doing that, you're going
(04:03):
to reveal how we do what we do when it
alerts the bed guys to what could be going on now.
Speaker 4 (04:09):
And there is some credibility to that. I don't want
to undermine that.
Speaker 3 (04:12):
There is a reason that we do have a classification system,
but at this point, at this point, I suspect that
any methods are going to be very very you.
Speaker 4 (04:24):
Know, the old school.
Speaker 2 (04:26):
Yeah, you know what I mean.
Speaker 4 (04:27):
I think it'll be an anachronism at this place.
Speaker 3 (04:29):
So I think that you're probably going to see, like
I said, things about people being flipped, which we all
know the FBI used an informant.
Speaker 4 (04:37):
Look at that.
Speaker 3 (04:38):
You know, it's been all over the January sixth discussion,
So everybody knows that. Everybody knows police and the FBI
use undercovers, which is different from an informant. An undercover
is an actual gun carrier that went through the academy
and is a member of that agency. That's a cop
or an agent that you then build a legend and
put in undercover.
Speaker 4 (04:57):
So you know, you'll see maybe some of.
Speaker 3 (04:59):
Those kinds of things, But in terms of embarrassment, that probably.
Speaker 4 (05:02):
Was a lot of why they bore so strenuously.
Speaker 3 (05:05):
Now, if you're talking to members of Congress who aren't
steeped in this kind of tradecraft, it.
Speaker 4 (05:10):
Can be easy to snow them.
Speaker 3 (05:11):
You know, they don't know any better, and you're telling them, well,
we can't do this. It's going to really end up
mine our efforts. You know, you don't want to be
that person in Congress who takes away a tool to
keep this the country safe.
Speaker 4 (05:21):
And so there may be some of that as well.
Speaker 1 (05:24):
I have a feeling that Trump's not going to buy
those arguments very easily, and I have a feeling that
Ratcliffe won't won't either. Let's let's go through two others
real quick. So well one quick and then we'll take
a little more time on JFK.
Speaker 2 (05:36):
What about RFK with.
Speaker 1 (05:38):
With Sir Hans Herehand, who I think is like a
Palestinian radical who shot him.
Speaker 2 (05:42):
What do you expect in these files not much.
Speaker 3 (05:46):
Again, Surround himself said he kept trying to plead guilty.
He had a good attorney in the attorney kept trying
to fight the case, and he kept trying to say no.
And then the term that you always see attributed to
sirhiser And is that he did the shooting with quote
unquote teny twenty years of malice, a forethought, you know,
trying to make it very clear that he just ate Kennedy.
Speaker 4 (06:08):
When they tossed his room, you know, after they after
they arrested him, they went back to his where he
was living, he had a diary. In the diary he was.
Speaker 3 (06:15):
Talking about how he fixated on RFK because RFK looked
like at that point he had won the California primary,
looked like he was probably on his way to the presidency,
and he was a supporter of Israel. So Sir Sir
Han born into a Palestinian Christian family, unusually but nonetheless,
(06:35):
was very much motivated by anti Israel animus.
Speaker 4 (06:40):
And you know, the.
Speaker 3 (06:41):
Only only aspect of the RFK story that's even worth
considering is this idea of a second gunment. I've never
seen anybody credibly assert that Suran had nothing to.
Speaker 4 (06:51):
Do with it.
Speaker 3 (06:52):
But you do see arguments that there was a security
guard there who was in on it. And it all
comes down to was RFK shot in the back and RFK,
you know, some of the wounds apparently looked to be
rear wounds, and some of the witnesses that were there,
and there were a lot of witness witnesses. George Plimpton,
famous writer at the time, who actually met years ago,
(07:16):
very credible person.
Speaker 4 (07:18):
He never asserted that I saw that it was anybody
other than Sir In and he was with Kennedy at.
Speaker 3 (07:22):
The time, as were a number of journalists, and I
never saw anybody credibly say that Sir Han wasn't involved.
Speaker 4 (07:29):
But one or two people have come out.
Speaker 3 (07:31):
Who are around that story, who have said that they
believe a second shooter was there. They also have the
audio tape from I believe a Polish journalist if I recall,
and on the audio tape it's not right there, but
it's from the ballroom that's adjacent, and the argument there
is that you can hear more shots than Sir Hans
(07:52):
gun held. So you know, but then the bureau came back,
the FBI came back and said, no, it's an echo
or something like that. So I default realistically here to
sir Sirhan is the loan shooter, just as I do
the same with MLK. That doesn't mean there won't be
some revelations around it. I think more with MLK than
(08:13):
r OK. But I think that the action, as you say,
is going to be with JFK.
Speaker 2 (08:18):
All right, so let's talk about that one.
Speaker 1 (08:20):
And for those just joining, we're talking with Paul Morrow,
former NYPD inspector, Fox News contributor and proprietor of the
ops Desk, which you can find at opsdesk dot com
or opsdesk dot substack dot com and become a subscribers
as I am. So, this obviously has been the subject
of all kinds of theories. I feel like the term
(08:41):
conspiracy theory is used a little too much, but there's
all kinds of theories around this. There has been since
it happened the Oliver Stone movie whenever that came out
in the eighties or nineties, and everybody's still wondering. And
I so, just so you know, Paul, I am not
a person who is deeply fascinated by the JFK story.
I don't care that much, really, But but what really
(09:04):
has me so interested is the what are they trying
to hide?
Speaker 2 (09:08):
Thing?
Speaker 1 (09:09):
Since Trump tried to declassify this in twenty seventeen and
apparently either CIA or FBI or both went to him
and talked him out of declassifying all of it.
Speaker 2 (09:18):
So that's the part that has me interested.
Speaker 3 (09:21):
Yeah, So I think that is probably the main interest
at this point because it was so long ago, but
it was the execution of an American president. Yeah, And
you know, I just think that the story doesn't fully wash.
Who's generally considered to have written among this series of
them more authoritative books on this, I Ny Posner proser
(09:42):
really the bul City idea that the Warner Commission got
it right and that Ogwald was the loan shooter. And
so you do accept that idea. And by the way,
by Posner also has written on the other assassinations, and
I generally agree with him, but on this one, I
don't for us to accept the idea that Oswald was
the long shooter. We have to accept the idea that
(10:03):
Jack Ruby decided to spend the rest of his life
in prison to silence Oswald because he was such a
Kennedy fan that he felt like he had to exact revenge.
The idea that a two big gangster working in New Orleans,
that's Jack Ruby. The idea that he was somehow or
(10:24):
other motivated by patriotism in order to shoot Oswald and
knowing that it was all going to be on camera
and that he was going to be going to jail
is ludicrous to me. And in fact, he could have
been liable for the death penalty himself. This is Texas at
the time, and this is a you know, intentional murder.
I don't buy that, especially with Ruby's background. I did
(10:46):
it on the opstesk substiactee. Jacob Rubinstein was his original name.
He was a Jewish gangster who worked with the mafia.
And you know, this is the old not long after
the old Dutch Shultz stage and all that, and he
was out of Chicago. Actually Ruby ended up in New
Orleans working as a nightclub manager for Carlos Marcello was
(11:08):
the mafia boss of New Orleans.
Speaker 4 (11:10):
And the idea that reportedly Ruby had terminal.
Speaker 3 (11:14):
Cancer and so the idea was, you got to silence
this guy, We'll take care of your family, and you
go into jail and you know, just never give it up.
Speaker 4 (11:24):
And he never did.
Speaker 3 (11:25):
And at the time there were people who understood this
kind of thing more than I think the national media did.
Speaker 4 (11:32):
Senator moynihan here in New.
Speaker 3 (11:34):
York Democratic senator who now would be considered, like you know,
to the right of Donald Trump, because he was a
very moderate guy. I actually knew he's got worked for
his chief of staff for a while in a different job.
He was the first person to say, get Oswald out
of there, get him away from all of this, get
him out of there, get him up here.
Speaker 4 (11:53):
We can't protect them.
Speaker 3 (11:55):
So you know, the the idea that Ruby, we can't
protect them down, they get them up at the idea
that Ruby, who would have been Liabel in the Texas
or Louisiana if you able to shoot him either one
of them, he would have been facing the death penalty.
The identity did that out of patriotism, I find ludicrous,
especially when you consider it his mafia background, and.
Speaker 4 (12:15):
Especially when you consider all motives.
Speaker 3 (12:19):
You know, the presidential election that Kennedy won in was
very widely it is very widely accepted now to have
been fraudulent. I don't mean to, you know, be an
election DENI or here, but it's a matter of history.
Leg and Connor the mafia bosson Chicago, Illinois, and reportedly
(12:41):
he helped LBJ to live at Texas.
Speaker 1 (12:44):
Okay, So just to connect the last two dots then,
because you didn't say it explicitly, but what what you're
saying is that the mafia perhaps had something to do
with the assassination of Kennedy, with getting Lee Harvey Oswalld
to kill Kennedy, and in order to keep that story
from coming out, to keep Oswald from.
Speaker 2 (13:04):
Talking, they had Ruby kill Oswald. Is that what you're saying.
Speaker 4 (13:08):
Yeah, and look, pure speculation. And reportedly according to the.
Speaker 3 (13:14):
Archivists who has the Kennedy archives in the National Archives,
there are no quote unquote smoking guns, no pun intended.
So this could all be off and he's been saying
that for years. But I just you know, it just feels,
you know, like it is what the mafia does and
always did, which is you.
Speaker 4 (13:31):
Kill a killer.
Speaker 3 (13:32):
You know, when they had to take one of the
boss of the Columbo family here in New York, they
killed him in Columbus Circle in the late sixties early seventies,
when of that was because he was becoming too public.
They got a guy to shoot Colombo, and then they
got one of the guys to immediately kill a shooter,
and that all happened right at the scene in Columbus
Circle of a very famous sort of crime story here
in New York.
Speaker 4 (13:52):
It just has theirm all over it. They had too
much motivation.
Speaker 3 (13:55):
Marcello reportedly told an FBI informant, I saw the interview
in fact of the FBI agent who ran the informant.
He said, he told our informant, we got that SOB
meaning JFK. And he didn't have a whole lot of motive.
This was small talk in prison. Marcella was already in
jail and he was moment So I just put a
lot together and I feel like there was some mafia involvement.
(14:16):
Were they the only ones involved? No, But you remember the.
Speaker 4 (14:18):
CIA, The FBI used to work with the mafia.
Speaker 3 (14:21):
It's a matter of history that they employed the mafia
to try to get Castro. And it is a matter
of history in the Mississippi burning case that they got
a notorious mafioso to go down grabbed the guy that
they suspected had killed the civil rights workers in that case.
Speaker 4 (14:43):
Take him into the woods, put his gun in his
mouth and tell us the story.
Speaker 3 (14:46):
And the guy that had never confronted something like that,
and he did. And it was a guy named Greg Scarpa.
And this is the kind of sources of the method
stuff I'm talking about that came out later because Scarpa
died after a blood transfusion of AIDS. But Scarpa was
a murderous mafioso. They used him to break the Mississippi
burning case. Of course that never came out. They just
(15:07):
said that they solved it. But the reason that you
Scarpa was he was an informant. Okay, he was doing
the Whitey Bulger thing where he was playing both sides
of the defense.
Speaker 2 (15:15):
So we just we just have a few minutes left.
Speaker 1 (15:17):
What part of what troubles me about this is, if
your theory is right, I just feel like there would
be a little bit more evidence of it by now.
Speaker 2 (15:31):
Right.
Speaker 1 (15:31):
I know that the mafia is good at keeping secrets,
and if you're right, I mean they killed Lee Harvey
Oswald to keep a secret, and other people don't want
to meet that same fate, so they're going to keep
their mouth shut. But sixty years later, wouldn't you think
there would be just a little more evidence of mafia
involvement if it were true, or do you think that
kind of evidence is what's still being hidden.
Speaker 3 (15:54):
Yeah, I think that there's an impetus to keep that
stuff buried. And by the way I should carry out
this a Serten effect and a speculative. We may not
get his positive answers here because that's a whole trail.
And you know, I forget how the Scarpel story came out,
but the idea that you know, somebody here, whether it's
(16:15):
the CIA, FBI hoovers that FBI who decided to look,
we got to get rid of this guy, and you know,
we have these hired killers that'll do it to me.
And if you really read up on the history and
the way that the country was run at the time,
is not that fanciful. And I, again, I don't know,
and I have a feeling that we may never know.
But if you did this at the time, you bury
(16:36):
it as deep as possible. And I would be very
surprised that this anything about this on paper. You know,
we may find out that somebody was an informant, et cetera.
But I don't know that we're going to really find
out that Marcello had Ruby killed central trafficante in Florida,
might have been in contact with elements in Cuba or otherwise.
Speaker 4 (16:55):
They were heavily involved in Bay of Pigs.
Speaker 3 (16:57):
That's the gripe they had against Kennedy and then as
I said, Sam g and Conny Chicago, but was very
very involved with them and shared a girlfriend with JFK,
one of the Maguire sisters.
Speaker 4 (17:09):
So these they are all varying nested. It's undeniable that
they will all play and foot seet with each other.
And it's just you know, my spidery sense. We call
what you want.
Speaker 3 (17:18):
Maybe it's cynicism, but I just feel like this just
too much there, too much, and I'm conspiracy theorists. The
other two I think are as been has been reported
to maybe revelations.
Speaker 4 (17:29):
The JFK one, I'm not sure I'll.
Speaker 3 (17:31):
Ever believe that it is as as reported a single
shooter from that book repository.
Speaker 1 (17:37):
Well, very interesting and it'll it'll be also interesting, and
I don't know whether there will be any reporting that
leaks out about it, but if to find out whether
CIA or FBI tries to talk Trump out of releasing
the whole thing. I don't think John Ratcliffe will go along.
I'll tell you what, if John Ratcliffe says there's stuff
here we can't release that, that would be really interesting
(17:59):
because I think he wants it released.
Speaker 2 (18:01):
So.
Speaker 1 (18:03):
Hard for me to buy that sources and methods is
an important thing anymore. Sixty years later, all right, last
question for you, Paul, and I'm asking all my listeners
this today.
Speaker 2 (18:11):
What is the worst movie you've ever seen?
Speaker 4 (18:15):
Oh? My god? That? Oh god, let me think, Oh,
worst worst movie? I haven't been a movie. Yeah, here's
what comes to mind.
Speaker 3 (18:23):
The only movie I have all walked out of a
science fiction movie involving Mick Jagger as the lead.
Speaker 4 (18:30):
Let's just say that Mick Jagger cannot act and I'll
leave it at that.
Speaker 1 (18:35):
All right, I've been to I'm gonna have to look
up the name of that movie.
Speaker 4 (18:39):
I can't remember the name of it, but it is.
Speaker 3 (18:40):
If you imagine if you watched it now, it would
be as hysterical of so amateurish.
Speaker 1 (18:45):
Free Free Jacks. That's the movie from nineteen ninety.
Speaker 3 (18:48):
Guy went to it in the movie theater and walked out,
So I was stones fan.
Speaker 4 (18:52):
That's how bad it was.
Speaker 2 (18:53):
Paul Morrow is a former NYPD inspector.
Speaker 1 (18:55):
He's a Fox News contributor, he's an attorney, and he
runs the Ops Desksack. I encourage you to sign up
O P S D E s K dot substack dot com.
Speaker 2 (19:05):
Thanks. I'm always grateful for your time, Paul.
Speaker 4 (19:08):
Thank you, buddy. Always a pleasure
The Ross Kaminsky Show News
Popular Podcasts
The Breakfast Club
The World's Most Dangerous Morning Show, The Breakfast Club, With DJ Envy And Charlamagne Tha God!
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Decisions, Decisions
Welcome to "Decisions, Decisions," the podcast where boundaries are pushed, and conversations get candid! Join your favorite hosts, Mandii B and WeezyWTF, as they dive deep into the world of non-traditional relationships and explore the often-taboo topics surrounding dating, sex, and love. Every Monday, Mandii and Weezy invite you to unlearn the outdated narratives dictated by traditional patriarchal norms. With a blend of humor, vulnerability, and authenticity, they share their personal journeys navigating their 30s, tackling the complexities of modern relationships, and engaging in thought-provoking discussions that challenge societal expectations. From groundbreaking interviews with diverse guests to relatable stories that resonate with your experiences, "Decisions, Decisions" is your go-to source for open dialogue about what it truly means to love and connect in today's world. Get ready to reshape your understanding of relationships and embrace the freedom of authentic connections—tune in and join the conversation!