I just want to update people here on my activities off-site. My thinking is that while it’s good if we continue to refine our reports and track down more leads, our combined efforts have already exceeded what a group of homicide detectives would do before bringing people in for questioning.
The purpose of all the zooming and enhancing is to understand the situation and to develop a list of people who can answer the questions we can’t find out by studying evidence. Our main problem is that, now that we’ve developed a short list of critical witnesses to interview, we have no power to actually bring them in.
So I’ve been doing a lot more outreach. Every time I see some new article about the first assassination attempt, I try to contact the reporter and tell them there’s much more critical stuff they could be covering, and that I’d be happy to explain. Usually, they express interest, and then I explain the main leads, and they fall silent.
I’m not sure why this is, but I get the feeling that most modern “journalists” are afraid of actual investigations, i.e., finding out something that somebody doesn’t want other people to know, something they’re trying to hide. In this case they may find it especially scary because it’s police and government trying to hide stuff.
If you run across anyone who seems like a good reporter but they’re barking up the wrong tree, maybe write to them, or @ me on here and I’ll do it. Thanks.