Staff Reports
In a shocking revelation, former Secret Service agent Paul Landis has emerged to challenge the widely accepted narrative surrounding the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. Landis, now 88 years old, insists that he has no hidden agenda and simply wants the American public to come to their own conclusions. His upcoming memoir aims to challenge the “magic bullet theory,” which was popularized by the Warren Commission’s investigation into the assassination.
BREAKING: JFK Assassination Witness Breaks Silence, Raises Bombshell New Questions https://t.co/oLMoyVabx5
— Jenna Ellis (@JennaEllisEsq) September 10, 2023
According to the Warren Commission, one bullet fired during the assassination struck Kennedy from behind, exited through his throat, and went on to strike Texas Governor John Connally multiple times. This peculiar trajectory earned it the moniker of the “magic bullet.” The commission claimed that the bullet was recovered from a stretcher at Parkland Memorial Hospital, where Connally was believed to have been treated. However, Landis disputes this account.
JFK assassination witness breaks his silence and raises new questions https://t.co/2WZHN4zc9w
— The Boston Globe (@BostonGlobe) September 10, 2023
Landis insists that he found the so-called “magic bullet” not at the hospital, but in the president’s limousine. Acting on instinct, he decided to place the bullet on the stretcher in the hopes that doctors could use it to aid Kennedy. However, Landis speculates that the two stretchers were inadvertently pushed together, causing the bullet to shift from one to the other. Landis laments the lack of security at the scene, expressing concern over the potential loss or mishandling of this crucial evidence.
While Landis firmly believes that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone as the gunman, he now admits to questioning this previously steadfast conclusion. This newfound doubt comes as a surprise to Landis himself, who had always maintained Oswald’s sole responsibility. The implications of Landis’s account are open to interpretation, but his perspective certainly raises valid doubts about the existing narrative.
This revelation by Landis challenges the long-held beliefs surrounding President Kennedy’s assassination and begs the question: What else might we have gotten wrong? With this new information, it becomes increasingly imperative to reexamine the evidence and explore alternative theories. Perhaps there is still much to uncover about this pivotal moment in American history.
