Status Updates From On the Trail of the JFK Ass...

Finally at the end we get to some interesting content! A look at the chain of evidence for the presidents body and possible alterations to both autopsy photos and records. This detailed look is very interesting and well evidenced.. the video tampering not so much, but il roll with it. Finally we are getting some meat on these bones, some thought inducing ideas.. but nope, book just ends with an online book sales pitc

I dont think this will ever be solved, but i think other books come closer. Time has tainted memories and stories have grown.
If a person was murdered, I bet I could find at least one person that knew the cat and thought the cat did it. That doesnt make it so.
Im going to read the LBJ theory book again to clense my mind

Why is this even a book? It feels like the main premise is to tell his pub story that he once visited the KGB. Towards the end he says that all his thoughts and data was detailed in 'the man who knew too much'.. so I should have read that? put that in the intro?
Il never read that because i got sucked in on this.
With any event in life there are 100 limks. In this incident every link ups their story be a bigger part

I was expecting a story that looks at events, pieces them together in chroni order to show a theory of what went down.
Instead it feels like a jfk investigators pin board has been converted to paper. A memo here, a source there, a browning newspaper clipping thats fluttered to the floor, it all ends up as a mess.
Is this 'murder she wrote - a day in dallas'? Am i expected to take this info and inferences t solve it?

Seemingly less a JFK trail walk than a JFK rapids ride. I dont get what the author is wanting me to understand, the sheer amount of FBI memos, interviews, references to comments by obscure people etc makes me think its a 'CIA who dun it' to angle but I just cant tell.
I have a feeling we are at the point where he will tell me each piece of evidence and why it is applicable, but currently its a wilderness of mirrors

Seems to be more - who is not on the trail. So far a focus on lack of journalistic investigation, or intentional lying. References to evidence ignored, but no detail. Less a case of 'its a conspiracy becausevof this evidence' than its a conspiracy because x didnt disclose this (enter vague ref)