The recent @ABC News Special "Truth and Lies: Who Killed JFK?" went to great pains to convince me to appear (along with #JimDiEugenio, who I insisted would join me on the air for "protection purposes," as I made the mistake of giving an interview to Peter Jennings in 2003 that was essentially cut to pieces). I figured this time they'd behave better.
But they did it again and repeatedly misrepresented who was going to be on the show, and once again, we were stuck in the ridiculous wasted argument about the #SingleBulletTheory (SBT), which is pathetically out-of-date given all the new information we've accumulated and presented, covering the period from 1991 when the original "JFK" came out up to now – 2025. ABC repeatedly cut any serious discussion in this complex case of any of the new evidence presented by the Assassination Records Review Board in 1994 or Jim DiEugenio and my documentary of 2021, #JFKRevisited. Instead, they fall back repeatedly on the indefensible SBT and pass this warmed over manure as their proof.
The show is a disgrace to those who follow the trail, and because of their wide access and irresponsible use of their TV license, can ONLY be believed by the suckers who still watch America's pathetic version of the news on the main network channels.
This is an old, old story with these three networks going back to 1964 with their attack on Mark Lane and defense of the Warren Report without even reading the evidence. They simply edit all dissent by not allowing counter-evidence to be presented honestly.
Below is our letter protesting these policies to ABC's producer, after which is the memo sent to me by DiEugenio when he saw the special. There is further detail here.
Eileen Murphy
Senior Producer
ABC News Studios
7 Hudson Square, New York, NY 10013
Dear Ms Murphy:
We have had the opportunity to watch the "Truth and Lies" special on the John Kennedy murder.
If you recall, when we had a zoom call with your colleague, Muriel Pearson – and again when we met in person before the show was filmed – we strongly insisted that we would not participate in any such program based on ABC’s past performance in this area – that is, the 2003 Peter Jennings special on the #JFK case, with which both of us had serious problems.
I insisted I would only participate if the new information that’s come out since 1992 because of my film and our documentary in 2021, “JFK Revisited,” were included, and you said you were well aware of my appearance at the House Oversight Committee's Task Force on the Declassification of Federal Secrets Hearing, which brought out much key information about the case, including the autopsy. I only agreed to do it about the current case and not the 1992 case, which was frozen back in time and gets us nowhere, i.e. the Magic Bullet, which I think we disproved quite well in various TV appearances, as well as the documentary.
You said, more than once, that no one involved in that 2003 ABC program would be involved with this one. That ended up not being true. When it was clear the first question in our interview was about the Magic Bullet, I pulled out immediately from the interview, sensing a set-up. I was furious, reminding you of your promise – that this would be about the information NOW – not then. But, smoothly, you managed to convince me this was not a set-up to prove the Single Bullet Theory.
Yet Dale Myers was one of the featured talking heads on the Jennings special. If you recall, he actually made the absurd statement that, through the magic of his computer simulation, the Single Bullet Theory was now the “Single Bullet Fact.”
If we had known that he was going to be a major talking head on this show at the end of the day, neither of us would have agreed to appear. It was bad enough being alerted to Philip Shenon on the day of the taping. It would never have gotten that far if we had known about Myers. And it is hard to comprehend that you did not know this since the first question asked at the taping was about the Single Bullet Theory. This again clearly suggests you were involved in setting us up to be contradicted by Myers.
Simple question: Why did you not tell us upfront about Myers? After that, the special degenerates into a series of omissions that render this program useless to any serious person interested in the case. Jim and I have received dozens of notes wondering why we gave our respectability to the show you did. And now we have to engage once again, uselessly, in damage control. One day, perhaps ABC will be wise enough to deal with reality and not these lies. It makes us believe, once more, that there’s some form of collusion between your news organization, which will not pursue ANY new information that’s come out since 1992, and the Government.
Sincerely yours,
Oliver Stone & Jim DiEugenio
To: Oliver Stone
From: James DiEugenio
RE: ABC SPECIAL
If I had been fully informed of who was going to be on this show, I would have strongly advised you not to do it. Because, in addition to Philip Shenon — who we were told about the day of filming — there was also Tim Naftali and Dale Myers. Naftali is the go to guy for CNN on the political assassinations of the sixties. Myers is Dr. Doom himself on the JFK case. Back in 2003, he did a computer simulation in which he announced that the Single Bullet Theory was now the Single Bullet Fact. I wish I was kidding about that, but I am not. BTW, that simulation has been demolished at least three times, by Pat Speer, Bob Harris, and Milicent Cranor. But yet, the 2 hour show built up to a repeat of this.
In retrospect, this sheds light on the first question that the woman asked you at your house, which was about the #MagicBullet. They wanted to get you on tape so Myers could disagree with you. They used you on commercials for the show, and you came up by name more than once when you were not on camera. For example, that predictable MSM historian Barbara Perry said, all the doubts about the case up to 1990 “were fodder for Oliver Stone.”
A major theme of the program was the idea that the reason people do not buy the Warren Commission today is that they cannot accept that a loser like Oswald could take down a great man like JFK. In other words, a lone sociopath could not do away with King Arthur and Camelot. This idea began on the 25th anniversary with CIA asset and authoress Priscilla Johnson.
The other theme that was utilized was the whole blanket shroud of “Conspiracy theorist” in relation to the case. They ignored the fact that this really began with the New York Times about 1967 when Jim Garrison began to make headlines about his inquiry into the JFK matter.
The show also indulged in smears, diminutions, and oversimplifications of Oswald, Kennedy, and Ruby. Oswald was right out of the Warren Commission: a pure lone nut who had a chance to be a big man and took it. This one was started by Ruth and Michael Paine. It's never explained that, if this was the case, why did Oswald always insist on his innocence? Same thing with Ruby: he did it to make a mark in history. They admitted his ties to the mob but dismissed this with: everyone had them. Oh, really? And they never explained how he got into the basement of city hall. With Kennedy, it was his philandering, which was pretty predictable.
Incredibly, they never showed the 544 Camp Street document. Which explains that Oswald was not a loner. And they tried to make the FPCC like some renegade outfit when it was spread out over the northeast and even in Florida. It was so successful that the CIA launched a counter program against it. There is next to nothing on Kennedy’s foreign policy reforms. So there is no political motive possible. They did mention the CIA Mob plots to kill Castro. But not that Ruby had met with Trafficante — who was in on them – while he was in detention in Cuba. Or that Trafficante’s casino manager, Lewis McWillie, was Ruby’s idol. Who he would do anything for.
There was no mention of the chain of custody problem with CE 399, the one we talked about with Henry Lee on "JFK Revisited." The reason they do not want to do this is that it would blow up Myers. "Dale, just what trajectory of what bullet are you diagramming, since its not CE 399?" Also, they never mention the question of which stretcher CE 399 was found on. It was not Connally’s, as proven by Josiah Thompson in Six Seconds in Dallas. And it had to be if Specter’s Single Bullet Theory is to have any validity.
There are two glaring giveaways to the scheme of the show, i.e. that it was a deliberate put-up job. They discuss the autopsy and try to chalk it up as inexperience and a rush job, due to RFK. They never deal with the military aspect in the autopsy room that night. Secondly, they never talk about how the HSCA lied about the gaping hole in the rear skull of Kennedy, and how that is strongly indicative of a shot from the front.
This relates to something kind of surprising, even for them. They show the Zapruder film, and they talk about your film in that regard, back and to the left. But guess what? They never show that part of the film, with Kennedy bouncing off the rear seat in clear reaction to a front shot! In other words, by curtailing those two aspects — the Z film and the HSCA hiding the gaping hole in the skull – they pictorially remove any suggestion of a front shot. Which is what Myers actually says in the film: that there is no such evidence. Well, if you do this kind of embellishment, you can say such a thing.
How do they place Oswald on the Sixth Floor? Through the testimony of Howard Brennan. This guy has been wrecked so many times, it’s not funny. He gave a full description of the sniper as to height and weight. How could that be if the guy was in a kneeling position, which he had to be in? And why would Brennan then refuse to testify for the HSCA? In fact, he did not even want to be informally interviewed. And he said that if he was summoned, he would hire a lawyer to fight the summons.
They also said that Oswald dashed down the stairs afterwards. How do they know this? No one saw him doing so. And he was notably not out of breath when he was encountered by supervisor Truly and officer Baker.
They also just plainly assumed that it was Oswald’s rifle. They ignored the problems we brought up about the sling attachment, which Brian Edwards noted. Oswald could not have done the screw on attachment on the butt of the rifle.
This will join the Jennings special, the 1967 CBS special, and the 1964 NBC and CBS specials in the hall of infamy on this case.