Texas salary calculator

r/Madden

2010.03.01 00:13 kmad26 r/Madden

A community for people who play Madden.
[link]


2010.08.03 16:38 kanez Lawn Care

Lawn care guides, pictures, and discussions.
[link]


2019.07.30 03:51 Lokio27 Ndless

Ndless, the premier tool for expanding the functionality of your Texas Instruments calculator!
[link]


2023.05.28 14:54 SomeCreature FP&A - Stay in current company or leave for new offer? Comparison of both included.

Long story short, recently received an offer from "Company A" for a Group FP&A role. This would be an international company with operations in Australia, EU, USA and Asia, directly under a very experienced and outgoing / friendly CFO (Previous experience includes being the CFO of multiple large banks in my country, finance institutions and supervisory board experience). After handing in the resignation to my current employer - Company "B", the Group CFO reached out to me and is preparing a counter offer for a similar position, as Group level Analyst, but this role could likely focus on something like a consolidation analyst and would result in me working below the Finance manager (who's first day on the job will be Monday, no idea yet if we have a synergy together), however, this would be 2 positions below the Group CFO.
In Company A i would be responsible for implementing Group level FP&A processes, forecasting, budgeting, vendor contracts, valuation of potential M&A targets, Impairment testing, preparing business cases for new markets and other reporting tasks for Group level and country based management.
Comparing the 2 jobs :
Company A
Positives
Cons :
Company B
Positives
Cons :
Honestly can't decide which would be better, as Company A might help with having a bit of a change in my daily routine and lead to being directly under a great CFO, however, company B is overall great, with the biggest worry of mine being under a new finance manager. Will have a short meeting on Tuesday with her to see if we are compatible.
Would being 2 positions under the CFO effect career growth significantly? Taking into account that she'd be retiring in 2-3 years and the company is significantly larger than Company A (2200 employees vs ~100 employees)
Total comp in Company B could potentially be higher, if they propose the same salary, due to quarterly bonuses. Approx. calculation for estimating monthly pay ((Monthly salary)*3,5/3)
submitted by SomeCreature to FinancialCareers [link] [comments]


2023.05.28 14:53 SomeCreature Stay in current company or leave, which would be the best for future career growth?

Long story short, recently received an offer from "Company A" for a Group FP&A role. This would be an international company with operations in Australia, EU, USA and Asia, directly under a very experienced and outgoing / friendly CFO (Previous experience includes being the CFO of multiple large banks in my country, finance institutions and supervisory board experience). After handing in the resignation to my current employer - Company "B", the Group CFO reached out to me and is preparing a counter offer for a similar position, as Group level Analyst, but this role could likely focus on something like a consolidation analyst and would result in me working below the Finance manager (who's first day on the job will be Monday, no idea yet if we have a synergy together), however, this would be 2 positions below the Group CFO.
In Company A i would be responsible for implementing Group level FP&A processes, forecasting, budgeting, vendor contracts, valuation of potential M&A targets, Impairment testing, preparing business cases for new markets and other reporting tasks for Group level and country based management.
Comparing the 2 jobs :
Company A
Positives
Cons :
Company B
Positives
Cons :
Honestly can't decide which would be better, as Company A might help with having a bit of a change in my daily routine and lead to being directly under a great CFO, however, company B is overall great, with the biggest worry of mine being under a new finance manager. Will have a short meeting on Tuesday with her to see if we are compatible.
Would being 2 positions under the CFO effect career growth significantly?
Total comp in Company B could potentially be higher, if they propose the same salary, due to quarterly bonuses. Approx. calculation for estimating monthly pay ((Monthly salary)*3,5/3)
submitted by SomeCreature to careerguidance [link] [comments]


2023.05.28 13:58 Directguids What is Florida Paycheck Calculator- Everything You Need to Know

Florida Paycheck Calculator is a must-have tool for anyone living and working in Florida. It is essential for estimating your take-home pay after hours and weeks of idling. Alternatively, it can be defined as a salary calculator that estimates how much an employee will receive from their salary after deducting Florida state taxes Read More
submitted by Directguids to u/Directguids [link] [comments]


2023.05.28 13:47 thcdumpster16 Hi all, i want to start saving more money and I need your advice

this might be a bit of a complicated question.
So I live in a remote area. The company I work at offers salary sacrifice. After doing calculations it saves me money if I salary sacrifice my yearly rental. I am kinda dumb and I just wanted to know if it is a smart thing doing so. If there is someone who does this I would really appreciate it if you could please share any tips you’ve got.
My next question. since I live in a remote area, I can claim remote area benefits.
This is what it says on my contract. “________ is offering salary packaging of rent assistance by way of reimbursement of up to 50% of the employee’s rent expense. Such a reimbursement is fully exempt from FBT.”
Does that mean I am eligible to get back 50% of my annual rent?
Can someone also please help clarify the following statement? “Each pay period, _______ will reimburse the expenditure after tax in equal amounts over the FBT year, at the same time as deducting the corresponding salary sacrifice from the employee’s gross salary. The reimbursement and salary sacrifice will therefore occur in the FBT year following the year in which the expenses were incurred.
submitted by thcdumpster16 to AusFinance [link] [comments]


2023.05.28 13:45 thcdumpster16 Need some advice

Ok this might be a bit of a complicated question.
So I live in a remote area. The company I work at offers salary sacrifice. After doing calculations it saves me money if I salary sacrifice my rental amount. I am kinda blonde and I just wanted to know if it is a smart thing doing so. If there is someone who does this I would really appreciate it if you could please share any tips you’ve got.
My next question. So since I live in a remote area, I can claim remote area benefits.
This is what it says on my contract. “________ is offering salary packaging of rent assistance by way of reimbursement of up to 50% of the employee’s rent expense. Such a reimbursement is fully exempt from FBT.”
Does that mean I am eligible to get back 50% of my annual rent?
Can someone also please help clarify the following statement? “Each pay period, _______ will reimburse the expenditure after tax in equal amounts over the FBT year, at the same time as deducting the corresponding salary sacrifice from the employee’s gross salary. The reimbursement and salary sacrifice will therefore occur in the FBT year following the year in which the expenses were incurred.
submitted by thcdumpster16 to AusLegal [link] [comments]


2023.05.28 12:15 MisterEmbedded My Guide To Get Into Computer Programming

Intro

Hi, I'm AdityaRaj, I'm a 17 Year Old Who Loves Programming, And Here's My Guide To Get Into Computer Programming.
Programming Is Surprisingly Quite Easy Once You Understand Few Basic Stuff, Like Memory, CPU, What Is Actually Happening In The CPU, Etc Etc, "Crash Course: Computer Science" is a awesome series which taught me ALOT about computers, and believe me it will make your life easier.
i'm learning like you all too! and i would be more than glad if you point out any mistake as it will help everyone who's reading this.

What is Lower & High Level In Computers?

Well Lower & High Level Basically Signifies How Close Something Is To "Bare-Metal" Or How Close Something Is To What The Computers Understand Directly.
The More Lower Level The More That Thing Is Close To What Computers Understand. See Computers Are Literally Just Rocks Made To Do Some Stuff Repeatedly, They Are Like Your Kitty Who Doesn't Even Understands Basic Maths.
Computers Do 3 Things In Their Entire Life, They Fetch The Instruction They Have To Execute, They Decode The Instruction They Fetched & Then They Execute That Instruction, That's Literally All Your Computer Ever Does, But This Becomes Very Powerful Because Modern Computers Can Do Such Stuff Like 2400000000 Times Every Second, And Gaming Computers Can Do Such Stuff At Like 400,00,00,000 Times Every Second, That's Like 400 Crore Times Every Second.

What Operating System To Choose?

Programming doesn't really depend on Operating System, if you're on windows then it's fine, if you're on mac it's fine, if you're on linux that's perfect.
In my opinion Linux provides you the best environment to develop any kind of software, and it is the recommended OS for writing software.
that doesn't mean you should quit using your existing Operating System, but learning linux will help you alot, there are jobs that specifically hire people who are masters in Linux, not to mention the fact that basically anything can run linux with a HUGE Performance gain.
in starting i will say just use whatever you have but try to learn linux side by side too!

What Programming Language To Choose?

It's Very Important What Programming Language You Choose, It Will Kind Of Decide That What Field In Programming You Will Be Doing.
  • Python
For example i started with a Programming Language Called "Python", it's simple, very easy to read & understand, and overall easy for an beginner, but Python didn't get me far, with Python I mainly had Data Science Or Artificial Intelligence To Learn, Cause There's Not Really Any Other Thing To Do With Python Other Than Also Writing Small Scripts That Do A Particular Task.
  • JavaScript
I Later Switched To A Language Called "JavaScript", JavaScript Is Most Common In Web Development, The Websites You Visit, Most Of Them Have Their Logic Written In JavaScript.
JavaScript is comparatively harder than Python, but it's use cases have been just increasing and increasing, JavaScript code can run in your browser, basically 90% of the Reddit is basically just JavaScript code.
JavaScript can run directly in your computer using a runtime called NodeJS or Deno, the Discord Web App, Mobile & Desktop App Is Also Written In Mostly JavaScript.
Using JavaScript You Can Go Into Web Development, Mobile App Development, Desktop App Development.
  • C/C++/Assembly
Now I Actually Went Quite Alot Lower Level...
i learned C, C is a programming language that's 51 years old! basically it was a "revolutionary" language, almost everything you see in the modern world has it's roots to C.
you can basically do anything with C, and this is the language i love alot... people say it's not for beginners but it's not the case really, if you understand how computers work, like even an overview then you won't have much problems in C.
with C you have endless possibilities and not to mention it's one of the fastest programming languages out there. if you want to write efficient, fast software use C.
C++ is also a language which was developed to extend C's capabilities by adding more feature, and C & C++ are often used in the same projects...
Linux Kernel is written in C, your favorite web browser is written in C & C++, Android Phone's App Use Java Which Has It's Roots To C.
In Many Cases C is Also Used With Assembly, assembly is basically a Human readable version of the ACTUAL code that runs on your computers, so it's like the lowest level programming language and FASTEST too.
C++ is used alot in Game Development, games made in Unreal Engine use C++, GTA Vice City was written in C++ too!
  • Swift
swift is a high-level programming language developed by Apple and used for developing software for Apple Products, it's a nice language, and the demand is high too! i can't comment much on the language as i don't have much experience with it, but if you own a Mac, i think Swift is the best thing to get into.
  • Java
Java is a high-level programming language which runs on more than 1 billion devices, all android phones have it, minecraft uses it. Java is used to develop android apps and it's not that hard as people say it is.
  • C#
C# is a high-level programming language, this language is often called "Microsoft Java" because this language does everything Java can do maybe a few things more, but all with Microsoft's branding.
no matter how much people may hate or bully this language, this language is very popular among Windows Developers as Microsoft recommends this language to develop Windows Applications.
C# is also used in Game Development, Mainly In Game Engines Like Unity & Godot.
  • Verilog, SystemVerilog or VHDL
these "programming languages" are used to program FPGAs.
FPGA's are one of the amazing stuff in technology. FPGAs are quite complex piece of hardware which you can use to design custom logic circuits.
basically our CPUs are made up of many MANY logic ciruits, these logic circuits determine the behavior of a particular CPU, you can basically create such logic circuits without having to touch a wire, you can program a FPGA to behave that way.
and as complex it sounds, sometimes it's quite more complex than that and requires alot of knowledge about how computers work and what you want the circuit to do.

What Career For What Language?

  1. The salaries mentioned are per-annum (yearly) and not monthly
  2. The salaries are what i found online, they may vary.
  3. The salaries mentioned is what offered in USA, and sadly they are quite low in India. (thanks to u/Accomplished-Toe-479 for mentioning this)
  • Embedded Systems
with C & Assembly Under your belt, and an awesome understanding of computers, you can get into a embedded systems job.
this field specializes in writing and optimizing software for computers that aren't your normal PC, Mobile Or Something, these are often very low-powerful computers that are used in stuff like your:
  • Digital Camera all those DSLRS and Stuff
  • Your Calculators & Your Digital watches
  • Your television & your setup-boxes like that tata-sky thing
  • or the computers in cars which detect how far the vehicle behind is, or the ECU in the car which decides how much fuel & air goes depending on the temprature load and etc
  • or the computers in an Train, like the engine which the train driver drives, or airplanes, all sorts of like passenger or fighter planes
at places like America you can earn like $1,10,269 (₹91,04,337) on AVERAGE, and the job demand is just increasing and increasing.
  • Web Developer
this field is most common one and the demand is high and the salary is nice too, on average you can earn $82,400 (₹68,03,339).
if you're doing web app, desktop app & mobile app development in JavaScript the figures will be quite same.
  • App Developer
your earning alot of times may depend on the platform too, an Android App Developer can earn $126,677 (₹1,04,59,061), but this isn't average you'll need alot of skills to earn this much or else it can go down by quite alot.
if you're an Apple App Developer using Swift language you can earn like on an average $135,804 (₹1,12,12,630) if you have skills.
i don't know much about desktop app developer salaries but you can earn like $84,500 (₹69,76,725) on an average.
  • Game Developer
game development is a relatively big topic and while there is no answer to how much you can earn as a game developer on an average a video game artist can earn $59,156 (₹48,84,203) and a video game programmer on an average can earn $75,486 (₹62,32,486).
and while the above mentioned figures are for when working for someone, if you decide to make your own team or work solo, the figure can go even higher if you make a game that has a huge return of investment.
in the start i think it's fine to work for someone to get the much needed experience and then you can work on your own game. but solely working on your game can be risky as if the game doesn't perform well you may earn even lower than what you earned by working for someone.
this isn't a guide about getting into game development but if you want to become a video game artist i'd say start with 3D Modelling Skills & Pixel Art, both of them aren't required. a programming language like C++, Java Or C# is required to if you want to program the game too or you can just hire someone or just work with someone you know.
  • Artificial Intelligence
don't know much about this field too but on an average you can earn like $105,000 (₹86,69,304).
  • FPGA Engineer
this job on an average pays $149,735 (₹1,23,62,840) but it can go upto as much as $192,000 (₹1,58,52,441).
these jobs have HIGH demand but because of the skill-set they require.

What Programming Language/Career you should go into?

i think you the person asking this question has the answer. every language/career has different difficult, adventure, salary and stress, and you should only go into the one in which YOU are interested in.
i want to go into embedded systems because those small computers & programming them is what attracts me, the salary is quite decent too, the stress it gives is almost none since it is what i am interested in.
any idiot can get into programming for the juicy money, but to actually earn what the professionals in this field earn you'll have to be passionate about your field & job.
and not only that but you'll have to get a degree too, because yes you can learn most of the stuff online but colleges, the good ones especially teach alot of stuff that you may not find online and not the mention that actually getting the job will be alot easier since the company knows you studied in the good college thus you have the skill they need.

Resources

here are some resources you might like to get into programming:
Note: the resources above are mostly in english and the resources in other languages have been mentioned with the language they are in.

Outro

that's really all i have to say, feel free to ask me anything you want to, don't feel that you'll sound dumb or something, i was an complete ass in the starting too (i still am xD).
also thanks to everyone appreciating me! lol it's alot to take in.
submitted by MisterEmbedded to IndianTeenagers [link] [comments]


2023.05.28 12:00 AutoModerator Daily r/LawnCare No Stupid Questions Thread

Please use this thread to ask any lawn care questions that you may have. There are no stupid questions. This includes weed, fungus, insect, and grass identification. For help on asking a question, please refer to the "How to Get the Most out of Your Post" section at the top of the sidebar.
Check out the sidebar if you're interested in more information on plant hardiness zones, identifying problems, weed control, fertilizer, establishing grass, and organic methods. Also, you may contact your local Cooperative Extension Service for local info.
How to Get the Most out of Your Post:
Include a photo of the problem. You can upload to imgur.com for free and it's easy to do. One photo should contain enough information for people to understand the immediate area around the problem (dense shade, extremely sloped, etc.). Other photos should include close-ups of the grass or weed in question: such as this, this, or this. The more photos or context to the situation will help us identify the problem and propose some solutions.
Useful Links:
Guides & Calculators: Measure Your Lawn Make a Property Map Herbicide Application Calculators Fertilizing Lawns Grow From Seed Grow From Sod Organic Lawn Care Other Lawn Calculators
Lawn Pest Control: Weeds & What To Use Common Weeds What's Wrong Here? How To Spray Weeds MSU Weed ID Tool Is This a Weed? Herbicide Types ID Turf Diseases Fungi & Control Options Insects & Control Options
Fertilizing: Fertilizing Lawns How To Spread Granular Fertilizer Natural Lawn Care Fertilizer Calculator
US Cooperative Extension Services: Arkansas - University of Arkansas California - UC Davis Florida - University of Florida Indiana - Purdue University Nebraska - University of Nebraska-Lincoln New Hampshire - The University of New Hampshire New Jersey - Rutgers University New York - Cornell University Ohio - The Ohio State University Oregon - Oregon State University Texas - Texas A&M Vermont - The University of Vermont
Canadian Cooperative Extension Services: Ontario - University of Guelph
Recurring Threads:
Daily No Stupid Questions Thread Mowsday Monday Treatment Tuesday Weed ID Wednesday That Didn't Go Well Thursday Finally Friday: Weekend Lawn Plans Soil Saturday Lawn of the Month Monthly Mower Megathread Monthly Professionals Podium Tri-Annual Thatch Thread Quarterly Seed & Sod Megathread
submitted by AutoModerator to lawncare [link] [comments]


2023.05.28 08:31 wegwerpaccount54321 Employer assumed I had a different degree and underpaid me for 1.5y

I started at the end of '21 in a large company. During the hiring process, they told me the salary was based on a barema. Since I have a degree of civil engineering (burgerlijk ingenieur), I assumed I would have one of the higher salaries, so I didn't negotiate or discuss it further. It was +-3000 bruto. By now, I'm making +-3600 (indexations and small promotions).
However, I found out that a colleague who has the same degree and no work experience, had a higher starter salary when he started last year, 3600 bruto (with indexation now +-4050). I talked to my boss about this, and we contacted HR. They acknowledged to my boss that they made a mistake with my degree and I should earn more (from my calculation 4200 instead of 3600). I haven't talked to HR in person yet, we still need to schedule a meeting to go over it. I'm sure they will adjust my next payslips, but they should also reimburse the difference in the previous payslips. Hence, my question. Did anyone had this problem before? I can't find someone who experienced the same or an article online about it, so I hope to find some helpfull answers here.
I don't want to be fucked with the taxes, so I'm wondering what they can offer me to reimburse it? Some options I'm thinking off; - increase bruto, won't be good for taxes - netto compensations, it will take years since I think there is a yearly limit to it? - pay for my leasing car, which is now a bruto exchange every month, still years to reimburse It feels like I will never get compensated fully as if I got the pay last year?
submitted by wegwerpaccount54321 to BESalary [link] [comments]


2023.05.28 07:38 PatientYellowbird Salary negotiation advice for Cologne, Germany (.NET, 5 YoE, BSc in CS)

I'm currently negotiating a salary for a .NET position, WPF in Cologne.
I've got 5 YoE in .NET after a BSc in CS.
The employers are estimating 60k € brutto/gross (around 37k netto, 3100/month after using a tax calculator, tax category 1, no church tax, state: NRW).
The site germantechjobs estimates around 57k as the median (42.5k bottom, 77.5k top).
On salaryexpert, I got that "The average .net developer gross salary in Cologne, Germany is 81.330 €".
Over at glassdoor, for 4-6YoE in Cologne it says "The possible range is 48K - 94K, while the most likely range is 57K - 75K"
A friend suggested <65k is not enough, that I should shoot for 70k and up.
Could people that are knowledgeable about the current salaries in Cologne shine a light, please? Different sites give me vastly different averages. I haven't lived in Germany before, numbeo estimates around 1k € for living costs without the rent.
submitted by PatientYellowbird to cscareerquestionsEU [link] [comments]


2023.05.28 04:35 L0CKE7 Calculating the Average Salary Given a Population Model and Regression

Greetings all,
I'm badly second guessing myself while calculating an average salary and would be grateful for some advice/assistance.
Essentially, given the model SALARY_i = B0 + B1YEARS_i + B2YEARS2_i + u_i, and an OLS regression, I am to calculate the average salary of a professor with 10 years of experience.
Note: I will provide a supplementary illustration
I am wondering whether I should set YEARS2_i equal to 0 or equal to (10)^2. The reason for my uncertainty concerns YEARS2_i being controlled for. Is it still okay to plug in 10^2 for YEARS2_i given that it is being controlled for in the regression?
The two answers I have so far are
68.29076 = 41.9686 + 3.03331(10) - .0401094(10^2)
and
72.3017 = 41.9686 + 3.03331(10)
Considering that YEARS2_i is controlled for, should I include it and plug in 10 while trying to compute the average salary?
https://preview.redd.it/e563y43wgh2b1.jpg?width=1073&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=266a004a2fba0a70d156113d5858ae47d4b2cc00
submitted by L0CKE7 to econometrics [link] [comments]


2023.05.28 04:20 L0CKE7 [UNI ECONOMETRICS/STATISTICS] Calculating the average salary; urgently need help

[UNI ECONOMETRICS/STATISTICS] Calculating the average salary; urgently need help submitted by L0CKE7 to HomeworkHelp [link] [comments]


2023.05.28 02:22 Zahariell Around 4 k keys were distributed after this round of key drops

Around 4 k keys were distributed after this round of key drops submitted by Zahariell to TXChainSawGame [link] [comments]


2023.05.28 01:38 trini0 Adding a Job

Hey all:
I just switched from the free plan to the Planner+ subscription. I removed all the static data from NewRetirement to start from scratch. When I attempt to add my job/salary, it jumps to the form for my spouse's job. For now, I am not including my spouse in the calculations. I need help finding a way to add my job/salary back.
Any ideas?
Thanks
submitted by trini0 to NewRetirement [link] [comments]


2023.05.27 20:18 Technical_Extent786 Now PMP

Passed today, 3 AT: 2 drag and drop questions, 1 calculation related to Pert/3 point but it was super weird as contained months and $ value (salary).
submitted by Technical_Extent786 to pmp [link] [comments]


2023.05.27 19:51 Swimma84 My homework on trying to understand Portugal taxes for S-Corp expat

Our family of 5 (2 adults and 3 kids) is evaluating possibility of moving to either Portugal, Spain or Italy (we're also open to other locations). I'm an IT consultant and work 100% of time remotely for US clients. I use S-Corp for invoicing, salaries and S-Corp distribution.
While researching what taxes I would need to pay in Portugal if I keep current org structure (S-Corp/40% Wages/60% scorp distribution) I found a page with a pretty detailed overview of S-Corp taxation https://www.fresh-portugal.com/blog/how-to-file-your-tax-return-in-portugal-for-2022
Most likely I'm not the only one with such org setup in DN community, so I'm looking for feedback/ideas from experienced Portugal expats on my understanding of potential tax burden. I think this thread this can be a very good reference point for future expats researching the same topic.
Pretending that S-Corp gross income is 300K
Soo... if my understanding is correct the final tax would be:

Questions:
  1. Where am I wrong in my calculations and understanding?
  2. How do I optimize tax burden?
  3. When does Foreign Earned Income Exclusion or Foreign Tax Credit kick in?
  4. Will Spain or Italy be a better option for a move from tax perspective?
submitted by Swimma84 to digitalnomad [link] [comments]


2023.05.27 18:21 alreadyalone100 Is the pension worth it?

I'm having 4.4% of every paycheck deducted. I started at 22 and if I leave at 62, I'll have 40 years of service (😮‍💨)
The calculation for this, if I'm doing it correctly and assuming my high-3 salary eventually reaches at least $100k would be:
$100,000 × 1.1% x 40 = $44,000 per year
Is that really all that the pension will yield? I know the TSP is factored into retirement as well but is the pension really beneficial if they take nearly 5% of every paycheck for it? I would also potentially like to retire at 57 which would make the yearly payout even lower, at around $35,000 per year...
submitted by alreadyalone100 to fednews [link] [comments]


2023.05.27 18:20 Pitiful-Pomegranate6 Salary Question

I’m an structural EIT with 1 YOE. Is 66k salary reasonable in Texas?
submitted by Pitiful-Pomegranate6 to StructuralEngineering [link] [comments]


2023.05.27 18:18 thinkingstranger May 26, 2023

https://heathercoxrichardson.substack.com/p/may-26-2023
While we wait to learn more about a possible budget deal under which Republicans would agree to raise the debt ceiling before June 5, the date Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen says will see the U.S. run out of funds, there is an interesting story coming out of Texas that might well shed light on the current dynamics in the Republican Party.
On Wednesday, witnesses testified before the Republican-led Texas House General Investigating Committee about how the state’s attorney general, Ken Paxton, has committed crimes in office, including trying to hide an affair, using his office to help a donor, building a culture of fear in his office, using his power to retaliate against opponents, misusing official information, and abusing his office. As attorney general, Paxton is in charge of overseeing the enforcement of the law in the state.
On Thursday the committee voted unanimously to recommend that Paxton be impeached and removed from office, citing 20 counts, including bribery and retaliating against whistleblowers, for his impeachment.
Paxton is not unused to trouble. He has been under a felony indictment for securities fraud since 2015, successfully holding off the charges through repeated delays. In 2020, eight of his top advisors accused him of abusing his office to help a wealthy donor, Nate Paul, resist an FBI investigation. But he has maintained his popularity with Republican voters in Texas by standing as a fervent Trump supporter and attacking the Biden administration, and party leaders would not turn on him.
That formula appears to be less potent than it used to be. It turns out that the House committee began investigating Paxton in March, after he tried to get $3.3 million of taxpayer money to settle a lawsuit with four whistleblowers who said he retaliated against them after they tried to expose his unsavory relationship with Paul.
Apparently aware of what was about to drop, Paxton on Tuesday accused House speaker Dade Phelan, a Republican, of being drunk at a public hearing and said he should resign. Once news of the committee vote dropped, Paxton on Friday attacked the “illegal impeachment scheme” and asked supporters to descend on the Texas Capitol for the impeachment vote. Paxton accused those calling for his impeachment of helping President Biden.
“The House is poised to do exactly what Joe Biden has been hoping to accomplish since his first day in office: sabotage our work, my work, as attorney general of Texas,” Paxton said. He refused to take questions. Right-wing figures, including the head of the Texas Republican Party and key Trump advisors—but not Trump himself—have declared their support for him. Texas governor Greg Abbott has stayed silent.
The full House will take up the question of Paxton’s impeachment tomorrow, with both Paxton’s supporters and Democratic supporters coming for the event.
Patrick Svitek of the Texas Tribune noted today that the impeachment effort has set off “a political earthquake in Texas.” “Republicans have chosen to remain largely silent
during years of alleged misconduct and lawbreaking by the attorney general. Now they will have to take a public stand,” he wrote. Local observers recognize the battle as one between far-right extremists, represented by Paxton, and Republicans who are trying to recover the party from the Trump wing.
There is likely a political calculation behind this move. Texas is a crucially important state for 2024, and voters are angry at the apparent corruption of prominent Republican figures like Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. Some leaders are likely eager to cut loose some big fish to reassure voters that they are not, in fact, the party of corruption. But in states that are currently dominated by Republicans so thoroughly that they are essentially one-party states, there are indeed systemic corruption problems because there is not the oversight that a healthy opposition party brings.
Both Paxton’s actions and his attempt to dismiss his Republican accusers as working for Biden appear to be a classic example of the behavior of political leaders in a one-party state. He has allegedly used his office to reward friends, retaliate against enemies, and avoid accountability for apparent lawbreaking. This pattern is common in authoritarian governmental systems; it was also common in the American South from about 1874 to 1965, when the Voting Rights Act that protected Black voting finally broke the one-party region dominated by white men.
Tomorrow, as Republican leaders in Texas look toward the 2024 election, they are going to have to decide whether to back an apparently corrupt attorney general who is popular with the Republican base or appeal to Republicans turned off by how extreme the party has become and get rid of him.
It will take a majority of the 149-member House to send the articles of impeachment to the Texas Senate for a trial. All 64 House Democrats will likely vote for impeachment. It is not clear what the Republicans will do.

https://capitol.texas.gov/tlodocs/88billtext/pdf/HR02377I.pdf
https://capitol.texas.gov/tlodocs/88billtext/html/HR02377I.htm
https://apnews.com/article/texas-ken-paxton-investigation-40ba70a33235eda9a31fc2628cbd7d61
https://apnews.com/article/2022-midterm-elections-dallas-houston-ken-paxton-62273089acc4feb70dd64349bc398f5d
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/texas-house-committee-wants-paxton-impeached
https://www.fox4news.com/news/dade-phelan-drunk-video-accusations
https://www.texastribune.org/2023/05/26/ken-paxton-responds-impeachment/
https://www.texastribune.org/2023/05/25/ken-paxton-impeach-republican-earthquake/
https://www.texastribune.org/2023/05/26/ken-paxton-texas-impeachment-latest/#AbbottSilent
https://www.texastribune.org/2023/05/26/ken-paxton-texas-impeachment-latest/#104fdf5c-5f44-435f-ae74-a4732b10a2c5
submitted by thinkingstranger to HeatherCoxRichardson [link] [comments]


2023.05.27 16:53 walterherbst The New York Times And The Warren Report

The New York Times And The Warren Report
Despite all the evidence to the contrary, today there are those who consider the findings of the Warren Commission as fact. However, what most people do not realize is that when the Warren Report was released, even supporters of the report were unsure of it accuracy.
On September 28, 1964, the New York Times front page headline read, WARREN COMMISSION FINDS OSWALD GUILTY AND SAYS ASSASSIN AND RUBY ACTED ALONE; REBUKES SECRET SERVICE, ASKS REVAMPING. Multiple pages of the edition were filled with articles about the assassination covering a wide variety of topics, but one article jumped out at me.
Titled, Scientific Work Traced Bullets to Oswald’s Rifle, it’s words were carefully chosen to hide the fact that the author was not so sure that JFK was assassinated by a lone gunman. Somewhat buried on page 16, column 5, is the continuation of the article which began on the front page. The 6th paragraph reads, “One shot passed through the President’s neck and then ‘most probably’ [italics included in the original article] passed through the chest of Texas Gov. John B. Connally Jr. A subsequent shot-the fatal one- hit the back of the President’s head. Another shot probably missed the Presidential limousine and its occupants altogether. The evidence is inconclusive as to whether the missed shot was the first, second or third shot.”
At the time, almost every reader was unaware of how important this paragraph was. The writer admitted that one shot missed the limo as fact. The only question was which shot missed. He realized the importance that one shot had to hit both Kennedy and Connally if another shot missed for the single bullet theory to be correct. However, the writer was clearly not sure that the single bullet theory could have happened, so he cleverly writes that one shot “most probably” hit JFK and Connally, and the other shot “most probably missed,” leaving the door open that there was a chance that did not happen. But one shot did miss – they knew this to be true within days of the assassination.
The writer’s concern is evident again in the 9th paragraph, which reads, “The commission held that one shot ‘most probably’ passed both through the President’s neck and the Governor’s body and offered calculations and medical testimony to support this view.”
In the same article, the 37th paragraph reads: “Analysis by four different firearms experts showed that the cartridges and the bullets could have been fired only by the rifle found on the sixth floor.”
When one first reads this, the conclusion seems clear – the experts concluded the bullets were fired from the rifle found. However, that is not what the writer said. He writes the bullets “could” have been fired from the gun, not that they “were” fired from the gun to the exclusion of all other guns. “Could” means it was possible and leaves the door open that the bullets “could” have been fired from another gun. It was clever wordsmanship, done purposely by the writer to deceive readers, most of whom were not well versed in the assassination details.
In addition, on October 2, 1964, Congressman Gerald Ford, in an article for Life magazine titled: Inside Account By A Member Of The Commission: Piecing Together The Evidence, wrote: ”It is still not absolutely clear which bullet hit the governor. Though he believes it was another bullet – the second fired by Oswald – the commission concluded that it probably was this same one that had passed through the President’s throat.” (Italics added)
Did Ford really write that after submitting their report, the Warren Commission was “still not absolutely clear which bullet hit the governor?” And it “probably” was the same bullet that hit Kennedy, not definitively. Ford knew it had to be the same bullet, otherwise there was more than one killer. He was hedging, for he knew the evidence supporting the Single Bullet Theory was flimsy as best.
Ford continued: “I personally believe that one of these three shots missed entirely…I believe that another struck the President in the back and emerged from his throat, and that this same bullet struck Governor Connally… [who] does not agree with this. He thinks the first bullet struck the President, the second hit him alone, and the third struck the President’s head. Nevertheless, it is frequently true that a wounded man does not know immediately when he has been hit. I think that Governor Connally did not know for an instant or two that he himself was wounded…”
Note how cleverly Ford implied that if Connally was correct, then a bullet did not miss the limo, although he knew it was a fact that one bullet did miss. He never mentioned the possibility of a second gunman. It was a subtle way of discrediting Connally.
And why did Ford write “I personally believe.” His opinion did not matter. He should have written “the evidence shows beyond doubt,” if that were the case. It obviously wasn’t. And how did Ford know that frequently a person shot could have a delayed reaction to pain. He was not qualified to make such a statement, but he knew that someday the Zapruder film would be released to the public, and the film showed Connally still holding his Stetson hat after JFK is visibly shot. So, he was covering himself.
The November 24, 1963, issue of The New York Times contained an article about Connally. It stated: “Physicians said that the bullet had traveled through the Governor’s body and had broken his fifth rib. It then struck his right wrist, causing a compound fracture, and lodged in his left thigh. A fragment from the rib punctured his lung.” Would any reasonable person think that a shooting victim sustaining such injuries would not know immediately that he was shot? Of course not, and Ford knew it too. That was why he downplayed the severity of the injuries to Connally. Ford wrote the bullet “struck Connally in the back and emerged from his chest, then went through his right hand and pierced his left thigh.”
It is clear that in 1964, supporters of the Warren Commission did their best to defend a conclusion that was indefensible, but at least they had the decency to cryptically let us know how they really felt. For more like this, check out my books: It Did Not Start With JFK.
https://preview.redd.it/zhschhxv0e2b1.jpg?width=3831&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=4fd79183fef6b482e4abd5f650eaa65c73cab837
https://preview.redd.it/ss3689iw0e2b1.jpg?width=3000&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=75fe2a9af0bc1046a3d4d58864214140179aeff7
https://preview.redd.it/klcjxy5x0e2b1.jpg?width=3000&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=6bd3ccda7fa420b7a1fad45cc86fdb9efd779838
submitted by walterherbst to 1960s [link] [comments]


2023.05.27 16:52 walterherbst The New York Times Misled Readers About The Warren Report

The New York Times Misled Readers About The Warren Report
Despite all the evidence to the contrary, today there are those who consider the findings of the Warren Commission as fact. However, what most people do not realize is that when the Warren Report was released, even supporters of the report were unsure of it accuracy.
On September 28, 1964, the New York Times front page headline read, WARREN COMMISSION FINDS OSWALD GUILTY AND SAYS ASSASSIN AND RUBY ACTED ALONE; REBUKES SECRET SERVICE, ASKS REVAMPING. Multiple pages of the edition were filled with articles about the assassination covering a wide variety of topics, but one article jumped out at me.
Titled, Scientific Work Traced Bullets to Oswald’s Rifle, it’s words were carefully chosen to hide the fact that the author was not so sure that JFK was assassinated by a lone gunman. Somewhat buried on page 16, column 5, is the continuation of the article which began on the front page. The 6th paragraph reads, “One shot passed through the President’s neck and then ‘most probably’ [italics included in the original article] passed through the chest of Texas Gov. John B. Connally Jr. A subsequent shot-the fatal one- hit the back of the President’s head. Another shot probably missed the Presidential limousine and its occupants altogether. The evidence is inconclusive as to whether the missed shot was the first, second or third shot.”
At the time, almost every reader was unaware of how important this paragraph was. The writer admitted that one shot missed the limo as fact. The only question was which shot missed. He realized the importance that one shot had to hit both Kennedy and Connally if another shot missed for the single bullet theory to be correct. However, the writer was clearly not sure that the single bullet theory could have happened, so he cleverly writes that one shot “most probably” hit JFK and Connally, and the other shot “most probably missed,” leaving the door open that there was a chance that did not happen. But one shot did miss – they knew this to be true within days of the assassination.
The writer’s concern is evident again in the 9th paragraph, which reads, “The commission held that one shot ‘most probably’ passed both through the President’s neck and the Governor’s body and offered calculations and medical testimony to support this view.”
In the same article, the 37th paragraph reads: “Analysis by four different firearms experts showed that the cartridges and the bullets could have been fired only by the rifle found on the sixth floor.”
When one first reads this, the conclusion seems clear – the experts concluded the bullets were fired from the rifle found. However, that is not what the writer said. He writes the bullets “could” have been fired from the gun, not that they “were” fired from the gun to the exclusion of all other guns. “Could” means it was possible and leaves the door open that the bullets “could” have been fired from another gun. It was clever wordsmanship, done purposely by the writer to deceive readers, most of whom were not well versed in the assassination details.
In addition, on October 2, 1964, Congressman Gerald Ford, in an article for Life magazine titled: Inside Account By A Member Of The Commission: Piecing Together The Evidence, wrote: ”It is still not absolutely clear which bullet hit the governor. Though he believes it was another bullet – the second fired by Oswald – the commission concluded that it probably was this same one that had passed through the President’s throat.” (Italics added)
Did Ford really write that after submitting their report, the Warren Commission was “still not absolutely clear which bullet hit the governor?” And it “probably” was the same bullet that hit Kennedy, not definitively. Ford knew it had to be the same bullet, otherwise there was more than one killer. He was hedging, for he knew the evidence supporting the Single Bullet Theory was flimsy as best.
Ford continued: “I personally believe that one of these three shots missed entirely…I believe that another struck the President in the back and emerged from his throat, and that this same bullet struck Governor Connally… [who] does not agree with this. He thinks the first bullet struck the President, the second hit him alone, and the third struck the President’s head. Nevertheless, it is frequently true that a wounded man does not know immediately when he has been hit. I think that Governor Connally did not know for an instant or two that he himself was wounded…”
Note how cleverly Ford implied that if Connally was correct, then a bullet did not miss the limo, although he knew it was a fact that one bullet did miss. He never mentioned the possibility of a second gunman. It was a subtle way of discrediting Connally.
And why did Ford write “I personally believe.” His opinion did not matter. He should have written “the evidence shows beyond doubt,” if that were the case. It obviously wasn’t. And how did Ford know that frequently a person shot could have a delayed reaction to pain. He was not qualified to make such a statement, but he knew that someday the Zapruder film would be released to the public, and the film showed Connally still holding his Stetson hat after JFK is visibly shot. So, he was covering himself.
The November 24, 1963, issue of The New York Times contained an article about Connally. It stated: “Physicians said that the bullet had traveled through the Governor’s body and had broken his fifth rib. It then struck his right wrist, causing a compound fracture, and lodged in his left thigh. A fragment from the rib punctured his lung.” Would any reasonable person think that a shooting victim sustaining such injuries would not know immediately that he was shot? Of course not, and Ford knew it too. That was why he downplayed the severity of the injuries to Connally. Ford wrote the bullet “struck Connally in the back and emerged from his chest, then went through his right hand and pierced his left thigh.”
It is clear that in 1964, supporters of the Warren Commission did their best to defend a conclusion that was indefensible, but at least they had the decency to cryptically let us know how they really felt. For more like this, check out my books: It Did Not Start With JFK.
https://preview.redd.it/ayuizpfo0e2b1.jpg?width=3831&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=2fe8f0d16e875c3f8a013acdd8223301b2c1e80e
https://preview.redd.it/pqtfuhwo0e2b1.jpg?width=3000&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=6667b1fd14e0663aacdcb01b8c61ea240aa899e3
https://preview.redd.it/uh7kdjpp0e2b1.jpg?width=3000&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=fac64ac0c5d0aa355dbf64f00b69481056244a84
submitted by walterherbst to JFKresearcher [link] [comments]


2023.05.27 16:51 walterherbst The New York Times Misled Readers About The Warren Report

Despite all the evidence to the contrary, today there are those who consider the findings of the Warren Commission as fact. However, what most people do not realize is that when the Warren Report was released, even supporters of the report were unsure of it accuracy.
On September 28, 1964, the New York Times front page headline read, WARREN COMMISSION FINDS OSWALD GUILTY AND SAYS ASSASSIN AND RUBY ACTED ALONE; REBUKES SECRET SERVICE, ASKS REVAMPING. Multiple pages of the edition were filled with articles about the assassination covering a wide variety of topics, but one article jumped out at me.
Titled, Scientific Work Traced Bullets to Oswald’s Rifle, it’s words were carefully chosen to hide the fact that the author was not so sure that JFK was assassinated by a lone gunman. Somewhat buried on page 16, column 5, is the continuation of the article which began on the front page. The 6th paragraph reads, “One shot passed through the President’s neck and then ‘most probably’ [italics included in the original article] passed through the chest of Texas Gov. John B. Connally Jr. A subsequent shot-the fatal one- hit the back of the President’s head. Another shot probably missed the Presidential limousine and its occupants altogether. The evidence is inconclusive as to whether the missed shot was the first, second or third shot.”
At the time, almost every reader was unaware of how important this paragraph was. The writer admitted that one shot missed the limo as fact. The only question was which shot missed. He realized the importance that one shot had to hit both Kennedy and Connally if another shot missed for the single bullet theory to be correct. However, the writer was clearly not sure that the single bullet theory could have happened, so he cleverly writes that one shot “most probably” hit JFK and Connally, and the other shot “most probably missed,” leaving the door open that there was a chance that did not happen. But one shot did miss – they knew this to be true within days of the assassination.
The writer’s concern is evident again in the 9th paragraph, which reads, “The commission held that one shot ‘most probably’ passed both through the President’s neck and the Governor’s body and offered calculations and medical testimony to support this view.”
In the same article, the 37th paragraph reads: “Analysis by four different firearms experts showed that the cartridges and the bullets could have been fired only by the rifle found on the sixth floor.”
When one first reads this, the conclusion seems clear – the experts concluded the bullets were fired from the rifle found. However, that is not what the writer said. He writes the bullets “could” have been fired from the gun, not that they “were” fired from the gun to the exclusion of all other guns. “Could” means it was possible and leaves the door open that the bullets “could” have been fired from another gun. It was clever wordsmanship, done purposely by the writer to deceive readers, most of whom were not well versed in the assassination details.
In addition, on October 2, 1964, Congressman Gerald Ford, in an article for Life magazine titled: Inside Account By A Member Of The Commission: Piecing Together The Evidence, wrote: ”It is still not absolutely clear which bullet hit the governor. Though he believes it was another bullet – the second fired by Oswald – the commission concluded that it probably was this same one that had passed through the President’s throat.” (Italics added)
Did Ford really write that after submitting their report, the Warren Commission was “still not absolutely clear which bullet hit the governor?” And it “probably” was the same bullet that hit Kennedy, not definitively. Ford knew it had to be the same bullet, otherwise there was more than one killer. He was hedging, for he knew the evidence supporting the Single Bullet Theory was flimsy as best.
Ford continued: “I personally believe that one of these three shots missed entirely…I believe that another struck the President in the back and emerged from his throat, and that this same bullet struck Governor Connally… [who] does not agree with this. He thinks the first bullet struck the President, the second hit him alone, and the third struck the President’s head. Nevertheless, it is frequently true that a wounded man does not know immediately when he has been hit. I think that Governor Connally did not know for an instant or two that he himself was wounded…”
Note how cleverly Ford implied that if Connally was correct, then a bullet did not miss the limo, although he knew it was a fact that one bullet did miss. He never mentioned the possibility of a second gunman. It was a subtle way of discrediting Connally.
And why did Ford write “I personally believe.” His opinion did not matter. He should have written “the evidence shows beyond doubt,” if that were the case. It obviously wasn’t. And how did Ford know that frequently a person shot could have a delayed reaction to pain. He was not qualified to make such a statement, but he knew that someday the Zapruder film would be released to the public, and the film showed Connally still holding his Stetson hat after JFK is visibly shot. So, he was covering himself.
The November 24, 1963, issue of The New York Times contained an article about Connally. It stated: “Physicians said that the bullet had traveled through the Governor’s body and had broken his fifth rib. It then struck his right wrist, causing a compound fracture, and lodged in his left thigh. A fragment from the rib punctured his lung.” Would any reasonable person think that a shooting victim sustaining such injuries would not know immediately that he was shot? Of course not, and Ford knew it too. That was why he downplayed the severity of the injuries to Connally. Ford wrote the bullet “struck Connally in the back and emerged from his chest, then went through his right hand and pierced his left thigh.”
It is clear that in 1964, supporters of the Warren Commission did their best to defend a conclusion that was indefensible, but at least they had the decency to cryptically let us know how they really felt. For more like this, check out my books: It Did Not Start With JFK.
https://preview.redd.it/8udvnowg0e2b1.jpg?width=3831&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=1b099d7a964953acdc72cff5876ebcf50ee5c9bb
https://preview.redd.it/muf02feh0e2b1.jpg?width=3000&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=c6e6190fd0a7a51cecd3f6ccbec401344bef63ea
https://preview.redd.it/2aru4d2i0e2b1.jpg?width=3000&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=6d34cf342eb7a491ed6f1f03ffeaac5c15a15627
submitted by walterherbst to JFKassasination [link] [comments]


2023.05.27 16:50 walterherbst The New York Times Misled Readers About The Warren Report

The New York Times Misled Readers About The Warren Report
Despite all the evidence to the contrary, today there are those who consider the findings of the Warren Commission as fact. However, what most people do not realize is that when the Warren Report was released, even supporters of the report were unsure of it accuracy.
On September 28, 1964, the New York Times front page headline read, WARREN COMMISSION FINDS OSWALD GUILTY AND SAYS ASSASSIN AND RUBY ACTED ALONE; REBUKES SECRET SERVICE, ASKS REVAMPING. Multiple pages of the edition were filled with articles about the assassination covering a wide variety of topics, but one article jumped out at me.
Titled, Scientific Work Traced Bullets to Oswald’s Rifle, it’s words were carefully chosen to hide the fact that the author was not so sure that JFK was assassinated by a lone gunman. Somewhat buried on page 16, column 5, is the continuation of the article which began on the front page. The 6th paragraph reads, “One shot passed through the President’s neck and then ‘most probably’ [italics included in the original article] passed through the chest of Texas Gov. John B. Connally Jr. A subsequent shot-the fatal one- hit the back of the President’s head. Another shot probably missed the Presidential limousine and its occupants altogether. The evidence is inconclusive as to whether the missed shot was the first, second or third shot.”
At the time, almost every reader was unaware of how important this paragraph was. The writer admitted that one shot missed the limo as fact. The only question was which shot missed. He realized the importance that one shot had to hit both Kennedy and Connally if another shot missed for the single bullet theory to be correct. However, the writer was clearly not sure that the single bullet theory could have happened, so he cleverly writes that one shot “most probably” hit JFK and Connally, and the other shot “most probably missed,” leaving the door open that there was a chance that did not happen. But one shot did miss – they knew this to be true within days of the assassination.
The writer’s concern is evident again in the 9th paragraph, which reads, “The commission held that one shot ‘most probably’ passed both through the President’s neck and the Governor’s body and offered calculations and medical testimony to support this view.”
In the same article, the 37th paragraph reads: “Analysis by four different firearms experts showed that the cartridges and the bullets could have been fired only by the rifle found on the sixth floor.”
When one first reads this, the conclusion seems clear – the experts concluded the bullets were fired from the rifle found. However, that is not what the writer said. He writes the bullets “could” have been fired from the gun, not that they “were” fired from the gun to the exclusion of all other guns. “Could” means it was possible and leaves the door open that the bullets “could” have been fired from another gun. It was clever wordsmanship, done purposely by the writer to deceive readers, most of whom were not well versed in the assassination details.
In addition, on October 2, 1964, Congressman Gerald Ford, in an article for Life magazine titled: Inside Account By A Member Of The Commission: Piecing Together The Evidence, wrote: ”It is still not absolutely clear which bullet hit the governor. Though he believes it was another bullet – the second fired by Oswald – the commission concluded that it probably was this same one that had passed through the President’s throat.” (Italics added)
Did Ford really write that after submitting their report, the Warren Commission was “still not absolutely clear which bullet hit the governor?” And it “probably” was the same bullet that hit Kennedy, not definitively. Ford knew it had to be the same bullet, otherwise there was more than one killer. He was hedging, for he knew the evidence supporting the Single Bullet Theory was flimsy as best.
Ford continued: “I personally believe that one of these three shots missed entirely…I believe that another struck the President in the back and emerged from his throat, and that this same bullet struck Governor Connally… [who] does not agree with this. He thinks the first bullet struck the President, the second hit him alone, and the third struck the President’s head. Nevertheless, it is frequently true that a wounded man does not know immediately when he has been hit. I think that Governor Connally did not know for an instant or two that he himself was wounded…”
Note how cleverly Ford implied that if Connally was correct, then a bullet did not miss the limo, although he knew it was a fact that one bullet did miss. He never mentioned the possibility of a second gunman. It was a subtle way of discrediting Connally.
And why did Ford write “I personally believe.” His opinion did not matter. He should have written “the evidence shows beyond doubt,” if that were the case. It obviously wasn’t. And how did Ford know that frequently a person shot could have a delayed reaction to pain. He was not qualified to make such a statement, but he knew that someday the Zapruder film would be released to the public, and the film showed Connally still holding his Stetson hat after JFK is visibly shot. So, he was covering himself.
The November 24, 1963, issue of The New York Times contained an article about Connally. It stated: “Physicians said that the bullet had traveled through the Governor’s body and had broken his fifth rib. It then struck his right wrist, causing a compound fracture, and lodged in his left thigh. A fragment from the rib punctured his lung.” Would any reasonable person think that a shooting victim sustaining such injuries would not know immediately that he was shot? Of course not, and Ford knew it too. That was why he downplayed the severity of the injuries to Connally. Ford wrote the bullet “struck Connally in the back and emerged from his chest, then went through his right hand and pierced his left thigh.”
It is clear that in 1964, supporters of the Warren Commission did their best to defend a conclusion that was indefensible, but at least they had the decency to cryptically let us know how they really felt. For more like this, check out my books: It Did Not Start With JFK.
https://preview.redd.it/91pvch290e2b1.jpg?width=3831&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=210b1bde552d40b4f56bd578251da787b7166f4c
https://preview.redd.it/xzkzdci90e2b1.jpg?width=3000&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=0447e59d9e2d888c1871109132074ba00c108d4f
https://preview.redd.it/sc74ra2b0e2b1.jpg?width=3000&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ad0fecf091e352e1a79d267e68389b971b0e8472
submitted by walterherbst to JFKTruth [link] [comments]