He has written this hit-piece called There is no magic bullet:
Talk about pounding square pegs into round holes, he came up with this:
He thinks that's how far Connally was from the side of the limo, and how close JFK was to it, with his shoulder crammed against it. He also added the white arrow to this photo:
Notice that 95% of the arrow is passing over the car door, not in an imaginary space between the car door and Connally. Let's look at it without the arrow.
What have you really got there? Connally was sitting closer to the door than Kellerman was.
All Lambert did was lie with an arrow.
Anyone can put an arrow anywhere, and anyone can draw a diagram any which way. Here is Lambert's diagram compared to that of the HSCA, and note that they had the exact same objective, to defend the Single Bullet Theory.
So, Lambert has Connally's head turned a full 90 degrees to the long axis of the limo whereas the HSCA had his head turned much less. But, Kennedy got hit when the limo was behind the freeway sign in the Zapruder film, and we don't get to see it. So, we don't know exactly which frame it was. But, if we take the first frame in which we can see Connally emerging, it's Z-222, and we get this:
Note that Connally's head is not turned at 90 degrees to the long axis of the limo or even close to it. So, already, Lambert is full of it. But, has Connally even been hit yet? Not according to his doctor. His doctor testified that he didn't think Connally got hit until Z-235, so over 10 frames later. As you know, this is a highly debated issue. So, for Lambert (and the HSCA) to assume that Connally has been hit here is to assume the very thing that is in major dispute. Let's keep going and see when we observe a clear sign that Connally has been hit.
I am not seeing any sign that Connally has been hit yet. He hasn't so much as flinched. Note that 227 is too blurry. But, in 228, Connally is back to sitting straight ahead, and he still hasn't reacted.
Why would anyone think that he's been hit when he hasn't even flinched? He's sitting perfectly straight and in balance.
Kennedy is going through conniptions back there, but there isn't the slightest sign of disturbance in Connally.
Note that he is still holding his hat, which he has raised in his right hand.
Connally still hasn't been shot. There is no basis to claim it.
That's when Connally's doctor said he was hit. Notice the pitch of his shoulders. And when you're watching it in the film, he does appear to flinch at that instant. Look at the imbalance in his shoulders. He wouldn't do that for no reason.
And in the next frame, you can practically see the distress on his face.
So, this doctor agrees with his doctor that that's when Connally got hit. But, there is no basis to think that Connally was already hit when he emerged from behind the freeway sign. JFK yes; Connally no. So, it means that the HSCA and Lambert are both completely mistaken. They are just saying, "notice Connally has been hit" when clearly he has NOT been hit.
Then there is the issue of the angle between the Sniper's Nest, Kennedy, and Connally. It has to be a straight line because that's how bullets travel. So, the delta from right to left and the descent delta have to be constant from the Sniper's Nest to Kennedy to Connally. Lambert only dealt with the right to left delta. He made it work by shifting Connally far more leftward in the limo than he actually was.
But, considering that the Sniper's Nest was 6 floors above the ground, and the ground was much higher there than down the hill, we wind up with a rather steep angle; I believe about 17 degrees. But, how could there be that much downward angle between Kennedy and Connally when Connally was sitting in front of Kennedy in the same car?
Another way to look at it is through the scope of the rifle.
Why, if you were shooting down into the back of the guy in back would the bullet travel forward into the back of the guy in front of him? It was a long limo, and Connally was well in front of Kennedy.
That diagonal white line is heading down to Connally's tailbone. I realize that there was some descent in the road, but how much road descent could there have been between Kennedy and Connally?
And look: we don't have to argue about this because it could easily be duplicated and with precision. Get the very limo to Dealey Plaza or an exact replica of it. Get guys who correspond exactly to JFK and Connally in size to sit in it. Place it exactly where it was. And then from the 6th floor, you use a laser light to duplicate the path of the bullet. See if you can get it to pass through Kennedy and Connally exactly as described. I'm willing to do that. Are they?
Next, Lyin' Lambert refers to Connally's entrance wound as being "oval" rather than "round." This is a rephrasing of the tumbling bullet claim. But, Millicent Cramor destroyed that claim long ago. The fact is that Connally's entrance wound was only 1.5 cms, not the 3 cms that is often claimed. And it was identical in size and shape to Kennedy's skull entrance wound. Read all about it in The Trajectory of a Lie:
Then, Lambert goes on to the pristineness of the magic bullet.
What do you think? Do you think that the pristine-looking bullet above was the same as the deformed bullet below it? We are talking about deviation away from a perfect cylinder. That bottom one (directly above) is highly deviated. But, if it was that deviated, it was that deviated throughout its length, so how could the tip be unaffected? Don't tell me that if it was mangled to that extent that it wouldn't be apparent throughout the length of the bullet. So, why did they resort to taking a photograph from that angle? Who does that? And how did they do it? The very fact that they would tells you that it was propaganda. Here is me trying to duplicate it.
Notice that I show the context in which the image was taken. Do they? No.
So, how did they come up with that image?
As I suspected, a little bit of the length of the bullet did come through in my picture. You can see it above. So, how did they take their picture, and how did they get that isolated barren effect? What basis do we have to know that it was the same bullet as this?
Just because they say so? But, it's the FBI saying it. Why didn't the Warren Commission demand to take possession of the bullet and have their own investigators take their own pictures of it?
This "evidence" is just the FBI selling the official story. Let's look at other evidence. This is the result of an Australian experiment showing deformation after impact. On the left shows you what the bullet looked like before being shot. Why did they accept so much help from the FBI when they were supposed to be an independent investigation? Here's what happens to bullets that hit things:
The experimenter only said that the bullets were fired into a "soft medium." Nothing hard like bone. This was a low velocity impact test shot over 1000 yards.
These deformed bullets were all recovered from the same species of animal:
The point is that if you have a bullet that traversed the bodies of two men, causing 7 wounds, and blasted through two bones, you don't expect it to look like this:
And note that this too could be easily tested because you could get animal carcasses that corresponded to Kennedy and Connally and shoot through them. Would the bullet even pass through that much tissue and bone? Very doubtful. But, I guarantee you that it wouldn't look like what we see above. It's preposterous.
Now read this by Gary Aguilar and Tink Thompson:
James Lambert is just another shill for the official story, and he is a particularly obnoxious one. James Bond had a gun and a license to kill. James Lambert has a Sharpie and a license to lie.