I know it’s daunting to hear that the Dallas Police killed Oswald. Your gut reaction wants to reject it for being too extreme.  But, say no to that. And think about what you know they did. They turned transferring Oswald to the County Jail into a media circus. They did that even knowing that there were threats against him. They said 100 people called threatening to kill Oswald, but that doesn’t make sense. When have criminals ever called the police to give them a heads-up about a crime they were about to commit? Never. That’s not how criminals behave.

Then, they said that Ruby snuck past Officer Roy Vaughn at the ramp, but Vaughn sued them over that. And they settled with him out of court. They paid him money.

They said the jail transfer would be at 10, but it was an hour and twenty minutes later, at 11:20. And they never gave a reason for the delay.

Ruby said he sent his money wire at 10:17. He told that to the Warren Commissioners, and it’s in the record. So, that would have put him in the basement at 10:20. He said that all he could remember was the police jumping him, and he didn’t know why. And he spoke: “What are you doing? You know me. I’m Jack Ruby.” And the detectives admitted that he said that. But, if you watch the films, you’ll see that the Shooter never spoke. He shot Oswald (or pretended to); then he jumped in front of him, to put his back to the camera. And then, he dove into the arms of the cops. He went to them. He dove into them. He literally dove. When has any other criminal done that?  But, he never said anything. And the reporters said afterwards that the Shooter never spoke, which is in the KRLD footage. So, the Shooter that we know never said a word, but Ruby spoke.

Vaughn and Ruby had different accounts of what happened at the top of the ramp: Vaughn said Pierce never stopped and they never talked; Ruby said that Pierce was “parked” at the top of the ramp, and an officer on foot was leaning into his window talking to him. These are not things that either of them would have lied about. It suggests that the Vaughn and Ruby were there at different times, and neither encountered the other. And you have good reason to believe that because Vaughn was a strapping 29 year old officer who went on to become a police chief, and the idea that Jack Ruby slipped past him at an 8 foot wide ramp is preposterous. Why believe the Dallas Police?  I believe Vaughn, and I believe Ruby.

And why didn’t the Dallas Police handcuff the Shooter in the garage? Why did they dance him into the Jail Office without doing that? And how did the officers involved know what to do? Nobody gave any direction. No one was in command. Doesn’t it seem that some of them would have had the thought to whip out their cuffs and handcuff the Shooter in the garage? And how did they all know to take him in through the corner door? Why not use the wide double doors? Wouldn’t that have been easier? How could they all do what they did without any direction? Did they have ESP? Could they read each other’s minds? We are talking about a coordinated action that presumably was not planned in advance, yet, it must have been planned in advance. Coordinated actions don’t happen without planning.

There is a very strange response by Jim Leavelle in this video at 2:53. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yxKEzFH_OHY&t=175s He said that after trying to jerk Oswald behind him (which he did try to do) he reached up and tried to take hold of Jack Ruby’s left shoulder with his right hand. This is Leavelle demonstrating.

Leavelle bold-faced lied. And then at 4:04, Leavelle said that “I immediately picked Oswald up with another officer I don’t remember who that was.”

You notice the lack of punctuation there, and it’s no accident because that’s exactly how Leavelle said it:  without pausing. But think about it.  If he was recalling it, wouldn’t he try to remember who it was? Frankly, I don’t think it's possible that he didn't rememer. But, my point is that he already had the thought in his mind that he couldn’t remember. He had already decided that he was going to say that, that he couldn’t remember. And the reason he said it is because no other officer helped him. He never picked Oswald up. Oswald wasn’t shot in the garage, and he went into the Jail office on his own power, behind the wall of people they sent running out in front of the camera to obscure the view. It was a human curtain. Think how big an object two men carrying another man would be. But, it was never captured, presumably because of the wave of men who suddenly appeared, totally blocking the view. And when it finally cleared, it was all over.

I don’t say that the Dallas Police decided on their own to kill Oswald.  I tell you that LBJ put them up to it. LBJ’s top henchman Cliff Carter was on the phone with Fritz 11x on Friday afternoon. and that was before cell phones. That is documented in Phil Nelson’s LBJ: MASTERMIND OF THE JFK ASSASSINATION. And LBJ was very cozy with the Dallas Police. He hired Detectives Elmer Boyd and Richard Sims to be his personal bodyguards whenever he came to Dallas. The last time had been in April 1963. Fritz' men were all WW2 vets, including Fritz himself, and LBJ was their Commander in Chief. I’m sure he gave them the spiel about civil war, economic collapse, war with the Soviet Union, and a 100 million dead. They never would have done it on their own accord. But, when your Commander in Chief gives you a mission to do, you do it. And their belief that Oswald had killed their police brother JD Tippit greased the wheels. Of course, Oswald did not kill Tippit, and he was never at 8^th and Patton.

After the garage cleared and everything settled down, two minutes passed before we heard or saw anything. The WFAA footage within the Jail Office began 2 minutes after the shooting. What happened in those 2 minutes? That’s when they got a bullet into Oswald.  And it’s in that footage that we see Ruby being taken to the elevator in only his unbuttoned shirt and no jacket, even though the detectives testified that they handcuffed him in his jacket and didn’t remove his jacket until they got him upstairs.

Ruby was hapless and hopeless. He was totally docile and non-violent. Every last thing you’ve heard about Ruby being in the Mafia is a lie.  I admit that my capacity for violence is much higher than Ruby’s.  I would never initiate violence against anyone, but if someone got violent with me, or got violent with someone else in my presence, I would act quickly, and I wouldn’t hold back. Jack Ruby had no such impulses. He was NOT a violent man.

I have been telling you the truth that Ruby got to the garage an hour early, where he was jumped and taken up to the 5^th floor. There he was told that he shot Oswald.  And Ruby, being totally docile and submissive, and pathologically respectful of the Dallas Police, accepted it just because they said it. He said he NEVER had any thought to hurt Oswald that whole weekend. The ONLY reason he accepted that he did it was because the Dallas Police said so, and he had no ability to defy them; to stand up to them, to dispute it. He just couldn’t do it. He was just so very obsequious and submissive.

Both Oswald and Ruby were innocent. Oswald was standing in the doorway during the shots.  Ruby was in custody up on the 5^th floor during the Garage Spectacle. The plotters needed Oswald dead because they knew he didn’t kill JFK and the case against him would never hold up in court. Not even the rifle could have held up in court because Oswald never mail-ordered one from Chicago. Read John Armstrong.

https://harveyandlee.net/Guns/Guns.html

In 2 days, it’s the 62^nd anniversary. Join me in saying: Stop the Lies! Oswald outside! And Ruby was innocent.

 Billy Lovelady never claimed that he was Doorman. It was other people claiming it and speaking for him. It's very troubling that they didn't put him in front of cameras and microphones at the beginning because they were claiming that he looked so much like Oswald that his step-children, and even his own wife, mistook Oswald for him. Of course, it wasn't true. Lovelady was 5'8" 170 pounds according to the FBI, while according to the Dallas Police, Oswald was 5'9, 131 pounds. Might as well say that Laurel and Hardy looked like twins.

 Lovelady testified to the Warren Commission, and that's what he was questioned about. At any time, he could have said that he was Doorman, but he didn't. And it's freaky how it went because, with other witnesses, Attorney Joseph Ball pointed to Doorman and asked, "Who is that?" But, he didn't do that with Lovelady. But they were looking at the photograph, and at any time, Lovelady could have pointed to Doorman and said, "That's me." But, he didn't. It was more like a chess game in which Ball asked Lovelady to draw an arrow to himself, and he gave him a photograph that already had an arrow on it, one that Frazier had drawn, with the arrow pointed at Doorman. I guess that was supposed to be a hint. I'm sure Lovelady got the message, but he just wasn't going to go along.

Instead, he drew an arrow to headless man who was visoring his eyes. Think about the irony of that. There was so much light streaming into his eyes that it was blinding him, yet, his entire head was in a black hole as he visored. Only in the JFK assassination do things like that happened. But, Lovelady did draw a little arrow, not pointing to Doorman, but to Black Hole Man, to indicate himself. So, that was Lovelady telling us and the world that he wasn't Doorman. I will attach the image.

  In 1967, CBS was doing a 4 hour Special on the JFK assassination, and they planned a whole segment on the Doorman controversy. They brought Lovelady down from Colorado, where he had moved after coming into wealth after the assassination. CBS photographed him, and they interviewed him. It was the first and only time that Lovelady submitted to a press interview. And after interviewing him, they took the action of destroying the interview and canceling the Doorman segment. They didn't mention him or Doorman in the 4 hour program at all. What did he tell him? We don't know, but it obviously wasn't what they wanted to hear.

 Then, 10 years later, the HSCA was tackling the Doorman controversy again. They brought in anthropologists to study the photos and take "anthropomorphic" measurements of Oswald and Lovelady, using photos. So, they were taking precise measurements even though a photo is a 2-dimensional rendering of 3-dimensional object. But, in the end, they said that Doorman was too blurry to take any measurements. But, what was the point of measuring at all if it didn't include him?

 But, Oswald was dead. Only Lovelady was alive. So, wouldn't it have made sense to interview Lovelady after swearing him under oath? But, after HSCA Attorney Ken Brooten went to visit Lovelady in Colorado, he told the HSCA, "you don't want to interview this guy." And they didn't. They never gave a reason. They just didn't interview him.

But, when they released their Final Report in January 1979, that is right when Lovelady suddenly died of a heart attack at the age of 41. It's unusual to get a heart attack that young, and it's even more rare for it to be fatal. But, in his case, it was. Of course, you know about the heart attack gun. Did you watch the Church Committee tapes about it? They could shoot you with a tiny frozen dart that contained a poison that would induce a heart attack or mimic one. That's why they called it the heart attack gun. But, they could also load it with a nerve agent, and that's what they did when they shot JFK in the back with it on Elm Street. The shot came from the open 2nd floor window in the Dal-Tex building when he was high on the hill; barely out of the intersection. But, in Lovelady's case, they induced a heart attack and that's what silenced him forever.

 Don't listen to the shills. Listen to me. I am telling you the truth that Oswald was the Altgens Doorman, and they have been lying to us about it for 62 years. You can readily see the matching features between Oswald and Doorman, but they are also wearing the same clothes: Oswald's unusual Russian shirt brought back with him from Russia, with most of the buttons missing, and also a stretched, tattered t-shirt. Both are wearing that exact outfit. It is insane to deny that they are the same person.

 Stop the lies! Oswald outside! Don’t listen to the Ops. Listen to me. I am telling you the truth. It is as certain that Oswald was the one standing in the Doorway as it is that Christ was nailed to the Cross on Calvary.  

In 4 days it is going to be 62^nd anniversary. Be brave; be strong; be fearless, and declare Oswald in the doorway because that is where he was during the shooting of JFK.

 On the  left is Ruby in the Jail Office, shortly after the shooting, when he was being taken upstairs. But, we have testimony from three detectives: Clardy, Archer, and McMillan, who said that when they got inside, the first thing they did was push Ruby to the floor and handcuff him. They didn’t say they removed his jacket first. In fact, they said that they didn’t remove his jacket until they got upstairs. So, how can this image of Ruby, handcuffed in the Jail Office without his jacket, be real? And the very idea that they would remove his jacket before handcuffing him is absurd. 

But, there are other problems with that image. Ruby’s hair doesn’t look right. It is the only image in which he appears to have thick, woolly patches of hair between a lake of baldness. His hair wasn’t like that, and there are no other images of him like that. But, it is just one of many weird and unique images of Ruby’s hair.  The center image is him the next morning, and in it, he has long ropy hair. That isn’t real either.  In those days, “retouching” was done with paint and brush, and every artist did it their own way.

They  had to give Ruby hair because he was mostly bald, while the Shooter had thick, dense, matted hair that I believe was a wig.

But, there is more. Why is Ruby’s shirt unbuttoned on the left? I think the idea is that his buttons were ripped off during the scuffle.  You better hope it’s that because otherwise it means they unbuttoned his shirt to stage this.  So, were his buttons ripped off?  Absolutely not because on the right, it’s him later that afternoon with his shirt looking neat and buttoned.  And you can’t tell me they sewed his buttons back on.  So, his buttons weren’t ripped off, which means that what we are seeing on the left is staging. And how could they have been ripped off when he was wearing a jacket during the scuffle? 

But, let’s keep going because there is more. Why does he look so portly on the left? He doesn’t look that way in the center or right. He’s got a protruding abdomen, a baggy neck, like he’s got a goiter, and his back is hunched. He looks very different physically than he does in the other images.

Finally, look at him on the left and on the right, which was a few hours later.  Isn’t that quite a makeover?  Doesn’t he look all disheveled and sloppy on the left? So, how did he get to looking so GQ on the right? Did they actually give him a makeover? It’s not in the record. There are two books that detail what happened to Ruby after his arrest. One is Vincent Bugoliosi’s RECLAIMING HISTORY and the other is Elmer Getz’ MOMEN OF MADNESS, and neither one says anything about a makeover. So, how did Ruby get all clean and groomed? A comb wasn’t listed among his possessions.

Almost everything you’ve been told about Ruby is a lie. He was not a Mafioso. He did not stalk Oswald. He never ran guns to Cuba. He did not shoot Oswald. He was not in the garage at the time. The guy masquerading as him was FBI Agent James Bookhout. Ruby got to the basement an hour before, and he told the Warren Commissioners that he sent the money wire at 10:17. He was being held up on the 5^th floor in his underwear at the time of the Garage Spectacle.

So, the Dallas Police killed Oswald, and LBJ put them up to it. The plotters knew beforehand that they had to kill Oswald.  They knew they could never try him.  He didn’t even own a rifle. The whole story about him having mail-ordered one from Chicago is a lie. You only have to read John Armstrong to know that.

  https://harveyandlee.net/Guns/Guns.html

Not only could they not try him, they couldn’t even let him see a lawyer. If they did, they would have had to kill the lawyer. They had to get him killed before he talked to a lawyer.

But, Oswald did so much damage at the Midnight Press Conference that they couldn’t kill him until they faked his meeting with Attorney H Louis Nichols, where Oswald supposedly turned down his offer for a lawyer. That never happened. Nichols met with an Oswald double. And Nichols was oblivious to it. He was totally bamboozled.

The Dallas Police shot Oswald after the theatrics in the Garage. Again, it wasn’t their idea;  LBJ put them up to it. And I can just imagine what he told them: that there will be chaos; the economy will collapse; there will be civil war; there will be war with the Soviet Union, and 100 million will die. He often spouted that to get people to do what he wanted. That included Earl Warren.  

It's true what I have been telling you that Jack Ruby was innocent. You only have to compare images of Ruby to the Garage Shooter to see that they were different men.

Our Government and Media have been lying to us about this for 62 years. The 62^nd commemoration is just a week away. Let’s draw a line in the sand. Oswald and Ruby were both innocent, and a cabal within the national security establishment killed both JFK and Oswald, and that included Vice President Lyndon Johnson.  If we have any self-respect at all, we will demand that the lies stop now.

 If Ruby was ordered by the Mafia to shoot Oswald, why did he bring his dog along? Doesn't the fact that he brought his dog along prove that he had no intention of shooting Oswald?

And let's continue comparing Ruby to the Shooter because that's what matters; not the lipflapping. And here we can see that Ruby and the Shooter were very different and nothing alike. Ruby, on the right, had a much longer neck; his hair in back was very different; he wasn't round and pudgy like the Garage Shooter; and the shape of his head was entirely different. These are, most certainly, two different men. You'd have to be out of your mind to claim that they are the same man. And it proves that Ruby was not the Shooter.

I am not suggesting it. I am saying that it's certain that Ruby was not the Shooter because the images say he wasn't. And nothing else matters.

Jack Ruby got to the garage an hour before the televised spectacle, and I can prove it.  First, there is the fact that Ruby told the Warren Commissioners that he sent the money wire at 10:17.  Right away, a Secret Service agent from San Francisco, who was not in Texas at the time, softly and gently corrected him. Ruby didn’t argue with him, but he didn’t relent either. He just didn’t respond. But, there is no chance that Ruby lied. He surely believed he sent the money wire at 10:17.

Second is the timeline. Ruby said he got up early Sunday morning. He didn’t give a time, but let’s say 8 because anything after 8 isn’t early. He said he fixed some breakfast and watched his favorite rabbi on tv, and also browsed the newspaper as he ate.  A call came in from Karen Carlin but they didn’t talk long because they had already talked the night before about her financial situation and need for an advance.  

So, how much time had elapsed since he got up early? It couldn’t have been more than an hour. So, if he got up at 8, it was 9. Do you know how far the drive was to Western Union? It was 5 minutes at the most. I put it in MapQuest. And remember that traffic was much lighter in 1963 than today. And it was a Sunday morning, which is one of the lightest traffic times of the week.

So, what time would he have gotten there? It seems like he could have gotten there by 9:30, but, let’s add a buffer of 30 minutes. That would make it 10:00.  And that works out perfectly for him to have sent the money wire at 10:17.

But, you can’t slap another hour into that timeline, not when he said he got up early, and only had to get dressed, eat breakfast, and talk to Karen Carlin briefly before leaving.

In her WC testimony, Karen was pressured to say that she called at 10 or later, but she was very reluctant to commit to that.

Mr. Hubert. Would you be able to say with any degree of accuracy that it could not have been earlier than 10?
Mrs. CARLIN. It could have been. I am not going to say for sure.

After that, Karen was put into the Witness Protection Program and relocated to Michigan with a new identity. And a rumor was started that she was dead. Penn Jones published that she was dead. But, someone tracked her down in Michigan many years later. I think it was the 1990s. She gave him an interview but was evasive.

I also read the testimony of George Senator, Ruby’s “roommate.” And I put that in quotes because it’s bizarre how they came to be roommates. Senator had his own apartment in Ruby’s building, and he was being evicted for not paying his rent for having lost his job. Ruby saw it happening, and he offered to let Senator move in with him- to keep him from being homeless. I don’t doubt Ruby’s sincerity, but I do doubt Senator’s. I think he was a plant.

But, when you read his testimony, it’s bizarre because, as with Karen Carlin, they wanted him to commit to a late departure by Ruby. But, Senator wouldn’t commit to it either. He kept saying that he was only guessing. Then, his questioner and him battled him over his use of the word “guess” for a whole page of transcript. But, Senator stuck to his guns, that he couldn’t be sure about the time he was being asked to confirm.  

But, forget about that. I keep my focus on Ruby, who said he got up early and just did a few predictable, easy to time things and then left. And 10:17 fits much better in that timeline than 11:17.

In his narrative, Ruby said he took twice his usual dose of amphetamines that morning plus some other tablets. And that’s all he said. But, who writes like that? And Ruby especially tended to be verbose, providing excess details. So, why did he take more drugs, and what were the other drugs? He didn’t say. Or did he? A Hollywood screenwriter William Read Woodfield was brought in to “help” Ruby write his narrative. I don’t know how that came about. But, what I suspect is that Woodfield was assigned to make sure the narrative included nothing that deviated from the official story.

Here's a flagrant example. Ruby said he got up early, and Woodfield wrote a subtitle for it: Approximately 9:30 AM. Ruby never said that, and 9:30 is not early. 9:30 is late. 

His “diet pills” referred to the amphetamine Preludin. But, what were the other tablets? And why would he say that without explaining? But, there is no doubt that Ruby was high as a kite that Sunday morning.

Compare the cop’s eye to Ruby’s. Ruby looks like a drugged-out freak; he was one.  And if you look closely, you can see that his pupil was very dilated, and it was due to drugs. 

The next thing is the discrepancy between what Ruby said and what Officer Roy Vaughn said about what happened at the Main Street ramp.

It was a one-way, incoming ramp. So, why was there a crowd gathered there? Who were they expecting to arrive? Elvis? There was no reason for them to be there. So why were they there? They were there to attract Ruby.  

So, Vaughn said that when Pierce was coming up the ramp that he responded by stepping to the curb to check on traffic. And seeing that it was clear, he waved Pierce through. He said that Pierce didn’t stop or slow down, and they didn’t exchange words; that Pierce just turned on Main and was gone.

But, Ruby gave a very different account. He said that when he got to the ramp that Pierce was stopped. The word he used was “parked”; that Pierce was parked at the top of the ramp. And he said there was a uniformed officer there who was leaning into Pierce’s window, and the two of them were talking. He didn’t recognize the officer. But, Ruby knew Roy Vaughn. Vaughn had pulled Ruby over once for a traffic violation, but he didn’t ticket him because “he was a friend of the Department.” There were also a couple times that Vaughn went to the Carousel Club, but always on police business; not for entertainment. The point is that Ruby knew Vaughn and would have recognized him. Ruby recognized Pierce, and he would have recognized Vaughn too, had he been there.  But, there must have been some other officer there whom Ruby didn’t know.

So, those are two very different accounts, and there is no reason to think that either of them was lying. So, how do we make sense of it? They were talking about different times and different events. Pierce went up that ramp twice: first at 10:15 and then again an hour later.  And the way it went for Vaughn was that he was working in the field somewhere in Dallas that morning, directing traffic. Then, he got a call on his radio to report to the Dispatch office. He went there and was told that one of Sergeant Dean’s men would come for him, and that he should wait. So, Vaughn waited and for a long time. He said he just drank coffee and chatted with the other men. Then, someone came for him and took him to the basement, where he was told to guard the Main Street ramp.

So, I looked at that timeline too. If he was in the field at 9, then it could easily have been 10:30 before he was placed at the ramp, which was after Ruby was apprehended at 10:20.

Vaughn was intended to be the third victim that day, the scapegoat who would be blamed for letting Ruby in, supposedly out of incompetence, not collusion. But, Vaughn was no pushover. After he got a reprimand for letting Ruby in, he hired a lawyer, and they filed suit against the DPD.  It was settled out of court, and the DPD paid him cold hard cash, an undisclosed amount of money to drop the lawsuit, and the reprimand was rescinded too.  

And 29 year old Roy Vaughn went on to have a very illustrious career, becoming the Police Chief in Midlothian, Texas, and after retiring from that becoming a Municipal Judge for 13 years before dying of old age. And to his last breath, he said that Ruby never got past him, and he didn’t. Ruby got there before Vaughn was placed there. It was a staggered situation; first Ruby; then Vaughn.

But, why Vaughn? Why’d they choose him? You should read John Hankey, who is the top expert on George HW Bush’s doings on 11/22. Bush was the “Houston oil man” who briefly got arrested after rushing out of the DalTex building in a suspicious manner.  The officer who arrested him was Roy Vaughn. Is that why they selected him to be the ramp patsy?  

And before I quit, let me say that all talk about Ruby lying; that he got to the basement another way with help from the DPD opening doors for him is nonsense. There was no collusion between the Dallas Police and Ruby. How could there be when they arrested him and were prosecuting him and trying to put him to death? If Ruby was in possession of a secret like that, don’t you think he would have told his lawyers? After all, he didn’t want to die in the electric chair. The Dallas Police could never have trusted Ruby with a secret like that. They would have had to kill him. It never happened. Ruby got in exactly as he said; by using the Main Street ramp. There wasn’t one thing that Ruby ever lied about. He was pathologically honest.

Jack Ruby was innocent. He was in custody on the  5^th floor in his underwear when the Garage Spectacle went down. FBI Agent James W. Bookhout masqueraded as him for the cameras. Ruby, with his clothes restored, was brought down to the 3^rd floor at 3 pm to make his catwalk in front of reporters, and that was his first emergence into the story.  It was a classic bait and switch.

Dallas Police covering up the head of the Shooter after his hat fell off. The Shooter was FBI Agent James W. Bookhout. Jack Ruby was already in custody up on the 5th floor, and he was slipped into the story later; a classic bait and switch. 

On the left is a man named Ed Tronolone, and it is me on the right next to him. Can you see that he and I look much more alike than Jack Ruby and the Garage Shooter? You'd have to be out of your mind to claim that Ed and I are the same man, but it is 10x worse to claim the Jack Ruby, on the left just 16 hours before, and the Garage Shooter are the same man.

On the left, you can see that Ruby had a relatively long face whereas the Shooter had a small round head. You can see that the Shooter had a Pillsbury Doughboy pudginess to him that Ruby did not have. You can see that the Shooter had a very short neck, while Ruby had a longer neck. The truth is that they don't look anything alike. Ed and I look more alike than they do. It is insane to say that Ed and I are the same man, and it is even more insane to claim that Ruby and the Shooter were the same man.

And there is nothing else that matters. There is no blah-blah-blah that negates this. This is the alpha and the omega. It proves that Jack Ruby was not the Garage Shooter of Oswald.

 If you think anyone put Jack Ruby up to shooting Oswald, how did he go on to live for over 3 years? If he was hiding the truth that someone ordered him to do it, then he could have woken up any morning and felt that he had had enough and tell his lawyers everything. So, how could the Mafia (who had no reason to want Oswald dead, since he had nothing on them to tell police) trust Ruby to keep his mouth shut? How could they take the chance? Why would they take the chance?

The fact that Ruby lived for 3+ years, and the fact that he, unlike Oswald, was allowed to speak to a lawyer right away, before he even talked to Fritz, should tell you that he didn't know anything.
He hadn't talked to anyone.

Ruby said he never had any thought to harm Oswald. He told reporters that he was feeling remorse that whole weekend but
not anger. He said the word anger wasn't even in his vocabulary.

And why would Ruby shoot Oswald just because the Mafia told him to do it? Would you? And what did they threaten him with if
he didn't do it? Of course, you don't know, and nobody else knows either because there is no evidence that it ever happened. It's just something that spewers spew. There isn't even a speck of evidence that it happened. There isn't even a nano-gram of evidence for it. And yet, people spew it all the time. But, spewing is what spewers do.

And why would the Mafia choose Ruby to do it when there was no evidence he ever fired a gun in his life, even at an inanimate target?

Jack Ruby was innocent. Your government killed Kennedy, and then they killed Oswald. They certainly didn't need Ruby to
kill Oswald for them; they just needed him to take the blame for it.

If you don't know that Jack Ruby was innocent, you don't know anything about the JFK assassination. The innocence of
Jack Ruby goes to the very heart of it. That was the one thing they tried to build a kryptonite wall around ,so that no one could get to it no matter what.

If you want to dispute Oswald's guilt, they don't care. That's been around since Day 1, and it's like the 39th Parallel. But, awareness of the innocence of Jack Ruby is a threat to the whole ugly and demonic story.

Well, I say: let's topple it. Let's take down the whole evil structure of JFK assassination orthodoxy. Jack Ruby was innocent. Say it boldly.