If someone stole Reagan’s identity (to author a script in the murder of Kennedy) collaboration in such a gesture would be a serious offense; indeed arguments are being made that believing the evidence implicates him at all is treason.  At first, this seems honest, until you learn that the proposition that Reagan was innocent was rejected because a Kennedy loyalist proposed it, in favor of allowing the guilty to hold domain as a gold dig in library futures; rendering the question of why Reagan would have rather advocated for his own character assassins than allow vindication by a loyalist of the deceased morbid and halfwit. The Kennedy loyalist is deluded they rage in spite.  For believing Reagan at first?  The authors of the malicious paradox announce their agency for the absurd calumny that disagreement in politics at all is illegal.   From there FBIHollywood announce that allowing the innocent to be tortured in defense of the truly guilty is sane, rational patriotism, so the slipknot manages to allow the question being banned.   If all that is certifiably so, does that not implicate Reagan in simply lying?   The First Amendment cannot summon the verve to defend such a whimsy. Such Constitutional guarantees, they sneer, bellowing, WORD ICH BOND, like Jim Muhammed, are voided by FBIHollywood, Jeannie-raping, Saoirse-killing contract law.

For obvious reasons, the photo of John Lennon sporting an “Insult Authority” button has been eradicated from the web.