I don't think so. For one thing, Oswald was the only shooter.
The evidence does not support that and it contradicts the report by the House Select-Committee on Assassinations.
The GNR test on Oswald's left and right cheeks and left hand were negative. Accordingly, you cannot prove he fired a rifle. The GNR test was positive on his right hand, but the only legal and logical conclusion you can draw is that Oswald fired a hand-gun, which he freely admitted when he admitted to shooting Officer J D Tippitt in self-defense.
Saying there were more is silly since, if there were two shooters, you're having 6 shots and what, 3 hits?
False, There were four shooters and they each fired one round. Connolly was struck by two separate bullets. Governor Connolly was a combat veteran and went to his grave insisting he was hit by two separate shots.
The House Select-Committee on Assassinations also believed there were four shots fired as evidenced by the audio recording of the assassination.
Your inability to understand that the motorcycle cop was an unwitting participant in the conspiracy is noted.
Also, I don't see the payoff from the decision to have a coup.
The pay-off is the Democrats winning the 1964 Election instead of getting buried in a blow-out.
Having said that, if Republicans had moved forward with impeachment and Kennedy was convicted of malfeasance, then LBJ would have better odds of winning, but is likely to have still lost.
How can we take the official report when the official report was lacking information at that time?
A most excellent point.
Seldom is there complete information available for any report to be written or action to be taken.
Information was available, but the Warren Commission chose to ignore it, and even that wouldn't be so bad, except that the Warren Commission also cherry-picked its evidence and then deceptively portrayed it wrong.
For example, the Warren Commission insisted Oswald spoke Russian because he was self-taught because he was a "commie."
Had the Warren Commission looked reviewed Oswald's DD 201 file, they would have known Oswald was taught Russian at the Military Language Institute then-located at Presidio of Monterey in California.
Do you not see a problem?
A: Your government taught Oswald to speak Russian
B: Oswald was self-taught.
Those are contradictions and a misrepresentation of a material fact.
Granted, his 201 file was classified, but then why would it be?
In 1976, the Marine officer who had Oswald's 201-file in a brief-case handcuffed to his wrist either accidentally or intentionally let it slip that Oswald took the Russian course at Presidio of Monterey when testifying before the House Select-Committee on Assassinations.
The Select-Committee members were forbidden to physically read Oswald's 201-file themselves, but they could ask questions, and the Marine officer would either answer them or not.
The real truth is that Oswald worked for the Office of Naval Intelligence and loaned to the CIA. His "defection" was planned by the CIA in order to get Oswald and others into the Soviet Union to get targeting data for US ICBMs and SAC bombers.
Remember, you don't have satellites in 1958. In spite of the fact that Sputnik was launched in 1958, it would still be 10 years before anyone had anything even remotely resembling a spy satellite, so the only way to get targeting data was to insert agents into the environment, which is what the CIA and MI5/6 did during the mid-to-late 1950s.
