One thing is clear, if nothing else: there are people who will say anything to promote the lone assassin theory, writes Milicent Cranor.

Jim DiEugenio discusses Dale Myers's reaction to his review of Reclaiming History.

On the serious issues of the day, the scandals, the murders, and wars that make up modern American history, papers like the New York Times, Washington Post and LA Times have not just been wrong, but they have been misleading, writes Jim DiEugenio.

At the start ... everyone had high hopes for the blogosphere. We believed that without the pervading pressure of corporate sponsorship, without the inevitable ties to government officials at higher levels, this was a great opportunity to return American journalism to the days that the late Angus McKenzie recalled in his book Secrets. ... So far, it hasn't happened, laments Jim DiEugenio.

With what the authors have now done to Williams' credibility, plus the near universality of agreement on the true nature of the C -Day plans, the end should be spelled out for this entire "second invasion" thesis, writes Jim DiEugenio.

An interesting, well-organized, and crafted book. [Haslam] has given us a documented, insightful, and arresting alternative to the unsatisfactory, or missing, official story [of Mary Sherman's death]; that alternative may have huge implications down to the present day. His work deserves attention and accolades, concludes Jim DiEugenio.

Author James DiEugenio reviews the CNN documentary Eyewitness to Murder: The King Assassination.

Author James DiEugenio updates his review of Larry Hancock's Someone Would Have Talked with further observations about the problem of its questionable source material.

Jim DiEugenio replies to yet more criticisms of his review of Bugliosi's Reclaiming History.

In a book like this, a lot of the credibility must come from the reader's trust in the author(s). Unfortunately, that is not forthcoming here, writes Jim DiEugenio.