Problem is his built-in bias is showing.
At the 3:36 mark, the bullet points in the video say there was a fourth bullet, based on what he claims were conclusions reached by the FBI, Secret Service, and CIA that three bullets landed in the limousine. He argues the Tague shot was that evidence of a fourth bullet, but apparently never considers whether it could have been the lead core of the head shot that struck Tague.
He also misdates the Warren Commission determination of the single-bullet concept vs. the determination of when Tague was wounded (claiming Tague's wounding caused the WC to develop the single-bullet concept). The single-bullet concept came before Tague testified and came about because of a close study of the Zapruder film and the recreation when compared to the eyewitness testimony, especially that of John Connally. It had nothing to do with Tague.
The Testimony of John Connally was taken on April 21st, 1964.
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh4/html/WC_Vol4_0055a.htm
The FBI / Secret Service reenactment was done May 24th, 1964.
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/18286-1964-fbi-re-enactment-color-credit-6th-floor-museum/
Tague's testimony was taken on July 23rd, 1964.
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh7/html/WC_Vol7_0280b.htm
So his claim in those bullet points that the discovery of the Tague wound led the Commission to decide on a single-bullet concept is false. The Tague wound wasn't the genesis, it was the recreation and the perceived timing of the shots combined with the testimony of the Governor.
Garbage in, Garbage out.
The Wikipedia page on the Single Bullet Theory has much more detail and exposes the claim in the cited video as a falsehood.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-bullet_theory
Note particularly the dates in these two paragraphs:
On April 14 and 21, two conferences were held at the Commission to determine when, exactly, the president and governor were struck. Assistant counsel Melvin Eisenberg wrote in a memorandum dated April 22 on the first conference that the consensus of those attending was, among other issues, that Kennedy was struck by frames 225–6 and that “the velocity of the first bullet [which struck Kennedy] would have been little diminished by its passage through the President. Therefore, if Governor Connally was in the path of the bullet it would have struck him and caused the wounds he sustained in his chest cavity... Strong indications for that this occurred are provided by the facts that... if the first bullet did not strike Governor Connally, it should have ripped up the car but it apparently did not.” However, the memorandum stated, given the relatively undamaged condition of the bullet presumed to have done this, CE 399, the consensus was a separate bullet probably struck his wrist and thigh. While not specifying a precise frame for when it was thought Connally was struck by the same bullet which struck Kennedy, the consensus was “by Z235” as afterwards his body position would not have allowed his back to be struck the way it was.
By the end of April 1964, the Commission had its working theory, the single-bullet theory, to account for the apparent timing discrepancies found in the Zapruder film and the lack of any damage to the limousine from a high-velocity bullet exiting the president's throat. (Impact damage was observed in the limousine, but was indicative of lower-velocity bullets or bullet fragments. For example, a nick on the limousine’s chrome was not from a high-velocity bullet as such a bullet would have pierced the chrome, not merely dented it.)
Tague didn't testify until July. His claims about the genesis of the single bullet concept are false.
I removed the footnoting present in the original.
