Well Walter, ask yourself why Kinnard, who was in the room at the time and Harper, who delivered the message, and Premetz, the non-commissioned medic who translated it for the Germans, all give repeated official accounts and interviews that contradict the account of your father, who by your own admission merely "worked for the general briefly".
Is it all a grand conspiracy to protect the good name and reputation of McAuliffe?
My father had a first hand account from McAuliffe, like the other three, and had no reason whatsoever to misrepresent it.
> Is it all a grand conspiracy to protect the good name and reputation of McAuliffe?
A small conspiracy is not at all far-fetched. First off, it's an inconsequential thing. Secondly, if one of the three told the truth, then he'd be called a liar by the other two. Who needs that? If you're in the military, you don't get ahead by contradicting the narrative. (My dad found that out the hard way - he was punished more than once for not writing reports that fit the narrative.)
For a grand conspiracy, consider how long Biden's staff held out insisting that Biden was sharp as a tack and writing off contrary reports as disinformation.
The most compelling bit about my evidence is the frankly laughable idea that a GI would use the word "nuts".
Is it all a grand conspiracy to protect the good name and reputation of McAuliffe?
I'll say no more.