Gerald Ford and the Cover-Up

[Thomas H. Purvis]

No LN theorist and no trajectory study that I'm aware of has ever placed this entry wound anywhere except in the upper back.

Arlen Spector, father of the single-bullet theory, has stated on national TV as late as 2004 that JFK was shot "in the back of the neck."

Okay, could you quote that in context, please?

I was off by a year, working from memory. This latest TV pronouncement that I'm aware was 2003:

"SPECTER: The bullet entered between two large strap muscles at the back of the president's neck, hit nothing solid, went through the pleural cavity, nicked his tie coming out."

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0311/22/asb.00.html

Ron,

Thanks, and yes, Specter did say that, but please take a look at CE 903 again and note that, if the bullet literally entered the nape of the neck, the SBT trajectory not only isn't helped, it's destroyed. Drawing a line from the nape through the tie knot sends the bullet headed for JFK's knees, not Connally's back.

Or take the Croft photo. How could a bullet entering the back of the neck and exiting below the Adam's apple end up hitting Connally where it did?

http://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/images/2/2...hsca_ex_135.jpg

My point is that the SBT doesn't require raising the back wound. The HSCA, e.g., endorsed the SBT and placed the entry wound in the upper back:

http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk...eport_0037a.htm

http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk...eport_0037b.htm

If someone can show me how raising the wound helps the SBT trajectory, I'm willing to listen, but IMO, Ford had no motive to move the wound as part of a "cover-up."

Jean

One last time before I put all of my "marbles" away and look for some other game to play.

[Thomas H. Purvis]

A reasonable assumption would be that Arlen Specter knew the actual and approximately 18-degree downward angle for the first shot fired, even though he continued on with the 45-degree questioning.

1. Time/Life had determined the downward angle of fire on November 25, 1963.

2. The U. S. Secret Service had determined the downward angle of fire during their re-enactment of December 1963, and the WC was in possession of this as well as all other documents related to this re-enactment.

3. The FBI had determined the downward angle of fire during their February 1964 re-enactment.

All of which would leave little doubt that Arlen Specter knew full well that the downward angle of fire for the first shot was only approximately 18-degrees downward.

[John Simkin]

These letters appeared in response to this article on Ford:

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2006/dec2006/ford-d28.shtml

You have done a nice job in this article as usual, penetrating the distortions by the mainstream media of the public record of former President Ford.

You were correct to highlight Ford’s presidential pardon of Richard Nixon, as that act constituted a historic travesty of justice. However, I was a little surprised that you did not also mention Ford’s earlier role as a member of the Warren Commission, the LBJ-appointed body which in 1964 performed the first official investigation of the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, and which of course concluded, against all evidence to the contrary, that a lone assassin, Lee Harvey Oswald, was responsible for Kennedy’s murder.

Poll after poll since 1964 has shown that a majority of Americans do not believe the findings of the Warren Commission, and in fact a second government investigation in the 1970s, this time by a US House subcommittee, concluded that JFK’s assassination was most likely a conspiracy. Meanwhile, millions of Americans (myself included) have become permanently traumatized, not only by the gruesome murder of a popular and promising president, but by the obvious fact that the Warren Commission’s report had represented a massive cover-up of the true circumstances of the assassination, mounted at the highest levels of government.

By all accounts, Ford, unlike several of the other Warren Commission members, never questioned any of its findings. Ford became the last surviving member of the commission, and continued to staunchly defend its findings whenever they were challenged, even to the point of lobbying to have the conspiracy documentary “The Men Who Killed Kennedy” permanently removed from The History Channel (it is my understanding that he may actually have been successful in that).

Taking into account both his pardoning of Nixon and his status as a Warren Commission member, Ford has the unique status of having been a major player in not one, but two of the biggest whitewashes in American history. He helped to cover up crimes and conspiracies that are surely among the most diabolical to have taken place within the last 50 years. Given that after all these years we still don’t know how and why JFK died, and that we also still don’t know the extent of Nixon’s abuses of power, Ford in a sense has helped to rob us of our history. Was that not in itself a crime of the highest magnitude?

RM

Durham, North Carolina, US

The headline in the December 28 edition of the Fort Lauderdale News-Sun Sentinel is “Gerald Ford Sacrificed His Own Political Career to Soothe Scandal-Ridden Nation.” The subtitle: “Ford Helped Heal Cynical Nation.” Wow, imagine that. He “sacrificed” his political career and “helped heal a nation.” An entire nation! Not just a few people, mind you, like a doctor would; or perhaps a few hundred needy souls, like, say, a miracle would. No, he helped heal an entire nation. (The nation of course being one big monolithic family. Who would dare think otherwise?)

And the sacrifice? Should not the sacrifice befit the not thousands, nay, millions, for whom it was made? Was it, Abraham-like, a son? A wife? Season tickets to the Redskins games? When we speak of Ford’s sacrifice, we speak instead of a ... career.

Further states the Sun-Sentinel article: “The pardon was widely derided at the time and may have caused Mr. Ford the 1976 election. But historians now say that in pardoning Nixon, who had appointed him vice president less than a year earlier, Mr. Ford put the interests of the nation before his own personal ambitions” (emphasis added).

In short, he pardoned Richard Nixon, otherwise charged at the time by special prosecutor Leon Jaworski as an “unindicted coconspirator” in the Watergate scandal. And who, pray tell, were some of the indicted coconspirators? Let’s see now, there was John Ehrlichman, H.R. Haldeman, and John Mitchell, all of whom went from The White House to The Big House. And I don’t mean heaven.

And, finally, this brief eulogy from recently defrocked Florida congressman Clay Shaw: “He prevented us from having to go through the agony of a trial of our former president, which I think would have been a disaster.” But of course! Isn’t it obvious? The “agony” of justice, the “disaster” of a trial. Who could stand such a trauma?

TF

Fort Lauderdale, Florida, US

[Nathaniel Heidenheimer]

Just read that Ford was a member of the anti-interventionist America First Group prior to World War II. In 1936 The Republican presidential Candidate was isolationist, but by 1940 the Republican pres. candidate was interventionist.

America First has interested me because it seems like people might have been attracted to it for very different reasons.

I came accross this in the historian Kevin Starr's book about the history of California from 1940-50, which is so far very interesting, and looks like it could be

promissing in terms of threads that might be woven into our understanding of the MIC.

Starr admits that there were a variety of different viewpoints within America First, but does not shy away from generalizing:

Founded in the spring of 1940 by a group of students at the Yale Law School that included future President Gerald Ford, future

Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart, and future Yale president Kingman Brewster, the chaiman of the Yale Daily News,

the America First movement soon developed into a nationwide organization attracting a variety of anti-interventionists. While

the movementincluded such a liberal figure as New Republic counist John Flynn, the basic membership and certainly the

leadership of America First was soon dominated by Midwestern Republicans of wealth. Its acting chairman was General

Robert Wood, chairman of the board of Sears, Roebuck in Chicago. Here was no fringe group.

Later, of course, Lindgergh joined.

Wondered if any other figures related to the Kennedy Assassination were associated with America First. There may be some ideological common ground here with figures in what later became known as the "China Lobby" who favored American unilateralism, and direct US action in Asia and Latin America as distinct from the multilatteralists who favored working via the UN and World Bank.

Anyway, like I say I found it interesting that Ford was a member of this group.

[John Dolva]

Just read that Ford was a member of the anti-interventionist America First Group prior to World War II. In 1936 The Republican presidential Candidate was isolationist, but by 1940 the Republican pres. candidate was interventionist.

America First has interested me because it seems like people might have been attracted to it for very different reasons.

I came accross this in the historian Kevin Starr's book about the history of California from 1940-50, which is so far very interesting, and looks like it could be

promissing in terms of threads that might be woven into our understanding of the MIC.

Starr admits that there were a variety of different viewpoints within America First, but does not shy away from generalizing:

Founded in the spring of 1940 by a group of students at the Yale Law School that included future President Gerald Ford, future

Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart, and future Yale president Kingman Brewster, the chaiman of the Yale Daily News,

the America First movement soon developed into a nationwide organization attracting a variety of anti-interventionists. While

the movementincluded such a liberal figure as New Republic counist John Flynn, the basic membership and certainly the

leadership of America First was soon dominated by Midwestern Republicans of wealth. Its acting chairman was General

Robert Wood, chairman of the board of Sears, Roebuck in Chicago. Here was no fringe group.

Later, of course, Lindgergh joined.

Wondered if any other figures related to the Kennedy Assassination were associated with America First. There may be some ideological common ground here with figures in what later became known as the "China Lobby" who favored American unilateralism, and direct US action in Asia and Latin America as distinct from the multilatteralists who favored working via the UN and World Bank.

Anyway, like I say I found it interesting that Ford was a member of this group.

Well done, Nathaniel. So Gerald Ford was one of them.

I've been searching 'high and low' for such connections.: "In Under Cover—My Four Years in the Nazi Underworld in America, John Roy Carlson penned the account of his successful infiltration of the vigorous Nazi Fifth Column that existed in the United States before and during World War II. Posing as a sympathizer and activist on behalf of the Nazi cause, Carlson gained access to the inner sanctum of the traitors—great and small—who sought to replace the Stars and Stripes with the Swastika. In Under Cover, the author chronicles the operations and ideological tenets of a large (and frequently overlapping) group of organizations that operated on behalf of the Third Reich (and also Imperial Japan). As Carlson illustrates in the book, the “small fry” domestic fascists are often cats’ paws for larger, more prominent political and economic figures. Many of the organizations were actually directed and financed by the Deutsches Ausland Institut—the foreign section of the Nazi party of Germany."

I suggest go to : http://spitfirelist.com/Books/books.html for a range of books for complete pdf format download. Specifically "Undercover" which extensilvely details the birth of the Isolationists. In two parts, the second has the index.

in his summary: after Pearl Harbor, the isolationists lost a lot of the publics support, however, the hard core that Carlson had penetrated, chillingly tells of a new younger cadre that for the moment has gone deeper under cover, and his Book ends at 1943.

It's the connections from then into the 50's that has been hard to establish. There are some others like Ham Fish, and many last names which are interesting. Henry Ford, of course is there.

[Nathaniel Heidenheimer]

John, thanks for the link.

Hope I am not diverting too much from the thread with the following link. It was only about five years ago that I learned of the many cartoons satarizing

Ameria First done by Dr Seuss. (Actually, last summer I blew up the cartoon of the women sitting in the chair reading the story to the children and relabeled

her Hillary '08 for a silly sign I was making against the Bush-Enabeling Democratic Party.)

Those who have not seen these before will enjoy a surprise. Dr. Seuss at the time worked for a NYC newspaper called PM.

http://www.tfaoi.com/aa/1aa/1aa291.htm

[John Dolva]

John, thanks for the link.

Hope I am not diverting too much from the thread with the following link. It was only about five years ago that I learned of the many cartoons satarizing

Ameria First done by Dr Seuss. (Actually, last summer I blew up the cartoon of the women sitting in the chair reading the story to the children and relabeled

her Hillary '08 for a silly sign I was making against the Bush-Enabeling Democratic Party.)

Those who have not seen these before will enjoy a surprise. Dr. Seuss at the time worked for a NYC newspaper called PM.

http://www.tfaoi.com/aa/1aa/1aa291.htm

You're welcome, Nathaniel.

From "Under Cover" part two:

(Image: ham and eggs)

[James Richards]

I suggest go to : http://spitfirelist.com/Books/books.html for a range of books for complete pdf format download. Specifically "Undercover" which extensilvely details the birth of the Isolationists. In two parts, the second has the index. (John Dolva)

Thanks for that link, John. Excellent.

John Roy Carlson was a very interesting character. His real name was Avedis Derounian. This rarely published photo below shows him as an under cover Arab.

He mixed with some interesting folk and in the chapter titled 'Gun Running' he mentions Labib Bey who connects to some people deep within U.S. Intel. I'm not 100% convinced Carlson knew who he was dealing with here.

The second attachment is Gerald L.K. Smith who by the way was with Huey Long when he was shot. Smith and Francis Townsend got behind Homer Rainey during his political push which meant they dealt with Rainey's campaign manager, one Malcolm Wallace.

James

Edited April 22, 2007 by James Richards

[John Simkin]

Just read that Ford was a member of the anti-interventionist America First Group prior to World War II. In 1936 The Republican presidential Candidate was isolationist, but by 1940 the Republican pres. candidate was interventionist.

America First has interested me because it seems like people might have been attracted to it for very different reasons.

I have been interested in the America First Committee (AFC) for sometime. Please find below an article about the group and biographies of its main members.

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/USAfirstC.htm

It was a mixture of right and left wingers. For example it included those on the right like Robert E. Wood, John T. Flynn and Charles A. Lindbergh but also progressives such as Burton K. Wheeler, Hugh Johnson, Robert LaFollette Jr., Amos Pinchot, Hamilton Fish and Gerald Nye.

Another interesting JFK connection is that Amos Pinchot, father of Mary Pinchot Meyer, was a member. Pinchot helped to establish the Masses magazine in 1911 that was prosecuted and closed down during the First World War. He was a pacifist and helped shape Mary's politics. Some people believe that it was Mary's political influence on JFK that got them both murdered.

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/USApinchotA.htm

Take a look at the history of the Masses. It was a great magazine that employed the best artists, cartoonists and journalists working in the US during this period.

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/ARTmasses.htm

This is an interesting topic and deserves its own thread:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=9825

[John Simkin]

Excerpts from Gerald Ford's introduction to "A Presidential Legacy and the Warren Commission" (2008)

"It is true that you can't ignore coincidences, but there are many reasons those coincidences occur. Conspiracies may or may not have existed or occurred somewhere, such as the government-sanctioned plot to kill Castro, but considering the meticulousness of our investigation, we were confident that we would have uncovered links from those to Oswald and to Kennedy's assassination had there been any. I have become increasingly adamant that we were correct as more and more experts have questioned and then verified our conclusions."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"The echoes of the assassin's shots had hardly died out before everyone began speculating 'whodunit.' The trouble was, given the kind of turbulence going on in the world at the time (not to mention covertly in the U.S.), there were plenty of groups with plausible motives to assassinate President Kennedy, which helped to encourage speculation. Notwithstanding that, our Commission's findings were that Lee Harvey Oswald was the assassin and that he worked alone -- there was no evidence of a conspiracy. The same went for Jack Ruby."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"I have been accused of changing some wording on the Warren Commission Report to favor the lone-assassin conclusion. That is absurd. Here is what the draft said: 'A bullet had entered his back at a point slightly above the shoulder and to the right of the spine.' To any reasonable person, 'above the shoulder and to the right' sounds very high and way off the side -- and that's what it sounded like to me. That would have given the totally wrong impression. Technically, from a medical perspective, the bullet entered just to the right at the base of the neck, so my recommendation to the other members was to change it to say, 'A bullet had entered the back of his neck, slightly to the right of the spine.' After further investigation, we then unanimously agreed that it should read, 'A bullet had entered the base of his neck slightly to the right of the spine.'"

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"The reason some things appeared to be suspicious was possibly because there were people who apparently did have things to hide. It came out later there was a government-sanctioned plot to kill Fidel Castro. There seemed to also have been a scramble to cover that up which did interfere marginally with our investigation, as I testified to the HSCA (House Select Committee on Assassinations). It was really more of a problem for the CIA. JFK's assassination and our investigation into it put certain classified and potentially embarrassing operations in danger of being exposed. Their reaction was to hide or destroy some information, which can easily be misinterpreted as collusion in JFK's assassination."

[Maggie Hansen]

"I have been accused of changing some wording on the Warren Commission Report to favor the lone-assassin conclusion. That is absurd. Here is what the draft said: 'A bullet had entered his back at a point slightly above the shoulder and to the right of the spine.' To any reasonable person, 'above the shoulder and to the right' sounds very high and way off the side -- and that's what it sounded like to me. That would have given the totally wrong impression. Technically, from a medical perspective, the bullet entered just to the right at the base of the neck, so my recommendation to the other members was to change it to say, 'A bullet had entered the back of his neck, slightly to the right of the spine.' After further investigation, we then unanimously agreed that it should read, 'A bullet had entered the base of his neck slightly to the right of the spine.'"

Both descriptions are technically inaccurate. The neck starts at C1 (cervical) and finishes at C7. The back starts at T1 (thoracic) and goes through to T12 then it goes to L1 (lumbar) to L5. There is also the sacral and coccyx areas at the end of the spine. Kennedy's injuries would have to be described in their relation to these positions. Plus the angle of entry relative to the horizon. Standard autopsy procedure. At least in Sydney, Australia.

[John Simkin]

By Joe Stephens

Washington Post Staff Writer

Friday, August 8, 2008;

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...8080702757.html

Confidential FBI files released this week to The Washington Post detail the inner workings of a secret back channel that Gerald R. Ford opened in 1963 between J. Edgar Hoover's FBI and the Warren Commission's independent investigation into the assassination of President John F. Kennedy.

The existence of the private conduit has long been known, first disclosed in documents released 30 years ago. Now, newly obtained, previously classified records detail one visit Ford made to one of Hoover's deputies in December 1963 -- three weeks after being named to the commission.

Declassified FBI memos on Ford's interactions with the bureau are among scores of documents in the FBI's previously confidential file on the former president, who died in December 2006. At the request of The Post, the FBI this week released 500 pages of the bureau's voluminous file.

A December 1963 memo recounts that Ford, then a Republican congressman from Michigan, told FBI Assistant Director Cartha D. "Deke" DeLoach that two members of the seven-person commission remained unconvinced that Kennedy had been shot from the sixth-floor window of the Texas Book Depository. In addition, three commission members "failed to understand" the trajectory of the slugs, Ford said.

Ford told DeLoach that commission discussions would continue and reassured him that those minority points of view on the commission "of course would represent no problem," one internal FBI memo shows. The memo does not name the members involved and does not elaborate on what Ford meant by "no problem."

Ford also told DeLoach that Chief Justice Earl Warren, who headed the commission, had told its members that "they should strive to have their hearings completed and the findings made public prior to July, 1964, when the Presidential campaigns will begin to get hot. He stated it would be unfair to present the findings after July." They missed their deadline, concluding in a report issued Sept. 24, 1964, that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone in the assassination.

Much of the material in the FBI file concerns intelligence about Ford's political adversaries when he was president, especially organizations that the bureau thought might disrupt Ford's appearances around the country. But the file also sheds light on the investigation into Kennedy's assassination and the FBI's relationship with Ford, and it shows how the bureau strove to curry favor with powerful politicians.

Another memo in the file, previously released with Warren Commission materials in 1978, details how Ford approached DeLoach in 1963 and offered to secretly inform the bureau about the inner workings of the then-ongoing Warren Commission investigation.

"Ford indicated he would keep me thoroughly advised as to the activities of the Commission," DeLoach wrote. "He stated this would have to be done on a confidential basis, however he thought it should be done."

Five days later, DeLoach had a second meeting with Ford and filed another confidential memo. DeLoach recounted that he "carefully" informed Ford that the FBI had released none of its investigative findings to the media. Instead, he said, it looked as though commission members were beginning to leak portions of the FBI report.

"I referred to this week's issue of 'Newsweek' magazine which contains a rather clear analysis of the report," DeLoach wrote. "I told Congressman Ford that 'Newsweek' was owned by the 'Washington Post' and that apparently some one was trying to curry favor. I told him we, of course, did not get along very well with either the 'Washington Post' or 'Newsweek.' He [said] that he was in the same boat, that he liked neither one of these publications."

The conversation, which has apparently not been previously reported, concluded with Ford saying he would like to take a confidential FBI report on the assassination with him on a family ski trip to Michigan. DeLoach offer to lend him an "Agent briefcase" with a lock, so Ford could safeguard the document.

What the Washington Post report does not say is the reason that LBJ selected Ford for the Warren Commission was that he was already under the control of Hoover. According to Bobby Baker (Wheeling and Dealing), who was himself under investigation for his corrupt relationship with politicians, businessmen and call-girls, Ford had been secretly taped by the FBI when he had attended meetings with Fred Black at the Sheraton-Carlton Hotel in Washington.

Nor does the report give examples of how Ford shaped the commission report. J. Lee Rankin, the chief counsel for the Warren Commission, appointed Norman Redlich as his special assistant. Redlich began investigating the relationship between Lee Harvey Oswald and Jack Ruby. He was especially interested in why Oswald appeared to be heading towards Ruby's apartment after the assassination.

According to William C. Sullivan (The Bureau: My Thirty Years in Hoover's FBI) Ford provided Hoover with information about the activities of staff members of the commission. "Hoover was delighted when Gerald Ford was named to the Warren Commission. The director wrote in one of his internal memos that the bureau could expect Ford to 'look after FBI interests,' and he did, keeping us fully advised of what was going on behind closed doors. He was our man, our informant, on the Warren Commission."

Hoover ordered that the FBI should carry out an investigation of Norman Redlich. He discovered that Redlich was on the Emergency Civil Liberties Committee, an organization considered by Hoover to have been set-up to "defend the cases of Communist lawbreakers". Redlich had also been critical of the activities of the House Committee on Un-American Activities.

This information was leaked to a group of right-wing politicians. On 5th May, 1964, Ralph F. Beermann, a Republican Party congressman, made a speech claiming that Redlich was associated with the Fair Play for Cuba Committee. Beermann called for Redlich to be removed as a staff member of the Warren Commission. He was supported by Karl E. Mundt who said: "We want a report from the Commission which Americans will accept as factual, which will put to rest all the ugly rumors now in circulation and which the world will believe. Who but the most gullible would believe any report if it were written in part by persons with Communist connections?"

Ford joined in the attack and at one closed-door session of the Warren Commission he called for Norman Redlich to be dismissed. However, Rankin and Earl Warren both supported him and he retained his job. However, after this, Redlich posed no threat to the theory that Oswald was the lone gunman.

[Charles Drago]

All of which makes the decision by the Kennedy family to present the 2001 Profiles in Courage Award to Ford in recognition of his pardon of Richard Nixon all the more troubling.

How to explain this markedly counterintuitive action? I offer only conjecture: The Kennedys were signaling their willingness to go along with the cover stories, a move perhaps made necessary by a sense of impending action to be taken against them -- or as reassurance that past actions in which family members were eliminated would not engender retaliation.

I cannot substantiate such a hypothesis, and I hope that I'm off base. But at the very least we can say with confidence that the, shall we say, irony of the action did not escape the senior senator from Massachusetts or his niece, Caroline.

According to the JFK Library website,

"President Gerald Ford was honored for his courage in making a controversial decision of conscience to pardon former President Richard M. Nixon. On September 8, 1974, President Ford granted a 'full, free and absolute pardon' to former President Nixon 'for all offenses against the United States which he...has committed or may have committed or taken part in' while he was president. Nixon accepted the pardon. The response from the press, Congress and the general public was overwhelmingly negative. Appearing before the U.S. House Committee on the Judiciary, President Ford explained under oath, in the first sworn congressional testimony ever given by a sitting president, that there were no deals connected with the pardon. Ford wrote in his autobiography that Nixon's pardon 'wasn't motivated primarily by sympathy for his plight or by concern over the state of his health. It was the state of the country’s health at home and around the world that worried me.' In 1976, President Ford lost the White House to Jimmy Carter in one of the closest elections in American history. Many historians believe Ford’s pardon of Nixon contributed to his defeat."

Certainly more than one Kennedy was sufficiently savvy to understand that the "country's health," already horribly failing, was dealt an arguably fatal blow by the Nixon pardon and all necrotic tissue that it managed to hide from the healing properties of fresh air.

Certainly more than one Kennedy understood that Ford likely committed perjury when he "explained under oath ... that there were no deals connected with the pardon."

Certainly more than one Kennedy was aware of how Ford acted as an accessory after the fact in the murder of JFK.

I managed to ask a Kennedy family member why he/she thought Ford was honored. I can still see shoulders shrugging.

Charles

Edited August 11, 2008 by Charles Drago

[John Simkin]

I am surprised that this Washington Post news report has not been of more interest to JFK researchers. We of course have known for sometime that Ford was an informant for the FBI and reported back on what was going on in the so-called secret Warren Commission meetings. What is interesting is the following passage in the newspaper report:

A December 1963 memo recounts that Ford, then a Republican congressman from Michigan, told FBI Assistant Director Cartha D. "Deke" DeLoach that two members of the seven-person commission remained unconvinced that Kennedy had been shot from the sixth-floor window of the Texas Book Depository. In addition, three commission members "failed to understand" the trajectory of the slugs, Ford said.

Ford told DeLoach that commission discussions would continue and reassured him that those minority points of view on the commission "of course would represent no problem," one internal FBI memo shows. The memo does not name the members involved and does not elaborate on what Ford meant by "no problem."

Why according to Ford was it "no problem" that two members of the Warren Commission were "unconvinced that Kennedy had been shot from the sixth-floor window of the Texas Book Depository" and that three commission members "failed to understand" the trajectory of the bullets. Was it not a "problem" because the powers behind Ford knew how to pressurize members of the WC in order to change their minds?

[Antti Hynonen]

I recall seeing interviews of Gerald Ford, regarding the JFK investigation, where he would repeat the final statement by the Commission, which was along the lines:

"The Commission has not found any evidence indicating a conspiracy in the murder of President John F. Kennedy."

Perhaps he meant by the "no problem" that the Commission would leave the report to President Johnson and the American people, with "clean hands" as they would add this clause to their report.