Cliff Varnell

Are you accusing Max Holland of making up something incredibly damning? It isn’t obvious that he’s spinning something incredibly damning? Jack Valenti corroborated the meeting. A Very Human President, Jack Valenti (1973, p3) <quote on> Shortly before 7:00 P.M., I escorted Senator J. William Fulbright, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and Ambassador Averell Harriman into the office. I fidgeted outside, in the middle of what would have appeared to be an objective onlooker to be a melange of confusion. No one of the Johnson aides, Marie Fehmer, his secretary; the late Cliff Carter, his chief political agent; Bill Moyers, nor any of the rest, was quite certain of what lay ahead. We were all busy on the phone and trying to assemble what measure of office discipline we could construct. <quote off> So when Katzenbach said he was under pressure from the State Department — that had to be a lie because it doesn’t fit your theory.

Pushing the angle Oswald was connected to the Soviets. Bundy called AF1 to inform Johnson there was no evidence of conspiracy. It didn’t start with Hoover.

After Harriman and Bundy gave the marching orders. Hoover was a reluctant lone nutter.

Quote Newman claiming someone from the CIA spoke with Johnson on 11/22/63. As opposed to linking LHO to the commies for the express purpose of blaming Castro as a pretext for invading Cuba? Of course you don’t Ben, since the following doesn’t fit your pet theories. Max Holland's The Assassination Tapes, pg 57: <quote on> At 6:55 p.m. Johnson has a ten minute meeting with Senator J. William Fulbright and diplomat W. Averell Harriman to discuss possible foreign involvement in the assassination, especially in light of the two-and-a-half-year sojourn of Lee Harvey Oswald [in Russia]...Harriman, a U.S. ambassador to Moscow during WWII, is an experienced interpreter of Soviet machinations and offers the president the unanimous view of the U.S. government's top Kremlinologists. None of them believe the Soviets have a hand in the assassination, despite the Oswald association. </q> There was no meeting of “top Kremlinologists” — Harriman made that up to leverage the US foreign policy establishment in support of the Lone Nut scenario. Katzenbach admitted he was under pressure from State. Don’t you read Pat Speer’s posts?

I couldn’t agree more! In his WC testimony Rusk spoke of the urgency he felt on the flight back to DC to join the inquiry into possible foreign involvement. By the time he got back the “inquiry” was already over — all on Harriman’s say so.

It was a done deal Friday night when LBJ ordered Cliff Carter to call the Texas authorities and order them to drop the conspiracy angle. Why would we expect Katzenbach to refuse to follow similar orders? He said he was under pressure from the State Department. The historical record shows Johnson under pressure from the State #3, Averell Harriman. Those who either demonize or lionize Katzenbach have not processed those facts.

Newman didn’t write this nonsense, you did. Someone at the CIA told LBJ, "'Hoo-boy, look at this LHO-Kostikov meeting, we better put the lid on this, or its WWIII."

You didn’t quote John Newman, did you?

Nonsense. The first people LBJ met with at the White House were Averell Harriman and William Fulbright. Harriman claimed to speak for all the US Gov’t Kremlinologists and informed him the Soviets were not involved. Harriman was the #3 man at the State Department. Katzenbach claimed he was under pressure from State. I don’t see why folks can’t believe him.

Hoover apparently changed his mind. "I urged strongly that we not reach conclusion Oswald was the only man." — Hoover on 12/12/63. He said Foggy Bottom leaned on him. The historical record shows the State Department behind the Lone Nut push.

“We may never know ifJFK’s death was the act of a lone shooter or a CIA coup d’état.” Why do folks celebrate this kind of False Mystery garbage?

I didn’t ask a question. I’ve presented the receipts for the State Department driving the Lone Nut scenario. Hoover wanted to push a commie conspiracy. From a 12/12/63 memo Hoover wrote: "I urged strongly that we not reach conclusion Oswald was the only man."

Who were following the dictates of higher ups at the State Department.

On the ground to paint Oswald as a killer commie, right?

The no-conspiracy “memo” from the White House didn’t go out until Friday night.

Someone Would Have Talked, Larry Hancock, pg 289. <quote on> On Friday night the White House placed telephone calls to Dallas DA Henry Wade, to Texas State Attorney General Carr and Police Chief Curry requesting that they avoid any official statements, charges, or discussion relating to conspiracy. Johnson’s aide Cliff Carter was making the calls and if the individual in question raised objections, President Johnson was used as the authority for the message. </q> Johnson met with Harriman and then instructed his aide Carter to call Dallas and cut short talk of conspiracy.

#3 man at Foggy Bottom, W. Averell Harriman, leveraged the entire US foreign policy apparatus to convince LBJ to back away from any commie conspiracy talk. But Harriman hadn’t consulted with anyone when he told Johnson top Kremlinologists concluded the Soviets were innocent. He was correct.

The Assassination Tapes, Max Holland, (pg 57): <quote on> At 6:55 p.m. Johnson has a ten minute meeting with Senator J. William Fulbright and diplomat W. Averell Harriman to discuss possible foreign involvement in the assassination, especially in light of the two-and-a-half-year sojourn of Lee Harvey [in Russia]...Harriman, a U.S. ambassador to Moscow during WWII, is an experienced interpreter of Soviet machinations and offers the president the unanimous view of the U.S. government's top Kremlinologists. None of them believe the Soviets have a hand in the assassination, despite the Oswald association. <quote off> This was the genesis of the Lone Nut Cover Story. Bundy called LBJ on AF1 and told him the lone assassin was in custody. As soon as Johnson got to the White House he found out that all of his government’s top Kremlinologists concluded the Soviets were innocent. But there was no such discussion among top Soviet experts on 11/22/63. By reputation the top 3 Soviet hands were Charles Bohlen, George Kennan, and Harriman himself. According to his biography, Bohlen was traveling by train in Europe. According to Kennan’s biography, he spent the day quietly with Robert Oppenheimer up in Princeton. By title, the US gov’t’s top Soviet guys were Llewelyn Thompson, Ambassador At Large for Soviet Affairs, and Dean Rusk, Secretary of State. From their Warren Commission testimonies: Mr. DULLES: Did you have any conversations at any time while you were Ambassador or after you returned to the United States with any Soviet official with regard to the Oswald case? Ambassador THOMPSON: I discussed with the Soviet Ambassador the desire of the [Warren] Commission to receive any documentation that they might have available, but I did not in any way discuss the case itself, nor did the Soviet official with whom I talked. Mr. DULLES: And do you know of any conversations of that nature that any other official of the Department had in connection with the Oswald case? Ambassador THOMPSON: I do not myself know of any. Mr. DULLES: You probably would, would you not, if that had taken place-of any importance? Ambassador THOMPSON: Off the record. (Discussion off the record.) Mr. DULLES: Your testimony is you have no knowledge of any other conversations other than that of the Secretary of State [Dean Rusk], in connection with communications to and from the Soviet Government on this case? Ambassador THOMPSON: That is correct. I know of no other cases where it was discussed with Soviet officials. </q> Thompson acknowledged discussions with Dean Rusk, but nothing about Harriman or other "top Kremlinologists". Rusk didn't return to Washington until after Harriman's meeting with Johnson. Here's what Rusk told the Warren Commission (Vol 5): <quote on>. Secretary RUSK: As the Commission may remember, I was with several colleagues in a plane on the way to Japan at the time the assassination occurred. When we got the news we immediately turned back. After my mind was able to grasp the fact that this event had in fact occurred, which was the first necessity, and not an easy one, I then, on the plane, began to go over the dozens and dozens of implications and ramifications of this event as it affects our foreign relations all over the world. I landed briefly in Hawaii on the way back to Washington, and gave some instructions to the Department about a number of these matters, and learned what the Department was already doing. But one of the great questions in my mind at that time was just that question, could some foreign government somehow be involved in such an episode. I realized that were this so this would raise the gravest issues of war and peace, but that nevertheless it was important to try to get at the truth-to the answer to that question-wherever that truth might lead; and so when I got back to Washington I put myself immediately in touch with the processes of inquiry on that point, and as Secretary of State had the deepest possible interest in what the truthful answer to those questions would be, because it would be hard to think of anything more pregnant for our foreign relations than the correct answer to that question. </q> Harriman and Bundy called the shots on the Lone Nut.

Didn’t the Dallas PD suspect Oswald’s involvement well before the FBI?

Hoover and LBJ made the decision to blame a lone gunman? Or was that decision made earlier? The President Has Been Shot, Charles Roberts (p. 141) A reporter for Newsweek, Roberts was on AFI and met McGeorge Bundy at Andrews. <quote on, emphasis added> I remember looking at (McGeorge) Bundy because I was wondering if he had any word of what had happened in the world while we were in transit, whether this assassination was part of a plot. And he told me later that what he reported to the president during that flight back was that the whole world was stunned, but there was no evidence of a conspiracy at all. <quote off>

Most Still Aren’t Buying JFK ‘Lone Gunman’ Conclusion https://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/lifestyle/general_lifestyle/october_2017/most_still_aren_t_buying_jfk_lone_gunman_conclusion Most Americans still aren’t convinced that President John F. Kennedy was the victim of a lone assassin in November 1963. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that 43% of American Adults accept the government’s conclusion that Kennedy was assassinated by a lone gunman. But 33% continue to believe he was the victim of a conspiracy, while one-in-four (24%) are undecided. </q> 6 years later: https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/rasmussen-reports-jfk/2023/07/12/id/1126834/ Voters are still divided on whether Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone in the 1963 assassination of President John F. Kennedy. A 1964 Warren Commission found that Kennedy was killed by Oswald, a U.S. citizen who had previously lived in the Soviet Union, and that Oswald acted alone. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that 38% of likely U.S. voters accept the government's conclusion that Kennedy was assassinated by a lone gunman. But 38% continue to believe he was the victim of a conspiracy, while 24% are undecided. These numbers haven't changed much since 2017, when 43% of adults said a lone gunman killed JFK. </q> Thr purveyors of False Mystery are prevailing, even if they don’t want to.

James Ellroy is a great auther. https://www.npr.org/2023/09/13/1199058023/book-review-james-ellroy-the-enchanters-sees-return-of-freddy-otash

I engaged in pseudo-debate for 21 years on-line. For the first 8 years I didn’t realize I was participating in the cover-up of the JFKA. In 2005 I went to the Cracking The Case Conference in Bethesda, a proud member of the Critical Community. By the time I got back home I was a critic of that community. I didn’t feel part of a movement at all. I engaged in fake debate for my own kicks. I’m not the one who put Our Lady of JFKA Truth in the gutter; I was just flicking ashes on Her bruised and bleeding body. By the end 2018 I felt I’d learned enough and quit with the fake debate. I was then entitled to enroll in the Vincent Salandria School of Research into the Obvious. With a license to ridicule pseudo debate, I still get my kicks.

I wonder if it was well received by the COPA crowd. He basically said to their faces they didn’t want to solve the case. The subtext of pseudo-debate: there is a foundational mystery to solve. In JFK Revisited it’s debunking the Magic Bullet that solves the false mystery. False because JFK had a shallow wound in his back and 6.5 mm Full Metal Jacket rounds don’t leave shallow wounds, not in soft tissue. Indeed. The last time the clothing evidence was mentioned at a JFK Conference was Schotz in ‘98.

A literal interpretation of “go through the ceiling” is equally valid: “unprecedented heights.”