Robert Blakey speaks about the JFK assassination

[Douglas Caddy]

On anniversary of JFK assassination, investigator looks back

Q&A with Robert Blakey, former chief counsel of House Select Committee on Assassinations

G. Robert Blakey speaks about the President John F. Kennedy assassination in a video being played at the Mob Museum in downtown Las Vegas Tuesday, Nov. 13, 2012.

By Tovin Lapan

Las Vegas Sun

Published November 22, 2012

http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2012/nov/22/49-years-have-passed-kennedy-assassination-still/

Forty-nine years ago today, on Nov. 22, 1963, President John F. Kennedy was assassinated in Dallas’ Dealey Plaza.

The assassination and subsequent slaying of shooter Lee Harvey Oswald shocked the country. In the five decades since, the assassination continues to capture the imagination of authors, filmmakers and the public. It has sparked hundreds of conspiracy theories and studies into who — if not Oswald — was behind Kennedy’s slaying.

Robert Blakey, an attorney who served in the Justice Department in the 1960s and worked on drafting the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations act, served on the House Select Committee on Assassinations that was established in 1976 to investigate the assassinations of both Kennedy and Martin Luther King Jr.

Unlike the earlier Warren Commission, which found Oswald acted alone, the House committee concluded its two-year investigation with a report stating Kennedy’s assassination was likely the result of a conspiracy.

Much of the evidence tied to the report was sealed from the public for 50 years. The committee specifically noted that it did not believe the conspiracy was orchestrated by the Soviet Union, Cuba, an organized crime group or any anti-Fidel Castro group but that the involvement of individual members of any of those groups could not be ruled out.

The committee consisted of 13 congressmen; Blakey served as its chief counsel and staff director from 1977 to 1979. Blakey helped draft the President John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Collection Act of 1992 and later wrote a book about the assassination, “The Plot to Kill the President.”

Blakey, in Las Vegas on Nov. 13 for a lecture at the Mob Museum, sat down with the Sun for an interview about his knowledge of the assassination.

One of the things the House select committee did was review the investigations conducted at the time, including by the FBI, CIA and, later, the Warren Commission. What stuck out to you?

First of all it was not a (federal) crime at that time to shoot the president, except for it being murder. So the FBI had to have a predicate in order to do an investigation. (One of the) bullets hit the car, and that’s destruction of government property. So, the whole Kennedy investigation (by the FBI) was premised on the ... destruction of government property, but that meant that the people who (oversaw) it in the bureau were from the property desk, not organized crime, and not the security people. The organized crime people were in a position to look into it, and they were never asked. They were never tasked with the investigation, and I couldn’t believe it.

You worked on the legislation that allowed for electronic surveillance, which eventually led to federal wiretaps on suspected members of organized crime. What did you learn about the connections between politics and organized crime?

One of the taps was set up in the Westside Democratic Club in Chicago, and they heard the whole story of what was actually going on in a phone conversation that’s really interesting. It’s a conversation between (organized crime boss) Sam Giancana and the mob there and Roland Libonati, a congressman. They are discussing how many votes Libonati should hit in the next election, how much he should win by.

So Libonati says: ‘Well I want it to look a little better than that, I want it to look like a close race.”

What were your thoughts about the Kennedy assassination before you started work on the committee?

A lot of people working on investigating the assassination spent a lot of their time looking for a conspiracy. When I started work on the assassinations committee, I did not think the mob did it. I thought it would be too high of a risk factor for them, and I knew (FBI Director J. Edgar) Hoover had electronic surveillance on them.

I said to myself: ‘I’ll be a hero to the mob. I’ll prove they didn’t do it by getting all this surveillance.’

So I got, I think, (information from) six months before and eight months after the (assassination), and the next thing you know they start talking about whacking the president.

What were some of the more interesting things you heard?

There is one conversation in Philadelphia where assassination is mentioned and (Philadelphia organized crime boss) Angelo Bruno says: ‘No, no. We don’t do that.’ And he tells the old Sicilian story about what happens when you take a prince out. You get his son, and the son is worse than the prince. So you live with what we have, and that was the message.

That changed over time. It was very clear they were talking about it. They were thinking about it and they were very angry about it, and particularly they were angry with Kennedy and the reason they were angry with Kennedy is twofold. Giancana had gotten him votes in Chicago, and then what did he do? He put Bobby Kennedy in (as attorney general) and sicced him on them. That’s not good.

And, there were romantic relationships between John Kennedy … well there were romantic relationships between Kennedy and everybody.

There were two John Kennedys. There was the public John Kennedy, which everybody admires, and then there is the guy who is sick when it comes to women. But he had a relationship with a woman who was … also associated with Sam Giancana.

What conclusions did you come to after it was all over?

I think the mob set Oswald up as a patsy. It’s not that I think (Oswald) didn’t shoot (Kennedy), but that I think he was set up so (investigators) would focus on the Cuban connections (and not the mob). Did the mob do it? I don’t know for sure, but it explains more of the evidence than anything else.

You were a part of the Justice Department when Robert Kennedy was attorney general and vigorously went after organized crime. What happened after John F. Kennedy’s death?

Whether the mob killed Kennedy or not I couldn’t tell you, but they were the one element of society that profited the most by the assassination, because the (federal government’s) organized crime program basically collapsed.

[Larry Hancock]

Blakey's remark about the legal justification for the FBI involvement is rather interesting (destruction of government property). Actually in a weekend call to Johnson's aide, Wakter Jenkins, Hoover told Jenkins that the Bureau had found a legal basis for the FBI taking over the investigation. He cited Section 241 (which relates to conspiracy). specifically to two or more persons who conspire to oppress, threaten or intimidate - and conviction carries a maximum sentence of ten years. Not murder of course but a bit stronger than property damage.

Of course that was early days, on Saturday morning, Wonder why Hoover had to give up on that legal angle - perhaps someone thought it best not to proceed down that line of justification...

Larry

[Don Roberdeau]

.... Good Day.... Thank You Douglas and Larry. Always good, detailed information that you provide!

Best Regards in Research,

++Don

Donald Roberdeau

United States Navy

U.S.S. John F. Kennedy, CV-67, plank walker

Sooner, or later, The Truth emerges Clearly

For your key considerations....

Homepage: President KENNEDY "Men of Courage" speech, and Assassination Evidence, Witnesses, Suspects + Outstanding Researchers Discoveries and Considerations.... http://droberdeau.bl...ination_09.html

The Dealey Plaza Map Detailing 11-22-63 Victims precise locations, Witnesses, Films & Photos, Evidence, Suspected bullet trajectories, Important information & Considerations, in One Convenient Resource.... http://img835.imageshack.us/img835/3966/dppluschartsupdated1111.gif

(new info, 2012 updated map)

Visual Report: "The First Bullet Impact Into President Kennedy: while JFK was Still Hidden Under the 'magic-limbed-ricochet-tree' ".... http://img504.images...k1102308ms8.gif

Visual Report: Reality versus C.A.D. : the Real World, versus, Garbage-In, Garbage-Out.... http://img248.images...ealityvscad.gif

Discovery: "Very Close JFK Assassination Witness ROSEMARY WILLIS

Zapruder Film Documented 2nd Headsnap: West, Ultrafast, and

Directly Towards the Grassy Knoll"....

http://educationforu...?showtopic=2394

T ogether

E veryone

A chieves

M ore

For the United States:

http://www.dhs.gov/dhspublic/

Edited November 26, 2012 by Don Roberdeau

[Cliff Varnell]

Blakey's remark about the legal justification for the FBI involvement is rather interesting (destruction of government property). Actually in a weekend call to Johnson's aide, Wakter Jenkins, Hoover told Jenkins that the Bureau had found a legal basis for the FBI taking over the investigation. He cited Section 241 (which relates to conspiracy). specifically to two or more persons who conspire to oppress, threaten or intimidate - and conviction carries a maximum sentence of ten years. Not murder of course but a bit stronger than property damage.

Of course that was early days, on Saturday morning, Wonder why Hoover had to give up on that legal angle - perhaps someone thought it best not to proceed down that line of justification...

Larry

Thanks for this, Larry!

I've long felt that Hoover was a reluctant lone nutter and not at all the driving force behind the Oswald Alone Theory as he is so often described. I think Hoover was trying to keep the door open for the "conspiracy scenario" all along, which was why he didn't endorse the SBT, perhaps.

[Guest Robert Morrow]

Blakey's remark about the legal justification for the FBI involvement is rather interesting (destruction of government property). Actually in a weekend call to Johnson's aide, Wakter Jenkins, Hoover told Jenkins that the Bureau had found a legal basis for the FBI taking over the investigation. He cited Section 241 (which relates to conspiracy). specifically to two or more persons who conspire to oppress, threaten or intimidate - and conviction carries a maximum sentence of ten years. Not murder of course but a bit stronger than property damage.

Of course that was early days, on Saturday morning, Wonder why Hoover had to give up on that legal angle - perhaps someone thought it best not to proceed down that line of justification...

Larry

Thanks for this, Larry!

I've long felt that Hoover was a reluctant lone nutter and not at all the driving force behind the Oswald Alone Theory as he is so often described. I think Hoover was trying to keep the door open for the "conspiracy scenario" all along, which was why he didn't endorse the SBT, perhaps.

Hoover's people were pushing the Lone Nutter fantasy within hours of the JFK assassination. The proof of this is the FBI man who edited Connie Kritzberg's copy of her article for the Dallas Times Herald on the night of 11-22-63:

The title of her story in the paper Dallas Times Herald, dated 11/23/63 was:

"Neck Wounds Bring Death to President"

"Wounds in the lower front portion of the neck and the right rear side of the head ended the life of President John F. Kennedy, say doctors at Parkland Hospital.

Whether there were one or two wounds was not decided. The front neck hole was described as an entrance wound. The wound at the back of the head, while the principal one, was either an exit or tangentially exit wound. A DOCTOR ADMITTED THAT IT WAS POSSIBLE THERE WAS ONLY ONE WOUND."

The sentence in all capital letters is the sentence the FBI added to her article according to Constance's editors who told her that around noon on Saturday 11/23, when she called in mad about the alteration of her article. She knew she had not written that sentence. She demanded to know WHO did and her editor said it was the FBI.

Get it? "One wound" was the FBI's very early attempt - probaby as early as midnight 11-22-63 to make it appear as if "One shooter" made "One wound" which killed JFK. That is "One Lone Nut" not involved in any type of conspiracy at all.

Here is the link on Connie Kritzberg and why she is extremely important: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=17687

[Michael Hogan]

Blakey's remark about the legal justification for the FBI involvement is rather interesting (destruction of government property). Actually in a weekend call to Johnson's aide, Wakter Jenkins, Hoover told Jenkins that the Bureau had found a legal basis for the FBI taking over the investigation. He cited Section 241 (which relates to conspiracy). specifically to two or more persons who conspire to oppress, threaten or intimidate - and conviction carries a maximum sentence of ten years. Not murder of course but a bit stronger than property damage.

Of course that was early days, on Saturday morning, Wonder why Hoover had to give up on that legal angle - perhaps someone thought it best not to proceed down that line of justification...

Larry

Thanks for this, Larry!

I've long felt that Hoover was a reluctant lone nutter and not at all the driving force behind the Oswald Alone Theory as he is so often described. I think Hoover was trying to keep the door open for the "conspiracy scenario" all along, which was why he didn't endorse the SBT, perhaps.

In a Sunday afternoon phone call Hoover told Jenkins "he dispatched to Dallas one of his top assistants to in the hope that he might stop the Chief of Police (Curry) and his staff from doing so much damned talking on televison."

Hoover pointed out that the Dallas police had no evidence that would convict Oswald of killing President Kennedy except for a few "tentative" identifications of him "as the man who shot the policeman and boarded a bus to go home after the President was killed."

Hoover made it clear that the FBI developed all the evidence that would have convicted Oswald, had he lived. Hoover was concerned that Fritz was "giving too much information to the press" and wanted him to "shut up." Hoover was certain that Oswald's civil rights had been violated.

Hoover had relayed to the Dallas Police Department death threats on Oswald made to the FBI. He accused Curry's department of not giving Oswald "adequate protection." The fact that Oswald was killed was "inexcusable."

Hoover was clearly concerned that there would be a Presidential Commission and made it clear that he was dead set against it. His grounds seemed to be that there were "several aspects" to the case "that would complicate our foreign relations."

In any event, Hoover told Jenkins that he (along with Katzenbach) "wanted something issued so we can convince the public that Oswald is the real assassin."

https://www.maryferr...4&relPageId=475

Actually it appears to me that when Hoover mentioned conspiracy he was in fact referring to one by the Dallas police to deprive the now dead Oswald of his rights.

http://www.justice.g.../crm/241fin.php

[Greg Burnham]

Agreed, Michael.

Today there is clear evidence that the Dallas Police Department was convinced "beyond reasonable doubt and to a moral certainty" NOT that Oswald was guilty of killing the president, but were convinced--in the heat of the moment--that Oswald had killed one of their own: Officer J. D. Tippit. Therein lay the ease by which Ruby gained access to the accused and the willingness of the DPD to cooperate in the deed.

After all, the feds had been able to remove the President's body from their jurisdiction just a few days before. The DPD was not going to allow "the killer of one of their own" to be removed from them so easily.

[Cliff Varnell]

Blakey's remark about the legal justification for the FBI involvement is rather interesting (destruction of government property). Actually in a weekend call to Johnson's aide, Wakter Jenkins, Hoover told Jenkins that the Bureau had found a legal basis for the FBI taking over the investigation. He cited Section 241 (which relates to conspiracy). specifically to two or more persons who conspire to oppress, threaten or intimidate - and conviction carries a maximum sentence of ten years. Not murder of course but a bit stronger than property damage.

Of course that was early days, on Saturday morning, Wonder why Hoover had to give up on that legal angle - perhaps someone thought it best not to proceed down that line of justification...

Larry

Thanks for this, Larry!

I've long felt that Hoover was a reluctant lone nutter and not at all the driving force behind the Oswald Alone Theory as he is so often described. I think Hoover was trying to keep the door open for the "conspiracy scenario" all along, which was why he didn't endorse the SBT, perhaps.

In a Sunday afternoon phone call Hoover told Jenkins "he dispatched to Dallas one of his top assistants to in the hope that he might stop the Chief of Police (Curry) and his staff from doing so much damned talking on televison."

Hoover pointed out that the Dallas police had no evidence that would convict Oswald of killing President Kennedy except for a few "tentative" identifications of him "as the man who shot the policeman and boarded a bus to go home after the President was killed."

Hoover made it clear that the FBI developed all the evidence that would have convicted Oswald, had he lived. Hoover was concerned that Fritz was "giving too much information to the press" and wanted him to "shut up." Hoover was certain that Oswald's civil rights had been violated.

Hoover had relayed to the Dallas Police Department death threats on Oswald made to the FBI. He accused Curry's department of not giving Oswald "adequate protection." The fact that Oswald was killed was "inexcusable."

Hoover was clearly concerned that there would be a Presidential Commission and made it clear that he was dead set against it. His grounds seemed to be that there were "several aspects" to the case "that would complicate our foreign relations."

In any event, Hoover told Jenkins that he (along with Katzenbach) "wanted something issued so we can convince the public that Oswald is the real assassin."

https://www.maryferr...4&relPageId=475

Actually it appears to me that when Hoover mentioned conspiracy he was in fact referring to one by the Dallas police to deprive the now dead Oswald of his rights.

http://www.justice.g.../crm/241fin.php

Spot on, Mike. Great stuff. Hoover couldn't have directly pressed for jurisdiction due to a "foreign conspiracy" even if he'd wanted to. His betters had put the kibosh on that the night before.