G. Robert Blakey

[Michael Griffith]

The longer I study the JFK case, the more I am inclined to view Blakey as someone who did much to advance the case for conspiracy and to increase our knowledge of the case. For a long time, I thought Blakey should have been prosecuted for obstruction of justice. But, now that I know more about the conditions and constraints under which he worked, I see him in a more favorable light. 

[John Kennedy White]

1 hour ago, Michael Griffith said:

The longer I study the JFK case, the more I am inclined to view Blakey as someone who did much to advance the case for conspiracy and to increase our knowledge of the case. For a long time, I thought Blakey should have been prosecuted for obstruction of justice. But, now that I know more about the conditions and constraints under which he worked, I see him in a more favorable light. 

Agreed. After reading Gaeton Fonzi's The Last Investigation, it took me a while to see beyond his personal frustration and understand the bigger picture.

[James DiEugenio]

Oh really?

Take a look at his discussion with Willens at the Sixth Floor Museum.

And just recall, we are now forty years past the HSCA.

Whatever progress we have made in understanding the crime was through the ARRB.  

Edited November 14, 2022 by James DiEugenio

[John Kennedy White]

12 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

Oh really?

Take a look at his discussion with Willens at the Sixth Floor Museum.

And just recall, we are now forty years past the HSCA.

Whatever progress we have made in understanding the crime was through the ARRB.  

Oof. That is painful.

[James DiEugenio]

I agree, to put it lightly.

And I believe this was in 2020.

Compare it to what Oliver and I were saying on the Fox program, JFK: The Conspiracy Continues.

[Paul Trejo]

On 11/14/2022 at 2:56 PM, James DiEugenio said:

I agree, to put it lightly.

And I believe this was in 2020.

Compare it to what Oliver and I were saying on the Fox program, JFK: The Conspiracy Continues.

Trouble is, the CIA didn't kill JFK.  Sure, Howard Hunt confessed, sort of, to being a bagman for Frank Sturgis.  He was a ROGUE for the radical right wing.

Frank Sturgis boasted about the JFK plot -- but he wasn't a CIA agent (he was a so-called "asset" in the plot to kill Fidel Castro).   He was a ROGUE for the radical right wing.

David Morales confessed -- sort of.   But he was a ROGUE for the radical right wing.

So -- after nearly 60 years of searching for a smoking gun in the CIA Headquarters -- nothing came up.   Give it up.

When (and if) the FINAL files on the JFK assassination are released, the answer will be found in the FBI files, not the CIA files, I predict.   Hoover knew exactly who did it.

Edited November 30, 2022 by Paul Trejo

[Paul Trejo]

On 11/12/2022 at 1:14 PM, Robbie Robertson said:

You can skip 35 min but he admitted Oswald was intelligence at the 1hr 7min mark 

 

G. Robert Blakey is the nation's foremost authority on the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act (RICO), has served on the Notre Dame Law School faculty for more than 30 years. He teaches in the areas of criminal law and procedure, federal criminal law and procedure, terrorism, and jurisprudence. Blakey was Chief Counsel and Staff Director to the U.S. House Select Committee on Assassinations from 1977 to 1979, which investigated the assassinations of John F. Kennedy and Martin Luther King Jr. under the direction of Louis Stokes. Blakey also helped Stokes draft the President John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Collection Act of 1992. He and Richard Billings, the editor of the final report of the Committee, would later write two books about the assassination.
 

Out Of The Blank #1264 - G. Robert Blakey

 

Robert, starting at 1:07, I don't hear Blakey saying that Oswald was intelligence.  Here's how I heard it:

BLAKEY: We have to ask, "What are we talking about?"  Are we talking about whether Oswald shot Kennedy and can we determine that through CIA files or Hoover files - of the FBI?

RR: The question is, "Was LHO intelligence or not?"

BLAKEY: YEAH.  The Warren Commission painted a story of Oswald as a loner. . . 

My point is that when Blakey said "YEAH" there, I don't think he was answering your question, "Was LHO intelligence or not?"  Rather, I think Blakey was answering his own open question: "What are we talking about."  You clarified that for him, and so he said, "YEAH".

My evidence is that Blakey continued with his observation that the WC decided that Oswald killed JFK, but could not figure out WHY! That is, was Oswald part of a conspiracy (known by the CIA or FBI) or was he just a lone nut? 

By the way, I think his first question was crucial, namely, "Can we determine that Oswald shot JFK through CIA files or Hoover's FBI files?"   That's the key question of December 2022, because when (and if) President Biden releases the final JFK top secret files, will we find the answer in CIA files or in FBI files?

For 58 years, I reckon that most JFK researchers have been scouring CIA files to blame the CIA and have failed miserably to find any smoking gun.  Hundreds of JFK researchers after 58 years!  It's a pitiful record.

I predict that when all the JFK top secret files are finally released, the answer will emerge from FBI files.

So, you might ask -- "Was Oswald then an FBI agent?"   After decades of research, I find no evidence that he was.  On the contrary.   I say Oswald was a Zelig. 

Oswald shot at General Walker in April 1963 because he was hanging out with George De Mohrenschildt (who informed for the CIA, but was not a CIA agent).  George hated General Walker (cf. I Am A Patsy! 1977).

Then, Oswald moved to New Orleans where he began hanging out with David Ferrie, Guy Banister, and Clay Shaw, who were trying to infiltrate the FPCC in order to get closer to Fidel Castro (to kill him).

In early 1963 Oswald was on the left.   In mid-1963 Oswald was on the right.

Oswald was a young, 23-year-old Zelig.  He defected to the USSR at the age of 19.  Then he realized he couldn't stand it and he returned.  He was young and immature.  He wasn't a nut. He was bright -- but he couldn't get a break.

Edited December 1, 2022 by Paul Trejo

[Chuck Schwartz]

David H., John S. updated his write up on operation 40 (70) in Dec. 2021 , fyi.....https://spartacus-educational.com/JFKoperation40.htm

 

[Robbie Robertson]

4 hours ago, Paul Trejo said:

Robert, starting at 1:07, I don't hear Blakey saying that Oswald was intelligence.  Here's how I heard it:

BLAKEY: We have to ask, "What are we talking about?"  Are we talking about whether Oswald shot Kennedy and can we determine that through CIA files or Hoover files - of the FBI?

RR: The question is, "Was LHO intelligence or not?"

BLAKEY: YEAH.  The Warren Commission painted a story of Oswald as a loner. . . 

My point is that when Blakey said "YEAH" there, I don't think he was answering your question, "Was LHO intelligence or not?"  Rather, I think Blakey was answering his own open question: "What are we talking about."  You clarified that for him, and so he said, "YEAH".

My evidence is that Blakey continued with his observation that the WC decided that Oswald killed JFK, but could not figure out WHY! That is, was Oswald part of a conspiracy (known by the CIA or FBI) or was he just a lone nut? 

By the way, I think his first question was crucial, namely, "Can we determine that Oswald shot JFK through CIA files or Hoover's FBI files?"   That's the key question of December 2022, because when (and if) President Biden releases the final JFK top secret files, will we find the answer in CIA files or in FBI files?

For 58 years, I reckon that most JFK researchers have been scouring CIA files to blame the CIA and have failed miserably to find any smoking gun.  Hundreds of JFK researchers after 58 years!  It's a pitiful record.

I predict that when all the JFK top secret files are finally released, the answer will emerge from FBI files.

So, you might ask -- "Was Oswald then an FBI agent?"   After decades of research, I find no evidence that he was.  On the contrary.   I say Oswald was a Zelig. 

Oswald shot at General Walker in April 1963 because he was hanging out with George De Mohrenschildt (who informed for the CIA, but was not a CIA agent).  George hated General Walker (cf. I Am A Patsy! 1977).

Then, Oswald moved to New Orleans where he began hanging out with David Ferrie, Guy Banister, and Clay Shaw, who were trying to infiltrate the FPCC in order to get closer to Fidel Castro (to kill him).

In early 1963 Oswald was on the left.   In mid-1963 Oswald was on the right.

Oswald was a young, 23-year-old Zelig.  He defected to the USSR at the age of 19.  Then he realized he couldn't stand it and he returned.  He was young and immature.  He wasn't a nut. He was bright -- but he couldn't get a break.

And to your point of him saying yeah, I asked him six time to make sure I clarified if Oswald was intelligence and if you notice at the 1/hr 10 min mark as I’m talking about Oswald intelligence connection he said yeah in the middle of me talking agreeing on what I was saying.

 

The beginning of the episode he stopped and corrected me when I got something wrong, so the idea of him saying yeah as a response but not answering the question is ridiculous, I asked him over five times and even clarified it further to make sure and if he didn’t agree he wouldn’t say yes or yeah after I asked the question and you can see that when he talks about the cia involvement in which he repeated that the government didn’t do it.

 

Then he even says at the 1/hr 22 min mark this is speculation but some possibilities and all were ways he could have been used, who speculates if they don’t agree he would have just said no and moved to a different question 

 

Edited December 1, 2022 by Robbie Robertson

[Michael Griffith]

Perhaps it would help to remember that WC apologists roundly attacked Blakey when the HSCA report was published, and that they have continued to attack him ever since. They have continued to attack him for repeatedly defending the acoustical evidence (including appearing in two documentaries to defend it), for making a solid case that elements of the Mafia played a role in JFK's death in his book Fatal Hour, for saying it is a "historical fact" that the Mafia killed JFK, for endorsing several pro-conspiracy books, for saying in 2012 that "the Mob set Oswald up as a patsy," for debunking the WC's ridiculous version of Jack Ruby's Mafia ties and movements and motives, for stridently attacking the CIA in his Frontline interview and in his 2014 statement to the 2014 AARC conference, etc., etc.  

 

[Gerry Down]

7 minutes ago, Michael Griffith said:

Perhaps it would help to remember that WC apologists roundly attacked Blakey when the HSCA report was published, and that they have continued to attack him ever since. They have continued to attack him for repeatedly defending the acoustical evidence (including appearing in two documentaries to defend it), for making a solid case that elements of the Mafia played a role in JFK's death in his book Fatal Hour, for saying it is a "historical fact" that the Mafia killed JFK, for endorsing several pro-conspiracy books, for saying in 2012 that "the Mob set Oswald up as a patsy," for debunking the WC's ridiculous version of Jack Ruby's Mafia ties and movements and motives, for stridently attacking the CIA in his Frontline interview and in his 2014 statement to the 2014 AARC conference, etc., etc.  

 

Blakey also endorsed "JFK Assassination Logic" by John McAdams. The endorsement is on the back cover.

[James DiEugenio]

I don't think the Mafia killed Kennedy.

And why would they ever recruit someone who was a bad a sniper as Oswald to do so anyway?

 

 

[Michael Griffith]

2 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

I don't think the Mafia killed Kennedy.

And why would they ever recruit someone who was a bad a sniper as Oswald to do so anyway?

If you mean the Mafia alone, I agree, but I think it is clear that the Mafia was part of the assassination plot. 

Obviously, I disagree with Blakey's stated belief that Oswald was hired by the Mafia to shoot JFK. 

Quote

Gerry Down said:

Blakey also endorsed "JFK Assassination Logic" by John McAdams. The endorsement is on the back cover.

Yikes. Well, that doesn't shock me, since I know that Blakey intensely dislikes conspiracy claims that he views as too "out there," too disturbing, conspiracy claims that point in directions that he finds unpalatable, and his endorsement of McAdams' book was probably a reflection of that attitude. 

Edited December 1, 2022 by Michael Griffith

[Ron Bulman]

On 11/12/2022 at 1:14 PM, Robbie Robertson said:

You can skip 35 min but he admitted Oswald was intelligence at the 1hr 7min mark 

 

G. Robert Blakey is the nation's foremost authority on the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act (RICO), has served on the Notre Dame Law School faculty for more than 30 years. He teaches in the areas of criminal law and procedure, federal criminal law and procedure, terrorism, and jurisprudence. Blakey was Chief Counsel and Staff Director to the U.S. House Select Committee on Assassinations from 1977 to 1979, which investigated the assassinations of John F. Kennedy and Martin Luther King Jr. under the direction of Louis Stokes. Blakey also helped Stokes draft the President John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Collection Act of 1992. He and Richard Billings, the editor of the final report of the Committee, would later write two books about the assassination.
 

Out Of The Blank #1264 - G. Robert Blakey

 

A historical interview Robbie though he's obviously a bit aged.  Your patience and questions are appreciated.

Took a few notes, comments in the next day or two.

[Ron Bulman]

Blakey did stumble a bit memory wise, and he tap danced more than once.

But I did not know he worked at the DOJ for RFK in 1963.  Louis Stokes statement that he wanted an investigation into their deaths (JFK/MLK) commensurate with the dignity of their lives was notable.  Too bad it didn't work out that way.  Blakey demanding no publicity, no statements, I.E., in secrecy, no transparency.  He didn't want the public to know or question what they were doing.

He saw the WCR as a legal brief, didn't want that for the HSCA.  So, he brought in a Life Magazine writer to write it.

He didn't suspect the mob going in.  FBI surveillance of them prior to the assassination mentioned nothing about it, Jack Ruby, Oswald.

Autopsy?  We didn't want to get into that.  Then the safe with the autopsy photos is broken into, left open, perused by as "security officer".  Whose prints found on them ID him as CIA.  Fired, did it on his own.

What they didn't give us I don't know.  The military destroyed evidence?  The head of the dictabelt investigation said "that's Blakey's problem" (?)*.

We never looked for other shots.  There was some evidence of other shots.  Did a shot come from the knoll?  Yes.  Grassy Knoll and TSBD, there was no systematic analysis of testimony of witnesses . . .

* Was this in relation to the dictabelt investigation revealing at least five or more shots, but Blakey said he could only sell four?

Then again, Joseph McBride proposes the dictabelt was a canard offered by Mary Ferrell and Gary Mack to discredit the HSCA.

Gary Mack dies; called attention to JFK acoustic evidence > JFK Facts

A follow up on Blakey's statements with Dan Hardway would be way cool Robbie.  If he's still with us, lucid and agreeable.