Jump to content
The Education Forum

Warren Commission members by attendance.


Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Benjamin Cole said:

Sept. 16, 1964 Russell dictates a dissenting statement disagreeing with the Warren Report single bullet theory that JFK and Connally were hit by the same bullet: "I do not share the finding of the Commission as to the probability that both President Kennedy and Governor Connally were struck by the same bullet.... I join in my colleagues in the belief that three shots were fired, but, to me, the testimony of Governor Connally that he heard the first shot fired and strike the President and turned before he was wounded makes more logical a finding that the first and third shots struck the President and the second shot wounded Governor Connally." The dissenting statement also disagrees with the Report's conclusion of no conspiracy. In Russell's judgment, "a number of suspicious circumstances," as well as the insufficiency of the evidence gathered against Oswald, "preclude[d] the conclusive determination that Oswald and Oswald alone, without the knowledge, encouragement or assistance of any other person, planned and perpetrated the assassination." Apparently with Russell's consent, this dissenting statement is never incorporated into the Warren Report.

---30---

https://digitalcommons.law.uga.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=&httpsredir=1&article=1137&context=fac_pm

So the dissenting statement survives, but was not in the WC. I think. 

Why  do you say that Russell's dissent not being included in the WR was apparently with his consent?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 31
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

4 hours ago, Micah Mileto said:

I love the part when Allen Dulles walks into Dr. Humes' testimony late, and when Humes was describing the chest tube incisions made at Parkland, Dulles asks "Are you describing exit wounds?", to which Humes replies "Sir, these are knife wounds".

Dulles playing the interested fool ... LOL ... Little correction: It was a tracheostomy-tube put in at the very same point of the neck entry wound which was widened by scalpell for that reason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Karl Kinaski said:

Dulles playing the interested fool ... LOL ... Little correction: It was a tracheostomy-tube put in at the very same point of the neck entry wound which was widened by scalpell for that reason.

Trust me, I know. I'm about to release 400 pages on the tracheostomy.

 

You know about the chest tube incisions right above JFK's nipples, right? And how the Parkland witnesses all insisted that the chest tubes were inserted all the way into the pleural cavity, while the Bethesda pathologists claimed the incisions were only superficial and the pleura was totally intact?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Micah Mileto

Maybe Dulles had the neck (bullet wound) in his mind while Humes was talking about the scalpel incisions of the neck and the chest. Seems like a communication problem between the two men. Which adds to the complete farce of the WC hearings ...

Edit:

IMO that was the case.

Quote of the WC hearing piece you mentioned.

Quote

(Humes) ... So  when  we  examined  the  President  in  addition  to  the  large
wound  which  we  found  in  conversation  with  Doctor  Perry  was  the
tracheotomy  wound,  there  were  two  smaller  wounds  on  the  upper
anterior chest.
Mr. Dulles     . These are apparently exit wounds?
Commander Humes   .  Sir,  these  were  knife  wounds,  these  were
incised  wounds  on  either  side  of  the  chest,  and  I  will  give  them  in
somewhat greater detail.

 

Edited by Karl Kinaski
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Roger Odisio said:

Why  do you say that Russell's dissent not being included in the WR was apparently with his consent?

RO--

Now I forget. Something I read while coming up with the scholarly links (which are worth reading, btw).

I guess he did put his signature on the WC. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Benjamin Cole said:

Thanks for that Ben, that is a pretty well written thesis.

I wasn't aware of the Minsk history, and such a strong connection with Cuba. That was interesting to learn

Any of my tutors or professors would given me a slap upside my head for presenting a document that carried some of those typos, but the substance is there!

Edited by Tommy Tomlinson
Ironically... for TYPOS...
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Jean Paul Ceulemans said:

Thanks Jean Paul

"In virtually all previous time studies of the Commissioner's labors, notice has been taken that of the 488 witnesses who testified, only 93 did so in the presence of any of the seven members of the Commission. From there, it is a relatively simple exercise to research Volumes I through V of the Hearings, and discover the time on task statistics of each Commissioner. Taking that approach, research indicates that Earl Warren attended the testimony of all 93 witnesses, Allen Dulles was present on 70 occasions, Gerald Ford on 60, John Sherman Cooper on 50, John McCloy on 35 occasions, Hale Boggs on 20, and Richard Russell on 6."

Wow...

That's... not a lot at all. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was going to copy and paste the comparative tables to show the ACTUAL attendances and so on, but without the context of the explanations it just seems easier to say "If you didn't know this stuff, like I didn't until just now... it's well worth the few minutes it takes to read it!"  and that I am surprised by just how little input those 7 men had in hearing from the witnesses.

That's another book for the shopping list.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Tommy Tomlinson said:

Thanks Jean Paul

"In virtually all previous time studies of the Commissioner's labors, notice has been taken that of the 488 witnesses who testified, only 93 did so in the presence of any of the seven members of the Commission. From there, it is a relatively simple exercise to research Volumes I through V of the Hearings, and discover the time on task statistics of each Commissioner. Taking that approach, research indicates that Earl Warren attended the testimony of all 93 witnesses, Allen Dulles was present on 70 occasions, Gerald Ford on 60, John Sherman Cooper on 50, John McCloy on 35 occasions, Hale Boggs on 20, and Richard Russell on 6."

Wow...

That's... not a lot at all. 

Great stuff. Specter was running the show, the government consigliere doing his job as instructed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said:

Great stuff. Specter was running the show, the government consigliere doing his job as instructed. 

I'd always had it at the back of my mind that Rankin was the string-puller-in-chief, but every new thing I learn kind of shoves me toward wondering how the Hell did Specter have so much influence, as a "Junior" lawyer on the Commission...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Tommy Tomlinson said:

I'd always had it at the back of my mind that Rankin was the string-puller-in-chief, but every new thing I learn kind of shoves me toward wondering how the Hell did Specter have so much influence, as a "Junior" lawyer on the Commission...

Rankin had the title, that's for sure. Specter later become a US Senator, and Ford the President (after the deposed Nixon). 

Makes one wonder. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see some musing as to who was really running the commission. As far as the one responsible for the overall arc of the commission and its final findings, Earl Warren is 100% responsible. As far as the day to day instruction to the junior members--who did almost all the work--J. Lee Rankin was the man, with key assistance from Redlich (who was largely responsible for the report) and Willens (who was involved in the hiring of the junior staff and served as the man in the middle between the commission and the justice department, FBI and CIA). 

Over the years, many a historian and researcher has provided cover for Warren, and made out that he was just an old man who didn't know what he was doing. This is humbug. 

From patspeer.com, chapter 3c:

 

The year 2013 marked the 50th anniversary of the assassination. Two books on the Warren Commission--one by New York Times reporter Philip Shenon and one by Warren Commission attorney Howard Willens--were pushed upon the public. Although Shenon's book held out that Oswald may have been put in motion by some Cubans he met in Mexico, both were essentially Oswald-did-it books.

Still, the release of these books exposed some startling facts...that only added to what we'd already come to know...

As a compliment to Willens' book, he released a number of documents, some of which have been previously discussed. One document which we have not discussed, however, is a memo created by Willens, in which he reported the number of days worked by the key members of the commission's staff.

Here, then, is a re-listing of these key employees, along with the number of days they worked, according to Willens.

  • Area 1: Francis Adams (16 days, 5 hours) and Arlen Specter (145 days, 5 hours) were charged with establishing the "basic facts of the assassination." (162 days, 2 hours)

  • Area 2: Joseph Ball (91 days) and David Belin (125 days) were charged with establishing the "identity of the assassin." (216 days)

  • Area 3: Albert Jenner (203 days) and J. Wesley Liebeler (219 days, 4 hours) were charged with establishing "Oswald's background." (422 days, 4 hours)

  • Area 4: William Coleman (64 days) and W. David Slawson (211 days) were charged with investigating "possible conspiratorial relationships." They were thus tasked with investigating Oswald's actions in Russia and Mexico. (275 days)

  • Area 5: Leon Hubert (115 days, 5 hours) and Burt Griffin (225 days, 4 hours) were charged with investigating "Oswald's death," and establishing both whether Ruby knew Oswald, and if Ruby had help in killing Oswald. (341 days, 1 hour)

  • Area 6: Samuel Stern was charged with researching the history of Presidential protection, so that the commission could make appropriate recommendations. (149 days)

  • Norman Redlich (186 days) was charged with supervising the investigations of all these areas, and with the subsequent writing of their report. His assistant--the man directly overseeing much of the investigation--was Melvin Eisenberg (167 days).

    • And, of course, the whole she-bang was overseen by J. Lee Rankin (308 days) and Howard Willens (an approximate of 250 days).

So, let's break this down. The Warren Commission's top staff (Rankin, Willens, Redlich, and Eisenberg) spent over 900 work-days supervising its investigation, co-ordinating its investigation with the commissioners, and editing and re-writing the commission's report. While, at the same time, the commission's investigators spent over 1,000 work-days investigating and writing about Oswald's life and death--separate from his role in the assassination. While, at the same time, the commission's investigators spent less than 400 work-days investigating what happened on the day of the shooting, and who pulled the trigger...

Well, this seems a bit backwards, correct? When one looks at the timing of these man-hours, this ratio seems even more out-of-whack. The investigation lasted, basically, 8 months, from late January to late September. Adams, Specter, Ball, and Belin (the investigators for Areas 1 and 2) worked 378 days, 2 hours, between them. But only 73 days, 1 hour of this was in the last three months of the commission's investigation. Well, this suggests that the commission's investigation into what happened and who did it was essentially over by June, and not September. And that the rest was just putting lipstick on a pig. I mean, seriously, Burt Griffin worked 91 of the last 96 days trying to understand why and how mobster wannabe Jack Ruby came to kill the supposedly lone-nut Oswald, and David Slawson worked 83 of the last 96 days trying to understand what the supposedly lone-nut Oswald was doing in Mexico City, meeting with Cubans and Russians. And that's not even to mention that Albert Jenner and Wesley Liebeler worked 81 days and 90 days, respectively, of the last 96 days of the commission, while trying to understand why in the heck Oswald would kill a President he claimed to admire.

All four of these men, individually, worked more days in the last three months of the commission's investigation than the four men who'd worked in areas 1 and 2, COMBINED.

Well, this supports what seemed clear from the beginning of the commission's investigation--that the commission was ready to claim Oswald did it without doing much digging, but was concerned this wouldn't fly if they didn't offer the public a mountain of reasons to believe Oswald was nothing but a nut, who acted alone.

But that's not all we learned from the release of Shenon's and Willens' books.

When one read between the lines, one discovered an awful reality--that liberal icon Earl Warren was not the simple bumpkin many had presumed, and that he was instead a one-man wrecking crew, committed to making sure his commission went nowhere and learned nothing.

Here, then, is a partial list of Warren "no-no"s, as we now know them.

1. Chief Justice Warren was determined from the outset that the commission investigating President Kennedy's death limit its scope to the investigations already performed by the Dallas Police, Secret Service and FBI. Yes, unbelievably, the transcript of the commission's first conference reflects that Warren wanted the commission to have no investigators of its own, no subpoena power, and no public hearings.

2. When the Attorney General of Texas, Waggoner Carr, persisted in his plan to convene a Texas Court of Inquiry, a public hearing at which much of the evidence against Lee Harvey Oswald would be presented, Warren convinced him to cancel his plan by assuring him the commission would be "fair to Texas." No record was made of this meeting.

3. Not long thereafter, the commission became privy to the rumor Oswald had been an intelligence asset. Although commissioner and former CIA chief Allen Dulles assured Warren and his fellow commissioners the FBI and CIA would lie about this, he also told them the only way to get to the bottom of it was to ask President Johnson to personally tell the heads of the FBI and CIA not to lie. Warren did not do this. And the transcript of the hearing in which this rumor was first discussed was destroyed, undoubtedly at Warren's direction.

4. The commission's staff had questions about the medical evidence. They were particularly concerned about the location of Kennedy's back wound, which may have been too low to support the single-bullet theory deemed necessary to the commission's conclusion Oswald acted alone. Even so, Warren personally prevented Dr. James J. Humes from reviewing the autopsy photos he'd had taken, and wished to review.

5. The commission's staff had questions about Oswald's trip to Mexico. What did he say to those he spoke to? What did he do at night? Did he actually go to the Cuban consulate and Russian embassy on the days the CIA said he'd visited the consulate and embassy? And yet, despite the commission's staff's fervid desire they be allowed to interview Sylvia Duran, a Mexican woman employed by the Cuban consulate, who'd handled Oswald's request he be allowed to visit Cuba, (and who, it turns out, was rumored to have entertained Oswald at night), Chief Justice Warren personally prevented them from doing so, telling commission counsel David Slawson that "You just can't believe a Communist...We don't talk to Communists. You cannot trust a dedicated Communist to tell us the truth, so what's the point?"

6. The commission's staff had questions about Russia's involvement in the assassination. Oswald, of course, had lived in Russia. His wife was Russian. While in Mexico, he'd met with a KGB agent named Kostikov, who was believed to have been the KGB's point man on assassinations for the western hemisphere. Shortly after the assassination, a KGB officer named Yuri Nosenkodefected to the west. Nosenko told his handlers he'd reviewed Oswald's file, and that Oswald was not a Russian agent. The timing of Nosenko's defection, however, convinced some within the CIA that Nosenko's defection was a set-up. The commission's staff hoped to talk to Nosenko, and judge for themselves if his word meant anything. The CIA (er, rather, The CIA's Assistant Director of Plans--its master of dirty tricks) Richard Helms, on the other hand, asked the commission to not only not talk to Nosenko, but to avoid any mention of him within their report. Chief Justice Earl Warren, acting alone, agreed to this request. He later admitted "I was adamant that we should not in any way base our findings on the testimony of a Russian defector."

7. The commission's staff had questions about Jack Ruby's motive in killing Oswald. Strangely, however, the commission's staff charged with investigating Ruby and his background were not allowed to interview him. Instead, the interview of Ruby was performed by, you guessed it, Chief Justice Earl Warren. Despite Ruby's telling Warren such things as "unless you get me to Washington, you can’t get a fair shake out of me...I want to tell the truth, and I can’t tell it here. I can’t tell it here…this isn’t the place for me to tell what I want to tell…” Warren refused to bring Ruby to Washington so he could provide the details he so clearly wanted to provide.

8. The commission's staff had even more questions about how Ruby came to kill Oswald. It was hard to believe he'd just walked down a ramp and shot Oswald, as claimed. As Ruby had many buddies within the Dallas Police, for that matter, it was reasonable to investigate the possibility one or more of the officers responsible for Oswald's protection had provided Ruby access to the basement. Commission counsel Burt Griffin even found a suspect: Sgt Patrick Dean. In the middle of Dean's testimony in Dallas, in which Dean said Ruby had told him he'd gained access to the garage by walking down the ramp, Griffin let Dean know he didn't believe him, and gave him a chance to change his testimony. Dean was outraged and called Dallas DA Henry Wade, who in turn called Warren Commission General Counsel J. Lee Rankin. Dean then asked that he be allowed to testify against Griffin in Washington. Not only was he allowed to do so, he received what amounted to an apology from, you guessed it, Chief Justice Earl Warren. Warren told Dean "No member of our staff has a right to tell any witness that he is lying or that he is testifying falsely. That is not his business. It is the business of this Commission to appraise the testimony of all the witnesses, and, at the time you are talking about, and up to the present time, this Commission has never appraised your testimony or fully appraised the testimony of any other witness, and furthermore, I want to say to you that no member of our staff has any power to help or injure any witness." It was later revealed that Dean had failed a lie detector test designed to test his truthfulness regarding Ruby, and that the Dallas Police had kept the results of this test from the Warren Commission. If Griffin had been allowed to pursue Dean, this could have all come out in 1964. But no, Warren made Griffin back down, and the probability Dean lied was swept under the rug. (None of this is mentioned in Willens' book, of course.)

9. Although Warren was purportedly all-concerned about transparency, and wanted all the evidence viewed by the commission to be made available to the public, he (along with commissioners McCloy and Dulles) came to a decision on April 30, 1964, that the testimony before the commission would not be published along with the commission's report. (This decision was over-turned after the other commissioners--the four elected officials on the commission, and thereby the only ones accountable to the public--objected.)

10. Although Warren was purportedly all-concerned about transparency, and wanted the public to trust the commission's decisions, he wanted to shred or incinerate all the commission's internal files, so no one would know how the commission came to its decisions. (This decision was over-turned after commission historian Alfred Goldberg sent word of Warren's intentions to Senator Richard Russell, and Russell intervened.)

11. Although Warren was purported to have worked himself day and night in order to give the President the most thorough report possible, he actually flew off on a fishing trip that lasted from July 6 to August 1, 1964, while testimony was still being taken, and the commission's report still being polished.

12. Although Warren was purportedly all-concerned about transparency, and felt the commission's work should speak for itself, he (according to Howard Willens' diary) asked the National Archives to hold up the release of assassination-related documents that were not used in the commission's hearings, so that said documents could not be used by critics to undermine the commission's findings.

So let's review. The Chief Justice, who was, by his own admission, roped into serving as chairman of the commission by President Johnson through the prospect of nuclear war, refused to allow important evidence to be viewed, refused to allow important witnesses to be called, cut off investigations into controversial areas, demanded that testimony before the commission be done in secret, agreed to keep the testimony before the commission from the public, tried to keep the commission's internal files from the public, and ultimately asked the national archives to help hide some of the evidence available to the commission from the public until a decent interval had passed in which the commission and its friends in the media could sell the commission's conclusions.

Now if that ain't a whitewash, then what the heck is?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Pat, I don't want to gush too much like a fanboy, but your website is a great resource! Not only the information it contains, but the style in which its written makes it so much easier for... less well informed... folk like me to play catch up! 

2 guys spent 412 "man-days" digging into "OSWALD" while 2 other guys spent 216 man-days "establishing the identity of the Assassin?"

I now have a mental image of Liebeler and Jenner looming over Ball and Belin, tapping cudgels into their palms like a couple of thugs in a Jimmy Cagney movie, saying "Don't you chumps DARE make all this work we've done meaningless!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Tommy Tomlinson said:

Thanks Pat, I don't want to gush too much like a fanboy, but your website is a great resource! Not only the information it contains, but the style in which its written makes it so much easier for... less well informed... folk like me to play catch up! 

2 guys spent 412 "man-days" digging into "OSWALD" while 2 other guys spent 216 man-days "establishing the identity of the Assassin?"

I now have a mental image of Liebeler and Jenner looming over Ball and Belin, tapping cudgels into their palms like a couple of thugs in a Jimmy Cagney movie, saying "Don't you chumps DARE make all this work we've done meaningless!"

Thanks. When I began my journey down the rabbit hole, I wished that there was a website comprising all the witness statements, from before, during, and after the WC investigation, and a step by step description of the WC investigation of the shooting itself, as opposed to Oswald's and Ruby's backgrounds, etc. I then realized that the best way for me to repay the likes of Harold Weisberg, Josiah Thompson, and Rex Bradford for their contributions was to create such a website myself. 

It's nice to know my efforts are appreciated. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

I see some musing as to who was really running the commission. As far as the one responsible for the overall arc of the commission and its final findings, Earl Warren is 100% responsible. As far as the day to day instruction to the junior members--who did almost all the work--J. Lee Rankin was the man, with key assistance from Redlich (who was largely responsible for the report) and Willens (who was involved in the hiring of the junior staff and served as the man in the middle between the commission and the justice department, FBI and CIA). 

Over the years, many a historian and researcher has provided cover for Warren, and made out that he was just an old man who didn't know what he was doing. This is humbug. 

From patspeer.com, chapter 3c:

 

The year 2013 marked the 50th anniversary of the assassination. Two books on the Warren Commission--one by New York Times reporter Philip Shenon and one by Warren Commission attorney Howard Willens--were pushed upon the public. Although Shenon's book held out that Oswald may have been put in motion by some Cubans he met in Mexico, both were essentially Oswald-did-it books.

Still, the release of these books exposed some startling facts...that only added to what we'd already come to know...

As a compliment to Willens' book, he released a number of documents, some of which have been previously discussed. One document which we have not discussed, however, is a memo created by Willens, in which he reported the number of days worked by the key members of the commission's staff.

Here, then, is a re-listing of these key employees, along with the number of days they worked, according to Willens.

  • Area 1: Francis Adams (16 days, 5 hours) and Arlen Specter (145 days, 5 hours) were charged with establishing the "basic facts of the assassination." (162 days, 2 hours)

  • Area 2: Joseph Ball (91 days) and David Belin (125 days) were charged with establishing the "identity of the assassin." (216 days)

  • Area 3: Albert Jenner (203 days) and J. Wesley Liebeler (219 days, 4 hours) were charged with establishing "Oswald's background." (422 days, 4 hours)

  • Area 4: William Coleman (64 days) and W. David Slawson (211 days) were charged with investigating "possible conspiratorial relationships." They were thus tasked with investigating Oswald's actions in Russia and Mexico. (275 days)

  • Area 5: Leon Hubert (115 days, 5 hours) and Burt Griffin (225 days, 4 hours) were charged with investigating "Oswald's death," and establishing both whether Ruby knew Oswald, and if Ruby had help in killing Oswald. (341 days, 1 hour)

  • Area 6: Samuel Stern was charged with researching the history of Presidential protection, so that the commission could make appropriate recommendations. (149 days)

  • Norman Redlich (186 days) was charged with supervising the investigations of all these areas, and with the subsequent writing of their report. His assistant--the man directly overseeing much of the investigation--was Melvin Eisenberg (167 days).

    • And, of course, the whole she-bang was overseen by J. Lee Rankin (308 days) and Howard Willens (an approximate of 250 days).

So, let's break this down. The Warren Commission's top staff (Rankin, Willens, Redlich, and Eisenberg) spent over 900 work-days supervising its investigation, co-ordinating its investigation with the commissioners, and editing and re-writing the commission's report. While, at the same time, the commission's investigators spent over 1,000 work-days investigating and writing about Oswald's life and death--separate from his role in the assassination. While, at the same time, the commission's investigators spent less than 400 work-days investigating what happened on the day of the shooting, and who pulled the trigger...

Well, this seems a bit backwards, correct? When one looks at the timing of these man-hours, this ratio seems even more out-of-whack. The investigation lasted, basically, 8 months, from late January to late September. Adams, Specter, Ball, and Belin (the investigators for Areas 1 and 2) worked 378 days, 2 hours, between them. But only 73 days, 1 hour of this was in the last three months of the commission's investigation. Well, this suggests that the commission's investigation into what happened and who did it was essentially over by June, and not September. And that the rest was just putting lipstick on a pig. I mean, seriously, Burt Griffin worked 91 of the last 96 days trying to understand why and how mobster wannabe Jack Ruby came to kill the supposedly lone-nut Oswald, and David Slawson worked 83 of the last 96 days trying to understand what the supposedly lone-nut Oswald was doing in Mexico City, meeting with Cubans and Russians. And that's not even to mention that Albert Jenner and Wesley Liebeler worked 81 days and 90 days, respectively, of the last 96 days of the commission, while trying to understand why in the heck Oswald would kill a President he claimed to admire.

All four of these men, individually, worked more days in the last three months of the commission's investigation than the four men who'd worked in areas 1 and 2, COMBINED.

Well, this supports what seemed clear from the beginning of the commission's investigation--that the commission was ready to claim Oswald did it without doing much digging, but was concerned this wouldn't fly if they didn't offer the public a mountain of reasons to believe Oswald was nothing but a nut, who acted alone.

But that's not all we learned from the release of Shenon's and Willens' books.

When one read between the lines, one discovered an awful reality--that liberal icon Earl Warren was not the simple bumpkin many had presumed, and that he was instead a one-man wrecking crew, committed to making sure his commission went nowhere and learned nothing.

Here, then, is a partial list of Warren "no-no"s, as we now know them.

1. Chief Justice Warren was determined from the outset that the commission investigating President Kennedy's death limit its scope to the investigations already performed by the Dallas Police, Secret Service and FBI. Yes, unbelievably, the transcript of the commission's first conference reflects that Warren wanted the commission to have no investigators of its own, no subpoena power, and no public hearings.

2. When the Attorney General of Texas, Waggoner Carr, persisted in his plan to convene a Texas Court of Inquiry, a public hearing at which much of the evidence against Lee Harvey Oswald would be presented, Warren convinced him to cancel his plan by assuring him the commission would be "fair to Texas." No record was made of this meeting.

3. Not long thereafter, the commission became privy to the rumor Oswald had been an intelligence asset. Although commissioner and former CIA chief Allen Dulles assured Warren and his fellow commissioners the FBI and CIA would lie about this, he also told them the only way to get to the bottom of it was to ask President Johnson to personally tell the heads of the FBI and CIA not to lie. Warren did not do this. And the transcript of the hearing in which this rumor was first discussed was destroyed, undoubtedly at Warren's direction.

4. The commission's staff had questions about the medical evidence. They were particularly concerned about the location of Kennedy's back wound, which may have been too low to support the single-bullet theory deemed necessary to the commission's conclusion Oswald acted alone. Even so, Warren personally prevented Dr. James J. Humes from reviewing the autopsy photos he'd had taken, and wished to review.

5. The commission's staff had questions about Oswald's trip to Mexico. What did he say to those he spoke to? What did he do at night? Did he actually go to the Cuban consulate and Russian embassy on the days the CIA said he'd visited the consulate and embassy? And yet, despite the commission's staff's fervid desire they be allowed to interview Sylvia Duran, a Mexican woman employed by the Cuban consulate, who'd handled Oswald's request he be allowed to visit Cuba, (and who, it turns out, was rumored to have entertained Oswald at night), Chief Justice Warren personally prevented them from doing so, telling commission counsel David Slawson that "You just can't believe a Communist...We don't talk to Communists. You cannot trust a dedicated Communist to tell us the truth, so what's the point?"

6. The commission's staff had questions about Russia's involvement in the assassination. Oswald, of course, had lived in Russia. His wife was Russian. While in Mexico, he'd met with a KGB agent named Kostikov, who was believed to have been the KGB's point man on assassinations for the western hemisphere. Shortly after the assassination, a KGB officer named Yuri Nosenkodefected to the west. Nosenko told his handlers he'd reviewed Oswald's file, and that Oswald was not a Russian agent. The timing of Nosenko's defection, however, convinced some within the CIA that Nosenko's defection was a set-up. The commission's staff hoped to talk to Nosenko, and judge for themselves if his word meant anything. The CIA (er, rather, The CIA's Assistant Director of Plans--its master of dirty tricks) Richard Helms, on the other hand, asked the commission to not only not talk to Nosenko, but to avoid any mention of him within their report. Chief Justice Earl Warren, acting alone, agreed to this request. He later admitted "I was adamant that we should not in any way base our findings on the testimony of a Russian defector."

7. The commission's staff had questions about Jack Ruby's motive in killing Oswald. Strangely, however, the commission's staff charged with investigating Ruby and his background were not allowed to interview him. Instead, the interview of Ruby was performed by, you guessed it, Chief Justice Earl Warren. Despite Ruby's telling Warren such things as "unless you get me to Washington, you can’t get a fair shake out of me...I want to tell the truth, and I can’t tell it here. I can’t tell it here…this isn’t the place for me to tell what I want to tell…” Warren refused to bring Ruby to Washington so he could provide the details he so clearly wanted to provide.

8. The commission's staff had even more questions about how Ruby came to kill Oswald. It was hard to believe he'd just walked down a ramp and shot Oswald, as claimed. As Ruby had many buddies within the Dallas Police, for that matter, it was reasonable to investigate the possibility one or more of the officers responsible for Oswald's protection had provided Ruby access to the basement. Commission counsel Burt Griffin even found a suspect: Sgt Patrick Dean. In the middle of Dean's testimony in Dallas, in which Dean said Ruby had told him he'd gained access to the garage by walking down the ramp, Griffin let Dean know he didn't believe him, and gave him a chance to change his testimony. Dean was outraged and called Dallas DA Henry Wade, who in turn called Warren Commission General Counsel J. Lee Rankin. Dean then asked that he be allowed to testify against Griffin in Washington. Not only was he allowed to do so, he received what amounted to an apology from, you guessed it, Chief Justice Earl Warren. Warren told Dean "No member of our staff has a right to tell any witness that he is lying or that he is testifying falsely. That is not his business. It is the business of this Commission to appraise the testimony of all the witnesses, and, at the time you are talking about, and up to the present time, this Commission has never appraised your testimony or fully appraised the testimony of any other witness, and furthermore, I want to say to you that no member of our staff has any power to help or injure any witness." It was later revealed that Dean had failed a lie detector test designed to test his truthfulness regarding Ruby, and that the Dallas Police had kept the results of this test from the Warren Commission. If Griffin had been allowed to pursue Dean, this could have all come out in 1964. But no, Warren made Griffin back down, and the probability Dean lied was swept under the rug. (None of this is mentioned in Willens' book, of course.)

9. Although Warren was purportedly all-concerned about transparency, and wanted all the evidence viewed by the commission to be made available to the public, he (along with commissioners McCloy and Dulles) came to a decision on April 30, 1964, that the testimony before the commission would not be published along with the commission's report. (This decision was over-turned after the other commissioners--the four elected officials on the commission, and thereby the only ones accountable to the public--objected.)

10. Although Warren was purportedly all-concerned about transparency, and wanted the public to trust the commission's decisions, he wanted to shred or incinerate all the commission's internal files, so no one would know how the commission came to its decisions. (This decision was over-turned after commission historian Alfred Goldberg sent word of Warren's intentions to Senator Richard Russell, and Russell intervened.)

11. Although Warren was purported to have worked himself day and night in order to give the President the most thorough report possible, he actually flew off on a fishing trip that lasted from July 6 to August 1, 1964, while testimony was still being taken, and the commission's report still being polished.

12. Although Warren was purportedly all-concerned about transparency, and felt the commission's work should speak for itself, he (according to Howard Willens' diary) asked the National Archives to hold up the release of assassination-related documents that were not used in the commission's hearings, so that said documents could not be used by critics to undermine the commission's findings.

So let's review. The Chief Justice, who was, by his own admission, roped into serving as chairman of the commission by President Johnson through the prospect of nuclear war, refused to allow important evidence to be viewed, refused to allow important witnesses to be called, cut off investigations into controversial areas, demanded that testimony before the commission be done in secret, agreed to keep the testimony before the commission from the public, tried to keep the commission's internal files from the public, and ultimately asked the national archives to help hide some of the evidence available to the commission from the public until a decent interval had passed in which the commission and its friends in the media could sell the commission's conclusions.

Now if that ain't a whitewash, then what the heck is?

Great stuff PS. I salute you. 

Also, add in this:

(Richard) Russell was further troubled during the December 5, 1963 meeting of the Commission by Warren’s seeming total acceptance of the FBI’s conclusion that Oswald was a lone assassin. The fact that Warren was joined in the whole-hearted belief by Deputy Attorney General Nicholas Katzenbach raised additional questions. Contemplating the matter, Russell wrote, “Something strange is happening. W. and Katzenbach know all about F.B.I. and they are apparently [illegible] and others planning to show Oswald only one considered.” 

https://scholarworks.wm.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=5464&context=etd

---30---

Russell did not trust either the CIA or FBI, which was interesting for such a Washington veteran and pro-military type of guy. 

Obviously, the WC decided in advance LHO was a lone assassin, and Ruby too. 

Sad side note: There was a time, perhaps Russell's time, when office-holders held measured views.

Now, an office-holder is expected to either revere every word from the FBI, or deny every word from the FBI, as a matter of party affiliation. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...