Oswald as designated patsy; from Bart Kamp's new book

[Sandy Larsen]

22 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

Hoover then tells LBJ about the voice not being Oswald and the picture not being Oswald. So they both had reason to doubt that story.

 

I don't understand why they would see those things as making the communist angle questionable. Rather, it seems like they show that those people on the surveillance photos and audio tapes are not Oswald.

If you look at ALL the evidence and statements coming out, it indeed does look like a communist plot. Just that it needs to be investigated more to be understood.

 

[Karl Kinaski]

 

 

Quote

 

 James DiEugenio said:

Both Hoover and LBJ decided to go with the lone sociopath angle. 

 

 

Quote

 

Cliff Varnell said: After Harriman gave the marching orders.

Hoover was a reluctant lone nutter.

 

 I think your are right. Hoover was reluctant. Till this emergency meeting of the Commission in January of 64 regarding the leak that Oswald was a FBI informant. I believe this was a warning shot for Hoover. IMO this whole emergency-thing was staged. 

[James DiEugenio]

Well Sandy how good does that make RFK look then?

Within about 48 hours he had fingered a CIA/Cuban exile/Mafia plot.

And in a week, he is sending a message to Moscow saying that he knows this is a large domestic conspiracy.  And that detente will now be put on hold.

[James DiEugenio]

KK:

Hoover was reluctant.

Now I know you did not read Bart's book.

In about two hours, Hoover is pushing the Oswald angle.  The call from Carter to Dallas is about 8-9 M that night.

 

 

Edited October 4, 2023 by James DiEugenio

[Cliff Varnell]

1 hour ago, James DiEugenio said:

KK:

Hoover was reluctant.

Now I know you did not read Bart's book.

In about two hours, Hoover is pushing the Oswald angle.  

Pushing the angle Oswald was connected to the Soviets.

1 hour ago, James DiEugenio said:

When, in fact, what is the evidence for this at that time?

 

Bundy called AF1 to inform Johnson there was no evidence of conspiracy.  It didn’t start with Hoover.

[Ron Bulman]

8 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

BTW, I should add that if Peter Scott is correct on this theory, then this argues for Johnson and Hoover not being part of the original conspiracy.

I should add, that this is a good aspect in Bart's book.

His book is, in large part, an hour by hour chronicle of the weekend of the assassination up to the murder of Oswald.

The book really shows how hard Hoover is pushing the Oswald did it angle.  Even with RFK, who of course, is not buying it.

 

That makes perfect sense.  Johnson and Hoover being excluded from planning.  Either one might have screwed it up with their personalities/positions, across the street neighbors for years enjoying Sunday back yard BBQ's.

I've thought for some years Johnson was notified by possibly Dulles personally, likely by a subordinate, a very few days before, maybe one or two.  So he wouldn't over react.  He was given no choice in the matter, of which he heartily approved, as opposed to potentially prison.

Hoover was left in the dark until it happened.  Forced to comply with the cover up.

[James DiEugenio]

The phone calls between Hoover and RFK that are in Talbot's book really say a lot.

Hoover essentially says, Your brother has been shot.

Calls back about 20 minutes later, Your brother is dead.

About ten days later he ripped out Bobby's personal line into his office.

The Kennedys did two things that Hoover did not wish to do: 1.) Go after the Mob, and 2.)Back the civil rights movement.

Recall what Bobby said about Hoover's communist threat?  If you took out all the FBI undercover agents, there would not be any communist party.

[Benjamin Cole]

1 hour ago, Cliff Varnell said:

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?

Max Holland? Max Holland? 

Each to his own. I doubt the State Department had much influence on the JFKA investigation, but the CIA was instrumental.

Just IMHO. 

 

[Benjamin Cole]

4 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

 

Jim,

Yes, it was wrong to give Oswald unconditional blame to Oswald.

So why did Katzenbach do such a terrible thing?

 

SL:

"So why did Katzenbach do such a terrible thing?"---SL. 

That is, ID LHO as the leftie, loner, loser and sole assassin? Before a trial or real investigation? 

Why? To close off a true, diligent investigation into LHO true connections---to US intel services, likely the ONI and CIA, and Cuban exiles. 

You think the CIA wanted the story out that several CIA assets murdered JFK? 

Being the most charitable I can be, I would say Katzenbach was duped by the Kostikov-LHO tale, and thought, "You know, if we investigate LHO's connections..that leads to WW III." 

So, he closes off a real JFKA investigation. He is acting AG, de facto. LBJ closes off the investigation also. 

Remember, Katzenbach admits he thought Dulles should be on the WC. 

Then, in 1965, McCone recommends Katzenbach become the next CIA director. Really. Why? 

 

 

[Cliff Varnell]

1 hour ago, Benjamin Cole said:

Max Holland? Max Holland? 

 

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> 

1 hour ago, Benjamin Cole said:

Each to his own. I doubt the State Department had much influence on the JFKA investigation, but the CIA was instrumental.

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.

[Benjamin Cole]

7 minutes ago, Cliff Varnell said:

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.

Max Holland? Max Holland? (Jackie Gleason voice, from the Honeymooners, on second or third repetition), "Max Holland?" 

[Benjamin Cole]

Add on:

In the near-immediate aftermath of the JFKA, RFK1 asks CIA Director McCone, "Did your guys do this?" 

But de facto Acting AG Katzenbach says, within 48 hours of the JFKA: "LHO was guilty, and him alone." 

Really? That holds water? 

Then McCone recommends Katzenbach to be CIA director in 1965. 

Really? 

You think there might be some ties between Katzenbach and the CIA?

And that after Katzenbach supports Dulles being on the WC, itself a Katzenbach idea? 

Maybe something was going on between Katzenbach and the CIA. Maybe. 

 

[Sandy Larsen]

1 hour ago, James DiEugenio said:

Well Sandy how good does that make RFK look then?

Within about 48 hours he had fingered a CIA/Cuban exile/Mafia plot.

And in a week, he is sending a message to Moscow saying that he knows this is a large domestic conspiracy.  And that detente will now be put on hold.

 

Are you telling me that as an FYI? Or are you making an argument against something I said?

 

[Sandy Larsen]

1 hour ago, Cliff Varnell said:

Bundy called AF1 to inform Johnson there was no evidence of conspiracy.  It didn’t start with Hoover.

 

Did Bundy get it from Harriman?

 

[Sandy Larsen]

36 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said:

5 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Jim, .... So why did Katzenbach do such a terrible thing?

36 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said:

Why? To close off a true, diligent investigation into LHO true connections---to US intel services, likely the ONI and CIA, and Cuban exiles. 

You think the CIA wanted the story out that several CIA assets murdered JFK?

 

Ben,

Yes, I know the answer to my question. I was asking Jim what he thought because I couldn't understand why he thought Katzenbach was such a terrible person given what he did with his memo.