Was Joe Molina the “known subversive” that Oswald met before JFK assassination?

[Steve Thomas]

It would be interesting to correlate the timing of Oswald's alleged meeting with two subversive 15 days prior to the assassination, and Oswald's unsuccessful visit to the FBI office to see Hosty.

The closest I've come is that Oswald went to see Hosty "one or two weeks" before the assassination.

https://maryferrell.org/pages/Destruction_of_the_Oswald_Note.html

If Oswald met with subversives 15 days prior to the assassination, and then tried to see Hosty 14 days prior, was he trying to pass something along?

Also, it would be interesting to correlate the timing of Oswald's alleged meeting with subversives, and the sighting of him going and out of the house at 3126 Harlandale.

Steve Thomas

  

[Jonathan Cohen]

5 hours ago, Larry Hancock said:

There is reason to think he was prepared to provide information to the FBI when it suited him, as it did in New Orleans, and that there was an FBI file on him there - as a source. Not as informant, which is a very different thing.

Exactly, Larry. These are two very different things.

[Tony Krome]

6 hours ago, Jonathan Cohen said:

There's zero hard evidence to support this, and a ton of it favoring the exact opposite conclusion.

What's your take on the people, that Marguerite Oswald worked for in September 1962, divulging to a reporter, that Marguerite told them, at the time, that Lee was involved in "anti-subversive" activities?

So this statement by Marguerite to her employers was over a year before the assassination.

September 1962 would be one month after the FBI sat with Lee in their car for 2 hours outside Mercedes.

[Matt Allison]

Someone posted in another thread a video of all the conversations Curry had in the hallway with reporters the weekend of the assassination; recall Curry saying that the FBI was "aware of this man", and then him later having to quickly backtrack and overexplain about how great the FBI was. Clearly Hoover was extremely sensitive to any potentially embarrassing links to LHO, and therefore any such situation has to be viewed through that lens.

[Jonathan Cohen]

10 hours ago, Tony Krome said:

What's your take on the people, that Marguerite Oswald worked for in September 1962, divulging to a reporter, that Marguerite told them, at the time, that Lee was involved in "anti-subversive" activities?

So this statement by Marguerite to her employers was over a year before the assassination.

September 1962 would be one month after the FBI sat with Lee in their car for 2 hours outside Mercedes.

My take is that Marguerite was a known li*r and embellisher, and as such anything she may have said to other people has to be taken with an enormous grain of salt. Have ANY of her tall tales ever proven to be true?

[Tony Krome]

2 hours ago, Jonathan Cohen said:

My take is that Marguerite was a known li*r and embellisher

That is something I'm not aware of. Which people came forward, prior to the assassination, exposed Marguerite as a person that you've described above?

[Jonathan Cohen]

37 minutes ago, Tony Krome said:

That is something I'm not aware of. Which people came forward, prior to the assassination, exposed Marguerite as a person that you've described above?

What do you mean, prior to the assassination? In what capacity could that have possibly happened? A co-worker proactively going to the authorities to do ... what, exactly? I was referring to her numerous embellishments and outright lies in the 15-plus years that she lived following the murder.

[Jonathan Cohen]

Tony, further to this line of discussion ... I am almost certain that Oswald, by choice, barely saw or communicated with Marguerite upon his return to Texas. So, even under the best of circumstances, she would not be in any position to comment with accuracy on what was going on in his life at that time.

[Tony Krome]

1 hour ago, Jonathan Cohen said:

What do you mean, prior to the assassination? 

Meaning who labelled Marguerite as a person, that was known to "li* and embellish", that knew her?

I'm referring to a statement she made in 1962. You are implying that what she said at that time was fabricated. So I'm interested in anything that indicates that she was of the type you described before the assassination.

[Tony Krome]

2 hours ago, Jonathan Cohen said:

I am almost certain that Oswald, by choice, barely saw or communicated with Marguerite upon his return to Texas.

Mr. RANKIN. You did move to be with your mother-in-law, lived with her for a time?

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes, about 3 weeks. 

[Gerry Down]

22 hours ago, Larry Hancock said:

We know that Oswald volunteered information to the FBI in New Orleans, he had also volunteered to report any foreign or subversive approaches made to him to the FBI when he was first interviewed after his return from Russia.  There is reason to think he was prepared to provide information to the FBI when it suited him, as it did in New Orleans, and that there was an FBI file on him there - as a source. 

Not as informant, which is a very different thing, but as a source.  Beyond that he could have been pursued as either a potential security informant (PSI) or as a potential criminal informant (PCI as Ruby was at one point for the FBI). For Oswald the more likely choice would be PSI since PCI would apply only if it appeared he might be in or get into a  position to ultimately provide inside information to a federal crime being investigated by the Bureau and function as a witness to it in a prosecution.

I base my belief that Oswald was some type of informant (PSI probably) in New Orleans mainly off the Orest Pena sighting whereby he saw Oswald in the company of DeBrueys and some customs officers. That to me would elevate Oswald above the level of a source and into at least a PSI (Potential Security Informant).

21 hours ago, Larry Hancock said:

We know that FBI offices did document incidents in which individuals volunteered to be both sources and informants (Stu Wexler and I documented that in our MLK assassination research).  We know that offices maintained lists of individuals considered as potential PCI's and of course we know they maintained files on those that were PCI's.  However those files were all local office working files so they would not necessarily show up at SOG/FBI HQ.  Sometimes they were shared with another field office (perhaps to prevent poaching?, sometimes not).

So what you're saying is that all of the above were local office working files, including documented incidents in which individuals volunteered to be both sources and informants? Is that correct? So if Oswald had approached DeBrueys and offered to be a source or informant, this would be documented but possibly only within the New Orleans FBI field office. And such documentation may never have left the New Orleans FBI field office. This would mean that Hosty and FBI HQ may never have been informed of it. 

[Jonathan Cohen]

38 minutes ago, Tony Krome said:

Mr. RANKIN. You did move to be with your mother-in-law, lived with her for a time?

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes, about 3 weeks. 

Yes. And then he barely had any contact with her from then until the day he died.

[Jonathan Cohen]

1 hour ago, Tony Krome said:

Meaning who labelled Marguerite as a person, that was known to "li* and embellish", that knew her?

I'm referring to a statement she made in 1962. You are implying that what she said at that time was fabricated. So I'm interested in anything that indicates that she was of the type you described before the assassination.

I'm not implying that. The point I am trying to make is that BEFORE and AFTER the assassination, she was known to embellish things and/or lie, particularly when they involved Lee (ie., her numerous misconceptions about Oswald's time in Russia being connected to some government spy work).

[Tony Krome]

1 hour ago, Jonathan Cohen said:

I'm not implying that. The point I am trying to make is that BEFORE and AFTER the assassination, she was known to embellish things and/or lie, particularly when they involved Lee (ie., her numerous misconceptions about Oswald's time in Russia being connected to some government spy work).

I think I understand you now. Marguerite in 1962 used the word "subversive" in relation to Oswald, but that was an embellishment.

Moving to post assassination, Patterson used the word "subversive" in relation to Oswald, and a reporter used the word "subversive" when asking Curry about Oswald's background.

Even though Marguerite used the same word, that was used a year later, that was purely coincidental. 

[Jonathan Cohen]

5 hours ago, Tony Krome said:

I think I understand you now. Marguerite in 1962 used the word "subversive" in relation to Oswald, but that was an embellishment.

Moving to post assassination, Patterson used the word "subversive" in relation to Oswald, and a reporter used the word "subversive" when asking Curry about Oswald's background.

Even though Marguerite used the same word, that was used a year later, that was purely coincidental. 

Yes. Its usage in all of those scenarios was coincidental.