C.A.A. Savastano's Blog, page 21

Evidence and the Big Easy II

                                                                                                                          A 1963 view of Canal Street in New Orleans, Louisiana 

The City of New Orleans is attributed a unique place in the Kennedy assassination case. Divergent historical claims rest amid the city's swirling convoluted history. New Orleans housed various federal, state, and local offices that had many connections to locally operating Cuban exiles. The Directorio Revolucionario Estudiantil (DRE) is just one of multiple exile groups the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) supported with tens of thousands of dollars monthly. Such organizations had dozens of members that performed covert and often illegal programs nationally. 

New Orleans was the site of CIA activities, housed FBI offices and their network of informants, and was part of Mafia boss Carlos Marcello's territory. Add to this menagerie of schemes the city's most historically accused former citizen, Lee Harvey Oswald. People with questionable motivations such as Jack Martin and David Lewis were among the denizens of New Orleans. Often such figures would have faded into history. Unfortunately, they and subsequently others have attempted to build unproven assertions concerning the Kennedy case. 

Just days following President Kennedy's assassination, Jack Martin launched a series of accusations toward Garrison suspect David Ferrie. Martin wrote a series of unsubstantial claims asserted to be "important facts" in a letter to Special Agent Richard E. Robey of the Federal Aviation Agency. He correctly remembered Oswald in a Civil Air Patrol squadron that Ferrie participated in, and recalls seeing a photograph of Oswald and Ferrie. Yet he asserts "Ferrie was getting mail from those Cuban people Oswald was connected with...at least this is what W. Hardy Davis tell me." Martin's claims reside on secondhand information and rumor. 

"We might also take into consideration that Ferrie was a professional hypnotist...that he used post hypnotic suggestion on his so-called candidates...when he advertised himself as "Ph.D." Martin's implication was that Ferrie somehow hypnotized Oswald to undertake the plot. Indeed Ferrie had misrepresented alleged credentials; his "doctoral degree" emerged from an unaccredited correspondence school in Europe.  However, Martin had misrepresented Ferrie's abilities and improbable hypnotic power.i ii    

Martin continues asserting, "Was not this the person (Oswald) that Ferrie helped to get in the Marine Corps...Ferrie's connection with the Cubans...Suffice it to say I am also told Ferrie had been in and out of town on several occasions just prior to this Kennedy business...Where was he..." David Ferrie was in New Orleans with Mafia leader Carlos Marcello's legal defense team. This is according to a statement voluntarily given November 25, 1963 to New Orleans Police. Ferrie offered a "detailed account" of his location prior and on November 22, 1963.iii Officials state having investigated and verified Ferrie's location in multiple instances. 

Another improbable claim attributed to Jack Martin and subsequently others was alleging that David Ferrie's library card was in Lee Harvey Oswald's possession. Some declare the card was a definitive link between Oswald and Ferrie. Subsequently, others have claimed they were in possession of the card or destroyed it. Yet the evidence supports none of these later evolving claims. 

The Federal Bureau of Investigation visited David Ferrie November 27, 1963. The Bureau's agents questioned Ferrie on his public criticisms of President Kennedy, including that he may have off-handedly commented Kennedy should be "shot". Ferrie also prior commented the President should not travel in an open car to prevent others from shooting him. Ferrie stated "he had never loaned his library card to Lee Harvey Oswald or any other person at any time and that his library card to the best of his recollection had not be out of his possession since it was issued to him." 

Ferrie presented his library card for verification to Agents Wall and Viater.iv Eventually Jack Martin informed authorities "he had no specific information to support his allegations."v Officials determined after investigation that Jack Martin's likely motivation was a prior grudge against David Ferrie. Martin allegedly impersonated an FBI Special Agent and spent time in a psychiatric ward. Martin suffered from a character disorder and was advised not meet with investigating agents due to possible worsening of his mental health.vi  

January 13, 1967 Jack Martin informed the Bureau's New Orleans office to inform them Jim Garrison "was conducting an investigation concerning the Lee Harvey Oswald case." Weeks later Martin called the FBI again demanding, "...that the FBI stop the New Orleans District Attorney's Office from 'harassing him'." Martin's speculative ire had feasibly shifted to a new target.  

Additionally noted by officials were the unlikely stories involving Martin's former roommate David Lewis. Jack Martin claimed, "...that Lewis was acquainted with Lee Harvey Oswald and was involved in the assassination plot with Oswald." Martin "Alleged that this conspiracy originated in the rooms above the offices of Mr. Guy Banister in New Orleans, Louisiana."vii  This assertion document predates the Shaw trial by years and is just months after Garrison had begun quietly building his case. Unfortunately, some of Jack Martin's unproven allegations became part of Garrison's case. Jack Martin was just one of many unverified sources attempting to influence the Garrison investigation.viii Others believing enough time had passed to conceal the origin of these poorly contrived ideas have attempted to present them as "new" insights.

David Lewis was interview by the New Orleans District Attorney's office and he told Jim Garrison "...that he had met Lee Harvey Oswald in the office of Mr. Banister." Lewis similar to some offering improbable stories claimed, "...his life is in jeopardy" due to the information he shared with the District Attorney Garrison's office. This often-repeated allegation too relies upon no verifiable evidence.ix Unknown to Lewis and others were prior official inquiries into his unproven claims. 

Among these was a letter from Mr. George Clark Johnston to the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Johnston was another former roommate of David Lewis who lived with Lewis during the period of President Kennedy's assassination. George observed a television show with Lewis "making numerous comments concerning the assassination..." and decided to contact the FBI. Johnston lived "...with David Lewis in Apartment C, 1047 Conti Street, New Orleans, Louisiana, at the time of the assassination of the late President Kennedy. Johnston added that at the time he was a close confidant of Lewis. According to Johnston, at no time during the period of the assassination did Lewis ever indicate to Johnston that he had any knowledge of the assassination of President Kennedy."Quite telling is no mention of a connection until Lewis and Martin presume to benefit from the allusion. 

Mr. Bob Guzman a former private investigator in Guy Banister's office informed the Bureau he too was "acquainted with David Lewis". Guzman described him as the "protégé of Jack Martin" and that Martin had promoted Lewis for Banister's use. Guzman characterized Lewis as "uneducated and completely incompetent." Guzman states Lewis was "detective-happy" and recalled one occasion when Lewis spent most of his paycheck on a new shoulder holster. "According to Mr. Guzman, Lewis then purchased a plastic pistol" from a local department store and brandished "the holster and plastic gun around town."

A confidential Bureau source of prior reliable information offered, "David Lewis is attempting in every way possible to make money out of his role in Garrison's investigation and is trying without success to sell his story to various news media for $1,000. Our source stated that he thinks Lewis should be locked up inasmuch he appears to be a dangerous mental case." Lewis received significant media publicity for his claims and likely inspired other feasible myths to emerge as well.  

The unproven claims of Martin and Lewis have misled some people and others have adopted them support improbable stories. Primary evidence displays the feeble nature of the assertions. Substantial verifiable problems reduce these mere rumors to proper form. They like some official and independent beliefs rely upon desire not verifiable facts.  

Sincerely,
C. A. A. Savastano  

TPAAK Facebook

References:

i. House Select Committee on Assassinations, Segregated Central Intelligence Agency files, Folder D, Garrison-DRE, Garrison Investigation Volume II, November 25, 1963   

ii. HSCA Report, Appendix X, Section XII, David Ferrie, p. 106

iii. HSCA Report, David Ferrie, p. 105

iv. Ibid, pp. 105-106

v. Federal Bureau of Investigation, Shaw/Allen FOIA cases, David William Ferrie-New Orleans Field Office, part 1, November 27, 1963 pp. 1-2

vi. HSCA, Segregated CIA files, Microfilm Reel 25, Folder D- Garrison Investigation Vol. II, February 21, 1967  

vii. Ibid

viii. Ibid

ix. Ibid

Primary Evidence Collections update

A manuscript regarding Lee Harvey Oswald by his associate George de Mohrenschildt entitled "I Am A Patsy" for your inspection. #JFK  http://tpaak.com/related-individuals-of-note

Primary Evidence Collection update

A manuscript regarding Lee Harvey Oswald by his associate George de Mohrenschildt entitled "I Am A Patsy" for your inspection. #JFK  http://tpaak.com/related-individuals-of-note

Primary Evidence Collections Update

Inspecting the CIA's 201 Records System and internal policies for navigating official intelligence files. #CIA #Evidence http://tpaak.com/the-201-system

Cuban Relations

                                                                                                   Cuban Communist Party Headquarters by Marco Zanferrari

In the Central Intelligence Agency files regarding Cuba under the Batista regime, Fidel Castro "manages to get himself involved in many things that do not concern him." "Beginning in 1948, the activities of Fidel Castro came to be of increasing concern to the Central Intelligence Agency and the United States Government (USG)."i  Despite the allegations of some officials, no direct link to Communism was established in Castro's history until after hostilities with the United States. "In fact, Agency support for the peaceful transfer of power from Batista to a democratically elected successor and amnesty for Castro and his followers...was proposed in a memorandum from the Inspector General in November 1957."ii Other methods had greater support in time.

The Agency began with assessing the Castro forces, "At least two agents were successfully placed in PSP ranks (Partido Socialista Popular), and in March 1958, one Agency officer managed to join the Castro forces in the mountains for a period of two weeks and to observe their tactics in combat."iii  Agency officer Alfred Cox suggested officials should undertake private support and diplomacy with the Castro government. "Col. J.C. King...met with William D. Pawley on 18-19 November 1958 to discuss a plan which would have Pawley travel to Cuba to meet with Batista in an attempt to convince him to bow out gracefully." Yet this seemingly peaceful intervention attempted to award the country not to Castro's groups but a more pliable junta. Undoubtedly, Castro would never agree to such arrangements.iv  

Colonel Joseph Caldwell King and the Western Hemisphere (WH) Division utilized the CIA's Havana Station. "What WH hoped to accomplish, presumably, was that they could organize these anti-Batista and anti-Castro dissidents and get them armed in time so that they could prevent Castro from taking over the government if Batista should suddenly resign or decide to flee the country."v "On 31 December 1958, Paramilitary Division reported to WH Division that a Helio Courier was already in place in Key West...a sterile C-54 (airplane) had been requested from Europe; and the Office of Logistics would have an arms load rigged for a drop by 2 January 1959."vi  Officials pursue wholly opposing policies to deal with the Castro regime simultaneously. If discovered these actions could lead to military confrontation or perhaps even similar clandestine revenge.

Fidel Castro's forces then seize control of Cuba."Ambassador Philip W. Bonsal arrived in Havana on February 19, 1959 determined to break the mold of previous U.S. ambassadors...for the next twenty months, Bonsal would work tirelessly to build a constructive relationship with Cuba's new revolutionary government..." Bonsal hoped to build international relations founded upon "mutuality of interest."vii He sought to find common ground and realized the revolution was a virtual assurance, Bonsal pushed for rapprochement with Castro. Strategically it was foolish to make so close an enemy in the same hemisphere. Bonsal hoped Castro received the official "soft-glove" approach. However, some military and intelligence leaders were not supportive of peaceful solutions.

Castro's ever increasing commitment to socialistic change was viewed as a threat to the over a billion dollars in US assets. Castro's revolution gained traction with crimes revealed during Batista's rule. "Hardly a Cuban does not have a relative who was killed during Batista's reign of terror."viii The corrupt dictator executed thousands, all while Batista accepted a fortune in repeated Mafia bribes. Castro prior condemned these actions as tyrannical, yet history often repeats itself.

The Castro regime executed hundreds of these former Batista officials to ensure the revolutions success. This action secured his powerbase and removed potential rivals. American officials decried Castro's purge, Castro labeled the charge a "campaign of lies".ix  Repeated political and internal official agendas intensified, Castro had disastrous conversations with then Vice-President Richard Nixon. During one meeting, Nixon tells Castro to cut off alliance with any Communist leaders or the United States would "cut off economic aid."x   

In November of 1959, General Charles Cabell regarding Fidel Castro's Communist status offered, "Our conclusion, therefore, is that Fidel Castro is not a Communist, however he certainly is not anti-Communist."  "If it should be established that the Cuban government is Communist-led or Communist-dominated, or if that government cannot be swayed from adopting measures which intentionally or unintentionally accomplish Communist objectives, the question of direct attacks against Castro will be re-examined...Under no circumstances would any asset be appraised of this contingency planning. In fact any disposition to undertake violent action should be promptly and emphatically discouraged pending a change in policy at the policy at the policy-making level."xii The Eisenhower administration did not initially embrace a violent overthrow of the Cuban regime. 

In December of 1959, Agency Western Hemisphere Chief Colonel J.C. King sent a memo to Allen Dulles the Director of Central Intelligence. Its "specific objective" is "The overthrow of Castro within one year, and his replacement by a junta friendly to the United States which will call elections 6 months after assumption of office...thorough consideration be given to the elimination of Fidel Castro." Deputy Director for Support L.K. White noted in his diary "There was considerable discussion of the situation in Cuba, and the Director requested Dick Bissell to organize a special task force to insure that we were attacking the situation from all possible angles."xiii  

The Agency Western Hemisphere Division created WH Division Branch 4 (WH/4) "as an expandable task force to run the 'proposed Cuban Operations." Western Hemisphere Branch 4 had "40 persons, with 18 at Headquarters, 20 at Havana Station, and 2 at Santiago Base." Officials appoint former Operation P.B. Success principal Jacob D. Esterline to head the new branch created by J.C. King. However, another version of the story credits Richard Bissell with Esterline's appointment.xiv  By 1960, officials circumvent King in many future decisions related to agents within his division.    

"As 1960 began General Cabell, the Deputy Director of the Central Intelligence, held a joint briefing on Cuba for the Department of State and the Joint Chief of Staff. Cabell "discussed the need for programs aimed at Castro -- psychological warfare, political action, economic action, and para-military (sic) action, all of which had been conducted in some degree during the past year."xv  

"The policy decided on by the US Government in March 1960 called for the displacement of Fidel Castro..." American leaders expand displacement to include Castro's possible assassination. "Because the policy makers feared censure by the United Nations...the myth of 'plausible deniability' was the caveat that determined the CIA would be the principal implementing arm for the anti-Castro effort."xvi "It also makes clear that various US corporate interests played an active (sometimes overactive) role in support of the anti-Castro efforts of the Government."xvii  

Officials produce dozens of failed plots against the Castro regime in the following years. The Mafia, Central Intelligence Agency, and dozens of anti-Castro Cuban groups fail to displace the rogue leader. His tenuous political future without a strong ally forces Castro to rely upon Soviet Communist support. The prior unfounded accusations became a self-fulfilling prophecy. Amid the failed policies, official fears become a reality for the Kennedy administration.

Sincerely,
C.A.A. Savastano

References:

i. Central Intelligence Agency file, Bay of Pigs History Volume 3, Evolution of the CIA's Anti-Castro Policies 1950-January 1961, George Washington University, pp. 1-3, gwu.edu

ii. Ibid, p. 4

iii. Ibid, p. 6

iv. Ibid, pp. 8-10

v. Ibid, pp. 13-14

vi. Ibid

vii. William M. LeoGrande and Peter Kornbluh,  "Back Channel to Cuba: The Hidden History of Negotiations between Washington and Havana", UNC Press Books, October 13, 2014, pp. 10-12

viii. Ibid, p. 12

ix. Ibid, p. 13

x. CIA file, Bay of Pigs History Vol. 3, p. 22, gwu.edu

xi. Ibid, p. 27

xii. Ibid, p. 28

xiii. Ibid, p. 32

xiv. Ibid p. 31

xv. Ibid p. 30

xvi. CIA file, Bay of Pigs History Vol. 3, Foreword pp. I-III

xvii. Ibid, p. 1

Our Appreciation

Our special thanks to Alan Dale, Jefferson Morley, and JFK Facts for mentioning "Two Princes And A King". The book is discussed in their latest episode of JFK Facts Online.  ‪#‎TPAAK‬ ‪#‎JFK‬ http://jfkfacts.org/jfk-facts-online-31-may-2016

Primary Evidence Collections Update

We are pleased to offer a new section of the Primary Evidence Collections, the Improbability Vault. Our first offering is a review of the National Enquirer's claim about Rafael Cruz, evidence, and the JFK case. #JFK #Myth

The Curse of Cock Robin

The tale of Cock Robin emerges from within the history of European folklore. A nursery rhyme mourns a heroic figure felled by an unlikely lone sparrow. Some assert it regards the political demise of an English politician and his government. Others have claimed it was a modern version of the Norse tale of the god Baldur's death at the hands of a blind sibling, and some note a resemblance to a Celtic hero murdered by an improbable assassin. The moniker was quietly affixed to John F. Kennedy in a private meeting of the President's Commission. 

Commissioner John J. McCloy regarded the various evidentiary presumptions of the Federal Bureau of Investigation and remarked, "Yes, 'We (the FBI) know who killed Cock Robin'. That is the point." Commission Lead Counsel Rankin subsequently offers the Bureau has "...decided the case, and we are going to have maybe a thousand further inquiries that we say the Commission has to know all these things before it can pass on this. And I think their reaction probably would be, "Why do you want all that. It is clear." Senator Russell mocks the FBI replying "You have our statement what else do you need?" Commissioner McCloy states, "It isn't only who killed cock robin (sic). Under the terms of reference we have to go beyond that."i   

Increasingly clear is J. Edgar Hoover's commitment to securing his preselected agendas surrounding the assassination. Hoover already had begun two reports blaming Oswald alone within seventy-two hours of the crime.ii His judgment occurred before the Commission existed. Hoover states "...the report on the assassination was practically completed." He alludes everything could be complete by the next week. Each unfortunate claim is highly improbable, and based on less than substantial evidence.iii J. Edgar Hoover began the investigative process by coming to a precipitous conclusion.

One can observe within Hoover's actions a consistent denial of the normal legal process. The FBI's intervention proceeds despite lacking jurisdiction,iv Hoover stance toward the President's Commission becomes adversarial.v After officials released the Commission Report, Hoover gathers derogatory information on every Commissioner.vi Hoover disregarded the legal process when it did not serve his purposes. From the moment of the Commission's establishment, the leader of its investigative force undermined it. Brazen investigative dysfunction mars the entire Commission investigation. 

J. Edgar Hoover fails to mention he canceled the security flash on Lee Harvey Oswald October 9, 1963.vii Yet he sends CIA Deputy Director of Plans Richard Helms files regarding Oswald for his information November 8, 1963.viii Senate investigators determined "Rather than addressing its investigation to all significant circumstances, including all the possibilities of conspiracy, the FBI investigation narrowly focused on Lee Harvey Oswald." "...The committee further concluded that the critical early period of the FBI's investigation was conducted in an atmosphere of considerable haste and pressure from Hoover to conclude the investigation in an unreasonably short period of time."ix In the rush of Hoover's forced investigation mistakes were predictable.
 
"The committee also noted that Hoover's personal predisposition that Oswald had been a lone assassin affected the course of the investigation, adding to the momentum to conclude the investigation after limited consideration of the possible conspiratorial areas. While Hoover continued to press conspiracy leads, his apparent attitude was reflected in a telephone conversation with President Johnson...Hoover said: The thing I am most concerned about...is having something issued so we can convince the public Oswald is the real assassin."x 
 
Hoover not only manipulated the investigation to fit a predetermined conclusion but additionally "...the FBI failed to cooperate fully with the Warren Commission. The Committee found the Bureau's relationship with the Commission to have been distinctly adversarial and that there were limited areas in which the FBI did not provide complete information to the Commission and in other areas in which the Bureau's information was misleading." The Senate Select Committee also notes the Bureau had suppressed and destroyed evidence.xi  

The Bureau investigation was obviously deficient and no reasonable investigation could adjudicate this matter before due legal process. Before the officially acknowledged investigation had begun, the Bureau's leader had already come to a judgment. He sought to supplant many of the President's Commission findings. Conflicts of interest doomed the investigation to failure at worst and incomplete findings at best. Neither serves as conclusive.
  
Was it merely Hoover's ego? Feasibly the Bureau suppressions did not merely serve to protect outside concerns but incompetence and disregarded foreknowledge of Oswald's activities. Within the murky agendas of J. Edgar Hoover, the line between legality and nefarious action is frequently crossed. A landscape of grey programs marked with veins of darker intention. Hoover's legacy is unanswered questions and deceptions offered to the public and eminent officials themselves.

Sincerely,
C. A. A. Savastano

References:

i. President's Commission Executive Session, January 27, 1964, pp. 33-34

ii. Federal Bureau of Investigation memo, J. Edgar Hoover regarding a Presidential Commission discussion with Nicholas Katzenbach, November 25, 1963, Harold Weisberg Archives, jfk.hood.edu
 
iii. FBI memo, J.E.H. regarding a Presidential Commission with N. Katzenbach

iv. FBI Memo, FBI HQ File 62-109060, Author William Manchester appointment and interview with J. Edgar Hoover, June 4, 1964

v. Senate Select Committee to Study Intelligence Activities, Book V: The Investigation of the Assassination of President John F. Kennedy, Performance of Intelligence Agencies, p. 5

vi. Ibid

vii. HSCA, Administration Folder Q-10, Oswald File Xerox, FBI Cable 327 925 D,  October 6, 1964

viii. HSCA, Segregated CIA file, Report on Lee Harvey Oswald about his arrest, affiliation with Fair Pla, Box 7, November 8, 1963  

ix. HSCA Report, Section 3, The FBI performed with varying degrees of competency..., p. 244

x. Ibid

xi. Ibid, pp. 244-245

Primary Evidence Collections Update

Three new documents, the first is an internal paper on the dangers and benefits of counterintelligence by CIA officer Woodbury Carter. The second is a policy document regarding Covert Security Approvals, such as those used in Agency Project QK-Enchant. The third is the Cuban Mug Book and Key Book Volume One, it contains hundreds of pictures and identities of Cuban nationals observed by the Agency for possible operational and security reasons. Each is offered for your inspection. http://tpaak.com/cia-policy-and-reference

The LBJ Myths

Feasibly second only to Lee Harvey Oswald, another person is asserted by some to be responsible for the death of President Kennedy. Some accuse President Lyndon Baines Johnson, based upon similar unproven hypotheses. They claim he is who most benefitted from the President's death; however, that is not true. Others did benefit more; for instance, J. Edgar Hoover received a lifetime appointment to the FBI's directorship from President Johnson. Johnson gained a looming shadow of accusation that has endured over five decades. His troubled one-term presidency is a paltry reward for such claimed actions.

Johnson was the quintessential opportunist, yet that does not attribute guilt to him regarding President Kennedy's assassination unless substantial evidence demonstrates it. Both Johnson and Lee Harvey Oswald enjoy the presumption of legal innocence without a trial. If LBJ had murderous intentions, why not use poisons that could be attributable to Addison's disease? Perhaps using the "accident" scenario instructed by the CIA's "A Study of Assassination"i would offer minimal chance for exposure. The overt manner of President Kennedy's death infers sending a violent message, not a clandestine removal of a public figure with minimum trouble and chance for discovery.

Some have attempted to assign nefarious blame to Johnson for actions influenced and undertaken by different officials. Some blame Johnson for moving President Kennedy's body from Parkland to Bethesda hospital. They refer to the events as both getaway and theft. However, Mrs. Kennedy would not leave without the President's body; this places untenable pressure on the situation. Yet not just Mrs. Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson feasibly rendered this controversial decision. According to Director of Central Intelligence John McCone's private files, he is with Attorney General Robert Kennedy shortly after the President is shot.

McCone had warmed to Kennedy from repeated years spent meeting on the Cuban issue together and their shared Catholic faith. After a long discussion McCone told Kennedy "...that the best thing to do would be to bring the President's body up as quickly as possible, as quickly as it could be released, and that he couldn't possibly get down there for three or four hours, by the time he got aboard a plane and got down there, and he would be out of touch all the time that he was in the air. He (Robert Kennedy) agreed with this, and as a result either decided or agreed with the decision that the body should be brought up with President Johnson and Mrs. Kennedy as quickly as possible."ii While McCone indeed suppressed evidence of Central Intelligence Agency incompetence and illegal programs, this account emerges from his private files. Secured files he had no reason to believe would become public. Nefarious action by Johnson is unproven and the explanation offered by McCone is reasonable. The removal of the body remains illegal, yet the explanation is seemingly not a planned tactic of conspiracy.

Additionally, some attribute the quick swearing in of Johnson again to an unproven nefarious plot he authored. In the files of DCI McCone is a brief discussion of the matter with Robert Kennedy. "He (Robert Kennedy) talked with President Johnson and there was a question of the procedure for swearing in President Johnson...He (Kennedy) contacted his office...to find out exactly who could administer the oath...He insisted that the swearing in be done immediately. I think President Johnson felt the same way. He (Kennedy) did not want the country to go for two hours and a half that President Johnson would be in the air without a President."iii Based on the primary evidence Robert Kennedy's principals, not Lyndon Johnson's power initiated the ceremony in Dallas.

Others claim Johnson attempted to evade the law by forming the President's (Warren) Commission. Yet President Johnson initially desired the Federal Bureau of Investigation to conduct a tidy investigation. However, Nicholas Katzenbach and others at the Department of Justice ultimately may have inspired the Commission's formation against Johnson and Hoover's will.iv Stories leaked to the press further raised the political stakes prompting the Commission's formation. The Commission was not Johnson's idea, but eventually forced upon him despite his want for a Bureau led investigation. The Commission investigation was deeply flawed, but not the mindless Johnson inspired construct some declare.   

Asserted to be among President Johnson's political manipulations is the appointment of Allen Dulles to the President's Commission. Primary evidence instead reveals "Abe [Fortas] has talked with Katzenbach and Katzenbach with the Attorney General (Robert Kennedy). They recommend a seven man commission- two Senators, two Congressman, the Chief Justice, Allen Dulles, and a retired military man..."v Katzenbach told the Select Committee "I doubted that anybody in the Government, Mr. Hoover, or the FBI or myself or the President or anyone else, could satisfy a lot of foreign opinion that all the facts were being revealed and that the investigation would be complete and conclusive and without any loose ends." A variety of uninspected evidence, witnesses, and suspects were the Commission's historical legacy. Many of its findings underwent revision multiple times by various official investigations.

While some have attempted to label Johnson a conspiracy mastermind, these passionate claims rely on no substantial evidence. If Johnson were the author of a murderous conspiracy, he would not challenge the official findings that did not implicate him. He would allow the imperfect actions of officials to suffice without question. Yet that is not what he did.

In private conversations, he disbelieved the Single Bullet Theory, noted possible Agency involvement in a conspiracy, and worried about a shot intended for him.vi vii viii These conversations are not indicative of guilt. Johnson's actions rather infer he was not involved and privately feared possible conspiracies targeting him as well. Akin to McCone, Johnson was unaware the public would learn of his statements.

DCI McCone noted Johnson is "very much concerned over the full-page ads run by anti-Kennedy types just prior to and on the day of the Kennedy visit to Dallas. He is likewise concerned over the flood of letters being sent to Dallas newspapers that the President's assassination was a good thing. DCI asked Dick Helms to see what information we can develop to explain this." If Johnson were responsible why continue to have officials pursue these matters? Johnson seemed find official answers incomplete and privately remained fearful and disturbed.       

The historical findings of multiple scholars and researchers attribute dishonesty, greed, and malice among Johnson's flaws. He was boorish, loud, not averse to violence, and known to burn political bridges easier crossed with diplomacy. Yet the evidence regarding President Kennedy assassination does not indicate the involvement of Lyndon Johnson presently. Shall those who propagated the former LBJ myths be as committed to seeing them dispelled? I have my doubts.

Sincerely,
C. A. A. Savastano

References:

i. CIA Guatemala 1954 Documents, “A Study of Assassination” and transcript, National Security Archive Electronic Briefing Book No. 4, George Washington University, georgewashington.edu

ii. Central Intelligence Agency, Miscellaneous Files, DCI Files, 1964, pp. 5-6

iii. Ibid, pp. 4-5

iv. Federal Bureau of Investigation file, J. Edgar Hoover regarding Katzenbach call, Hood University, Harold Weisberg Archives (HWA), November 25, 1963, pp. 1-3

v. Hearings of the House Select Committee on Assassinations, Appendix Volume XI, The Warren Commission, March, 1979, p. 6

vi. Wilkes, Donald E. Jr., “JFK Killer Not Alone, UGA Professor Says”, (1994), Popular Media, Paper 117, University of Georgia Law, digitalcommons.law.uga

vii. Federal Bureau of Investigation Memorandum, Letter from Cartha DeLoach to Clyde Tolson, HWA, April 4, 1967

viii. Phone Conversation between FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover and President Lyndon Johnson in the Whitehouse, (n.d.) , History Matters, history-matters.com, November, 1963