Touring the Tippit Scene

[Alan Ford]

Redlich is seldom mentioned by the conspiracy believers - those who think the WC was a coverup - because it makes no sense that someone with his strong civil libertarian/liberal beliefs would coverup for essentially a rightwing coup of the country. For crissakes, the man took on Joe McCarthy. He's not going to go along with something like a military overthrow of the government.

Hoover wanted him off the Warren Commission because he, Redlich, has worked with leftwing groups in the 1950s and 60s, particularly (as you cited from the obituary) the "National Emergency Civil Liberties Committee. In fact, the FBI had a thick file on Redlich that accused him of being associated with "subversives." The FBI viewed the committee as a "communist-front" organization.

Gerald Ford was informed of Redlich's ties to these leftists groups and raised the question of whether it was appropriate to have him on the Commission. Warren defended Redlich and the commission agreed to let him continue his role.

Redlich was in charge of a sort of "clearinghouse" for all of the information that the WC received. It all went through him; he read it all, kept up on it all. He was working 18+ hours a day, even on weekends, and was probably THE most important member of the staff. As I said above, he wrote the first six chapters of the Report, the one detailing the actual assassination.

So again: if someone believes the Warren Commission Report was a lie, a fraud, a coverup of the assassination then it's impossible to believe that Redlich wasn't the key person in pulling off this act. He was in the very center of the investigation. All of it ran through him.

Just pasting this in from the other thread, Mr Galbraith, as you evidently missed it 

From patspeer.com:

Let's slip back in time to March, 1964. The Warren Commission's staff has been discussing whether or not they should pre-interview witnesses and avoid problematic questions and answers...in order to keep the record "clean." Some, including Norman Redlich, have argued the creation of a "deceptively clean" record would be a disservice to the public. But, after hearing from a few problematic witnesses on 3-10 (e.g. Arnold Rowland, James Worrell) Chief Justice Earl Warren had planted his foot, and said he wanted a "clean record" where the staff "did not pursue in very much detail the various inconsistencies," and that, accordingly, any counsel wanting to pre-interview witnesses off the record should feel free to do so.

[Zeon Mason]

Bill’s method of walking arse backwards while retracing the supposed route of Oswald, is INGENIUS!!

[Walt Cakebread]

Whew.  If Hoover had the goods on JFK, wouldn't it be a lot easier to force him to resign than stage an elaborate and risky conspiracy to assassinate the President of the United States?  What an interesting fantasy world you must live in to contemplate this type of fantasy.  And, of course, if anyone truly believed the FBI was behind the murder of the President, they might be reluctant to say so on a public forum for fear of the FBI death squad.  So Walt doesn't really believe his own nonsense.

What world do you live in.....De Nile?   It's common knowledge that Hoover knew about JFK and M. Monroe, And Judith Campbell...and had incriminating photos to blackmail....

And, of course, if anyone truly believed the FBI was behind the murder of the President, they might be reluctant to say so on a public forum for fear of the FBI death squad.

This absurd statement is utterly ridiculous!!   Clearly you believe that the FBI has a "death squad" and you are so stupid that you believe they would need to murder a nobody citizen when they have been successfully discrediting us nobody's for five decades...

[Richard Smith]

What world do you live in.....De Nile?   It's common knowledge that Hoover knew about JFK and M. Monroe, And Judith Campbell...and had incriminating photos to blackmail....

And, of course, if anyone truly believed the FBI was behind the murder of the President, they might be reluctant to say so on a public forum for fear of the FBI death squad.

This absurd statement is utterly ridiculous!!   Clearly you believe that the FBI has a "death squad" and you are so stupid that you believe they would need to murder a nobody citizen when they have been successfully discrediting us nobody's for five decades...

Good grief.  You can't even understand the obvious point?  Let's try again.  If Hoover had the goods to blackmail and/or control JFK as you suggest (and is likely true given JFK's dubious behavior with women and drugs) why would Hoover engage in a high risk conspiracy to assassinate him rather than force him to resign or do whatever it was that Hoover wanted?  Can you understand that simple point?  You are suggesting that Hoover was involved in the assassination of the President of the United States when he could have coerced him into doing whatever he wanted.   

[Steve M. Galbraith]

There is no evidence presented - none - that Hoover had a "blackmail" file on Redlich. There is no evidence presented that Redlich was blackmailed. There is no evidence presented that he did things that he could be blackmailed for. Where is the evidence? Present it.

Redlich did not write just a "portion" of the report. He wrote the first six chapters, he was the main author for the rest of the report. The information that was compiled by the other staffers and others all went through him (see the Epstein book "Inquest" and the Shenon book "A Cruel and Shocking Act" for details). He was at the center of the report. He was THE main person involved. If you believe the WR was a deliberate, willful lie then you have to believe that Redlich was the main creator of this lie. How can he not be; he was at the very center of the investigation.

Redlich was openly critical of Hoover, of the "Red Scare", of McCarthyism. Why didn't Hoover blackmail him into silence?

There is no evidence for any of these blackmail claims. Redlich died forty years after the assassination. He had numerous opportunities to reveal this so-called coverup, to expose what conspiracy people think happened. There would have been no upheaval since all of the people allegedly involved - LBJ, Hoover - were long dead.

[Martin Weidmann]

Good grief.  You can't even understand the obvious point?  Let's try again.  If Hoover had the goods to blackmail and/or control JFK as you suggest (and is likely true given JFK's dubious behavior with women and drugs) why would Hoover engage in a high risk conspiracy to assassinate him rather than force him to resign or do whatever it was that Hoover wanted?  Can you understand that simple point?  You are suggesting that Hoover was involved in the assassination of the President of the United States when he could have coerced him into doing whatever he wanted.

And you are suggesting that Hoover wasn't involved in the assassination of the President of the United States because he could have coerced him into doing whatever he wanted.

Both suggestions are pure speculation for which not a shred of evidence exists. Neither Walt, nor you, knows what Hoover had on Kennedy, if he had anything at all, and if it would have been enough to remove his from the Presidency.

This entire argument is a complete waste of time.

[Martin Weidmann]

There is no evidence presented - none - that Hoover had a "blackmail" file on Redlich. There is no evidence presented that Redlich was blackmailed. There is no evidence presented that he did things that he could be blackmailed for. Where is the evidence? Present it.

Redlich did not write just a "portion" of the report. He wrote the first six chapters, he was the main author for the rest of the report. The information that was compiled by the other staffers and others all went through him (see the Epstein book "Inquest" and the Shenon book "A Cruel and Shocking Act" for details). He was at the center of the report. He was THE main person involved. If you believe the WR was a deliberate, willful lie then you have to believe that Redlich was the main creator of this lie. How can he not be; he was at the very center of the investigation.

Redlich was openly critical of Hoover, of the "Red Scare", of McCarthyism. Why didn't Hoover blackmail him into silence?

There is no evidence for any of these blackmail claims. Redlich died forty years after the assassination. He had numerous opportunities to reveal this so-called coverup, to expose what conspiracy people think happened. There would have been no upheaval since all of the people allegedly involved - LBJ, Hoover - were long dead.

There is no evidence presented - none - that Hoover had a "blackmail" file on Redlich. There is no evidence presented that Redlich was blackmailed. There is no evidence presented that he did things that he could be blackmailed for. Where is the evidence? Present it.

And there is no evidence presented (only your speculation) that Hoover, or anybody else, needed to blackmail Redlich.

He was at the center of the report. He was THE main person involved. If you believe the WR was a deliberate, willful lie then you have to believe that Redlich was the main creator of this lie.

BS, he could have been the executor of the lie, without actually knowing it and while acting in good faith. You keep on ignoring the "garbage in, garbage out" principle.

He had numerous opportunities to reveal this so-called coverup

If - and that's a massive "if" - he even knew or understood it had been a coverup,

Let's see if you get this through your skull; every wrongful conviction is based on false, manipulated or misrepresented evidence, yet highly educated people like judges and prosecutors are frequently, and most often unknowingly, fooled by the evidence presented to them to such an extent that they end up sending an innocent person to jail or the chair.

So, don't even try to suggest that something like that couldn't possibly have happened to Redlich.

[Richard Smith]

And you are suggesting that Hoover wasn't involved in the assassination of the President of the United States because he could have coerced him into doing whatever he wanted.

Both suggestions are pure speculation for which a shred of evidence exists. Neither Walt, nor you, knows what Hoover had on Kennedy, if he had anything at all, and if it would have been enough to remove his from the Presidency.

This entire argument is a complete waste of time.

It's Walt's claim that Hoover was involved in a conspiracy to assassinate the President of the United States and frame Oswald for the crime.  I agree that is baseless.  I was just pointing out the logical fallacy of his narrative that Hoover was an all powerful figure capable of blackmail while suggesting that he had to resort to murder in the case of JFK.  There were ample grounds to blackmail JFK based on his extramarital affairs, drug use, and serious medical issues that he lied about while running for president.  Those are documented facts and provide the basis for blackmail.  On at least one occasion, Hoover did confront JFK with information concerning the mob connections of one of his girlfriends.  There is no speculation that Hoover maintained such information on various presidents including JFK.  What is a waste of time is your constant contrarian input that adds nothing except to suggest no fact in human history could ever be proven to your satisfaction.