Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members

Author Topic: A hole in Bledsoe's story?  (Read 6448 times)

Offline John Mytton

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4604
Re: A hole in Bledsoe's story?
« Reply #184 on: March 22, 2025, 02:03:43 PM »
Advertisement

Only the FBI could muster the resources and manpower to do this work within an acceptable time frame. We had no other comparable pool of trained and experienced investigators in the United States. If the FBI and other federal agencies were barred from assisting the commission, candidates would have to come primarily from state and local police departments, with no assurance of their quality or independence.

Do you read what you post?

Did you read the entire post?

What we did was to use them as a base, and then the staff and the Commission took off from there and handled individually the inquiries, the questions, and any leads that came to the Commission or to the staff.

BTW I can understand why Charles is avoiding you, and this above is a perfect example, you keep isolating passages and then apply conspiracy logic without considering the surrounding context.

JohnM

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: A hole in Bledsoe's story?
« Reply #184 on: March 22, 2025, 02:03:43 PM »


Offline Michael Capasse

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 369
Re: A hole in Bledsoe's story?
« Reply #185 on: March 22, 2025, 02:06:28 PM »
Did you read the entire post?

What we did was to use them as a base, and then the staff and the Commission took off from there and handled individually the inquiries, the questions, and any leads that came to the Commission or to the staff.

BTW I can understand why Charles is avoiding you, and this above is a perfect example, you keep isolating passages and then apply conspiracy logic without considering the surrounding context.

JohnM

The quote above re enforces the fact that the WC had to rely on the FBI for all its evidence.
What witness or evidence went into the report without the preset of the FBI?
« Last Edit: March 22, 2025, 02:07:35 PM by Michael Capasse »

Offline John Mytton

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4604
Re: A hole in Bledsoe's story?
« Reply #186 on: March 22, 2025, 02:08:40 PM »
The quote above re enforces the fact that the WC had to rely on the FBI for all its evidence.
What witness or evidence went into the report without the preset of the FBI?

From the first, the Commission considered its mandate to conduct a thorough and independent investigation. The Commission reviewed reports by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Secret Service, Department of State, and the Attorney General of Texas, and then requested additional information from federal agencies, Congressional committees, and state and local experts. The Commission held hearings and took the testimony of 552 witnesses. On several occasions, the Commission went to Dallas to visit the scene of the assassination and other places.
https://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/warren-commission-report/intro

JohnM

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: A hole in Bledsoe's story?
« Reply #186 on: March 22, 2025, 02:08:40 PM »


Offline Michael Capasse

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 369
Re: A hole in Bledsoe's story?
« Reply #187 on: March 22, 2025, 02:22:10 PM »
From the first, the Commission considered its mandate to conduct a thorough and independent investigation. The Commission reviewed reports by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Secret Service, Department of State, and the Attorney General of Texas, and then requested additional information from federal agencies, Congressional committees, and state and local experts. The Commission held hearings and took the testimony of 552 witnesses. On several occasions, the Commission went to Dallas to visit the scene of the assassination and other places.
https://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/warren-commission-report/intro

JohnM

I'm not denying any of that.
One correction on above - A few members of the WC went to Dallas ONE time in June '64. There were not several occasions.
Most witnesses were a deposition taken at the local court house or Post Office by a Commission attorney and reporter.
All evidence requests went thru the FBI. AND monthly FBI reports would be guiding the Commission in the progess of the narrative.

So>>>>What witness or piece of evidence went in to the Report without that preset from the FBI?
« Last Edit: March 22, 2025, 02:27:43 PM by Michael Capasse »

Online Charles Collins

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4038
Re: A hole in Bledsoe's story?
« Reply #188 on: March 22, 2025, 03:47:07 PM »
Some more from “History Will Prove Us Right” by Howard Willens, page 100:

Because Rankin had required that all investigative requests be reviewed by me before going to him for approval, I had more dealings than others on the staff with James Malley, the FBI inspector who was our official liaison with the bureau. There were approximately three hundred such investigative requests, most to the FBI. On occasion, Malley discussed a particular request with Rankin or me (or other lawyers) and suggested ways to rephrase or break it down into more limited requests. We almost always agreed to make these suggested changes. If the responsible lawyer and Malley could not agree, Rankin would resolve the issue. Malley described his relationship with the commission as businesslike, and I agree with that. He knew that I worked for the Justice Department and had access to high officials there. I knew that he had superiors at FBI headquarters who insisted that he keep them fully informed about the commission.

The commission’s lawyers weren’t hesitant about questioning the FBI’s work. They understood that they had been appointed from the private sector in large measure to ensure their independence in conducting a thorough investigation. In fact, they relished proving FBI conclusions wrong. Most of our lawyers focused on finding flaws in the FBI conclusion that there were no conspiracies involving Oswald or Ruby. Many likely thought that someone (or some organization) more able and intelligent than Oswald and Ruby might have had a hand in this national tragedy and that this possibility had to be fully investigated. The team worked hard to examine every possible angle from which a conspiracy might have arisen. Conspiracies are almost always eventually revealed. No one on the staff wanted to go down in history as among those who failed to uncover the conspiracy that had taken a president’s life. None of us regarded the FBI denial of conspiracies involving Oswald or Ruby as established fact.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: A hole in Bledsoe's story?
« Reply #188 on: March 22, 2025, 03:47:07 PM »


Offline Michael Capasse

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 369
Re: A hole in Bledsoe's story?
« Reply #189 on: March 22, 2025, 04:06:20 PM »
Some more from “History Will Prove Us Right” by Howard Willens, page 100:

Because Rankin had required that all investigative requests be reviewed by me before going to him for approval, I had more dealings than others on the staff with James Malley, the FBI inspector who was our official liaison with the bureau. There were approximately three hundred such investigative requests, most to the FBI. On occasion, Malley discussed a particular request with Rankin or me (or other lawyers) and suggested ways to rephrase or break it down into more limited requests. We almost always agreed to make these suggested changes. If the responsible lawyer and Malley could not agree, Rankin would resolve the issue. Malley described his relationship with the commission as businesslike, and I agree with that. He knew that I worked for the Justice Department and had access to high officials there. I knew that he had superiors at FBI headquarters who insisted that he keep them fully informed about the commission.

The commission’s lawyers weren’t hesitant about questioning the FBI’s work. They understood that they had been appointed from the private sector in large measure to ensure their independence in conducting a thorough investigation. In fact, they relished proving FBI conclusions wrong. Most of our lawyers focused on finding flaws in the FBI conclusion that there were no conspiracies involving Oswald or Ruby. Many likely thought that someone (or some organization) more able and intelligent than Oswald and Ruby might have had a hand in this national tragedy and that this possibility had to be fully investigated. The team worked hard to examine every possible angle from which a conspiracy might have arisen. Conspiracies are almost always eventually revealed. No one on the staff wanted to go down in history as among those who failed to uncover the conspiracy that had taken a president’s life. None of us regarded the FBI denial of conspiracies involving Oswald or Ruby as established fact.

James Malley, the FBI inspector = Captain's 1st mate to guide the ship.

Most of our lawyers focused on finding flaws in the FBI conclusion that there were no conspiracies involving Oswald or Ruby. Many likely thought that someone (or some organization) more able and intelligent than Oswald and Ruby might have had a hand in this national tragedy and that this possibility had to be fully investigated. The team worked hard to examine every possible angle from which a conspiracy might have arisen

No they didn't. One proof of that is how they handled the Hudgens allegations. They buried it.
They followed the mandate set out by the Katzenbach Memo.

Jan. 22 1964 | Executive Session
A: But they are concluding that there can't be a conspiracy without those being run out. Now that is not from my experience with the FBI.
Q: It is not. You are quite right. I have seen a great many reports.
« Last Edit: March 22, 2025, 04:28:51 PM by Michael Capasse »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: A hole in Bledsoe's story?
« Reply #189 on: March 22, 2025, 04:06:20 PM »