Dan, frankly it is obvious that you have fallen for the nonsense that the CT crowd tends to write. If you would (with an open and unbiased mind) balance your reading by including some of what the folks who were actually there and a part of the Warren Commission have written, you should see that your post is full of nothing but conjecture and innuendo that couldn’t be further from the truth. Howard Willens, David Belin, and Arlen Specter have all written excellent books about their experiences and how the Warren Commission went about its business.
Here’s a small snippet from Willens’ book that you might appreciate:
The FBI delivered its report to the department late on December 5—a week after Hoover’s initial target date. I remember “being called to the Deputy’s office and asked to take possession of one of the few copies and review it before it went to the White House.” I prepared “a short two-page release regarding the finding of the report.” The report reflected a prodigious investigative effort conducted by the bureau in less than two weeks. It represented the work of some 150 agents under the direction of Gordon Shanklin, the head of the Dallas field office, who in turn reported to Alexander (“Al”) Rosen, the assistant director in charge of the FBI’s general investigative division.29 The report was seventy-five pages long, supplemented by a thirteen-page index and three volumes of exhibits. Part I described the assassination and identified Oswald as the killer. Part II set forth the evidence “conclusively showing that Oswald did assassinate the President.” Part III discussed what the FBI knew about Oswald prior to the assassination and reported the results of the FBI’s investigation, after the assassination, of Oswald’s background, activities, and associates. The exhibits included the documents relating to Oswald’s contacts with the Soviets and the Communist Party. The FBI found no evidence that Oswald was part of a conspiracy to kill the president. Although the scope of the investigation and the documentation in the FBI report were impressive, I immediately noticed some critical errors that required further review. I concluded that this initial report could not be accepted as a complete or authoritative assessment of the facts relating to the assassination.30
That is exactly what the Warren Commission did.
No they did just the opposite of your claim. But don’t take my word for this. Do your own research. What I just suggested above would be a good start.
Viewed through this lens it becomes obvious that the FBI visited Bledsoe to make sure she 'remembered' Oswald wearing the shirt that they already had fibre evidence for.
You are simply looking through the wrong lens. What is obvious through an unbiased and logical lens is that they were simply trying to find out whether or not Bledsoe remembered seeing that shirt on LHO when she saw him on the bus just after the assassination.
Let me get this straight.
According to Willens, Hoover's report to the Commission "identified Oswald as the killer", "conclusively showing that Oswald did assassinate the President" and that there was "no evidence that Oswald was part of a conspiracy to kill the president".
Hoover had already decided exactly this outcome less than 48 hours after the assassination.
He decided exactly this outcome before the investigation had barely started.
Don't you find that strange?
Is this another in the long line of things that you're not surprised about, that you should be surprised about?
As you've already posted, according to Willens:
"If the president had to have this commission, its function should be to receive the FBI’s report, review it, ask questions aimed at clarifying its findings, then endorse the report and disband."The Warren Commission was nothing more than a rubber stamp for Hoover's predetermined outcome - that Oswald was the lone assassin.
What you've posted, as some kind of attempt to show otherwise, only confirms this.
I'd advise a little less reading what others think and more finding out for yourself.
