Philip Shenon has an article in the Boston Globe.
He shows an affidavit the WC wanted Bobby to sign. He didn't sign it.
He shows an affidavit the WC wanted Bobby to sign. He didn't sign it.
What else did Bobby Kennedy know? Last year, the
son and namesake of the late Attorney General Robert Kennedy revealed publicly
that his father had considered the Warren Commission’s final report, which
largely ruled out the possibility of a conspiracy in the assassination of John
F. Kennedy, to be a “shoddy piece of craftsmanship.” Robert Jr. said his father
suspected that the president had been killed in a conspiracy involving Cuba,
the Mafia or even rogue agents of the CIA. Historian Arthur Schlesinger Jr., a
close friend of the Kennedy family, would disclose years later that he was told
by Robert Kennedy in December 1963, a month after the president’s murder, that
the former attorney general worried that the assassin, Lee Harvey Oswald, was
“part of a larger plot, whether organized by Castro or by gangsters.”
Schlesinger said that in 1966, two years after the Warren Commission report,
Kennedy was still so suspicious about a conspiracy that he wondered aloud “how
long he could continue to avoid comment on the report—it is evident that he
believes it is was poor job.”
Newly disclosed documents from the commission, made
public on the 50th anniversary of its final report, suggest that the panel
missed a chance to get Robert Kennedy to acknowledge publicly what he would
later confess to his closest family and friends: that he believed the
commission had overlooked evidence that might have pointed to a conspiracy.
The documents show the commission was prepared to
press Kennedy to offer his views, under oath, about the possibility that Oswald
had not acted alone. An affidavit, in which Kennedy would have been required to
raise his right hand and deny knowledge of a conspiracy under penalty of
perjury, was prepared for his signature by the commission’s staff but was never
used. Instead, the attorney general became the highest ranking government
official, apart from President Lyndon Johnson, who was excused from giving
sworn testimony or offering a sworn written statement to the commission.
The decision to scrap the affidavit is another
example of the extraordinary deference paid to the attorney general and his
family by Chief Justice Earl Warren, the commission’s chairman. In an unsworn
August 1964 letter to Warren—already public and long seen by historians as
evasive, if not as an effort to mislead the commission outright about what he
really knew and suspected—Kennedy said he was aware of “no credible evidence to
support the allegations that the assassination of President Kennedy was caused
by a domestic or foreign conspiracy.” Kennedy’s private papers, however,
suggest he struggled over signing even the unsworn letter to Warren.
The newest documents were released on the personal website of a
former top commission staff lawyer, Howard P. Willens, who was deployed to the
commission by the Justice Department and served as the department’s day-to-day
liaison with the investigation. Willens, an 83-year-old Washington lawyer whose
recent book, History Will Prove Us Right, defended the commission’s
legacy, saved files from the investigation and is releasing hundreds of them
this year, for the Warren Report’s 50th anniversary.
Willens did not reply to emailed questions about
the files, including why several of his documents, or at least copies of them,
do not appear to be have been retained in the vast library of the commission
paperwork now stored at the National Archives. On his website, Willens said he was releasing the
documents “to shed light about the truth of the investigation and the
assassination of President John F. Kennedy” and to dispel conspiracy theories
about the president’s murder. “It is clear that theories asserting Oswald did
not act alone remain popular. However, as a member of the Commission staff, I
assure you that if you’ll consider the evidence, you will find that the
Commission conclusion is the correct one.” (An effort to determine exactly
which of his documents are duplicated at the National Archives would take a
mammoth research effort, given the archives’ collection of hundreds of
thousands of pages of commission files. In researching my recent book on the
assassination, I spent many days at the archives with the paperwork and
am convinced I did not see duplicates of several of the documents in Willens’
files, including the affidavit prepared for Robert Kennedy.)
Some former commission staffers are troubled today
that the panel never questioned Kennedy, especially given the disclosure in
recent decades by congressional investigators about his deep involvement in
directing plots by the CIA to oust, if not kill, Fidel Castro; the Cuban
dictator was always seen by the commission’s staff as a prime suspect in
Kennedy’s assassination. If Robert Kennedy or others had been forced to reveal
the Castro plots, these former staffers say, the commission would have been
much more aggressive in trying to determine if Castro or his agents, possibly
aware of the plots, ordered the president’s murder in retaliation. In an
interview for my book, former White House aide Joseph Califano, who was part of
the anti-Castro plotting, said he was convinced that “Robert Kennedy
experienced this unbelievable grief after his brother’s death because he
believed it was linked to his—Bobby’s—efforts to kill Castro.”
The affidavit above was
prepared for Robert Kennedy to sign stating that he knew of "no credible
evidence" of a "domestic or foreign conspiracy" in his brother's
assassination, but Kennedy never signed the document.
David Slawson, another key commission staffer, told
me that the files released by Willens were a reminder of the error made by the
commission in not insisting that Robert Kennedy testify. “With hindsight, he
absolutely should have been required to testify,” said Slawson, who is retired
from the faculty of the law school of the University of Southern California. He
stressed that he had no involvement in the commission’s interactions with
Kennedy or with the Justice Department in 1964. “But looking back, of course it
was a mistake not to make Bobby testify,” Slawson said. “If we questioned
Jackie, why didn’t we question Bobby?” In addition to the first lady, the
roster of senior officials required to give sworn testimony to the commission
included FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover, Secretary of State Dean Rusk and
Director of Central Intelligence John McCone.
For my book, which focused on the history of the
Warren Commission, I found Robert Kennedy’s relationship with the commission to
be deeply disturbing, since he insisted in public that he believed the
commission’s report and accepted that Oswald acted alone—but said precisely the
opposite to the people closest to him.
What would he have wanted to hide from the
commission? Many things, including his hands-on involvement in the war on
Castro, possibly including CIA plots in which the spy agency recruited the
Mafia to carry out Castro’s murder. The disclosure of the existence of the
CIA-Mafia plots could have damaged, or even destroyed, Kennedy’s future
political prospects since he had made his reputation, first on Capitol Hill and
then at the Justice Department, as a Mob-buster.
Other commission staff members said that Willens
had been in an awkward position on the staff, since he was serving as both a
senior member of the commission’s staff—he was chief deputy to J. Lee Rankin,
the commission’s general counsel—and as the panel’s representative to his
ultimate boss back at the Justice Department: Bobby Kennedy. Previously
released commission files show it was Willens who relayed the message to the
commission that Kennedy wanted to be excused from testifying—a request that
Warren accepted, apparently believing it would be unseemly to ask the
grief-stricken Kennedy to answer questions about his brother’s death.
The Willens files, in addition to suggesting that
Kennedy was paying closer attention to the investigation than was previously
known, contain other revelations, including that the attorney general was the
key intermediary in helping the commission set up a brief sworn interview with
former First Lady Jacqueline Kennedy. In a private memo to the attorney general
in June 1964, Willens sought Robert Kennedy’s help in arranging a meeting to
take sworn testimony from Jackie, suggesting that the attorney general had veto
power over whether the former first lady would testify at all.
“As I understand the situation, it is agreed that
Mrs. Kennedy may be questioned at any place convenient to you and her and with
only those persons present that you wish,” Willens wrote to the attorney
general. “Everyone associated with the commission would prefer not to question
Mrs. Kennedy regarding some of the events of last November 22,” but “we feel it
is necessary for two reasons,” Willens wrote. “First, all the other persons
directly involved have testified before the commission, and the commission has
to do a complete job. Second, she may have particular recollections about the
events which will help clarify some of the still unresolved questions.”
Attached to the memo was a list of dozens of
proposed questions for the former first lady, including how many shots she had
heard and how her husband had reacted to the first bullet that hit him.
Ultimately, few of the detailed questions were asked when, later that month,
Warren and Rankin, the general counsel, went to her home in Georgetown, with
her brother-in-law in attendance. In her testimony, Jackie Kennedy recalled the
events in Dallas of the day of the assassination, including some of the
gruesome details of what went on in the president’s limousine when shots rang
out in Dealey Plaza. The session, which was transcribed and appeared in an
appendix to the commission’s final report, lasted just nine minutes.
Other files on Willens’ site offer new evidence of
the Warren Commission’s hostility toward the FBI; inside the commission’s
staff, the bureau was seen as hindering the investigation to hide its own
blunders before the assassination.
The files include a draft letter to FBI Director J.
Edgar Hoover in which the commission effectively accused the bureau of trying
to cover up evidence that documented the extent of the FBI’s surveillance of
Oswald in the weeks before Kennedy’s murder. The February 1964 draft, which was
ultimately not sent, possibly out of fear of the wrath of the powerful Hoover,
said that Warren was “seriously disturbed by what appears to be a deliberate
effort to conceal the facts from the commission.” The draft letter was prepared
after the discovery by the commission’s staff that, in a typewritten account of
the contents of one of Oswald’s notebooks, the FBI had omitted a key item that
had appeared in Oswald’s handwriting in the notebook—the name, phone number and
license plate number of an FBI agent who had him under surveillance in the
weeks before the assassination. Commission staffers said in interviews for my
book that they believed the FBI had omitted the information in hopes of hiding
just how closely the FBI had been trailing Oswald in the fall of 1963.
“As you know the commission is charged with the
responsibility of developing and reporting the complete facts relating to the
assassination of President Kennedy,” according to the draft letter, which was
being prepared for Rankin’s signature. “Up to this point in its
activities, the commission had assumed that it would have the full cooperation
of federal investigative agencies.” The draft said that “omissions of such
vital information from your reports not only lend credibility to otherwise
unsupported allegations” but “also cast doubt on the ability of the commission
to fulfill the task assigned to it by President Johnson.”
The documents released by Willens may hint at what
revelations are still to come about the workings of the commission and other
secrets kept from the investigation. The National Archives has confirmed that
more than 1,000 documents related to the president’s murder are still being
withheld from public view, most of them at the request of the CIA. Under a 1992
law passed as a result of the furor over Oliver Stone’s conspiracy-laden
film JFK, all of those documents must be released publicly by
October 2017. Some historians and other scholars suspect the still-secret files
must reveal the names of people still living who worked for American
intelligence in the early 1960s and who might be in danger if that spy work was
revealed.
Will the release of those last files end the dark
suspicions of a conspiracy in President Kennedy’s death? Almost certainly not.
If even Robert Kennedy was a conspiracy theorist, it is hard to see how
millions of other Americans will ever be convinced to accept that Lee Harvey
Oswald acted alone.
No comments:
Post a Comment