Post by Rob Caprio on Aug 22, 2022 19:50:20 GMT -5
All portions ©️ Robert Caprio 2006-2024
upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e6/FrankChurch.jpg
3.bp.blogspot.com/_I4lZU0BrRsg/TPXTI3y8v1I/AAAAAAAAAE4/Hot_KJ7VKdY/w1200-h630-p-k-no-nu/warren.jpg
upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b0/Hoover-JEdgar-LOC.jpg
The Church Committee (CC) was created in 1975 after the revelations of the previous Rockefeller Commission which had exposed some of the Central Intelligence Agency’s (CIA) past indiscretions. The purpose of the CC was to look deeper into these issues and include the entire United States' intelligence community and see how they performed in major events.
One such event was the assassination of President John F. Kennedy (JFK) on November 22, 1963. The two primary agencies that the CC looked into were the FBI and CIA as those two were most involved in the “investigation” of the assassination for the Warren Commission (WC) in late 1963 and 1964.
This post examines the CC’s comments about the relationship between the FBI and the WC. It should be kept in mind that in late 1963 and 1964 the FBI really meant J. Edgar Hoover (JEH) who was the director of the Bureau. He was the FBI.
In this post we will continue the look at the relationship between the FBI and the WC. As we saw previously the FBI viewed the WC as an adversary. The main reason for this was because JEH was worried that the WC would disagree with his conclusion.
JEH was also worried about the fact that the FBI dropped the ball on the security case for Lee Harvey Oswald (LHO). LHO was under almost constant surveillance by the FBI everywhere he went. He had FBI Agent James Hosty’s, Dallas office, telephone number, office address and license plate number. The WC wrote the following in their Report about this issue.
Quote on
www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/pages/WCReport_0176a.gif
The Commission also investigated the circumstances which led to the presence in Oswald's address book of the name of Agent Hosty together with his office address, telephone number, and license number. Hosty and Mrs. Paine testified that on November 1, 1963, Hosty left his name and phone number with Mrs. Paine so that she could advise Hosty when she learned where Oswald was living in Dallas. Mrs. Paine and Marina Oswald have testified that Mrs. Paine handed Oswald the slip of paper on which Hosty had written this information. In accordance with prior instructions from Oswald, Marina Oswald noted Hosty's license number which she gave to her husband. The address of the Dallas office of the FBI could have been obtained from many public sources. (WCR, p. 327)
www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0176a.htm
Quote off
Things are not this simple as the FBI withheld this information from the WC for some time and this is shown in Commission Exhibit (CE) 833. This was a letter from the FBI to the WC in response to a series of questions the WC had.
Quote on
www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/pages/WH_Vol17_0415a.jpg
When and for what reason were pages 279 through 283 of the report of SA [Special Agent—S.M.] Gemberling of February 11, 1964, prepared [setting forth the entries in Oswald's address book which had not been included in the report of SA Gemberling of December 23, 1963]?
Pages 279 through 283 of the report of SA Gemberling dated February 11, 1964, were prepared at the time such report was being typed by the Dallas Office during a few-day period immediately preceding submission of such report to FBI headquarters by the Dallas Office. In this connection, your attention is also directed to this Bureau's letter to the Commission dated February 27, 1964, enclosing an affidavit executed by SA Robert P. Gemberling explaining in detail his handling and reporting of data in Lee Harvey Oswald's address book. You will note that in his affidavit, SA Gemberling explains why certain data in Oswald's address book was reported in his December 23, 1963, report, whereas the remaining data . . . was reported in SA Gemberling's February 11, 1964, report.
(CE 833, p. 15)
www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0415a.htm
Quote off
The problem with this answer is it does NOT give an answer to the question. It instead alludes to an affidavit by FBI Special Agent Robert Gemberling, but the affidavit was not published in the twenty-six volumes of evidence. Why NOT?
During his WC testimony JEH made some additional comments about the Gemberling report.
Quote on
This report was not prepared for this Commission but rather for investigative purposes of the FBI, and therefore the information concerning Hosty's name, telephone number, and license number was not included in the report, as the circumstances under which Hosty's name, etc., appeared in Oswald's notebook were fully known to the FBI.
After our investigative report of December 23, 1963, was furnished...we noted that Agent Hosty's name did not appear in the report. In order that there would be a complete reporting of all items in Oswald's notebook, this information was incorporated in another investigative report...dated February 11, 1964. Both of the...reports were furnished to the Commission prior to any inquiry concerning this matter by the...Commission.
Quote off
Since the FBI was tasked with being the investigative arm of the WC, why were they writing reports that were “for their own purposes” and NOT the WC as late as December 23, 1963? I thought they were tasked with working for the WC by President Lyndon B. Johnson (LBJ)? I think so as this is included in the WCR on pp. 471 and 472.
WCR, pp. 471-472:
www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/pages/WCReport_0248a.gif
www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/pages/WCReport_0248b.gif
Furthermore, since the report was submitted to the WC, albeit NOT prepared for them, why did this copy of the report omit the Hosty entries? If the “circumstances were fully known” to the FBI as JEH said, why did the December report not include an explanation and an account of the Hosty entries in LHO’s notebook? This is important because when one sees Hosty’s name, address, telephone number and license number in LHO’s notebook one is bound to suspect a compromising relationship between Hosty and/or the FBI and LHO.
The page in LHO’s notebook with this information was ripped out. If this was innocent, why was this done? This pattern of the FBI monitoring people that would allegedly commit a crime would be seen numerous times in the future.
JEH had each member of the WC checked as he was seeking derogatory information on them. He claimed that none of this information was disseminated while the WC was in session, but this wasn’t a secret and it put pressure on the members to toe the line.
On December 10, 1963, JEH told Assistant Director Alan Belmont that he would be “personally responsible for reviewing every piece of paper that went to the Warren Commission.” (Church Committee Book V, p. 47) JEH picked an inspector to be the liaison to the WC. In a December 10, 1963, memorandum JEH wrote:
Quote on
history-matters.com/archive/church/reports/book5/pages/ChurchVol5_0027b.gif
…I also alerted [the inspector] that there were indications that the Chief Justice, who headed the Presidential Commission, was endeavoring to find fault with the FBI and certain information had been leaked by the Chief Justice to which was critical of the FBI’s functioning in Dallas prior to the assassination.
I told [the inspector] and Alan Belmont that the Chief Justice had now demanded all of the so-called “raw” reports upon which the FBI report of the assassination was predicated, and in doing so the Chief Justice had characterized the FBI report as being in “skeleton form.” I stated the Chief Justice had further added in his statement to this press: “In order to evaluate it we have to see the materials on which the report was prepared.”
I stated that this statement by the Chief Justice I felt was entirely unwarranted and could certainly have been phrased better so not as to leave the impression, at least by innuendo, that the FBI had not done a thorough job. (Ibid., p. 48)
www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=1161#relPageId=54
Quote off[/font]
This shows the disdain that JEH had for any comments that made his report seem incorrect and not thorough. Keep in mind that this report that he was so anxious to defend was written in a matter of days after the assassination (perhaps before), so how could it be thorough?
Of course JEH denied that LHO had ever been an informant, agent or provider of any information whatsoever to the FBI. He offered no evidence, just his word. His word isn’t worth much as he lied repeatedly before the WC while giving testimony. In a January 31, 1964, memorandum JEH would state the following.
Quote on
…I told Mr. [J. Lee] Rankin that Lee Harvey Oswald was never at any time a confidential informant, undercover agent, or even a source of information for the FBI, and I would like to see that clearly stated on the record of the Commission and I would be willing to so state under oath. [Ibid.)
Quote off
JEH was a comedian, wasn’t he? Like being under oath would prevent him from lying. Especially when the WC didn’t charge one witness with perjury. What evidence did JEH provide for his statement? None.
The WC receives a lot of criticism, and rightly so, but their hands were really tied from the beginning by JEH and others. Here is what Assistant Director Alan Belmont kept JEH abreast of daily during the WC’s tenure.
Quote on
history-matters.com/archive/church/reports/book5/pages/ChurchVol5_0027b.gif
history-matters.com/archive/church/reports/book5/pages/ChurchVol5_0028a.gif
1. the internal Commission meetings and decisions;
2. the areas in which the Commission was requesting information, or further FBI investigation; and,
3. the materials which the Bureau intended to provide to the Commission. (Ibid., pp. 48-49)
www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=1161#relPageId=55
Quote off
JEH was so paranoid that even when the WC complimented the Bureau and its agents, he thought it was because they had looked for gaps in the FBI and didn’t find any so they “tried to get sympathy” (Ibid., p. 49)
The WC didn’t find any gaps because they didn’t dare find any. JEH repeatedly took offense, and so did the other senior officials, and confused any attempt to actually look into the assassination with criticizing them. JEH expected the WC to just accept everything his Bureau said without question. The WC never was meant to find out what really happened to JFK and JEH’s tight control over the WC proves this. He was used by the conspirators to shut down any real investigation.
Nothing shows that there was a conspiracy in the assassination of JFK better than JEH’s actions (and the actual evidence of course).
upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e6/FrankChurch.jpg
3.bp.blogspot.com/_I4lZU0BrRsg/TPXTI3y8v1I/AAAAAAAAAE4/Hot_KJ7VKdY/w1200-h630-p-k-no-nu/warren.jpg
upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b0/Hoover-JEdgar-LOC.jpg
The Church Committee (CC) was created in 1975 after the revelations of the previous Rockefeller Commission which had exposed some of the Central Intelligence Agency’s (CIA) past indiscretions. The purpose of the CC was to look deeper into these issues and include the entire United States' intelligence community and see how they performed in major events.
One such event was the assassination of President John F. Kennedy (JFK) on November 22, 1963. The two primary agencies that the CC looked into were the FBI and CIA as those two were most involved in the “investigation” of the assassination for the Warren Commission (WC) in late 1963 and 1964.
This post examines the CC’s comments about the relationship between the FBI and the WC. It should be kept in mind that in late 1963 and 1964 the FBI really meant J. Edgar Hoover (JEH) who was the director of the Bureau. He was the FBI.
In this post we will continue the look at the relationship between the FBI and the WC. As we saw previously the FBI viewed the WC as an adversary. The main reason for this was because JEH was worried that the WC would disagree with his conclusion.
JEH was also worried about the fact that the FBI dropped the ball on the security case for Lee Harvey Oswald (LHO). LHO was under almost constant surveillance by the FBI everywhere he went. He had FBI Agent James Hosty’s, Dallas office, telephone number, office address and license plate number. The WC wrote the following in their Report about this issue.
Quote on
www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/pages/WCReport_0176a.gif
The Commission also investigated the circumstances which led to the presence in Oswald's address book of the name of Agent Hosty together with his office address, telephone number, and license number. Hosty and Mrs. Paine testified that on November 1, 1963, Hosty left his name and phone number with Mrs. Paine so that she could advise Hosty when she learned where Oswald was living in Dallas. Mrs. Paine and Marina Oswald have testified that Mrs. Paine handed Oswald the slip of paper on which Hosty had written this information. In accordance with prior instructions from Oswald, Marina Oswald noted Hosty's license number which she gave to her husband. The address of the Dallas office of the FBI could have been obtained from many public sources. (WCR, p. 327)
www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0176a.htm
Quote off
Things are not this simple as the FBI withheld this information from the WC for some time and this is shown in Commission Exhibit (CE) 833. This was a letter from the FBI to the WC in response to a series of questions the WC had.
Quote on
www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/pages/WH_Vol17_0415a.jpg
When and for what reason were pages 279 through 283 of the report of SA [Special Agent—S.M.] Gemberling of February 11, 1964, prepared [setting forth the entries in Oswald's address book which had not been included in the report of SA Gemberling of December 23, 1963]?
Pages 279 through 283 of the report of SA Gemberling dated February 11, 1964, were prepared at the time such report was being typed by the Dallas Office during a few-day period immediately preceding submission of such report to FBI headquarters by the Dallas Office. In this connection, your attention is also directed to this Bureau's letter to the Commission dated February 27, 1964, enclosing an affidavit executed by SA Robert P. Gemberling explaining in detail his handling and reporting of data in Lee Harvey Oswald's address book. You will note that in his affidavit, SA Gemberling explains why certain data in Oswald's address book was reported in his December 23, 1963, report, whereas the remaining data . . . was reported in SA Gemberling's February 11, 1964, report.
(CE 833, p. 15)
www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0415a.htm
Quote off
The problem with this answer is it does NOT give an answer to the question. It instead alludes to an affidavit by FBI Special Agent Robert Gemberling, but the affidavit was not published in the twenty-six volumes of evidence. Why NOT?
During his WC testimony JEH made some additional comments about the Gemberling report.
Quote on
This report was not prepared for this Commission but rather for investigative purposes of the FBI, and therefore the information concerning Hosty's name, telephone number, and license number was not included in the report, as the circumstances under which Hosty's name, etc., appeared in Oswald's notebook were fully known to the FBI.
After our investigative report of December 23, 1963, was furnished...we noted that Agent Hosty's name did not appear in the report. In order that there would be a complete reporting of all items in Oswald's notebook, this information was incorporated in another investigative report...dated February 11, 1964. Both of the...reports were furnished to the Commission prior to any inquiry concerning this matter by the...Commission.
Quote off
Since the FBI was tasked with being the investigative arm of the WC, why were they writing reports that were “for their own purposes” and NOT the WC as late as December 23, 1963? I thought they were tasked with working for the WC by President Lyndon B. Johnson (LBJ)? I think so as this is included in the WCR on pp. 471 and 472.
WCR, pp. 471-472:
www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/pages/WCReport_0248a.gif
www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/pages/WCReport_0248b.gif
Furthermore, since the report was submitted to the WC, albeit NOT prepared for them, why did this copy of the report omit the Hosty entries? If the “circumstances were fully known” to the FBI as JEH said, why did the December report not include an explanation and an account of the Hosty entries in LHO’s notebook? This is important because when one sees Hosty’s name, address, telephone number and license number in LHO’s notebook one is bound to suspect a compromising relationship between Hosty and/or the FBI and LHO.
The page in LHO’s notebook with this information was ripped out. If this was innocent, why was this done? This pattern of the FBI monitoring people that would allegedly commit a crime would be seen numerous times in the future.
JEH had each member of the WC checked as he was seeking derogatory information on them. He claimed that none of this information was disseminated while the WC was in session, but this wasn’t a secret and it put pressure on the members to toe the line.
On December 10, 1963, JEH told Assistant Director Alan Belmont that he would be “personally responsible for reviewing every piece of paper that went to the Warren Commission.” (Church Committee Book V, p. 47) JEH picked an inspector to be the liaison to the WC. In a December 10, 1963, memorandum JEH wrote:
Quote on
history-matters.com/archive/church/reports/book5/pages/ChurchVol5_0027b.gif
…I also alerted [the inspector] that there were indications that the Chief Justice, who headed the Presidential Commission, was endeavoring to find fault with the FBI and certain information had been leaked by the Chief Justice to which was critical of the FBI’s functioning in Dallas prior to the assassination.
I told [the inspector] and Alan Belmont that the Chief Justice had now demanded all of the so-called “raw” reports upon which the FBI report of the assassination was predicated, and in doing so the Chief Justice had characterized the FBI report as being in “skeleton form.” I stated the Chief Justice had further added in his statement to this press: “In order to evaluate it we have to see the materials on which the report was prepared.”
I stated that this statement by the Chief Justice I felt was entirely unwarranted and could certainly have been phrased better so not as to leave the impression, at least by innuendo, that the FBI had not done a thorough job. (Ibid., p. 48)
www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=1161#relPageId=54
Quote off[/font]
This shows the disdain that JEH had for any comments that made his report seem incorrect and not thorough. Keep in mind that this report that he was so anxious to defend was written in a matter of days after the assassination (perhaps before), so how could it be thorough?
Of course JEH denied that LHO had ever been an informant, agent or provider of any information whatsoever to the FBI. He offered no evidence, just his word. His word isn’t worth much as he lied repeatedly before the WC while giving testimony. In a January 31, 1964, memorandum JEH would state the following.
Quote on
…I told Mr. [J. Lee] Rankin that Lee Harvey Oswald was never at any time a confidential informant, undercover agent, or even a source of information for the FBI, and I would like to see that clearly stated on the record of the Commission and I would be willing to so state under oath. [Ibid.)
Quote off
JEH was a comedian, wasn’t he? Like being under oath would prevent him from lying. Especially when the WC didn’t charge one witness with perjury. What evidence did JEH provide for his statement? None.
The WC receives a lot of criticism, and rightly so, but their hands were really tied from the beginning by JEH and others. Here is what Assistant Director Alan Belmont kept JEH abreast of daily during the WC’s tenure.
Quote on
history-matters.com/archive/church/reports/book5/pages/ChurchVol5_0027b.gif
history-matters.com/archive/church/reports/book5/pages/ChurchVol5_0028a.gif
1. the internal Commission meetings and decisions;
2. the areas in which the Commission was requesting information, or further FBI investigation; and,
3. the materials which the Bureau intended to provide to the Commission. (Ibid., pp. 48-49)
www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=1161#relPageId=55
Quote off
JEH was so paranoid that even when the WC complimented the Bureau and its agents, he thought it was because they had looked for gaps in the FBI and didn’t find any so they “tried to get sympathy” (Ibid., p. 49)
The WC didn’t find any gaps because they didn’t dare find any. JEH repeatedly took offense, and so did the other senior officials, and confused any attempt to actually look into the assassination with criticizing them. JEH expected the WC to just accept everything his Bureau said without question. The WC never was meant to find out what really happened to JFK and JEH’s tight control over the WC proves this. He was used by the conspirators to shut down any real investigation.
Nothing shows that there was a conspiracy in the assassination of JFK better than JEH’s actions (and the actual evidence of course).