WC general counsel and assistant counsel

[Oscar Navarro]

Yes, I'm familiar with that controversy too. Ford did indeed, at least from what I read in the same account you mentioned, apparently try to get him removed. Redlich was, well, he was a leftwinger and not a liberal. He thought the Rosenbergs and Hiss were innocent. Or at least they shouldn't have been given the death penalty (which he opposed throughout his life).  As to Hiss's innocence: What was he thinking?

Re Shenon's book: it's a pretty good overview of how the WC was formed and worked.

These were honorable men in a difficult situation. Sure, legitimate criticism of the investigation can be made; it was a product made by humans: what do people make that is perfect? But the claims that they deliberately covered things up is simply not, for me, true.

Steve, here's the link to WC Executive Session of May 19, 1964. It's mostly about Norman Redlich  https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=1332#relPageId=5&tab=page
  the last 10 or so pages are almost unreadable which is too bad but it increases my admiration for both Warren and McCloy while further diminishing my opinion of Russell. It's a bit long (40 readable pages) but worth the time and effort.

I completely agree there was no cover up. The very notion of leaving things out was repeatedly considered and rejected by the WC members in many instances and they were aware of the historical importance of this inquiry.

[Jerry Freeman]

If the commission had found a conspiracy, their individual careers would soar and they'd be American heroes forever. In fact, I think one of the staffers said something to that effect. Hell, we all came to this looking for a conspiracy, didn't we?

A nameless staffer   There is one item that was not mentioned here in this thread...motive. Vincent Bugliosi postulates that  Oswald killed JFK due to his "delusions of grandeur and that he wanted to do something that [history] would remember him 10,000 years from now". I guess this is all based on the 'Oswald diary'. There is just one problem with this claim...Oswald denied everything....so forget about that motive.
 

[Oscar Navarro]

A nameless staffer   There is one item that was not mentioned here in this thread...motive. Vincent Bugliosi postulates that  Oswald killed JFK due to his "delusions of grandeur and that he wanted to do something that [history] would remember him 10,000 years from now". I guess this is all based on the 'Oswald diary'. There is just one problem with this claim...Oswald denied everything....so forget about that motive.

Bill Chapman
If the commission had found a conspiracy, their individual careers would soar and they'd be American heroes forever. In fact, I think one of the staffers said something to that effect. Hell, we all came to this looking for a conspiracy, didn't we?

A nameless staffer

If you actually took the time to read the thread you would see the nameless staffer was named. It was Assistant counsel Burt Griffin.

[Alan Ford]

Terrific post. Short and to the point. Two names jump out at me:

Norman Redlich. Redlich was a committed civil libertarian, a strong leftist in his politics (he was a vocal critic of Joe McCarthy when it wasn't easy to do), a life long opponent of the death penalty, and a supporter of Civil Rights from the start. And not a fan of Hoover's either (the two reportedly detested one another). There is no one who could argue with any sense of logic that he would join with "right wing" or "militarist" elements to coverup for the murder of JFK.

Redlich was the main author of the WC Report. He personally wrote the first six chapters including the critical chapter detailing the actual shooting. If - again if - one believes the Warren Report was a lie from start to end then you'd have to say that Redlich was a key part in producing this lie.

John Hart Ely. Ely was not an important staffer in the investigation but he did play a role in investigating Oswald's background including his childhood. It's safe to say he found no evidence of "two Oswalds". Later he went on to become one of the most influential constitutional scholars of modern times and is among the widely quoted experts on the Constitution.

I find it completely implausible that these two men would cover up for the murder of the president.

Decent men playing their part in preventing WWIII? Unthinkable!

[Oscar Navarro]

Decent men playing their part in preventing WWIII? Unthinkable!

Yes, all decent men. I  would like to see any declassified memo that instructs them to actually engage in covering anything up.