Hoover’s effort to “convince the public that Oswald” was lone assassin…

[Richard Smith]

I think you’ve absolutely nailed it here...

When both memos were written, there was no solid evidence of any kind... as you noted... "They decided that Oswald was a lone nut long before they really knew who was behind the assassination."... and then they suppressed all evidence that might have suggested any other conclusion than the one they wanted... from the very beginning!!

The most likely explanation for this... and I would think every fair judge and jury would agree... Hoover and company were part of a big cover-up... for themselve and their partners in crime... and some might even suggest Oswald’s past record looks a little better than Hoover’s...

There was "no solid evidence of any kind"?  Oswald's rifle was left at the crime scene.  The shots were fired from the building in which he worked.  He had no credible alibi for the moment of the assassination.  He fled the building and was implicated in the murder of a police officer less than an hour later.  They were aware of his suspect political background.  Pretty much a slam dunk case at that point.  Nevertheless, they conducted an extensive investigation which proved his guilt.  To this day, nearly six decades later, there is no doubt as to his guilt and no credible evidence of the involvement of anyone else.

[Martin Weidmann]

There was "no solid evidence of any kind"?  Oswald's rifle was left at the crime scene.  The shots were fired from the building in which he worked.  He had no credible alibi for the moment of the assassination.  He fled the building and was implicated in the murder of a police officer less than an hour later.  They were aware of his suspect political background.  Pretty much a slam dunk case at that point.  Nevertheless, they conducted an extensive investigation which proved his guilt.  To this day, nearly six decades later, there is no doubt as to his guilt and no credible evidence of the involvement of anyone else.

There was "no solid evidence of any kind"?

In the sense that it was enough to convict? No, there wasn't. And most certainly not in the first 48 hours. That's what Hoover told LBJ!

Nevertheless, they conducted an extensive investigation which proved his guilt.

Wrong, it was an extensive investigation to only find material that could prove his guilt.

For crying out loud, the entire FBI investigation was supervised by Hoover, a known blackmailer of Presidents, members of Congress and anybody else who he considered a threat and who even denied that there was any such thing as a mafia. The guy was a criminal with no scruples whatsoever. To believe that he would conduct a fair and unbiased investigation is an insult to anybody's intelligence.

[Jake Maxwell]

There was "no solid evidence of any kind"?

In the sense that it was enough to convict? No, there wasn't. And most certainly not in the first 48 hours. That's what Hoover told LBJ!

Nevertheless, they conducted an extensive investigation which proved his guilt.

Wrong, it was an extensive investigation to only find material that could prove his guilt.

For crying out loud, the entire FBI investigation was supervised by Hoover, a known blackmailer of Presidents, members of Congress and anybody else who he considered a threat and who even denied that there was any such thing as a mafia. The guy was a criminal with no scruples whatsoever. To believe that he would conduct a fair and unbiased investigation is an insult to anybody's intelligence.

Yes, it was a plan from the beginning to frame Oswald as a lone nut and then cover-up all evidence that might prove otherwise...
It is exactly how corruption works...
And yes... Hoover was corrupt...

[Richard Smith]

There was "no solid evidence of any kind"?

In the sense that it was enough to convict? No, there wasn't. And most certainly not in the first 48 hours. That's what Hoover told LBJ!

All the evidence noted was known within 48 hours (e.g. that Oswald's rifle was left at the crime scene, that he had fled, that he was the prime suspect in the murder of a police office, and that he had a suspect political background known to the FBI who had kept tabs on him).  The presence of his rifle alone was sufficient to convict absent a credible alibi or alternative explanation for its presence.

[Martin Weidmann]

All the evidence noted was known within 48 hours (e.g. that Oswald's rifle was left at the crime scene, that he had fled, that he was the prime suspect in the murder of a police office, and that he had a suspect political background known to the FBI who had kept tabs on him).  The presence of his rifle alone was sufficient to convict absent a credible alibi or alternative explanation for its presence.

that Oswald's rifle was left at the crime scene

More BS. All they knew within 48 hours of the assassination is that, according to Kleins' the rifle they found at the TSBD was ordered and sold to somebody called A. Hidell.

that he had fled

Nope.. they didn't know that either. All they knew Oswald was one of several TSBD employees who was not present at the roll call

that he was the prime suspect in the murder of a police office,

That's what they arrested him for. No the murder of the President. So, how do you get from "we suspect him of killing a police officer" to "he is the lone nut that killed the President"?

that he had a suspect political background known to the FBI

It's not a crime to have a particular political background (whatever that means) and having such a background doesn't make somebody a lone nut killer.

The presence of his rifle alone was sufficient to convict absent a credible alibi

Knock it off with this "his rifle" crap. Until this day we don't know for sure if it was his rifle or not.

They did not know if Oswald could offer a credible alibi or not. The mere fact that he didn't give one to Fritz doesn't mean he had none. He has the right to remain silent and that can not be held against him

or alternative explanation for its presence.

They never investigated any alternative explanation for the presence of the rifle at the TSBD.

As per usual, you are blowing hot air.

[Richard Smith]

that Oswald's rifle was left at the crime scene

More BS. All they knew within 48 hours of the assassination is that, according to Kleins' the rifle they found at the TSBD was ordered and sold to somebody called A. Hidell.

that he had fled

Nope.. they didn't know that either. All they knew Oswald was one of several TSBD employees who was not present at the roll call

that he was the prime suspect in the murder of a police office,

That's what they arrested him for. No the murder of the President. So, how do you get from "we suspect him of killing a police officer" to "he is the lone nut that killed the President"?

that he had a suspect political background known to the FBI

It's not a crime to have a particular political background (whatever that means) and having such a background doesn't make somebody a lone nut killer.

The presence of his rifle alone was sufficient to convict absent a credible alibi

Knock it off with this "his rifle" crap. Until this day we don't know for sure if it was his rifle or not.

They did not know if Oswald could offer a credible alibi or not. The mere fact that he didn't give one to Fritz doesn't mean he had none. He has the right to remain silent and that can not be held against him

or alternative explanation for its presence.

They never investigated any alternative explanation for the presence of the rifle at the TSBD.

As per usual, you are blowing hot air.

You are really suggesting here that by Nov. 25 the authorities did not know that Hidell was an alias used by Oswald?  He had such an ID in his wallet when arrested!  The authorities knew the rifle found was linked to Oswald per Klein's via both Oswald's PO Box AND an alias he was known to use.  And now you are admitting there was a roll call!  Wow.  Oswald had been questioned.  He failed to provide a credible alibi or explanation for the presence of his rifle.  Instead he lied.  There was no doubt of his guilt as of the time the memo was written.  Nevertheless, the federal government conducted the most extensive investigation in criminal history on their own motion.  It was not required. 

[Walt Cakebread]

that Oswald's rifle was left at the crime scene

More BS. All they knew within 48 hours of the assassination is that, according to Kleins' the rifle they found at the TSBD was ordered and sold to somebody called A. Hidell.

that he had fled

Nope.. they didn't know that either. All they knew Oswald was one of several TSBD employees who was not present at the roll call

that he was the prime suspect in the murder of a police office,

That's what they arrested him for. No the murder of the President. So, how do you get from "we suspect him of killing a police officer" to "he is the lone nut that killed the President"?

that he had a suspect political background known to the FBI

It's not a crime to have a particular political background (whatever that means) and having such a background doesn't make somebody a lone nut killer.

The presence of his rifle alone was sufficient to convict absent a credible alibi

Knock it off with this "his rifle" crap. Until this day we don't know for sure if it was his rifle or not.

They did not know if Oswald could offer a credible alibi or not. The mere fact that he didn't give one to Fritz doesn't mean he had none. He has the right to remain silent and that can not be held against him

or alternative explanation for its presence.

They never investigated any alternative explanation for the presence of the rifle at the TSBD.

As per usual, you are blowing hot air.

"The mere fact that he didn't give one to Fritz doesn't mean he had none. "

The mere fact that he didn't give one ( an alibi ) to Fritz doesn't mean he had none.

Captain Fritz: Where were you at the time the president passed by the building ?

Lee Oswald:  I was eating my lunch in the first floor lunchroom.

Lee had a rock solid alibi , and he gave it to Fritz.....  That alibi was verified by Junior Jarman and Harold Norman.
Lee said that at the time that he was in the first floor lunchroom eating his lunch he saw Jarman and Norman walk by the lunchroom.    Jarman and Norman confirmed that they had in fact walked by that 1st floor lunchroom at about 12:26  / 12:27.