Did Clay Shaw commit perjury when he said he'd never worked for the CIA?

[Fred Litwin]

Max Holland does NOT accept what the historian wrote.

The segregated collection is online. You can search it yourself. There is no CIA document, except this one, that refers to a "contract source."

It is obviously a mistake.

The document was made by staff, not by McDonald himself.

Paul Hoch found another error in the document.

From my post:

It is important to note the McDonald summary document in question (which is factually unreliable for reasons apart from its description of Shaw) was not prepared contemporaneously during Shaw’s years of service to the Agency, but decades later. It was compiled for the purpose of describing a collection of assassination-related documents the Agency was preparing to release at the order of then CIA Director Robert Gates, months before the Assassination Records Collection Act became law. All of this material was given to the HSCA.

As for the document's reliability, researcher Paul Hoch has found another example of where this document was wrong. It refers to "records relating to Gilberto Alvarado, who maintained that he witnessed Cubans passing Oswald cash at a party on the night before the assassination." In fact, this description is obviously a confused mashup of two allegations that were separately made: one by Gilberto Alvarado in 1963 (which he ultimately retracted), and another, made later, by Elena Garro de Paz.

A different page in the 1992 document correctly describes Alvarado as "the Nicaraguan who claimed he saw Lee Harvey Oswald receive cash in meetings inside Mexico City Cuban embassy."

Elena Garro de Paz claimed to have seen Oswald and two companions at a "twist party" in Mexico City.

The date given for this twist party (November 21) matches neither allegation and is obviously an error, thus suggesting that the 1992 document is not exactly a completely reliable accounting of what is in the CIA's own archive.

https://www.onthetrailofdelusion.com/post/was-clay-shaw-a-contract-agent-for-the-cia

[Michael Capasse]

Maybe it was "Bertrand"   

George Lardner | Washington Post
The Attorney General’s remarks consequently amounted to an acceptance of Garrison’s
charge that Clay Shaw and "Clay Bertrand” are one and the same. “It’s the same guy,”
said one source in the Justice Department.

[Tom Graves]

Maybe it was "Bertrand"   

George Lardner | Washington Post
The Attorney General’s remarks consequently amounted to an acceptance of Garrison’s
charge that Clay Shaw and "Clay Bertrand” are one and the same. “It’s the same guy,”
said one source in the Justice Department.

Point being?

[Steve M. Galbraith]

Maybe it was "Bertrand"   

George Lardner | Washington Post
The Attorney General’s remarks consequently amounted to an acceptance of Garrison’s
charge that Clay Shaw and "Clay Bertrand” are one and the same. “It’s the same guy,”
said one source in the Justice Department.

"Justice Admits Error in Shaw-Bertrand Tie"/George Lardner

"The Department of Justice acknowledged yesterday that it goofed in ever suggesting that Clay Shaw was the mysterious "Clay Bertrand" sought after the assassination of President Kennedy.

Attorney General Ramsey Clark took responsibility for the snafu in a statement issued by a Department spokesman. Clark, the spokesman said, felt that justice would best be served by the embarrassing admission.




https://ia801206.us.archive.org/35/items/nsia-ClarkRamseyStatementsOnShaw/nsia-ClarkRamseyStatementsOnShaw/Clark%20Ramsey%20On%20Shaw%2008.pdf

[Michael Capasse]

"Justice Admits Error in Shaw-Bertrand Tie"/George Lardner

"The Department of Justice acknowledged yesterday that it goofed in ever suggesting that Clay Shaw was the mysterious "Clay Bertrand" sought after the assassination of President Kennedy.

Attorney General Ramsey Clark too responsibility for the snafu in a statement issued by a Department spokesman. Clark, the spokesman said, felt that justice would best be served by the embarrassing admission.




https://ia801206.us.archive.org/35/items/nsia-ClarkRamseyStatementsOnShaw/nsia-ClarkRamseyStatementsOnShaw/Clark%20Ramsey%20On%20Shaw%2008.pdf

see all the ducks go in a row. 

[Tom Graves]

See all the ducks go in a row.

What's that supposed to mean?

[Steve M. Galbraith]

see all the ducks go in a row. 

So Clark "reveals" that Shaw was Bertrand; "they" (them again) then had to scramble to cover that up: and you conclude from this that they had "all the ducks in a row"?

I would think if they had their ducks lined up that Clark wouldn't have revealed this in the first place. Some ducks, some row. There I go with that crazy lone nutter logic again. The world where 1+1 = 2 and not conspiracy world where it's whatever one wants it to be.

I know I shouldn't but how did they get Clark to retract the statement? And then keep it quiet the remainder of his life? This is Ramsey Clark, someone known for taking on the government. Did they threaten him with the secret death squads going around silencing witnesses?