Oswald in the doorway: the blog of the Oswald Innocence Campaign, by Ralph Cinque

Two months ago, in August, the National Enquirer made the claim that the document-dump that is about to happen a few days from now will reveal that JFK had fired Hoover, that he gave him a date to have his desk cleared out, for him to be gone from the FBI Building. That date was December 31, 1963. 

Here is the link: http://www.nationalenquirer.com/photos/j-edgar-hoover-fbi-jfk-murder/

We'll see if it materializes. The article states that Hoover is the one who brought Guy Bannister, a former FBI agent, into it to groom Oswald as patsy. According to the article, Hoover's hit team was made up of "Cubans." 

But, what I want to see is that document showing that JFK terminated Hoover as of December 31 because that will be big, big, big.

But, regardless if it's there or not, I have no doubt that Hoover was deeply involved in the operation of killing Kennedy. Not just covering it up afterwards, which of course Hoover did, but killing him. 

And that makes it all the more ironic that Hoover should have been the one who called Robert Kennedy. The very murderer called the victim's brother. 

And Robert Kennedy relented; there is no doubt about it. He wasn't a stupid man. He got it. So, why did he do it? Didn't he love his brother? Of course, he did. 

But, his brother was dead, and Hoover's threat included JFK's legacy. You want your brother to be glorified and canonized don't you? You want his dirt to die with him, don't you? Of course, all his dirt did eventually come out, but if RFK had gone on the warpath, it would have come out immediately. 

Imagine for a moment if RFK had gone on the warpath, if he made a public announcement that he does not believe the story that is being told about a lone gunman, that he thinks a coup d'etat took place, that he believes that soon to be fired LBJ, and soon to be fired J. Edgar Hoover, and already fired Allen Dulles were behind the killing of his brother and that his own investigation would prove it. What would have been the response?

First, the media would have stopped giving RFK a mic. LBJ would have immediately fired RFK as Attorney General. A criminal investigation of RFK would have begun. Obviously, it would have been a crisis the likes of which we have never seen in this country. I think most politicians, out of self-protection, would have supported the new leader and the new government and condemned Robert Kennedy. But some, who had close ties to RFK and the Kennedy family, would no doubt have supported him. It would have been unprecedented. It may have led to martial law. There really is no telling what would have happened. 

But, Robert Kennedy thought about it and decided not to oppose. And once he did, all others, including the Kennedy family and Kennedy loyalists within the government and Congress took their cue from him and did likewise. It's interesting that he didn't even resign as Attorney General. If he had done that, resigned, refused to work under Johnson, it would have shaken things up a bit, but they would have spun it, saying that his family needed him now, and dealing with his brother's records and legacy was what he had to do. There would have been plenty of murmuring, but that alone, his resignation, would NOT have thrown the country into crisis.  So, I'm surprised that Robert Kennedy didn't at least do that much: resign. 

Of course, if he had resigned, others may have resigned, such as Pierre Salinger. But, no way would Rusk, McNamara, or Bundy have resigned. Huh. Fat chance. 

But, Robert Kennedy didn't even do that. He didn't even resign. He eventually did resign to run for the Senate, but that wasn't the same as resigning immediately. And I wouldn't be surprised if that phone call from J. Edgar Hoover had something to do with it. 

"I don't have to tell you how important solidarity is at this time. It will not only serve the interests of the country but also of your brother's legacy." 

Robert Kennedy got the message.