Today NewsMax, a quasi- independent online media outlet, is reporting the latest obfuscation by old and decrepit JFK assassination investigators—Burt Griffin, David Slawson, and Robert Blakey. Slawson and Griffin are outright liars; Blakey is trying to redeem himself.
According to NewsMax, “In separate interviews with The Associated Press, Burt Griffin and fellow staff counsel David Slawson stood by the Warren Commission's conclusions. Each pointed to a series of personal rejections behind Oswald's deadly action: Weeks after he made an unsuccessful attempt in Mexico City to get a visa to Cuba, his wife Marina rejected his attempts to reconcile their rocky marriage. It was during Oswald's visit, the night before the shooting, to the suburban Dallas home where his wife and two young daughters were staying that he packed up his disassembled Mannlicher-Carcano rifle to take to work the next day, the Warren Commission determined. That next morning, he removed his wedding ring, left his money with his wife, and departed to carry out the assassination.”
“‘If she had taken him back," Slawson said, "he wouldn't have done it.’”
There is so much disinformation and deception in that report that it is hard to know where to begin. First of all, there is absolutely no evidence that Marina and Lee Oswald were breaking up. They’d had a turbulent relationship for years and, yet, had stayed married. Why do Slawson and Griffin presume Marina was not taking him back? They were not living together full time as it was, but Lee and Marina saw each other every weekend at Ruth Paine’s house. (Author’s note: Ruth Paine was a CIA covert operative who was married at the time to Michael Paine, Bell Helicopter employee with a CIA security clearance. Conveniently, both the Paines and Oswalds maintained separate residences from their spouses in order to confuse and divert future investigators from more closely linking and examining their relationships and their intelligence links.) The only reason Griffin and Slawson make their wild speculation about that particular weekend is that JFK was assassinated on that Friday, and they have to provide some motivation for the presumed (incorrectly so) killer. You see, the Warren Commission never could come up with a believable motive for Oswald. Some, like Griffin and Slawson, say he wanted to do something earth-shattering to make himself feel important, or to impress others, like his wife. Just one minor problem, OSWALD DENIED HAVING ANYTHING TO DO WITH JFK’s MURDER! Oops, scratch that desperate attempt at assigning motive.
The other investigator named in the NewsMax story was G. Robert Blakey, head of the House Select Committee on Assassinations that conducted its business in the mid-1970s. According to NewsMax, “there were mountains of material considered by the committee, some of it from the CIA. And the CIA's liaison to the committee was none other than George Joannides, by then retired from the agency. Blakey, the committee's chief counsel, recalled how the CIA brought in Joannides to act as a middleman to help fill requests for documents made by committee researchers. ‘He was put in a position to edit everything we were given before it was given to us,’ Blakey said.
“But Blakey didn't learn about Joannides' past until Morley unearthed it in files declassified years later.
‘If I'd known Joannides was the case officer for the DRE, he couldn't have been liaison; he would have been a witness,’ Blakey told The Associated Press.
“Blakey added: ‘Do I think I was snookered, precisely like the Warren Commission was? Yes.’"
The article then circles back to the still-secret investigative files—about 300 pages of which relate to Joannides. The question needs to be asked: Why after 50 years is the CIA still withholding evidence? What is it hiding?