John F. Kennedy's letter to his alleged mistress (Mary Meyer) is up for auction

[Jim DiEugenio]

I have no idea what Doyle hopes to accomplish by calling me a lone nut advocate. That is simply looney.

But to get back to his finger waving accusation. Let me refer to parts of my review. Which, for instance, Deb Conway thought was one of the best things I ever wrote.

From an historical point of view, its always good to examine the origins of some phenomenon or trend. That is, where did the author begin.

As Janney himself notes, he began with Leo Damore. Which, in my view, is problematic right off the bat. Because, its clear that Damore hit at least one, perhaps two roadblocks in his travail on this story. One was tragically personal, and the other was intellectual. I have little inside knowledge of the first which resulted in a personal tragedy for him.

But let us examine the latter. Here is an excerpt from my review of Janney's book:

Well, Janney's piece de resistance in this regard is a set of notes made by Damore's lawyer, Jim Smith, about a phone call Damore had with him in 1993. Damore called Smith and said he solved the Meyer case. Damore said he sent a letter to a CIA safe house to one William Mitchell. Recall, this is the guy who used a chemical process to turn himself from white to black to fake out Wiggins in the murder. Well, if you can believe it, Mitchell replied to Damore's letter.

Again, it is necessary to step back from the construct. I have been doing field research in this case for a long time. I have encountered CIA safe houses. The reason they are called that is that they are run, monitored, and controlled by the Agency. The idea that a journalist like Damore would write a letter to one, it would get through, the hit man would reply, and they then would talk for hours on the phone, this is all quite foreign to my experience. But that is what Janney wants us to believe happened. (Janney p. 407) Janney even writes that Damore supposedly met the man in person. (ibid, pgs. 378, 404) Now, just this would be enough for me to arch my eyebrows and close my eyes. But further, there are no tapes or transcripts of any part of the call. Even though Damore said he taped the whole thing. (ibid, p. 408) Even though Damore said he was up most of the night talking to the man. (ibid, p. 404) Further, none were produced either at the time of the call in 1993, after Damore's death two years later, or in the intervening 17 years. Any writer worth his salt who had been working on a project as long as Damore had would have:

1. Taped the call
2. Had it transcribed almost immediately
3. He would then have had the tape and transcripts duplicated.
4. The originals would have been placed either in a personal safe or in a safe deposit box at a bank. Not just to prevent them from being purloined. But because they were worth money. They would be instrumental in negotiating a large book contract from a major publishing house.

What does Janney say in this regard? That Damore's book agent told him "he thought he remembered Damore talking about certain aspects of this call." (ibid, p. 412, italics added) Under normal conditions, once Damore told the agent about every aspect of the call, the agent would have requested the copies be sent to him special delivery. He then would have begun working the phones. Within a week or so, he would have had a substantial contract for Damore to sign. Yet, none of this happened, or even came close to happening. Damore had two years to come up with this proof, or to meet with Mitchell, attain his photo, and ascertain his precise living conditions. Yet none of this information exists.

[Jim DiEugenio]

To me, the above was so bizarre, so weird, so against the rational path, that I was shocked that Janney included it in his book.

But this is now indiscriminate Janney was. How eager to embrace things that simply would not stand scrutiny from any objective observer.

To really understand why this is so bizarre, let me reiterate:

Damore is saying he talked to the actual killer of Mary Meyer. Both on the phone and in person.

He is also saying that he wrote a letter to him and the guy replied. From a CIA safe house.

[size=12]But yet, even though Damore was an experienced author, and he knew the value of tapes, he did not record the call.

Even though it would have been the end of the Holy Grail. And it would have meant a huge six figure contract for his book.

Janney apparently bought this and continued in these footsteps.

My question would be: Why? This would have set off all kinds of alarm bells with me. As Henry Lee once said, "Something wrong here."


[/SIZE]

[Jim DiEugenio]

But that is not the worse part of this.

Even though its pretty bad.

Because recall, Janney said that he could not find this guy that Damore said replied to his letter, who he talked with on the phone for hours, who he met with in person, at least once.

That is, the killer of Mary Meyer. About which all that exists is Damore's agent's jottings and memories. Of this version of Mitchell in New York.

But Tom Scully, armed with not anything like the resources Janney had, just with his computer did find Mitchell.

And, guess what, this Mitchell in California cannot be the guy Damore says he talked to more than once.

So where does that leave the whole Damore story then?

And what does that tell us about Janney's sleuthing powers.

[Jim DiEugenio]

Let us continue with Damore's reliability which Janney never questioned.

Again, from my review:

But Janney now goes further in using Damore. The notes say that Damore talked to Fletcher Prouty. Prouty helped Damore put some pieces of the puzzle together and identified Mitchell as an assassin. (ibid, p. 420) This jarred me. Knowing the life and work of Prouty as I do, it was out of character for him. Fletcher never identified a black operator unless he had a high public profile e.g. Ed Lansdale, Alexander Butterfield. I knew this not just from his work but also from the patron of his work, Len Osanic. So I talked to Len about this point: Did you ever know Fletcher to expose an undercover black operator? He replied in the negative. In fact, he even sent me a radio show in which a host was badgering Prouty to do just that. Fletcher would not. I then asked him if Fletcher had ever mentioned Damore, Janney, or Mary Meyer to him. He said no. I asked if, since Fletcher's death in 2001, Janney had called him to confirm anything? He said no he had not. I then asked him when Fletcher had resigned his position in the Pentagon. Len said it was in January of 1964. (E-mail communication with Osanic of 6/22/12)

I now started to scratch my head. Mary Meyer was killed in October of 1964. How could Fletcher have known about the Damore/Janney "operation" if he wasn't in the Pentagon anymore?

[Albert Doyle]

I have no idea what Doyle hopes to accomplish by calling me a lone nut advocate. That is simply looney.

You're putting words in my mouth that I didn't say Jim. I clearly said that the best discussion of the evidence inevitably leads to a point where denial of real assassination events conflicts with the stated purpose of this site and has to be reckoned with. That is clearly NOT calling you a Lone Nutter which I definitely did not do. What I did say is that argument of wrongful information whose content and tenor misleads the public on the truth of assassination matters is the equal of the same violation that Lone Nutters commit and is restricted by this site by rule. You know, it's sort of what you do, criticizing people for getting stuff wrong. Only this time I feel you are wrong and you are violating your own standards. That was clear from what I wrote. It is unfair to suggest otherwise.

I feel that you are ignoring Leary's documented and real investigation of Mary Meyers' death by means of faulty logic. It makes sense that Leary would not get emotional on his roof or engage in an investigation in New York for a person he never met. Just the opposite, this reaction bespeaks the relationship Janney claims. Second, you overtly suggested the recently-discovered letter was a fake. The provenance suggests it isn't. Again, no need for any unpleasantness, but I feel this deserves an answer since you have taken a position that is not correct.

We've already covered the fact that if you look for flaws in Janney you will find them, however in my opinion that doesn't answer or compensate for the things I pointed-out. Do you understand, Jim, that Janney could have chased bad sources on a good theory and that it is the responsibility of good researchers to sift the credible information from the whole? This is the "little bit pregnant" rule I have pointed-out many times before. What you are doing is like saying a huge mound of manure that contains a million dollars in gold flakes strewn through it should be thrown out because it is a big smelly pile of ****. The good researcher goes for the gold no matter what it is contained in.


.

[Drew Phipps]

I had no idea that the discussion would be sidetracked by what is apparently a long standing argument. Can you close this thread?

[Jim DiEugenio]

Before you think of closing it, please consider this:

Doyle on June 6th:

I am also forced to mention that this site does not allow Lone Nutters. At some point an evaluation has to be made if denial of Harvey & Lee and Janney, and backing of notorious sites, requires accountability on that account in regard to the very real assassination of Mary Meyer by CIA and how it relates to Kennedy's assassination.



Doyle, two days later:
You're putting words in my mouth that I didn't say Jim.

[Albert Doyle]

Before you think of closing it, please consider this:

Doyle on June 6th:

I am also forced to mention that this site does not allow Lone Nutters. At some point an evaluation has to be made if denial of Harvey & Lee and Janney, and backing of notorious sites, requires accountability on that account in regard to the very real assassination of Mary Meyer by CIA and how it relates to Kennedy's assassination.



Doyle, two days later:
You're putting words in my mouth that I didn't say Jim.

It clearly means that since the site does not allow Lone Nutters that therefore denial of real evidence that equals Lone Nutter denial should not be allowed either. It is clearly saying that in the same sense of restricting Lone Nutters, that denial of real evidence should also be disallowed or at least evaluated in the same sense that Lone Nutter denial is.


But honestly, wouldn't it be the shorter route to answer the points of evidence I spelled-out instead of parsing semantics?


Jim, you spoke at the ROKC conference. ROKC is rabidly anti-Armstrong. Hargrove's latest Armstrong entry is very strong evidence of the legitimacy of the Harvey & Lee theory. I believe it merits an explanation since you yourself specialize in calling out people's associations with bad sources.


(Apologies to Drew. Perhaps it should go to another thread)

[Jim DiEugenio]

Nice try at a walk back. Your sense of irony is quite limited.

Are you really going to equate me speaking via Skype at ROKC on the state of the case with you going over to an actual lone nutter forum, namely Duncan's, and trashing me?

[Mark A. O'Blazney]

John F. Kennedy's letter to his alleged mistress is up for auction

Jun 3rd 2016 2:25PM

http://www.aol.com/article/2016/06/03/jo.../21388585/

Another scrap of former President John F. Kennedy's personal life is up for auction, and this one includes some revealing details about his relationship with an alleged mistress. Among the many Kennedy-related items RR Auction is selling are four sheets of White House stationery on which Kennedy scribbled a 4-page note to Mary Pinchot Meyer, a D.C. painter who's believed to have carried on an affair with Kennedy.


The note reads in part: "Why don't you leave suburbia for once come and see me. ... You say that it is good for me not to get what I want. After all of these years you should give me a more loving answer than that." An auction spokesperson told People, "There's a playfulness to him in the letter that you don't see in JFK's other correspondence."


Meyer married CIA official Cord Meyer in 1945, and the couple became close friends of the Kennedy family. Rumors of an affair between Kennedy and Meyer swirled for years; Washington Post editor Ben Bradlee confirmed the affair in his 1995 autobiography. The letters are undated, but the site places them circa October 1963 one month before Kennedy was assassinated. Meyer herself was also shot and killed one year later; her murder was never solved, a fact that's launched many conspiracy theories.


Bidding for the letters is expected to reach $30,000, so you'll need deep pockets to have a shot at this piece of Kennedy memorabilia.

******
It is said that the letter was never actually mailed, and that Evelyn Lincoln kept the letter in her possession for years.

Have just received my registration info from Sue Recks at RR Auction House in Boston.

Item # 8021 is but one of the many verifiable pieces of Kennedy's life & times to be made available to the public.

Just saw Woody's 'Cafe Society' last night, and Bobby's love interest had bought a love letter written by Rudolph Valentino to impress her boss, whom she is having an affair with, the letter bought as a gift for their 'paper' anniversary of their paramouric excursion.

Sorry to ramble, just trying to get back on topic here…….. right, Mr. Phipps ? There IS another thread going on about the nuances of this ongoing murder mystery. I can understand why Ms. Meredith requested an all-encapsulating 'prayer man' thread.