JFK Most Recent Biography

May 17, 2023 marks the 106th birthday of the 35th President, John Fitzgerald Kennedy, and November 22, 2023 the 60th anniversary of his assassination. I’ve read numerous books on the 35th POTUS, there have been many hundreds of them written about him. The most recent biography of JFK of the many written, was by Harvard historian Frederik Logevall, and released in 2020 — JFK: Coming of Age in the American Century, 1917–1956. I highly recommend it. It was volume 1 of what will be a two volume series covering JFK’s entire life. I have exchanged emails with the author several times. Below is the most recent one I sent to him, which I did after reading an interview he gave in 2020 and the answer he provided on how he plans to address JFK’s assassination in Part 2 of his biography (1956–1963).

As I said to him, when released, his volume 2 will be the most recent and current biography of the 35th POTUS, after much new information has been discovered and released, with potentially more on the way before he publishes. I mentioned he has a chance to discuss his presidency, assassination, and legacy in a new light as a result of this newly released information.

Hi Fred:

I am writing to provide comments to you for your Volume 2, I hope you find them useful. I also am making a request for you to include a specific JFK quote in Volume 2. I realize I have been sending you too many emails on this topic, this will be the last one, at least until after Volume 2 is published!

First, I want to comment regarding your interview with the Harvard Crimson in September of 2020 and to give you this one reader’s feedback and input on one item asked of you in your interview. Second, I want to make a request for the inclusion of a JFK quote in Volume 2 which I only recently learned of. I found it on the web site of the “Virtual JFK” creators, the book and documentary exploring counterfactuals based on oral testimony of key decision makers, scholars, and access to classified documents, and the Armageddon Letters, a project on the Cuban Missile Crisis.

In the interview, you were asked about how you will cover the assassination in Volume 2. Your response was “I haven’t yet written Volume 2 so I haven’t fully decided how I will proceed on this. But certainly I will talk about Lee Harvey Oswald’s background, about what led him to take this action, and will give the reader a full sense of how it all culminated in this terrible moment. And I think I will owe the reader my assessment of what I believe happened. So I will provide it. I don’t think I will get heavily into the deliberations of the Warren Commission or the various conspiracy theories that have sprouted up over the years.”

After thinking and reflecting about it, I do not believe that you do owe the reader your assessment of who killed JFK when writing Volume 2 of his biography. However, if you did decide to provide this assessment as you stated in the interview, I strongly believe you would be making a huge historical mistake if you conclude that Oswald did “take this action,” acting alone, and your reputation as a historian could be negatively affected if you did do so. Many other historians are still treading this path (e.g. Michael Beschloss), and it may ultimately hurt their reputation as historians but in the short term may keep them in good standing with those that want that narrative to remain unchallenged. You previously corresponded with me saying “I will not be able to give in-depth coverage to this topic.” I agree with this and therefore suggest you do not address it at all directly. My detailed explanation and rationale for this position is included at the end of this email.

Since I think JFK’s Cuban and Cold War policy for which his actions there and with the USSR were the centerpiece, and the ultimate reason for his demise, I would like to now give you my request, the inclusion of a JFK quote, purportedly made during the Cuban Missile crisis, assuming it is a valid quote. I discovered it when I found the site for the 2008 Virtual JFK site, which produced a book and documentary, which I have not read nor seen yet, although many clips are on youtube and are quite good. Apparently they have been used by K-12 teachers as a teaching tool based on the comments of those that viewed them as children.

The project included James G. Blight who among his many projects, served as director of the Avoiding Nuclear War project at the Harvard Kennedy School of Government to develop a pioneering research method called critical oral history. This work produced the Armageddon Letters, “a transmedia project (multiplatform storytelling) launched on the occasion of the 50th anniversary of the Cuban missile crisis — takes visitors behind the scenes during the October 1962 Cuban missile crisis, the most dangerous crisis in recorded history.”

Now to the requested quote. I know you have very many great JFK quotes to choose from and have to decide which ones to include in Volume 2. The one I am requesting supposedly occurred near the middle of the Cuban missile Crisis, on October 23, 1962, the day after JFK first addressed the nation on the crisis. I like it because I too played HS football (which you covered for JFK in Volume 1). The quote highlights multiple aspects of JFK the man, his policies and beliefs, his leadership style, his use of humor, and perhaps more importantly, as historian and JFK biographer Robert Dallek notes, it demonstrates how perilous, dangerous and dysfunctional his relationship with his key military generals was. For USAF General Curtis LeMay, the resolution to the crisis was a failure “worse than Munich” (echoes of father Joseph P Kennedy, Volume 1) and “the greatest defeat in our history.” It is unclear where the requested quote took place, and who was present to hear it, or whether JFK actually did speak to Jackie (or another paramour) about this musing, but that would also be interesting to know too!

“Why do I keep remembering a lesson taught to me by high school football coach? He said: “when the opponent is coming at you in the open field, shield your crotch!” That’s what he said. Or sometimes, he was more colloquial: “keep your nuts covered when you are about to be hit.” Now that the shit has hit the fan and everyone knows that we know about the missiles in Cuba, I can’t get that advice out of my mind. The problem is: in this context, there is no way to follow the old man’s advice. There is no protection against an attack of nuclear ballistic missiles. There is no way to put a great big jock strap over the United States of America. That’s what all my hotheads can’t quite grasp.

Maybe as a back-up strategy, I can find a way to put jock straps over the heads of my generals, to muffle their calls for war, war, and more war! That sounds like a job for the great Bob McNamara. I wonder if McNamara knows what a jock strap is. Oh, this is scary. America, cover your nuts.

I need to find a metaphor for the 50% of Americans who have no nuts to cover. I’ll speak to Jackie about this tonight.”

Fred, when released, your Volume 2 will be the most recent JFK biography to be published and will occur after much more is now known about his life and his death and assassination than was known when previous biographies were written. You do have the opportunity, should you choose to take it, to offer new information on his life, his policies, and the historical implications of these, yes including speculation on counterfactuals when discussing his impact and legacy and the legacy of events occurring on November 22, 1963 and since then. With the 60th anniversary of the assassination upcoming, we can expect many remembrances similar to the 50th with more speculations and endless known and unknown unknowns continuing to thrive.

I really do look forward to Volume 2 regardless of where you come down on the “who shot John” question. Volume 1 was a great book and if you approach Volume 2 in the same manner, really digging into JFK the man, his beliefs, relationships, policies and passions, I am convinced his story will show that his life, particularly his later life, was one lived in anticipation of his death as it occurred on November 22, 1963, setting the course for the rest of the American Century.

Thanks for reading and putting up with my many emails to you.

Best Regards,

Jim Loving

“Who Shot John ” and Why? Should Volume 2 of JFK’s Biography attempt an Answer?

The “who shot John” question has been the subject of an inquiring President of a CIA Director, three official investigations by the US government: the Warren Commission (1964); House Select Committee on Assassinations (1977); and Assassination Records Review Board (1996–98); hundreds of books; hundreds of songs; countless movies and documentaries; several lawsuits, with many hundreds of researchers, historians and authors having spent who knows how many man-years investigating this question with the result being there is still no accepted historically accurate explanation!

Numerous public surveys since 1963 repeatedly show that a majority of Americans do not accept the government’s official position — that Lee Harvey Oswald shot the president for no reason, then he himself was murdered within 48 hours while in Police custody by another lone gunman with ties to the mafia who shot him because he felt sorry for Jackie Kennedy. If you attempted to explain why Oswald did it, you would not have enough pages to adequately explore Oswald, and would be on the wrong side of history while attempting to make the case that the US government and their apologists (see Gerald Posner, Vincent Bugliosi, et. al.) and explainers have never been able to make, and for which LHO was never tried nor convicted in a US court of law.

This is a huge rabbit hole for a biographer to attempt to crawl into within a larger scope biography, such as the one you are writing for JFK Volume 2, 1956–63. You could not possibly either historically explain the “who, what, why” of JFK’s murder, or satisfy your readers and those judging your work, regardless of which side of the question of “who shot John” that they may be on.

Having said the above, JFK was murdered, assassinated in broad daylight by gunshots to the head and torso. Everybody agrees on that, we all saw the movie (long before the existence of Deep Fakes, although the Zapruder film was in the CIA’s National Photo Interpretation Center Saturday and Sunday nights 11/23–24/1963). JFK did die for a reason. Somebody (or many somebodies) wanted him killed. Lots of people had numerous motives to kill JFK, the “motives were piling up,” so said ex-FBI agent Bill Turner. All murderers have a motive and detectives attempting to solve them look at physical evidence (The Best Evidence) and potential motives and means for people who could be suspected of killing the deceased. The Nobel prize for literature winner Bob Dylan even wrote in 2020 the best of the many songs (his longest) about the assassination, “Murder Most Foul.”

Your Volume 1 was subtitled “Coming of Age in the American Century.” The term American Century was originally coined by Henry R.Luce in a 1941 editorial as the US anticipated the end of WWII and the beginning of the Cold War, which George Kennan established was an existential fight that would ultimately continue for 45 years until the USSR ceased to exist. After JFK “came of age” he brought with him everything we read about in your Volume1 into the remainder of his public and personal life to be covered by you in Volume 2. His expertise and interest in international affairs was central to his political story from 1956–1963.

This period, along with his death, was in my opinion the fulcrum point of the Cold War and the American Century. JFK was THE major casualty of the Cold War fight of this American Century. He lost the argument for the future direction of the country, attempting to bring about détente with the Communists. Jeffrey Sachs says essentially the same thing, but without the conspiracy. JFK did not lose with the voters, but rather with the power elite which he was confronting in numerous ways during his political life, especially during his presidency, presiding over a government he was not completely in control of. He paid the ultimate price with his life. In my opinion, that is the central story of Volume 2.

Ken Burns, during his famous PBS special on the Civil War said (paraphrasing) everything in American history until the Civil War was in anticipation of it, and everything after it was a result of it. You could say in Volume 2, everything in JFK’s life during the American Century was in anticipation of America confronting its ideals, values, role and place in the world after WWII, and everything demonstrating those since have been as a result of his assassination. The remainder of the American Century is the aftermath of extra-Constitutional regime change but with echoes of his Presidency reverberating since. Every POTUS since JFK are covered with the long shadow of JFK’s short but impactful tenure. Larry Sabato did not quite say all that, but he covered much of it. He did not say all that because he, like many other historians, has not told the historically accurate story of JFK’s death, why he died and why it matters. James Douglas, quoting Thomas Merton, refers to this as the “Unspeakable.” We can speak of it, and we must.

JFK’s life and his death had a huge impact. Britannica says his murder was “the most notorious political murder of the 20th century.” As you have noted, claiming counterfactuals can be a parlor game, but it is undeniable the impact that JFK’s death had in many key areas of our lives, and as a biographer it is something you get to weigh in on — the impact and the potential causes for it happening via political assassination.

Given the above assertion, and given the historical fact of JFK’s murder at the height of the Cold War, and given there were key people with means and motive, as I suggested to you in a previous email, if you intensely explore JFK’s key relationships, personal including illicit ones, and professional, along with his key beliefs and policies, if you were to successfully do that in Volume 2 you will illuminate who his domestic enemies and killers likely were and what their likely motives were. You would really break new ground if you also were to illuminate the skillful means by which the killers could have both assassinated him (if you cover JFK and the many CIA covert operations like the ones I mention below of his administration and Eisenhower administration, but that’s been covered in many other books) and developed their cover story — Bob Dylan’s “magic trick” of concealing the truth from 1963 until the present day. You could do all of this without accusing the first person of murder or attempting to show “who shot John” and why.

If you did all that, you will have done a great historical service while telling the story of JFK the man and his life for his last seven years. You could discuss what JFK was attempting to accomplish, and how some of those things were achieved by his successor and how others were dramatically and instantly altered with his death.

So, who do I think “shot John?” I believe JFK was likely killed by domestic enemies (just like Jackie and RFK believed) because of his policies. I believe his death was a Coup D’tat, conducted as the then-latest black covert regime change operation which was a plan not a plot which took existing covert plans of the US government, including plans to assassinate Castro riding in an open jeep — “Pathfinder”, adding other CIA studied plans — the failed Valkyrie plot to remove Hitler, along with the Joint Chiefs proposed and denied-by-JFK Operation Northwoods False Flag proposal, and re-directed these plans to JFK. This overall strategy and plan have been executed mostly successfully. I arrive at this belief from multiple researchers including Bill Kelly, and his many years of research. His key insight is that for one to understand what happened in Dealey plaza and its aftermath at the highest level of abstraction, one must come to understand the art and craft of intelligence, spycraft, or what those in that profession refer to as the “Great Game.”

By mostly successfully I mean “they” have gotten away with it but did have issues and flaws as all “perfect crimes” do. If the cabal’s motive was a hot war with Cuba and the USSR, which they did not get with the Bay of Pigs nor Cuban Missile Crisis, with JFK’s murder by a Communist Cuban sympathizer the provocation for such a war, which also happened to be their “Day 1” cover story vs the “Lone Nut” “Day 2” cover story LBJ imposed, they did not get that. LBJ did say to the joint Chiefs of Staff on Christmas eve 1963 “Just let me get elected, and then you can have your war.” (Stanley Karnow, Vietnam, A History, p326). LBJ only gave them their war in Viet Nam and refused to blame JFK’s murder on a communist conspiracy, as the Dallas DA Henry Wade intended to do before LBJ intervened with him and J. Edgar Hoover.

LBJ resisted the desired alternative — WWIII with 50 million dead Americans, and thus arrived at his “day 2”solution, getting Earl Warren to cry and accept his assignment (or patriotic duty) to lead the Dulles, err Warren Commission with its pre-determined conclusion. One could even argue that LBJ’s Day 2 story and coverup was in the best interest of the country because it did avoid WWIII, as at that time, America’s military was in a heightened state of alert. Overseas commands in Europe and the Pacific had even put their forces in a greater state of readiness closer to DEFCON III. . However, the historical record has not accurately accounted for LBJ’s actions immediately after the assassination. So…Lee Oswald did it, write that story Commission, issue the report in 11 months, and move on — , end of story. Life and the country moves on. Stuff happens.

No case for who was responsible for the assassination has been proven to a certainty by anyone. There has only been one trial for the murder, New Orleans DA Jim Garrison’s in 1969, which was universally attacked and undermined and ultimately unsuccessful. The American people to this day await a truthful explanation.

There are dozens of theories of who shot John and how and why they did it, thus the rabbit hole. But, if you really want to crawl into that rabbit hole and look into Oswald, starting there is a good place to start. If you were to do so, you will begin to find that Oswald was likely what he said he was, a patsy, his final service to his country. As former Senator Schweiker said, Oswald had the “fingerprints of intelligence” all over him. The US government has continued to conceal all the files it still has (those not already destroyed long ago) on Oswald and other intelligence agents (George Joannides), some of whom have now been established to have been working a CIA influence operation regarding Castro’s Cuba that involved and used Oswald.

The Mary Ferrell Foundation now has active a lawsuit against POTUS Joe Biden to have the government fully comply with the 1992 JFK Records Act which requires full disclosure of all files associated with the JFK Assassination. As the VP of Mary Ferrell Foundation, researcher, author, and former WAPO reporter Jefferson Morley notes, releasing all the files will help researchers and historians better get at the historical truth. One of those files, should it be released in full before you publish, you may find most interesting and useful as a historian. This would be the 1961 still redacted report by POTUS advisor and historian Arthur Schleshinger that was commissioned by JFK as an analysis to advise JFK on how he should reorganize the CIA (this after JFK fired CIA Director Allen Dulles and CIA Deputy Director Charles Cabell, whose brother Earle Cabell was a CIA asset and Mayor of Dallas in 1963, for the Bay of Pigs disaster). Why would the CIA insist that a presidential advisor’s memo on a government reorganization be redacted for reasons of national security 60 years after the fact? I would think historians as well as practitioners of good government design would like to know the answer to that question. Wouldn’t you like to fully know what Schleshinger proposed to JFK and that he likely would have implemented (another very interesting counterfactual)?

One person and place you may want to start is right there in Cambridge. You could have coffee with former CIA operations specialist Ralph Mowatt-Larssen, Senior Fellow for the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs. Like many others, he had an interest in JFK’s assassination, and after looking into it, he has concluded the CIA did it. He only believes it was a small cadre (4–5 people) that was involved in the planning, people that had means and motive, with a very personal animosity towards JFK. He even spoke about this at Harvard. He has spoken publicly about this numerous other times.

Many others including myself think he only partially has it right. Sure, the CIA was likely involved, but so were many other organizations (many unwittingly at first) in the choreographed execution and coverup, ongoing to this very day. The CIA is an operational arm of the government that has “Clients” or “stakeholders” like all other federal agencies do, and they operate on behalf of those clients. Taking Executive Action on their own is not likely.

There were many accessories after the fact. The press was derelict in its coverage and lack of investigative inquiry from the beginning. Many people have talked and died mysterious deaths before talking further. Who knows what Mowatt-Larssen’s ultimate motivation for speaking out is. It could be part of a CIA limited hangout, as they gradually see their 60 years of denial, obstruction, disinformation, and obfuscation begin to finally unravel. Or, he does not want to consider more than that because he just does not have enough information to publicly claim more than that, or as he has said, does not want to face that dark, “unspeakable” possibility as a patriotic, former CIA employee.

So, my recommendation is to consider all the facts and historical implications before you crawl into this rabbit hole. Other JFK biographers have completely sidestepped the “who shot John?” question in their biographies. Some of their readers were unhappy that they did so. I would not be dissatisfied if you did not offer a theory. As this reviewer noted regarding Michael O’Brien’s 2005 JFK biography, “This 905 page behemoth seems to cover every aspect of JFK’s life — often in daunting detail — and to thoroughly examine every controversy, large and small, with admirable balance and objectivity. The book ends swiftly with Kennedy’s assassination and funeral…and without any consideration of his legacy or impact on the country. Throughout the book’s forty-four chapters the author takes care to avoid siding with ardent fans of Kennedy but also to avoid castigating him for his most conspicuous faults. And in the end, rather than evaluate the Kennedy legacy, he leaves final consideration of this inspirational but flawed president entirely to the reader.”