RFK & Jackie to the Soviets: ‘He [the assassin] did not act alone’

“Perhaps there was only one assassin, but he did not act alone …. Dallas was the ideal location for such a crime.”

— William Walton, a friend of the Kennedys’, speaking on behalf of Robert and Jacqueline Kennedy. Walton delivered his message in Moscow to Georgi Bolshakov, who had been a backchannel to the Soviet leadership and was asked to repeat it to Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev. This incident occurred a week after the assassination.

The story was told first in Timothy Naftali and Alexsandr Furskenko’s “One Hell of a Gamble. Naftali is the director of the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum in Yorba Linda, California. The story is also recounted in David Talbot’s “Brothers: The Hidden History of the Kennedy Years.”


  1. Brian LeCloux says:

    Might things have turned out differently if Robert Kennedy had publicly challenged the Warren Commission as others were?
    If people like Mark Lane, Harold Weisberg, Sylvia Meagher and Josiah Thompson had Robert Kennedy on their side would the corporate, mainstream media have been more skeptical of the official theory (and it is a theory)?
    These researcher/writers had more than amply documented that the Warren Report was in need of it’s own autopsy. The files of the Commission disprove the Report.
    Would the media have played the role of watch dog instead of their usual role as lap dog if Robert Kennedy had joined scholarly attack on the Commission?
    As David Wrone, Harold Weisberg and Howard Roffman and others have documented, the major institutions of this country failed during the Warren investigation and the periods of major criticism of it. Does it take the comments of a major public personality to get these institutions to do their job? Or, is there another explanation of how institutions should work in a democracy?

  2. Russian newspaper propaganda very soon focused on pinning the blame (accurately) on Dallas, TX oil executives who hated JFK. By 1965, the KGB had concluded that Lyndon Johnson was behind the JFK assassination. As as been posted here, the Russians also concluded that Cuba policy was a big factor in the JFK assassination and that it was an anti-Soviet coup.

    All of those things are not mutually exclusive. I think they were all factors and players in the JFK assassination. As mentioned before Evelyn Lincoln had both LBJ and CIA angry over Bay of Pigs on her list of JFK murder suspects. Richard Nixon’s code for the JFK assassination was “the whole Bay of Pigs thing.”


    By September 16, 1965, the Soviet KGB had concluded that Lyndon Johnson was responsible for the JFK assassination. On 12/1/66 J. Edgar Hoover sent a memo to LBJ which stated:

    “On September 16, 1965, this same source reported that the KGB Residency in New York City received instructions approximately September 16, 1965, from KGB headquarters in Moscow to develop all possible information concerning President Lyndon B. Johnson’s character, background, personal friends, family, and from which quarters he derives his support in his position as President of the United States. Our source added that in the instructions from Moscow, it was indicated that “now” the KGB was in possession of data purporting to indicate President Johnson was responsible for the assassination of the late President John F. Kennedy. KGB headquarters indicated that in view of this information, it was necessary for the Soviet Government to know the existing personal relationship between President Johnson and the Kennedy family, particularly between President Johnson and Robert and “Ted” Kennedy.”

  3. JSA says:

    I have another question, related to Robert Kennedy’s private thoughts about the assassination in Dallas and how he told the entire family (according to sources listed in David Talbot’s book, Brothers) that he thought the President was killed by a larger domestic conspiracy. Here’s my question: Why did Edward Kennedy, in his final memoir, True Compass, published just around the time of his death, say that he thought that the Warren Commission was mostly correct in its findings and that he had no problems with supporting their conclusions? Was he playing a “public consumption” card a la his brother Robert, who publicly stated in 1964/65 that he supported the Warren Commission’s findings? Why would he do this in his final book, and why wouldn’t speak out at the end of his life?

    I think it’s great what RFK, Jr. did to put the media on watch about the JFK assassination in a year of attention on its 50th anniversary. And from everything I’ve read so far, from David Lifton’s phenomenal book 30 years ago (Best Evidence) through many others, including Brothers and Dr. Charles Crenshaw’s books, I have to think that Oswald was set up and that the assassination was a domestic coup. Still, I wonder why Ted Kennedy said what he did in his final book?

    Anyone care to make a hypothesis?

    • D Jon Davies says:

      Oswald was set up ? The Real killers allowed Oswald to roam freely and possibly creating an alibi ? While they killed the president then got away unseen ?

      You think it’s a smart move to shoot the president from the front but leave evidence behind and just alter the presidents wounds to make it all fit ?

      This is just too easy.

      • greg parker says:

        “Oswald was set up ? The Real killers allowed Oswald to roam freely and possibly creating an alibi ? While they killed the president then got away unseen ?”

        Oswald had no need to “create” an alibi – whatever you may mean by that. He had an alibi by virtue of following his normal routine. Unfortunately, there was no recording of the interrogations which resulted in the only interrogator to accurately record his alibi was the only non-law enforcement person there – Harry Holmes. The others made subtle changes to it in order to void its ability to exonerate him. We know Holmes recorded it accurately because the first day newspaper accounts confirm it – via police sources. Unless Oswald was psychic and “knew” what the newspapers would report, there should be no doubt that those reports corroborate him.

        In any case, why would he give an alibi that in fact left the door open to the possibility he was the sniper? Because if you believe Fritz’ and other versions of the alibi – that is what Oswald did – gave an alibi that did not exonerate him at all.

        • Rex Bradford says:

          In Fritz’s case, his own handwritten notes provide a more compelling alibi for Oswald – eating lunch in the lunchroom and “two negr. came in…..one Jr. & short negro.” – than what Fritz told the Warren Commission Oswald had said (that he had eaten lunch with two negros). Indeed black employees Junior Jarman and the shorter Harold Normal did enter the lunchroom as Oswald told Fritz, though they did not each lunch with him. Fritz donated his notes to the National Archives in the 1990s. See this page for more details, including scanned copies of the notes:

          • greg parker says:

            You’re correct, Rex. He saw them come in at abt 12:25. Soon after that, he went to the 2nd floor for a coke (as was his normal routine). He came back down just as all the commotion started and was standing just outside the little store-room near the stairs sipping his coke when Truly and Baker came in (see stories in the DMN and NY Herald Tribune using Truly and Occhus Campbell as sources respectively). He was not questioned by them as he obviously could not be the shooter. Truly however would recall at least seeing him there.

            He then attempts to leave and is stopped at the front door by Welcome Barnett and asked to step aside while they get his details. After that, he was allowed to go. That his details were taken as per Harry Holmes’ and early news accounts, tells us exactly why his name appears at the top of Revill’s list – the first out is at the top. And it was not the first time Oswald had given a slightly incorrect address. He did it at least once before on PO Box application.

            Unless I missed it, Fritz’ notes do not include anything from the last session where Holmes’ attended. There is a good reason for that.

            The first floor sighting was switched to the second floor and combined with an encounter the Dynamic Duo actually did have on the 4th floor (see Baker affidavit). Truly didn’t come up with the second floor story until the next day. On his affidavit, you’ll see handwritten at the bottom, Mrs Reid’s name. It was given to the cops as someone who could “corroborate” Oswald being on the second floor. She was needed to put Oswald there AFTER The assassination – not at the time of it. In reality, she never saw him at all.

    • Ted Kennedy? A coward. After JFK and RFK were killed, Ted got the Kennedy family together and asked/told them not to make public comments about the JFK & RFK assassination.

      As for Jackie, she would often tell her friends it doesn’t matter, talking about it is not going to bring Jack back, or RFK (who she really loved the most) back to life.

      I once called Ted Kennedy’s office before he died and spoke with a lower level aide. I got the distinct impression that Ted Kennedy believed that a high level domestic political conspiracy murdered JFK. (I wonder if Ted thought GHW Bush had involvement in the JFK assassination.)

      Ted, like RFK, would never publicly comment on what he really thought. Much like Caroline Kennedy, a member of the CFR, who cherishes her establishment bona fides. The JFK Library is controlled by Caroline Kennedy and it is time for that group to start approaching the JFK assassination in a realistic fashion.

  4. D jon Davies says:

    My post was deleted yet you leave these kooks posts up…Jackie really loved rfk not jfk ? Jefferson you’re a kook too. Sayonara.

    • jeffmorley says:

      Your post was not deleted. Your comment that other commenters are “kooks” is violation of JFK Facts Comment policy, which bans ad hominem attacks. I’m only publishing this message to disabuse you and everybody of the false notion that dissent is not welcome here.

      Dissent is welcome. Witness Bill Kelly’s respectful treatment of Jean Davison, with whom he disagrees profoundly. If you show such respect, you will always be welcome here. If you don’t, please stay away.

    • Correct. Jackie Kennedy was infatuated with Robert Kennedy who was emotionally there for her in ways that JFK never was. For example, when Jackie had her first stillborn child in the mid 1950’s, JFK was partying with George Smathers and a bevy of beauties on a sailboat in the Mediterranean. RFK was at the hospital comforting Jackie, much in the same way he rushed on Air Force One on 11/22/63 when it landed in DC and hurried to her side. He said “I’m here.”

      David Heymann wrote a book entitled “Bobby and Jackie: A Love Story.” He convinced me.


      Re: D jon Davies, maybe other folks aren’t “kooks.” Maybe you are just ignornant. Btw read the comments sections of my Amazon review of Heymann’s book. I put a lot of his documentation in there of the RFK-Jackie affair.

      • greg parker says:

        Robert, is the same C David Heymann who was a plagiarist and who used the most tendentious hearsay sources he could find to smear the Kennedys? Is this the person you find so credible?

        You simply don’t care. If it involves a sex angle – you’ll believe anyone.

  5. Jonathan says:

    D. Jon Davies asks whether Oswald was set up. A fair question.

    Yes, hes was set up. Somewhat crudely. But professionally.

    The rifle and C.E. 399 and the backyard photos: steak and baked potato for any skilled, unbiased defense attorney. Given the reasonable doubt standard.

    The nitrate tests. Negative on the cheek; negative for a rifle shot.

    The Walker shooting: just give the facts to a competent defense attorney, and Oswald walks.

    But the story he shot at Walker, killed Tippit and killed JFK was promoted by our government and the MSM. Promoted but never cross-examined for the benefit of the American people.

    Like Jeff, I embrace dissent. But I hew to the facts. The facts tell me Oswald was a patsy.

  6. LMB says:

    On this C-span program at the 45.20 mark on this question, see the response to this question. Everyone has their own believes.

  7. Harry says:

    RFK and Jackie should have said something at the time. To remain silent was a disservice to the American people and the nation as a whole. Jackie HAD to know there were many gunmen firing from many directions since she chased a piece of her husband’s skull that was blown out over the rear of the limousine.

    RFK was more knowledgeable as an insider that there were threats against his brother’s life and he knew who the real enemies of JFK were even as JFK himself knew that if a coup occurred it would come from the CIA as he stated to Arthur Krock in an October 3, 1963 New York Times article.

    Even Arthur Schlesinger, in later years, stated cryptically “we were at war with the national security people” when asked who he thought killed JFK. The people around Kennedy knew what really happened and kept quiet about it. David Powers and Kenneth O’Donnell in the follow-up car knew what happened but were urged to tow the government line by the FBI.

    Now look at the abysmal mess this country is in. If the traitors that killed the President had been brought to trial instead of protected, would the country be better off today? I say yes.

    • Jason L. says:

      I was heartened by the RFK Jr. comments last year, but I don’t understand why the Kennedy clan is still so passive about this. Most of us would be enraged to the point of insanity if this happened to our family. And with the resources they have, they at one time at least might have been able to get to the bottom of it. I just don’t get it.

  8. Avinash says:

    Maybe if RFK had become President, he would have reopened the investigation into his brother’s assassination.

  9. Larry Schnapf says:

    we can only speculate why the Kennedy family did not publicly share the private doubts they had on the WC conclusion. It could have been to protect the children, to preserve RFK’s viability to run for president or to prevent disclosures of the Castro assassination attempts and our government’s association with mobsters. The Kennedy family could have helped the country learn the truth but they had no obligation to do so. The government covered up the truth–why should they put more family members at risk in the face of such opposition?

  10. Harry says:

    QUESTION: Does the Kennedy family have the authority to have JFK exhumed and do a private autopsy on his body? And if they do, would they? I know the Army has jurisdiction over the grave, but do the Kennedy’s have jurisdiction over the body?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

In seeking to expand the range of informed debate about the events of 1963 and its aftermath, JFKFacts.org welcomes comments that are factual, engaging, and civil. more