Spitfire List Web site and blog of anti-fascist researcher and radio personality Dave Emory.

For The Record  

FTR #971 Nazis in New Orleans

Dave Emory’s entire life­time of work is avail­able on a flash dri­ve that can be obtained HERE. The new dri­ve is a 32-giga­byte dri­ve that is cur­rent as of the pro­grams and arti­cles post­ed by late sum­mer of 2017. The new dri­ve (avail­able for a tax-deductible con­tri­bu­tion of $65.00 or more.)

WFMU-FM is pod­cast­ing For The Record–You can sub­scribe to the pod­cast HERE.

You can sub­scribe to e‑mail alerts from Spitfirelist.com HERE.

You can sub­scribe to RSS feed from Spitfirelist.com HERE.

You can sub­scribe to the com­ments made on pro­grams and posts–an excel­lent source of infor­ma­tion in, and of, itself HERE.

This broad­cast was record­ed in one, 60-minute seg­ment.

Intro­duc­tion: This broad­cast is some­thing of a “pre­quel” to the next two pro­grams, both deal­ing with Char­lottesville.

What the media have termed “Alt-Right” and the author calls “the rad­i­cal right” were present at Char­lottesville and par­tic­i­pants in the assas­si­na­tion of JFK.

Numer­ous pro­grams and arti­cles on this web­site have dealt with Nazi involve­ment with the assas­si­na­tion of JFK, from para­mil­i­tary Amer­i­can Nazi ele­ments to indi­vid­u­als and insti­tu­tions over­lap­ping the Rein­hard Gehlen spy milieu.

In this pro­gram, we excerpt a recent, mas­sive vol­ume Gen­er­al Walk­er and the Mur­der of Pres­i­dent Kennedy by Jef­frey H. Cau­field M.D. NB: For a sea­soned researcher, this is a use­ful and impor­tant book, how­ev­er it MUST be handicapped–the author is dis­mis­sive of the [by now record­ed fact] that ele­ments of the intel­li­gence com­mu­ni­ty were involved in the killing. Of course, they were.

Notwith­stand­ing that sig­nif­i­cant flaw, the book fea­tures a trea­sure trove of infor­ma­tion about Nazi and fas­cist con­nec­tions to the assas­si­na­tion of JFK. A vet­er­an researcher can–and should–easily take the infor­ma­tion from Cau­field­’s book and col­late it with the intel­li­gence com­mu­ni­ty ele­ments with which the “rad­i­cal right” indi­vid­u­als and insti­tu­tions are affil­i­at­ed.

Although not coter­mi­nous by any means, what Cau­field terms “the rad­i­cal right” and U.S. intel­li­gence are pro­found­ly con­nect­ed.

We sus­pect that over­lap­ping groups com­pris­ing what Cau­field terms “the rad­i­cal right” con­sti­tute an “Amer­i­can Glad­io.”

This hypo­thet­i­cal rela­tion­ship sug­gests the pos­si­bil­i­ty of a domes­tic ver­sion of “Oper­a­tion Stay Behind” and its Ital­ian com­po­nent, “Oper­a­tion Glad­io”. The above were NATO oper­a­tions that uti­lized extreme right and fas­cist ele­ments as poten­tial gueril­la forces to fight against com­mu­nists in the event of either a suc­cess­ful Sovi­et takeover of West­ern Europe (an extreme improb­a­bil­i­ty), or the greater like­li­hood of a pop­u­lar Com­mu­nist takeover of a major West­ern Euro­pean coun­try. In prac­tice, Glad­io result­ed in a pro­gram of ter­ror­ist acts (bomb­ings, kid­nap­pings and assas­si­na­tions) direct­ed against the left. (Many of those acts were actu­al­ly blamed on the left, in order to dis­cred­it it in the eyes of the pub­lic.)

Dis­turbed by the alleged lack of “back­bone” demon­strat­ed by Amer­i­can mil­i­tary per­son­nel dur­ing the Kore­an War, Amer­i­can strate­gic thinkers under­took to indoc­tri­nate the Amer­i­can pub­lic with a prac­ti­cal­ly mil­i­tant, anti-Com­mu­nist per­spec­tive. These lead­ers feared that, in the event of a pro­tract­ed nuclear face-off with the Sovi­ets, lack of Amer­i­can polit­i­cal resolve could result in the Unit­ed States “blink­ing” and back­ing down in such a con­fronta­tion.

In 1958, the Eisen­how­er admin­is­tra­tion issued a Nation­al Secu­ri­ty Coun­cil direc­tive autho­riz­ing the mil­i­tary to engage in a pro­gram of polit­i­cal indoc­tri­na­tion of mil­i­tary per­son­nel and (more impor­tant­ly) the civil­ian pop­u­la­tion as well. The goal of this direc­tive was to alter the polit­i­cal views of the Amer­i­can peo­ple. The con­sti­tu­tion­al impli­ca­tions of this direc­tive could not be exag­ger­at­ed. The bulk of the broad­cast exam­ines evi­dence that sug­gests that, as a result of this NSC direc­tive, the nation­al secu­ri­ty estab­lish­ment began uti­liz­ing far-right and fas­cist groups in order to real­ize the desired ide­o­log­i­cal trans­for­ma­tion. Mr. Emory sug­gests that these net­works may very well have been uti­lized in the Amer­i­can polit­i­cal assas­si­na­tions of the 1960s and ear­ly 1970s, as well as domes­tic intel­li­gence oper­a­tions against the civ­il rights and anti-Viet­nam War move­ments.

We begin our analy­sis with New Orleans DA Jim Gar­rison’s 1967 let­ter to Lord Bertrand Rus­sell, in which he not­ed the Nazi asso­ci­a­tions of many of the peo­ple involved with the JFK assas­si­na­tion.

Next, we excerpt text dis­cussing David Fer­rie’s Nazi mus­ings and asso­ci­a­tions.

In future pro­grams, we will take up the issue of what Fort Sill Oper­a­tions Com­mand Offi­cer Glenn Pinch­back referred to as a “Neo-Nazi plot to enslave Amer­i­ca in the name of anti-Com­mu­nism” and “a neo-Nazi plot gar­gan­tu­an in scope.”

In FTR #188, we detailed the “Hate Bus,” a gam­bit by Amer­i­can Nazi Par­ty leader George Lin­coln Rock­well to protest the Free­dom Rid­ers and the Civ­il Rights move­ment. It bears some struc­tur­al sim­i­lar­i­ty to the Char­lottesville inci­dent, with fas­cists stag­ing a counter-event to a pro­gres­sive demon­stra­tion, in this case the “free­dom rid­ers” bus rid­den by white col­lege stu­dents and black civ­il rights activists in sup­port of inte­gra­tion and vot­ing rights in the South.

Note that appar­ent Oswald asso­ciate Ray Lea­hart was the best man at the wed­ding of David Duke, a major par­tic­i­pant in the Char­lottesville event.

High­light­ing aspects of the career of “Hate Bus” par­tic­i­pant Ray Lea­hart, a New Orleans ANP [Amer­i­can Nazi Par­ty] mem­ber, we note that:

  • Lea­hart was alleged to have been an asso­ciate of Lee Har­vey Oswald. ” . . . . On Decem­ber 16, 1963, after the Kennedy assas­si­na­tion, the New Orleans FBI inves­ti­gat­ed a tip that Lee Har­vey Oswald had been seen with Ray Lea­hart dur­ing the pre­vi­ous sum­mer. Lea­hart was a New Orleans Nazi whom [Guy] Ban­is­ter had bailed out of jail in the Hate Bus inci­dent. . . .”
  • The FBI had no doc­u­ments on Lea­hart, rais­ing the ques­tion of what hap­pened to a doc­u­ment about Lea­hart’s arrest in the “Hate Bus” inci­dent. (For more about the Hate Bus, see FTR #188.) Author Cau­field spec­u­lates that Oswald han­dler Guy Ban­is­ter’s close rela­tion­ship with FBI SAC Reg­is Kennedy may have had some­thing to do with the dis­ap­pear­ance of Lea­hart’s arrest record. ” . . . . No FBI doc­u­ments, oth­er than the New Orleans police mug shots from the Hate Bus arrest, were in the FBI record, which rais­es the ques­tion of what hap­pened to FBI ref­er­ence 841767D (Lea­hart’s arrest record in the Hate Bus inci­dent) and why it did not accom­pa­ny the alle­ga­tion and sub­stan­tial like­li­hood of an Oswald-Lea­hart asso­ci­a­tion when sent to the War­ren Com­mis­sion. Ban­is­ter’s close friend­ship with New Orleans FBI SAC Reg­is Kennedy may have had some­thing to do with the crit­i­cal omis­sion. . . .”
  • Lea­hart was close to Dal­las, Texas, ANP mem­bers, includ­ing Robert Sur­rey, who print­ed a noto­ri­ous poster of JFK: ” . . . . . . . The Dal­las FBI office was aware of cor­re­spon­dence link­ing Lea­hart to ANP [Amer­i­can Nazi Par­ty] activ­i­ties in Texas. One Dal­las ANP mem­ber, Robert Sur­rey, was a close asso­ciate of Gen­er­al [Edwin] Walk­er. Sur­rey’s wife Mary was Walk­er’s per­son­al sec­re­tary. Wealthy oil­men report­ed­ly fund­ed Sur­rey’s Nazi out­fit. Sur­rey print­ed the infa­mous ‘Want­ed for Trea­son’ poster which had cir­cu­lat­ed in Dal­las before the asso­ci­a­tion. The poster pic­tured mug-shot-styled pho­tos of Pres­i­dent Kennedy and accused him of trea­son. Sur­rey and Walk­er were War­ren Com­mis­sion wit­ness­es, and, of course, Walk­er was close to both Guy Ban­is­ter and Kent Court­ney. . . .”
  • Lea­hart was an asso­ciate of David Duke, and was best man at Duke’s wed­ding. ” . . . . On Sep­tem­ber 9, 1972, Lea­hart became the best man at Duke’s wed­ding. . . .”

The pro­gram then reviews Daniel Bur­ros, one of the Amer­i­can Nazi Par­ty mem­bers whose con­tact infor­ma­tion was in Lee Har­vey Oswald’s address book.

Bur­ros viewed with favor vet­er­an Nazi Edward Hunter, a Guy Ban­is­ter’s asso­ciate, who had been a mem­ber of the pre-war Nazi Fifth Col­umn in the U.S.

Bur­ros alleged­ly com­mit­ted sui­cide at the home of Penn­syl­va­nia Klan leader Roy Frankhouser, who–as seen in AFA #13–had oper­a­tional links with ele­ments of U.S. intel­li­gence, CIA in par­tic­u­lar.

Frankhouser also infil­trat­ed the Social­ist Work­ers Par­ty, an orga­ni­za­tion so infil­trat­ed by spooks and fas­cists that it was lit­tle more than a right-wing front orga­ni­za­tion. (The SWP was the ide­o­log­i­cal petri dish in which Lyn­dn LaRouche and Bernie Sanders were cul­tured.)

Note that Frankhouser was appar­ent­ly in pos­ses­sion of cor­re­spon­dence from Michael and Ruth Paine, two “lib­er­al” babysit­ters of Lee Har­vey Oswald and his wife. Both Michael and Ruth Paine had strong links to the nation­al secu­ri­ty estab­lish­ment.

Flesh­ing out the con­ti­nu­ity between the Nazi Fifth Col­umn of the pre-World War II peri­od and what author Cau­field termed the “rad­i­cal right” and by con­tem­po­rary observers as “the alt-right,” we excerpt John Roy Carl­son’s Under Cov­er. Note that Edward Hunter was an asso­ciate of Guy Ban­is­ter’s. (Ban­is­ter was one of Oswald’s appar­ent intel­li­gence han­dlers.)

Ger­hard Frey was the edi­tor of the Deutsche Nation­al Zeitung und Sol­dat­en Zeitung, which had vet­er­ans of the SS and Goebbels’ pro­pa­gan­da bureau on its edi­to­r­i­al staff. The pub­li­ca­tion received finan­cial sup­port from the CIA.

A financier of con­tem­po­rary Russ­ian fas­cist Vladimir Zhi­ronovsky, Frey was asso­ci­at­ed with the Anti-Bol­she­vik Bloc of Nations.

Formed by Adolf Hitler in 1943, that orga­ni­za­tion is a con­sor­tium of East­ern Euro­pean Third Reich sub­sidiaries such as the Ukrain­ian OUN/B, the Roman­ian Iron Guard, the Bul­gar­i­an Nation­al Front, the Hun­gar­i­an Arrow Cross, the Croa­t­ian Ustachi, the Slo­va­kian Hlin­ka Par­ty and oth­ers. The uni­fy­ing ele­ment in these fas­cist orga­ni­za­tions was the SS. The ABN became a key ele­ment of the Gehlen orga­ni­za­tion and the GOP.

Both Frey and Gen­er­al Charles Willough­by were asso­ci­at­ed with the ABN.

 Gen­er­al Charles Willough­by was also tight with the ABN, and its founder Jaroslav Stet­zko, the head of Ukraine’s Nazi col­lab­o­ra­tionist gov­ern­ment. (The spelling of Stet­zko’s name varies with the translit­er­a­tion from the Cyril­lic alpha­bet.) In numer­ous pro­grams, we have dis­cussed Stet­zko, his wartime geno­ci­dal oper­a­tions, his and the ABN’s links to the Gehlen orga­ni­za­tion, the GOP, the CIA and the Under­ground Reich.

An ele­ment of con­ti­nu­ity between the wartime regime of Jaroslav Stet­zko and the present OUN/B suc­ces­sor orga­ni­za­tions in Ukraine is Roman Svarych.

Roman Svarych was Stezko’s per­son­al sec­re­tary in the ear­ly 1980’s. He became Ukraine’s min­is­ter of jus­tice (the equiv­a­lent of Attor­ney Gen­er­al) under Yuschenko, and held the same post under both Tim­o­shenko gov­ern­ments. Svarych then became an advis­er to Ukraine’s pres­i­dent Petro Poroshenko and is the chief spokesman for the Azov Bat­tal­ion. (We high­light Stetzko/Stetsko in numer­ous programs–use the search func­tion with the alter­nate spellings to flesh out your under­stand­ing.)

1. We begin our analy­sis with New Orleans DA Jim Gar­rison’s 1967 let­ter to Lord Bertrand Rus­sell, in which he not­ed the Nazi asso­ci­a­tions of many of the peo­ple involved with the JFK assas­si­na­tion.

Gen­er­al Walk­er and the Mur­der of Pres­i­dent Kennedy by Jef­frey H. Cau­field, M.D.; More­land Press [HC]; Copy­right 2015 Jef­frey H. Cau­field; ISBN-13: 978–0‑9915637–0‑8; p. 70.

. . . . Above the oper­a­tional lev­el, insu­lat­ed and removed to the point of being very near­ly invis­i­ble, appeared to have been indi­vid­u­als whose polit­i­cal ori­en­ta­tion can only be described as Neo-Nazi. Even as I have described this Neo-Nazi aspect, I am sure that it sounds some­what fan­ci­ful. Because of the unbe­liev­abil­i­ty of this part of the pic­ture, I have found it nec­es­sary to refrain from men­tion­ing it . . . . . Nev­er­the­less, the essen­tial­ly Fas­cist ori­gin of the assas­si­na­tion is inescaple.–D.A. Jim Gar­rison’s Let­ter to Lord Bertrand Rus­sell, August 27, 1967. . . .

2. Next, we excerpt text dis­cussing David Fer­rie’s Nazi mus­ings and asso­ci­a­tions.

In future pro­grams, we will take up the issue of what Fort Sill Oper­a­tions Com­mand Offi­cer Glenn Pinch­back referred to as a “Neo-Nazi plot to enslave Amer­i­ca in the name of anti-Com­mu­nism” and “a neo-Nazi plot gar­gan­tu­an in scope.”

Gen­er­al Walk­er and the Mur­der of Pres­i­dent Kennedy by Jef­frey H. Cau­field, M.D.; More­land Press [HC]; Copy­right 2015 Jef­frey H. Cau­field; ISBN-13: 978–0‑9915637–0‑8; pp. 86–87.

. . . . Gar­ri­son did not pro­vide an expla­na­tion for all of the [David Fer­rie] note’s sub­ject mat­ter. How­ev­er, he did know the mean­ing of “fly­ing Barag­o­na in the Beech.” “Beech” refers to the mod­el of Fer­rie’s air­plane, a Beechcraft. Barag­o­na was a Nazi from Fort Sill. . . .

. . . . Gar­ri­son also obtained a tran­script of a let­ter writ­ten by Fer­rie to Barag­o­na. Next to Barag­o­na’s name, Gar­ri­son wrote: “Note Barag­o­na is impor­tant.” The let­ter had been sent to Gar­ri­son by Glenn Pinch­back, and a car­bon copy was sent to Mendel Rivers, a con­gress­man from Geor­gia. (Pinch­back worked in the Oper­a­tions Com­mand at Fort Sill, where he inter­cept­ed mail.) In the let­ter, Fer­rie shared his dream of the re-uni­fi­ca­tion of Ger­many and liv­ing in a world where all the cur­ren­cy was in Deutschmarks. Pinch­back­’s sum­ma­tion of the let­ter described a “Neo-Nazi plot to enslave Amer­i­ca in the name of anti-Com­mu­nism,” and “a neo-Nazi plot gar­gan­tu­an in scope.” The Fer­rie let­ter spoke of the need to kill all the Kennedys and Mar­tin Luther King, Jr. . . . Pinch­back also report­ed­ly obtained a let­ter from David Fer­rie to Barag­o­na con­fess­ing his role in the assas­si­na­tion of Robert Gehrig, who was a Nazi and Fort Sill sol­dier. . . .”

 3. In FTR #188, we detailed the “Hate Bus,” a gam­bit by Amer­i­can Nazi Par­ty leader George Lin­coln Rock­well to protest the Free­dom Rid­ers and the Civ­il Rights move­ment. It bears some struc­tur­al sim­i­lar­i­ty to the Char­lottesville inci­dent, with fas­cists stag­ing a counter-event to a pro­gres­sive demon­stra­tion, in this case the “free­dom rid­ers” bus rid­den by white col­lege stu­dents and black civ­il rights activists in sup­port of inte­gra­tion and vot­ing rights in the South.

Note that appar­ent Oswald asso­ciate Ray Lea­hart was the best man at the wed­ding of David Duke, a major par­tic­i­pant in the Char­lottesville event.

High­light­ing aspects of the career of “Hate Bus” par­tic­i­pant Ray Lea­hart, a New Orleans ANP [Amer­i­can Nazi Par­ty] mem­ber, we note that:

  • Lea­hart was alleged to have been an asso­ciate of Lee Har­vey Oswald. ” . . . . On Decem­ber 16, 1963, after the Kennedy assas­si­na­tion, the New Orleans FBI inves­ti­gat­ed a tip that Lee Har­vey Oswald had been seen with Ray Lea­hart dur­ing the pre­vi­ous sum­mer. Lea­hart was a New Orleans Nazi whom [Guy] Ban­is­ter had bailed out of jail in the Hate Bus inci­dent. . . .”
  • The FBI had no doc­u­ments on Lea­hart, rais­ing the ques­tion of what hap­pened to a doc­u­ment about Lea­hart’s arrest in the “Hate Bus” inci­dent. (For more about the Hate Bus, see FTR #188.) Author Cau­field spec­u­lates that Oswald han­dler Guy Ban­is­ter’s close rela­tion­ship with FBI SAC Reg­is Kennedy may have had some­thing to do with the dis­ap­pear­ance of Lea­hart’s arrest record. ” . . . . No FBI doc­u­ments, oth­er than the New Orleans police mug shots from the Hate Bus arrest, were in the FBI record, which rais­es the ques­tion of what hap­pened to FBI ref­er­ence 841767D (Lea­hart’s arrest record in the Hate Bus inci­dent) and why it did not accom­pa­ny the alle­ga­tion and sub­stan­tial like­li­hood of an Oswald-Lea­hart asso­ci­a­tion when sent to the War­ren Com­mis­sion. Ban­is­ter’s close friend­ship with New Orleans FBI SAC Reg­is Kennedy may have had some­thing to do with the crit­i­cal omis­sion. . . .”
  • Lea­hart was close to Dal­las, Texas, ANP mem­bers, includ­ing Robert Sur­rey, who print­ed a noto­ri­ous poster of JFK: ” . . . . . . . The Dal­las FBI office was aware of cor­re­spon­dence link­ing Lea­hart to ANP [Amer­i­can Nazi Par­ty] activ­i­ties in Texas. One Dal­las ANP mem­ber, Robert Sur­rey, was a close asso­ciate of Gen­er­al [Edwin] Walk­er. Sur­rey’s wife Mary was Walk­er’s per­son­al sec­re­tary. Wealthy oil­men report­ed­ly fund­ed Sur­rey’s Nazi out­fit. Sur­rey print­ed the infa­mous ‘Want­ed for Trea­son’ poster which had cir­cu­lat­ed in Dal­las before the asso­ci­a­tion. The poster pic­tured mug-shot-styled pho­tos of Pres­i­dent Kennedy and accused him of trea­son. Sur­rey and Walk­er were War­ren Com­mis­sion wit­ness­es, and, of course, Walk­er was close to both Guy Ban­is­ter and Kent Court­ney. . . .”
  • Lea­hart was an asso­ciate of David Duke, and was best man at Duke’s wed­ding. ” . . . . On Sep­tem­ber 9, 1972, Lea­hart became the best man at Duke’s wed­ding. . . .”

Gen­er­al Walk­er and the Mur­der of Pres­i­dent Kennedy by Jef­frey H. Cau­field, M.D.; More­land Press [HC]; Copy­right 2015 Jef­frey H. Cau­field; ISBN-13: 978–0‑9915637–0‑8; pp. 73–82.

. . . . The Hate Bus rolled in to New Orleans after ear­li­er stops in strife-torn Mont­gomery, Alaba­ma, and Mobile, Alaba­ma, the next day, on an avowed cam­paign against inte­gra­tion and Com­mu­nism. Accord­ing to the Nazi Par­ty, the Hate Bus was sent, “to sym­bol­ize the fact that decent Amer­i­cans do hate and should hate Com­mu­nism and race mix­ing.” The Nazis fol­lowed the itin­er­ary of the Free­dom Riders–equal num­bers of black and white civ­il rights workers–who began their jour­ney south from Wash­ing­ton D.C. . . . .

. . . . On Decem­ber 16, 1963, after the Kennedy assas­si­na­tion, the New Orleans FBI inves­ti­gat­ed a tip that Lee Har­vey Oswald had been seen with Ray Lea­hart dur­ing the pre­vi­ous sum­mer. Lea­hart was a New Orleans Nazi whom [Guy] Ban­is­ter had bailed out of jail in the Hate Bus inci­dent. The report is pre­sent­ed here for the first time:

MUNCY PERKINS: Clerk Car­rolton Avenue Sta­tion, New Orleans Pub­lic Ser­vice, Inc., res­i­dence address 5320 Camp Street, New Orleans advised that occa­sion­al­ly indi­vid­u­als have been observed by him at the Car­rolton Avenue Sta­tion in the ear­ly morn­ing hours wait­ing for RAY JAMES LEAHART, one of the bus dri­vers. MR. PERKINS thought that pos­si­bly LEE HARVEY OSWALD may have been among those per­sons wait­ing for LEAHART. . . .

. . . . No FBI doc­u­ments, oth­er than the New Orleans police mug shots from the Hate Bus arrest, were in the FBI record, which rais­es the ques­tion of what hap­pened to FBI ref­er­ence 841767D (Lea­hart’s arrest record in the Hate Bus inci­dent) and why it did not accom­pa­ny the alle­ga­tion and sub­stan­tial like­li­hood of an Oswald-Lea­hart asso­ci­a­tion when sent to the War­ren Com­mis­sion. Ban­is­ter’s close friend­ship with New Orleans FBI SAC Reg­is Kennedy may have had some­thing to do with the crit­i­cal omis­sion.

Gar­rison’s inves­ti­ga­tors were aware of Lea­hart, but not of the alle­ga­tion that he was seen with Lee Har­vey Oswald. They had infor­ma­tion that Ray Lea­hart, a city street­car or bus dri­ver, past­ed ANP [Amer­i­can Nazi Par­ty] slo­gans and posters on the walls of the Mag­a­zine Street bus depot where he worked. Inves­ti­ga­tors were aware that Lea­hart had been to the train­ing cap across Lake Pontchar­train with Derek Frier who was a couri­er for the Nazi Par­ty (sev­er­al alle­ga­tions that Oswald had been to the camp were not­ed in Chap­ters One and Two), and that Frier’s friend Loren But­ler was a high-rank­ing offi­cial in the Nazi Par­ty.

Accord­ing to FBI doc­u­ments, Ray Lea­hart and Blu­ford Bal­ter were orga­niz­ers of the New Orleans Amer­i­can Nazi Par­ty. Lea­hart per­son­al­ly knew George Lin­coln Rock­well and had at least twelve per­son­al dis­cus­sions with Rockwell—and even vis­it­ed him on one occa­sion in Vir­ginia. Rock­well also met with Lea­hart, the head of the New Orleans Nation­al States’ Rights Par­ty, in New Orleans, in New Orleans in Sep­tem­ber 1964. In 1961, a “Spe­cial New Orleans Edi­tion” of the NSRP news­pa­per The Thun­der­bolt was issued with the front page head­line, “[LEANDER] PEREZ TURNS SPOTLIGHT ON THE ENEMY,” and appeared with a sto­ry writ­ten by Ray James Lea­hart above a large pho­to­graph of Lean­der Perez, Ban­is­ter’s close friend. . . . Guy Ban­is­ter sub­scribed to  The Thun­der­bolt. . . .

. . . . The Dal­las FBI office was aware of cor­re­spon­dence link­ing Lea­hart to ANP [Amer­i­can Nazi Par­ty] activ­i­ties in Texas. One Dal­las ANP mem­ber, Robert Sur­rey, was a close asso­ciate of Gen­er­al [Edwin] Walk­er. Sur­rey’s wife Mary was Walk­er’s per­son­al sec­re­tary. Wealthy oil­men report­ed­ly fund­ed Sur­rey’s Nazi out­fit. Sur­rey print­ed the infa­mous “Want­ed for Trea­son” poster which had cir­cu­lat­ed in Dal­las before the asso­ci­a­tion. The poster pic­tured mug-shot-styled pho­tos of Pres­i­dent Kennedy and accused him of trea­son. Sur­rey and Walk­er were War­ren Com­mis­sion wit­ness­es, and, of course, Walk­er was close to both Guy Ban­is­ter and Kent Court­ney. . . .

 . . . . In the 1970s, Lea­hart became a lead­ing mem­ber in the Nation­al Social­ist White Peo­ple’s Party—a recon­fig­ured ANP and Ku Klux Klan outfit—along with David Duke, per­haps the best-known white suprema­cist in Amer­i­ca in the 21st cen­tu­ry, Lea­hart ped­dled his pro­pa­gan­da along with Duke in what was known as a “Free Speech Ral­ly” at Louisiana State Uni­ver­si­ty in Baton Rouge. On Sep­tem­ber 9, 1972, Lea­hart became the best man at Duke’s wed­ding. . . .

5. The pro­gram then reviews Daniel Bur­ros, one of the Amer­i­can Nazi Par­ty mem­bers whose con­tact infor­ma­tion was in Lee Har­vey Oswald’s address book.

Bur­ros viewed with favor vet­er­an Nazi Edward Hunter, a Guy Ban­is­ter’s asso­ciate, who had been a mem­ber of the pre-war Nazi Fifth Col­umn in the U.S.

Bur­ros alleged­ly com­mit­ted sui­cide at the home of Penn­syl­va­nia Klan leader Roy Frankhouser, who–as seen in AFA #13–had oper­a­tional links with ele­ments of U.S. intel­li­gence, CIA in par­tic­u­lar.

Frankhouser also infil­trat­ed the Social­ist Work­ers Par­ty, an orga­ni­za­tion so infil­trat­ed by spooks and fas­cists that it was lit­tle more than a right-wing front orga­ni­za­tion. (The SWP was the ide­o­log­i­cal petri dish in which Lyn­dn LaRouche and Bernie Sanders were cul­tured.)

Note that Frankhouser was appar­ent­ly in pos­ses­sion of cor­re­spon­dence from Michael and Ruth Paine, two “lib­er­al” babysit­ters of Lee Har­vey Oswald and his wife. Both Michael and Ruth Paine had strong links to the nation­al secu­ri­ty estab­lish­ment.

Gen­er­al Walk­er and the Mur­der of Pres­i­dent Kennedy by Jef­frey H. Cau­field, M.D.; More­land Press [HC]; Copy­right 2015 Jef­frey H. Cau­field; ISBN-13: 978–0‑9915637–0‑8; p. 78.

. . . . One of his [Daniel Bur­ros’] favorite books was Under Cov­er, which exposed many well-known right wingers as Nazis, like Ban­is­ter’s friend Edward Hunter, who was an admit­ted Nazi before WWII. It also exposed a Kent Court­ney and Edwin Walk­er asso­ciate, Harold Lord Varney–the pub­lish­er of The Amer­i­can Mer­cury–as a Nazi.

After the Kennedy assas­i­na­tion, Bur­ros wore a but­ton he designed that read, “Lee Har­vey Oswald Fan Club.” He became inter­est­ed in the Ku Klux Klan at a Klan ral­ly in Bear, Delaware. Roy Frankhouser intro­duced Bur­ros to the Impe­r­i­al Wiz­ard (Nation­al leader) of the Unit­ed Klans of Amer­i­ca, Robert Shel­ton, who cher­ished Klan mem­bers from the north. Frankhouser was the Grand Drag­on of the State of Penn­syl­va­nia. Shel­ton swore in Bur­ros as Klea­gle (orga­niz­er) and, lat­er, as pro­vi­sion­al Grand Drag­on of the State of New York. Frankhouser, whose first ties to the Klan were in 1958, report­ed­ly assault­ed a police cap­tain dur­ing a seg­re­ga­tion­ist ral­ly in Octo­ber of 1961 in Atlanta. Attor­neys and promi­nent lead­ers in the Klan and NSRP, J.B. Ston­er and James Ven­able respec­tive­ly, defend­ed Frankhouser. Inter­est­ing­ly, Ven­able intimated–not long before he died in the 1990’s–that Lee Har­vey Oswald had vis­it­ed his Stone Moun­tain, Geor­gia, home in 1963. It is also worth not­ing that Ston­er served as the attor­ney for the con­vict­ed assas­sin of Dr. Mar­tin Luther King, Jr. James Earl Ray.

. . . . Bur­ros retreat­ed to Frankhouse­r’s home in Read­ing, Penn­syl­va­nia, where upon read­ing the arti­cle expos­ing his Jew­ish background–shot him­self in the head. After Bur­ros’ death, Frankhouser told The New York Times that Bur­ros had offered the FBI Pho­to­stats that con­nect­ed Lee Har­vey Oswald to the Social­ist Work­ers Par­ty. In a May 18, 1967, FBI memo, an infor­mant told the FBI that Frankhouser had, in a secure place, let­ters con­cern­ing the assas­si­na­tion of Pres­i­dent Kennedy from a per­son known as “Payne.” The let­ters were appar­ent­ly were intend­ed to be giv­en by the infor­mant to Gar­ri­son dur­ing his inves­ti­ga­tion, but they nev­er mate­ri­al­ized. The infor­ma­tion was, how­ev­er, passed along from the FBI to the Secret Ser­vice. “Payne” was deter­mined to be a ref­er­ence to Michael Paine, whose wife shared their home with the Oswalds before the assas­si­na­tion. Frankhouser, in a 1975 inter­view, claimed that Ruth and Michael Paine had infil­trat­ed the Social­ist Work­ers Par­ty when he had infil­trat­ed the par­ty in 1960, and that he had met Oswald when the Paines took him to New York for an inter­na­tion­al sci­ence meet­ing. . . .

6. Flesh­ing out the con­ti­nu­ity between the Nazi Fifth Col­umn of the pre-World War II peri­od and what author Cau­field termed the “rad­i­cal right” and by con­tem­po­rary observers as “the alt-right,” we excerpt John Roy Carl­son’s Under Cov­er. Note that Edward Hunter was an asso­ciate of Guy Ban­is­ter’s. (Ban­is­ter was one of Oswald’s appar­ent intel­li­gence han­dlers.)

Under Cover–My Four Years in the Nazi Under­world in Amer­i­ca by John Roy Carl­son; E.P. Dut­ton & Co. [HC]; Copy­right 1943 by E.P.Dutton & Co.; pp. 446–7.

. . . . Hunter set up shop in 1932 “to incul­cate the prin­ci­ples of Amer­i­can­ism in indus­tri­al, reli­gious, fra­ter­nal, and edu­ca­tion­al cir­cles” under the high-sound­ing name, Indus­tri­al Defense Asso­ci­a­tion, Inc. That same year he was con­tact­ed by Kurt G. W. Luedecke, a Nazi agent with whom Hunter became friend­ly and intro­duced at the Exchange Trust Com­pa­ny. Here Luedecke opened a bank account then tried to induce Hunter to found a chap­ter of the Swasti­ka League of Amer­i­ca. The League actu­al­ly func­tioned for a while, but was denied a state char­ter. When Hitler came to pow­er a year lat­er, Hunter mys­te­ri­ous­ly began to receive $300 a month which he devot­ed to the pub­li­ca­tion of an exten­sive line of pro-Nazi tracts.

Even though the Boston Bet­ter Busi­ness Bureau brand­ed him an anti-Semi­te, it did not ham­per Hunter. But when his role of a Nazi par­ty-line fol­low­er took an omi­nous course, the Mass­a­chu­setts Leg­is­la­ture inves­ti­gat­ed him in 1937. Hunter proved to be an eva­sive wit­ness. Sen­a­tor Thomas M. Burke final­ly asked:

Q: Isn’t it true you attempt­ed to cre­ate a cor­po­ra­tion of the Nazi League in Mass­a­chu­setts? A. Yes. Q. Then I say, is it true you are a Nazi . . . ? A. Yes, I am.

Even though the Com­mit­tee con­clud­ed that he car­ried on “the most vicious activ­i­ty clear­ly intend­ed to incite racial and reli­gious hatred,” Hunter was released to take up from where he had left off. I dug out a let­ter he wrote in 1938 to a cor­re­spon­dent: I am acquaint­ed with Bund mem­bers . . . and do not want to know any fin­er or clean­er Amer­i­cans than they are. I can assure you 99.9% of the pro­pa­gan­da against the Bund orig­i­nat­ed in Com­mu­nis­tic cir­cles. . . . I would advise you to send a cou­ple of dol­lars to World Ser­vice and George Deather­age [the address­es of both were giv­en], ask­ing them to place you name on their mail­ing list.

He wrote again: I can­not under­stand how any stu­dent of Rad­i­cal­ism can be mis­led by the Jew­ish cry of Fas­cism and Nazism. . . . Fas­cism is made out of whole cloth by the fathers of liars (St. John’s 8–44). There is no such ani­mal in Amer­i­ca. . . .

 8. Ger­hard Frey was the edi­tor of the Deutsche Nation­al Zeitung und Sol­dat­en Zeitung, which had vet­er­ans of the SS and Goebbels’ pro­pa­gan­da bureau on its edi­to­r­i­al staff. The pub­li­ca­tion received finan­cial sup­port from the CIA.

A financier of con­tem­po­rary Russ­ian fas­cist Vladimir Zhi­ronovsky, Frey was asso­ci­at­ed with the Anti-Bol­she­vik Bloc of Nations.

Formed by Adolf Hitler in 1943, that orga­ni­za­tion is a con­sor­tium of East­ern Euro­pean Third Reich sub­sidiaries such as the Ukrain­ian OUN/B, the Roman­ian Iron Guard, the Bul­gar­i­an Nation­al Front, the Hun­gar­i­an Arrow Cross, the Croa­t­ian Ustachi, the Slo­va­kian Hlin­ka Par­ty and oth­ers. The uni­fy­ing ele­ment in these fas­cist orga­ni­za­tions was the SS. The ABN became a key ele­ment of the Gehlen orga­ni­za­tion and the GOP.

Both Frey and Gen­er­al Charles Willough­by were asso­ci­at­ed with the ABN.

Gen­er­al Walk­er and the Mur­der of Pres­i­dent Kennedy by Jef­frey H. Cau­field, M.D.; More­land Press [HC]; Copy­right 2015 Jef­frey H. Cau­field; ISBN-13: 978–0‑9915637–0‑8; pp. 403–404.

. . . . The inter­view end­ed with Walk­er say­ing, “Give my regards to my Ger­man friends, espe­cial­ly Ger­hard Frey,” . . . . Ger­hard Frey was edi­tor of the paper  and not only was he a friend of Walk­er but—unknown to the War­ren Com­mis­sion, he was also a friend of Gen­er­al Charles Willough­by, as we shall see lat­er. Frey and Willough­by were mem­bers of the far-right Anti-Bol­she­vik Bloc of Nations. . . .

9. Gen­er­al Charles Willough­by was also tight with the ABN, and its founder Jaroslav Stet­zko, the head of Ukraine’s Nazi col­lab­o­ra­tionist gov­ern­ment. (The spelling of Stet­zko’s name varies with the translit­er­a­tion from the Cyril­lic alpha­bet.)

In numer­ous pro­grams, we have dis­cussed Stet­zko, his wartime geno­ci­dal oper­a­tions, his and the ABN’s links to the Gehlen orga­ni­za­tion, the GOP, the CIA and the Under­ground Reich.

An ele­ment of con­ti­nu­ity between the wartime regime of Jaroslav Stet­zko and the present OUN/B suc­ces­sor orga­ni­za­tions in Ukraine is Roman Svarych.

Roman Svarych was Stezko’s per­son­al sec­re­tary in the ear­ly 1980’s. He became Ukraine’s min­is­ter of jus­tice (the equiv­a­lent of Attor­ney Gen­er­al) under Yuschenko, and held the same post under both Tim­o­shenko gov­ern­ments. Svarych then became an advis­er to Ukraine’s pres­i­dent Petro Poroshenko and is the chief spokesman for the Azov Bat­tal­ion.

Gen­er­al Walk­er and the Mur­der of Pres­i­dent Kennedy by Jef­frey H. Cau­field, M.D.; More­land Press [HC]; Copy­right 2015 Jef­frey H. Cau­field; ISBN-13: 978–0‑9915637–0‑8; p. 189.

. . . . Willough­by was a sup­port­er of the Anti-Bol­she­vik Bloc of Nations and its founder pro-Nazi Jaroslaw Stet­zko, was list­ed on the let­ter­head of Willoughby’s For­eign Intel­li­gence Digest. . . .

Discussion

2 comments for “FTR #971 Nazis in New Orleans”

  1. Peter. Dale Scott on Inter­na­tion­al Para-Fas­cism http://8bitmode.com/rogerdog/lobster/lobster12.pdf

    Posted by Hugo Turner | September 24, 2017, 7:00 pm
  2. Is that a rat we’re smelling? A dif­fer­ent large rodent? Because some­thing sure stinks in this sto­ry about the dis­ap­pear­ing Secret Ser­vice text mes­sages. As we’re already seen, a large num­ber of agents texts on Jan 5–6 request­ed by Con­gres­sion­al inves­ti­ga­tors appear to have been delet­ed. Adding to the scan­dal is that we first learned about these delet­ed texts from the Depart­ment of Home­land Secu­ri­ty’s Office of Inspec­tor Gen­er­al (DHS OIG) pub­licly decry­ing how these text appear to have been delet­ed after the OIG made its requests. The Secret Ser­vice had coun­ter­ing that the delete texts were lost due to a pre-planned ‘device migra­tion’ and that the OIG’s requests weren’t made until Feb 26, a month after the device migra­tion.

    So we had a kind of ‘He said/She said’ sit­u­a­tion going on between the DHS OIG an the Secret ser­vice. And now we’re get­ting more infor­ma­tion on when those requests were made and what result­ed in the delet­ed texts. Infor­ma­tion that is mak­ing the whole sit­u­a­tion small a lot like a rat. That was the lan­guage used by con­gress­man Jamie Raskin in response to these lat­est rev­e­la­tions.

    For starters, we’re now learn­ing that the Secret Ser­vice hand­ed over a sin­gle text mes­sage from Jan 5–6. Yep. Just one. Specif­i­cal­ly, a text from the then-Chief of the Capi­tol Police request help from the Secret Ser­vice dur­ing the insur­rec­tion. That was it. Recall what we were told by the Secret Ser­vice in ear­li­er reports on this mat­ter:

    ...
    The Secret Ser­vice said it has pro­vid­ed a sub­stan­tial num­ber of emails and chat mes­sages that includ­ed con­ver­sa­tions and details relat­ed to Jan. 6 to the inspec­tor gen­er­al. It also said text mes­sages from the Capi­tol Police request­ing assis­tance on Jan. 6 were pre­served and pro­vid­ed to the inspec­tor general’s office.
    ...

    Yes, the Secret Ser­vice was telling the pub­lic that they turned over a “a sub­stan­tial num­ber of emails and chat mes­sages”, includ­ing “text mes­sages from the Capi­tol Police request­ing assis­tance on Jan. 6.” And while that cer­tain­ly sounds good, it’s the kind of state­ment that is cast in a new light when we learn that a text mes­sage from then-Capi­tol Police offi­cer Steven Sund ask­ing the Secret Ser­vice for help was the only text sent by the Secret Ser­vice to inves­ti­ga­tors. The fact that it was a text des­per­ate­ly request­ing help dur­ing the insur­rec­tion just adds insult to injury.

    We’re also learn­ing that con­gres­sion­al inves­ti­ga­tors made four requests to the Secret Ser­vice for texts from Jan 5–6 on Jan­u­ary 16, 2021, 9 days before the Jan 25 planned start of the device migra­tion. So whether or not the DHS OIG made its request for these texts on Feb 26 as the Secret Ser­vice claims, it appears Con­gress made four requests a week and a half before the migra­tion start­ed.

    But it gets worse: it turns out the Secret Ser­vice’s meth­ods for archiv­ing texts dur­ing this device migra­tion involved a rather curi­ous fea­ture that could be in vio­la­tion of the Fed­er­al Records Act. Because it was the agents them­selves who decid­ed which text to archive. So the agents involved the insur­rec­tion inves­ti­ga­tion got to choose which mes­sages to keep and the only one kept was the plea from the Capi­tol Police for help.

    It’s worth recall at this point how Alex Jones claimed he was asked by the Trump White House three days before the ral­ly to lead the march. The Secret Ser­vice even escort­ed him out of the ral­ly crowd thir­ty min­utes before the end of Trump’s Speech so he could lead the march to the Capi­tol. Did any of those delete texts come from or go to Alex Jones? We’ll prob­a­bly nev­er know, but these are the kinds of embar­rass­ing texts that these agents were tasked with archiv­ing. Archiv­ing or delet­ing.

    Oh, and we’re also going to see, the Secret Ser­vice ini­tial­ly stat­ed that the 24 agents in ques­tions were not actu­al­ly impact­ed by that device migra­tion, which should raise even more ques­tions about the dis­ap­pear­ing texts. But now we’re told that the agency is inves­ti­gat­ing whether or not those agents’ devices were indeed part of that device migra­tion. A device migra­tion that did­n’t just involve the Secret Ser­vice but also include gov­ern­ment staffers work­ing on Capi­tol Hill. So this ‘device migra­tion data loss­es’ issue could actu­al­ly be much larg­er than the just the Secret Ser­vice.

    But then we get to an absolute­ly fas­ci­nat­ing his­to­ry echo in this whole sto­ry: as we’re going to see tucked away near the bot­tom of a WaPo piece on this sto­ry from last week, this isn’t the first time the Secret Ser­vice was caught delet­ing infor­ma­tion about pos­si­ble fore­knowl­edge of a major assault on the US democ­ra­cy involv­ing white suprema­cists:

    ...
    When a con­gres­sion­al com­mit­tee was inves­ti­gat­ing assas­si­na­tions and assas­si­na­tion attempts, it sought box­es of records that report­ed­ly showed the Secret Ser­vice received ample advance warn­ings and threats before Pres­i­dent John F. Kennedy’s death that white suprema­cists and oth­er orga­ni­za­tions were plot­ting to kill Kennedy using high-pow­ered rifles from tall build­ings. The Secret Ser­vice told inves­ti­ga­tors the records had been destroyed as part of a nor­mal culling of old archives — days after inves­ti­ga­tors had request­ed them.
    ...

    Yep, the Secret Ser­vice hap­pened to ‘acci­den­tal­ly’ destroy the records show­ing fore­knowl­edge of a white suprema­cist plot against JFK. After the records were destroyed. Sound famil­iar? So while the cur­rent mys­tery of the lost Secret Ser­vice records is cer­tain­ly some­thing that absolute­ly must be inves­ti­gat­ed furi­ous­ly, could we maybe took anoth­er look into that white suprema­cist JFK angle? No? Is that just old news now? It’s the kind of sto­ry that should add some addi­tion­al con­text to the cur­rent Secret Ser­vice mys­tery. Con­text that should serve as a remind that these kinds of cov­er up don’t just resolve them­selves. They will go on indef­i­nite­ly if the peo­ple engaged in the cov­er up are allowed to do so. And the big­ger the scan­dal, the more effort that will go into that coverup:

    The Hill

    Secret Ser­vice turns over sin­gle mes­sage to Jan. 6 pan­el: ‘I smell a rat’

    by Rebec­ca Beitsch and Mychael Schnell
    07/20/22 3:27 PM ET

    The only text mes­sage the Secret Ser­vice turned over to the House com­mit­tee inves­ti­gat­ing the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capi­tol was a plea from then-Capi­tol Police offi­cer Steven Sund ask­ing for help.

    Law­mak­ers on the pan­el are increas­ing­ly con­fused and irri­tat­ed by the lack of mes­sages from the Secret Ser­vice after it sub­poe­naed the records fol­low­ing a let­ter from a gov­ern­ment watch­dog indi­cat­ing that mes­sages had been “erased” dur­ing a device replace­ment pro­gram.

    “That’s all that we have,” Rep. Stephanie Mur­phy (D‑Fla.) told The Hill.

    A source close to the Secret Ser­vice pre­vi­ous­ly told The Hill that Sund had con­tact­ed the Secret Ser­vice on Jan. 6 request­ing assis­tance.

    “That mes­sage was cap­tured and it was turned over,” the source said.

    The Secret Ser­vice has denied that it mali­cious­ly delet­ed any text mes­sages but has said some data was lost dur­ing a sys­tem migra­tion.

    Agency spokesman Antho­ny Gugliel­mi said Secret Ser­vice pol­i­cy pro­hibits using text mes­sages due to secu­ri­ty con­cerns, but that the ini­tial 20 agents whose records were request­ed did not have phones impact­ed by the migra­tion.

    He said there were no “hid­den mes­sages” the agency was con­ceal­ing or any­thing else offi­cials were “hold­ing out” from the pan­el.

    Law­mak­ers on the pan­el have said they are hope­ful the Secret Ser­vice will be able to recov­er the infor­ma­tion from the phones even though they were wiped.

    “My hope is that the Secret Ser­vice will use their foren­sic data capa­bil­i­ties to recap­ture the texts that we have request­ed and com­ply with the sub­poe­na. I think the infor­ma­tion they’ve pro­vid­ed us to date leaves a lot of ques­tions regard­ing their process for data reten­tion,” Mur­phy said.

    But they’ve grown increas­ing­ly frus­trat­ed with Secret Service’s expla­na­tion around why its records weren’t ful­ly pre­served in the days after Jan. 6.

    “We were just updat­ed and it remains a big mys­tery to me,” Rep. Jamie Raskin (D‑Md.) told reporters Wednes­day

    He added that the Secret Service’s expla­na­tion stretch­es the out­er lim­its of plau­si­bil­i­ty.

    “I smell a rat,” he said. “That seems like an awful­ly strange coin­ci­dence for those text mes­sages to be ban­ished into obliv­ion on two days where there was also the most vio­lent insur­rec­tion against the union in our his­to­ry, after the Civ­il War.”

    Mur­phy pre­vi­ous­ly said Secret Service’s actions are ques­tion­able, giv­en the time frame.

    They received four requests from con­gres­sion­al com­mit­tees on Jan. 16 to pre­serve records, and they had this planned migra­tion for the 25th, I believe, of Jan­u­ary, and nobody along the way stopped and thought, ‘Well, maybe we shouldn’t do the migra­tion of data and of the devices until we are able to ful­fill these four requests from Con­gress,’” she said dur­ing an inter­view on MSNBC.

    ...

    ————

    “Secret Ser­vice turns over sin­gle mes­sage to Jan. 6 pan­el: ‘I smell a rat’” by Rebec­ca Beitsch and Mychael Schnell; The Hill; 07/20/2022

    ““They received four requests from con­gres­sion­al com­mit­tees on Jan. 16 to pre­serve records, and they had this planned migra­tion for the 25th, I believe, of Jan­u­ary, and nobody along the way stopped and thought, ‘Well, maybe we shouldn’t do the migra­tion of data and of the devices until we are able to ful­fill these four requests from Con­gress,’” she said dur­ing an inter­view on MSNBC. ”

    Just one text. It’s like pub­lic inves­tiga­tive gaslight­ing. But that’s the Secret Ser­vice’s sto­ry: there was just one text left undelet­ed fol­low­ing the ‘device migra­tion’ sna­fu. And this was despite the fact that there four requests from Con­gress for these records made on Jan 16, over a week before the planned Jan 25 migra­tion. The Secret Ser­vice’s sto­ry just does­n’t add up.l Or as con­gress­man Jamie Raskin put it, “I smell a rat”:

    ...
    The only text mes­sage the Secret Ser­vice turned over to the House com­mit­tee inves­ti­gat­ing the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capi­tol was a plea from then-Capi­tol Police offi­cer Steven Sund ask­ing for help.

    ...

    “That’s all that we have,” Rep. Stephanie Mur­phy (D‑Fla.) told The Hill.

    A source close to the Secret Ser­vice pre­vi­ous­ly told The Hill that Sund had con­tact­ed the Secret Ser­vice on Jan. 6 request­ing assis­tance.

    “That mes­sage was cap­tured and it was turned over,” the source said.

    ...

    We were just updat­ed and it remains a big mys­tery to me,” Rep. Jamie Raskin (D‑Md.) told reporters Wednes­day

    He added that the Secret Service’s expla­na­tion stretch­es the out­er lim­its of plau­si­bil­i­ty.

    “I smell a rat,” he said. “That seems like an awful­ly strange coin­ci­dence for those text mes­sages to be ban­ished into obliv­ion on two days where there was also the most vio­lent insur­rec­tion against the union in our his­to­ry, after the Civ­il War.”
    ...

    But it gets worse. Because we’re now learn­ing that the lost text mes­sages were due to a sin­gle indi­vid­ual involved with retain­ing the agen­cy’s records. Instead, it appears that the indi­vid­ual agents them­selves were tasked with pre­serv­ing texts. So the loss of near­ly all of the text mes­sage from that day required the group effort of ALL of the agents in ques­tion. In oth­er words, if this is a cov­er up, it’s a high­ly coor­di­nat­ed one that may have involved a vio­la­tion of the Fed­er­al Records Act:

    The Hill

    Jan. 6 pan­el says Secret Ser­vice may have vio­lat­ed law with ‘erased’ text mes­sages

    by Rebec­ca Beitsch
    07/20/22 4:41 PM ET

    The Secret Ser­vice may have vio­lat­ed fed­er­al records laws by fail­ing to pre­serve data — includ­ing infor­ma­tion relat­ed to the Jan. 6 Capi­tol attack — after it had been request­ed by inves­ti­ga­tors, the House com­mit­tee inves­ti­gat­ing the riot said Wednes­day.

    The con­dem­na­tion came after the pan­el sub­poe­naed the agency fol­low­ing an alle­ga­tion from the inspec­tor gen­er­al at the Depart­ment of Home­land Secu­ri­ty (DHS), which over­sees the Secret Ser­vice, that it had “erased” the texts dur­ing a device replace­ment pro­gram.

    “We have con­cerns about a sys­tem migra­tion that we have been told result­ed in the era­sure of Secret Ser­vice cell phone data,” Chair Ben­nie Thomp­son (D‑Miss.) and Vice Chair Liz Cheney (R‑Wyo.) said in a joint state­ment.

    “The U.S. Secret Ser­vice sys­tem migra­tion process went for­ward on Jan­u­ary 27, 2021, just three weeks after the attack on the Capi­tol in which the Vice Pres­i­dent of the Unit­ed States while under the pro­tec­tion of the Secret Ser­vice, was steps from a vio­lent mob hunt­ing for him. Four House com­mit­tees had already sought these crit­i­cal records from the Depart­ment of Home­land Secu­ri­ty before the records were appar­ent­ly lost,” they added.

    “Addi­tion­al­ly, the pro­ce­dure for pre­serv­ing con­tent pri­or to this purge appears to have been con­trary to fed­er­al records reten­tion require­ments and may rep­re­sent a pos­si­ble vio­la­tion of the Fed­er­al Records Act.”

    Law­mak­ers con­firmed Wednes­day that the Secret Ser­vice turned over just one text sent on Jan. 6, a plea from then-Capi­tol Police chief Steven Sund to the Secret Ser­vice for help.

    It was the only text includ­ed in more than 10,000 pages sent in response to the committee’s Fri­day sub­poe­na.

    The agency has said it did not inten­tion­al­ly delete any mes­sages, but did lose some data as part of what it has called a sys­tem migra­tion.

    But the Secret Service’s let­ter to the com­mit­tee sent along­side its doc­u­ments, shared by the pan­el Wednes­day, offers its most thor­ough expla­na­tion to date.

    The agency under­went a migra­tion to Microsoft start­ing Jan. 27, order­ing agents to install Intune on their phones, a soft­ware that allows remote man­age­ment of mobile devices and pro­tects data.

    “We are cur­rent­ly unaware of any text mes­sages issued by Secret Ser­vice employ­ees between Dec. 7, 2020 and Jan. 8, 2021 request­ed by OIG that were not retained as part of the Intune migra­tion,” Secret Ser­vice wrote in the let­ter.

    How­ev­er, it appears it was left almost entire­ly to agents to deter­mine what records on their phones need­ed to be pre­served in accor­dance with the law.

    Agents were direct­ed to self-install Intune and fol­low a guide for pre­serv­ing any data.

    “All Secret Ser­vice employ­ees are respon­si­ble for appro­pri­ate­ly pre­serv­ing any gov­ern­ment records, includ­ing elec­tron­ic mes­sages that may be cre­at­ed dur­ing text mes­sages,” the agency wrote in the let­ter, not­ing that employ­ees are required to “cer­ti­fy that they under­stand this pol­i­cy when they enter duty.”

    The Secret Ser­vice has pre­vi­ous­ly claimed that none of the 24 agents whose infor­ma­tion was request­ed by DHS OIG had phones impact­ed by the migra­tion.

    But in the let­ter the agency notes that “Secret Ser­vice is fur­ther research­ing whether any rel­e­vant mes­sages sent or received by the 24 indi­vid­u­als were lost due to the Intune migra­tion and, if so, whether such texts are recov­er­able.”

    ...

    ————

    “Jan. 6 pan­el says Secret Ser­vice may have vio­lat­ed law with ‘erased’ text mes­sages” by Rebec­ca Beitsch; The Hill; 07/20/2022

    ““Addi­tion­al­ly, the pro­ce­dure for pre­serv­ing con­tent pri­or to this purge appears to have been con­trary to fed­er­al records reten­tion require­ments and may rep­re­sent a pos­si­ble vio­la­tion of the Fed­er­al Records Act.””

    Was the destruc­tion of all these text mes­sages a vio­la­tion of the Fed­er­al Records Act? Let’s hope so. Because oth­er­wise that act would appear to allow for the bla­tant destruc­tion of records.

    But it’s not just the loss of these texts that was poten­tial­ly a vio­la­tion of the act. There’s also the fact that the agents them­selves were the ones tasked with decid­ed which records were pre­served:

    ...
    The agency has said it did not inten­tion­al­ly delete any mes­sages, but did lose some data as part of what it has called a sys­tem migra­tion.

    But the Secret Service’s let­ter to the com­mit­tee sent along­side its doc­u­ments, shared by the pan­el Wednes­day, offers its most thor­ough expla­na­tion to date.

    The agency under­went a migra­tion to Microsoft start­ing Jan. 27, order­ing agents to install Intune on their phones, a soft­ware that allows remote man­age­ment of mobile devices and pro­tects data.

    “We are cur­rent­ly unaware of any text mes­sages issued by Secret Ser­vice employ­ees between Dec. 7, 2020 and Jan. 8, 2021 request­ed by OIG that were not retained as part of the Intune migra­tion,” Secret Ser­vice wrote in the let­ter.

    How­ev­er, it appears it was left almost entire­ly to agents to deter­mine what records on their phones need­ed to be pre­served in accor­dance with the law.

    Agents were direct­ed to self-install Intune and fol­low a guide for pre­serv­ing any data.

    “All Secret Ser­vice employ­ees are respon­si­ble for appro­pri­ate­ly pre­serv­ing any gov­ern­ment records, includ­ing elec­tron­ic mes­sages that may be cre­at­ed dur­ing text mes­sages,” the agency wrote in the let­ter, not­ing that employ­ees are required to “cer­ti­fy that they under­stand this pol­i­cy when they enter duty.”
    ...

    Keep in mind the obvi­ous impli­ca­tions of this rev­e­la­tion: if the agents them­selves were the ones decid­ing which mes­sages got turned over to the OIG, and only one text mes­sage was turned over, that implies a wide­spread cov­er up inside the agency involv­ing a large num­ber of agents. It was­n’t just an indi­vid­ual high­er up in agency tak­ing these actions that result in a cov­er up. And that brings us to one of the oth­er high­ly sus­pi­cious changes in the Secret Ser­vice’s sto­ry: The agency pre­vi­ous­ly claimed that none of the 24 agents whose infor­ma­tion was request­ed by DHS OIG had phones impact­ed by the migra­tion. And now we learn that the agency is inves­ti­gat­ing whether or not any of those 24 agents had their mes­sages lost due to the phone migra­tion:

    ...
    The Secret Ser­vice has pre­vi­ous­ly claimed that none of the 24 agents whose infor­ma­tion was request­ed by DHS OIG had phones impact­ed by the migra­tion.

    But in the let­ter the agency notes that “Secret Ser­vice is fur­ther research­ing whether any rel­e­vant mes­sages sent or received by the 24 indi­vid­u­als were lost due to the Intune migra­tion and, if so, whether such texts are recov­er­able.”
    ...

    So at this point the Secret Ser­vice’s sto­ry makes no sense: we’re first told that the agency turn over a sub­stan­tial num­ber of emails and chats, only to learn that a sin­gle text was turned over. Then we’re told that this was all a mis­un­der­stand­ing due to a pre­vi­ous­ly sched­uled device migra­tion, only to learn that Con­gress made four requests for those texts over a week before the planned migra­tion. Then we’re told that none of the 24 agents whose records were request­ed were impact­ed by this device migra­tion issue, which then rais­es obvi­ous ques­tions about why just a sin­gle text was turned over. Then we’re told that the agency is actu­al­ly now look­ing into whether or not those 24 agents’ texts were indeed lost in the device migra­tion, at the same time we’re learn­ing that the agents them­selves were the ones who got to decide which text mes­sages to pre­serve. That rat is start­ing to stink to high heav­en.

    And as the fol­low­ing WaPo arti­cle from last week that first report­ed on these delet­ed text reminds us, this ‘device migra­tion’ plan did­n’t just involve Secret Ser­vice agents. Most of the replace­ment pro­gram began with staff mem­bers in Wash­ing­ton offices, and if they did not back up their old text mes­sages that infor­ma­tion is last too. It’s the kind of fun fact that should raise all sorts of addi­tion­al ques­tion regard­ing the still-mys­te­ri­ous sets of burn­er phones pur­chased by Kylie and Amy Kre­mer to com­mu­ni­cate with fig­ures that includ­ed White House Chief of Staff Mark Mead­ows.

    But there’s anoth­er remark­able his­toric fun fact found at the end of this arti­cle. A fun fact about the chill­ing his­toric echos in this sto­ry: when con­gres­sion­al inves­ti­ga­tors look­ing into the JFK assas­si­na­tion sought records that report­ed­ly showed the Secret Ser­vice received ample advance warn­ings and threats before Pres­i­dent John F. Kennedy’s death that white suprema­cists and oth­er orga­ni­za­tions were plot­ting to kill Kennedy using high-pow­ered rifles from tall build­ings. The Secret Ser­vice told inves­ti­ga­tors the records had been destroyed as part of a nor­mal culling of old archives — days after inves­ti­ga­tors had request­ed them. Yep. In oth­er words, this isn’t the first time the Secret Ser­vice has destroyed records involv­ing a white suprema­cist plot to under­mine the US’s demo­c­ra­t­ic insti­tu­tions:

    The Wash­ing­ton Post

    Secret Ser­vice erased texts from Jan. 5 and 6, 2021, offi­cial says

    By Maria Sac­chet­ti and Car­ol D. Leon­nig
    Updat­ed July 15, 2022 at 11:54 a.m. EDT|Published July 14, 2022 at 9:06 p.m. EDT

    A gov­ern­ment watch­dog accused the U.S. Secret Ser­vice of eras­ing texts from Jan. 5 and 6, 2021, after his office request­ed them as part of an inquiry into the U.S. Capi­tol attack, accord­ing to a let­ter sent to law­mak­ers this week.

    Joseph V. Cuf­fari, head of the Depart­ment of Home­land Security’s Office of Inspec­tor Gen­er­al, wrote to the lead­ers of the House and Sen­ate Home­land Secu­ri­ty com­mit­tees indi­cat­ing that the text mes­sages have van­ished and that efforts to inves­ti­gate the Jan. 6, 2021, attack were being hin­dered.

    “The Depart­ment noti­fied us that many U.S. Secret Ser­vice (USSS) text mes­sages, from Jan­u­ary 5 and 6, 2021 were erased as part of a device-replace­ment pro­gram,” he wrote in a let­ter dat­ed Wednes­day and obtained by The Wash­ing­ton Post. The let­ter was ear­li­er report­ed on by the Inter­cept and CNN.

    Cuf­fari empha­sized that the era­sures came “after” the Office of Inspec­tor Gen­er­al request­ed copies of the text mes­sages for its own inves­ti­ga­tion, and sig­naled that they were part of a pat­tern of DHS resis­tance to his inquiries. Staff mem­bers are required by law to sur­ren­der records so that he can audit the sprawl­ing nation­al secu­ri­ty agency, but he said they have “repeat­ed­ly” refused to pro­vide them until an attor­ney reviews them.

    “This review led to weeks-long delays in OIG obtain­ing records and cre­at­ed con­fu­sion over whether all records had been pro­duced,” he wrote, and offered to brief the House and Sen­ate com­mit­tees on the “access issues.”

    ...

    Cuf­fari, nom­i­nat­ed by Trump in 2019 and con­firmed by the Sen­ate, has faced sig­nif­i­cant crit­i­cism since he took over the office. His first-year audits plum­met­ed to his­toric lows, he clashed with Immi­gra­tion and Cus­toms Enforce­ment over the verac­i­ty of an inspec­tion of a deten­tion cen­ter, and he blocked inves­ti­ga­tions into the Secret Service’s han­dling of protests in Lafayette Square fol­low­ing the mur­der of George Floyd and the spread of the coro­n­avirus in the agency’s ranks, doc­u­ments show.

    The OIG’s office is under inves­ti­ga­tion by the Coun­cil of the Inspec­tors Gen­er­al on Integri­ty and Effi­cien­cy (CIGIE), an inde­pen­dent enti­ty in the exec­u­tive branch, for undis­closed alle­ga­tions of mis­con­duct, accord­ing to an inter­nal email cir­cu­lat­ed to the office in Jan­u­ary.

    The non­prof­it Project On Gov­ern­ment Over­sight (POGO), an inde­pen­dent watch­dog, has called on Pres­i­dent Biden to remove Cuf­fari.

    Cuffari’s office did not respond to requests for com­ment on Thurs­day, and DHS had no imme­di­ate com­ment on his alle­ga­tions.

    A per­son briefed on the Secret Service’s reac­tion to Cuffari’s let­ter said the agency rejects his char­ac­ter­i­za­tions that they elim­i­nat­ed or delet­ed records after Cuffari’s office request­ed them. Like oth­ers inter­viewed for this report, this per­son spoke on the con­di­tion of anonymi­ty to share con­fi­den­tial inter­nal dis­cus­sions.

    Accord­ing to two peo­ple briefed on the doc­u­ments request, the Secret Ser­vice began a long pre­planned, agen­cy­wide replace­ment of staff tele­phones to improve com­mu­ni­ca­tion across the agency in Jan­u­ary 2021.

    It wasn’t until some­time in Feb­ru­ary 2021 that Cuffari’s office request­ed that the Secret Ser­vice pro­duce records that cen­tered on Jan. 6 and the days lead­ing up to the attack on the Capi­tol, seek­ing inter­nal agency com­mu­ni­ca­tions, mem­o­ran­dums, emails and tele­phon­ic records such as text mes­sages.

    By the time of the request, the peo­ple said, as many as a third of Secret Ser­vice per­son­nel had been giv­en new cell­phones.

    Most of the replace­ment pro­gram began with staff mem­bers in Wash­ing­ton offices, and if they did not back up their old text mes­sages, the peo­ple said, the infor­ma­tion from Jan. 6 and the days before that is lost. That could con­ceiv­ably include the texts sent and received by for­mer White House deputy chief of staff Tony Orna­to and for­mer Trump secu­ri­ty detail leader Bob­by Engel and oth­er senior lead­ers in the Secret Ser­vice.

    This device replace­ment pro­gram, and result­ing fail­ure to back up texts, does not appear to affect emails.

    The Secret Ser­vice has a pol­i­cy requir­ing employ­ees to back up and store gov­ern­ment com­mu­ni­ca­tions when they retire old elec­tron­ic or tele­phon­ic devices, but in prac­tice, staff do not con­sis­tent­ly back up texts from phones.

    A sim­i­lar issue came up in 2018, when the Jus­tice Depart­ment inspec­tor gen­er­al said he used “foren­sic tools” to recov­er miss­ing text mes­sages from two senior FBI offi­cials who had inves­ti­gat­ed Hillary Clin­ton and Trump and exchanged notes crit­i­cal of the pres­i­dent. The miss­ing mes­sages gen­er­at­ed crit­i­cism when GOP lead­ers and the pres­i­dent ques­tioned how the FBI failed to pre­serve them.

    The Secret Ser­vice has had a his­to­ry of impor­tant records dis­ap­pear­ing under cov­er of night and agency staff mem­bers refus­ing to coop­er­ate when inves­ti­ga­tors came call­ing seek­ing infor­ma­tion.

    When a con­gres­sion­al com­mit­tee was inves­ti­gat­ing assas­si­na­tions and assas­si­na­tion attempts, it sought box­es of records that report­ed­ly showed the Secret Ser­vice received ample advance warn­ings and threats before Pres­i­dent John F. Kennedy’s death that white suprema­cists and oth­er orga­ni­za­tions were plot­ting to kill Kennedy using high-pow­ered rifles from tall build­ings. The Secret Ser­vice told inves­ti­ga­tors the records had been destroyed as part of a nor­mal culling of old archives — days after inves­ti­ga­tors had request­ed them.

    ...

    ———-

    “Secret Ser­vice erased texts from Jan. 5 and 6, 2021, offi­cial says” by Maria Sac­chet­ti and Car­ol D. Leon­nig; The Wash­ing­ton Post; 07/14/2022

    Most of the replace­ment pro­gram began with staff mem­bers in Wash­ing­ton offices, and if they did not back up their old text mes­sages, the peo­ple said, the infor­ma­tion from Jan. 6 and the days before that is lost. That could con­ceiv­ably include the texts sent and received by for­mer White House deputy chief of staff Tony Orna­to and for­mer Trump secu­ri­ty detail leader Bob­by Engel and oth­er senior lead­ers in the Secret Ser­vice.”

    It’s not just the Secret Ser­vice who was poten­tial­ly play­ing these games. This device migra­tion began with staff mem­bers in Wash­ing­ton offices. It’s a reminder that the Secret Ser­vice’s coverup might be coor­di­nat­ed with a num­ber of oth­er actors out­side the agency.

    But then we get to this remark­able fun fact near the end of the arti­cle: this whole chap­ter is eeri­ly rem­i­nis­cent of one of the unex­plored chap­ters of the JFK assas­si­na­tion: the box­es of records that report­ed­ly showed the Secret Ser­vice received ample advance warn­ings and threats before Pres­i­dent John F. Kennedy’s death that white suprema­cists and oth­er orga­ni­za­tions were plot­ting to kill Kennedy using high-pow­ered rifles from tall build­ings. Records that were also destroyed after inves­ti­ga­tors request­ed them:

    ...
    When a con­gres­sion­al com­mit­tee was inves­ti­gat­ing assas­si­na­tions and assas­si­na­tion attempts, it sought box­es of records that report­ed­ly showed the Secret Ser­vice received ample advance warn­ings and threats before Pres­i­dent John F. Kennedy’s death that white suprema­cists and oth­er orga­ni­za­tions were plot­ting to kill Kennedy using high-pow­ered rifles from tall build­ings. The Secret Ser­vice told inves­ti­ga­tors the records had been destroyed as part of a nor­mal culling of old archives — days after inves­ti­ga­tors had request­ed them.
    ...

    The more things change, the more they stay the same. Like the ero­sion of what’s left of the US’s demo­c­ra­t­ic insti­tu­tions. It just keeps hap­pen­ing. At least until there aren’t any demo­c­ra­t­ic insti­tu­tions left to erode. We’ll pre­sum­ably just move on to erod­ing what’s left of human dig­ni­ty at that point. While nev­er look­ing back and seri­ous­ly ask­ing how we got here.

    Posted by Pterrafractyl | July 20, 2022, 4:10 pm

Post a comment