Once 
upon a time, Bill O’Reilly had balls when it came to investigating the 
Kennedy assassination. Back in 1991 — as a reporter for the tabloid TV 
news show, “Inside Edition” – O’Reilly 
had the guts
 to track the epic crime all the way into the dark labyrinth of the 
CIA. Following up on the important work done by investigators for the 
House Select Committee on Assassinations in the late ‘70s, O’Reilly 
boldly told his “Inside Edition” audience that there were “crucial” 
links between alleged assassin Lee Harvey Oswald and the CIA. O’Reilly 
also reported that the CIA had infiltrated the office of New Orleans 
District Attorney Jim Garrison, who brought the only criminal case in 
the JFK assassination to trial, in an effort to sabotage Garrison’s 
investigation.
That was then – when O’Reilly was a scrappy 
reporter for low-budget syndicated TV. But now, of course, he’s BILL 
O’REILLY – Fox News icon, a lavishly paid centerpiece of the Murdoch 
empire. Everything he says   – every windy pontification and dyspeptic 
remark – is writ LARGE. He can no longer afford to have the courage of 
his suspicions. In O’Reilly’s new ideological mold, the CIA is not the 
incubator of an unspeakable crime against American democracy – it’s the 
defender of the greatest nation in the world.
And so we have the Fox News star’s latest instant bestseller, 
“Killing Kennedy: The End of Camelot,” co-written by Martin Dugard, who collaborated with O’Reilly on his earlier runaway success, 
“Killing Lincoln.”
 There is almost nothing in this Kennedy for Beginners book that 
indicates O’Reilly once did some original research on this murky and 
still deeply haunting subject. Most of this surprisingly dumbed-down 
book is a biographical rehash of the Kennedy story that will contain 
nothing new for even casual readers of People magazine and viewers of 
Kennedy soap opera biopics over the years. Once again, we get the story 
of JFK’s PT-109 heroics in the South Pacific; the lurid tales of Jack’s 
womanizing and Jackie’s anguish; the requisite cameos of Sinatra, 
Marilyn and the Mob; the familiar snapshots of a deeply disgruntled 
Lyndon Johnson, continually humiliated by the Kennedy brothers and their
 elite Harvard crowd. None of this is worth the book’s $28 price of 
admission.
When
 it comes to the assassination of President Kennedy, these days Bill 
O’Reilly embraces the lone nut theory, pinning sole blame on Lee Harvey 
Oswald. But his case against Oswald is feeble, and he’s obviously still 
haunted by the suspicions of the younger, freer Bill O’Reilly. In 
“Killing Kennedy,” he can’t help returning to those earlier suspicions, 
in fleeting moments of the book, as if darting a tongue at a nagging 
tooth.
O’Reilly floats the name Allen Dulles, the CIA spymaster 
who became deeply embittered toward Kennedy when the president fired him
 in the wake of the spy agency’s disastrous 1961 Bay of Pigs invasion of
 Cuba. He also throws out the name Curtis LeMay, the Strangelovian Air 
Force chief who was willing to risk doomsday by launching preemptive 
nuclear attacks on Cuba and the Soviet Union – and who considered JFK 
weak for putting the brakes on the military. And he considers the Mafia,
 whose godfathers expected lenient treatment from the Kennedy 
administration, after their cozy relationship with family patriarch Joe 
Kennedy, but instead came under relentless pressure from the morally 
fervent young attorney general, Robert F. Kennedy.
But, in the 
end, O’Reilly returns to the safe path, following the hapless young 
ex-Marine Lee Harvey Oswald on his trail toward infamy. O’Reilly cuts 
back and forth between the JFK story line and Oswald’s. If his portrayal
 of Kennedy is at least reassuringly conventional, his portrait of the 
accused assassin is hopelessly muddled and confusing. O’Reilly tries to 
make a case for Oswald as a “crack shot,” a man supposedly capable of 
pulling off the magical act of marksmanship in Dealey Plaza. But then he
 acknowledges that Oswald couldn’t even hit an easy sitting target, when
 he allegedly took an errant shot at former Army general Edwin Walker, 
while the reactionary military man was huddled over his taxes in his 
Dallas home.
O’Reilly seems intent on building a profile of Oswald
 as a bitter loser who resented JFK for everything from his sex appeal 
to his war on Castro’s Cuba. But, in the end, O’Reilly – who employs a 
weird use of the present tense that is more corny than dramatic — 
concedes that “Oswald does not hate the president … in fact, Oswald 
would very much like to emulate JFK.” O’Reilly observes that Oswald was 
so smitten by Kennedy that he checked out JFK biographies and the 
president’s bestseller, “Profiles in Courage,” from the New Orleans 
Public Library.
Predictably, O’Reilly then makes a stab at tying 
Oswald into a vague communist plot. “Castro definitely wants [Kennedy] 
dead,” he flatly asserts, without offering a shred of evidence. In fact,
 in the months before the president’s assassination on Nov. 22, 1963, 
Kennedy was sending out peace feelers to the Cuban leader, to the great 
alarm of Washington national security hard-liners when they found out. 
As news of JFK’s violent death reached Havana, a deeply unnerved Castro 
blurted out, “Everything is changed,” according to a French journalist 
who was interviewing him at the time. Castro predicted that the 
post-Kennedy U.S. government would make life much tougher for him.
In
 the end, O’Reilly is at a loss to explain Lee Harvey Oswald. The Fox 
News anchor is clearly unsettled by the fact that Oswald never proudly 
took credit for the assassination, as do most slayers of kings and 
presidents, including John Wilkes Booth (“Sic semper tyrannis!”), the 
villain of his last book. In contrast, Oswald proclaimed his innocence 
to the end, shouting out to reporters in the Dallas police station, “I’m
 just a patsy!” O’Reilly finds the remark “tantalizing,” but does 
nothing to follow it up.
O’Reilly continues to be intrigued by a 
key player in the Oswald story, an elegant, White Russian, globetrotting
 oilman named George de Mohrenschildt.  In his new book, O’Reilly writes
 that de Mohrenschildt “may have CIA connections.” But back in his 
“Inside Edition” days, the TV newsman was more definitive, calling him 
“a crucial link between the CIA and Lee Harvey Oswald.” In fact, de 
Mohrenschildt was a CIA contract agent with long family ties to Allen 
Dulles – the man who perhaps looms largest in the Kennedy assassination 
drama. Even after he was fired by JFK as CIA director in 1961, Dulles 
continued to play a subterranean role in U.S. intelligence that was 
unknown by Kennedy. And following the assassination, Dulles took the 
dominating role in the Warren Commission investigation, carefully 
guiding the panel away from CIA-related areas he found too sensitive.
Many
 Kennedy assassination researchers have concluded that de Mohrenschildt 
acted as Oswald’s CIA “baby sitter,” when the young man returned to 
Texas from the Soviet Union, after a “defection” that observers in the 
U.S. embassy in Moscow found oddly “staged.” Later, de Mohrenschildt 
introduced Oswald and his Russian wife, Marina, to another young Dallas 
couple, Michael and Ruth Paine, whose family also had deep personal and 
business connections to Dulles. It was Ruth Paine who would find Oswald 
his job in the Texas Book Depository a month before the gunfire erupted 
in Dealey Plaza.
O’Reilly waits until the end of the book to break
 his only bit of news. In the afterword, he reveals that in March 1977, 
as a young TV reporter, he tracked de Mohrenschildt to a home in swanky 
Palm Beach, Fla., and was knocking on the door to interview him when a 
shotgun blast exploded inside. Authorities later declared that the 
mysterious de Mohrennschildt, who had been subpoenaed to testify by the 
House Assassinations Committee and was a figure of growing interest in 
the JFK case, had taken his own life. But some assassination researchers
 who looked into de Mohrenschildt’s death, like attorney Mark Lane, 
insisted that the former CIA asset had been silenced because he knew too
 much. Again, Bill O’Reilly – the tough guy who prides himself on his 
bulldog news instincts – leaves this story dangling. He has nothing new 
to add to this perplexing Kennedy footnote.
In a reader’s note 
that prefaces “Killing Kennedy,” O’Reilly comments that the tragedy of 
John F. Kennedy is “somewhat personal for me … my Irish-Catholic family 
had deep emotional ties to the young president and his family.” But 
there is nothing to indicate the tribal toughness of the Irish in this 
weak and limp effort. O’Reilly’s book simply exploits the public’s 
powerful curiosity about the assassination without offering any fresh 
insights into the monumental crime. With friends of the Kennedy family 
like Bill O’Reilly, who needs enemies?
                Continue Reading
                Close
                        
                                    
                
            Salon founder David Talbot is the author of the New York Times bestseller, 
Uploader Comments (kleermaker1000)