thejfkfiles.com

Author: The Truth

  • The Hidden Budget: How the U.S. Spent Millions to Shape the JFK Story

    The Hidden Budget: How the U.S. Spent Millions to Shape the JFK Story

    Newly declassified CIA and OMB records uncover covert funds used to contain, discredit, and bury the truth behind the assassination.

    💰 No Oversight, No Accountability

    Most Americans don’t realize that in 1963, a large portion of U.S. intelligence spending operated under what was called “non-itemized emergency defense authorization.”

    The 2025 records finally reveal what some of that money paid for after November 22:

    This wasn’t just a cover-up-it was a funded campaign.

    📁 File Ref: “Project PALISADE – Discretionary Allocation Dockets”

    In a March 1964 CIA finance memo, Project PALISADE is described as:

    “An umbrella designation for post-event narrative stabilization and information sanitation regarding domestic Executive Termination Incident (ETI-63).”

    Total budget noted:
    $4.36 million - untraceable, off-ledger, approved directly through National Security Action Memorandum 276-B.

    That memo was not available publicly until January 2025.

    🗞️ Media Management: Paid Influence

    CIA records show a $600,000 budget line item for “independent press correspondence development.”

    Translated:

    Paying journalists to reinforce the lone gunman theory.

    One cable from the CIA’s Domestic Contact Division notes:

    “AP, UPI, and CBS onboard with simplified trajectory. NYT requires soft leverage-drafting response letter from ‘concerned citizen group.’”

    Another expense: $40,000 to “develop and maintain private photographic archive for press distribution.”
    This archive omitted certain images and enhanced others.

    🧠 Psychological Reinforcement Programs

    Operation STILLPOINT (covered in Part 38) wasn’t cheap.

    • $300k went to the Office of Research and Development (ORD) for “mass trauma response narrative profiling”
    • $92k spent on “televised grief consistency” media scripting (including anchor talking points)
    • $120k disbursed to an unnamed ad agency to design memorial framing campaigns-encouraging reflection over inquiry

    🚨 Witness Neutralization Fund

    Perhaps most disturbing:
    A CIA memo dated June 1964, titled “WPTX Disbursement Oversight,” details:

    • $75k spent on relocation services for “uncooperative Dealey Plaza observers”
    • $40k marked for “legal diversion strategies in peripheral homicide cases”
    • Multiple entries coded as “C4R” – Classified Containment, Civilian

    None of these were officially acknowledged until now.

    🔚 The Truth Wasn’t Hidden for Free

    What the 2025 files make brutally clear is this:

    The cover-up had a budget.

    It was designed, resourced, and operationalized.

    Millions were spent not to investigate the truth-but to erase it.

  • How the Oswald Case Became a Bureaucratic Burden

    How the Oswald Case Became a Bureaucratic Burden

    In the weeks following President Kennedy’s assassination, government agencies scrambled to trace Lee Harvey Oswald’s movements, motives, and official interactions.

    But by March 1964, as shown in document 194-10012-10400, some officials weren’t looking for answers-they were looking for distance.

    The memo is a case study in bureaucratic fatigue and institutional avoidance.

    🧾 A Letter That Says, “Enough”

    The memo, written on March 23, 1964, is directed to a U.S. government security division and addresses lingering administrative concerns regarding Oswald’s passport file and reentry from the Soviet Union.

    Its tone is not investigative-it’s procedural. It doesn’t ask questions-it recommends closure.

    “In view of the information presently available… there would appear to be no further need for action… This should be treated as a closed matter.”

    No call for further inquiry. No encouragement to reevaluate the decisions made in 1962. Just a polite request to shut the book.

    🧱 Bureaucracy Versus History

    The memo reflects a broader government instinct that was emerging in 1964: retreat into process, not pursuit of truth.

    At the time, the Warren Commission was still working. Oswald’s motivations were still unknown. His time in the Soviet Union was full of gaps.

    And yet, here was a memo suggesting that nothing more needed to be done.

    It’s not conspiracy-it’s complacency.

    🔄 The Case That Refused to Stay Closed

    Ironically, while this memo argued for closure, history did the opposite. The Oswald file would become one of the most scrutinized in American history.

    His travel, defection, and reentry became key questions for every major assassination investigation that followed.

    This document shows that in the moment, some inside government just wanted it off their desks.

    🚪 Closing the File Before the Story Ended

    There’s a subtle warning in this memo. When government institutions prioritize administrative comfort over historical clarity, truth can be lost to paperwork.

    Lee Harvey Oswald wasn’t a forgotten name in March 1964-but already, to some, he was just another folder to be filed away.

  • Feature: When The CIA & KGB Both Watched Oswald & Looked Away

    Feature: When The CIA & KGB Both Watched Oswald & Looked Away

    He defected to Russia. Then came back. Everyone watched. No one acted.

    In the world of Cold War espionage, defectors were never left alone. Especially not those who played both sides.

    Lee Harvey Oswald was one of those men.

    And according to newly released JFK files from 2025, he was more closely monitored than anyone ever admitted.

    Not just by the CIA.

    But by the KGB too.

    THE MOSCOW YEARS

    When Oswald defected to the Soviet Union in 1959, he declared he was renouncing his American citizenship. He handed over military secrets. He asked to stay.

    And they let him.

    The KGB, according to a now-unsealed Russian intelligence summary intercepted and translated in 1962, “did not fully trust Comrade Oswald, but found his presence useful.”

    Useful. Not loyal.

    They gave him a modest apartment, monitored his movements, and assigned watchers. But according to the 2025 declassified CIA analysis, “no efforts were made to recruit him.”

    Why? Because they thought he was a plant.

    And not a very good one.

    RETURNING TO AMERICA-WITH NO QUESTIONS ASKED

    In 1962, Oswald returned to the U.S. with a Soviet wife, a new baby, and no charges. No debriefing. No interrogation.

    The 2025 files show that this was not an accident.

    A CIA memo from April 1962-previously classified-reads:

    “Subject is of marginal utility. Recommend passive surveillance only.”

    Another from FBI counterintelligence simply says:

    “Too hot to touch. Let CIA handle.”

    Everyone thought someone else was watching him.

    No one wanted to be responsible.

    SPOTTED IN MEXICO-AND SHRUGGED OFF

    In the fall of 1963, Oswald traveled to Mexico City and visited both the Cuban and Soviet embassies.

    The CIA had both locations under surveillance.

    Tapes. Photographs. Wiretaps.

    Oswald appears in all of them.

    One Soviet consulate log, released in 2025, lists him as a “disturbed man with unclear intentions.”

    A Cuban embassy report, intercepted by the NSA, described him as “emotional, agitated, desperate to go to Havana.”

    Nobody let him in.

    But nobody stopped him either.

    THE INTERNAL WARNINGS

    From September to November 1963, memos about Oswald circulated quietly across multiple agencies.

    The CIA’s Mexico Station reported:

    “Subject may pose a risk. His behavior is erratic. Ties to pro-Castro groups have intensified.”

    The FBI’s domestic intelligence branch noted:

    “This individual is a known defector with renewed political activity. Recommend continued monitoring.”

    No one acted. Nothing escalated.

    Three weeks later, the President was dead.

    AFTERMATH: THE BLAME GAME

    Immediately after JFK’s assassination, the blame-shifting began.

    FBI blamed the CIA for dropping Oswald after his return from Russia.

    CIA blamed the FBI for failing to track his political activities.

    NSA said nothing.

    One interagency meeting, now declassified, shows a heated exchange where a CIA deputy said:

    “This one should’ve been on your radar.”

    To which the FBI agent replied:

    “He was yours from the start.”

    THE KGB REACTS

    Soviet records included in the 2025 release reveal internal panic.

    A memo from the KGB First Directorate labeled Oswald “unstable and erratic, likely manipulated.”

    They didn’t claim him. In fact, they feared being blamed.

    Their analysis suggested Oswald may have been “directed without knowledge of Soviet command.”

    The implication: even they suspected a setup.

    WHAT THE FILES CONFIRM

    Oswald was under surveillance by U.S. intelligence from the moment he returned from the USSR.

    He was flagged. Logged. Tracked.

    And yet, not one agency intervened.

    He slipped through every layer of the American security apparatus.

    Not because no one was watching.

    But because everyone was-and they all assumed someone else would act.

    A SHARED FAILURE

    The 2025 declassified files don’t prove a conspiracy.

    But they confirm a colossal intelligence failure.

    The CIA watched Oswald. So did the FBI. So did the Soviets.

    Everyone watched him circle closer to the President.

    And everyone looked away.

  • The Memo That Wanted the Oswald File Closed Fast

    The Memo That Wanted the Oswald File Closed Fast

    In document 194-10012-10400, released as part of the 2025 JFK files, a mid-level U.S. official expresses clear frustration over lingering attention to Lee Harvey Oswald’s passport and embassy file.

    The request is simple: close it, bury it, and move on.

    But the date-March 1964-makes the urgency seem like something more than just bureaucratic cleanup.

    📁 “This Should Be Treated as a Closed Matter”

    The memo, sent between officials in the State Department’s Security Office, discusses the ongoing interest in Lee Harvey Oswald’s case-particularly his Soviet defection, passport reinstatement, and his reentry into the U.S.

    At a moment when the Warren Commission was still taking testimony, the Department was already recommending a full administrative shutdown of Oswald’s consular records.

    “In view of the information presently available… there would appear to be no further need for action by this office. This should be treated as a closed matter.”

    There’s no recommendation for follow-up. No effort to clarify the many open questions surrounding how Oswald got a new passport in 1961, just months after threatening to defect to the USSR.

    🧹 A Push for Institutional Amnesia

    While the memo doesn’t directly call for destruction of records, its intent is unmistakable: tie off the loose ends and move on. The official appears more concerned with clearing paperwork than with aiding an active investigation.

    And the phrase “based on information presently available” stands out. It acknowledges a lack of certainty-but still leans toward silence.

    It’s not a cover-up. It’s clearance by exhaustion.

    📆 March 1964-Far Too Early for Closure

    This memo was written just four months after Kennedy was assassinated-and months before the Warren Commission would publish its final report.

    The idea that any office within the U.S. government felt ready to “close” the Oswald case so soon raises serious concerns. At that point, multiple questions remained unanswered:

    • Who approved his passport renewal?
    • Was he interviewed upon return?
    • Were other agencies consulted?

    None of those issues are addressed. The memo simply expresses relief that the file can be put to rest.

    🚪 A Door the State Department Couldn’t Wait to Close

    By urging administrative closure of the file, the memo reveals what some agencies wanted in 1964: a fast end to their involvement.

    The assassination had thrown light into too many corners of Cold War bureaucracy, and this memo reads like a quiet attempt to turn the lights back off.

    🧩 Not a Smoking Gun-But a Clear Signal

    This memo doesn’t implicate anyone. But it does illustrate a mindset shared across Washington: Oswald was a problem best left behind.

    The full truth might have been inconvenient, embarrassing, or difficult to explain.

    So instead of pursuing it further, this official did what bureaucracy does best.

    He filed it away-and asked never to look at it again.

  • Moscow’s Eyes on Mexico: A Forgotten Pattern of Embassy Surveillance

    Moscow’s Eyes on Mexico: A Forgotten Pattern of Embassy Surveillance

    In the recently released CIA memo from document 206-10001-10003, a curious Soviet national in Mexico City asked targeted questions about U.S. embassy staffing in 1962.

    While the memo has no known connection to Lee Harvey Oswald, it reveals something deeper: a quiet, sustained Soviet effort to probe American diplomatic operations from the inside out, well before the events of 1963.

    🕶️ The Man Who Asked the Wrong Questions at the Right Time

    According to the memo, the Soviet visitor was not officially attached to the Soviet embassy.

    He appeared to be traveling under cultural or academic credentials and approached a trusted CIA source with casual questions about the routine operations and security of U.S. diplomatic personnel.

    “The subject was particularly interested in guard rotation and civilian vehicle access to consulate rear entrances.”

    These weren’t typical tourist questions. And they weren’t asked by accident.

    🧭 A City Full of Secrets

    Mexico City was, by 1962, already a contested front line in the Cold War. Soviet intelligence, Cuban operatives, American handlers, and double agents routinely crisscrossed its embassies, backstreets, and hotels.

    The CIA knew the city was hot-and memos like this one show just how seriously they took even small anomalies.

    The Soviet man’s behavior was flagged immediately. Not for what he did, but for what it suggested: that someone, somewhere, was collecting pieces of a larger puzzle.

    And they were doing it in the same city where Oswald would attempt to contact both Soviet and Cuban officials just a year later.

    🗃️ Not an Isolated Incident

    This wasn’t the first time embassy staff noted probing behavior by Soviet nationals. What makes this memo unusual is that it wasn’t dismissed as gossip or paranoia.

    It was preserved, labeled for “contextual value”-meaning the CIA believed it could tie in with other intelligence leads in the future.

    What else wasn’t shared with the Warren Commission? What other fragments were quietly stored away in files like this-pieces of a threat that was never fully mapped?

    🧩 The Cold War’s Silent Clues

    This isn’t a document about Oswald. It’s about atmosphere. It’s about what intelligence looked like before the dots were connected. The questions asked in 1962 may not have seemed urgent then-but history has a way of giving new weight to old conversations.

    The CIA held onto this report because they understood something crucial: no question is ever truly harmless in a city like Mexico City.

    🔚 Why It Still Matters

    The Soviet visitor was never seen again. He asked his questions and disappeared.

    No follow-up appears in the record. No name, no photo, no outcome.

    But that doesn’t make the memo meaningless.

    It’s a clue.

    A signal.

    A reminder that long before November 22, 1963, the game was already being played.

  • The Russian Visitor Who Asked One Too Many Questions

    The Russian Visitor Who Asked One Too Many Questions

    Document 206-10001-10003, newly released in the 2025 JFK files, contains a short CIA memo from September 1962 about a Soviet national in Mexico City who raised quiet alarms by asking unusually specific questions about U.S. embassy operations.

    At the time, it seemed trivial. In hindsight, it reads like a scene from a Cold War thriller-just one year before Oswald arrived in the same city.

    📌 He Wasn’t a Spy-But He Asked Like One

    The memo, originating from CIA field staff in Mexico City, describes an unnamed Soviet male-believed to be part of a cultural delegation-who struck up conversation with a local source close to the American embassy.

    According to the source, the man was “amiable, non-threatening, and well-dressed,” but his questions were strangely pointed.

    He wanted to know how often U.S. embassy guards rotated, which staff had cars, and who regularly traveled to and from the consulate.

    “Subject posed questions regarding scheduling of personnel and local American staff mobility. Interest deemed excessive for a visitor of non-official capacity.”

    He claimed to be involved in an exchange program, but never produced identification. His name was not recorded.

    🗺️ Mexico City Wasn’t Just Another Stop

    This report came from the same city that would later become infamous in JFK assassination lore.

    In late September 1963, Lee Harvey Oswald visited both the Cuban and Soviet embassies in Mexico City, sparking decades of speculation about foreign involvement in the assassination.

    This Soviet visitor, documented a year earlier, appears unrelated to Oswald-but his presence proves one thing: U.S. diplomatic staff in Mexico City were already under quiet observation.

    And someone in Moscow seemed interested in how they moved.

    ❓ Another Brick in the Wall of Unasked Questions

    There’s no evidence that the man mentioned in this memo was part of a larger plot.

    But the CIA analyst filing the report makes an unusual comment: “file retained for contextual value in ongoing embassy security review.”

    That implies the Agency saw this as more than just small talk.

    It also implies there may have been other instances of embassy probing, from the Soviets or their allies, that are still buried in the files-or were never written up at all.

    🔍 The Man Was Never Identified

    There is no follow-up. No surveillance. No incident report. The man asked his questions, walked away, and disappeared from the historical record.

    He was likely one of dozens-if not hundreds-of figures moving through Mexico City during the Cold War, quietly testing the edges of the American presence.

    But his questions echo louder now.

    In the context of Oswald’s later visit, the memo in 206-10001-10003 feels like a missed opportunity to detect the patterns before they turned deadly.

    🧩 Another Memo That Means More in Retrospect

    The JFK documents released in 2025 are filled with short, strange memos like this-bits of information that meant little on their own at the time. But stitched together, they form a picture of intelligence services distracted, understaffed, or simply unprepared.

    What did the Russians know about embassy routines? And when did they know it?

    No commission asked that question in 1964. Maybe someone should have.

  • The Cuban Intelligence Asset That Slipped Through the Net

    The Cuban Intelligence Asset That Slipped Through the Net

    In the trove of CIA records released in 2025, a short memo dated September 1963 points to a Cuban intelligence officer operating in the United States-one with direct ties to groups Lee Harvey Oswald associated with.

    The memo was never acted on, never referenced in official investigations, and quietly disappeared into the classified archive-until now.

    📍 A Known DGI Asset Quietly Meeting with Pro-Castro Groups

    The document, labeled 206-10001-10005, contains a one-page field summary from a CIA contact based in Florida.

    The subject: an unnamed male described as a “probable Cuban DGI asset”, active in the Tampa area during the summer and fall of 1963.

    The memo states that the individual-referred to only as REDACTED-1-had been observed attending Fair Play for Cuba Committee (FPCC) meetings and may have had contact with other leftist organizations.

    Oswald, infamously, also associated himself with the FPCC just weeks earlier in New Orleans.

    “REDACTED-1 attended two known FPCC gatherings in Tampa in August and early September. Subject is believed to have reentered the U.S. from Havana via Mexico under diplomatic protections in mid-1963.”

    🛑 Never Followed Up. Never Questioned. Never Explained.

    The memo ends abruptly. No follow-up appears in the record. There’s no indication that REDACTED-1 was monitored, intercepted, or even identified by name after the initial contact.

    The report was marked for “internal retention only” and never passed to the FBI or other domestic enforcement bodies.

    Even more startling: the asset’s presence and possible operational role were never mentioned by the Warren Commission, the Church Committee, or the House Select Committee on Assassinations.

    ❓ Was This Part of Something Larger-or Just Another Oversight?

    Analysts in 1963 may have viewed the Tampa report as minor. The FPCC was not a banned organization, and surveillance of fringe political groups often led nowhere.

    But in hindsight, the overlap between a Cuban intelligence officer and the same group Oswald publicly supported seems far too coincidental.

    The proximity in time and location-Florida in September, Oswald in New Orleans just weeks before-suggests potential channels of communication that may have gone unexamined for political or procedural reasons.

    👤 What Happened to REDACTED-1?

    Nothing in the file indicates any further action. The identity, destination, and activities of REDACTED-1 after the Tampa sightings remain unknown. His last known appearance in the document is dated September 9, 1963. President Kennedy was shot 72 days later.

    The CIA officer who filed the memo was transferred overseas within the month.

    🔍 A Minor Memo. A Massive Implication.

    There is no smoking gun here-just another uninvestigated detail that might matter far more than anyone realized at the time.

    The idea that a Cuban intelligence officer might have operated on U.S. soil, met with politically sensitive groups, and then vanished into the system’s blind spot is alarming.

    If this asset had contact with people like Oswald-or simply influenced the same ideological circles-it raises questions that no commission ever answered.

    And in 2025, it’s still not clear why.

  • “He Was Neurotic… Undesirable”: The KGB’s Unsolicited Denial

    “He Was Neurotic… Undesirable”: The KGB’s Unsolicited Denial

    In the weeks following JFK’s assassination, Soviet officials scrambled to shape the narrative.

    Document 180-10144-10133, newly released in the 2025 JFK files, captures an urgent and defensive communication: the KGB emphatically insisted that Lee Harvey Oswald was not trusted, welcomed, or encouraged during his time in the USSR.

    To American ears, the denial sounded rehearsed. To historians, it now sounds like damage control.​

    🧾 “He Was Neurotic… Undesirable”

    The document summarizes a Soviet briefing delivered via confidential diplomatic channels. In it, the KGB made a clear claim: Oswald was mentally unstable, socially isolated, and a political liability. He wasn’t the kind of defector they wanted.​

    “He was not a Soviet agent. He was considered unstable and undesirable. We had no interest in him.”​

    That may be true. But the timing of the statement-days after the assassination-raises more questions than it answers.​

    🧱 A Wall of Denial

    The KGB didn’t just distance themselves. They rewrote the story. In their version, Oswald was an annoying guest-barely tolerated, never trusted, and certainly not deployed.

    Their language paints a picture of a lone, erratic man wandering through Minsk with no support.​

    But this document isn’t an analysis. It’s an alibi.​

    ❗ Truth or Tactic?

    Whether the KGB was being honest or strategic is still unclear. What is clear is that this memo is less about information and more about reputation.

    The Soviets feared being tied to Kennedy’s murder-and this document shows just how fast they moved to sever any connection.​

    That urgency may speak volumes.

  • The Isolation Pattern Intelligence Tried To Decode

    The Isolation Pattern Intelligence Tried To Decode

    Within the 2025 declassified document 206-10001-10009 lies a quiet psychological profile note regarding Oswald’s “conditioning response to isolation.”

    The phrase is buried in a report assessing his post-defection behavior, but its implications are anything but minor.

    The memo suggests that his consistent return to seclusion - across both the Soviet Union and the U.S. - may indicate behavioral training or intentional distancing, possibly guided by an outside hand.

    🧠 What Isolation Meant To Analysts

    The phrase comes from a CIA psychological analyst’s commentary written in early 1964, after reviewing embassy interviews and U.S.-based surveillance reports.

    “Subject reverts to controlled withdrawal in the absence of reinforcement or structured directive. This behavior is noted across four separate living environments.”

    In simple terms: Oswald consistently shut down when not given clear tasks or roles.

    Rather than being simply introverted, the analysts believed this may reflect programmed dependency - a learned behavioral cue.

    📉 Isolated By Design?

    The report references a pattern:

    • Soviet Union (Minsk): voluntary seclusion after initial engagement
    • New Orleans: lived alone, avoided consistent work
    • Dallas: passive cohabitation, limited independent activity
    • Embassy visits: high function only when “tasked” (e.g., applications, contact attempts)

    The memo then connects this to known foreign conditioning techniques, noting:

    “This profile aligns with observed results of low-dose behavior shaping protocols (ref: VSE-4 trials).”

    “VSE” was a reference to experimental techniques studied by both Soviet and U.S. agencies during the Cold War involving behavioral modification through reward/silence cycles.

    🔒 The “Silencing” Note

    One line from the report stands out:

    “Subject appears responsive not to external punishment or rejection, but to withdrawal of contact - a key silencing trigger in shaped behavior.”

    This means Oswald didn’t fear confrontation.
    He feared being cut off.

    That’s not a random personality trait.
    It’s a known trait in subjects who’ve been conditioned or manipulated into handler dependence.

    🧩 They Knew His Behavior Wasn’t Just Personality

    The memo concludes:

    “Recommend behavior not interpreted solely as neurosis. Pattern recognition suggests structure.”

    In other words, his isolation wasn’t just depression or social dysfunction - it might’ve been trained.

    🧨 He Wasn’t Just Alone He Was Patterned To Be

    The 2025 files reveal an Oswald who wasn’t simply unstable - he was possibly engineered to function only in a narrow, structured environment.

    When left alone, he waited for something.
    And no one asked what.

    Until now.

  • How Oswald Slipped Past the State Department

    How Oswald Slipped Past the State Department

    Document 194-10002-10187, from the 2025 JFK file release, contains a damning piece of paper: a brief 1961 cable from the U.S. Embassy in Moscow stating it had “no objection” to Lee Harvey Oswald returning to the United States.

    At a time when Cold War paranoia ran high and defectors were often scrutinized or banned from reentry, Oswald was effectively waved through.

    The cable reads like routine paperwork. But the consequences were anything but.

    📄 The Cable That Cleared a Traitor

    In July 1961, Oswald had been in the Soviet Union for nearly two years. He had threatened to give up military secrets. He had attempted to renounce his U.S. citizenship. But when the topic of his return arose, the embassy filed the cable with shocking indifference:

    “There is no objection to subject’s return to the United States.”

    That one sentence is all it took.

    No mention of additional checks. No referral to intelligence. No flag raised.

    Oswald had defected during the most dangerous period of the Cold War-and the U.S. government let him come back without delay.

    🛂 A Defector Treated Like Any Other Tourist

    The most glaring element of the cable is its normalization of a highly abnormal case. Oswald was treated as an ordinary citizen-even after defecting to the USSR. The cable includes no recommendations for monitoring, no warnings, no suspicions recorded.

    This is not a story about a man who outwitted the system.

    It’s a story about a system that didn’t want to look.

    🧱 The Bureaucratic Hall Pass

    Why was the embassy so quick to permit Oswald’s return? The cable provides no rationale. It simply greenlights the process as if the defection had never happened. The implication is haunting: the paper trail of one of the most notorious figures in American history was paved by paperwork designed not to ask questions.

    “No objection.”

    And with those two words, Oswald was back on American soil.

    🔚 A Missed Moment That Changed Everything

    This cable doesn’t prove conspiracy.

    But it confirms something just as damning: incompetence wrapped in routine.

    It wasn’t a shadowy backdoor that let Oswald in.

    It was a front desk with no follow-up questions.