Jim DiEugenio writes of how the author of what was a good book on the JFK case when it first came out has subsequently held less tenable views of both John Kennedy and his assassination, and how he blindly jettisons Garrison's achievements.

Jim DiEugenio's second book on the JFK assassination, which takes Bugliosi's pretentious and inflated bag of obfuscation as its framework for dismantling the Warren Commission, the Clark Panel, and the HSCA, and for further revealing how beholden the film and TV industry has become to Washington in general and to the CIA in particular.  A masterful dissection of a rotting corpse, and the rightful heir to Accessories after the Fact. [Al Rossi]

This book may well represent the high point of Jesse's legacy ... We can all be thankful of the fact that he felt compelled to commit his power and influence toward noble causes, rather than sell his soul to the highest bidder, like so many others have, writes Frank Cassano.

Sherry Fiester [uses] established science-based protocols to determine events and causalities, not to search for manufactured support of an a priori conclusion, write LeBlanc and Dragoo.

By showing the difference between Kennedy and what came before and after him, [Muehlenbeck] helps us understand why the prime minister of Somalia later said that "the memory of Kennedy is always alive in us Africans", writes Jim DiEugenio.

This is a kind of odd book. Even for the MSM. Clarke and his cohorts seem to be just catching up to what people in the know understood about Kennedy decades ago. But only now, in 2013 can this be revealed. But even then, it must be accompanied by the usual MSM rumor-mongering and dirt.  I guess, under those restrictive circumstances, this is the best one can expect from someone who trusts the likes of Ben Bradlee, concludes Jim DiEugenio.

After reading this volume, the only apparent betrayal will be to the consumer who plunks down $25.00 for this mess, complains Bill Davy.        

It would not necessarily be surprising ... if [LBJ] had foreknowledge or tacitly approved of the assassination. ... I do not think, however, that at this date ... an explanation which ignores the larger political forces of the national security state can be taken seriously, writes Joseph Green.

[This] book is more about the CIA's nefarious and illegal operations, including the MK/ULTRA project. If you are interested in learning more about the shadowy world of the CIA, this is a good book. If you are interested in learning more about what happened to JFK and why he was assassinated, I believe there are many books out there that do a better job in answering your questions, writes Vasilios Vazakas.

In the early days after the Rolling Stone article appeared, it appears that [Saint John] and his brother actually had a good deal of skepticism towards what their father had told him about the mechanics of the assassination.  What happened to that skepticism? ... Hunt's personal story, with some good supplementary research about his father and mother, could have been politically interesting and personally compelling. But it didn't come out that way, concludes Seamus Coogan.