William F. Buckley Jr. was a brilliant demagogue who pretended that Lee Harvey Oswald murdered John F. Kennedy even though he clearly knew better. On December 1, 1966, when he interviewed Mark Lane, he said the following;

"It is widely alleged that sinister forces who have a vested interest in suppressing the real truth as to the identity of the assassin, have been here and there killing off crucial people; former strippers at Ruby's joint in Dallas, a truck driver roomate and friends of Oswald, that kind of thing. How come if you are the man who has changed history, these forces haven't bumped you off, Mr. lane?"

Asking such a question when real journalists like Dorothy Kilgallen were in fact "bumped off" for investigating the facts, is clearly absolutely disgusting, to say the least.

First and foremost, William F. Buckley Jr. falsely claimed that only Liberals and Leftists refused to accept the Warren Report, and if that was is in fact the case, they are the only people who have functioning brain.

To be brief, the debate between Mark Lane and William F. Buckley Jr., proved that Mr. Buckley was a brilliant advocate who was in fact motivated by the obsession to protect the fraudulent conclusions of the Warren Commission Report. Mark Lane was motivated by the desire to explore the truth, and the following exchange is quite clear in that regard:

William F. Buckley Jr.   If you are willing to believe, I think, that some combination of ruthlessness, cynisism and sloth, committed J. Edgar Hoover and Earl Warren and 7 or 8 distinguished Americans appointed by the President, with the tacit acquiessence of Robert Kennedy, and a bunch of hardworking professional lawyers/investigators, to come up with a verdict that is palpably indefensible, then, if you are willing to set up that assumption, it becomes simply a matter of legal ingenuity -and you are extremely ingenius to contrive an extremely interesting case, to go ahead and prove your assumptions, methodologically as much in error as the warren Commission.

Mark Lane:    Well I think if you adopt that approach, you say there is no truth, we can never discover what has ever happened. I don't believe that that's so. I think we can. I think there are mechanisms developed so that we can. I think that the American judicial system is a sound one; cross-examination, open and public hearings, the right to counsel for the accused...I think these things tend to assist the determination of the truth.

William F. Buckley Jr.    I'm glad you pretend, because we know about an awful lot of innocent people who are convicted and guilty people who are let go.

Mark Lane:   Just think of how many innocent people would have been convicted if they didn't have those protections. The fact is the Warren Commission made none of those protections available. You know what they did, they took testimony, they've never published the transcripts of that testimony, that's locked up by the order of your President for 75 years.

William F. Buckley Jr.   Yours too by the way.

Mark Lane:   Yes

William F. Buckley Jr.    You voted for him.

Mark Lane:   No I did not vote for him, as a matter of fact. September 2039, is when we can examine them. What the Commission did was to publish a printed version, but Volume 1 of the Report states that the Commission reserves the right to edit the transcript to improve the accuracy and the clarity of the witnesses' statement. Doesn't that frighten you a little bit -that power?

William F. Buckley Jr.    No more so than I don't have access to the notes that went into your book. I'm sure that every time you bumped into a witness who said, "Yes Mr. Lane, I saw him and he was Oswald" -he very likely didn't figure prominently in your book.

In Mr. Buckley's world, Mark Lane was merely a target to be discredited, and in the process, Warren Report apologist, Mr. Buckley, discredits himself. As a matter of fact, the following exchange destroys Mr. Buckley's credibility so clearly and so convincingly, that one would have to be both ignorant and mad, to doubt his sinister motivation -to conceal the truth about the assassination of President John F. Kennedy.

William F. Buckley Jr.   Mr. Lane, I gather that the burden of your charge is that evidence that the Warren Committee secreted away -the loose notes, the notebooks and so on, were it publicly accessible, would tend to undermine the Warren Commissions case. Otherwise, could it not simply be a matter of fact and conventional way of exercising editorial judgement. For instance, I find it impssible to read everything that Ruby said in his own interview with the Warren Commission investigators, simply on the grounds of its inherent unintelligibility. Now do't they have some sort of a right to exercise editorial judgement, assuming that we trust their integrity.

Mark Lane:    I'm surprised you asked that question, because you know that can never be done in a trial in any court. No Judge edits the testimony and then presents it to a jury or to the public, and to this most important case the jury was the American people, I think, and we have the right to look at the unintelligible statements made by Mr. Ruby and the unintelligible questions asked by Chief Justice Warren as well. I think that's one of our basic rights in a democratic society.

In retrospect, there is nothing surprising about anything that William F. Buckley Jr. ever said.

NEXT: His role in the assassination of President John F. Kennedy.