Why is this being released now rather than later when it was supposed to? It’s outrageous that he was being hounded and wiretapped so extensively and so many resources were expended doing so and he was being urged by FBI to take his own life.
Violence against women is of course deplorable but so is the fed government in not intervening on the women’s behalf at the time of the violence and reported rape(s).
Himom, the last link explains some documents were released as part of another ruling that seems to supercede. But admits digging for info is challenging.
OP, You don’t have “primary sources.” You have purported FBI notes from an era in which the FBI operated in their own regrettable ways, often for the sole purpose of discrediting. I suspect you can learn more about this via some googling and just how many people were affected by lies and manipulations.
I’m asking for that critical thinking. Not, he says it so it must be true. Or he read a note that said it, so it is true.
It doesn’t matter if the writer has a Pulitzer. The state of journalism today is that many reputable sources look for their various forms of clickbait. Sorry to say.
^The FBI tapes were sealed by court order until 2027. From the Standpoint article it appears the notes and such used for the Standpoint article were released due to the provisions of The President John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Collection Act, which mandated the public release of tens of thousands of government documents and some of the documents were part of congressional investigations of US intelligence agencies predating the 1977 order.
I would imagine the FBI witnesses many crimes during surveillance activities and they don’t intercede because it would compromise the surveillance.
This is likely why the biographer felt he could publish this information now rather than wait eight years for the source recordings and transcripts to be made available:
Without question Sullivan and his aides had both the microphone-transmitted tape-recording, and a subsequent full transcript at hand while they were annotating their existing typescript; in 1977 Justice Department investigators would publicly attest to how their own review of both the tapes and the transcripts showed them to be genuine and accurate.
*
@romanigypsyeyes As are Harvey Weinstein, Keven Spacey, Bill Clinton, Bill Cosby etc. Should they also be given a reprieve or at best a casual glance since they were ‘complicated’?
We were to believe Christine Ford (supported by our own Senators) and take down Judge Kavanaugh … but here we allow a ‘complicated’ defense.
Speechless.
As per Media Bias.
CNN - Left Bias mixed factual reporting
The New York Times - Left Center high factual reporting
MSNBC - Left Bias - mixed factual reporting
Often used sources on CC…
MODERATOR’S NOTE:
I’ll assume we’ll have no further examples of media bias.
*. Edited to honor skieurope 'request’
I’m getting at the fact that there were dozens of pages, rightfully, filled with disgust when the actions of (most) of the men mention in #30 came to light. In fact, there was a willingness to accuse someone, and ruin their life based on a false allegation.
Add to that the willingness to condemn the Covington High School boys **** edited ***** and the fact someone is questioning the integrity of the pulitzer winning journalist - in spite of past glowing coverage of MLK - and I decided to point out some hypocrisy.
We ALL have world views we love and cherish. Hate to give those up - it’s human nature.
Gotcha. Thanks.
Seems like the FBI document referring to rape is this one:
https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/docid-32989551.pdf#page=18
Is this really news? I thought I had seen that FBI memo quoted many times before, although I don’t remember the specific allegation of “rape.” The memo is pretty hilariously self–impeaching, though, with all its fussing about “unnatural sex acts” and “depravity,” as well as miscegenation. It’s clearly not a neutral, unbiased record of surveillance of King during the period in question.
Both the conclusory use of the term “rape” and the handwritten additions about King’s behavior during the “rape” lack the kind of specificity that would be required to prove anything in court, especially given that the FBI agents actually saw nothing, were inferring everything from wiretaps, and never bothered to identify or to interview the supposed victim. Their job was not to make a factual record; their job was to provide material for blackmailing King. Without some pretty strong corroboration from someone who wasn’t being paid to smear King, I wouldn’t regard any of this as factual.
@lookingforward and @JHS , I’m not looking to change anyone’s mind about this, or to prove anything to a legal standard for a criminal act.
This is all new information curated by a famed MLK historian. Certainly newsworthy, in my opinion. But others disagree. The Atlanta J-C opted against publishing because it doesn’t include source material.
I asked for opinions on the matter, and have received many good ones that span the spectrum.
Personally, I think MLK was slime, but the womanizing itself was enough for me to form that opinion. There is no way I would want my wife or daughter near him if he were still alive. That opinion doesn’t require proof beyond reasonable doubt.
Also, I don’t believe this will alter his legacy. Not sure if anyone has weighed in on that, yet. Perhaps the source material in 2027 will affect the legacy, but we’ll have to wait and see. At that point, you’re talking a lifetime after the events occurred, so there probably won’t be too many people that even care.
^ Exactly. That is the difference. There is no complaining victim and the FBI under Hoover was known and documented to have been the weapon of his personal hate and debauchery.
MODERATOR’S NOTE:
For the sake of accuracy, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution was among many many outlets that took a hard pass on this story.
I know - you’ve told us at least 5 times. Feel free to express your opinion and let others share theirs. But repeatedly rebutting the same point will only get the thread shut down.
I don’t think it’s all-new information at all. I believe I have seen portions of this FBI memo quoted going back decades. I don’t remember “rape,” and maybe that’s new, but I don’t understand how it would be. This general material has been in the public domain for 40 years.
From a 2008 CNN article:
@skieurope , thank you for adding accuracy to my comment in #53.
@ohiobro I sit in the let’s wait and see what comes out crowd. MLK’s legacy could definitely be tarnished by confirmed allegations (especially since a part of his legacy is built on taking a moral stand), but I don’t know if his legacy could be “destroyed”. History is littered with characters who have changed the world despite having “character flaws” including many who have committed criminal acts.
MLK’s legacy is built on his stands for civil rights, his actions that helped change the course of America history, and his sacrifice (life taken for what he believed). That part of his legacy survives anything found in the FBI tapes, but the alleged information could taint his story and how history remembers MLK overall.
Legacy in general is a complicated concept because history has a way of finding out all of your dirty secrets if you are famous/infamous enough. When I think of Bill Cosby, I see a man who has been convicted of heinous crimes against women, and he is now being punished (much too late however). But he was also the man that influenced my entire viewpoint of what a father should be (Funny, supportive, patient, loving, but stern when he needed to be on TV). While Bill Cosby’s overall legacy has been irreparably damaged, my idea of a father still sees that 1980’s TV character. My guess is that MLK’s ideas and his sacrifice will stand the test of time even if the man (through FBI tapes) shows himself to be more flawed than any of us realized.
I don’t know anything about this and MLK is an icon but tbd on this information.
If true it’s a bit different than being a bad husband like some Presidents or celebrities mentioned.
Also I dont like to judge other people’s marriages or their relationships. It could be awful for all we know.
If it is determined to be true that this occurred, rooting on behavior like this is criminal and beyond just being a boor. It’s really inexcusable and impossible to defend. But I’m waiting for more information.
I would ask all of us to be consistent in fairness to @OhiBro however, if we really believe that anonymous sources are not really credible and fbi is not always on the up and up - that we honestly apply it evenly to both people we like and don’t like.
@ChangeTheGame , great parallel to Bill Cosby.
Thanks for the vote of confidence, @privatebanker .
WaPo now citing many historians that say we must wait for more evidence, and some calling Garrow irresponsible for writing this now.
Interesting find, @JHS . Maybe it was available in some form a long time ago. I only took a peak at the records, of which Garrow said there were thousands, and the documents are so…old. Not electronically searchable, so I harnessed my inner millennial, and stopped reading.
I’ll balance the tone of this thread with something positive. MLK was so young. 34 at “I have a dream”! Has there ever been such a prolific speaker at that age?
This video claims to show King’s first TV interview in 1957. Such eloquence at age 28!
https://youtu.be/-Ll4QmvnGcU
If confirmed, will these allegations lead to consequences like removal of statues, renaming or cancellation of the national holiday, etc.?