Though I am impressed at the sheer amount of work and information that Lamar Waldron provides in The Hidden History of the JFK Assassination, and while he has pretty clearly lain out the most compelling and likely networks of both cause and activity related to JFK's murder, I found his writing and presentation styles in this book to be opaque and somewhat pedestrian. As a result, I felt that much of this read was a slog, and it was only sheer tenacity that got me through to the end, rather than the enjoyment of the contents.

Not only is the subject matter plausible, most of it is gallingly obvious once it is all spread out like a detective's white board, and for that Waldron's work should be lauded – especially when held against other specious tell-alls within the massive stable of literature on the JFK assassination. I regret, though, that a white board was not actually included with the text, as it would have made the dense, meandering connections and poor organization which mar the book far more intelligible to the reader. Perhaps that is one of the effects of paring down the author's previous, more extensive works into this one, and removing all footnotes in the name of accessibility. More likely it is an issue of Waldron being a fine investigative researcher but a limited writer. Between his choice of retaining contractions, amateurish sentence construction, constant repetition of information, and pervasive use of "however," Hidden History loses much of the punch that it promises over and over again within the text itself.

I was annoyed by the repeated sales pitches for Waldron's other works throughout the book, which crop up in introduction, body, and conclusion (complete with references to the trade paperbacks being stocked with information the older editions lack), as well as frequent first-person references to his own interviews, discoveries, and triumphs in the archives. Leaving these out would not only provide more room for relevant information, but also would preserve the continuity of the narrative without breaking the spell of the story that he is attempting to tell. What is left, though, is a frantic explosion of sometimes staccato information, with chapters feeling like they were originally written to be self-contained website essays. Data and thesis are often reiterated between chapters, with space dedicated to explaining people and operations which have already been explained. It would have been far more effective to have a simple list of dramatis personae and key for acronyms to help readers gain familiarity with the most important players in the study.

Even with these issues, the premise of Waldron's book is sound and intriguing – so much so that it has certainly shaped my understanding of the most likely "truths" behind what really happened in November 1963. In other words: I believe him, at least until better or more compelling information becomes available. Yet there are still some pockets of ambiguity that could use some ironing out. For instance, Waldron's assessment of Oswald is all over the place, and he never really commits to explaining the would-be assassin's actual place in the scheme. Perhaps this is simply because the most obvious patsy in this crime was manipulated so well by multiple parties that his position cannot actually be verified. Other characters are left floating in similar positions, including Guy Banister, Clay Shaw, and David Ferrie.

Likewise, I found it difficult to parse one of the author's key explanations for the governmental cover-up of JFK's murder. Waldron stresses the absolute necessity for US officials to prevent conflict with the USSR as the main reason why Mafia, CIA, and Cuban ties were not divulged after the assassination. Any retaliation for aggression by Castro or other US military action against Cuba, the Soviet proxy in the Western Hemisphere, Waldron leans on, would be met with the possibility of nuclear war. Yet JFK and RFK were secretly plotting a coup attempt near the time of the President's death, which he explains would have been seen as somehow more "acceptable" by Soviet authorities, as long as US intervention was requested by internal Cuban dissidents. In charge of these plots in Cuba was Juan Almeida, conspiratorial attache to the Kennedy administration, whom all agencies of the US government bent over backward to protect through the entire assassination fiasco and even into the late aughts. Yet both the CIA and FBI are eviscerated by Waldron, who asserts they did everything in their power to cover up facts and withhold evidence about Kennedy's death, including eliminating key witnesses and falsifying information. Was Almeida's safety really that important to numerous government agencies? Were they actually protecting Almeida or the US connection to him – or was it the CIA and Mafia's ties to murder of Kennedy that was actually being preserved by not divulging Almeida's identity? Who was in who's pocket? Who had dirt on whom? I have no idea, because Waldron is not particularly clear on any of it. He probably knows, but he just can't write it out concisely. Alternatively, maybe I'm just not getting it.

Considering that this nearly 500-page beast of an investigative monograph is Waldron's truncated, "more accessible" version of 2008's Legacy of Secrecy, one can only imagine what was left out here, other than detailed footnotes and a full bibliography. I am just not willing to find out by subjecting myself to his more expansive works, mostly because I don't think I could take it. Your mileage, of course, may vary. ( )