New Book Says LBJ Killed JFK

http://home.knology.net/news.cfm?id=31601

NEW YORK, Aug 22, 2003 (United Press International via COMTEX) -- A new book claims Lyndon Johnson was behind the 1963 assassination of President John F. Kennedy.

The author of "Blood, Money & Power: How LBJ killed JFK" is Barr McClellan, father of White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan, the New York Daily News reports.
<snip>

There's not much more info at the link, but it got my attention!

has always suspected LBJ was behind his assasination.

for the LBJ crowd. Not at all. Just another good ole boy hunting trip that wasn't that complicated.

The Kennedy clan constantly maligned LBJ and he had huge friends that only knew the Texas style way of settling insults. I believe LBJ was the one that called Bobby & informed him of the demise of Jack. Bobby always messed with LBJ.

So did he kill Bobby too? And then the man who killed his way to the presidency voluntarily stepped aside in 1968 instead of running for a second term?

Johnson was a tough boiled politician, but he was no Richard the Third.

by allowing Vietnam to continue until Tricky Dick stepped in the oval office. I'm not saying I believe the theory yet, but it is interesting that it's the Press Secretary's dad who wrote the book.

LBJ also didn't pursue taking our currency away from the Federal Reserve Bank as JFK intended to.

or did he ? Maybe someone "suggested" that he step aside.
Just a thought that I never had before...

Doubtless LBJ knew who did it.

Likely he stepped down least he be next.

Peter Dale Scott's "Deep Politics and the Death of JFK." The "LBJ did it" book sounds ridiculous.

Here's what I don't understand: how is it that most Americans can accept that there was a conspiracy to kill President Kennedy, even accept that it was perpetrated by elements of their own government, and yet it doesn't appear to mean a fucking thing to them? It's just infotainment whitenoise. Is it about denial, and the truth being just too awful?

I know the guy. One of his closest buddies is a USC prof who has over the years helped engineer all kinds of b.s. projects to dispute a conspiracy. My own impression is that Scott is just in it to make money, make a name for himself, and maybe help to completely confound anybody trying to make sense of the facts by serving up a wholly mixed concoction of truth and disinformation.

I don't know what you mean by saying his friend has helped engineer projects to dispute a conspiracy. That's not Scott's position at all. He points the finger at an alliance of military-intelligence and criminal interests.

True, he supports a conspiracy theory. True in his books he has rehashed most of the evidence about the conspiracy. True he has added all kinds of new and interesting twists to that evidence.


But I'm telling you I have had bitter discussions with him about his support and defense of people who are most certainly a part of the cover-up operation. One in particular is his close buddy, Paul Hoch, a physicist who helped Pentagon Nobel scientist Luis Alvarez concoct the "Jet Effect" b.s. propagated through Scientific American magazine to "explain" the rearward jerk of JFK's head when hit by a bullet supposedly coming from the rear. (The theory is so preposterous it is nearly comical. It flies in the face of Newton's law. And, of course, the only time it's ever occurred was when JFK was shot. What BS!)

Tell me why somebody supposedly as passionate as Scott would cavort with people who are clearly part of the cover-up. I have long since learned to judge people by their actions. Scott I simply do not trust.

...concoct a theory. I never read this "defense" of the standard version of the JFK assassination in any of his writings. Got a link?

If there's one man who's capable of finding out everything about Johnson's life, it's Robert Caro. When his 4th book on Johnson comes out (if indeed he's able to finish it), I'm certain it will talk about the assassination and I'm guessing it will quickly become the definitive take on Johnson's relationship to the assassination.

I, too, will wait for what Caro has to say. His three books on LBJ are some of the best history I've ever read.

.

Partly (more importantly) powerlessness. What, exactly, would we do about it? How?

This is part and parcel of what I consider "The Big Lie" to be. The Official Story is accepted -- but not believed -- in part because some people won't accept such an atrocity is possible and prefer the myth of the Official Story. And others don't accept it, see through the lie, but see no way to do anything about it.

What would YOU do about it?

Eloriel

I think it is denial. quite frankly I always thought the good ole boys and the hawks had much to do with it... and often wondered where in the Hierarchy was Bush, sr at the time. He was in the CIA. I never indulged any reading on in, but always thought it was an inside black op. The bay of pigs was being conducted as a black op. JFK knew nothing about it, but Nixon was in on it. Or so I have read. I will bet key players in this admin know I believe the cancer present here (texas oil) could be traced back as far as JFK.

as for the denial Americans are as indocrinated as any other countries people. Fed on ideology. Look how many people you know unwilling to even consider a standdown on 9/11. Have no interest in pursuing it. Couldn't connect a dot if the dot hit them between the eyes. I believe when one considers things along those lines it messes in a way with ones own sense of self. We identify ourselves by many externals and our country is like our parents. It would be like having all of a sudden to deal with the thought we were adopted. It messes with our sense of self.

And then of course there is the safety factor involved. Our leaders help maintain our sense of security. The denial factor plays very big. For good sakes most of us can not fathom the fact that we age and we die we spend a good part of our lives denying the two things that can't be denied.

It breaks new ground with new information about LBJ's chief henchman and lawyer in Austin, with whom McLellan (the author) practiced law. This is the guy who engineered the cover-up, according to the theory.

I'll reserve judgement. But there is virtually no doubt LBJ knew in advance. His long-time mistress, Madeline Brown, wrote in her book:

On Thursday night, Nov. 21, 1963, the last evening prior to Camelot's demise, I attended a social at Clint Murchison's home. It was my understanding that the event was scheduled as a tribute honoring his long time friend, J. Edgar Hoover (whom Murchison had first met decades earlier through President William Howard Taft), and his companion, Clyde Tolson. Val Imm, the society editor for the now-defunct Dallas Times Herald, unwittingly documented one of the most significant gatherings in American history. The impressive guest list included John McCloy, Richard Nixon, George Brown, R. L. Thornton, H. L. Hunt and a host of others from the 8F group. The jovial party was just breaking up when Lyndon made an unscheduled visit. I was the most surprised by his appearance since Jesse had not mentioned anything about Lyndon's coming to Clint's. With Lyndon's hectic schedule, I never dreamed he could attend the big party. After all, he had arrived in Dallas on Tuesday to attend the Pepsi-Cola convention. Tension filled the room upon his arrival. The group immediately went behind closed doors. A short time later Lyndon, anxious and red-faced, re-appeared. I knew how secretly Lyndon operated. Therefore I said nothing... not even that I was happy to see him. Squeezing my hand so hard, it felt crushed from the pressure, he spoke with a grating whisper, a quiet growl, into my ear, not a love message, but one I'll always remember: "After tomorrow those goddamn Kennedys will never embarrass me again - that's no threat - that's a promise."

The next morning she had another brief discussion with LBJ:

I had barely eked out the words, "About last night..." when his rage virtually went ballistic. His snarling voice jolted me as never before - "That son-of- a-b---- crazy Yarborough and that g- - - - - - f - - - ing Irish mafia bastard Kennedy will never embarrass me again!"

Plus, I have told the story many times on this site of Texas Governor John Connally's deliberate manipulation of JFK's advance man, Jerry Bruno, to change the route of the motorcade forcing it to pass beneath the Book Depository building and slow down to 12 mph in order to make the odd turn. Connally was LBJ's "Son I never had."

Ride in the same limo as the guy about to be shot?

Please, even a Texas pol ain't that crazy.

Connally never intended to ride in the car with JFK. He had Yarborough slated to do that, while he was to ride with LBJ.

But the night before, in Fort Worth, according to the accounts of two people, one of whom was a secret service agent stationed outside JFK's hotel room, JFK and LBJ had a loud and angry argument about seating arrangements for the motorcade. JFK said the whole reason for his Texas trip was to help heal the growing rift between the liberal wing (Yarborough) and the conservative wing (Connally & LBJ) of the Democratic party in Texas. He ordered LBJ to have Connally ride with him, and Yarborough with LBJ.

That explains why, according to Jackie Kennedy's account, and even Connally's wife's account, the first words out of Connally's mouth after being shot were "Good Lord! They're going to kill us all."

tell your mistress that your gonna assasinate the president. Some people will believe anything!

At least, she was planning on 'outing' the President and his brother before she was killed! Her diary was stolen. And, she had a secret enema...administered by someone else...full of powerful drugs which killed her...and, which wouldn't show up in a typical autopsy. She did not commit suicide! Ask Peter Lawford. He was there AFTER RFK flew in from Northern California for "the day". He was the guy who was there to 'clean up' after the fact.

This is fact and not fiction!

George HW Bush pretends he doesn't remember where he was when he heard JFK was shot. He was the name plaintiff in a suit against Gov. Connelly at the time. So my money is on senior.

GHW* involvement.

Kennedy's election was also very controversial, similar to Bush's. I really do think that the Kennedy brothers were very corrupt. Just like the Bush crime family.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Because I don't think all Democrats are infallible gods?

You will not find one shred of evidence of corruption within the Kennedy administration (except that which was associated with LBJ). In fact, you will find JFK solidly standing on principal even when it hurt him badly, as with the Bay of Pigs (CIA) fiasco.

These were people of high principal.

Did they fight like hell to win? You bet. Did that make them corrupt? No.

If you're talking about the Illinois election questions, most intelligent observers know that solid Republican Southern Illinois was just as corrupt as Northern Illinois.

If you're talking about rumored mafia connections, that's all they were, rumors. The fact that JFK slept with a woman who also slept with a mafia don means nothing given that both men were mutual friends with Frank Sinatra, and introduced to the woman (Judith Exner) by Sinatra.

So what else do you have to back your slanderous accusations? Nothing. Nothing other than what you've heard on Limbaugh and Liddy.

Welcome to DU, btw.

I like telling the truth about the criminal Kennedys too, but they are gods and saints to some on here, and they will slander you, when you are merely telling the truth. Of course, they project this by accusing you of slander instead.

Kudos for mentioning the dubiousness of the 1960 election. :thumbsup:

Joe had mob connections big time. So the kennedy boy's kind of went foul with the mob is partially how I saw it. Giancana helped get him elected and then Bobby decides to go after organized crime. At the very same time was the covert and black ops on the bay of pigs which it has been said JFK knew nothing of. At least I have never run across anything that says differently. I am not sure the boys were as corrupt as the father. It never made any sense that bobby would go after organized crime. Then what happens an arab kills Bobby. Considering my frame of reference now that strikes me as interesting. Sirhan Sirhan (was he egyptian)?

Wow it's all coming up to roost. I agree with Jackswift this could very well be disinformation deflect attention from the Bush's.

not that I am saying I know this for a fact. I just always felt Senior was close to the core group. This administrational cancer goes back as far as bay of pigs. After the towers fell often would come to mind for me. If they had only answered who shot JFK perhaps those buildings would still be standing. We could have gotten them more than once, but nah.

Might be too late now. I find myself often way too cynical than is healthy. Damn we had em during Iran contra too.

This is it folks.

The republicans are so full of shit I can't believe it.

alone - there was a group.

George Bush Sr. was CIA in covert Ops in Texas and was part of the bay of pigs invasion of Cuba. He was the xcontact man for deMohrensheildt (sp") who was Oslwald's handler.

This would be really funny (this nbook) if it was not so blatantly a coverup of the Bush role. Coming from the father of Bush's spokeperson is a CLASSIC black op.

The Bushes NEED to rewrite history,

But they are incredibly Yale-stupid. Don't they know that by opening this can of worms that the obvious ties to Bush will have to be reiterated?

Tarpley.net's biography of Bush has a lot of good details on the JFK assassination *as well as the ties of the Bushes to John Hinkley who, Tarpley posits and I believe him, was USED by the BFEE to try to kill Ronnie to give the presidency to HWBush.


ABSOLUTELY ESSENTIAL READING ON THE BUSH-JFK ASSASSINATION TIES:

http://tarpley.net/bush8b.htm

You're right about Poppy's phone number being in deMorenshildt's phone book (and listed as "Poppy"), and you're right about GHWB playing a key role in Bay of Pigs as, undoubtedly, a CIA agent--while his bio says he was an oil man (the oil "bidness" has always been a convenient false front for CIA operatives because it provides cover for world travel and international connections).

However, the assassination is way, way more complex than that. And absolutely no serious student of it suggests that Bush was anything other than a CIA operative at the time.

Though components of the CIA unquestionably played a role in it, involvement alone is not the key. The question is, who engineered the operation, and who were the key players. GHWB was way, way down that list, by any measure. For one thing, he was a fairly young man at the time.

.... and one of the reasons most Americans treat it all like a soap opera is that by now one thing is clear, we will likely never know who was behind it.

But anyone who is a student of poppy Bush's dealings and LBJ's wouldn't have much trouble choosing between the two if they were both considered the prime suspects. Not even a horserace here.

If you mean somebody who studies the tabloids and gets his "facts" from whisper-down-the-lane "experts" on the web or from talk radio, then you're probably right.

But there is in fact a large body of genuine, real, honest, discernable, historic FACT out there that your could study if you really wanted to. I have. So have many others.

When you actually study the FACTS, you do not come to the conclusion at all that Poppy was any kind of a key player. But you DO come to the solid, undeniable conclusion that LBJ had foreknowledge, and that many of the people he was closest to--like Connally--played key roles in the killing and the cover-up.

I believe Allen and John Dulles engineered it and Bush was a player. But Prescott and the Dulleses were partners in the "whole Hitler thing" just as Bush was a key CIA player in the "whole Bay of Pigs" Thing. The fact that Oswald's handler was in contact with Poppy and Poppy was close to the hit team (while he may not have planned the thing -- he may have been considered too stupid and inexperiences) -- he certainly was a key player in the coverup.

Like Jr. even their own BFEE knows that they cannot rely on the Georges to get things done right and he almost screwed the whole thing up by reporting about the death threats (or maybe that was to keep him clear AND give him plausible deniability)

I agree that HW was down the list --- but it was the BFEE that got JFK even if HW was not in on the planning. I's bet anything his father was close to it.

Follow the bouncing ball:
Oswald killed Kennedy.
Ruby killed Oswald.
End of story.

:think:

In order to believe the crap you're spouting, you must believe in the "Single Bullet" theory. It's common knowledge that Oswald couldn't have done the shooting. There had to have been a second gunman (or multiple gunmen), which by definition makes it a conspiracy.

...that day.

Because it would be damned embarrassing to say "I was standing in this storm sewer catch basin in Dallas Texas, with a Remmington 700 chambered in 6.5 Mannlicher, waitin' for a limo to roll by...."

Where was GH Bush that day??? Is there something about to come out clarifying GH Bush's whereabouts in Dallas that day??

ahhaha, i kid, i kid. :dunce:

claiming that a Democrat killed JFK is "father of White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan".

I'm sure it's just a coincidence.

how he feels about having a conspiracy nutter for a father.

the source on this one, sorry. Father of the White House press secretary? Heavily tied in with the BFEE? Looks like another mushroom cloud smoking gun to me.

To me they waste time and engery and take away from issues that matter, while burning credibility with the public.

I would be interested to know whether Merlin's claim that JFK's ties to the mafia were nothing but rumors is true or not. It was my understanding that these ties were pretty well evidences and not really in any serious dispute, but perhaps I am wrong. Maybe its just more conspiracy theory.

Apparently you aren't aware of the fact that there were and remain many powerful forces out there determined to smear JFK beyond redemption. Not unlike Clinton, he was detested by the right, by racists in the South, and by arch-conservative Democrats. Not unlike Clinton, he had a zipper problem that didn't help efforts to defend him.

But to say he was in cahoots with the mafia is just about as uninformed and ridiculous as one can be. By ALL accounts, his administration ran the most relentless campaign EVER against the mafia. Read about it. It's the reason Sinatra broke with Kennedy and became a Republican. It's the reason the CIA was able to contract with the mafia, and CIA operatives involved in the assassination were able to get the mafia to assist in JFK's murder and the cover-up.

Johnson was a cynical hardboiled politician and was willing to destroy his enemies political, but I highly doubt that he had it in him to kill JFK. I'm going to read Robert Caro's 4th volume in the Johnson saga before I'll accept so such rediculous claims.

Does anyone here really believe that Poppy Bush didn't plan the assassination?

This stupid book is even more reason to conclude that Poppy did it.

>Does anyone here really believe that Poppy Bush didn't plan the assassination?

I can tell you, there are hundreds of genuine experts on the Kennedy assassination. I know a great many of them. Most are sincere, very intelligent, studious, extremely well read experts who have worked long and hard on this incredibly complex subject.

NOT A SINGLE ONE OF THEM believes "Poppy Bush (planned) the assassination."

NOT ONE.

NOT EVEN A SINGLE ONE.

None. Nada. Zilch. Zero.

Poppy was a bit player as a CIA operative, but not a kingpin.

As much as I hate the Bushs, this is the most ridiculous notion to make its way into DU since I've been on this board.

and I have been researching this for years. See my post in response to my Bush post above on WHY I still think the Bushes were involved and why the idea that they may have been key players is NOT that much of a stretch.

It is NOT ridiculous or the most ridiculous notion to find its way on to this board (for that I would nominate treepig's assertion that exposure to radioactive pollution is good for you and that water is a dangerous substance and as bad as radiation-- see the Radioactive Wasp thread).


In any event, Merlin, the idea that LBJ was behind the assassination is WAY less plausible than the Bush family being behind it.

I find the most credible evidence that LBJ was NOT in on it is the tapes of him years afterward saying he thought the warren commission was wrong and implying he thought there MUST have been a conspiracy.


After all, he was surrounded by the conspirators who wanted JFK dead and he could probably not even himself get the truth.


Dulles et al would surely have lied to him.

This book is utter bullshit. But don't demean thoise like me who believe that Bush was in the shadows. It is MORE than plausible, even if he had no command authority.

and interesting - after all the effort over the past 2+ years to dismiss any admin culpability as "conspiracy theory" - they now want their wingnuts to believe that conspiracies do exist in high places.

I'm a lihoper, this can work to our advantage.

As for JFK, I always thought it was J.Edgar.

Many people held this theory back in the day, long before Oliver Stone picked it up. I am not so convinced. JFK had a lot of enemies -- the mob and Castro being two outstanding ones. Why should LBJ take this risk when he could just kick back his feet and wait for the logical to happen?

:bounce:....They will soon be dead but the Truth will eventually be found out!

...but something was definately going on somewhere/somehow....

Too much forensic evidence has disappeared during and shortly after the event and a convienent assasin was "found" with a questionable rifle, silenced shortly thereafter with elected officals running a police investegation.

I'm not a big fan of conspirery theories, but I get a strong impression someone had a lot to hide back then and it only adds to the mystery.

of the School Book Depository 11-22-63 ?

I saw it once in a link. Sure seems that photo could be enhanced to show who it was definitely .

hungry for power (a la Tom DeLay) who noticed how close their (Texas) guy was to being The Big Boss. Just one little ol' shot away.

Alternatively, Nixon. He never could stand losing. Couldn't stand it!