Gen. “Hanging Sam” Williams was a good friend of Edward Lansdale. In 1991 author John Newman and David Lifton went to see Lansdale’s papers at the Hoover Institution and they found correspondence of Edward Lansdale to Gen. Williams in which Lansdale said he was coming down to Texas to visit Williams in the fall of 1963. They also found a bump stock piece of paper in Lansdale’s possession of the Texas Hotel in Fort Worth. That is the exact hotel that JFK stayed at the night before he died and also I think Lyndon Johnson kept an office in the Texas Hotel. In 2018 both John Newman and David Lifton each personally confirmed to me what I have written above. John Newman said that after he visited the Lansdale papers that a librarian called him and said that U.S. government agents were at the Library and they were removing or classifying everything that Newman had looked at regarding Lansdale.
In fall of 1963 Gen. Samuel Williams was living in Denton, TX which is 38 miles north of Dealey Plaza where Lansdale was identified on 11-22-63 by Col. Fletcher Prouty and Gen. Victor “Brute” Krulak.
Here is the oral history of General Samuel T. “Hanging Sam” Williams with the LBJ Library from March 2, 1981 https://www.adst.org/OH%20TOCs/Williams,%20Samuel%20T.toc.pdf
JFK's WWII love affair with Inga Arvad could have been the blackmail tool that LBJ/Rayburn used to force JFK to Lyndon Johnson on the 1960 Demo ticket
David Lifton:
As I have indicated, I disagree with Peter, because the way it was (apparently) put was not that LBJ had to be selected--but rather, that the offer had to be made, that LBJ had to be given "the right of first refusal." That was the essence of the deception, and the reason for the shock and amazement (on the Kennedy brothers' part) when LBJ said, in effect, "Oh thank you, Jack. I'm so glad you offered. Why yes, I do accept!"
But getting to your point, Dawn, and what you have correctly zero'd in as as "the problem with that explanation" ("that explanation" being, really, any explanation that concerns the arithmetic of the electoral vote): ". . .there would be no reason to hide it."
That is correct. There would be no reason to hide that. And so. . the question then becomes: just what WAS it that was Kennedy's Achilles heel? If there was pressure, what was the "blackmail" all about? What was it that he (JFK) was alluding to (without being specific) when he said what he did to Hyman Raskin? And when he told Pierre Salinger that it would be best that it never be revealed?
I have analyzed and re-analyzed this many times, and I believe there is only one reasonable answer.
THE ANSWER
First of all, and logically, one must rule out just about all the incidents that have been cited by many and which occurred after JFK reached the White House. Obvioiusly. None of that had occurred yet.
So. . what was it IN HIS PAST?
I believe there is only one answer, one thing that qualifies as packing the dynamite punch that would have frightened JFK--and that is something that was ALREADY part of the FBI files that Hoover had, and which could have been (and I think was) made available to whoever it was who pressured JFK. And that would be his affair with Inga Arvad, the Danish beauty with whom he was quite in love, way back in the early 1940s when he was in his 20's.
For all practical purposes, no one knew about Arvad back in 1960, but--and this is so very critical-- it was all a matter of record in FBI files, and today--because of FOIA--it is not only available, it has been published in some important books.
Inga Arvad --in later years--went on to live a perfectly normal and exemplary life, becoming the wife of TV western actor Tim McCoy. But Inga Arvad, back in 1936, was a Danish beauty ("Miss Denmark") and a budding journalist who had attended the 1936 Olympics with Adolph Hitler. I don't think there is any reason to believe she ever had an affair with Hitler, but she certainly had an association with him (because she was writing about him, for her Copenhagen newspaper) and there are pictures of the two of them together, with Hitler looking admiringly (if not adoringly) at her. And she was his companion at the 1936 Olympics.
So it would have been easy to smear Kennedy by going back to the early 1940s, and saying that a major love of his life--and that, she was--had been "Hitler's girlfriend" and a "German spy."
And that, basically, is what's in the FBI files.
Then, it gets worse: Inga Arvad came to the U.S. and worked for the Washington Star. There, she became friends with one of John Kennedy's sisters--in fact, if I recall, she extended a helping hand to the sister, in connection with her launching a journalism career.
Everything I am saying above is laid out, chapter and verse, in chapter 28 of Kurt Gentry's 1991 book, "J. Edgar Hoover: The Man and His Secrets". Every freshman legislature rated a file, and those files were "kept in the office of [FBI official] Lou Nichols, who handled Congressional liason."
Then he goes on to say the following: "The most potentially damaging--and the fattest, containing over 250 documents and more than 600 pages--was initially kept in Nichol's office and later transferred to the office of the director, where it became a part of Hoover's own Official/Confidential file."
And then he continues, as follows: "Although much of it deal with the sexual activities of John Fitzgerald Kennedy, it was not filed under his name but was instead captioned FEJOS, Mrs. Paul, NEE INGA ARVAD-IS-ESP-G, the initials being Bureau shorthand for INTERNAL SECURITY-ESPIONAGE-GERMAN.
The FBI agent who actually conducted the Inga Arvad investigation was Special Agent Frederick Ayer, Jr. and the entire story of that investigation, and this file, is spelled out in Chapter 28 of Gentry's book, titled "The Kennedys". Inga Arvad, who had been "Miss Denmark," and then "Miss Europe ("crowned by Maurice Chevalier") became the Berlin correspondent for a Copenhagen newspaper, interviewed Hermann Goring "and was among the select few invited to his wedding. . . " Hoover kept a file on young Kennedy, reporting his findings to FDR and ONI. As a result, Kenedy was transferred to South Carolina But he kept seeing Arvad on weekends (this is in 1942) with the bureau keeping detailed records, and even having wiretaps of their lovemaking."
"Kennedy's father grew concerned, and arranged for his son to get a transfer to the Pacific." As Gentry put it (with some irony): "Although the end result was certainly not what the FBI director had intended, Kennedy was sent to the South Pacific, had his P-T boat rammed and snk, returned home a hero, and (skipping details here). . "was launched on his political career, serving first as a congressmen, then as a senator, and in July of 1960, as the Democratic nominee for president of the United States. If Hoover felt in any way responsible for Kennedy's rise, he never bragged about it."
Let me assure anyone reading this post that the Inga Arvad affair was --in 1960--political dynamite, if not nitro-glycerine. If it had been revealed, in 1960, that the FBI had national security files on Senator Kennedy, because of his connection, in Washington, with "Hitler's girlfiend" (not an accurate characterization, but easily described that way, for purposes of smearing the candidate)--AND that Kennedy's sister was a friend of the woman (when both worked at a Washington newspaper), that could have been very damaging, politically. It would have damaged him with liberals, with the Jewish vote, etc.
Writes Gentry: "Hoover's documentation on the Arvad affair, and the uses to which the FBI director might put it, concerned John F. Kennedy and his father throughout the 1960 campaign and long afterward. Damaging as as the revelations of Kennedy's sexual involvement with a suspected Nazy spy would have been to his political hopes, it could have been worse. For, voluminous as the FBI's Kennedy-Arvad file was--it ran to 628 pages and included transcriptions of the two bugged weekends in the Charleston hotel room--it was incomplete. Finally, having decided that Inva Arvad was probably not a spy, or that at least "no subversive activities were discovered," the FBI in March 1945 closed its investigation."
The fact is that Inga Arvad was a serious woman, and Kennedy had been deeply in love with her. He also saw her, briefly, AFTER the war ended (in NYC in November 1946).
In my opinion, nothing was more potentially damaging to Kennedy's 1960 presidential hopes than the Inga Arvad affair, and the fact that it was the subject of a 600 page FBI file.
Gentry also notes something else that seems relevant, and that's what occurred just weeks after the July 14, 1960 Kennedy announcement that LBJ would be his running mate:
QUOTE
Less than three weeks after JFK’s nomination, on August 4, 1960, the New York Times reported, “During a series of news conferences on his lawn today, Senator Kennedy was asked whether, if elected, he would retain J. Edgar Hoover as director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation and continue the agency’s program as it is constituted. He replied that he would, of course, retain Mr. Hoover and planned no major changes within the agency.” (footnote 14: “NYT, Aug 4,1960”)
Although the statement was, in all likelihood, triggered in the usual way, by a planted question from a favored reporter, both the candidate and his father must have anticipated it well in advance, realizing there was only one possible response.
UNQUOTE
Here's my own commentary: This is two weeks after what was very likely the Hoover-supplied blackmail data, re Arvad, that (I believe) was used (by some third party) to insure that Kennedy chose Johnson as his veep."
So. . .to recap: Its my opinion that the 600 page (plus) Inga Arvad was used, by whomever turned the screws on Senator Kennedy, in the early AM of July 14, to get him to go along with this political farce, and make the "offer" to Lyndon Johnson. But let me make this clear: I do not know who the "cut-out" was--i.e., I do not know who actually met with Kennedy, and made the threat. (In other words: I do not know who did Lyndon Johnson's dirty work.) But someone must have done just that. All I do believe, and with considerable certainty, is that it began sometime after midnight, when Kennedy was at Chasen's restaurant, was tapped on the shoulder, went out to the parking lot, and was delivered the message that he should call Sam Rayburn. Then, just hours later, comes the complete reversal in who's picked to be his Veep, the disingenuous offer to Johnson, the amazement at his acceptance, the conversation with Hyman Raskin about why these puzzling events had just occurred: that he (JFK) was being blackmailed by Rayburn and Johnson, etc.
What is important about the above explanation is that it ties the blackmail threat to something very specific, something that was fully documented and in Hoover's FBI files, and something that Kennedy would definitely have seen as a serious political threat.
So no, I don't believe for a minute that it was Kennedy's "philandering" that did him in, or some recent affair with any Hollywood personality--rather, it was this very real and fully documented affair with a woman with whom he had in fact, years before, been very much in love, and who could be associated with Adolph Hitler (and his sister's friendship with that same person, years later, after the war); and the existence of this very damaging FBI file.
One final irony to all this; Kurt Gentry was Bugliosi's "co-author" in writing Helter Skelter. In other words, and in plain English, Gentry--who (years later) did so much original research for his book on Hoover--happens to be the person who, years before, had essentially written Helter Skelter, the book that put Vincent Bugliosi on the map, earlier in his writing career; the same Bugliosi who relied so heavily on Dale Myers, in writing Reclaiming History.
DSL
2/9/11; 1 PM
Los Angeles, CA
David Lifton on his 1980 interview with Ralph Yarborough:
QUOTE
I interviewed Ralph Yarborough--at length--in January, 1980. He was still furious over the fact that Lyndon Johnson said that agent Youngblood vaulted over the front seat and sat on top of him. No such thing ever occurred, said Yarborough. "Its just a fabrication. It didn't happen at all," he said, angry that Johnson had the conceit to concoct such a story, when Yarborough was seated right there, in the rear seat, and knew it was all a fiction."
UNQUOTE
David S. Lifton
Author, BEST EVIDENCE
LBJ's Account of Rufus Youngblood's Actions:
Johnson: “…it is apparent that there were many reactions to the first shot…I did not know what it was. Agent Youngblood spun around, shoved me on the shoulder to push me down and shouted to all of us, “Get down!”Almost in the same movement, he vaulted over the seat, pushed me to the floor, and sat on my right shoulder to keep me down and to protect me. Agent Youngblood’s quick reaction was as brave an act as I have ever seen anyone perform. When a man, without a moment’s thought or hesitation, places himself between you and a possible assassin’s bullet, you know you have seen courage. And you never forget it.”
6. It later turned out that Dulles had nothing but scorn for both the evidence and critical arguments against the Oswald-did-it hypothesis. In 1965, at UCLA, David Lifton questioned Dulles about the Zapruder film and Harold Feldman's essay entitled "51 Witnesses" about many witnesses hearing a shot from the grassy knoll. Dulles not only denied that evidence, he ridiculed Lifton for even bringing it up. He said bizarre things like "There is not a single iota of evidence indicating a conspiracy." When Lifton pointed out testimony, and even pictures, of smoke arising on the grassy knoll, Dulles derisively replied with, "Now what are you saying, someone was smoking up there?" When Lifton brought up Feldman's essay, Dulles – even though he knew full well about it – asked him where it was published. When Lifton answered, Dulles replied, with ridicule: "The Nation! Ha, ha, ha, ha , ha." When Lifton showed him frames from the Zapruder film arranged in sequential order to show Kennedy's head going back toward the seat – the opposite direction of a shot from the Texas School Book Depository – Dulles said: "You have nothing! Absolutely nothing! ... I can't see a blasted thing here. You can't say the head goes back. I can't see it going back. It does not go back. You can't say that." Dulles then tried to neutralize this Z film argument by tendentiously saying he had never heard it before. (Best Evidence, pgs. 34-36) When, of course, the Commission had seen the film dozens of times. They just did not feel that powerful evidence, like Kennedy's violent reaction backwards, merited mention in the Warren Report.
David Lifton on Bill Clinton's opinion of the JFK assassination
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=18942&pid=249463&st=30&#entry249463
(1) A very good friend of mine--the late Robert Chapman, who was also very close with Mary Ferrell--related to me his personal experiences with Bill Clinton, at a time when Clinton was a candidate for President, and would drop by Molly's the restaurant he owned in Memphis. Robert personally talked to Clinton and there's no question but that he was a closet buff, and believed there was a conspiracy in the JFK case. But now. . read on. .
(2) The Clintons were close with Jacqueline Kennedy, and in August, 1993, one can find newspaper articles (and photographs) in which Jacqueline Kennedy hosted them for several hours on the family yacht. Bill Clinton (and probably Hillary, too) also spent time with Jacqueline Kennedy at her New York apartment. All this is a matter of record.
(3) On the thirtieth anniversary of the assassination, with the assassination of JFK receiving a huge amount of publicity, Clinton publicly stated, in a news conference, that he believed the Warren Report, and that Oswald acted alone. Quoting now fromthe NY Times story by David Rosenbaum, which ran under the headline, “30-Year Commemoration in Dallas and Arlington:
QUOTE:
President Clinton, who has often said that Kennedy was his idol, intended to take no public notice of the anniversary. But at a news conference, he was asked whether he thought Kennedy was killed by a single assassin and whether he was satisfied with his own security arrangements.
The President replied: "I'm satisfied with the finding that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone. I am also very satisfied with the work done by the Secret Service in my behalf."
UNQUOTE
On the 30th anniversary, I happened to be in Dallas, where I spoke at the ASK conference. I also attended the ceremonies at the Sixth Floor Museum, and actually met Nellie Connally. Knowing what Clinton had said to Robert Chapman, I was astounded to read--in USA Today (as I recall)--what he was then quoted as saying about the assassination.
One half year later, Jacqueline Kennedy was buried at Arlington.
Because of Clinton's changed position, I have always believed that Jacqueline Kennedy personally implored Clinton not to pursue the issue, because of the damage it would do to her husband's legacy. That's just my opinion.
But if one draws a time line, there's a serious delay between the time the JFK Records Act was passed (and signed) --October 1992--and the time the ARRB was actually "up and running," which was about October 1994.
DSL
3/27/12; 2:30 PDT
Los Angeles, Calfornia
David Lifton, again, on Bill Clinton and the JFK Assassination
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=20259&page=12
Regarding the statement in your post. . : "David Lifton says that in the 1992 Bill Clinton on the campaign trail (privately) revealed himself to be quite a conspiracy buff in the JFK assassination. . "
Yes, that is true. My very good friend, the late Robert Chapman (who, btw, was also a close friend of Mary Ferrell, and did a lot of the "dog work" in connection with setting up the Ferrell Foundation), was the owner of a restaurant in Memphis: "Mollies". There was an occasion--and perhaps more than one--when candidate Clinton came by, and Robert spoke to him, at length. Without question, Bill Clinton followed the case. Remember what he said to Hubble (when he appointed him AG): that he wanted him to get to the bottom of two things, UFO's and the Kennedy assassination.
Some six months before she died, Jacqueline Kennedy spent time with Clinton, on a yacht (there are photographs of all this) and I think that it was made clear to Clinton that Jacqueline Kennedy did not want President Clinton to pursue the matter. (I have my own beliefs as to why). But, I believe, that goes to the root of why Clinton changed his position, which indeed he did. And I believe one can find that laid out in NY Times accounts of a press conference he held around the 30th anniversary of the Kennedy assassination.
I am writing this post from memory, but I want to reiterate that Robert Chapman definitely had talks with Bill Clinton, when he was a candidate, and yes, Clinton was most interested in the Kennedy assassination.
DSL
6/18/13; 8:40 PM PDT
Los Angeles, California
David Lifton on JFK’s blackmailablity with regards to his sexual indiscretions
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=17218&pid=219092&st=105&#entry219092
Robert Morrow wrote:
There are a few key points I am making:
1) The ONLY reason Lyndon Johnson got on the 1960 Demo ticket was through the use of sexual blackmail and other threats the night of July 13, 1960. Stuart Symington of MO had already been offered the VP spot by Clark Clifford.
2) JFK was extremely compromised by his promiscuous sex life. It was his Achilles Heel and JFK succumbed to blackmail inducements from LBJ because of it.
3) 3 years later, Lyndon Johnson was perhaps the most critical cog in the JFK assassination. Having the new president LBJ on board was critical to the plotters and the post assassination cover up.
4) As a side note, Robert Kennedy (his wife Ethel and 10 children) was having a torrid affair with Jackie Kennedy post JFK assassination. This affair was on big reason RFK was silent on the true nature of his brother's assassination.
Yes, I agree I need to change my *presentation* of the ugly facts regarding the Kennedys' (JFK and RFK) sexual dysfunctions, but understanding the *content* of it is critical to understanding how the Kennedy assassination was able to happen in the first place and why the Kennedys (Robert and Jackie) were handcuffed afterwards in speaking the truth.
David Lifton:
People are jumping all over Robert Morrow and I’m not sure its warranted.
FWIW, I’d like to recount my own experiences in this particular, er, “research area.”
First, back around 1977, I bought the book by Joan and Clay Blair, “The Search for JFK,” published in 1976, by Berkeley Putnam. Clay Blair was the Editor in Chief of the Saturday Evening Post (the magazine that put Norman Rockwell paintings on the cover) and the book (written with his wife) was a Literary Guild Alternate selection. From this single and very well written book, it seemed clear that JFK had had quite a few ladies in his life—and (as I recall) that was my first introduction to that subject. But it wasn’t really about sex. It was about charisma. I suppose there had been various articles in tabloids, but this was a book published by a prominent publisher, and both authors had excellent credentials.
Now let’s move forward by some 12 years. In 1989, I read "A Woman Named Jackie," by David Heymann. Controversial? Yes, of course, but also very well reviewed; and it was a revelation. First of all, although primarily focused on Jacqueline Kennedy, it was loaded with information about JFK’s affairs, way beyond the Blair book, and much of it came as a complete surprise. Not just who JFK had allegedly been with, but the sheer numbers of women. It was obvious that this was a side of JFK about which I knew little, and its importance (of course, and as Morrow rightly points out) stemmed from the fact that this made President Kennedy subject to blackmail; and so, finally, I started to understand just how it might (I stress “might”) have been possible to argue to various puritanical agents (and even officials) that JFK was a "national security risk." (I, personally, didn’t believe any of that, but I wondered if this was the way it could be pitched).
Perhaps the affair that startled me the most was with Ellie Rometch, the beautiful East German, who had communist affiliations, and who Bobby Kennedy saw to it was sent back to Germany. This was in the fall of 1963.
From that time onwards, I wondered whether any agents on the Secret Service had been pitched on the grounds of “national security.”
Eight years later came the beginnings of what could be the answer: “The Dark Side of Camelot” (1997) by Seymour Hersh—a major best-seller and one in which he clearly laid out, for the first time, that Secret Service agents were indeed knowledgeable about, and highly critical of, JFK’s sex life. Four—at least—went “on the record” and Hersh even published their pictures in the book.
I don’t call this character assassination. Its reality. As far as I know, that was the first time in American history where Secret Service agents went “on the record” with that sort of information.
Ever since, I have taken it for granted that JFK was obviously blackmailable, so it didn’t come with all that much of a surprise when, some years later, Evelyn Lincoln let the cat out of the bag and said that indeed, that was what JFK’s “problem” was all about on the night of July 13, 1960, the night he won the Democratic Nomination on the first ballot. That was the night when, after assuring Symington (early in the afternoon) he was his choice for Veep (and you can read all about that in Clark Clifford’s memoir, “Counselor” and Clifford was Symington’s campaign manager) JFK suddenly changed his mind. Furthermore, its clear that “the problem” developed between about 1 AM on the morning of July 14, and 7 AM.
I am using tame language here, and I'm trying not to be judgemental, but anyone who does not read "A Woman Named Jackie," has no idea of the extent of it. On the one hand, JFK attracted women like flies, and was like a rock star (Evelyn Lincoln, I believe, put it just that way). On the other hand, he was—by any reasonable use of the English language, a sexaholic (IMHO).
Let me assure anyone reading this that I have always cared much more about JFK who gave the American University speech, in June, 1963, and who avoided a nuclear war in the Caribbean in October, of 1962, than about his personal life. JFK's policies and his having to deal with a very hawkish and oppositional military has always been my focus, but its simply not possible to study JFK in depth, and not encounter all this “other stuff,” too.
TWO PHOTOS OF INTEREST
Two other pieces of evidence, and I am sorry I do not have the photos to post. But I was at Globe Photo agency, in New York, around 1989 and was brought out dozens of photos of JFK. (I was looking for one to put on the VHS box for the Best Evidence Video.) One, a beautiful color transparency, showed JFK on the night of his inauguration, at a party—sitting at a table with Angie Dickenson, and one or two other ladies. I don’t think anyone looking at the picture—showing an absolutely star struck and adoring Angie Dickenson—could mistake her attraction to him. I wanted to buy it for “research purposes,” but the Globe person chaperoning my visit wasn’t buying my “just for research” story. They wanted $400 for just that privilege alone, and that was beyond my budget. Another photo worth having was one selected by the NY Times editors and put on page 1, the day of one of JFK’s news conferences, when he was at his scintillating best and Hepburn was either at the White House, or watching him on a large TV screen. So there, on page one of the New York Times, is Audrey Hepburn, looking at JFK—all doe-eyed and fascinated. Someone can look it up—and I’ll trust any group of readers to tell me what it means. She was obviously not contemplating JFK’s Vietnam policy. (And, when you put that picture next to the one at the Globe taken on the night of 1/20/61, it doesn’t take much of novelist, or a screenwriter, to imagine other agendas. . . . . )
Yes, JFK had charisma—as Sorensen said, in his recent memoir, it was not imaginary. It was real.
That was part of Kennedy’s electability; it was also part of his attractiveness to women; and yes, it apparently became a problem. When you occupy the most powerful office in the world, and beautiful women are constantly throwing themselves at you, its probably not that easy to control one’s propensity towards hedonism. (Of course, that’s just a hypothesis <G>).
Morrow has chosen to spell out the details—and a lot folks on this forum are squirming (and others are screaming). Take action! Stop him! But the basic facts are there, for anyone who wishes to read these books. And if you’re tired of text, then someone should write a check to Globe, and publish the photo of JFK and Angie on the night of 1/20/61.
When we don’t like the message, its not proper to go out and shoot the messenger. The information is out there, for anyone wishing to do the reading.
The Kennedy assassination involves more than just issues revolving around the Single Bullet Theory, the Zapruder film headsnap, and whether Oswald was on McWatter’s bus, or in Whaley’s cab. Or whether JFK's shirt and jacket rode up a few inches when waving to the crowd.
There's also questions of human behavior, and who may have been neutralized, and how, and why.
DSL
2/6/11; 4:40 AM PST
Los Angeles, CA
David Lifton on Lyndon Johnson:
"Here's my favorite quote, from WC attorney Eisenberg's memo of February 17, 1964, recording for posterity what Chief Justice Warren had told him (and the other WC attorneys) as to what LBJ had said:
QUOTE:
The President stated that rumors of the most exaggerated kind were circulating in this country and overseas. Some rumors went so far as attributing the assassination to a faction within the Government wishing to see the Presidency assumed by President Johnson. UNQUOTE
Yeah, that's right Lyndon!"
David Lifton again:
"And there's one other quote I love, but forgot to make a note of--some months back--when I had the appropriate file open. It was a record of telephone transcripts between LBJ and others, in the week following the assassination. And Lyndon was on the phone with Congressman John McCormack, Speaker of the House.
Is there anything I can do? asked McCormack.
Replied Lyndon: "Stop investigating."
Yes. . that's what LBJ said: "Stop investigating."
If someone can find that quote, please do send it to me."
David Lifton on JFK sanctioning the plots to kill Castro:
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=18804&st=120
"Let's first start with David Belin, Executive Director of the Rockefeller Commission who really pursued the question of the Castro plots --yes, he pursued this matter seriously, even though he was (imho) a confirmed lone nutter.
Here's what Belin found, on the subject of who was behind, and aware of, the Castro plots;and here's what he wrote in is book, "FINAL DISCLOSURE", published by Scribners in 1988.
From Chapter 19, "The Amnesia Syndrome":
There was little doubt in my mind that Robert McNamara was not telling me the truth. He was nervous and ill at ease. . . within a few minutes, he started to apologize for his lack of his memory.
The words just did not ring true. .
Top officials inside the Kennedy administration were directly aware of the assassination plots against Fidel Castro. (118); moreover, some of those officials were actively encouraging his liquidation.
And:
I believe that Robert McNamara was one of those parties; I also believe that Robert Kennedy was another; and, if Robert Kennedy knew, then I believe that his brother, President John F. Kennedy, also knew and approved of the plans.”"
David Lifton Interview by Dana Point – posted on August 19, 2020
Lyndon Johnson told Robert Novak in summer 1962 that the Kennedys were losing the cold war against the Soviet Union, losing to conservatives in Congress and that Robert Kennedy was planning to dump him off the 1964 Democratic ticket.
Robert Novak later married Geraldine, a secretary to LBJ
Notice how Johnson is telling Novak in the summer of 1962 how the Kennedy Administration was "losing" the cold war to the Russians. This is before the fall, 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis. I imagine Johnson was using these same arguments with the generals, the Texas oil men and the military intelligence in the lead up to the JFK assassination.
Robert Novak:
QUOTE
"After a Texas-style cookout, LBJ reclined, nearly prone, by the swimming pool. It was just the two of us drinking Scotch, and he spoke with a candor he never bestowed on me before or after. He felt the Kennedy administration was in serious trouble, losing the cold war to the Soviet Union and losing the legislative war to conservatives in Congress. He said that he had done everything the Kennedys had wanted, including foreign missions that only guaranteed him bad publicity.
He was repaid with insults and humiliation, especially from the attorney general. Johnson was sure Bobby Kennedy was plotting to dump him in 1964. "But I'm going to fool them," he said. "I'm going to pack it in after the term ends and go home to Texas." That would have been a huge scoop, but I knew Johnson was just blowing off steam.
As for going back to Texas, the political environment there was hardly more congenial for LBJ than it was in Washington. Johnson's protege, John B. Connally, had just won the Democratic nomination for governor of Texas, which still all but guaranteed election in Texas. As secretary of the Navy, Connally had been the highest Kennedy administration official bearing the LBJ brand.
But campaigning for governor, Connally removed the brand. With JFK and LBJ both unpopular in Texas, Connally ran against the administration he had just left, and won. Talking about Big John in that summer evening in 1962 led Johnson into self-pity. "John has turned my picture to the wall," LBJ told me. "You know I would never turn his picture to the wall."
QUOTE
[Robert Novak, The Prince of Darkness, pp. 90-91]
David Lifton analysis of what Lyndon Johnson was telling Robert Novak about his major bad blood with the Kennedys in summer, 1962.
David Lifton email to Robert Morrow on 2/18/2020
2/18/2020 - 8:20 AM CST
Robert,
I think you missed an important “data-point.”
Note the following quote:
" He was repaid with insults and humiliation, especially from the attorney general. Johnson was sure Bobby Kennedy was plotting to dump him in 1964. "But I'm going to fool them," he said. "I'm going to pack it in after the term ends and go home to Texas." That would have been a huge scoop, but I knew Johnson was just blowing off steam.
Forget about what Novak thinks; and focus on what LBJ said.
By stating this to Novak, LBJ was creating a public record of his having no future political ambition(s). Rather, his intent is to “go home to Texas.” IMHO: This statement is his (somewhat weak) attempt to create the appearance that he has no future political ambition; thus, removing him as having a “personal motive” in the upcoming assassination of JFK. Think about it. . : The bank robber is outside the bank; a key person says, “I don’t know what you guys think you’re up to, but I’ve got to go to the bathroom. Is there a bathroom nearby? Oh well, I’m going down the street to that Texaco station. I think they have a toilet.” etc etc. So. . . He’s no longer at the scene of the crime; he’s not “in charge.” He was just there, but that’s of no consequence, because he left when he suddenly needed to go to the nearest bathroom, down the street.”
IMHO: That’s what LBJ was doing with Novak. Creating a “political alibi.” I disagree with Novak. Johnson was not “blowing off steam.” He knew about—and was probably up to his neck—the upcoming plan to “get rid of JFK” . (And remember: it was LBJ who—as Manchester reported, based on extensive interviews with Jackie and with Kenneth O’Donnell’—pleaded with JFK to make the Texas trip ; and who (according to Jackie)“lured” him to go to Texas.
And that’s the word that she used: “lured” — and that’s after all the editing of what Manchester originally wrote. The word “lured” remained. G-D only knows what the original draft stated, before the editing by Sorensen (remember that?).
So, the central notion that LBJ (according to the evidence was deeply involved in getting Kennedy to “make the trip”; but, simultaneously was planning to “go home to Texas”—is absurd. That’s just plain nonsense. As I’ve heard they would say, down there in Texas: “That dog won’t hunt!”.
DSL
P.S. Also. .
Lyndon Johnson told Robert Novak in summer,1962 that the Kennedys were losing the cold war against the Soviet Union,
For Johnson to be saying this is significant because (a) That would echo the sort of thing coming from a Curtis Lemay, (and others of that ilk); and second: since when does a Vice President take up a political position that is so completely different than his boss, the President, who is pursuing reasonable compromise, so that the world is peaceful, and things don’t escalate into a nuclear exchange? IMHO. DSL
Political Journalist and author Alfred Steinberg: LBJ was so concerned about being dropped from the 1964 Democratic ticket that he developed severe stomach pains in the fall of 1963
QUOTE
By the fall of 1963 talk was common in Washington that Johnson would be dropped from the 1964 ticket because he had turned into a negative factor. A Midwestern senator, who traveled to Connecticut with the Vice President for a fund-raising affair for the Vice President’s pal Senator Tom Dodd, reported to his Senate colleagues afterward that Johnson had lugubriously remarked during their New England visit, “I’m going to be out of it for a second term. Jack has another man in mind for Vice President.” So concerned was Johnson over what he believed would be his political doom that he developed severe stomach pains. But in this instance, the doctor’s diagnosis found it a coincidence of timing, that he was suffering from an oversupply of calcium and should eliminated milk from his diet.
UNQUOTE
[Alfred Steinberg, Sam Johnson’s Boy: A Close-Up of the President from Texas, p. 589]
David Lifton analysis of what Lyndon Johnson was telling Robert Novak about his major bad blood with the Kennedys in summer, 1962.
David Lifton email to Robert Morrow on 2/18/2020
2/18/2020 - 8:20 AM CST
Robert,
I think you missed an important “data-point.”
Note the following quote:
" He was repaid with insults and humiliation, especially from the attorney general. Johnson was sure Bobby Kennedy was plotting to dump him in 1964. "But I'm going to fool them," he said. "I'm going to pack it in after the term ends and go home to Texas." That would have been a huge scoop, but I knew Johnson was just blowing off steam.
Forget about what Novak thinks; and focus on what LBJ said.
By stating this to Novak, LBJ was creating a public record of his having no future political ambition(s). Rather, his intent is to “go home to Texas.” IMHO: This statement is his (somewhat weak) attempt to create the appearance that he has no future political ambition; thus, removing him as having a “personal motive” in the upcoming assassination of JFK. Think about it. . : The bank robber is outside the bank; a key person says, “I don’t know what you guys think you’re up to, but I’ve got to go to the bathroom. Is there a bathroom nearby? Oh well, I’m going down the street to that Texaco station. I think they have a toilet.” etc etc. So. . . He’s no longer at the scene of the crime; he’s not “in charge.” He was just there, but that’s of no consequence, because he left when he suddenly needed to go to the nearest bathroom, down the street.”
IMHO: That’s what LBJ was doing with Novak. Creating a “political alibi.” I disagree with Novak. Johnson was not “blowing off steam.” He knew about—and was probably up to his neck—the upcoming plan to “get rid of JFK” . (And remember: it was LBJ who—as Manchester reported, based on extensive interviews with Jackie and with Kenneth O’Donnell’—pleaded with JFK to make the Texas trip ; and who (according to Jackie)“lured” him to go to Texas.
And that’s the word that she used: “lured” — and that’s after all the editing of what Manchester originally wrote. The word “lured” remained. G-D only knows what the original draft stated, before the editing by Sorensen (remember that?).
So, the central notion that LBJ (according to the evidence was deeply involved in getting Kennedy to “make the trip”; but, simultaneously was planning to “go home to Texas”—is absurd. That’s just plain nonsense. As I’ve heard they would say, down there in Texas: “That dog won’t hunt!”.
DSL
David Lifton on what Bill Clinton thinks about the JFK assassination:
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=18942&st=15
I think its important to understand Bill Clinton's beliefs about the Kennedy assassination, and so its for that reason, and no other, that I'm writing this brief post.
Besides what he told Webb Hubbell, there is this other data:
(1) A very good friend of mine--the late Robert Chapman, who was also very close with Mary Ferrell--related to me his personal experiences with Bill Clinton, at a time when Clinton was a candidate for President, and would drop by Molly's the restaurant he owned in Memphis. Robert personally talked to Clinton and there's no question but that he was a closet buff, and believed there was a conspiracy in the JFK case. But now. . read on. .
(2) The Clintons were close with Jacqueline Kennedy, and in August, 1993, one can find newspaper articles (and photographs) in which Jacqueline Kennedy hosted them for several hours on the family yacht. Bill Clinton (and probably Hillary, too) also spent time with Jacqueline Kennedy at her New York apartment. All this is a matter of record.
(3) On the thirtieth anniversary of the assassination, with the assassination of JFK receiving a huge amount of publicity, Clinton publicly stated, in a news conference, that he believed the Warren Report, and that Oswald acted alone. Quoting now fromthe NY Times story by David Rosenbaum, which ran under the headline, “30-Year Commemoration in Dallas and Arlington:
QUOTE:
President Clinton, who has often said that Kennedy was his idol, intended to take no public notice of the anniversary. But at a news conference, he was asked whether he thought Kennedy was killed by a single assassin and whether he was satisfied with his own security arrangements.
The President replied: "I'm satisfied with the finding that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone. I am also very satisfied with the work done by the Secret Service in my behalf."
UNQUOTE
On the 30th anniversary, I happened to be in Dallas, where I spoke at the ASK conference. I also attended the ceremonies at the Sixth Floor Museum, and actually met Nellie Connally. Knowing what Clinton had said to Robert Chapman, I was astounded to read--in USA Today (as I recall)--what he was then quoted as saying about the assassination.
One half year later, Jacqueline Kennedy was buried at Arlington.
Because of Clinton's changed position, I have always believed that Jacqueline Kennedy personally implored Clinton not to pursue the issue, because of the damage it would do to her husband's legacy. That's just my opinion.
But if one draws a time line, there's a serious delay between the time the JFK Records Act was passed (and signed) --October 1992--and the time the ARRB was actually "up and running," which was about October 1994.
DSL
3/27/12; 2:30 PDT
Los Angeles, Calfornia
Lyndon Johnson on April 23, 1963 was the FIRST person to announce that John Kennedy was coming, not merely to Texas, but to DALLAS and LBJ was also urging that JFK be in a open motorcade in Dallas
LBJ in announcing the trip said of JFK, “At least wait until next November before you shoot him down.
[David Lifton email to Robert Morrow:
8/3/21 - 9:48 PM PDT
Robert:
Old news (as I’m sure you realize). But… thanks for reminding me. DSL
P.S. I’m not sure you realize this, but. . . .
This was not LBJ merely “announcing” something.
Rather: It was LBJ engaging in a political maneuver which would commit JFK to making a Dallas trip. DSL
8/4/21 Robert Morrow reply: I agree]
LBJ Sees Kennedy Dallas Visit - One-Day Texas Tour~ Eyed ."
Dallas Times Herald
Page One
April 24, 1963
LBJ:
"President Kennedy's schedule would permit him to attend a breakfast in Ft. Worth, a luncheon in Dallas, and an afternoon tea in San Antonio..."
He's the only pilot you have, and if the plane goes down, you go down with it. At least wait until next November before you shoot him down."
LBJ to editors of Dallas Times Herald who were hyper critical of JFK on Tuesday April 23, 1963 - also present were execs from KRCE: AM, FM and TV station.
The Dallas Times Herald – April 24, 1963:
The bold print headline at the top of the paper said
LBJ Sees Kennedy Dallas Visit
“One-Day Texas Tour Eyed”
Sub headline “Continued Cuba Watch Revealed by Vice President”
The article read:
QUOTE
At the afternoon reception, a crowd of nearly 2,000 jammed the Cystal Ballroom of the Baker Hotel to hear Vice President Johnson lash out at vociferous critics of the government.
Before shaking hands for nearly an hour, the vice president said he had not come to “say anything ugly” about anyone. “My heart is not filled with fear or hate or hypocrisy” he said.
SCORES DETRACTORS
“I see some people who are filled with hate and fear and hypocrisy and I say ‘God forgive them’” he said to cheers from the Democrats assembled.
“I sympathize with those few who are in the minority. If they think this country is in as bad shape as they say it is, if they think our government is stupid and disloyal, well, I wonder why they agree to stay here anyway?” he said.
He said the President of the United States is like a pilot and the election is when the nation picks an airplane and a pilot for the next four years.
COMMON DANGER
“Once you pick him, and you’re flying across the water in bad weather, don’t go up and open the door and try to knock him in the head. He’s the only pilot you have and if the plane goes down, you go with it.”
“At least wait until next November before you shoot him down.”
The vice president said he had supported President Eisenhower …
UNQUOTE
[“LBJ Sees Kennedy Dallas Visit,” Dallas Times Herald, 4-24-1963, excerpt is from a continuation of the article on page 22A, column 3]
David Lifton: "Civil Rights" was the bone thrown to liberal left to coopt them on the JFK Assassination
https://deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/showthread.php?10096-Book-Review-of-Robert-Caro-s-THE-PASSAGE-OF-POWER/page3
I completely agree with the notion that "civil rights" was the bone thrown to the liberal left which they swallowed whole, and which served to anesthetize that entire segment of the body politic to the notion that Kennedy's assassination was anything more than the "Oswald did it" scenario.
Certain insiders were given what I call the "insider's cover story" (which actually became public in early March, 1967): "Kennedy was trying to get Castro, but Castro got him first".
And then, of course, there was the "World War 3" story which was used, as needed (e.g., to scare the wits out of Warren et al).
So these are three of the primary tools (of persuasion) that were in LBJ "political toolbox."
To repeat:
(1) LBJ was a major promoter of civil rights (in the tradition of FDR, who was, in fact, one of his heroes)
I personally happen to think LBJ was sincere in this, but that is largely irrelevant.
He was still involved in the murder of his predecessor, regardless of what figleaf was used to hide his involvement.
It does not change the fact that 58,000 Americans died in Asia,not to mention over 1 million Asians dead or seriously injured which occurred when, finally, in the Spring of 1965 (and beyond) the conflict in SE Asia was deliberately escalated to the fourth largest war in American history, which was clearly not Kennedy's intent.
(2) LBJ was able to hint darkly of two ominous underlying truths; either that:
(a) Oswald's presence in Mexico City --seven weeks before--was evidence he was a Castro agent etc.
(a line which was completely believed, and subsequently promoted, by Al Haig and Califano, for example)
(b) Castro had pre-empted (i.e., he acted in self-defense).
"Kennedy was trying to kill Castro, and so. . . " (complete in 25 words or less. . e.g., "this was a backfire. ." or "this was blowback" etc)
This line was reserved strictly for insiders (and possibly even top media moguls in the NY times or the Luce organization)
It became public in the Spring of 1975, when Howard K Smith and Marianne Means each revealed how LBJ had taken them into his confidence with this one.
The basic pitch: "We can't let the world know that the President and his brother were trying to kill Castro! That would make it look like Castro acted in self-defense!" Johnson's exact words (per H K Smith: "I'll tell you something that will rock you. . Kennedy was trying to get to Castro, but Castro got to him first." -- "Johnson is Quoted on Kennedy Death", NY TImes, 6/25/76)
(c ) The "truth" had to be subordinated to something more important: i.e., preventing World War 3:
The details: "If the public knew the truth, there would be an outcry" and that would lead to unstoppable political pressure to attack Cuba; and so there's be a replay of the Cuban Missile Crisis. . etc
Documentary source; Memo, Melvin Eisenberg to file, 2/17/64, memorializing what C J Earl Warren told the staff, at the first staff meeting: "The President stated that rumors of the most exaggerated kind were circulating in this country and overseas. Some rumors went so far as attributing the assassination to a faction within the Government wishing to see the Presidency assumed by President Johnson. Others, if not quenched, could conceivably lead the country into a war which could cost 40 million lives. No one could refuse to do something which might help to prevent such a possibility. The President convinced him that this was an occasion on which actual conditions had to override general principles."
These three rationales were like different cans of paint, on a shelf, when one is redecorating a house. Working behind this assortment of smokescreens, LBJ--with Jack Valenti at his side, every step of the way, and with Dean Rusk (who then showed his "hawk" colors for all to see)--was able to implement the true agenda of the plotters: the Vietnam escalation. Specifically, dispensing with the entire Cuban agenda (which was Kennedy's focus) LBJ was able to quietly engineer the escalation of the Vietnam War which did not commence until after he won reelection in his own right (Nov 1964). Then, in the Spring of 1965 (and starting in February, 1965, a ful fourteen months after Dallas, and with an incident at Bien Hoa air base) overtly began the implementation of a reversal of what had been JFK's ("out by '65") policy. The LBJ escalation began when the tit for tat bombing of North Vietnam was escalated to the continual "bombing of the north" (called "Rolling Thunder" by the Air Force); then came sending in choppers, and then Marines to protect the choppers, and by July of 1965, the U.S. presence had grown to hundreds of thousands.
In navigating these post-assassination "political waters," LBJ (pardon the mixed metaphors) "played" various "insider constituencies" and the public like an expert violinist, in much the same way he manipulated various coalitions throughout his political career.
Its really obvious, in retrospect, how he did this. Of course the liberals loved the "Great Society," so that served to anesthetize them. Meanwhile, the true hidden agenda of Dallas was the escalation in Vietnam, and there were enough "Cold War liberals" to go along with that bull shit. As I used to say to John Newman (this was back around 1988-89, before he wrote his thesis, which became his book): "Kennedy's problem (politically) was how to disguise a withdrawal; Johnson's, how to disguise an escalation." Its really that simple.
Johnson's entire leitmotif --in the opening days and weeks--was: "Let us continue. . ." That, basically, was what he told individual JFK aides, in seeking to get them to "stay on board" for awhile; and that, basically, was the speech he delivered to the joint session of Congress about 6 days after Dallas. It was his theme song.
But he did anything but "continue" as the Washington, D.C. monument to the Vietnam War dead attests.
DSL
6/17/12; 5:30 PM PDT
Los Angeles, CA
Sincerely,
Robert Morrow 512-306-1510 Austin, TX
Presidential Historian and Distinguished Fellow at the Lyndon Baines Johnson Institute for the Study of Presidential Crime
The World’s Foremost Authority on the JFK Assassination
The Top Historian in the World on Lyndon Johnson (sorry Robert Caro, it is not you …)
The Greatest Presidential Historian in American History
One of the World’s leading public intellectuals due to my sparkling expertise in the JFK assassination
America’s Premier Living Historian
Knows more about the JFK assassination than every Presidential Medal of Freedom winner EXCEPT Lyndon Johnson (1980 posthumous recipient) who orchestrated the murder of JFK.
One of the top Menches in the United States. “Mensch” being a person of integrity, honor and noble character.
The “Muhammed Ali of the JFK Assassination research community” meaning, I am the Greatest analyst in the world of JFK research and I know it.
One of the top two of the Greatest JFK Assassination Researchers of all time, superceded only by Joachim Joesten who nailed the JFK assassination in real time in the 1960’s.
Knows far more about the JFK assassination than Oliver Stone who can’t figure out that LBJ murdered JFK because “Vietnam” is Stone’s hammer and he thinks everything is a nail.
Nation’s #1 Opposition Researcher on the Clintons & the author of The Clintons’ War on Women (published 2015)
Knows more about the JFK assassination than all the professors of history and politics who have ever taught at Princeton University combined.
Knows more about the JFK assassination than every “credentialed” or “degreed” journalist or academic in this World of 7,983,378,450 people (as of 10/24/2022)
Up and Coming Scholar on the USS Liberty Murders which were orchestrated by Lyndon Johnson and the leaders of Israel and were to be blamed on Egypt to give the USA a pretext to enter the Six Day War
Knows more about the JFK assassination than the 27 Smartest People on the Planet combined. (See “Here is a List of the 27 Smartest People On the Planet,” by Osien Kuumar)
Smarter by a country-mile, generously better informed and significantly less egotistical than the New Yorker’s (lone nutter) Lawrence Wright.
Knows more about the JFK assassination than all the professors at Princeton, Harvard , Yale, Stanford, the University of Texas at Austin and SMU and anyone who has ever written for the New York Times or Washington Post combined.
Can out-debate 40 Ivy League professors of history and politics on the topic of the JFK assassination at one time.
Knows far more about the JFK assassination than anyone who has ever posted at Education Forum, although that can be a very useful web site.
Obviously, I know more about the JFK assassination than every professor, fellow and expert at the Univ. of Virginia's Miller Center on the Presidency combined.
Generously better informed and significantly more intelligent than EVERY journalist I have ever met, spoken with or interacted with, with the exception of the legendary Wayne Madsen.
Runs the best blog on the internet on the many crimes of Lyndon Johnson and the topic of the JFK assassination at “Robert Morrow Political Research” blog
Knows more about the JFK assassination than the combined knowledge of all 2,000 members of NYC’s The Century Club which was founded in 1847
A lot smarter than anyone who has ever written for Texas Monthly, the Texas Tribune, the Dallas Morning News, D Magazine, The New Yorker, The Daily Beast or the Washington Post; or who has ever reported for WFAA Dallas or KLBJ radio Austin, but not the Midlothian Mirror.
Understands Texas politics better than anyone else has in the past 60 years.
**One of the USA’s leading thought leaders.**
Knows more about the JFK assassination than the combined knowledge of anyone who has ever worked as a professor, fellow, staff member, secretary or janitor or who has been on the advisory board at the Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics and Public Policy.
Obviously, knows more about the JFK assassination than anyone who has EVER worked at or been affiliated with the Harvard Kennedy School of Government.
Far more knowledgeable and accurate than the Sixth Floor Museum on the topic of the JFK assassination. Executive director hilarious (lone nutter) Nicola Langford and curator Steve Fagin do not know a tenth of a thimble compared to what I know.
Knows more about the JFK assassination than all the 8,000 scholars and scientists combined who have been fellows at the Princeton, NJ Institute for Advanced Study in its 90-year history
Knows more about the JFK assassination than the combined knowledge of all recipients of the Johan Skytte Prize in Political Science which has been awarded since 1995
Knows far more about the JFK assassination than Ken Jennings (lone nutter), who won 74 consecutive Jeopardy contests and is the highest earning American game show contestant of all time.
Knows more about the JFK assassination than the combined membership of the ultra high IQ Mega society which is only composed of people with an IQ level of one in a million.
Knows more about the JFK assassination than all the people who have ever been members and subject matter experts at the Council on Foreign Relations combined except for those members who were involved in the murder of JFK from their roles in U.S. intelligence
Knows more about the JFK assassination that all the people who have received MacArthur Fellow “genius grants” combined since the program began in 1981.
Knows more about the JFK assassination than all the people who have ever received a Whiting Writers’ Award or a Guggenheim Fellowship combined.
Knows more about the JFK assassination than any single person alive since 1963 who has a tested IQ score of 175 and above.
Knows more about the JFK assassination than Mel Kiper knows about the NFL draft.
Knows more about the JFK assassination than the entire lot of the living 4,500 Rhodes Scholars who are in over 100 countries around the world.
Knows more about the JFK assassination than all 250 members of the Texas Philosophical Society combined.
Knows more about the JFK assassination than the combined membership of the Society of Fellows at the Aspen Institute as well as the entire Board of Trustees of the Aspen Institute.
Knows more about the JFK assassination than the collective knowledge of all pathologists, medical examiners and ballistic experts who have ever practiced in the history of the USA.
Knows more about the JFK assassination than the combined knowledge of the current and past members of the American Historical Association, the Society of American Historians or Organization of American Historians.
Knows more and is a far more “stable genius” than Donald Trump who says that a lone nut killed JFK.
Knows more about the JFK assassination than the combined knowledge of everyone who has won a Pulitzer Prize.
Knows more about the JFK assassination and Lyndon Johnson than the combined knowledge of everyone who has ever won: a Century Association Archives medal, a National Book Foundation medal for Distinguished Contribution to American Letters, a Los Angeles Book Prize in Biography, a Plutarch Award from the Biographers International Organization, the Mark Lynton History Prize, the National Book Critics Circle Award, The New York Historical Society’s American History Book Prize, a Gold Medal for Distinguished Service to Humanity from the National Institute of Social Sciences, Norman Mailer Prize for Distinguished Biography, a Biographers International Organization Award for major contribution to the advancement of the art and craft of biography, a History Makers Medal (the highest honor of the New York Historical Society, a Bookend Award (the highest honor of the Texas Book Festival), a Gold Medal in Biography (awarded once every six years by the American Academy of Arts and Letters), the Ambassador Book Award for Distinguished Achievement from the English-Speaking Union, the John Steinbeck Award, Carl Sandburg Literary Award (from the Chicago Public Library Foundation), the National Book Award in Nonfiction, a Pulitzer Prize, a New School for Social Research – Doctor of Humane Letters, Lifetime Achievement Award for the Guild Hall Academy of Arts, a National Book Critics Circle Award, a Washington Monthly Political Book Award, an Award in Literature from the American Academy of Arts and Letters, H.L. Mencken Award for Best Book, an American Institute of Architects Special Citation, Francis Parkman Prize (awarded by the Society of American Historians), a Carnegie Fellowship at the Columbia University School of Journalism, a Nieman Fellowship at Harvard University, a Deadline Club Award from the Society of Professional Journalists, a Society of Silurians Award for outstanding achievement in the field of public service or been elected to the American Academy of Arts and Sciences or been inducted into the American Academy of Arts and Letters or been inducted into any state’s or country’s Writer’s hall of fame or who has been made an honorary member of the Texas Rangers or been named a Living Landmark by the New York Landmarks Conservancy.
Knows more about the JFK assassination than the combined knowledge of everyone who has received a Nobel Prize in any field.
If Professor K. Anders Ericsson (deceased) were alive, this internationally renown “experts on experts” would sure proclaim me as the “World’s Greatest Expert on the JFK Assassination.”
Unlike CFR member Max Boot I have never written a biography which proves that Gen. Edward Lansdale murdered JFK (“The Road Not Taken: Edward Lansdale and the American Tragedy in Vietnam”) and then hollered at the top of my lungs that a lone nut commie killed JFK.
Knows spectacularly more about the JFK assassination than former Dallas Morning News reporter Bill Minutaglio (later a professor) and whose knowledge and analysis of the JFK assassination is a TAD LACKING, to say the least.
Unlike Texas Tribune editor Evan Smith, I was not personal friends with the wife of the murderer of JFK, Lyndon Johnson, nor did I ever chum up to her and call her “Mrs. J” and nor have I taken money from the daughter of Lyndon Johnson, Luci Baines Johnson. [“Mrs. J,” Evan Smith, Texas Monthly, September 2007 and Texas Tribune All Time List of donors: Luci Baines Johnson & her husband Ian Turpin - $149,097 as of 1/5/2022.]
Unlike longtime columnist Michael Barnes of the Austin-American Statesman I don’t pal around with ultra wealthy Luci Baines Johnson while somehow weirdly forgetting to mention in the Austin paper for literally decades that Lyndon Johnson murdered JFK.
Unlike LBJ biographer Doris Kearns Goodwin, I have never had the man who murdered JFK – Lyndon Johnson – ask me to marry him (“A Tale of Hearts and Minds, Sally Quinn, Washington Post, 8-24-75)
Unlike LBJ biographer Robert Caro, I have was never co-opted by one of the men – LBJ crony Ed Clark – who murdered JFK (see “Blood, Money, and Power” by Barr McClellan, published 2003)
Unlike LBJ biographer Robert Dallek, I do not endorse the ludicrous, machine gun-riddled Warren Report fantasy that Lyndon Johnson, Robert Kennedy, Jackie Kennedy, the KGB, Gerald Ford, Sen. Richard Russell, Sen. John Sherman Cooper, Cong. Hale Boggs, Sen. Barry Goldwater, Richard Nixon, CIA chief William Casey, JFK aides Kenny O’Donnell and Dave Powers, and LBJ’s inner circle mistress Madeleine Brown, LBJ kickbacks king Billie Sol Estes and and JFK’s longtime secretary Evelyn Lincoln never believed.
Unlike LBJ biographer Michael Beschloss, I was never a personal friend of Lady Bird Johnson, the wife of the man Lyndon Johnson, who murdered JFK and I have never implied that Fidel Castro might be behind the JFK assassination.
Unlike LBJ biographer Randall Woods, I have never slandered completely innocent CIA patsy Lee Harvey Oswald for the JFK assassination which was orchestrated by Lyndon Johnson (Randall Woods, LBJ: Architect of American Ambition, p. 417-418)
Unlike LBJ biographer Julian Zelizer, I have never defamed Lee Harvey Oswald for the murder of JFK, a crime that Lyndon Johnson committed.
Unlike historian Douglas Brinkley I have never shat in my pants telling a national TV audience “Look, it’s clear Lee Harvey Oswald killed John F. Kennedy” – and imploring everyone to honor the legacies of Gerald Ford, John McCloy and Arlen Specter in regards to their work covering up the JFK assassination (ABC’s “Face the Nation,” Nov. 17, 2013)
Unlike Senior News Reporter Jason Whitely of WFAA (Dallas) I have never pushed the fantasy that a lone nut named Oswald killed JFK.
Unlike the LBJ Library, I have not erected museum exhibits that endorse the validity and accuracy of the truly bonkers Warren Report that not even Lyndon Johnson believed for one minute.
Has an IQ closer to 140 than 130
Princeton, A.B. – History, 1987
Univ. of Texas at Austin -- MBA, 1990
Tuscaloosa Academy, graduated #3 out of 40 students. Recipient of TA’s highest academic honor, 1983
Star basketball player for Tuscaloosa Academy from 1980-1983, leading my teams to a 114-5 record over 4 years. Scored 2,003 career points. The last years were an unblemished 90-0 with 3 consecutive private school state championships. I was my teams’ MVP as a freshman, junior and senior. I like losing less than Nick Saban, Vince Lombardi, Mike Krzyzewski, Tom Brady and Lyndon Johnson combined.
On top of ALL that, I found the “golden egg” at the Indian Hills Country Club (Tuscaloosa, AL) Easter Egg hunt TWICE in approximately 1974 and 1975 (back to back years) which meant that I received a very large stuffed bunny each time.
