Lyndon Johnson was the ultimate psychopath

[Guest Robert Morrow]

I live in Austin, TX which is nice. I like to ask old people, people older than 65 what they thought about Lyndon Johnson. The man has no defenders. Almost universally people have anecdotes on how corrupt beyond belief Lyndon Johnson was. Even people who worked directly for him will tell you what a bastard he was. All the love in town is reserved for Lady Bird Johnson, who is considered a revered figure. Even the local Democrats shun Lyndon Johnson; their annual dinner is a "Ralph Yarborough" dinner. I remember one time I went to a nursing home, and one of the ladies there was one of LBJ's mistresses. Someone else told me that one of his requirements for secretaries was "Does she shuck her drawers."

Lyndon Johnson the man is an embarassment down here still. Nobody celebrates his birthday, or his death, or his "accomplishments" (murdering JFK, etc.); the media TV, radio, newspaper, Univ. of Texas are pretty much silent about the man. Nobody throws a big party in his honor such as a "Reagan Day" dinner. Talk to the Republicans, they will tell you LBJ was insanely corrupt. Talk to the Democrats, ditto. Lyndon Johnson in Austin, TX in the year 2010 is like an open herpes sore: no one wants to touch him!

.... now about Dallas ...

John Kennedy on 11/18/63 told George Smathers that Lyndon Johnson was making one of his absurd demands: that Jackie Kennedy ride with Lyndon Johnson in his car on the Texas trip. That right there is "smoking gun" evidence of Lyndon Johnson's participation in the JFK assassination. That is a clever, cunning psychopath in action. Lyndon Johnson knew that John Kennedy was going to be assassinated in a motorcade in Dallas, and out of a twisted sense of chivalry, is trying to get Jackie into the relative safety of his car and out of the kill zone.

Remember what LBJ told his beloved Mistress Madeleine in the morning of 11/22/63: That son-of-a-bitch crazy Yarborough and that goddamn f___king Irish mafia bastard Kennedy, will never embarass me again!" [Texas in the Morning, p. 167]

There is no need to give Lyndon Johnson "the benefit of the doubt" on anything and especially the JFK assassination. There is nothing that he did in his entire life to have earned that. Quite the contrary, read Caro's and Dallak's biographies and you run across mountains of examples of Johnson depraved, crooked and bizarre behavior. The anti-social whackjob in the JFK assassination was not LHO, but rather Lyndon Johnson himself, the usurper president! Bill Moyers and Richard Goodwin, 2 aides SEPARATELY went to see a psychiatrist inquiring about Lyndon Johnson's mental condition. Also, read George Reedy's book on LBJ - calls him a lout and a SADIST. That description from a 15 year aide. LBJ had a sick desire to break men. While at the time time the guy himself could barely function; he was a paranoid basket case (PROJECTING his evil intentions/tactics on others), smoking 3 packs of cigarettes a day and sucking down cases of low end Cutty Sark scotch.

Here is Lyndon Johnson talking through his aide Bill Moyers to get that "goddamned" bubble off JFK's car. Bill Moyers was on the phone from Austin, TX barking out these orders for the Secret Service in Dallas:

"Moyers had been on the phone with Ms. Harris, informing her that the President did not want the bubbletop. He told Harris to 'get that God-damned bubble off unless it's pouring rain.' Shortly thereafter the weather began to clear. Ms. Harris approached Sorrels about the bubble-top and together they had the agents remove the glass top."

[Phillip Nelson, LBJ: Mastermind of JFK's Assassination, p.428] Nelson's source for this quote is HSCA, Volume 11, p. 526.

Lyndon Johnson was also a control freak when he was in one of his manic periods, when he was pulling off one of his devious capers, machinations, he had dozens of them. Example would be President Lyndon Johnson calling Will Fritz on 11/23/63 and telling him to STOP his investigation, that he had the right man (patsy LHO). Another would be LBJ on 11/24/63 calling Parkland Hospital himself and personally talking to Dr. Charles Crenshaw and trying his best to get a confession out of the accused assassin (patsy) the dying Oswald.

Did not mean to forget Lyndon Johnson on literally the afternoon of 11/22/63 calling his financial advisor, saying he had to SELL HIS HALLIBURTION STOCK!

Pardon my asking, but what in the hell is going on in the mind of that man? Remember, LBJ has done nothing to earn "the benefit of the doubt" in his entire life. That is not the state of mind of a man worried about an "international conspiracy" or "nuclear war" or being killed by a hit squad on the loose. It is the state of mind of a man trying to think of all the ways he can of covering up his participation in the slaughter of the nation's president.

[From Family of Secrets by Russ Baker, p. 132]

Pat Holloway, former attorney to both Poppy Bush and Jack Crichton, recounted to me an incident involving LBJ that had greatly disturbed him. This was around 1PM on November 22, 1963, just as Kennedy was being pronounced dead. Holloway was heading home from the office and was passing through the reception area. The switchboard operator excitedly noted that she was patching the vice president through from Parkland Hospital to Holloway’s boss, firm senior partner Waddy Bullion, who was LBJ’s personal tax lawyer. The operator invited Holloway to listen in. LBJ was talking “not about a conspiracy or a tragedy,” Holloway recalled. “I heard him say: ‘Oh I gotta get rid of my goddamn Halliburton stock.’ Lyndon Johnson was talking about the consequences of his political problems with his Halliburton stock at a time when the president had been officially declared dead. And that pissed me off… It really made me furious.”

Then post assassination, Lyndon Johnson starts making "cowboy love" to Jackie, telling her he wants to be the "daddy" of Caroline and John-John.

From LBJ: Architect of American Ambition:

“During his first five weeks in office, Johnson called Jackie numerous times. Instinctively, awkwardly, he attempted to make what Hubert Humphrey referred to as “cowboy love” to her. A conversation the first week in December was typical: “Your picture was gorgeous. Now you had that chin up and that chest out and you looked so pretty marching in the front page of the New York Daily News … well,” LBJ said “I just came, sat in my desk and started signing a log of long things, and I decided to I wanted to flirt with you a little bit…. Darling, you know what I said to the Congress – I’d give anything in the world if I wasn’t here today … Tell Caroline and John-John I’d like to be their daddy!”

[LBJ: Architect of American Ambition, Randall Woods, p. 423]

That, my friend, is a CHAMPION psychopath in action. Lyndon Johnson slaughter's Jackie's husband, then he wants to be the "daddy" of Caroline and John-John. All the while telling Kennedy's staff "Ah need yew more than he ever did" to every one of them.

So what is a "psychopath?" A psychopath is someone who often looks "normal" sometimes even "charming" but there is something seriously wrong with them. They use people. They have no empathy. They are dangerous. Another psycopath would be Ted Bundy - volunteers at a suicide hotline - then its on to slaughtering coeds. How many markers of a psychopath does Lyndon Johnson display. Really? Let's see if Lyndon Johnson displays characteristics of a psychopath.

A psychopath will use people for excitement, entertainment, to build their self-esteem and they invariably value people in terms of their material value (e.g. money, property, comfort, etc..). They can involve and get other people into trouble quickly and they seem to have no regret for their actions. To date there is no checklist of behavior and symptoms that will tell you with certainty whether or not a person is a psychopath. But there are warning signs. The following warning signs are based on my experience but primarily research conducted by Robert Hare, Ph.D - the leading expert on the Psychopathic Personality.

http://www.crisiscounseling.com/articles/psychopath.htm

Characteristics of a Psychopath

1) superficial charm [LBJ would find a powerful person, then totally bootlick them.]

2) self-centered & self-important [100% LBJ]

3) need for stimulation & prone to boredom [Yes, hated to be alone]

4) deceptive behavior & lying [Possibly LBJ's #1 trait]

5) conning & manipulative [ LBJ not just conning, but "cunning" - master manipulator]

6) little remorse or guilt [how about killing the nanny Dale Turner? Is that ruthless enough for you?]

7) shallow emotional response [Yes.]

8) callous with a lack of empathy [besides lying, the other great trait of LBJ]

9) living off others or predatory attitude [God yes, like a jackal or hyena]

10) poor self-control [many examples of this]

11) promiscuous sexual behavior [Very promiscous. Bragged he had more women by accident than JFK had on purpose]

12) early behavioral problems [LBJ's grandmother PREDICTED he would go to jail.]

13) lack of realistic long term goals [Tell everyone for decades he was going to be President, (even if he had to kill to get there)]

14) impulsive lifestyle [impulsive, yes, but also a clever planner and manipulator]

15) irresponsible behavior [LBJ should have been executed by the state multiple times]

16) blaming others for their actions [Robert Kennedy was not the only one he hated]

17) short term relationships [Johnson had long term relationships; but if you threatened him, they got shorter real quick with a call to Mac Wallace]

18) juvenile delinquency [LBJ's grandmother PREDICTED he would go to jail.]

19) breaking parole or probation [Lyndon Johnson, too cunning, clever, ruthless and dangerous to go to jail! But he had to murder to cover up many things. He was not far away from jail.]

20) varied criminal activity [kickbacks, taking bribes, blackmailing, jury tampering, murder - A+ criminal. Should have been executed multiple times over.]

The idea that psychopaths eat people is a myth. In reality, a person with a psychopathic personality can lead what appears to be an ordinary life. They can have jobs, get married and they can break the law like anyone else. But their jobs and marriages usually don’t last and their life is usually on the verge of personal chaos. They are almost always in some kind of trouble or they are not far from it.

A psychopath is usually a subtle manipulator. They do this by playing to the emotions of others. They typically have high verbal intelligence, but they lack what is commonly referred to as "emotional intelligence". There is always a shallow quality to the emotional aspect of their stories. In particular they have difficulty describing how they felt, why they felt that way, or how others may feel and why. In many cases you almost have to explain it to them. Close friends and parents will often end up explaining to the psychopath how they feel and how others feel who have been hurt by him or her. They can do this over and over with no significant change in the person's choices and behavior. They don't understand or appreciate the impact that their behavior has on others. They do appreciate what it means when they are caught breaking rules or the law even though they seem to end up in trouble again. They desperately avoid incarceration and loss of freedom but continue to act as if they can get away with breaking the rules. They don't learn from these consequences. They seem to react with feelings and regret when they are caught. But their regret is not so much for other people as it is for the consequences that their behavior has had on them, their freedom, their resources and their so called "friends." They can be very sad for their self. A psychopath is always in it for their self even when it seems like they are caring for and helping others. The definition of their "friends" are people who support the psychopath and protect them from the consequence of their own antisocial behavior. Shallow friendships, low emotional intelligence, using people, antisocial attitudes and failure to learn from the repeated consequences of their choices and actions help identify the psychopath.

Edited September 20, 2010 by Robert Morrow

[Jerry Craig]

ive been saying johnson was a nut for a long time!!!

[Dean Hagerman]

Why in the world did you start another thread about this Robert?

Why couldnt you post this in the other 154 threads that you have started about LBJ being a psychopathic serial killer?

Seriously Robert, the way you are going about trying to "prove" that LBJ is a serial killer is not working at all

[Dean Hagerman]

[LBJ's grandmother PREDICTED he would go to jail.]

So what?

I tell my wife everyday that our sneaky one year old daughter is going to jail when she is an adult

Is my daughter going to go to jail? Of course not

Just like you claim that LBJ was a serial killer(even thought you know that LBJ never killed anybody in his life) please tell me how many times LBJ went to jail and how long his jail sentences were

[John Dolva]

LBJ killed millions as pres. ''hey hey lbj, how many kids (in indo china) have you killed today''.

but that's just par for the course for the establishment.

Edited September 20, 2010 by John Dolva

[Dean Hagerman]

LBJ killed millions as pres. ''hey hey lbj, how many kids (in indo china) have you killed today''.

Thats crazy, I dont remember LBJ going over to Indo China with a sniper rifle and picking off millions of kids

I wonder why LBJ is not listed at the top of every serial killer or mass murder list?

Maybe its because he never killed anyone, that could be the first clue

[John Dolva]

Isn't an accomplice or planner of murder as guilty?

[Dean Hagerman]

Isn't an accomplice or planner of murder as guilty?

In cases such as Charles Manson who directly planned out the killings

Was LBJ on the front lines of war telling each soilder who to shoot, when to shoot, who to execute, where to drop a bomb?

If thats your view John then Harry Truman must be guilty of killing 200,000+ people

Is Harry Truman a serial killer?

[Peter McGuire]

ive been saying johnson was a nut for a long time!!!

Good to hear from you Jerry.

One of the biggest omissions - among countless omissions in the Warren Report was Roger Craig’s report on the Mauser and Rambler.

The Warren Report needed only one lie or omission to invalidate the report completely.

They sure went over that one!

The Warren Report clearly means nothing.

Sadly, they had to kill Roger Craig to silence him.

Edited September 20, 2010 by Peter McGuire

[David Andrews]

LBJ killed millions as pres. ''hey hey lbj, how many kids (in indo china) have you killed today''.

but that's just par for the course for the establishment.

I've often felt that the "How many kids?" chant was a reaction to having Kennedy replaced by LBJ, thus escalating the war. It was a reproach for several levels of immoderation, and for old men's return to power.

[Guest Robert Morrow]

[LBJ's grandmother PREDICTED he would go to jail.]

So what?

I tell my wife everyday that our sneaky one year old daughter is going to jail when she is an adult

Is my daughter going to go to jail? Of course not

Just like you claim that LBJ was a serial killer(even thought you know that LBJ never killed anybody in his life) please tell me how many times LBJ went to jail and how long his jail sentences were

Dean, I have found that the JFK assassination is like a religion to many folks. Meaning, they believe things on an article of FAITH, no matter what the facts are, just to fit into their theory of the JFK assassination. So, if you believe that Lyndon Johnson murdered no one, on an article of faith, go right ahead, no problem.

I do believe, based on many accounts of credible people, that Lyndon Johnson murdered MANY people mainly to cover up the crimes he was committing on an almost daily basis. For example the Governor of Texas Allan Shivers in 1956 accused Lyndon Johnson of having a man in prison, Sam Smithwick, murdered so that he would not talk about the 1948 voting fraud in Duval County that got Lyndon Johnson elected to the Senate. That is the GOVERNOR of Texas Allan Shivers, in 1956, telling Lyndon Johnson to his FACE that he had a man murdered in prison. [Robert Dallek, Lone Star Rising, p. 347]

There is a good book you ought to read that goes into depth on Lyndon Johnson. It is LBJ: Mastermind of JFK's Assassination (2010) by Phillip Nelson. http://www.lbj-themastermind.com/

The ultimate psychopaths are the ones who never go to jail. They kill, steal, cheat and break crimes left and right, but they are seasoned masters of deception, diversion and manipulating people. When an ultimate psychopath such as Lyndon Johnson is in government, they corrupt the machinery of government and the legal process, whether it is judges, prosecutors, police, the legislature.

As for Lyndon Johnson's grandmother, she said he would go to jail and she was referring to his extreme anti-social behavior as a youth. You can read about this in Blood, Money and Power by Barr McClellan. Once when Johnson was a youth, he tortured a mule and worked it until it died. Later Johnson did a series of dangerous pranks including setting off dynamite in the public square. Just to show you how sick Johnson was, once he tied a dog to dynamite and blew it up. Lyndon Johnson was a sick son of a bitch and many people knew it. But LBJ was just too clever and cunning a sociopath/psychopath as he climbed the political ladder, escaping jail the whole way.

Robert Caro went back and interviewed is student peers at San Marcos State Teacher's College and found that decades later, his college peers hated and detested the man. LBJ was such a corrupt, evil, manipulative pathological xxxx.

So, Dean, you can believe whatever "religion" you want to in the JFK assassination - like the Muslims, the Christians, the Buddhists, the Jews do in their religions. As for me I think there is a mountain of evidence that indicts Lyndon Johnson in the JFK assassination.

[John Dolva]

LBJ killed millions as pres. ''hey hey lbj, how many kids (in indo china) have you killed today''.

but that's just par for the course for the establishment.

I've often felt that the "How many kids?" chant was a reaction to having Kennedy replaced by LBJ, thus escalating the war. It was a reproach for several levels of immoderation, and for old men's return to power.

I think it also was taken up globally as an anti draft chant. It followed him around oz during his visit here for example. Youth of conscription age were often referred to as ''kids'', but in general I think it refers to innocents from all sides killed in the slaughter.

It goes well with ''ho ho ho chi minh, dare to struggle dare to win''

[Guest Robert Morrow]

Close aide Richard Goodwin on Lyndon Johnson:

Here is a MUST READ article on Lyndon Johnson by his aide Richard Goodwin: President Lyndon Johnson: The War Within. Lyndon Johnson a scheming paranoid, a severely mentally ill man, who would PROJECT his own evil intentions/tactics/methods onto others. In common parlance, that would be a "whackjob" or a "mad man." And Johnson's mental illness, delusions, paranoia (and fear of being discovered as ONE of the murderers of JFK) escalated as he became president and cracked under the pressures of the job that he had maniacally pursued his whole life. Sen. Richard Russell would say he Lyndon Johnson would break down into uncontrollable crying whenever he would visit him in the White House.

Richard Goodwin, who, along with Bill Moyers, consulted doctors on LBJ's mental instabilies, concludes: "All three doctors offered essentially the same opinion: that Johnson's behavior - if the layman's descriptions we provided were accurate -seemed to correspond to a textbook case of paranoid disintegration, the eruption of long-suppressed irrationalities. The disintegration could continue, remain constant, or recede, depending on the strength of Johnson's resistance, and, more significantly, on the direction of those external events - the war, the crumbling public support -the pressures from which were dissolving Johnson's confidence in his ability to control events."

http://www.nytimes.c...&pagewanted=all

"Around midsummer 1965, about the time the decision was made to increase by more than 100,000 the number of American troops in Vietnam - a decision that transformed Vietnam into an American war - I became convinced that President Johnson's always large eccentricities had taken a huge leap into unreason. Not on every subject, and certainly not all the time: it was during this same period that Johnson was skillfully crafting some of the greatest triumphs of his Great Society.

But there is no question that the President's conduct during 1965 was, on occasion, markedly, almost frighteningly different from anything I had observed previously. My conclusion is that President Johnson experienced certain episodes of what I believe to have been paranoid behavior. I do not use this term to describe a medical diagnosis. I am not L.B.J.'s psychiatrist, nor am I qualified to be. I base my judgment purely on my observation of his conduct during the little more than two years I worked for him. And this was not my conclusion alone. It was shared by others who also had close and frequent contact with President Johnson." ...

"The following day, I noted in my diary: ''Hugh Sidey came to see me. He said there was an increasing worry about the President around town. A fear that his personal eccentricities were now affecting policy. For example, he told me that in responding to criticism over the Ayub and Shastri affair, Johnson had said to reporters, 'After all, what would Jim Eastland [ the conservative Senator from Mississippi ] say if I brought those two niggers over here.' ''We agreed that it was such a stupid remark for L.B.J. to say - knowing that if it ever made its way into public print, he would be severely damaged - that he had to be a little out of control to say it at all.'' ...

Late that spring, alarmed at what I perceived to be the President's increasingly irrational behavior, I began to study medical textbooks. I learned that the paranoid personality may pass relatively undisturbed through a long and productive lifetime, manifesting itself only in subtle traits of behavior: a somewhat excessive secrecy and suspicion, a need for control over the external world. Because particular displays of these traits nearly all have some basis in reality - there are real adversaries, real reasons for an ambitious man to seek control over people and events - they are ordinarily perceived more as personal eccentricity than as a failure of reason or a distortion of reality. To the gifted few they may even be a source of strength, increasing their ability to achieve mastery over that always treacherous world they inhabit.

Yet if control is threatened, mastery undermined, enemies increasing in number and moving beyond reach, the mental apparatus so carefully constructed to transform potential weakness into external strength can begin to falter. The latent paranoia, liberated by the erosive pressures of misfortune and sensed helplessness, can take occasional control of the conscious mind, thereby transforming the most highly developed faculties into instruments of willed belief, even delusion.

Something like this began to happen to Lyndon Johnson during 1965, when he found himself - for almost the first time - surrounded by men and events he could not control: Vietnam and the Kennedys, and, later, the press, Congress, and even the public, whose approval was essential to his own esteem. As his defenses weakened, long-suppressed instincts broke through to assault the carefully developed skills and judgment of a lifetime.

"It was during this period, in the spring of 1965, that I first noticed Johnson's public mask begin to stiffen. In his public appearances, the face seemed frozen, the once-gesturing arms held tightly to the side or fixed to a podium. Protective devices proliferated - Teleprompters, a special Presidential rostrum that traveled with him, even the careful excision of colorful or original language -all, I now believe, designed at least in part to guard him from spontaneously voicing inner convictions that he knew, in that part of his mind still firmly in touch with reality, would, if voiced, discredit him. ''You know, Dick,'' Johnson once told me. ''I never really dare let myself go because I don't know where I'll stop.'' "

I accompanied Moyers back to his office. ''We were both shaken, alarmed,'' I noted in my diary, ''not so much at the content of Johnson's statements - surely he didn't mean to halt all discussions with the Soviet Union or pull out of the United Nations - but at the disjointed, erratic flow of thought, unrelated events strung together, yet seemingly linked by some incomprehensible web of connections within Johnson's mind. He won't act on his words, but he believes they're true.''

On June 28, I recorded in my diary that Johnson had ''asked me and Bill if we thought Tom Wicker [ of The New York Times ] was out to destroy him, if Wicker was caught up in some sort of conspiracy against him. We said no, that he writes some favorable and some unfavorable stories, but we couldn't convince him. . . .''

President Lyndon Johnson: The War Within

By Richard N. Goodwin; Richard N. Goodwin was assistant special counsel to President John F. Kennedy from 1961 to 1962, and special assistant to President Lyndon B. Johnson in 1964 and 1965. This article is adapted from his latest book, ''Remembering America: A Voice From the Sixties,'' to be published by Little, Brown next month.

Published: August 21, 1988

But the foreign-policy pundits did not swallow Johnson's explanation. We had, they wrote, deliberately offended two of Asia's most important leaders because they did not approve our bombing of North Vietnam. A week later I sat beside Johnson as Air Force One carried us from the Texas ranch to the White House. Suddenly, Johnson leaned over to me, looked around, and, speaking in tense, almost whispered tones, as if he were confiding the highest secrets of state, said, ''Listen, Dick, do you know why there was so much trouble about Ayub and Shastri?'' ''No, Mr. President,'' I replied. ''Well, you ought to know about it, so you can keep on the alert. I had it investigated. Do you know there are some disloyal Kennedy people over at the State Department who are trying to get me; that's why they stirred things up?'' ''I didn't know that,'' I answered. ''Well, there are, and we can expect to hear from them again. They didn't get me this time, but they'll keep trying.'' In my diary entry of that date I noted that ''the President spoke in an intense low-keyed manner, characteristic of his most irrational moments.''

''I don't want telegrams like that,'' he said, almost shouting, then he picked up the phone. ''Get me Rusk. . . . Listen, Mr. Secretary,'' he began, softly sardonic, ''you know those telegrams about Humphrey?'' We couldn't hear Secretary of State Dean Rusk's reply, but listened as the President suddenly raised his voice: ''If they send me any more telegrams like that, I want you to call them back. Fire the bunch of them. I don't want any more telegrams like that.''

The President replaced the handset and turned toward Moyers. ''You know what it is, Bill, don't you, it's those damn Kennedy ambassadors trying to get me and discredit me.''

IT WAS NOT SURPRISING THAT THE ''Kennedy crowd'' should be the prelude to that swarming mob of ''enemies and conspirators'' that began to infect Johnson's mind. Not only had he felt humiliated - and with some cause -during Kennedy's Presidency, but the enduring shadow of Camelot -glamorous, popular, intellectual Camelot, enshrined in steadily growing myth - seemed to him to obscure the achievements of his own Presidency, preventing others from seeing how much more he was accomplishing than his predecessor.

Johnson once explained why Fulbright and ''all those liberals on the Hill'' were squawking at him about Vietnam. ''Why? I'll tell you why. Because I never went to Harvard. That's why. Because I wasn't John F. Kennedy. Because the Great Society was accomplishing more than the New Frontier. You see, they had to find some issue on which to turn against me, and they found it in Vietnam.''

For Johnson, the omnipresent ghost of that past was reincarnated in the person of Robert F. Kennedy and his followers. But understandable hostility would soon be displaced by the more ominous conviction that Robert Kennedy was not just an enemy, but the leader of all Johnson's enemies, the guiding spirit of some immense conspiracy designed to discredit and, ultimately, to overthrow the Johnson Presidency.

''Why does he keep worrying about me?'' Robert Kennedy once asked me. ''I don't like him, but there's nothing I can do to him. Hell, he's the President, and I'm only a junior Senator.''

''That's right, that's the reality,'' I replied. ''But we're not talking about reality. In Johnson's mind you're the threat. If he had to choose between you and Ho Chi Minh'' (to be his successor in office), ''he'd pick Ho in a minute.''

In May 1965, I drafted a speech that Johnson was scheduled to deliver in San Francisco on the anniversary of the United Nations Charter. Not limited to the standard plea for increased peace and understanding among the nations, it contained several tangible and far-reaching proposals for the control of nuclear arms. Johnson was delighted with the draft, approved it, and ordered that it be prepared for delivery. Then, shortly before the President was scheduled to go to San Francisco, Robert Kennedy addressed the Senate, calling for progress toward nuclear disarmament. The Kennedy speech received little public attention. But it infuriated Johnson.

''I want you to take out anything about the atom in that speech,'' he said. ''I don't want one word in there that looks like I'm copying Bobby Kennedy.''

''But, Mr. President,'' I protested, ''the Kennedy speech is very different from yours, and it's only his opinion. These are formal proposals from the President of the United States. The entire world will be listening.''

It was as if I hadn't spoken. Johnson picked up a newspaper. ''Here's Reston's column on Kennedy's speech. You make sure we don't say anything that he says Bobby said. I'm not going to do it.'' Thus all the arms-control proposals were excised, the American initiatives were canceled simply because Bobby Kennedy had made a speech.

Late that spring, alarmed at what I perceived to be the President's increasingly irrational behavior, I began to study medical textbooks. I learned that the paranoid personality may pass relatively undisturbed through a long and productive lifetime, manifesting itself only in subtle traits of behavior: a somewhat excessive secrecy and suspicion, a need for control over the external world. Because particular displays of these traits nearly all have some basis in reality - there are real adversaries, real reasons for an ambitious man to seek control over people and events - they are ordinarily perceived more as personal eccentricity than as a failure of reason or a distortion of reality. To the gifted few they may even be a source of strength, increasing their ability to achieve mastery over that always treacherous world they inhabit.

Yet if control is threatened, mastery undermined, enemies increasing in number and moving beyond reach, the mental apparatus so carefully constructed to transform potential weakness into external strength can begin to falter. The latent paranoia, liberated by the erosive pressures of misfortune and sensed helplessness, can take occasional control of the conscious mind, thereby transforming the most highly developed faculties into instruments of willed belief, even delusion.

Something like this began to happen to Lyndon Johnson during 1965, when he found himself - for almost the first time - surrounded by men and events he could not control: Vietnam and the Kennedys, and, later, the press, Congress, and even the public, whose approval was essential to his own esteem. As his defenses weakened, long-suppressed instincts broke through to assault the carefully developed skills and judgment of a lifetime.

It was during this period, in the spring of 1965, that I first noticed Johnson's public mask begin to stiffen. In his public appearances, the face seemed frozen, the once-gesturing arms held tightly to the side or fixed to a podium. Protective devices proliferated - Teleprompters, a special Presidential rostrum that traveled with him, even the careful excision of colorful or original language -all, I now believe, designed at least in part to guard him from spontaneously voicing inner convictions that he knew, in that part of his mind still firmly in touch with reality, would, if voiced, discredit him. ''You know, Dick,'' Johnson once told me. ''I never really dare let myself go because I don't know where I'll stop.''

In mid-June, Moyers entered the Oval Office to find Johnson holding a wire-service report torn from the teletype machine that stood close to the desk. The President said: ''Did you see this? Bundy'' - McGeorge Bundy, the national security adviser - ''is going on television -on national television - with five professors. I never gave him permission. That's an act of disloyalty. He didn't tell me because he knew I didn't want him to do it. Bill, I want you to go to Bundy and tell him the President would be pleased, mighty pleased, to accept his resignation.'' Johnson paused. ''On second thought, maybe I should talk to him myself. . . . No, you go do it.'' Then, as if responding to some sensed hesitation on Moyers's part: ''That's the trouble with all you fellows. You're in bed with the Kennedys.''

Moyers wisely ignored the President's order, and left the White House to go home. ''At midnight,'' I noted in my diary, ''Moyers called me to talk about Johnson. He said he was extremely worried, that as he listened to Johnson he felt weird, almost felt as if he wasn't really talking to a human being at all.''

The next morning when Moyers entered the Oval Office, Johnson looked up at him. ''Did you speak to Bundy?'' ''No, I didn't, Mr. President,'' Bill replied. Johnson grunted, and returned to the memorandum he had begun reading. Bundy was to last another year.

A week later, Moyers and I were talking with Johnson in the Oval Office when, provoked by nothing more than my comment that his education bill had virtually complete support from liberal organizations, Johnson proclaimed: ''I am not going to have anything more to do with the liberals. They won't have anything to do with me. They all just follow the Communist line - liberals, intellectuals, Communists. They're all the same. I detest the United Nations. They've tried to make a fool out of me. They oppose me.

''And I won't make any overtures to the Russians. They'll have to come to me. In Paris, Gagarin'' - Yuri Gagarin, the Soviet cosmonaut - ''refused to shake hands with the astronauts. I sent those astronauts myself, and what he did was a personal insult to me.'' (In fact, Gagarin did shake hands, but later declined to meet with American officials, which Johnson persisted in inflating into a personal affront.) ''I can't trust anybody anymore. I tell you what I'm going to do. I'm going to get rid of everybody who doesn't agree with my policies. I'll take a tough line - put Abe Fortas or Clark Clifford in the Bundy job. I'm not going in the liberal direction. There's no future with them. They're just out to get me, always have been.''

I accompanied Moyers back to his office. ''We were both shaken, alarmed,'' I noted in my diary, ''not so much at the content of Johnson's statements - surely he didn't mean to halt all discussions with the Soviet Union or pull out of the United Nations - but at the disjointed, erratic flow of thought, unrelated events strung together, yet seemingly linked by some incomprehensible web of connections within Johnson's mind. He won't act on his words, but he believes they're true.''

On June 28, I recorded in my diary that Johnson had ''asked me and Bill if we thought Tom Wicker [ of The New York Times ] was out to destroy him, if Wicker was caught up in some sort of conspiracy against him. We said no, that he writes some favorable and some unfavorable stories, but we couldn't convince him. . . .''

GRADUALLY, AS Johnson moved closer and closer to the crucial decision of July 28 -when he would raise the number of American troops in Vietnam by more than 100,000 - circumstances began to overwhelm him, elude his grasp. The decision to transform the war, which he knew was potentially fatal to his public ambitions, could no longer be evaded or postponed. Increasing opposition from the press and critics on the Hill could no longer be controlled by his hitherto almost irresistible power of persuasion. The somewhat frightening, always puzzling outbursts became more frequent.

No longer satisfied with impugning the motives of his critics (''That Fulbright,'' he told me after Senator J. William Fulbright had joined the ranks of dissent, ''he never was satisfied with any President that wouldn't make him Secretary of State''), or attributing his difficulties to ''those Kennedys'' or ''those Harvards,'' Johnson began to hint privately that he was the target of a gigantic Communist conspiracy in which his domestic adversaries were only players - not conscious participants, perhaps, but unwitting dupes.

Sitting in the Oval Office on July 5, Johnson interrupted our conversation on domestic matters: ''You know, Dick, the Communists are taking over the country. Look here,'' and he lifted a manila folder from his desk. ''It's Teddy White's F.B.I. file. He's a Communist sympathizer.''

A few days before, I had been sitting in Bill Moyers's office, when Bill walked in, visibly shaken, his face pale. ''I just came from a conversation with the President,'' he said. ''He told me he was going to fire everybody who didn't agree with him, that Hubert [ Humphrey ] could not be trusted and we weren't to tell him anything; then he began to explain that the Communist way of thinking had infected everyone around him, that his enemies were deceiving the people and, if they succeeded, there was no way he could stop World War III.''

''Suppose he really does go crazy,'' I said. And then, answering my own question: ''I tell you what would happen if we went public with our doubts. They could assemble a panel of psychiatrists to examine the President, and he would tell them how sad it made him that two boys he loved so much could have thought such a thing, and then explain his behavior so calmly and reasonably that when he was finished, we would be the ones committed.''

Shortly thereafter, I talked with a psychiatrist who was also a close personal friend. After he agreed to treat our conversation as privileged, I described the President's behavior in detail as I had observed it. At the time, I did not even inform Moyers of this step; nor did he tell me, until years later, that he had independently followed the same course, speaking with two different psychiatrists.

"All three doctors offered essentially the same opinion: that Johnson's behavior - if the layman's descriptions we provided were accurate -seemed to correspond to a textbook case of paranoid disintegration, the eruption of long-suppressed irrationalities. The disintegration could continue, remain constant, or recede, depending on the strength of Johnson's resistance, and, more significantly, on the direction of those external events - the war, the crumbling public support -the pressures from which were dissolving Johnson's confidence in his ability to control events."

====================================================================================

George Reedy, who worked closely with Lyndon Johnson from 1951-1965, calls LBJ a “bully, a sadist, a lout, and egoist” in his book

“Deeply disturbed” does not adequately describe Lyndon Johnson … pathological xxxx, master manipulator, clever sociopath, and serial killer along the lines of a John Wayne Gacy or Ted Bundy (charming … then you are dead)

George Reedy, former press secretary for Lyndon Johnson: http://www.absolutea...cs/George_Reedy

George Reedy on Lyndon Johnson:

• "He may have been a son of a bitch, but he was a colossal son of a bitch."

• "Not only did Johnson get somewhat separated from reality, he had a fantastic faculty for disorienting everybody around him as to what reality was."

• "What was it that would send him into those fantastic rages where he could be one of the nastiest, most insufferable, sadistic SOBs that ever lived and a few minutes later really be a big, magnificent and inspiring leader?"

In his book, Lyndon B. Johnson: A Memoir by George Reedy… Reedy is quoted on his book flap as calling LBJ “a bully, a sadist, lout, and egoist.” He describes LBJ as “magnificent, inspiring leader; the other that of an insufferable bastard.”

Edited September 20, 2010 by Robert Morrow

[Guest Robert Morrow]

Martin, would you like for me send you my "LBJ and CIA killed JFK" file? If anyone wants it, just send me an email to Morrow321@aol.com.

I offered it to you before, but you declined, which I think is a good example of what I am talking about. People have religious views of the JFK assassination where they believe things based on FAITH ... and they don't even want to even LOOK at the evidence which contradicts their FAITH. So by declining to look at or even skim my "LBJ and CIA killed JFK" file, you give a perfect example of closemindedness.

So "believe" whatever you want to "believe" if it makes you feel happy.

For other folks, I suggest watching on You Tube episodes of the Men Who Killed Kennedy, the Guilty Men. That offers up LOTS of good evidence of Lyndon Johnson's deep involvement in the JFK assassination.

1) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eaWUcyjAeIk TMWKK, ep. 9, The Guilty Men, seg. #1

2) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=05AsvqWfzts TMWKK, ep. 9 The Guilty Men, seg. #2

3) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XJPWhn6P5fE&feature=channel_page TMWKK The Guilty Men episode 9, segment #3

4) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rO0q4gsDURk LBJ Benefited Most from JFK Assassination

5) http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2127940572158431861# - The Men Who Killed Kennedy The Guilty Men here is a fabulous collection of these valuable videos. [as of 8/18/10 the web link worked.

Edited September 20, 2010 by Robert Morrow

[Dean Hagerman]

Dean, I have found that the JFK assassination is like a religion to many folks. Meaning, they believe things on an article of FAITH, no matter what the facts are, just to fit into their theory of the JFK assassination. So, if you believe that Lyndon Johnson murdered no one, on an article of faith, go right ahead, no problem.

I do believe, based on many accounts of credible people, that Lyndon Johnson murdered MANY people mainly to cover up the crimes he was committing on an almost daily basis.

I'm absolutely gobsmacked. I cannot believe you would have the gall to claim that Dean is the one trying to make the evidence fit a pet theory! Un-frickin-believable.

Name your "credible" witnesses, Robert.

And show us one, just one, single scrap of credible evidence that LBJ orchestrated the JFK assassination.

xxxx or get off the pot, Robert.

You've got NOTHING and it's time you stopped accusing a man of murder without the evidence to back it up.

Robert is way out of line

Tell me the name of just one person who LBJ killed

Tell me how LBJ killed him, tell me when LBJ killed him

If you cant do that (which you cant because LBJ has never killed a single person) then stop calling him a serial killer

I have no doubt that LBJ was a shady president and was power hungry, but he is not a serial killer

I want you and John to call FDR, Woodrow Wilson and Harry Truman pyschopathic serial killers

You have no problem calling LBJ one, lets see you do it to the three presidents I listed above