Jump to content
The Education Forum

Was the assassination planned in 1960? Johnson as Vice President.


John Simkin

Recommended Posts

...

In 1963 Kennedy announced his intention to close a number of corporate tax loopholes, including the depletion allowance. Was this the policy that got Kennedy killed? What we do know is that Johnson cancelled Kennedy’s tax reforms and the oil depletion allowance remained in operation. (18)

John,

Another very interesting and informative post -- thank you.

If the postulate that a 'forced power change' was in the works as early as 1960, I don't think that any *one* Kennedy policy can be said to be "the one."

I'm more inclined to hypothesize that the timing of the events in Dallas may have been forced by LBJ's growing legal problems and the rumors that JFK would change running mates in 1964. These events, if allowed to flow to fruition, might de-rail the plans of 1960 (or before) for quite a while -- perhaps indefinitely. It would not be hard to envision a scenario (based on your original idea) wherein JFK is "allowed" to serve nearly a full term and is bumped off during the campaign trail -- not dissimilar to what happened to RFK.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 68
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

John S wrote:

In 1963 Kennedy announced his intention to close a number of corporate tax loopholes, including the depletion allowance. Was this the policy that got Kennedy killed?

Well this would make JFK the first political leader in history who was killed over a provision in a tax law!

Somehow, regardless of who killed JFK, I think there were more serious issues involved than tax deductions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jim Root and John Simkin

Johnson's Senate Armed Forces Committee work is germane to the enquiry.

What did Johnson have over Richard Russell?

He was single handedly carrying out ALL Constitutional intelligence oversight in 1960.

What did Rayburn and Johnson have over JFK at the convention?

This is often connected to J. Edgar Hoover, but as you know I think

the naval agencies kept close watch on JFK, his women and his Addison's treatments.

shanet

John

Well written piece.

During his first term as a Senator, Johnson was first elected minority whip then minority leader. He gained a position on the Senate Armed Services Committee and chaired several sub-committees of importance including the Senate Special Committee on Space and Astronautics.

Johnson was also involved with the Department of Defense Reorganization Act of 1958 and the National Security Agency Act of 1959. All of these committee assignments as well as his position as Majority Leader of the Senate would provide Johnson with the type of intelligence briefings reserved for those at the top of the Congressional heap.

I tend to believe that the U-2 incident was an intelligence coup that was designed to disrupt the Paris Summit. If so one could also believe that it would be a good possibility that Johnson may have either been aware of or could have guessed at who or what agency was responsible for staging that event.

I have believed for years that the U-2 incident was an important event for Kennedy on his road to the White House. Being privy to the type of information that was available to Johnson in his position of power in the Senate, Johnson may have been easily led to "jump on the bandwagon" of the person (Kennedy) who had been "selected" to be the next President by the power elite. Johnson may also have realized that if Kennedy stumbled along the way this group of the "power elite" would have a reliable hand at hand to turn to.

This would be especially true if some of the same caliber of people that were suggesting him for the Vice-Presidendcy were amoung the group that had the ability to stage the U-2 incident.

Jim Root

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What did Rayburn and Johnson have over JFK at the convention?

Rather than blackmail, I believe Johnson managed to obtain the V.P. nomination through trickery and betrayal. Bobby's oral history makes it clear that Kennedy was informed that Johnson wanted the offer and that he would decline to accept. But Johnson didn't decline. Bobby described the scene when JFK returned to the hotel suite after making what was supposed to be a pro forma offer with prearranged refusal:

And he said, "You just won't believe it."

I said, "What?"

And he said, "He wants it."

And I said, "Oh, my God!"

He said, "Now what do we do?"

Bobby made his famous visit to convince Johnson to withdraw:

So I went, and I said, "you can run the party." And in my judgment - seeing him since then - he is one of the greatest sad-looking people in the world. You know, he can turn it on. I thought he'd burst into tears. I don't know whether it was just an act or anything. But he just shook, and tears came into his eyes, and he said, "I want to be Vice President, and if the President will have me, I'll join with him in making a fight for it." It was that kind of conversation.

Johnson sprung a trap that JFK couldn't escape.

T.C.

Edited by Tim Carroll
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will have to refresh my reading but I thought Poppa Joe was instrumental in convincing his son of the political wisdom of having LBJ on the ticket. Generally JFK did what his father demanded.

Of course, in the event, LBJ barely carried Texas (and probably only through fraudulent ballots).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will have to refresh my reading but I thought Poppa Joe was instrumental in convincing his son of the political wisdom of having LBJ on the ticket.

Poppa Joe supported the nomination after the fact. Kennedy went to the convention planning on Symington.

T.C.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the things that has always puzzled me is that if Lyndon Johnson was behind the plot to kill Kennedy, there are probably some FBI or CIA documents around that provides evidence to back this up. Therefore, why have Republican administrations not ordered the release of these documents?

Under existing guidelines, government documents are supposed to be declassified after 25 years unless there is particular reason to keep them secret. See:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=6187

However, a large number of documents that relate to the JFK assassination remain classified. Could it be that these documents implicate both political parties in the assassination? This is definitely the case if one goes for the “oil industry theory”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John wrote:

One of the things that has always puzzled me is that if Lyndon Johnson was behind the plot to kill Kennedy, there are probably some FBI or CIA documents around that provides evidence to back this up. Therefore, why have Republican administrations not ordered the release of these documents?

Well, John, that would then lead to the conclusion that LBJ did not do it, wouldn't it?

Of course you all know that I do not believe Johnson, or anyone high in the FBI or CIA did it, but I think it can be safely said that if anyone so situated was smart enough to plan the dastardly deed he was also smart enough to ensure there were no incriminating documents sitting in any government files.

I do not think the successful planner of the "crime of the century" merited mention on the TV show "The World's Stupidest Criminals".

Edited by Tim Gratz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

John wrote:

One of the things that has always puzzled me is that if Lyndon Johnson was behind the plot to kill Kennedy, there are probably some FBI or CIA documents around that provides evidence to back this up. Therefore, why have Republican administrations not ordered the release of these documents?

Well, John, that would then lead to the conclusion that LBJ did not do it, wouldn't it?

Of course you all know that I do not believe Johnson, or anyone high in the FBI or CIA did it, but I think it can be safely said that if anyone so situated was smart enough to plan the dastardly deed he was also smart enough to ensure there were no incriminating documents sitting in any government files.

I do not think the successful planner of the "crime of the century" merited mention on the TV show "The World's Stupidest Criminals".

You of course left out this part of my posting:

However, a large number of documents that relate to the JFK assassination remain classified. Could it be that these documents implicate both political parties in the assassination? This is definitely the case if one goes for the “oil industry theory”
Link to comment
Share on other sites

John, if anyone associated with the government planned the assassination, you can be assured he or they as the case may be left behind no "smoking gun" evidence.

RMN was not that smart. He ignored Connally's advise to burn the "Watergate tapes".

Do you really think that among the still classified documents there are documents proving who did it?

There is a five letter "N" word for people who so think.

Edited by Tim Gratz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

John, if anyone associated with the government planned the assassination, you can be assured he or they as the case may be left behind no "smoking gun" evidence.

RMN was not that smart. He ignored Connally's advise to burn the "Watergate tapes".

Do you really think that among the still classified documents there are documents proving who did it?

There is a five letter "N" word for people who so think.

Why then do you think the CIA and FBI are unwilling to release all their documents concerning the assassination? Of course, none of them actually say who did it, but within them there will be a lot of clues.

Have you seen this posting? It seems that Bush has ordered a lot of the documents declassified by Bill Clinton in 1995 to be removed from the open files. I wonder why?

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=6187

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John, yes, I read that with amusement. Some of the documents they are reclassifying seem absurd. It is either pathetic or funny. I understand there are still civil war era records that remain classified.

There are many possible reasons why FBI or CIA documents could remain classified. The "operations Northwoods" documents probably should have remained classified, the scenarios seriously discussed therein are scary.

Here is just one scenario: what if there was in fact a plan to "stage" an assassination attempt on JFK and blame it on Castro, a plan hijacked by the conspirators. What would it do to the agency involved should proof of such a scheme be revealed?

Or what if Oswald was in fact a CIA or military intelligence agent? Then documents might need to remain classified lest they prove that, previously, our government lied to us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or what if Oswald was in fact a CIA or military intelligence agent? Then documents might need to remain classified lest they prove that, previously, our government lied to us.

It seems that Clinton wanted to expose these lies but Bush wants to cover them up. I wonder if it has anything to do with daddy?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[color=#006600]

Of course you all know that I do not believe Johnson, or anyone high in the FBI or CIA did it,

So then Tim why do YOU think so many people have been killed over the years and why all the documents are classified til after we are all but dead?

If our government isn't covering up for its own deeds then who's? And PLEASE don't tell me they would

do so for Castro. That just isn't credible.

Dawn

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John, yes, I read that with amusement. Some of the documents they are reclassifying seem absurd. It is either pathetic or funny. I understand there are still civil war era records that remain classified.

Would those be the ones that explain why Ms. Surratt and her fellow conspirators were hanged, despite the history books teaching that Booth acted alone? Would those be the ones implicating Secretary Stanton in a much wider plot than has heretorfore been acknowledged; the ones suggesting that persons in the US government arranged to have the President killed while his Vice President and entire cabinet were to be set upon or sequestered elsewhere? God knows, they should be kept classified. Were those kind of documents given wider prominence, why, they might actually incline people to wonder aloud if the same thing happened in Dallas, while Kennedy's own cabinet was sequestered elsewhere.

There are many possible reasons why FBI or CIA documents could remain classified. The "operations Northwoods" documents probably should have remained classified, the scenarios seriously discussed therein are scary.

Then, by all means, shut your eyes and click your heels three times, Dorothy, all the while wishing real hard that the scariness goes away. Nothing worse in a democracy than actually knowing what kind of foul and dastardly deeds your own government gets up to. Wouldn't want that "scary" word to spread, would we? Just think what an informed populace might do!

Here is just one scenario: what if there was in fact a plan to "stage" an assassination attempt on JFK and blame it on Castro, a plan hijacked by the conspirators. What would it do to the agency involved should proof of such a scheme be revealed?

Now just how would those "conspirators" be aware that there was such a "staged" assassination attempt planned, in order to "hijack" it? Surely, that would have been a very closely held secret, and very few persons would be aware of it. Are you suggesting that somebody within the US government was loose-lipped in the wrong quarters? Or are you suggesting that somebody within the US government arranged for that "hijacking?" By God, we might actually be making some progess with our recalcitrant "researcher" after all!

Or what if Oswald was in fact a CIA or military intelligence agent? Then documents might need to remain classified lest they prove that, previously, our government lied to us.

Oh, Lord, who is this Key West radical who dares suggest that he and his fellow citizens might actually be lied to by their own government? Does he not realize his government is in the hands of honourable men? Does he dare suggest that somebody within that government would ever stoop to employing, for any purpose, a semi-literate, maladjusted Marxist Marine malcontent? Why, the next thing you know, this Key West firebrand will have the temerity to suggest that somebody within the US government was responsible for killing Kennedy and using this Oswald chap as a scapegoat.

These conspiracy theorists just get nuttier every day, don't they?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...