Jump to content
The Education Forum
Sign in to follow this  
John Simkin

LBJ as Vice President

Recommended Posts

Most of Kennedy’s closest advisers were shocked when they discovered that he had chosen Lyndon Johnson as his running mate for the 1960 presidential election. It was a strange decision. Ken O’Donnell, probably his most influential adviser, had already promised important figures in the trade union and civil rights movement that LBJ would not be vice president. Powerful figures in the party such as Walter Reuther also objected. In fact, no one seemed to favour the idea.

It seems that pressure for LBJ came from Philip Graham (owner of the Washington Post). Later, Robert Kennedy claimed that the job was offered to LBJ because they had heard from one of his closest advisers, Bobby Baker, that he would turn it down. Therefore, they thought that by offering him the job they could get his goodwill without having him on the ticket. In other words, JFK was tricked into giving him the job.

JFK had his own story of what happened. He said he wanted LBJ out of his job as leader of the Democrats in the Senate. JFK was convinced that LBJ would use his power to block his legislation. Therefore, he was paving the way for his friend, Mike Mansfield, to become leader in the Senate. LBJ was made vice president because it would remove his power (this was the very reason why his friends said he would turn the job down).

Pierre Salinger, Kennedy’s press secretary, gives another version of events in his book, ‘With Kennedy’. Salinger was strongly opposed to the decision. So was O’Donnell, who described it as a “double-cross” and the “worst decision that JFK ever made”.

Salinger recalls a conversation with JFK a few days after the convention. He asked him again why he had made this strange decision. JFK gave him the arguments that I have included above. When Salinger questioned the logic of these arguments, JFK admitted: “The whole story will never be known. And it’s just as well that it won’t be.”

In his book Salinger claims that he did not know what JFK was on about. However, there seems to be only one explanation. JFK was blackmailed into having LBJ as his running mate. That raises the question. Why was LBJ so keen to be Vice President?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems history repeats itself.

Did you know that Ronald Reagan had vowed that George Bush would never be his running mate?

Then shortly before his nomination he announced Bush. Jim Marrs can tell you all baout it.

Wim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why was LBJ so keen to be Vice President?

I think for the same reason that George H.W. Bush wanted to be Reagan's Vice President. Two months after taking office, Reagan was shot. By a lone nut, of course.

I recall that LBJ made some kind of remark, before JFK's death, about how many presidents never lived to complete their terms. Does anyone recall that exactly?

While many researchers don't seem to think that LBJ was in on the conspiracy, but only involved in the cover-up, there was nothing about him to make one think he would not lead a conspiracy himself. By all accounts, LBJ was about as low as you can get.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LBJ was a real piece of work who would do anything, and his nomination was strongly supported by Speaker of the House Sam Rayburn.

Tim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

John

I think you will find that Lyndon had a private conversation with John Kennedy

before the 1960 convention that apparently included some material developed by J.Edgar Hoover concerning Mr. Kennedy's personal experiences.

Against the wishes and unknown to his brother and closest advisors

Kennedy then offered the vice-presidency to Lyndon.

I have read this in a couple narratives (Hersh, Summers?)

Maybe some one else has the citations exactly,

but I am pretty sure that is what happened.

Hoover and Johnson were allied and Kennedy hated both of them.

The nomination and submission to blackmail would eventually spell his doom.

Shanet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While we are on the subject, I know John was impressed with

Barr McClellan's book. What do the other members think of

the book. It seems to hinge, perhaps toomuch, on the

finding that it was Ed Clark's fingerprint on the box in the

sniper's nest (6th floor TBSD)...

what do you all think of Barr McClellan?

He is certainly an intelligent and well connected person,

and wouldn't make such a pariah of himself (alienating his family, etc.)

if he weren't pretty sure he had the real story....

Shanet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
While we are on the subject, I know John was impressed with

Barr McClellan's book.  What do the other members think of

the book.  It seems to hinge, perhaps toomuch, on the

finding that it was Ed Clark's fingerprint on the box in the

sniper's nest (6th floor TBSD)...

what do you all think of Barr McClellan?

He is certainly an intelligent and well connected person,

and wouldn't make such a pariah of himself (alienating his family, etc.)

if he weren't pretty sure he had the real story....

Shanet

I thought it was supposed to be Mac Wallace's print.

Tim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mac Wallace?

Re Barr. He is totally convinced of his work and has indeed made great personal sacrifices to get his story told. He is also trustworthy, IMO. He has worked on this book a long time to find a publisher brave enough to take on this stroy. Look what happened to that portion of Nigel Turner's work: The History channel outright cancelled it. They have not ever done that before, they were the one brave network to feature Nigel's work all these years, til "The Guilty Men" portion, featuring Barr's work.

What Barr needed to do was to write a book that told just this story, LBJ, Mac Wallace, the finger print evidence and LEAVE OUT his "faction" stuff. Last year he really took a hit from the "critical community" due to these chapters. Some people even branded him a disinformationist based on who his son works for. (W's press secty). That is not fair. I have had many discussions with Barr about these problems in his book. They happen to be his opinion (eg that LHO was also a shooter, along with Mac Wallace) because he just does not know these areas of the case very well.

But he really knows his stuff on the LBJ background. And to finally get a true insider view is pretty remarkable. I know Barr's print expert well and you will not find a more credible person than Nathan Darby. I just hope that someone can pick up this work, but it's really hit a dead end. No one can get Mac Wallace's known print from Austin's Dept. of Public Safety any longer. Nathan told me yesterday that Barr can no longer even get it. This is, I am told, in part because of the way researcher Glen Sample -(Men on the Sixthe Floor) -obtained it. At first Sample did not concur with Darby's analysis of the print match, but he does now. This is an area that someone needs to do further work on. It would be really nice to see it happen in the lifetime of Nathan Darby, who is getting up in years.

Dawn (Meredith)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mac Wallace?

Shanet,

John's got a good page on Wallace.

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKwallaceM.htm

James

Yes that is a good page.

I haven't read the book, but I read the website and saw the TV version.

So apparently Ed Clark co-ordinated Mac Wallace, LBJ's hit man.

Barr McClellan says it is all on file in a legal office safe, with LBJ's papers.

Shanet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
While we are on the subject, I know John was impressed with

Barr McClellan's book.  What do the other members think of

the book.  It seems to hinge, perhaps toomuch, on the

finding that it was Ed Clark's fingerprint on the box in the

sniper's nest (6th floor TBSD)...

what do you all think of Barr McClellan?

He is certainly an intelligent and well connected person,

and wouldn't make such a pariah of himself (alienating his family, etc.)

if he weren't pretty sure he had the real story....

Shanet

I thought it was supposed to be Mac Wallace's print.

Tim

On 29th May, 1998, Walt Brown gave a press conference where he claimed that a previously unidentified fingerprint on a box found on the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository belonged to Malcolm “Mac” Wallace:

Brown presented data showing a 14-point match between Wallace's fingerprint card, obtained from the Texas Department of Public Safety, and the previously unidentified print, a copy of which was kept in the National Archives. The match was made by A. Nathan Darby, an expert with certification by the International Association of Identifiers.

The Texas researchers forwarded their findings to the Dallas Police Department, who passed it on to the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Copies have also gone to Assassination Records Review Board, the federal panel created to oversee the identification and release of records relating to the JFK assassination.

Walt Brown is a member of the Forum. I will email him to get the latest on the fingerprint evidence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
While we are on the subject, I know John was impressed with

Barr McClellan's book.  What do the other members think of

the book.  It seems to hinge, perhaps toomuch, on the

finding that it was Ed Clark's fingerprint on the box in the

sniper's nest (6th floor TBSD)...

what do you all think of Barr McClellan?

He is certainly an intelligent and well connected person,

and wouldn't make such a pariah of himself (alienating his family, etc.)

if he weren't pretty sure he had the real story....

Shanet

It was not Ed Clark's fingerprint. It was, reportedly, the fingerprint of Mac Wallace. Quite sure this is correct.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 29th May, 1998, Walt Brown gave a press conference where he claimed that a previously unidentified fingerprint on a box found on the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository belonged to Malcolm “Mac” Wallace:

Brown presented data showing a 14-point match between Wallace's fingerprint card, obtained from the Texas Department of Public Safety, and the previously unidentified print, a copy of which was kept in the National Archives. The match was made by A. Nathan Darby, an expert with certification by the International Association of Identifiers.

The Texas researchers forwarded their findings to the Dallas Police Department, who passed it on to the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Copies have also gone to Assassination Records Review Board, the federal panel created to oversee the identification and release of records relating to the JFK assassination.

Walt Brown is a member of the Forum. I will email him to get the latest on the fingerprint evidence.

Interested parties who did not want to get the typical "Oswald did it alone and don't bother" answer took the print issue to experts at Interpol, and, I'm told, hearsay-wise, that a match was confirmed. I can't prove that, but that is what I was told. Nathan worked or worked/is working on that one print for several years, and he just turned 90.

Edited by Walt Brown

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×