Photographic Evidence

[Tim Gratz]

[Hi Tim:

Please bear in mind that original plans called for Senator Yarborough to share the limo with the equally "liberal" President, while the "conservative" Vice President and his friend the Texas Governor were to ride together in the followup car.  There was quite a stink raised about these seating arrangements before Kennedy himself, apparently, settled the issue by insisting on the final seating configuration we see on film.

At this juncture, what could be said?  Assuming Connally were a conspirator, would he volunteer to Kennedy that he refused to ride in the President's limo?  What possible reason could he give for such a refusal?  [FWIW... I believe Connally was out of the loop - he had argued AGAINST the Texas visit from the outset - though others will disagree.] 

In the event that Connally knew nothing in advance about the assassination, but Johnson did, would Johnson have argued more strenuously in order to save a friend?  Doubtful.  To accept this, one must ignore all we have learned about the Vice President's pathalogical disregard for anything that stood between him and his aims.  If the accidental/collateral-damage murder of Connally assured Johnson's ascension to the Oval Office, I suspect the Vice President would not have thought twice.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Oh, I think he would have, not necessarily for altruistic concern for his friend's well-being as much as for his selfish political interest. Connally was a strong man and smooth operator. Politicians like that don't grow on trees. And he was a strong ally of LBJ. LBJ would not have wanted to risk the loss of such a political asset. (If LBJ was smart enough to plan the assassination and orchestrate the cover-up, he was smart enough to know how foolish it would be to risk Connally. Ergo, LBJ did not do it.) Another argument: wouldn't LBJ risk being exposed if Connally was wounded and found out LBJ was behind it? I suspect their friendship would have ended rather quickly.

Understand I am not coming from the perspective of a Johnson follower. I knew he was a crook in 1964. On the other hand, I think our society is a far better place for LBJ's pushing enactment of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

Edited January 6, 2005 by Tim Gratz

[Pat Speer]

I suspect Connally may have been involved. Look at the pictures of him in the motorcade; I don't think there's one of him where he's smiling. Furthermore, while Posner et al make the argument that Connally turned to his right shortly after the car turned onto Elm, and that his rapid movement indicates he'd heard a shot, Connally's actual testimony indicates he was 150 feet or so down Elm before he heard the first shot. Still, he was looking back and forth in a rapid fashion as soon as the car turned onto Elm. As a result I believe he knew what was coming. His words when he got hit,"My God, they're going to klll us all!", are still another indication.

It's important to note that while Connally stood by a timeline of the wounds that conflicted with the Warren Report, he ALWAYS insisted he supported the Warren Report's conclusions, even though his timeline made them impossible. It's equally important to note that he ALWAYS deferred to his wife's recollections as the reason for his timeline. In other words, he was keeping the peace with Nelly, even if it made LBJ's commission look a little wrong-headed.

When one compares Connally's memoirs with the biography Lone Star, one can see how Connally misrepresents his corruption trial, presenting his accuser Jake Johansen, LBJ's long-time crony, who'd known Connally for over 20 years, as "some lobbyist" or some such thing. One can only conclude from this that Connally was covering up and was guilty as sin. When one takes into account the Watergate Tapes of Connally and Nixon conspiring to get more money out of the Milk producers, as well as the Teamsters, one can only conclude that Connally was a dirty politician. Sorry, Big John.

In light of this, it's intriguing to me that Connally acknowledged that while he was Secretary of the Treasury he looked through all the Secret Service files on the JFK Assassination and saw nothing unusual. One wonders if anything was removed. In his autobiography, he mentions that one of the reasons he blames Oswald is that Oswald was shown to be practicing with his rifle before the assassination. This is utter nonsense--according to both the Warren Commission and the HSCA there were no credible reports of Oswald shooting his rifle for months before the assassination. They both insisted that Oswald smuggled his gun into work on the morning of the assassination after not having fired it for months. As a result it's clear that Connally was grossly over-stating the case against the man accused of shooting him. One would have to ask why.

Furthermore, in her book about the assassination, From Love Field, Nellie Connally reproduces her original notes written in 1963 along with a typed version purported to reproduce it word for word. It's strange, though, how neither she, or her co-writer (the same man who co-wrote her husband's memoirs) noticed that her description of Kennedy's wounds was changed for the typed-up version from "I turned and looked toward the President just in time to see him clutch his throat" to "I turned and looked toward the President just in time to see his hands fly up to his throat." The difference in his "clutching" and his "hands flying up"of course is the difference between a conscious action and a neuro-muscular response. Clearly, the lone-nutters have gotten to her (or her co-writer) and convinced her (or her co-writer) to go along with the ridiculous "Thorburn" theory of Lattimer and Posner. One has to wonder why. What would be so awful if we were allowed to judge for ourselves what she meant by "clutch?"

[Tim Gratz]

I suspect Connally may have been involved.  Look at the pictures of him in the motorcade; I don't think there's one of him where he's smiling.  Furthermore, while Posner et al make the argument that Connally turned to his right shortly after the car turned onto Elm, and that his rapid movement indicates he'd heard a shot, Connally's actual testimony indicates he was 150 feet or so down Elm before he heard the first shot.  Still,  he was looking back and forth in a rapid fashion as soon as the car turned onto Elm.  As a result I believe he knew what was coming.  His words when he got hit,"My God, they're going to klll us all!", are still another indication. 

It's important to note that while Connally stood by a timeline of the wounds that conflicted with the Warren Report, he ALWAYS insisted he supported the Warren Report's conclusions, even though his timeline made them impossible.  It's equally important to note that he ALWAYS deferred to his wife's recollections as the reason for his timeline.  In other words, he was keeping the peace with Nelly, even if it made LBJ's commission look a little wrong-headed.

When one compares Connally's memoirs with the biography Lone Star, one can see how Connally misrepresents his corruption trial, presenting his accuser Jake Johansen, LBJ's long-time crony, who'd known Connally for over 20 years, as "some lobbyist" or some such thing.  One can only conclude from this that Connally was covering up and was guilty as sin.  When one takes into account the Watergate Tapes of Connally and Nixon conspiring to get more money out of the Milk producers, as well as the Teamsters, one can only conclude that Connally was a dirty politician.  Sorry, Big John. 

In light of this, it's intriguing to me that Connally acknowledged that while he was Secretary of the Treasury he looked through all the Secret Service files on the JFK Assassination and saw nothing unusual. One wonders if anything was removed.  In his autobiography, he mentions that one of the reasons he blames Oswald is that Oswald  was shown to be practicing with his rifle before the assassination. This is utter nonsense--according to both the Warren Commission and the HSCA there were no credible reports of Oswald shooting his rifle for months before the assassination.  They both insisted that Oswald smuggled his gun into work on the morning of the assassination after not having fired it for months.  As a result it's clear that Connally was grossly over-stating the case against the man accused of shooting him.  One would have to ask why.

Furthermore, in her book about the assassination, From Love Field, Nellie Connally reproduces her original notes written in 1963 along with a typed version purported to reproduce it word for word.  It's strange, though, how neither she, or her co-writer (the same man who co-wrote her husband's memoirs) noticed that her description of Kennedy's wounds was changed for the typed-up version from "I turned and looked toward the President just in time to see him clutch his throat" to "I turned and looked toward the President just in time to see his hands fly up to his throat."  The difference in his "clutching" and his "hands flying up"of course is the difference between a conscious action and a neuro-muscular response.  Clearly, the lone-nutters have gotten to her (or her co-writer) and convinced her (or her co-writer) to go along with the ridiculous "Thorburn" theory of Lattimer and Posner.  One has to wonder why.  What would be so awful if we were allowed to judge for ourselves what she meant by "clutch?"

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

If you are right Connolly must rank as one of the most corrupt, but bravest, politicians in American history. "Gee, I hope our assassin is a good shot!". And he must not even thought about a bullet passing through JFK and hitting him. And by god, he was even willing to put his wife in the line of fire! He must have hated JFK with a passion to put his life and the life of his wife at stake!

[Pat Speer]

If you are right Connolly must rank as one of the most corrupt, but bravest, politicians in American history. "Gee, I hope our assassin is a good shot!". And he must not even thought about a bullet passing through JFK and hitting him. And by god, he was even willing to put his wife in the line of fire! He must have hated JFK with a passion to put his life and the life of his wife at stake!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I don't believe that Nellie was at risk of getting hit. As for Connally himself, yes, he was a brave man, but also one with much to lose if Kennedy lived and everything to gain if he died. Connally was connected to Johnson and would have went down with the ship if the Bobby Baker investigation continued. Something had to be done. LBJ's attempts to get Yarbrough to ride with the President were to no avail. Connally evidently never even asked JFK about it. He was determined to roll the dice. It is historically significant that Nixon, who certainly seems to have known more about the assassination than he ever admitted, calling the Warren Commission "the greatest fraud ever perpetuated" at one point on his tapes, positioned Connally as his heir apparent. One would have to ask "why?" Did Nixon owe him for something beyond Connally's efforts for the Democrats for Nixon? While this is all conjecture, this is all there is for us to go by.

It may also be significant that only a few years before the assassination Connally's eldest daughter blew herself away with a shotgun. It's sad but true that people whose children die in such a manner often lose the fear of their own death. I, of course, have no proof of Connally's involvement, but simply feel that this is an element of the assassination too often ignored.

Edited January 6, 2005 by Pat Speer

[Tim Gratz]

I don't believe that Nellie was at risk of getting hit. As for Connally himself, yes, he was a brave man, but also one with much to lose if Kennedy lived and everything to gain if he died. Connally was connected to Johnson and would have went down with the ship if the Bobby Baker investigation continued. Something had to be done. LBJ's attempts to get Yarbrough to ride with the President were to no avail. Connally evidently never even asked JFK about it. He was determined to roll the dice. It is historically significant that Nixon, who certainly seems to have known more about the assassination than he ever admitted, calling the Warren Commission "the greatest fraud ever perpetuated" at one point on his tapes, positioned Connally as his heir apparent. One would have to ask "why?" Did Nixon owe him for something beyond Connally's efforts for the Democrats for Nixon? While this is all conjecture, this is all there is for us to go by.

It may also be significant that only a few years before the assassination Connally's eldest daughter blew herself away with a shotgun. It's sad but true that people whose children die in such a manner often lose the fear of their own death. I, of course, have no proof of Connally's involvement, but simply feel that this is an element of the assassination too often ignored.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

With all due respect, Mr. Speer (I thought your seminar was one of the best by the way):

One: You don't believe Mrs. Connolly was at risk? On what basis can you possibly say that?

Two: Connolly's political career would not have been ruined if his buddy LBJ had gone to jail over Bobby Baker. It's a non sequitur.

Three: Even assuming for the point of argument that Connolly's political career would be ruined if LBJ was indicted or convicted, why in heaven's name would Connolly risk his life (let alone his wife's) to save his political career? It makes no sense.

Four: as I pointed out in another thread, Connolly could have marched into the Oval Office and walked away with JFK's letter of resignation. Bloodshed was unnecessary to gain LBJ the presidency.

To reiterate, I think we can safely dismiss as possible conspirators anyone sitting in the limousine that fateful day.

[John Geraghty]

since yarborough was supposed to ride along with kennedy and connolly with lbj, are we to assume that the assassins were told to take out kennedy and yarborough as a secondary target, then the morning of the assassination lbj was informed that connally would be riding with kennedy, and the assassins were not informed?

john

[Pat Speer]

since yarborough was supposed to ride along with kennedy and connolly with lbj, are we to assume that the assassins were told to take out kennedy and yarborough as a secondary target, then the morning of the assassination lbj was informed that connally would be riding with kennedy, and the assassins were not informed?

john

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

No, I don't believe the assassins would ever have been told that Yarbrough was gonna be in the car, as it was never likely to happen. It is a tradition that the Governor is the official host of the President and is the one who rides with him. According to Connally, the so-called feud was between LBJ and Yarbrough. Evidently, as Senator, Yarbrough had expected to be the go-to guy for political appointments etc. in his home state. Instead, LBJ, the former master of the senate, had continued on in that role, and had effectively minimized Yarbrough's power in the state that had elected him, making him one of the least poweful senators in the country. Adding to the tension was that Yarbrough's liberal constituents, JFK's biggest supporters, were largely denied access to him on the trip so that JFK could kiss up to Connally's biggest supporters, the Texas money men. According to Connally, this was JFK's idea, and was the real purpose for the trip, paying respects to Albert Thomas merely being an excuse. Maybe someone else knows more about this and can add on their impressions. Anyhow, there seems to have been some tension between LBJ and Yarbrough, to such an extent that Yarbrough wanted to ride in any car except LBJ's. One school of thought--I'm undecided--is that LBJ was trying to create a situation where JFK would just say, screw it, Yarbrough rides with me. This would have got Connally out of harm's way. Instead, the opposite occurred, JFK told Yarbrough to behave like a grown man and ride with his sworn enemy, LBJ.

Edited January 6, 2005 by Pat Speer

[Pat Speer]

With all due respect, Mr. Speer (I thought your seminar was one of the best by the way):

One: You don't believe Mrs. Connolly was at risk? On what basis can you possibly say that?

Two: Connolly's political career would not have been ruined if his buddy LBJ had gone to jail over Bobby Baker. It's a non sequitur.

Three: Even assuming for the point of argument that Connolly's political career would be ruined if LBJ was indicted or convicted, why in heaven's name would Connolly risk his life (let alone his wife's) to save his political career? It makes no sense.

Four: as I pointed out in another thread, Connolly could have marched into the Oval Office and walked away with JFK's letter of resignation. Bloodshed was unnecessary to gain LBJ the presidency.

To reiterate, I think we can safely dismiss as possible conspirators anyone sitting in the limousine that fateful day.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well, thanks for the compliment on the seminar. And you're correct in that I over-stated the evidence by saying Mrs. Connally was not at risk. She was at risk, but only slightly. I believe the trajectories involved in the assassination made her the least likely person in the car to get hit, whereby she would only have been hit should a professional shooter fire the worst shot of his life. Keep in mind that Jackie wasn't hit and she was only inches away from JFK. I honestly don't believe LBJ or Connally knew exactly what was gonna happen, but suspect that both had an idea that something was gonna happen. After all, Connally was looking back and forth--if he'd known the shooter was in the TSBD he might have looked in that direction.

Anyhow, I'm not 100% convinced of Connally's involvement. It's just that I think it's incorrect to assume that desperate ambitious men wouldn't risk their own lives for their cause. They do it all day long. And you're way off on the Baker investigation's proximity to Connally. LBJ and his Texas cronies had been running the Navy for the benefit of their backers for 10 years. Connally had been Secretary of the Navy specifically to do Johnson's bidding; Korth was LBJ's pick to replace him, and Korth DID go down.

I also think it's incorrect to think that Connally or LBJ or anyone could have walked into JFK's office and got him to resign. The Kennedys, particularly Bobby, were scrappers. It shouldn't be doubted that Bobby could have arranged for all the dirt he had on LBJ and Connally to come out before they'd even made it out the front door of the White House.

Politics is hardball. The Pros play HARD. Assassinations sometimes happen when desperate teams refuse to accept defeat. I think it's significant that Johnson, who approved political coups on his own, talked about the "divine retribution" involved in Kennedy's death (because of the attempts on Castro and the death of Diem), as if looking for a justification. It's also significant that Nixon, whose running mate Henry Cabot Lodge was the ambassador to Vietnam who helped arrange for Diem's death, arranged for Howard Hunt to "improve" the State department cables to make it look like JFK was directly responsible. Why was that important? And don't tell me because he was scared Teddy was gonna challenge him in 72. The only reason that makes sense, based upon what we know of Nixon's psyche, is that he felt some sort of resentment over JFK's saintly image, and wanted to tarnish it and bring it down to Nixon's own level. By trying to alter the historical record to blame JFK for something his own cronies had pushed, the assassination of Diem, and by digging into the Bay of Pigs files to make sure his own hands were clean, even though he was the one who'd approved the assassination attempts on Castro, Nixon was trying to wash some blood off his hands. Kennedy's blood. Whether he believed the Castro attempts had backfired and some pro-Castro element including Oswald had killed Kennedy, or whether he believed the anti-Castro crowd had killed Kennedy, is open to question. I would lean to the latter as Nixon ridiculed the Warren Commission, which pointed its fingers at Oswald, as "the greatest fraud ever perpetuated." That Nixon's people turned to Hunt and his anti-Castro crowd to do their top secret dirty work indicates that he trusted these men to keep secrets. This raises the question of how he would know they could keep a secret. One might assume that he knew because he was aware of a secret that they'd already kept.

[John Simkin]

No, I don't believe the assassins would ever have been told that Yarbrough was gonna be in the car, as it was never likely to happen.  It is a tradition that the Governor is the official host of the President and is the one who rides with him.  According to Connally, the so-called feud was between LBJ and Yarbrough.  Evidently, as Senator, Yarbrough had expected to be the go-to guy for political appointments etc. in his home state.  Instead, LBJ, the former master of the senate, had continued on in that role, and had effectively minimized Yarbrough's power in the state that had elected him, making him one of the least poweful senators in the country.  Adding to the tension was that Yarbrough's liberal constituents, JFK's biggest supporters, were largely denied access to him on the trip so that JFK could kiss up to Connally's biggest supporters, the Texas money men.  According to Connally, this was JFK's idea, and was the real purpose for the trip, paying respects to Albert Thomas merely being an excuse.  Maybe someone else knows more about this and can add on their impressions.  Anyhow, there seems to have been some tension between LBJ and Yarbrough, to such an extent that Yarbrough wanted to ride in any car except LBJ's.  One school of thought--I'm undecided--is that LBJ was trying to create a situation where JFK would just say, screw it, Yarbrough rides with me.  This would have got Connally out of harm's way. Instead, the opposite occurred, JFK told Yarbrough to behave like a grown man and ride with his sworn enemy, LBJ.

There was indeed an argument about seating arrangements in the car. It is true that this is mentioned by Kenneth O’Donnell in his book, Johnny, We Hardly Knew Ye (1972 - page 21). However, it was not about the motorcade. When JFK arrived in Texas it was arranged for him to attend a dinner at Governor Connolly’s mansion. Ralph Yarborough discovered he had not been placed at the head table with Kennedy. He was further infuriated by the decision not to invite Yarborough’s wife to the dinner. Yarborough blamed Johnson for this snub. When the party arrived in San Antonio, Yarborough refused to ride in the same car with Johnson. Kennedy was furious about this dispute (after all, he was visiting Texas in order to heal the divisions between Yarborough and Connally supporters). Kennedy applied pressure on Connally and Yarborough and his wife got to sit on the head table. By the time of the motorcade in Dallas, Yarborough and Johnson were willing to sit together in the car.

However, I have heard a story that Johnson tried to persuade Connally not to ride in the president’s car in the motorcade. I have yet to find evidence to support this story. If it is true, then it does suggest that Johnson might have known about the planned attack.

Then, when it happened at Dealey Plaza, Connally was so surprised he said, "My God, they're going to kill us all!"

Like Ron I believe this comment is very significant. It suggests to me that he was aware of the planned assassination attempt but believed it would take place when he was not sitting next to JFK.

[Robert Charles-Dunne]

No, I don't believe the assassins would ever have been told that Yarbrough was gonna be in the car, as it was never likely to happen.  It is a tradition that the Governor is the official host of the President and is the one who rides with him.  According to Connally, the so-called feud was between LBJ and Yarbrough.  Evidently, as Senator, Yarbrough had expected to be the go-to guy for political appointments etc. in his home state.  Instead, LBJ, the former master of the senate, had continued on in that role, and had effectively minimized Yarbrough's power in the state that had elected him, making him one of the least poweful senators in the country.  Adding to the tension was that Yarbrough's liberal constituents, JFK's biggest supporters, were largely denied access to him on the trip so that JFK could kiss up to Connally's biggest supporters, the Texas money men.  According to Connally, this was JFK's idea, and was the real purpose for the trip, paying respects to Albert Thomas merely being an excuse.  Maybe someone else knows more about this and can add on their impressions.  Anyhow, there seems to have been some tension between LBJ and Yarbrough, to such an extent that Yarbrough wanted to ride in any car except LBJ's.  One school of thought--I'm undecided--is that LBJ was trying to create a situation where JFK would just say, screw it, Yarbrough rides with me.  This would have got Connally out of harm's way. Instead, the opposite occurred, JFK told Yarbrough to behave like a grown man and ride with his sworn enemy, LBJ.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

There was indeed an argument about seating arrangements in the car. It is true that this is mentioned by Kenneth O’Donnell in his book, Johnny, We Hardly Knew Ye (1972 - page 21). However, it was not about the motorcade. When JFK arrived in Texas it was arranged for him to attend a dinner at Governor Connolly’s mansion. Ralph Yarborough discovered he had not been placed at the head table with Kennedy. He was further infuriated by the decision not to invite Yarborough’s wife to the dinner. Yarborough blamed Johnson for this snub. When the party arrived in San Antonio, Yarborough refused to ride in the same car with Johnson. Kennedy was furious about this dispute (after all, he was visiting Texas in order to heal the divisions between Yarborough and Connally supporters). Kennedy applied pressure on Connally and Yarborough and his wife got to sit on the head table. By the time of the motorcade in Dallas, Yarborough and Johnson were willing to sit together in the car.

However, I have heard a story that Johnson tried to persuade Connally not to ride in the president’s car in the motorcade. I have yet to find evidence to support this story. If it is true, then it does suggest that Johnson might have known about the planned attack.

Then, when it happened at Dealey Plaza, Connally was so surprised he said, "My God, they're going to kill us all!"

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yarborough was made furious by a series of exclusions, and snubs of his wife. Because Connally was the nominal host for the President's trip, and made the arrangements which so offended Yarborough, the Senator refused to ride with Connally. Which is when Kennedy entered the fray to settle the matter.

A few notes cribbed from Jim Bishop's "The Day Kennedy Was Shot:" [bantam paperback 1969]

Page 38:

"Kennedy found it impossible to bring [Connally] and [Yarborough] together for a smile and a handshake, so he settled for asking that Yarborough ride with V-P Johnson. In this instance, Johnson was tractable, but Yarborough declined. The President, increasingly incensed at what might become a Connally trap, stopped requesting that the Senator ride with V-P and demanded it."

[some snippage]

"This is why the President, through Kenny O'Donnell, ordered Yarborough to ride with Johnson "or walk." In effect, he was working the easy side of the street. The proper move would have been to thrash the matter out alone with Connally and Yarborough, but Kennedy was too insecure a party leader to risk a state ultimatum."

This, from 9 AM on the day, page 60-61:

"The President chatted again with Ralph Yarborough; no one heard the words, but the face of Mr. Kennedy was stern and frowning, and the index finger pointed and probed whatever point was being made. The Senator didn't appear to resist the President; his features appeared to be in shock, as though he could not credit the words or ideas he was hearing"

[snippage]

"Well, I'll tell you one thing: [Yarborough will] ride with Johnson today, or he'll walk!" [Kennedy to Connally]

[Frank Agbat]

I've always found JBC's choice of words to be intriguing...

"My God, they're going to kill us all!"

I understand that in the heat of the moment, the choice of words may not be as well thought-out as under normal conditions.

However, I might expect something like:

"Holy &(*&@%*@ !!!"

or

"Get down!!"

or even

"We're all going to die!!"

But I have always been puzzled by the phrase: "...they're going to kill us all!"

Perhaps it is nothing, or in the heat of the moment his actual impression (or knowledge?) slipped past the censor...

[Ron Ecker]

Connally's spontaneous words certainly suggest that he knew what was going to happen that day. And if Connally knew, it stands to reason that LBJ knew. As the soon to be president, with a cover-up in the offing, LBJ certainly had more of a need to know than Connally did.

Ron

[Pat Speer]

Connally's spontaneous words certainly suggest that he knew what was going to happen that day. And if Connally knew, it stands to reason that LBJ knew. As the soon to be president, with a cover-up in the offing, LBJ certainly had more of a need to know than Connally did.

Ron

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I was extremely curious about Connally's words some time back and read his Warren testimony, Life Magazine interview, HSCA testimony, and autobiography searching for answers. While on the surface it may seem he knew about a conspiracy, his official explanation is equally damaging to the Lone-Nut theory. Connally, a veteran, a hunter, and a former Secretary of the Navy testified that the shots were extremely close together, so much that he believed they were either fired by two different shooters or by one man with an automatic rifle. The "they" referred to the two shooters he assumed were firing. A man with Connally's experience with guns would certainly know that the 3 seconds between shots favored by the likes of Posner would be enough to re-fire a bolt action rifle. Refuting the argument that Connally merely lost his sense of time and remembered the shots coming faster than they occurred is that he estimated the total time of the shooting as lasting over 10 seconds--which is typical of eyewitness testimony where a fleeting moment is most usually stretched out to twice its actual length.

As to the feud with Yarbrough, it's intriguing that some accounts report the feud as being between primarily Connally and Yarbrough, while others report it as being between primarily LBJ and Yarbrough. The Bishop book was written with LBJ's blessing and presented his version against the Manchester book, which he considered the Kennedys' version. If the Bishop book does indeed make it sound like Yarbrough was supposed to ride with Connally, but that he refused, then this book, most likely under the guidance of LBJ, was telling the public a lie. The Governor rides with the President, period. That LBJ may have conspired with Bishop to make it look like Connally was feuding with Yarbrough, makes me suspect LBJ was trying to cover his own tracks. This is yet another reason to suspect LBJ's complicity.

Edited January 9, 2005 by Pat Speer

[Tim Gratz]

Connally's spontaneous words certainly suggest that he knew what was going to happen that day. And if Connally knew, it stands to reason that LBJ knew. As the soon to be president, with a cover-up in the offing, LBJ certainly had more of a need to know than Connally did.

Ron

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I was extremely curious about Connally's words some time back and read his Warren testimony, Life Magazine interview, HSCA testimony, and autobiography searching for answers. While on the surface it may seem he knew about a conspiracy, his official explanation is equally damaging to the Lone-Nut theory. Connally, a veteran, a hunter, and a former Secretary of the Navy testified that the shots were extremely close together, so much that he believed they were either fired by two different shooters or by one man with an automatic rifle. The "they" referred to the two shooters he assumed were firing. A man with Connally's experience with guns would certainly know that the 3 seconds between shots favored by the likes of Posner would be enough to re-fire a bolt action rifle. Refuting the argument that Connally merely lost his sense of time and remembered the shots coming faster than they occurred is that he estimated the total time of the shooting as lasting over 10 seconds--which is typical of eyewitness testimony where a fleeting moment is most usually stretced up to twice its actual length.

As to the feud with Yarbrough, it's intriguing that some accounts report the feud as being between Connally and Yarbrough, while others report it as being between LBJ and Yarbrough. The Bishop book was written with LBJ's blessing and presented his version against the Manchester book, which he considered the Kennedys' version. That LBJ was anxious to make it look like Connally was feuding with Yarbrough, while Connally swore it was LBJ with whom Yarbrough refused to ride, makes me suspect LBJ was trying to cover his own tracks. This really makes me suspect LBJ was trying to create a situation whereby Yarbrough would have been the one riding with Kennedy.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It makes logical sense that Connally assumed there was more than one shooter because of the proximity of the shots. Had Connally said, "My God, he's going to kill us all", one could make a conspiratorial argument that he knew in advance of the lone nut scenario. To read anything into Connally's excited utterance is really stretching thins, IMO.

If, however, Connally said this after hearing TWO shots, does it not follow he was hit by the THIRD shot?

What makes no sense at all is that Connally would risk his life and that of his wife if he had advance knowledge of the assassination.

In fact, because LBJ and Connally were so close, I have argued that Connally's presence in the motorcade also argues against LBJ's participation in the assassination. If the assassination had to occur in Texas, there were times to do it that would not risk Connally's life.

[Pat Speer]

It makes logical sense that Connally assumed there was more than one shooter because of the proximity of the shots. Had Connally said, "My God, he's going to kill us all", one could make a conspiratorial argument that he knew in advance of the lone nut scenario. To read anything into Connally's excited utterance is really stretching thins, IMO.

If, however, Connally said this after hearing TWO shots, does it not follow he was hit by the THIRD shot?

What makes no sense at all is that Connally would risk his life and that of his wife if he had advance knowledge of the assassination.

In fact, because LBJ and Connally were so close, I have argued that Connally's presence in the motorcade also argues against LBJ's participation in the assassination. If the assassination had to occur in Texas, there were times to do it that would not risk Connally's life.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Once again, I respectfully disagree with your theory that no one in the car could have been a conspirator because they'd be risking their own life. Conspiracy to assassinate a President is treason and punishable by death. Everyone involved had put their life on the line. Sitting in the car was no more risky than being a shooter, and there were at least two of them. As I said, I doubt Connally knew the exact plan. Look at the Zapruder film and tell me if you don't think Connally looks worried from the moment they make the turn. His being in the car, in effect, cleared him of involvement in the eyes of the public. This might have been part of the plan from the get-go.

As to his words, he yelled them AFTER the second shot but before the third. He heard the first, was hit by but did not hear the second, yelled, and was pulled down onto Nellie as the third shot or shots struck Kennedy in the head.