Joe Bauer Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 3 hours ago, Douglas Caddy said: Joe, you are right on in what you perceive and write about above. In her book, “Faustian Bargains: Lyndon Johnson and Mac Wallace in the Robber Baron Culture of Texas,” Professor Joan Mellen goes to extraordinary shameful lengths to attack and darken the character of U.S. Marshal Clint Peoples, a truly great American whom I feel privileged to have known. Mellen’s book, nevertheless, is definitely worth reading to get an overall picture of what Texas was like when LBJ and his crooked cronies ruled the state unchallenged. Mellen focuses in her book on Malcolm (Mac) Wallace, whom Billie Sol asserted was a stone cold killer that LBJ used when necessary. In her book, Mellen writes, “Mac Wallace is a case in point, his history with Lyndon Johnson is a window into Johnson’s methods. Wallace’s story is so intriguing because, unlike other of Johnson’s acolytes, it is difficult to prove what he did for Lyndon Johnson and what Lyndon Johnson did, in turn, for him. More than any other of Johnson’s protégés and acolytes, Wallace’s connection to him remains cloaked in secrecy. “In the major events of Mac Wallace’s life, Lyndon Johnson remains invisible. Yet one truth is irrefutable. Everything that was positive and promising in Wallace’s life came to him before he made the acquaintance of Lyndon Baines Johnson and joined Johnson’s circle.” Was Malcolm Wallace LBJ's personal "hit man?" I believe he was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Bulman Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 43 minutes ago, Joe Bauer said: Was Malcolm Wallace LBJ's personal "hit man?" I believe he was. So Mac killed JFK for LBJ and it's all been covered up since. I guess references are Roger Stone and Alex Jones? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger DeLaria Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 1 hour ago, Joe Bauer said: Was Malcolm Wallace LBJ's personal "hit man?" I believe he was. I agree with you Joe, I believe he was too. I won't say that he actually shot JFK, but I believe he was involved somehow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Bauer Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 Not saying Wallace shot at or killed JFK. I do believe he killed Henry Marshall. LBJ'S employing, protecting and promoting a convicted murderer for many years clearly implies a "Godfather" type role and relationship between he and Wallace. I'm always amazed at how successful LBJ's defenders have been in keeping the truth of his massive corruption out of the main stream historical record. Same with Hoover. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger DeLaria Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 (edited) 3 hours ago, Joe Bauer said: Not saying Wallace shot at or killed JFK. I do believe he killed Henry Marshall. LBJ'S employing, protecting and promoting a convicted murderer for many years clearly implies a "Godfather" type role and relationship between he and Wallace. I'm always amazed at how successful LBJ's defenders have been in keeping the truth of his massive corruption out of the main stream historical record. Same with Hoover. I know you're not saying Wallace shot JFK, my second sentence was referring to Ron's post. Sorry, I didn't specify that. I most definitely believe he killed Marshall too, as well as many others. Wallace was pretty indebted to LBJ, I think. It's near impossible to find an honest assessment of LBJ's true nature and corruption in the msm, for sure. Caro's work barely touches on it, but not quite. Edited January 25, 2018 by Roger DeLaria Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Bulman Posted January 26, 2018 Share Posted January 26, 2018 On 1/24/2018 at 10:16 AM, Ray Mitcham said: Agreed, Ron. For those who want to watch a BBC documentary on the Liberty. Just finally finished watching this. A sad moment in U S history indicative of the remorselessness of the powers that be that orchestrated it. It could not have happened without CIA complicity. Thanks for posting the link Ray. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandy Larsen Posted January 26, 2018 Share Posted January 26, 2018 (edited) Regarding the Mac Wallace fingerprint: On 1/24/2018 at 8:22 PM, Ron Bulman said: The smudged fingerprint is not and never was a match. The assertion that it was is based on a Copy of the print in the National Archives, deemed unusable by a current certified expert. This statement is factually incorrect. The print examiner, Robert Garrett, never saw Nathan Darby's copy of the print. He saw only a copy of Darby's copy, the one sent to him by Joan Mellen. So he could not have determined if Darby's copy was unusable. Quote The "match' was made by a man whose certification had been expired 14 years at the time. That is a controversial statement regarding Nathan Darby. But even if true, would that mean that his abilities as a print examiner had also expired? Of course not. This is merely an attempt to discredit Darby. Quote Ms. Mellen anonymously contacted Robert Garrett a well experienced law officer, a Certified Latent Print Examiner, Certified Crime Scene Analyst, and Fellow, Fingerprint Society of Idman Forensics, a reputable firm. He could not match Wallaces prints from his 1950's murder arrest or Marine/ONI security clearance prints to the Archive copy not knowing whose they were. The work done by Robert Garrett and conclusions made by Joan Mellen regarding this fingerprint are deeply flawed. (IMO) First, recall that Nathan Darby identified 14 matching points between the TSBD lifted print and Mac Wallace's DPS print. And this was corroborated by another print examiner. Mellen sent to Garrett copies of the prints marked up by Darby, and asked him to evaluate the comparison himself. Garrett first noted that, of the 14 matching points found by Darby, 7 were "indistinct" on the TSBD lifted print. The obvious reason for those 7 matching points being "indistinct" is that the copy sent by Mellen was a poor one. Duh. I mean, surely those points were distinct to Darby... on his copy. But don't get me wrong. I'm not accusing Mellen of intentionally sending a poor copy of the print to Garrett. My point is that Mellen shouldn't have published the flawed evaluation of Darby's work. It wasn't Darby's fault that Garrett got a poor copy. Despite this obvious problem, Garrett proceeded his study with the remaining 7 points. At first it appeared that he had accepted them as matches. But then he proceeded to discredit them by showing that their relative locations on the TSBD lifted print were not highly aligned with their locations on the Wallace print. There is a fundamental flaw in this analysis, and that is that the location of fingerprint "minutiae" points change over time. Not only that, but they merge, split, and change in other ways! How do I know that? Simple. I compared Mac Wallace's military fingerprints taken in 1939 with his DPS prints taken in 1951. I focused on the minutiae studied by Darby and Garrett and discovered many significant changes. Had Garrett's applied his minutiae location analysis to Mac Wallace's 1939 Marine Corps fingerprint versus his 1951 DPS fingerprint, he would have likewise discovered that they do not match! In other words, Garrett's analysis would have indicated that the 1951 Mac Wallace was different from the 1939 Mac Wallace. So, Garrett's first study is pretty much 100% flawed. It should never have been published. Subsequent to this first study, Mellen sent to Garrett a high quality "gray scale" copy of the TSBD lifted print. Reports indicate that Darby never had a gray scale copy. The problem with this second study is that Mellen and/or Garrett chose to use Mac Wallace's old 1939 military prints rather than his newer 1951 DPS prints for the comparison. I've already mentioned how much the minutiae changed between 1939 and 1951, a 12 year lapse. For this study there would be an even longer, 24 year, lapse! Why would Mellen and/or Garrett choose to use the older fingerprint for the comparison? Is Garrett unaware that fingerprints change over time? Or, at the very least, that Mac Wallace's did? Even layman Sandy Larsen knows that the latter is true. (And strongly suspects that the former is true as well.) Anyway, remember those 7 matching points of Darby's that Garrett himself saw? Nearly all of those matches disappeared when the older Wallace fingerprint was introduced! Same person's print... just a longer time lapse. And so we can plainly see the flaw introduced due to Mellen's and/or Garrett's poor decision. I'm surprised that Garrett didn't notice that problem. Having said all that, I will also say that Nathan Darby has some explaining to do himself (if he were alive). There are a three ending ridges on the TSBD lifted print that are not on Mac Wallace's latest print. Darby was certainly aware of two of these differences, as they are very easy to spot. I suspect that what he would say is that damage to the skin and changes over time could account for them. I have confirmed Darby's analysis myself using the high quality "gray scale" version of the TSBD lifted print which Joan Mellen obtained. I believe Darby is right, that the prints do match. I believe Darby used good judgement in accounting for the few differences he saw. I am unimpressed by Garrett's analyses and his lack in recognizing their deficiencies. However, that does not mean that I believe Mac Wallace was ever in the TSBD building. I believe it is much more likely that the print was planted into evidence and was meant to be used as blackmail against LBJ should he cause trouble for the conspirators. I hope one day to give a presentation showing my findings for others to evaluate. I haven't done so because of the huge effort it will require. Edited January 26, 2018 by Sandy Larsen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Douglas Caddy Posted January 26, 2018 Share Posted January 26, 2018 Sandy: I hope that you are able to find the time to make a presentation of your findings of Mac Wallace's fingerprints for others to evaluate. This would be a great contribution to history. Joan Mellen's book is illuminating about LBJ on many ways despite its flaws that include attacking two great Americans, Nathan Darby and Marshal Clint Peoples, and denigrating others. There is a small but powerful clique within the JFK assassination community that maintains only its members possess the "truth" and all others who make credible contributions are to be dismissed. The clique believes in a regulated marketplace of ideas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Bauer Posted January 26, 2018 Share Posted January 26, 2018 Just viewed the U.S.S. Liberty video. Dear God ! Were the Liberty victims ( including families of the deceased ) ever offered or given any reparations? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Mitcham Posted January 26, 2018 Share Posted January 26, 2018 13 hours ago, Ron Bulman said: Just finally finished watching this. A sad moment in U S history indicative of the remorselessness of the powers that be that orchestrated it. It could not have happened without CIA complicity. Thanks for posting the link Ray. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cory Santos Posted January 26, 2018 Share Posted January 26, 2018 1 hour ago, Joe Bauer said: Just viewed the U.S.S. Liberty video. Dear God ! Were the Liberty victims ( including families of the deceased ) ever offered or given any reparations? Ha, yes in the early 1980s I believe and it was nothing. It was a disgrace! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cory Santos Posted January 26, 2018 Share Posted January 26, 2018 I fail to see how the fingerprint issue still persists. As a lawyer, I hire an expert, he reviews the evidence, then says yes or no. I too have concerns about Mellon's book as I did about her Garrison book. I will check with some of our experts and see if a fingerprint person is available. This should easily be settled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Bauer Posted January 26, 2018 Share Posted January 26, 2018 1 minute ago, Cory Santos said: Ha, yes in the early 1980s I believe and it was nothing. It was a disgrace! How much? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cory Santos Posted January 26, 2018 Share Posted January 26, 2018 I have to look it up, I read about this years ago. This site might have some info. http://www.gtr5.com/ you can even listen to recordings http://www.ussliberty.org/voices.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandy Larsen Posted January 27, 2018 Share Posted January 27, 2018 (edited) 5 hours ago, Cory Santos said: I fail to see how the fingerprint issue still persists. As a lawyer, I hire an expert, he reviews the evidence, then says yes or no. Cory, Nathan Darby was an expert. He said yes. Surely you know that experts can disagree. Edited January 27, 2018 by Sandy Larsen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now