Larry Hancock: Someone Would Have Talked

[Larry Hancock]

John, nothing on that one, a partial list of the companies that Phillips might have contactted would include:

United Fruit, Lone Star Cement, Freeport Sulphur, Chase Manhatten Bank, King Ranch, Standard Oil, Hilton Hotels, The Texas Company and International Harvester.

I say that because all had been doing business in Cuba, all had been subject to solicited for "security payments" by Castro with some of their employees and property held hostage and all are listed in CIA and State Department memos as having vested interests in Cuba. The Cuban companies with operations in New York are a separate list, included on it would be the Cuban Sugar Institute.

I can say for sure that Phillips received introductions to Kleberg at King Ranch and to Freeport Sulphur...beyond that its still a matter of research.

As to Phillips, he did have contact with rich Texans but those were primarily people who had business interests in Cuba before Castro - Kleberg is an example -perhaps even more connections to the old established Cuba sugar money which had moved to New York City after Castro's revolution.  While some of Phillips exile surrogates seem to have tried to collect money from rich Texans there is little sign of Phillips himself doing that sort of thing. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Earl E. T. Smith was Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary to Cuba (1957-59). Active in right-wing anti-Castro Cuban Exile groups in Florida, he was also director of U.S. Sugar Corporation. He was also married to the woman who was JFK's long-term mistress (1944-63). Any possible connection?

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

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[Tim Carroll]

John,  given the Luce's aggressive conservatism (both husband and wife) I find it very consistent that they would have been doing deep background exploration on any potential democratic candidates.  I suspect that they saved the "ammunition" as you speculate - but simply because Kennedy was the primary candidate in 1960 and by 1964 when he was running as a war candidate over Viet Nam they may not have been that opposed to him. 

In regard to the Luce's [sic], LIFE and the war against Castro it is certainly true that the Luce's [sic] [an apostrophe is used to denote possession, not plurality] kept up the "get Castro" drumbeat but the more I study this subject the more indications I find that Luce was probably no more an ongoing source of a call to get rid of Castro than was RFK and at times there may even have been more mutual interest than I might have imagined.  An example is the TILT mission, where I once viewed it to be an almost rogue operation by JMWAVE personnel I have recently been reviewing correspondance between Pawley and Marshall Carter which clearly gave the go ahead for LIFE's involvement on the chance that the mission might provide proof of Russian and Cuban duplicity and demonstrate missiles still in Cuba.  This occurs at the same time that the Kennedy administration was itself moving to a formal position that the agreement with the Russians for non-intervention was null and void since the UN inspections which were part of that agreement had run into a stone wall and were obviously not going to happen. 

--  Larry

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

While Kennedy obviously paid lip-service to many positions, it is naive to cite the U.N. inspections aspect of the no-invasion pledge - especially given the secret deal to remove the Jupiter missiles from Turkey, as well as the most obvious fact that Castro never at any time agreed to U.N. inspections. The evidence of the removal of the missiles was provided at sea, where U.S. overflights were met with removal of the tarps to reveal the missiles heading back to Russia. Castro had made it clear from the beginning that he would not accede to inspections, and no serious person ever thought they would occur on Cuban soil. So what is the source of the above blue-inked assertion "that the Kennedy administration was itself moving to a formal position that the agreement with the Russians for non-intervention was null and void since the UN inspections which were part of that agreement had run into a stone wall and were obviously not going to happen?" It had always been the official position that the agreement was null absent the inspections, but there was no movement toward doing anything about that. Thus, the Life sponsored Operation Tilt, intended to embarrass JFK.

Secondly, the assertion that Kennedy "by 1964 ... was running as a war candidate over Viet Nam?" Huh? I understand the misspeak about 1964, which Kennedy did not live to see, but the ignoring of NSAM 263 in the shaping of such a conclusion is another thing.

Tim Carroll

Edited December 22, 2004 by Tim Carroll

[John Simkin]

I can say for sure that Phillips received introductions to Kleberg at King Ranch and to Freeport Sulphur...beyond that its still a matter of research.

That is an interesting one. Kleberg had links to LBJ and the Suite 8F Group.

[John Simkin]

What about links between Phillips and Morales with the Dallas Petroleum Club? This is what Martin Shackelford had to say about it in his article A Celebration of Freedom: Latest Research and Secrets from the Files

http://www.assassinationweb.com/shack3g.htm

Texan George Brown of Brown and Root was LBJ's chief financial sponsor. He also employed, 1958-1963, George DeMohrenschildt, Oswald's "closest friend" for the CIA in Dallas. Previously, DeMohrenschildt had worked for LBJ backer John Mecom. Oil barons Mecom, Murchison, Sid Richardson and H.L. Hunt were all described as his close friends, as well as then-oilman George Bush. These men met at the Dallas Petroleum Club and other private gathering spots. Among their associates were Harold Byrd (owner of the Texas School Book Depository), Dallas Mayor Cabell, Ted Dealey (publisher of the Dallas Morning News), and Abraham Zapruder, who filmed the assassination.

[Larry Hancock]

Tim, I wish I could cite you the specific sources - my remark was based in

what I heard of Lamar Waldron's presentation in Dallas last month. Lamar

did cite several references ranging from State Department documents to

correspondance by RFK. Several of the State Department items were in

a publication available from one of the book resellers at the conference and

Lamar had brought a copy as well. Unfortunately I was not in a position

to take detailed notes on his presentation. I know Lamar is pretty tied up at the

moment but I would be happy to contact in in a few weeks and get the

specific references.

John,  given the Luce's aggressive conservatism (both husband and wife) I find it very consistent that they would have been doing deep background exploration on any potential democratic candidates.  I suspect that they saved the "ammunition" as you speculate - but simply because Kennedy was the primary candidate in 1960 and by 1964 when he was running as a war candidate over Viet Nam they may not have been that opposed to him. 

In regard to the Luce's [sic], LIFE and the war against Castro it is certainly true that the Luce's [sic] [an apostrophe is used to denote possession, not plurality] kept up the "get Castro" drumbeat but the more I study this subject the more indications I find that Luce was probably no more an ongoing source of a call to get rid of Castro than was RFK and at times there may even have been more mutual interest than I might have imagined.  An example is the TILT mission, where I once viewed it to be an almost rogue operation by JMWAVE personnel I have recently been reviewing correspondance between Pawley and Marshall Carter which clearly gave the go ahead for LIFE's involvement on the chance that the mission might provide proof of Russian and Cuban duplicity and demonstrate missiles still in Cuba.  This occurs at the same time that the Kennedy administration was itself moving to a formal position that the agreement with the Russians for non-intervention was null and void since the UN inspections which were part of that agreement had run into a stone wall and were obviously not going to happen. 

--  Larry

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

While Kennedy obviously paid lip-service to many positions, it is naive to cite the U.N. inspections aspect of the no-invasion pledge - especially given the secret deal to remove the Jupiter missiles from Turkey, as well as the most obvious fact that Castro never at any time agreed to U.N. inspections. The evidence of the removal of the missiles was provided at sea, where U.S. overflights were met with removal of the tarps to reveal the missiles heading back to Russia. Castro had made it clear from the beginning that he would not accede to inspections, and no serious person ever thought they would occur on Cuban soil. So what is the source of the above blue-inked assertion "that the Kennedy administration was itself moving to a formal position that the agreement with the Russians for non-intervention was null and void since the UN inspections which were part of that agreement had run into a stone wall and were obviously not going to happen?" It had always been the official position that the agreement was null absent the inspections, but there was no movement toward doing anything about that. Thus, the Life sponsored Operation Tilt, intended to embarrass JFK.

Secondly, the assertion that Kennedy "by 1964 ... was running as a war candidate over Viet Nam?" Huh? I understand the misspeak about 1964, which Kennedy did not live to see, but the ignoring of NSAM 263 in the shaping of such a conclusion is another thing.

Tim Carroll

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[Tim Carroll]

No cite; no historical integrity.

Tim, I wish I could cite you the specific sources - my remark was based in

what I heard of Lamar Waldron's presentation in Dallas last month. --  Larry

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

So what is the source of the above blue-inked assertion "that the Kennedy administration was itself moving to a formal position that the agreement with the Russians for non-intervention was null and void since the UN inspections which were part of that agreement had run into a stone wall and were obviously not going to happen?" It had always been the official position that the agreement was null absent the inspections, but there was no movement toward doing anything about that. Thus, the Life sponsored Operation Tilt, intended to embarrass JFK.

Secondly, the assertion that Kennedy "by 1964 ... was running as a war candidate over Viet Nam?" Huh? I understand the misspeak about 1964, which Kennedy did not live to see, but the ignoring of NSAM 263 in the shaping of such a conclusion is another thing.

Tim Carroll

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

So what about the assertion of Kennedy being "a war candidate" in "1964?"

Tim Carroll

[John Simkin]

I recently discovered that three senators, Carl T. Curtis, John Williams and Hugh Scott made strenuous attempts to expose the Bobby Baker scandal. The LBJ tapes reveal that he was able to blackmail Williams and Scott into silence (they had both been recorded doing things at the Quorum Club). However, it is clear from the tapes that they were unable to dig up any dirt on Curtis. Therefore, in theory he was free to say what he knew about the case. Searching on the web I discovered that Curtis died on 24th January, 2000. However, I was delighted to discover that he published a book on his attempts to bring an end to corruption in Congress: Forty Years Against the Tide (1986). I ordered the book from Adsrus Books (Des Moines) and it arrived this morning. It contains a lot of interesting information that helps us understand the Grant Stockdale case and the whole issue of Bobby Baker.

Curtis was a member of the Senate Rules Committee that interviewed Don Reynolds in secret on the day that JFK was assassinated. He remained on the Senate Rules Committee and spent two years trying to get the case investigated. Curtis admits that most of the information against Baker came from John Williams. According to Burkett Van Kirk, the lawyer who worked with Williams on this case, this information came from Robert Kennedy, who had leaked it in 1963 in an attempt to get LBJ dropped as vice president.

Curtis also reveals that much of the information on Baker came from a “bug” placed in Fred Black’s Washington hotel room in 1963 on instructions from RFK.

In his book Curtis reveals what went on behind closed doors on the Senate Rules Committee. The committee was made up of B. Everett Jordan (chairman and a man fully under the control of LBJ), Carl Hayden, Claiborne Pell, Joseph Clark, Howard Cannon and Robert Byrd. The three Republicans were Sherman Cooper (also on the Warren Commission), Hugh Scott and Carl Curtis.

The secret testimony of Don Reynolds on the day that JFK was assassinated led to other people being interviewed. This included Carole Tyler, Baker’s secretary. It became clear that she had handled funds involved in the bribing of politicians. She had also travelled several times to Los Angeles on Serve-U Corporation business. Tyler was called before the committee but she refused to answer questions in case she incriminated herself.

Curtis wanted to interview Margaret Broome, who had also been employed by Baker as a secretary. It seems that she could not be relied on to keep quiet. As a result, the six Democrats voted against allowing her to appear. Others they voted against interviewing was:

Eugene Hancock: Worked with Grant Stockdale and George Smathers at Automatic Vending before moving to the Serve-U Corporation. Hancock played an important role in trying to keep Ralph Hill (Capitol Vending) from talking about Bobby Baker’s scams.

Matthew McCloskey. A former treasurer of the Democratic Party, McCloskey was a friend of both Stockdale and JFK. McCloskey also owned a large construction company based in Philadelphia. According to the evidence obtained from Don Reynolds, Baker had arranged for McCloskey to get the contract for the building of the stadium in the District of Columbia. The government project was initially fixed at $6m but for some reason it was agreed to allow McCloskey to charge $20m for the project. Reynolds was able to provide paperwork to show that $25,000 was paid to Baker for this contract.

Rein J. Vander Zee: He had worked as an assistant to Bobby Baker for several years. Zee had information about meetings he had attended with Baker, Don Reynolds, Carole Tyler and Ralph Hill. Zee also had information about the kickbacks that Baker had been paying to members of the Senate. However, the Democratic majority ruled Zee’s testimony as irrelevant.

Paul Aguirre: He had travelled with Baker to New Orleans concerning a business deal. He had also met Carole Tyler and Eli Rometsch at Baker’s parties. The committee voted 5-4 not to interview Aguirre.

Nick Popich: A New Orleans businessman and close associate of Bobby Baker. Apparently the two men spent a lot of time talking on the phone. One venture they were involved in together was the building of a pipeline in Washington. Popich was also associated with crime bosses in New Orleans.

Max Kampelman: The founder of the District of Columbia National Bank. Bobby Baker and Fred Black were both major shareholders in this bank. Kampleman was linked via Black to Benjamin S. Siegelbaum (Miami) and Edward Levinson (Las Vagas). It seems that Carole Tyler made several visits to Las Vagas. This was probably to meet Levinson on behalf of Baker. The committee voted 5-4 not to interview Kampelman.

All these men need investigating. I wonder if any of them are still alive?

Another man Curtis found Baker involved with was Clint Murchison. Although known mainly as an oilman in Texas, Murchison also owned Hampco Haitian-American Meat Provision Company. The firm exported meat from Haiti to Puerto Rico. Baker had arranged with the Department of Agriculture for Murchison to ship a cargo of dodgy meat to Puerto Rico. Baker received a substantial sum of money from Murchison. Curtis speculates that this money might have been a “kickback to Baker for the use of his influence with the Department of Agriculture?” Curtis then adds the comment: “Or might it have amounted to payment by Murchison to Baker for some other mysterious favour extended by Baker to the Murchison interest?”

[Larry Hancock]

John, you've taken this direction much further than I had and are now dealing with names that are new to me. However I can add a couple of observations and suggest one more name of my own.

First it's important to remember that although Johnson's elevation to the Presidency allowed him the political power to eventually neuter the Baker Congressional investigation, he continued to be worried about it for some months. Reynold's was one of his biggest worries because Reynolds remarks directly targeted Johnson with taking pay offs rather than even secondarily through Baker's influence brokering.

Second, it's important to recall that the Congressional investigation was more of a threat to Johnson than Baker who had already resigned his positions in any event. However Baker continued to be exposed both to the Hill law suit over ServeUCorp - which did not settle out of court until October of 1964 and then after that to a Grand Jury which returned 9 indictments in 1966 not leading until an actual trial in 1967.

Baker himself notes that his secretary, Carole Taylor, continued to try and get him to separate from his wife until her death in a private plane crash in May of 1965. Certainly she still retained the leverage of giving testimony up to that point - and she Reynolds had written insurance business for her just as he had for Fred Black according to G.R. Schriber in his book "The Bobby Baker Affair."

The additional name I would bring to your attention is that of Mickey Weiner, a lawyer, lobbiest and close associate of Bobby Baker in 1963. He was also associated with Fred Black - probably much more closely than Black was willing to admit on the stand given that Weiner did manage to pick up some aircraft industry work and work from Otis Elevator, one of Black's clients who was involved in a scandal later in the Johnson administration that seriously worried Johnson again (you will find that in my book). Weiner was suspected as using the same girls for business purposes as Baker and a Justice Department file on Rometsch mentions Weiner and his girls. Rometsch went to parties in Myron "Mickey" Weiners suite along with Bobby Baker. Weiner also kept an apartment in Hollywood . Margarete Broom, Baker's secreatary from 1955 to 1961 stated that Myron had "made Baker's office his second office".

Weiner seems to lead to some other names and yet another set of rumors about his possible knowledge of a conspriracy in JFK's death, he also leads to money going through a Miami bank - but that's another story and it's Christmas eve.

-- good hunting

[John Simkin]

The additional name I would bring to your attention is that of Mickey Weiner,  a lawyer,  lobbiest and close associate of Bobby Baker in 1963.  He was also associated with Fred Black - probably much more closely than Black was willing to admit on the stand given that Weiner did manage to pick up some aircraft  industry work and work from Otis Elevator, one of Black's clients who was involved in a scandal later in the Johnson administration that seriously worried Johnson again (you will find that in my book).  Weiner was suspected as using the same girls for business purposes as Baker and a Justice Department file on Rometsch mentions Weiner and his girls.  Rometsch went to parties in Myron "Mickey" Weiners suite along with Bobby Baker.  Weiner also kept an apartment in Hollywood .  Margarete Broom, Baker's secreatary from 1955 to 1961 stated that Myron had "made Baker's office his second office". 

Weiner seems to lead to some other names and yet another set of rumors about his possible knowledge of a conspriracy in JFK's death,  he also leads to money going through a Miami bank - but that's another story and it's Christmas eve.

-- good hunting

Interesting new name. I believe Mickey Weiner was a senior figure in organized crime. In a recent article by Mark Dankof, it was claimed he held similar ranking to Giancana, Roselli and Marcello. Only Meyer Lansky was ranked higher. (1)

Carl Curtis does in fact mention Weiner but is not aware that he was a figure from the criminal underworld. According to Curtis, Weiner was a lobbyist working for Harry K Barr (president of Barr Shipping Company and chairman of Ocean Freight Forwarders). Barr paid Weiner $50,000 for this work. Some of this money eventually found its way into the bank account of Bobby Baker and Ernest C. Tucker. Curtis believes this money was buying government favours. (2)

Using the indexes of my books on JFK and LBJ, the only author to mention Weiner is Seymour Hersh. He claims that Baker approached JFK with a story that a Mickey Weiner (he described him as a New Jersey lawyer) was working for the wife of a movie star (Edmund Purdom). Alicia Darr had become sexually involved with JFK in 1951. At the time she was working as a prostitute. Darr had information about JFK that posed some sort of threat to his political survival. According to Hoover (document released in 1977) Darr posed a serious threat to JFK in 1960.

According to Baker, Darr wanted $150,000 to keep quiet about this matter. However, Darr was not in need of any money. Her previous husband, Alfred Clark, had died of a heart attack, 13 days after marrying her. He left her the bulk of his $10 million estate. (Was this a Mafia “sting”?).

Hersh is unaware of Baker’s links with Weiner. Nor does he know that Weiner was an important figure in the criminal underworld. Baker is portrayed as someone trying to help JFK with this difficulty.

Baker gave Hersh an interview in 1995. Hersh appears to accept Baker’s story of trying to help out JFK. Baker does reveal something of great interest. He says that he initially met Weiner when he was trying to get “defense contacts”. (3)

I suspect that Weiner was involved in using the “sex parties” held at the Quorum Club and Carole Tyler’s house to obtain information about politicians that they could use to blackmail them into approving government contracts (or at a later stage, to force them to cover up such dealings).

This is another example of two authors who have important information on the JFK case but did not know its true relevance. This seems to be the great advantage of the forum. It allows people working together, to make those links.

By the way, Weiner is also mentioned by Bill Bradlee (A Good Life pages 256-7) and Michael Collins Piper (Final Judgment, pages 58 and 189)

Notes

(1) http://www.markdankof.com/mossadmurdersjfk.htm

(2) Carl Curtis, Forty Years Against the Tide (1988) page 273

(3) Seymour Hersh, The Dark Side of Camelot (1998) 113-116

[Larry Hancock]

Very good start John, a couple of new references for me. Plus it is very interesting to note that Seymour Hersch felt Weiner to be involved in a scandal that could have been very threatening to JFK - that would make two since the Rometch scandal was a huge political exposure to JFK given the German connections.

I suggest you check out Robert Morrow's interviews that are relevant to Weiner - see First Hand Knowledge. He interviews two people who had a good deal to say about Weiner and his associates, even connecting one of them directly to Johnson.

The one thing to be careful of in the name searches is that there were several Weiner's - one was indeed high in organized crime but I don't think that is our "Myron" who started as a lawyer from New Jersey.

For further reference, Weiner made frequent trips to Switzerland and returned through Miami, apparently connected to the Bank of Miami Beach, a sister bank to the Miami National Bank. Reportedly the Miami Beach Bank of Carl Epstein had been mob controlled and performed financial tasks servicing the Havana casinos.

Also, Weiner reportedly stopped over in Vagas on his trips back and forth to LA and the west coast and seems to have been a serious gambler - with possibly some serious debts?

[John Simkin]

Very good start John,  a couple of new references for me.  Plus it is very interesting to note that Seymour Hersch felt Weiner to be involved in a scandal that could have been very threatening to JFK - that would make two since the Rometch scandal was a huge political exposure to JFK given the German connections.

I suggest you check out Robert Morrow's interviews that are relevant to Weiner -  see First Hand Knowledge.  He interviews two people who had a good deal to say about Weiner and his associates,  even connecting one of them directly to Johnson.

The one thing to be careful of in the name searches is that there were several Weiner's - one was indeed high in organized crime but I don't think that is our "Myron" who started as a lawyer from New Jersey. 

I believe that Mickey Weiner and Myron Weiner are indeed the same person. Anyway, that is what Name Base thinks. I have always found them reliable.

http://www.namebase.org/

Anyway, this can be deduced by carefully reading the sources quoted. Carl T. Curtis points out that Myron Weiner was a lobbyist working with Bobby Baker. According to Curtis he was working with firms based in the New York area.

Baker does not mention Weiner in his book, Wheeling and Dealing (that is probably significant). However, Baker was willing to talk to Seymour Hersh about Weiner. Hersh had found out that Weiner was negotiating on behalf of Alicia Darr, who was trying to blackmail JFK. Hersh also discovered that Baker had been involved in this blackmail attempt. When Hersh tackled Baker about this he admitted he had talked to JFK about Darr. However, he was trying to help him deal with the situation. Baker told Hersh that he had discovered about the blackmail threat via Weiner. He had met Weiner when he became involved in trying to get government contracts for his clients. It was Baker who described him as a New Jersey lawyer. This of course fits in with Curtis’s description of Weiner.

My view is that Baker came involved with organized crime bosses via Serve-U Corporation. They discovered that Baker was involved via Johnson with handing out government contracts that were far more profitable than vending deals being obtained by Serve-U Corporation. Mickey Weiner was one of those figures who tried to act as a middle man between Baker and companies willing to challenge the monopoly being created in Texas (Brown & Root, Bell Helicopters, etc.) Weiner was no doubt representing companies based on the East Coast. After all, Bell Helicopters had been forced to move to Texas to get its contracts. This development would have disturbed the Suite 8F Group and probably triggered the decision to drop Baker in 1963.

If you have not done so, I highly recommend you read two books about this: Robert Bryce’s Cronies (2003) and Dan Briody’s The Halliburton Agenda (2003). They do not cover the JFK assassination or Bobby Baker. However, they tell you a great deal how the Texas Group worked from between 1935 and 1968.

[John Simkin]

Do you think that the activities of Cliff Carter and Walter Jenkins are important in understanding the assassination of JFK?

Have you read Evelyn Lincoln's book, Kennedy & Johnson (1968)? Do you consider her a reliable witness? Her account of the weeks leading up to the assassination seem very important.

[Larry Hancock]

John, I certainly belive Cliff Carter's history, activities and reported later day confession are extremely important. Equally important is that Carter was in Texas and working the Dallas trip advance with Puterbaugh - which is very interesting in that Carter did not play a visible role but rather gave advice and counsel to Puterbaugh from a distance...... creating a window into all aspects of the security and motorcade planning. If Carter were complicit he could very will have been key in passing on such information to the tactical people.

I haven't run across anything to really bring any other aide into it but I might suggest you pay a bit of attention to Johnson's military advisor and aide Howard Burris - who did make a special trip down to Texas in conjunction with the JFK visit. According to Burris he carried down briefing documents to prepare Johnson for a confrontation with JFK on international affairs. Given both the trip schedule and Johnson's lack of interest in such things - not to mention JFK's agenda for the Texas trip - well it would be fascinating to have more detail on the reason for that trip. And if you want an oil connection, that name will lead you in some interesting directions.

[John Simkin]

Have you read Evelyn Lincoln's book, Kennedy & Johnson (1968)? Do you consider her a reliable witness? Her account of the weeks leading up to the assassination seem very important.

There are several reasons why Lincoln's book is very important:

(1) Evelyn Lincoln knew who JFK was meeting and how he was responding to those conversations. Maybe JFK told her directly what was going on in the months leading up to the assassination. After all, we all need to talk to someone. Who better than the person always by your side. Not that Lincoln would ever disclose any information that would knowingly hurt JFK. She was too loyal for that. However, she might have revealed information that would have hurt his enemies.

(2) Lincoln also had access to the tapes of JFK telephone conversations. Immediately after the assassination these tapes were seized by RFK (with the help of Secret Service agent Robert L. Bouck). Afterwards RFK showed concern about Lincoln’s knowledge of JFK's activities. He suspected that she had taken papers that belonged to JFK. However, he was unable to prove it. He also seemed scared of Lincoln. Friends say that RFK was often highly critical of Lincoln behind her back but was unwilling to take her on in face to face situations. RFK was right to be suspicious of Lincoln. When she died in 1995, tapes of JFK’s conversations were found in her possession. These were of course handed over to the Kennedy family and it is not known what was on them.

(3) Lincoln's book discusses the relationship Kennedy had with Johnson. Lincoln, like all JFK’s other close associates, was shocked by JFK’s decision to select LBJ as his running mate. She claims that LBJ was never once considered in the months leading up to the decision as a possible vice presidential candidate. The main reason for this was that JFK hated LBJ. This is not surprising considering LBJ’s attacks on JFK during the campaign. He was especially upset by LBJ’s dirty tricks campaign.

(4) In the book Lincoln points out the role that Philip Graham played in these events (we know from Bobby Baker’s book Wheeling and Dealing that Graham had been having meetings with LBJ in an attempt to get him the VP job). Lincoln claims that Stuart Symington had been offered the job of VP (he accepted). The problem came when Graham’s newspaper Washington Post published a story on the day of his nomination that JFK had selected LBJ as VP. This story disturbed JFK. He thought that his announcement that Symington was his choice would humiliate LBJ. He knew LBJ was in a position to cause problems when he tried to introduce legislative measures. Therefore he decided to personally explain to LBJ why he had chosen Symington. The meeting took place at 10.00 the morning after the nomination. JFK returned from the meeting with the news that he had given the job to LBJ.

Lincoln points out that when Graham published his account of events he lied about some important aspects of the case. Graham was obviously involved in this plot to get LBJ as VP. Why? We will probably never know as he committed suicide, aged 48, a few weeks before JFK was assassinated.

(5) Lincoln describe the relationship JFK had with LBJ. Lincoln recalls the first important meeting the two men had after the decision had been made. It took place in JFK’s home. She saw the meeting through the glass. She also had reason to enter the room several times. She was shocked by what went on. Lincoln claims that LBJ did almost all of the talking. He constantly wagged his finger at JFK as if he was telling him what to do. Lincoln reports that JFK was distressed after his meeting. In fact, LBJ nearly always had this impact on JFK. Especially in the early days of the presidency when LBJ played an active role in decision making.

(6) Lincoln was surprised by the way LBJ was able to persuade JFK to appoint his friends to positions of power. Lincoln was particularly shocked by JFK willingness to appoint John Connally as Secretary of the Navy. She knew that JFK did not like or respect Connally. This was an important post as it made decisions about government arms contracts. When Connally left to become Governor of Texas, he was replaced by Fred Korth, another one of LBJ’s buddies. JFK in fact gave LBJ the right of veto to “all job appointments for Texans, in or out of the state”.

JFK’s major objective when becoming president was to deal with the power held by the important Congressional Committees. He was particularly concerned about the seniority rule. LBJ had used this rule to ensure that his men chaired all the important committees. In this way they were able to block all liberal legislation from being passed by Congress. JFK had come under considerable pressure from liberal senators in the North to tackle this problem.

JFK’s first task was to undermine the power of Howard W. Smith, the chairman of the House Rules Committee. In this post he held a stranglehold over all legislation. One possibility was to get rid of his right-hand man, William Colmer of Mississippi. LBJ and Sam Rayburn rejected this idea. Instead they suggested that the size of the committee should be increased from 12 to 15. This would enable them to get a committee that would allow more liberal legislation through. LBJ and Rayburn promised they would ensure that Democrats in the South would vote for this measure.

JFK agreed to this proposal but later discovered that LBJ and Rayburn were in fact lobbying against this plan. The only way JFK could get in through was to persuade Republicans to vote for this proposal. JFK won the vote by 217 to 212. All 64 democrats from the South and border states voted against the legislation. However, JFK won because he had persuaded 22 Republicans in the North to vote for the proposal.

JFK now knew that LBJ was unwilling to help him get his legislation passed. Therefore he isolated LBJ from decision making and made preparations to replace him in 1964.

Stories on JFK’s plans to dump LBJ emerged as early as 1962. At a press conference on 9th May, 1962, JFK was forced to deny this story. However, it was true. JFK had already selected his 1964 running mate. His choice was Terry Sanford. The two men had become very close during JFK election campaign. By 1963 they held similar views on all the major issues. JFK became convinced that Sandford was the one liberal from the South who could help him get progressive legislation through Congress.

(7) Lincoln points out that the Bobby Baker scandal reinforced JFK’s plans to dump LBJ. JFK became aware that LBJ was blackmailing Republicans with threats that their G.O.P. tax returns would be audited. At a press conference on 14th November, 1963, JFK admitted that the Department of Justice had discovered a great deal about Bobby Baker and he promised that appropriate action would be taken against all those involved in this scandal. JFK of course knew that this involved LBJ and the chairman of all the important committees in Congress. What he did not know was that Bobby Baker had cleverly pulled JFK into this scandal (see my posting in the Suite 8F Group later today for information on this) and that the full truth would never emerge.

(8) Lincoln is also very interesting about what she has to say about the trip to Texas. She says that JFK was very reluctant to go on this trip: “Advance reports from our own staff and from many other people gave us cause to worry about the tense climate in Texas – and, most especially, in Dallas. Dallas was removed and then put back on the planned itinerary several times. Our own advance man urged that the motorcade not take the route through the underpass and past the Book Depository, but he was overruled.”

Lincoln comments on a meeting that took place between JFK and Connally only three days before Bobby Baker resigned. The meeting was about Baker and the proposed trip to Texas. After Connally left JFK told Lincoln: “He sure seemed anxious for me to go to Texas”.

[Tim Gratz]

Quoting Larry Hancock:

I haven't run across anything to really bring any other aide into it but I might suggest you pay a bit of attention to Johnson's military advisor and aide Howard Burris - who did make a special trip down to Texas in conjunction with the JFK visit. According to Burris he carried down briefing documents to prepare Johnson for a confrontation with JFK on international affairs.

I had read somewhere that the confrontation with respect to the briefing documents was supposed to occur on the evening of November 22, 1963. If true, the scheduled meeting conclusively exonerates LBJ, does it not? You don't schedule an aftenoon meeting for a man you know will be dead before he eats his lunch!