John Simkin Posted July 25, 2006 Share Posted July 25, 2006 Connally had been bedmates with Johnson since as early as 1941, maybe 1940:"Connally distinguished himself at the University of Texas, where he received a law degree in 1941. He had already passed the bar examination before graduation and begun his career in politics on the staff of Congressman Lyndon Baines Johnson, the beginning of a life-long association." The important point is that Connally worked as LBJ's campaign manager in the 1948 Senate election. LBJ's main opponent in the Democratic primary (Texas was virtually a one party state and the most important elections were those that decided who would be the Democratic Party candidate) was Coke Stevenson. Johnson was criticized by Stevenson for supporting the Taft-Hartley Act. The American Federation of Labor was also angry with Johnson for supporting this legislation and at its June convention the AFL broke a 54 year tradition of neutrality and endorsed Stevenson. Johnson asked Tommy Corcoran to work behind the scenes at convincing union leaders that he was more pro-labor than Stevenson. This he did and on 11th August, 1948, Corcoran told Harold Ickes that he had "a terrible time straightening out labor" in the Johnson campaign but he believed he had sorted the problem out. On 2nd September, unofficial results had Stevenson winning by 362 votes. However, by the time the results became official, Johnson was declared the winner by 17 votes. Stevenson immediately claimed that he was a victim of election fraud. On 24th September, Judge T. Whitfield Davidson, invalidated the results of the election and set a trial date. A meeting was held that was attended by Tommy Corcoran, Francis Biddle, Abe Fortas, Joe Rauh, Jim Rowe and Ben Cohen. It was decided to take the case directly to the Supreme Court. A motion was drafted and sent to Justice Hugo Black. On 28th September, Justice Black issued an order that put Johnson's name back on the ballot. Later, it was claimed by Rauh that Black made the decision following a meeting with Corcoran. On 2nd November, 1948, Johnson easily defeated Jack Porter, his Republican Party candidate. Coke Stevenson now appealed to the subcommittee on elections and privileges of the Senate Rules and Administration Committee. Corcoran enjoyed a good relationship with Senator Styles Bridges of New Hampshire. He was able to work behind the scenes to make sure that the ruling did not go against Johnson. Corcoran later told Johnson that he would have to repay Bridges for what he had done for him regarding the election. The Johnson-Stevenson case was also investigated by J. Edgar Hoover and the FBI. Johnson was eventually cleared by Hoover of corruption and was allowed to take his seat in the Senate. As a result of this fixed election, LBJ was under the control of both Hoover and Connally. This might explain Connally's reaction to the shots being fired he Dealey Plaza. He clearly thought he was a target as well. If LBJ was involved in the assassination of JFK I am sure he would have said, get Connally at the same time. It might also explain why Nixon took Connally into his administration. His inside information on Democratic Party corruption would have been useful. It was probably the same reason why Nixon also employed William Sullivan. He was the man who originally carried out the FBI investigation into the assassination of JFK. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawn Meredith Posted July 25, 2006 Share Posted July 25, 2006 A trip by JFK to Texas was first discussed by JFK, Vice President Lyndon Johnson, and Governor John Connally on June 5, 1963, at the Cortez Hotel in El Paso, Texas. I might have known Johnson would be involved in it somewhere! Informative post, thanks. God and CIA work in mysterious ways. Ashton I posted this 6/5 discussion re Cortez Hotel also. May have been on other thread tho. (SInce this question is asked here and in Watergate. Ash you asked me to post that over here too, so I guess I will. Dawn ps I don't think God works with the CIA Or they for Him, except the good ones, and there have been good ones. Gary Underhill comes to mind. "Suicide" (65) after telling others- (immediately after to assassination)- that JFK had been killed by CIA" and it was connected with Cuba. Was "suicided" (wrong hand too!) 5/8/64. Bullet to head, by right-handed former CIA Underhill, but bullet hit behind left ear. Don't they all kill themself this way? It's so damn in your face!! Ashton: Post you requested to be moved to this thread: Dawn Meredith Jul 23 2006, 11:50 AM Post #14 Ashton, to answer your question on JFK in DP and the exact route change, as far as I know that is one of the black holes. Prouty always made a big point in my talks with him that things like that were the most important and the magic show of the exact shooters et al. minor compaired to it. , The one question of whether Kennedy had been set up to go to Dallas prior to 14 October 1963 or not is absolutely crucial. Central. Pivotal. That's the tea party with Ruth Hyde Paine and Marina and Linnie Mae Frazier after which Paine does the set-up for Oswald being hired at the TSBD. If plans for Kennedy to go to Dallas were made prior to 14 October 1963, that's the end of all "lone assassin" theories. Their dust can be put into an urn and scattered at sea, and the JFK Assassination forum will be entirely deloused of that whole faction of disinformation scum. Plans were definately made prior to 14 October. I will try to locate the exact cite later today. It originated with Connolly, and LBJ who stated that Jack needed to drum up some support in TX. Adlai Stevenson had been to Dallas prior to October and saw that it was far from friendly and strongly urged JFK to abandon this trip to Dallas. Indeed that morning -11/22/63- Wanted for Treason signs were being passed out. Nellie Connally's last word's prior to the first shot-"Well you can't say Dallas doesn't love you" have always seemed very creepy to me. Like she knew. I know that sounds overly paranoid, that coincidences do occur, but the timing was very weird. In Blood Money and Power, How LBJ Killed JFk, Barr McClellan writes: "ON June 5th , 1963 Kennedy Johnson and Connolly met in El Passa Texas and agreed the Texas trip whould be in the fall...to raise money for the 1964 election (p 183) ...the details for the Texas trip were announced November 3" (p 189) including trips to Fort Worth, Dallas and Austin. We'd also then know that the Paine track will connect with the instigators for the Dallas trip somewhere, somehow, and you're on the hot trail. It might even run into Southwestern as yet another CIA front. Many have long considered the Paines "help" to both Lee (job at TSBD) and Marina overtly suspicious. Ruth and Michael Paine's CIA ties made for a most strange and intriuging " friendship" to the young couple. Attorney Craig Zirbel, writing in The Texas Connection states: "On April 23, 1963 Johnson announced that the Presidnet would visit in the near future. Less than 45 days after this announcement the basic outline for a November trip to Texas was agreed upon in a private meeting between Kennedy, Johnson and Connolly at the Cortez Hotal in Texas" (p 185) (There is no cite for this quote however, a problem overall for much of this book, published in 1991) Dawn ps Sorry bout typo: Should say EL PassO. When I am in a rush before court I often don't have the time to edit, but since BS is making such an issue of this I am MAKING the time to better edit. But only when I do have the time. (Otherwise BS is just that. poof, MIA. -------------------- Biography: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=2036 Full Edit Quick Edit « Next Oldest · Watergate · Next Newest » Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Ecker Posted July 25, 2006 Share Posted July 25, 2006 Attorney Craig Zirbel, writing in The Texas Connection states: "On April 23, 1963 Johnson announced that the Presidnet would visit in the near future. Less than 45 days after this announcement the basic outline for a November trip to Texas was agreed upon in a private meeting between Kennedy, Johnson and Connolly at the Cortez Hotal in Texas" (p 185) (There is no cite for this quote however, a problem overall for much of this book, published in 1991) Another interesting passage from Zirbel's book: "However, after this (October 4) meeting, and as the Bobby Baker scandal surfaced in Washington amidst rumors tying Johnson to the scandal, Johnson left for his Texas ranch to get ready to give President Kennedy a 'Texas Welcome.' Aside from one or two short trips out of Texas, Johnson did not return to Washington and had nothing to do but prepare for Kennedy's trip the next month" (p. 188). Zirbel, citing no source, is saying that Johnson left Washington and spent almost two months in Texas preparing for JFK's trip. Can this be true? If so, there certainly must have been a lot of arrangements to work on, with LBJ apparently in charge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashton Gray Posted July 25, 2006 Author Share Posted July 25, 2006 Ruth and Michael Paine's CIA ties made for a most strange and intriuging " friendship" to the young couple. Tell me more about that. Ashton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Simkin Posted July 25, 2006 Share Posted July 25, 2006 Zirbel, citing no source, is saying that Johnson left Washington and spent almost two months in Texas preparing for JFK's trip. Can this be true? If so, there certainly must have been a lot of arrangements to work on, with LBJ apparently in charge. I think Larry Hancock could tell us about this issue. He has done a lot of research into the activities of LBJ before and after the assassination. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawn Meredith Posted July 25, 2006 Share Posted July 25, 2006 Zirbel, citing no source, is saying that Johnson left Washington and spent almost two months in Texas preparing for JFK's trip. Can this be true? If so, there certainly must have been a lot of arrangements to work on, with LBJ apparently in charge. I think Larry Hancock could tell us about this issue. He has done a lot of research into the activities of LBJ before and after the assassination. I don't know if Larry was on this scene when an Austin group called ASK- (loosely affiliated with the famous South by Southwest music conference held annually in March, here in Austin)- began doing conferences. Well known researcher Geroge Michael Evica spoke at one of these events and addressed this issue: Evica's research traced the trip planning back to April 1963. A November 21 date was set for Houston by a committee of the Knights of San Jacinto, an elite subgroup of the Sons of the Republic of Texas that included JACK VALENTI!!! This group of Connally cronies proposed the Al Thomas dinner, an event which JFK would not miss , Congressman Thomas being a pal of JFK's. The cover story for the dinner was to honor Thomas' role in establishing the NASA facility in TX. (later named, of course, the Johnson Space Center). The November date for the TX. trip was later expanded to include San Antonio, Fort Worth, - (very near Dallas), and Austin, but the basic date never changed after April 12, 1963. (San Jacinto Day). After the event was set, John Connally was considered to be the force behind getting JFK under the snipers' guns. And the rest is...terrible history. Dawn Ashton: Re the Paines. Will get back to you on that. It's a very "big" question that I do not have time for today, but will get back to you when time permits. (And someone else is more than welcome to chime in here re LHO and the Paines. ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Ecker Posted July 25, 2006 Share Posted July 25, 2006 Evica's research traced the trip planning back to April 1963. A November 21 date was set for Houston by a committee of the Knights of San Jacinto, an elite subgroup of the Sons of the Republic of Texas that included JACK VALENTI!!! This group of Connally cronies proposed the Al Thomas dinner, an event which JFK would not miss , Congressman Thomas being a pal of JFK's. The cover story for the dinner was to honor Thomas' role in establishing the NASA facility in TX. (later named, of course, the Johnson Space Center). The November date for the TX. trip was later expanded to include San Antonio, Fort Worth, - (very near Dallas), and Austin, but the basic date never changed after April 12, 1963. (San Jacinto Day). I would like to see Evica's sources on this, as I have to question the November 21 date being set by the Houston committee. According to Cliff Carter and Connally, the first date considered at the June meeting with JFK was August 27, LBJ's birthday. August 27 was rejected according to Carter because it was too close to Labor Day, and according to Connally because August is the worst month of the year in Texas. Carter said that the next date that JFK's schedule would allow was November 21, which was the date finally chosen. The White House announced that date on September 26. If Carter is to be believed, this was based on JFK's schedule, and not on a date set by a Houston committee in April. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hogan Posted July 25, 2006 Share Posted July 25, 2006 In The Third Alternative - Survivor's Guilt, Vince Palamara writes: J) From Jerry Bruno's Library file- Connally's itinerary called for the Statler Hilton Hotel, with no mention at all of either of the two eventual choices, and Bruno's own 11/7/63 itinerary states unequivocally that the Women's Building was the destination for 11/22/63. K) Bruno told the HSCA that he believed the Women's building was initially selected as the final choice. [HSCA 11517-518], suggesting strongly, that like the motorcade route, the site was also changed after the fact. L) Although most people like to believe that Connally was a strong advocate for the Trade Mart, in addition to the aforementioned itinerary, he is also on record as blaming the White House Staff (O'Donnell) for the decision.[WR]! The conclusion from all this confusion? I believe that it was the Secret Service's premature approval of the Trade Mart by members of the Dallas Office and Floyd Boring, over the reservations of O'Donnell, Behn, and Bruno, that made this speech site an inevitability, and thus narrowed down what routes could be used, the speed of the limousine, and the security of the building. In a way, JFK has been made to take the blame for this as well, supposedly he was succumbing to Connally's iron will to go to the Trade Mart. I believe the aformentioned evidence gives one great pause to consider a "third alternative" - the Secret Service factors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawn Meredith Posted July 25, 2006 Share Posted July 25, 2006 [quote name='Mark Valenti' date='Jul 25 2006, 11:09 PM' post='70284'] According to JFK White House aide, Jerry Bruno, one of those responsible for planning the Texas trip: Initially there were two locations under consideration for JFK's speech in Dallas - the Trade Mart and the Women's Building, described as a "sprawling auditorium which could seat 4000 people." The Trade Mart was a potential security risk due to the high ceiling and numerous catwalks. If JFK had been scheduled to speak at the Women's Building, his motorcade would have traveled two blocks farther away from the TSBD and at a much higher rate of speed. The Johnson/Connally team wanted to use the Trade Mart because parts of it could be closed off and the "fat cats" of the area could attend a more exclusive gathering. As we know, Connally insisted on the Trade Mart site. Bruno reported it seemed that the Johnson/Connally team deliberately held back on selling tickets to the Austin fundraiser in order to get their way on the Trade Mart location. Eventually they prevailed. The motorcade route was set. Still, Bruno contined to be concerned. On Nov. 22, he tried to reach Jack Puterbaugh, the Dallas advance man who helped to set up the motorcade route and the luncheon site. Before Bruno could reach Puterbaugh, JFK was shot in Dealey Plaza. Mark: My friend J Harrison, just prior to his death (5/25/05) told me something re Puterbaugh. Just called out of the blue and said "post this" (J NEVER went on forums) , so he dictated and I typed. No clue as to when, but obviously prior to last May 25. All I remember was it seemed positive, but also vague. I believe tho that he said Pererbaugh did set up the route; but it also could have been he was to do so...which is more in keeping with what Bruno has said. It does keep coming back to LBJ and Connally and higher ups who controlled Dallas. A view that LBJ was involved, but "under" CIA (Mil Intel) fits with my research. Always has. They did it in Dallas because they could. Ron: Re Evica's research: I have posted as much I know, just from notes. I did not attend the ASK conference, so obtained the information second hand by someone who was in attendance. Dawn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashton Gray Posted July 26, 2006 Author Share Posted July 26, 2006 (edited) In a way, JFK has been made to take the blame for this as well, supposedly he was succumbing to Connally's iron will to go to the Trade Mart. I believe the aformentioned evidence gives one great pause to consider a "third alternative" - the Secret Service factors. Interesting as always, Michael. I believe the Secret Service factors may indeed loom large. I haven't had an opportunity yet to fully respond to John Simkin's earlier post where he was talking about Nixon's possible reasons for making Connally Treasury Secretary, and although this isn't directly responsive to what you posted, nor a complete response to John, I still have to at least mention here that Connally was installed five days before the taping system was, and Secret Service was in Treasury at the time, so of course under Connally. Butterfield had the SS under him within his White House duties, but that didn't alter the fact that they were Connally's boys, so Butterfield had to have tight and secure coordination lines with Treasury. I don't think Connally's appointment had diddly to do with any reasons Nixon might have been deluded into believing he had. I don't have time to go into all the ramifications, but I've already pointed out that Connally started as Treasury Secretary five days before the tape system was installed, and left five days before the Watergate "arrests." This doesn't require Mensa qualifications to figure out who Connally was serving. It warn't Nixon. But back to the Trade Mart, and here's a TANGENT ALERT: The entire Trade Mart concept was pioneered and perfected starting in 1948, in N'awleens, by that gay blade and CIA (but not really; but, okay, a little bit; but le's jist not talk about it, okay?!) operative Clay Shaw. And throughout 1963 he was fixing himself up a "new, improved" Trade Mart in N'awleens. Ashton Gray P.S. By some means that is a complete mystery to me, I've become unable to post more than one reply in any thread until somebody else posts something. If I try to respond to more than one message, or even do an "ADDREPLY" after I've posted a message (and before anyone else has), it just gets added to the last message I posted, as though I had edited that message (when I haven't) no matter what I try to do. I've appealed to the Forum gods in the appropriate forum but so far to no avail. I'm mentioning this here because there are several other posts and people I'd like to be responding to in this thread, but simply can't until this gets fixed. It's very annoying. (At least for me. Some here likely consider it a gift from God.) Edited July 26, 2006 by Ashton Gray Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted July 26, 2006 Share Posted July 26, 2006 In a way, JFK has been made to take the blame for this as well, supposedly he was succumbing to Connally's iron will to go to the Trade Mart. I believe the aformentioned evidence gives one great pause to consider a "third alternative" - the Secret Service factors. Interesting as always, Michael. I believe the Secret Service factors may indeed loom large. I haven't had an opportunity yet to fully respond to John Simkin's earlier post where he was talking about Nixon's possible reasons for making Connally Treasury Secretary, and although this isn't directly responsive to what you posted, nor a complete response to John, I still have to at least mention here that Connally was installed five days before the taping system was, and Secret Service was in Treasury at the time, so of course under Connally. Butterfield had the SS under him within his White House duties, but that didn't alter the fact that they were Connally's boys, so Butterfield had to have tight and secure coordination lines with Treasury. I don't think Connally's appointment had diddly to do with any reasons Nixon might have been deluded into believing he had. I don't have time to go into all the ramifications, but I've already pointed out that Connally started as Treasury Secretary five days before the tape system was installed, and left five days before the Watergate "arrests." This doesn't require Mensa qualifications to figure out who Connally was serving. It warn't Nixon. But back to the Trade Mart, and here's a TANGENT ALERT: The entire Trade Mart concept was pioneered and perfected starting in 1948, in N'awleens, by that gay blade and CIA (but not really; but, okay, a little bit; but le's jist not talk about it, okay?!) operative Clay Shaw. And throughout 1963 he was fixing himself up a "new, improved" Trade Mart in N'awleens. Ashton Gray P.S. By some means that is a complete mystery to me, I've become unable to post more than one reply in any thread until somebody else posts something. If I try to respond to more than one message, or even do an "ADDREPLY" after I've posted a message (and before anyone else has), it just gets added to the last message I posted, as though I had edited that message (when I haven't) no matter what I try to do. I've appealed to the Forum gods in the appropriate forum but so far to no avail. I'm mentioning this here because there are several other posts and people I'd like to be responding to in this thread, but simply can't until this gets fixed. It's very annoying. (At least for me. Some here likely consider it a gift from God.) I too have been annoyed by that forum feature recently. You have to wait 15 minutes between postings on the same thread. However, I think you can overcome it by going to another thread and posting something. This seems to clear the default, and then you can return to the first thread. Annoying. Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Dolva Posted July 26, 2006 Share Posted July 26, 2006 (edited) FWIW In the leadup to the nomination in 1960, Kennedy engaged his opponents in some clever tactics which represent a typical way Kennedy dealt with these things. Targeting states where the Catholic question was an issue, and without ever seeking to talk about it, but going there and against advice seeking delegates, the outcome being that he became more acceptable to many. Dallas, in a sense was a 1964 election 'litmus test' or perhaps a rubicon to Kennedy that he counted on winning. Dallas was the big city that didn't vote Kennedy in 1960. A victory in Dallas, which necessitated a successful 1963 visit, would go a long way towards a second term. His opponents by now were familiar with Kennedy's thinking, and I think something like (previous post): "a question:: In Theodore Soerensens 'Kennedy' a luncheon in the White House is mentioned (p372) where the publisher of Dallas News demanded 'a man on horseback to lead this nation'. This is presented as a sign of hate for Kennedy. In white supremacy lore 'the man on horseback (in shining armour)' is an anticipated, looked for 'Leader'. In the prewar (US entry) this was suggested to be Charles Lindbergh. Given the rhetoric of the times, could this have been Walker in the sixties? Kennedy was not one to shirk confronting his enemies. He was by this time already sparring with the John Birch Society. Given that throwing down the gauntlet to Kennedy could assure an acceptance of a Dallas trip, my question is to see if anyone knows the date of this luncheon? Given the context of the telling in 'Kennedy' it would appear to be in '63." talks about the flipside of this topic. What better way to ensure that Kennedy would not change his mind or back out of going there? Dallas was being presented to him as a 'must do'. Some of the postings in this topic seem to de-emphasise Kennedy's authority in trip descicions. One thing about Kennedy, more than many Presidents before him, was he left no doubt about who was in charge. Where he failed was usually where the information he was basing his descicions on was incomplete. IOW if intimates and others were painting a picture of Dallas as a safe place, he would be more likely to distance himself from details. so, the suggestion here is that the planning may involve aspects mirrored in time outside of the grouping under consideration, but also part of 'the planning'. For example, why did the Dallas News editor attend the luncheon? What were the stories in Dallas papers at this time? etc Edited July 26, 2006 by John Dolva Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashton Gray Posted July 26, 2006 Author Share Posted July 26, 2006 Excuse me? We're— We're this far into this question, and not a single soul has brought up the fact of Lawrence F. O'Brien—later to play the longsuffering role of the poor Watergate "victim" while Connally was Treas Sec—having been John F. Kennedy's Special Assistant to the President for Congressional Relations? And having been "very well acquainted with Congressman [Albert] Thomas"? And having been in on "some discussions" about the Texas trip? And did nobody notice that Kennedy's Appointments Secretary, ferchrissake, Kenneth O'Donnell, couldn't manage to give a single firm date for anything related to the planning of that trip when Arlen Sphincter helped him weasel all around it in "testimony" just six months later? And his testimony was taken right at his White House office, where every record he ever made would have been! Oh, he can tell you the helicopter left the White House lawn at 10:45 a.m. for Andrews AFB the day the trip started, but for every answer about when it was planned, he might hit the month. Maybe. But mostly not. In fact he makes the waters as muddy as he possibly can by saying "We had been discussing this for almost 6 or 7 months, but the time had never seemed quite right..." Right. Well, despite O'Donnell's Sphincter-aided weaseling, it looks like Dawn might have a laser lock on how this thing was cooked, because O'Donnell nearly wrote a book trying to soften the edges and make it seem "oh, all happenstance, ya know," but here's where he spills it anyway: Mr. SPECTER. When were the specific dates of November 21 and November 22 finally set as being the precise times for the trip to Texas?Mr. O'DONNELL. Well, I am not clear in my recollection of that. I would think some time early in November. I know Thanksgiving was one of the problems we had to work with. We decided that would be the best time to go, in that general area, and we, in general, would keep a file—once we agreed we were going to Texas—we would keep a file on all the speaking engagements, all the invitations the President had received. I would go to that file and select some that might look promising. One of them that I recollect was an invitation from Congressman Albert Thomas, or his committee, that was giving him an appreciation dinner—not the Congressman himself. And the President was very fond of Congressman Thomas, he was most helpful to him, and I knew he would want to go, if this was at all possible. I would think that probably had more to do with setting the actual definite dates of the 21st and 22d. Hmm. Wonder how that "looks promising" invitation from the Valenti committee for Congressman Thomas got into that file? Wouldn't have been the Special Assistant to the President for Congressional Relations who tucked it in there, would it? Ohhhhh, hell no. Ashton Gray Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hogan Posted July 26, 2006 Share Posted July 26, 2006 Surely the President's November trips to Chicago and Tampa-Miami somehow figured into the equation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawn Meredith Posted July 26, 2006 Share Posted July 26, 2006 [quote name='Ron Ecker' date='Jul 25 2006, 09:08 PM' post='70263'] Evica's research traced the trip planning back to April 1963. A November 21 date was set for Houston by a committee of the Knights of San Jacinto, an elite subgroup of the Sons of the Republic of Texas that included JACK VALENTI!!! This group of Connally cronies proposed the Al Thomas dinner, an event which JFK would not miss , Congressman Thomas being a pal of JFK's. The cover story for the dinner was to honor Thomas' role in establishing the NASA facility in TX. (later named, of course, the Johnson Space Center). The November date for the TX. trip was later expanded to include San Antonio, Fort Worth, - (very near Dallas), and Austin, but the basic date never changed after April 12, 1963. (San Jacinto Day). I would like to see Evica's sources on this, as I have to question the November 21 date being set by the Houston committee. According to Cliff Carter and Connally, the first date considered at the June meeting with JFK was August 27, LBJ's birthday. August 27 was rejected according to Carter because it was too close to Labor Day, and according to Connally because August is the worst month of the year in Texas. Carter said that the next date that JFK's schedule would allow was November 21, which was the date finally chosen. The White House announced that date on September 26. If Carter is to be believed, this was based on JFK's schedule, and not on a date set by a Houston committee in April. Ron: The event was 11/18-22/93 In Dallas at the Dallas Hyatt. I am able to get a copy of the transcript that I can perhaps try to scan, or if you perfer, send me a PM with a mailing address or fax number and I can get for you. Likely tho not til after vacation 8/5-13. I have more than enough work between now and then to work 18 hour days. (Which I am doing). Dawn 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