Jack Ruby many times explained why he carried a gun upon his person.

He often carried around large sums of cash. Sometimes thousands of dollars and when leaving the Carousel in the early morning hours after closing, one would know to be cautious in that way.

However, it seems Ruby carried on his person his loaded 38 all the time.

Sounds like Ruby practically slept with his loaded 38.

3 hours ago, Gene Kelly said:

Gil and Joe:

David's excellent paper points out that there was a door on the Main St. side of the parking garage which led to the sub-basement, and two doors that opened into passenger elevators in the central part of the garage. Reserve Officer Alvin Brock was assigned to guard the doors and elevators but was re-assigned to traffic detail (about an hour or so before Ruby arrived). There was a second reservist (G.E. Worley, Jr.) guarding that area ... but, after Officer Brock left, he too was reassigned to traffic duty and left the building.  So, twenty minutes before Oswald was brought to the basement, there were no police officers guarding the parking area. This is where Croy enters the scene ... and Ruby arrives in the basement within 1-2 minutes of Oswald's transfer (thanks to Westbrook, Fritz and Harry Holmes), blending in with the news media and knowing exactly where to stand (next to Croy).  And it's clear that he didn't come down the ramp, as the Warren Commission (and Officer Patrick Dean) wanted us to believe.

Nothing coincidental or spontaneous about any of this. 

Gene

Thank you for this very plausible and reasonable postulation.

33 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:

Facts are facts. The facts about the blood spatter are not based upon my theories. My theories came after a close study of the facts. For decades, people took quotes from  this or that witness and spun it into being support for their pet theory. And then others quoted the spin. When I devoted myself to the case, however, I realized that much of what was being sold people on both sides of the fence was just not so, or likely not so. 

The Oswald did it crowd routinely repeats myth after myth, such as that Vickie Adams ran down the stairs after Oswald, or that Oswald had plenty of time to fire some relatively easy shots. But the Oswald didn't do it crowd has plenty of myths of its own. And the blood and brain exploded from the back of JFK's head and slammed into Hargis is one of them. 

Hargis, from his earliest statements, insisted he saw an explosion from the right side of JFK's head, and not the back. And he also explained over and over again that he drove through a cloud of debris. Could this shot have been fired from in front of JFK? Perhaps. Blood spatter explodes at a right angle to the surface of the skull where struck. So the explosion of blood observed in the Z-film could be from a shot from most any direction, provided that shot impacted at the supposed exit. 

While the severity of damage strongly suggests a tangential shot, moreover, that tangent need not be from behind. It is the entirely of the evidence, such as the impact on the windshield and on the curb down by Tague, that suggests the fatal shot came from behind, not the explosion of blood and debris. 

Now, there remains a problem in saying that ta-da! the shots came from behind. And that problem is that the earwitnesses and smoke witnesses suggest a loud sound and smoke in the knoll area. 

Well, that led me to wonder if someone might have exploded a firecracker in that area as a diversion. No one in JFK land had written about this. So I combed through books and WWII articles on sniping and found that both the Germans and Japanese had used diversionary devices (essentially long-fused firecrackers) to help conceal the location of elevated snipers from those on the street below. 

 

Hmmm.

Maybe the puff of smoke those salt of the Earth Texas railroad men saw coming out from the trees above the knoll was from a diversionary firecracker?

59 minutes ago, Chris Bristow said:

His comment that he thought he was "hit", meaning he thought for a moment he had been shot, implied he was struck with some force. He also said he assumed he might be getting hit with concrete. I don't know where that would come from or why he assumed that other than something substantial struck him. 

The Ln explanation for the blood on Hargis and Martin is that they just rode into a cloud of debris that hung in the air for 2/3 of a second as they drove into it. Hargis's testimony is inconsistent with that theory. If the hanging debris cloud theory is correct then it hung there for almost 2 seconds before Kinney drove into it.

 

Exactly.

Little Lynn's call request for $25 that morning..."just happened" to take Ruby to the perfect location at the perfect time to get him in the perfect position to shoot Oswald?

Sorry...too many "just happened" events for me to believe it was all just...coincidence.

On 2/12/2023 at 4:42 AM, Denny Zartman said:

I'm sorry that happened and I hope you're feeling better now, @Joe Bauer.

Oh, thanks Denny.

On 2/12/2023 at 3:20 AM, Robert Burrows said:

Marjorie Trailer Queen...

Good one RB!

So, in one way, we are expected to believe Hargis's 3 feet away right there eyewitness view and take ( 2 shots only?) from the TXSBD but we are supposed to then "not" believe his statement that the limo "came almost to a stop" just as JFK was hit with the head shot?

I would have liked to ask Hargis how much solid brain matter hit him from JFK's exploding brain?

A little? A lot? Did the matter hit him lightly...or did he feel it with more force?

I am going to go back to James Humes actual words regarding his handling of JFK's brain from initial inspection to removal.

I thought I had read where even he had some reservations about it's damaged state.
I do remember him most often acting arrogant and irritated at many questions presented to him regards his autopsy.

However, when Humes was confronted with the fact that he nor anyone weighed JFK's brain and yet did weigh the other major organs during the autopsy...he lost that arrogance and assumed a more humble "lost for words" demeanor which I think has more importance than nothing.

James Carville Describes Republican Party Leaders And Base.

WHITE TRASH!

5 hours ago, Ron Bulman said:

Pat, the brain weight in particular, and the fact it is missing and wasn't sectioned have been perplexing to me for years.  I've not read in depth on the subject, e.g. your site, what maybe your friend Dr. Mantik (just kidding!) may have written.  Seems like maybe something by Doug Horne, Best Evidence (?), Eye of History or elsewhere.

I thought I'd read a doctor or two or three, maybe a nurse at Parkland (through the softball sized exit wound in the rear of the head) and a corpsman or two plus maybe one of the FBI guys, Sibert or O'Neal (?) said that close to half of the brain was gone.  Not 1/3 of the right side.

This is what still troubles me.  If JFK had an oversized brain of 1500g, entirely possible imho given his wit and intellect, as opposed to a normal male average weight of 1370.  Then say just 1/3 less of that total brain would be 1000g.  15-20% added from soaking in formalin would be 1150-1200.  Noticeably lower than average.

Would a pointed tipped copper jacketed bullet passing straight though have caused a loss of 300-350g, or more?

The bigger question you kind of alluded to is, why the hell they didn't weigh it at Bethesda that night?  Isn't that normal autopsy protocol for a brain injury?

Exactly.

Here are some factual accounts of JFK's brain matter losses starting with the head shot.

JFK brain matter sprayed up and out. With chunks and pieces seen inside the car interior. On the seat, floor and interior upholstery.

The two DPD motorcycle cop escorts behind the limo reported they felt JFK's brain matter hit their upper bodies.

Jackie climbed onto the car trunk to grab a chunk of her husband's brain to hold until she handed it to a Parkland doctor in the ER.

Much oozing from JFK's head throughout the drive to Parkland.

Several attendees in the ER room stated they saw brain matter oozing out of JFK's head wound. Actually falling away.

Bethesda autopsy Dr. James Humes stated that JFK's brain just fell into his hands when he went to remove it.

Bethesda Navy Corpsman Paul O'Conner testified under oath that most of JFK's brain wasn't left inside his skull while he was at JFK's head location to assist in the autopsy. Just "a handful" of eviscerated chunks.

So, the formaldehyde extra weight excuse is the best one they can find to explain the official autopsy report of JFK brain weight being listed at 1400 to 1500 grams?

PLEASE!

15 hours ago, Douglas Caddy said:

"She yelled 'xxxx' when President Biden gave his State of the Union." This was posted on Facebook.

 

There is something cavewomanish attractive about Marjorie Taylor Greene imo.

Kind of a Paleolithic Pamela Anderson?

Looking at her brings out my Neanderthalic genetic past animal desires.

6 hours ago, Denis Morissette said:

In my case, I have not totally discarded a conspiracy. I`ve kept pushing to find new material on the topic in the hope to find a conspiracy. Most LNers may be people who don`t bring anything new to the table. They`re just satisfied reading books and analyzing the facts that are already knows. It is their choice. I`m a different bread. I am an asset for the honest CTers. 

Hope so.

Now, what is your take on the Sylvia and Annie Odio story?

Odio was interviewed by the HSCA, as were her family, her psychiatrist, Hall, Seymour, Larry Howard and the FBI agent who had interviewed Hall.^[14]

The HSCA reported that it was "inclined to believe Silvia Odio" and that at least one of the men resembled Oswald.^[15] The HSCA did not agree with the Warren Commission that Oswald could not have been in Dallas during the time period specified in Odio's allegations and reported the most likely dates for the encounter to be September 25, 26 or 27, 1963.^[15] The committee stated that Oswald's actions and values were consistent with one who would favor the Castro regime, and speculated that Oswald may have associated with anti-Castro activists to implicate movements such as JURE in the assassination or for some unrelated reason.^[16]

So many suspicion begging contradictions regards Jack Ruby's actions and words leading up to and following JFK's killing and his whacking of Lee Harvey Oswald.

When Jack Ruby planted himself in the Dallas Morning News advertising offices early on 11,22,1963 and uncharacteristically stayed hanging around there for hours ( instead of going down to the motorcade parade to see his real class fantasy goddess Jackie Kennedy in the flesh? ) right up to the shooting of JFK, even then, he didn't run immediately out of the offices? Perhaps to personally see and hear what the heck just happened from people on the ground just blocks from him?

Instead Ruby calls his sister EVA and cryingly sobs to her about what happened and his angst about what to do, where to go?

What happened afterwards and where Ruby went when he finally left the DMN building has always been a murky debated issue.

Ruby told the WC he went back to his club? Maybe stopping in at his local synagogue?

Reputable journalist Seth Kantor told the WC that Ruby instead went to Parkland hospital where he ( Kantor) was personally approached by Ruby and they exchanged words. The Warren Commission decided Kantor was over-excited delusional and he didn't really meet and talk to Ruby at Parkland hospital. Ha!

Later that same evening, Jack Ruby is on national newsreel film, walking through the halls of the Dallas Police Department, carrying his loaded 38 and mixed in with the huge press crowd allowed in there.

When Dallas DA Henry Wade gave his late night news conference ( in the same building? ) there was Jack Ruby in Inspecter Clouseau glasses and press note pad carrying disguise standing on a table in back, loudly interrupting Wade with clarification about Oswald's "Fair Play For Cuba" association back in New Orleans.

Uh...that was "Fair Play For Cuba Committee."

Curious...Jack Ruby did more reading research on Oswald than most of the press people in that room? And how much detailed background info on Oswald was even out there in just the first hours after JFK's murder?

But, there was Jack Ruby knowing more about Oswald than Wade and the dozens of press people in the audience as well?

All the while, Jack Ruby so obsesses about Jackie Kennedy's suffering and Jews perhaps being implicated in JFK's killing because a fellow Jew had published a "JFK WANTED FOR TREASON" ad in the local paper... when he finds himself just outside the DPD basement when Oswald is being moved out of there he loses his grasp of reality.

He realizes he could relieve both his soul torturing demons by going down to the DPD basement entrance, slip past security to once again mix in with Curry's press crowd and even manages to shove himself to the front of the crowd and lo and behold...Oswald's two side guards bring this smirking SOB right to him where all he needs to do is leap a couple of feet to get a full frontal open shot into Oswald's gut!

What incredible fateful luck!

My knight in shining armor destiny is NOW!

BOOM!

Ruby testified he didn't remember his thoughts or his saying anything during his shooting Oswald and his being wrestled to the ground right after.

But Dallas PD officers fighting him down clearly remember Ruby shouting..."YOU KNOW ME...I'M JACK RUBY!"

I bring you deli sandwiches and provide you with free drinks and girls! Just ask one of my closest police buddies "Blackie" Harrison.

He was standing right in front of me in the press crowd just as I leaped out and saved Jackie's honor!

Now, how about a pastrami on rye sandwich fellas? I haven't eaten hardly anything since Friday morning.

1 hour ago, Tom Gram said:

Lance, this goes both ways. The LN approach is to say “Oswald HAS TO BE guilty, so all those mysteries and suspicions HAVE to have innocent explanations - so the ONLY possible way to account for the events of the morning of November 24th is to believe Ruby’s highly dubious HSCA-debunked “alibi” of strolling down the Main St. ramp.”

It’s actually a bit worse than that. Instead of “Oswald HAS to be guilty” the LN approach is more like “every single aspect of the official story HAS to be correct”, so many LNs will refuse to consider even the tiniest suggestion that the WC got something wrong even if it has no bearing whatsoever on Oswald’s guilt.

Another common LN thinking error is their utter refusal to acknowledge the fact that human beings are capable of planning. Ruby is a great example. LNs treat Ruby’s journey from Western Union to the DPD basement as if it were the Manhattan project or something. Is it really that difficult to envision a scenario where Ruby was signaled somehow or his movements were planned in advance? Is it really that hard to believe that Ruby brought his dog so the police would take care of it and it wouldn’t be sitting at home hungry?

I actually agree with a lot of your criticisms, but fervent devotion to lone assassinism at the expense of objectivity is no different than devotion to something like Badgeman or the Hickey-did-it theory. There is a legitimate circumstantial case against Oswald for the JFKA, but there is also a legitimate circumstantial case for conspiracy, and anyone new to the case with any semblance of critical thinking skills figures that out pretty quickly. LNs on the other hand make it their mission to fight the conspiracy heretics by minimizing this ambiguity at all costs. The most common debate strategy is straight out of the Hitchens-approved militant atheist playbook: project false intellectual superiority through condescension, insults and ridicule in the hope that impressionable readers will feel smart and not want to be associated with “those people”. 

I don’t agree with everything in this talk but I liked Jeremy Gunn’s approach to the case, and I think LNs in particular could learn something from it. Gunn gives his opinion on the case at the very end: 

 

 

T. Gram. A very reasoned essay imo.

I also agree with a decent amount of Lance P's postulations.

Yet, I disagree with many of his premises as well.

I don't get personal on the forum for many reasons in thread posting responses.

Still, had to laugh at a couple of light barbs directed at LP in two recent postings.

One from Alan Lowe who suggested LNer LP " go back to his handler and tell him/her that your mission has failed."

No malice there LP, but that was a funny retort.

The other is Tom Gram's comparative quip regards Ruby's going down to breach the DPD basement as not equal to breaching the "Manhattan Project". HA!

Starting in the 1950's, I've lived no more than two miles away ( usually closer, even just blocks away ) from the DLI in Monterey, CA. for almost every year of my 71 years long life.

I went to school here from kindergarten through high school and in every grade there were always many fellow kids whose parents taught at the DLI school.

My best friend through high school's father taught Burmese there.

I casually met dozens of these older generation DLI teachers just by hanging out with their kids.

Every one of these parents came from the countries whose language they taught.

I always liked the interesting mix of cultures and languages these DLI teachers and their families brought to the over-all color of the Monterey Peninsula.

It was fun to share their different foods and hear their different music, etc.

One constant I noticed however was the seriousness of these DLI language instructors in their teaching efforts and responsibilities.

They all seemed like tough demanding teachers.

Many came from tough living conditions in poor and/or war-torn countries.

They didn't take for granted the living conditions they had here. I think they were decently paid as well. Almost all bought homes and several owned rental homes as well!

I sensed that anyone in the military sent to the DLI for language training were subjected to quite rigorous course work. Serious teachers, serious expectations for comprehension skill upon graduation.

I once heard that the amount of money our military committed for each student's language learning at the DLI was huge.

If Oswald were ever sent to the Monterey DLI for the purpose of learning or improving his Russian language skills, I believe he would have left speaking and even writing very good Russian upon completion of his course work. 

The Monterey DLI has always had a highly regarded reputation for rigorous, demanding expectations and high quality graduation results.

On 2/10/2023 at 6:36 AM, Michael Griffith said:

One of the most outstanding pieces of work done by the HSCA was their thorough demolition of the myth that Ruby used the Main Street ramp to enter the basement. 

My most important motive reasons for wanting to write a book as I described above, focusing on the DPD and Ruby murdering Oswald while he was in their custody and handcuffed to only two guards at his side leaving him vulnerable to an unobstructed frontal attack, is because I have always felt Oswald's murder less than 48 hours after his arrest was as American collective society psyche damaging and world history impacting as JFK's in several ways.

An event that has not been adequately acknowledged, explored, explained and understood regards the true level of traumatizing impact it had on our collective society psyche.

Jack Ruby didn't just kill Lee Harvey Oswald. He also killed the only real chance America had at finding the full truth behind the crime of killing their president - JFK.

And I believe that tens of millions if not well over 100 million Americans who were watching Jack Ruby blow out Oswald's guts on live national TV the morning of 11,24,1963 harbored that same ominous thought and were consequentially afflicted with an emotional and psychological trauma much deeper than any writer has yet to adequately define and express.

JFK's brutal slaughter was a once in a lifetime major entire society traumatizing event on several levels.

I was old enough to see and feel this myself.

Tremendous shock, sadness, confusion with significant unsettling unsureness.

However, America did not actually see JFK's head being blown off with blood and brain matter exploding all around him and his horrified wife.

If they had, their trauma would have been much deeper imo.

However, the trauma of deep and dark suspicion and mistrust of our own government was "not yet" a part of the JFK killing trauma imo.

The incredibly and disturbingly improbable brutal murder of Lee Harvey Oswald in the custody of a major city police department seen live on national TV by tens of millions ( and over 100 million on news reel reruns) was the defining event that triggered the trauma I describe in the last paragraph.

Mistrust and suspicion that I don't think America had ever felt on the level it was. This was viscerally felt as a sick sinking feeling in one's guts. Just what I felt upon watching Ruby shoot Oswald live in national TV.

From 11,24,1963 to this day, the majority of our society ( those that were born before or just after for sure) never fully trusted our government regards the truth of JFK's ( and Oswald's) murder.

Oswald's killing was just "too improbable" under the circumstances of his importance in finding the full truth as to the who and why of JFK's murder.

Loss of trust and secureness in institutions one would normally feel safe under is a well known symptom of severe Post Traumatic Stress Disorder.

Individually it could be loss of trust in authority figures, family, one's immediate surroundings, personal relationships etc.

The bloody gut shot killing of Oswald by Jack Ruby under incredibly improbable and suspicious circumstances right in front of many millions of American's own eyes is one of the top two or three collective society traumatizing events in American history.

And America is "still" suffering it's effects imo.

One is that most American's "still" don't believe the Warren Report findings regards both JFK's and Oswald's murders.

A deeper and more comprehensive exhumation and exploration of how that monumentally damaging traumatic event came about and the effect it had on our entire society collectively versus what has been published so far is worthy literary contemplation endeavor to consider imo.

The truth shall set you free ... if you allow it to.

In this case of great and long term societal post traumatic stress damage for sure.

IMO anyways.

20 minutes ago, Michael Griffith said:

Oswald's use of the word "patsy" is revealing. He could have expressed his innocence in several other ways, but he chose to use the word "patsy," which indicated he was aware he had been set up. 

When I began to study the JFK case, Oswald's vehement assertion of his innocence and use of the word "patsy" jumped out at me. I thought to myself, "If Oswald killed JFK to satisfy his alleged craving for fame, to strike back at society for his perceived mistreatment, and/or to go down in history as a courageous revolutionary, surely he would have proudly and loudly taken credit for his deed."

Exactly the common sense belief of millions of Americans.

I can't see anything in that photo.

Never was able to.

The video above begs so many disturbing questions.

Oswald safety concerned Katzenbach says he contacted the DPD once they had arrested Oswald and advised them to keep Oswald separated from other prisoners. He said he did so to prevent Oswald from being attacked and maybe even killed by other prisoners.

The DPD then parades Oswald several times right next to and through the press crush inside their own building as they moved Oswald from one office to another?

How did Katzenbach feel about that action from an Oswald security concern perspective?

When DPD chief Jessie Curry was confronted about allowing the press access right inside the DPD building during Oswald's time there (which Detective Jim Levealle described as a pushing, shoving, yelling circus,) Curry kept saying he did so to show the press Oswald wasn't being physically abused in their custody.

Since Katzenbach was so concerned about Oswald's personal physical safety, I wonder if he was outraged at Oswald being murdered right inside the DPD building Sunday morning in front of 10's of million Americans watching this on live national TV?

Did Oswald security minded Katzenbach even once call Chief Curry or perhaps the Mayor of Dallas and rip into Curry regards the worst possible security failure in American history?

Wonder what Katzenbach thought of Curry announcing even a ball park time of Oswald's daytime transfer to the press? And how open Oswald was when he was led within inches of the gun firing arm of Jack Ruby?

Washington Post editor Ben Bradlee repeated what 100 million Americans  thought about Oswald's murder in the custody of the DPD.

That you have the most important and most threatened criminal suspect in American history and you don't come up with a better security plan than a publicy announced transfer time and place in daylight hours?

It's proven that even members of the DPD had expressed common sense concern that Oswald's transfer be done at night, away from any press and not announced to the public.

Curry ( and one assumes even Dallas mayor Cabell? ) simply ignored those concerns and chose to do Oswald's transfer his way.

And it seems so many in the video totally accepted that Oswald was the killer of JFK and shooter of Connally within 24 hours and without any consideration of a thorough investigation and subsequent trial.

Ruby L*** in this video. He tells the press he has only run legitimate legal businesses.

Gun running, pimping, gambling, flying to Cuba to help Mafia Godfather Santos Trafficante get out of a Castro jail? Please.

Dallas TV man Wes Wise described Ruby exactly as journalist Seth Kantor did in Kantor's Warren Commission sworn testimony.

A man who wanted to be where the action was. A man who wanted to get close to newsmen. Who would walk up to them and initiate conversation. To the point of being an irritating pest.

Just as Kantor described Ruby doing to him at Parkland Hospital the early afternoon of 11,22,1963.

Incredibly, the Warren Commission concluded in their final report volume that Kantor was over excited delusional in thinking Ruby confronted him like Kantor described. And that Jack Ruby was instead the more emotionally rational and believable person over Kantor and that Ruby's tale of not going to Parkland and engaging Seth Kantor was the one they chose to believe.

Like I've stated in a few posts, if I could write, I would choose as a main JFK event topic Oswald's murder in the custody of the Dallas Police department.

A chronology of the DPDs actions once they had Oswald in their custody, leading up to Jack Ruby murdering Oswald right inside their own building.

As well as a historical perspective of the DPD and their leadership during those times. And their relationship with Jack Ruby himself. 

I came up with this provocative "real time" national TV reporting shocking title:

"HE'S BEEN SHOT, HE'S BEEN SHOT!"

"LEE OSWALD HAS BEEN SHOT!"

Quoting the national TV journalist who shakily shouted those exact words to an audience of millions of Americans who had just witnessed Oswald's improbable murder on live TV...including myself!

Sorry, but I couldn't hear anything well enough to understand this witness's take.

Could you explain the story?

Anyone who had a heart

Would have felt sick when they first heard of JFK's brutal killing.

I was a little older than you Kirk on 11,22,1963.

I was really taken with Dionne Warwick songs as a teenager.

Couldn't share that with guy friends though.

Thought they would see me as less than macho.

And I also loved the Beach Boys music.

I grew up spending so much time on California beaches from the youngest age.

I would slowly wade into the cool waters of Lovers Point cove beach in our small coastal town of Pacific Grove. Starting at the age of 5 and six. I didn't know how to swim very well, but I would go under the water and look around ( no goggles) and let the tidal ebb and flow gently sway me back and forth.

Our welfare single mom would send me to this beach every weekday morning of the summer with a quarter to get in the public pool there with just a towel and bathing suit.

My 12 years older oldest brother was a lifeguard there and my other 8 years older brother ( there were 7 of us Bauer Boys ) worked off the pier as a rower of one of their glass bottom boats berthed there.

They would keep an eye out for me from time to time. I wouldn't go home until late in the afternoon. Every summer I would get sunburned and then tan doing this.

I knew the ocean waters so instinctively. Became a young surfer ( inner tube rider actually ) for awhile. Had bleached blond hair. Quit doing that around 11 or 12 or so. Right around the time of the JFK assassination.

But I could really relate to the Beach Boy songs and lyrics.

There truly was something magical and freeing about spending so much time at the beach. Warm sand, aqua green waters. Thought and worry freeing wide open blue sky and fresh ocean air.

To this day I STILL am super calmed by driving around our coastline and seeing, feeling and even smelling the ocean after pulling into a dirt parking spot and opening my window there.

The California Coastline ( especially the beaches ) are truly geographical beauty valium. You can forget your problems there better than seeing a talk therapist imo.

Favorite Beach Boy songs are "Surfer Girl" and "In My Room."

And let me tell you...there truly were "Surfer Girls" back then.

Tan, blond young goddesses. 

Hanging around in bikinis. Talk about paradise for those of us guys who were lucky enough to be on those beaches as much as we could be at that age.

I thought maybe heaven is kind of like being young on a warm, cool water California beach in the Summer.

1 hour ago, Douglas Caddy said:

The five Republican justices on the Supreme Court who are Catholic embrace this radicalism in their opinions in many instances. This includes Chief Justice Roberts.

The justiciar system in America is on the road to being ruled by religious beliefs rather than by the law.

FBI Memo Warns against 'Radical Traditionalist Catholic Ideology’ | National Review

 

 

 

Absolutely true.

1 hour ago, Douglas Caddy said:

Thank you, Joe, for this. I shall use it in the book I am writing.,

Thank "you" DC...for everything you have given to so many.

Years and years and thousands of hours of hard work, time and expense to try to enlighten us with important truths.

Truths purposely hidden and buried by forces whose agendas were never about promoting American Democracy and the common good.

Doug, please let me know when your book is published and I can buy a copy personally signed by you?

13 hours ago, Douglas Caddy said:

Gil Jesus asked at the beginning of this topic is I had anything to contribute.  I wrote about Billie Sol Estes in my autobiography, Being There: Eyewitness to History, published in 2018. Here is that chapter:

CHAPTER SEVEN

 

BILLIE SOL ESTES AND LBJ

 

           After the Texas Policy Institute under a Moody Foundation grant sponsored a highly successful conference that I had organized in Galveston on the Star Wars project in 1983, Shearn Moody asked that I visit him at his ranch there. He told me that he had received a phone call from his former lobbyist in Austin, Jimmy Day, who was then in the federal prison in Big Spring, Texas. It appeared that Day had moved on to Washington, D.C. after he was no longer working for Shearn and had gotten himself in big trouble there. As explained to me by Shearn, Day on a visit to the White House had clandestinely heisted some White House stationery and then wrote fraudulent letters on it recommending his superior lobbying talents. Shearn termed the felony charge against Day as being “puffery.” In any event Day had called Shearn to say that he wanted Shearn to talk on the phone with another prisoner. When Shearn inquired who that might be, Day said that it was Billie Sol Estes, an infamous criminal whose notoriety approached historical proportions.

       Day gave the phone to Billie Sol who then informed Shearn that he wanted to tell all he knew about his close criminal relationship over many decades with President Lyndon Johnson who had died ten years earlier in 1973. He asked Shearn for a grant from the Moody Foundation that would enable him to do this.

      Shearn, a history buff, requested that I visit with Billie Sol in prison and get more details. A few weeks later I traveled to Big Spring and met with Billie Sol who told me that he had a story to tell about LBJ that would rock the world. I advised him that the best way to do so would be to write a book and his response was that he would think about it. As our meeting ended I said that I would report back to Shearn what he had told me in the event there was a possibility of a Moody Foundation grant.

      Nothing more happened until early January 1984, about six months after my prison visit, when Billie Sol telephoned Shearn from his home in Abilene and said that he had been released from prison and wanted to tell his story in a book under a Moody Foundation grant. Shearn asked that I travel to Abilene and confer further with Billie Sol. Shearn said that for a foundation grant to be awarded it would require a tax-exempt entity agreeing to sponsor Billie Sol’s proposal.

      I arrived in Abilene and talked with Billie Sol who readily agreed that writing a book was the best way to tell his story. This was because after I had visited him in prison he had encouraged his daughter, Pam, to write a book, which she did, “Billie Sol Estes, King of the Wheeler-Dealers.” Her book had been well received and gotten lots of publicity. He said his daughter’s book was only concerned with how the family survived while he was in prison and did not contain any substantive disclosures of his criminal activities with LBJ. He boasted that his tell-all book would be a best-seller.

      I explained to him that a tax-exempt entity had to be the recipient of the foundation grant under which Billie Sol would write his book. He said that would be no problem and picked up the phone and called the President of Abilene Christian University who agreed to meet us later that afternoon. Billie Sol was a prominent member of the Church of Christ and the university was affiliated with that Church. At the meeting the university president agreed that if a Moody Foundation grant were forthcoming to the university a portion of it would be allocated for Billie Sol to write his book.

      Upon returning to Galveston I reported this to Shearn who said that he would sponsor such a Moody Foundation grant in the amount of $500,000 of which $400,000 would go to Abilene Christian University for its unrestricted purposes and $100,000 to Billie Sol. A short time later I returned to Abilene and informed both the university president and Billie Sol of Shearn’s intention of getting a grant approved at the next quarterly meeting of the foundation’s trustees.

     When I told Billie Sol this news he responded that to disclose what he knew of his and LBJ’s criminal activities he would need to receive immunity from prosecution from the U.S. Department of Justice. By a twist of fate I found myself in a position of possibly securing such immunity. Investigative Research Foundation, which had received Moody Foundation grant, was preparing to sponsor a National Conference on Terrorism, this being 1984 when few persons were talking about it. As the organizer of the conference I had retained as a consultant Edward Miller, former associate director of the FBI, to assist in developing the speakers list and agenda. Miller and former assistant director of the FBI, Mark Felt, had been convicted of doing illegal “black bag” jobs against members of the Weather Underground and other far left-wing radical grounds engaged in illegal activist activities such as exploding a bomb in the U.S. Capitol Building that caused a crack in the building’s famous dome. President Ronald Reagan had pardoned them, asserting they were heroes and not criminals. The key person who had shepherded their pardon process to success was Stephen Trott, Assistant Attorney General for the Criminal Division in the Justice Department. Miller believed that he and I could get an appointment with Trott to discuss Billie Sol receiving a grant of immunity.

      About this time Billie Sol voluntarily appeared before a grand jury in Robertson County and testified that LBJ was behind the 1961 murder of U.S. Department of Agriculture official Henry Marshall. The Dallas Morning News of March 23, 1984 in a front page article headlined “Billie Sol Links LBJ to Murder” reported “Franklin, Texas -- Convicted swindler Billie Sol Estes told a grand jury that Lyndon B. Johnson was one of four men who planned the 1961 murder of an agricultural official, sources close the grand jury said Thursday.

     “The sources said Estes testified that the group feared the official would link Estes’ illegal activities to the vice president.

     “Estes, who testified before the Robertson County Grand Jury Tuesday, told grand jurors that Johnson felt pressure to silence Henry Harvey Marshall of Bryan, a regional USDA official in charge of the federal allotment program, sources said.”

      Marshall had been shot five times in the chest and his bolt-action .22 caliber rifle was found nearby in the field where he died.

     As a result of Estes’ testimony the 1984 grand jury voted to change the official death certificate of Marshall entered in 1961 as “Wound by Gunshot Self Inflicted Suicide by Gunshot Wounds Self-Inflicted” to “Wound by Gunshot Homicide by Gunshot Wounds.”

      Estes’ testimony and the action of the Robertson Country grand jury created a sensation throughout Texas.

      Estes appearance before the grand jury had been arranged by Clint Peoples, the U.S. Marshal for the Northern District of Texas. Peoples had followed Estes career as a businessman and criminal for 25 years, starting when he was first a Texas Ranger. Estes had introduced me to Peoples and I visited Peoples in his Marshal’s office in the U.S. Courthouse in Dallas on several occasions. During one of these visits Peoples’ pulled out a file from a cabinet that contained a large quantity of material on Estes and LBJ and showed me about a dozen photographs of Henry Marshall’s body when he had been found dead in the field.

     In “Taking care of business: Lawman solves slaying after 23 years of trying,” the Dallas Times Herald of March 23, 1984, reported

For 23 years, solving the murder of Henry Marshall was lawman Clint Peoples’ No. 1 piece of unfinished business.

But Tuesday, the U.S. Marshal’s questions were answered when convicted con man Billy Sol Estes made good on a long-standing promise to Peoples and told a Robertson grand jury everything he knew about the case.

“I feel more relieved now than I’ve felt in my life,” Peoples said Thursday afternoon.

Peoples, the U.S. Marshal for Northern Texas since 1973, originally investigated the case in March 1962, when he was a Texas Ranger. It was one of the very few cases he could not solve.

“I said that as I lived, I would try to solve this case, although I didn’t know if I ever would,” said Peoples, now 73.

He entered the case when the trail was cold….

In 1979, Peoples escorted Estes on a flight from Dallas to the La Tuna federal penitentiary near El Paso after Estes was convicted of mail fraud and conspiracy of mail fraud to conceal assets to avoid paying back taxes.

According the Peoples’ book, he queried Estes about the Marshall murder and said it always had haunted him.

Estes said he knew Marshall was murdered, the book says, and often wanted to tell the ranger that he was “looking in the wrong direction.”

When Peoples asked which way to look, according to the book, Estes said he should look at “people who had the most to lose.”

“Should I be looking in the direction of Washington?,” Peoples asked.

“You are now definitely on the right track,” the book quotes Estes as saying.

     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.”

      Billie Sol asserted that Mac Wallace murdered USDA official Henry Marshall upon the orders of LBJ.

     In the wake of the Robertson County Grand jury action Edward Miller made an appointment for the two of us to visit Assistant Attorney General Stephen Trott in the Justice Department. As a result of that meeting I received the follow letter from Trott dated May 29, 1984:

Dear Mr. Caddy:

RE: Billy Sol Estes

I have considered the materials and information you have provided to me in connection with your representation of Billy Sol Estes. I understand that Mr. Estes claims to have information concerning the possible commission of criminal offenses in Texas in the 1960's and that he is willing to reveal that information at this time. I also understand that Mr. Estes wants several things in exchange for this information, such as a pardon for the offenses for which he has been convicted and immunity from any further prosecution among other things.

Before we can engage in any further discussions concerning Mr. Estes' cooperation or enter into any agreement with Mr. Estes we must know the following things: (1) the information, including the extent of corroborative evidence, that Mr. Estes has about each of the events that may be violations of criminal law; (2) the sources of his information; and (3) the extent of his involvement, if any, in each of those events or any subsequent cover-ups. Until we have detailed information concerning these three things we cannot determine whether any violations of federal criminal law occurred which are within our jurisdiction to investigate and prosecute and, if so, whether the information is credible and otherwise warrants investigation. Accordingly, if we are to proceed with meaningful discussions concerning Mr. Estes' proffered cooperation, we must receive a detailed and specific written offer of proof from you setting forth the information noted above. The government will hold your offer of proof in strictest confidence and will not make any use of it other than to determine the credibility of the proffered information and whether it warrants further discussions with or debriefings of Mr. Estes.

I must make sure that several things are understood at this time concerning Mr. Estes' proffered cooperation. First, if after reviewing your offer of proof we decide the information that Mr. Estes can provide is credible and in all other respects warrants further investigation -- a decision which will be made unilaterally by the government -- it will be necessary for Mr. Estes to be interviewed and to reveal everything he knows about the possible criminal violations. He will have to do so completely, truthfully and without guile. Second, it must be understood that the government is not now making specific promises to Mr. Estes except with respect to the confidentiality and use of your offer of proof as noted above. If it is decided that Mr. Estes should be interviewed, the extent of promises concerning the confidentiality or use of the statement or promises of reward or consideration to Mr. Estes, if any, will be determined only after we receive a detailed written offer of proof from you.

Above all else, I must emphasize that Mr. Estes must act with total honesty and candor in any dealings with the Department of Justice or any investigative agency. If any discussions with or debriefings of Mr. Estes take place after receipt of your offer of proof and if any agreement ultimately is reached after Mr. Estes provides a statement, the government will not be bound by any representations or agreements it makes if any of his statements at any time are false, misleading or materially incomplete or if he knowingly fails to act with total honesty and candor.

Sincerely
Stephen S. Trott
Assistant Attorney General
Criminal Division

Upon receipt Trott’s letter I conferred with Billie Sol who provided me with information that would be contained in a letter of proffer to be sent back to Trott in response. His daughter, Pam, was present when he disclosed the information to me. Here is my letter back to Assistant Attorney General Trott:

August 9, 1984

Mr. Stephen S. Trott
Assistant Attorney General, Criminal Division
U.S. Department of Justice
Washington, D. C. 20530

RE: Mr. Billie Sol Estes

Dear Mr. Trott:

My client, Mr. Estes, has authorized me to make this reply to your letter of May 29, 1984. Mr. Estes was a member of a four-member group, headed by Lyndon Johnson, which committed criminal acts in Texas in the 1960's. The other two, besides Mr. Estes and LBJ, were Cliff Carter and Mac Wallace. Mr. Estes is willing to disclose his knowledge concerning the following criminal offenses:

I. Murders

1. The killing of Henry Marshall
2. The killing of George Krutilek
3. The killing of Ike Rogers and his secretary
4. The killing of Harold Orr
5. The killing of Coleman Wade
6. The killing of Josefa Johnson
7. The killing of John Kinser
8. The killing of President J. F. Kennedy.

Mr. Estes is willing to testify that LBJ ordered these killings, and that he transmitted his orders through Cliff Carter to Mac Wallace, who executed the murders. In the cases of murders nos. 1-7, Mr. Estes' knowledge of the precise details concerning the way the murders were executed stems from conversations he had shortly after each event with Cliff Carter and Mac Wallace.

In addition, a short time after Mr. Estes was released from prison in 1971, he met with Cliff Carter and they reminisced about what had occurred in the past, including the murders. During their conversation, Carter orally compiled a list of 17 murders which had been committed, some of which Mr. Estes was unfamiliar. A living witness was present at that meeting and should be willing to testify about it. He is Kyle Brown, recently of Houston and now living in Brady, Texas.

Mr. Estes states that Mac Wallace, whom he describes as a "stone killer" with a communist background, recruited Jack Ruby, who in turn recruited Lee Harvey Oswald. Mr. Estes says that Cliff Carter told him that Mac Wallace fired a shot from the grassy knoll in Dallas, which hit JFK from the front during the assassination.

Mr. Estes declares that Cliff Carter told him the day Kennedy was killed, Fidel Castro also was supposed to be assassinated and that Robert Kennedy, awaiting word of Castro's death, instead received news of his brother's killing.

Mr. Estes says that the Mafia did not participate in the Kennedy assassination but that its participation was discussed prior to the event, but rejected by LBJ, who believed if the Mafia were involved, he would never be out from under its blackmail.

Mr. Estes asserts that Mr. Ronnie Clark, of Wichita, Kansas, has attempted on several occasions to engage him in conversation. Mr. Clark, who is a frequent visitor to Las Vegas, has indicated in these conversations a detailed knowledge corresponding to Mr. Estes' knowledge of the JFK assassination. Mr. Clark claims to have met with Mr. Jack Ruby a few days prior to the assassination, at which time Kennedy's planned murder was discussed.

Mr. Estes declares that discussions were had with Jimmy Hoffa concerning having his aide, Larry Cabell, kill Robert Kennedy while the latter drove around in his convertible.

Mr. Estes has records of his phone calls during the relevant years to key persons mentioned in the foregoing account.

II. The Illegal Cotton Allotments

Mr. Estes desires to discuss the infamous illegal cotton allotment schemes in great detail. He has recordings made at the time of LBJ, Cliff Carter and himself discussing the scheme. These recordings were made with Cliff Carter's knowledge as a means of Carter and Estes protecting themselves should LBJ order their deaths.

Mr. Estes believes these tape recordings and the rumors of other recordings allegedly in his possession are the reason he has not been murdered.

III. Illegal Payoffs

Mr. Estes is willing to disclose illegal payoff schemes, in which he collected and passed on to Cliff Carter and LBJ millions of dollars. Mr. Estes collected payoff money on more than one occasion from George and Herman Brown of Brown and Root, which was delivered to LBJ.

In your letter of May 29, 1984, you request "(1) the information, including the extent of corroborative evidence, that Mr. Estes sources of his information, and (3) the extent of his involvement, if any, in each of those events or any subsequent cover-ups."

In connection with Item # 1, I wish to declare, as Mr. Estes' attorney, that Mr. Estes is prepared without reservation to provide all the information he has. Most of the information contained in this letter I obtained from him yesterday for the first time. While Mr. Estes has been pre-occupied by this knowledge almost every day for the last 22 years, it was not until we began talking yesterday that he could face up to disclosing it to another person. My impression from our conversation yesterday is that Mr. Estes, in the proper setting, will be able to recall and orally recount criminal matters. It is also my impression that his interrogation in such a setting will elicit additional corroborative evidence as his memory is stimulated.

In connection with your Item #2, Mr. Estes has attempted in this letter to provide his sources of information.

In connection with your Item #3, Mr. Estes states that he never participated in any of the murders. It may be alleged that he participated in subsequent cover-ups. His response to this is that had he conducted himself any differently, he, too, would have been a murder victim.

Mr. Estes wishes to confirm that he will abide by the conditions set forth in your letter and that he plans to act with total honesty and candor in any dealings with the Department of Justice or any federal investigative agency.

In return for his cooperation, Mr. Estes wishes in exchange his being given immunity, his parole restrictions being lifted and favorable consideration being given to recommending his long-standing tax leins being removed and his obtaining a pardon.

Sincerely yours,

Douglas Caddy

The full four letters can be found online using google.

      Two other murders bedsides that of Henry Marshall merit examination here because they are interrelated. These are the murders of John Kinser in 1951 and of Josefa Johnson, Lyndon’s sister in 1961, ten years later.

      The inside flyleaf of Mellen’s book is illuminating. It reads:

Perhaps no other president has a more ambiguous reputation than Lyndon Johnson. A brilliant tactician, he maneuvered colleagues and turned bills into law better than anyone. But he was trailed by a legacy of underhanded dealings, from his “stolen” Senate election in 1948 to kickbacks he artfully concealed from deals engineered with Texas wheeler-dealer Billie Sol Estes, defense contractors, and his Senate aid Bobby Baker. On the verge of investigation, Johnson was reprieved when he became president upon John F. Kennedy’s assassination.

Among the remaining mysteries of his life has been LBJ’s relationship with Malcolm “Mac” Wallace, who, in 1951, shot a Texas man having an affair with LBJ’s loose-cannon sister Josefa, also Wallace’s lover. When arrested, Wallace coolly said, “I work for Johnson…I have to get back to Washington.” Charged with murder, he was overnight defended by LBJ’s powerful lawyer John Cofer, and though convicted, amazingly received a suspended sentence. He then received a secret security clearance to work for LBJ friend and defense contractor D.H. Byrd, which the Office of Naval Intelligence tried to revoke for years without success.

     Billie Sol claimed that John Kinser was killed by Mac Wallace upon being ordered to do so by LBJ because Josefa had disclosed too many of LBJ’s secret criminal activities that threatened his goal of ascendancy to the presidency.

     In 1984 I arranged for Lucianne Goldberg, a prominent literary agent in New York City who later became famous in the Bill Clinton-Monica Lewinsky scandal, to meet with Billie Sol and me in Abilene to discuss his writing a book and getting it published. Among the murders he disclosed at our meeting with that of Josefa Johnson, LBJ’s sister. Billie Sol asserted that in 1961, Josefa was served on Christmas Eve a portion of a cake that contained poison and that she died the next day and was quietly buried the following day in the Johnson family cemetery on the Johnson ranch.

      Billie Sol in his autobiography “Billie Sol Estes: A Texas Legend” writes about this:

For a time after the Kinser death, Josefa Johnson kept her mouth shut, but soon there were additional reports of her talking. In the end it was decided she could never be trusted. On Christmas day [1961] she became ill and died. I was told she was given poison. When Cliff [Carter] told me this, I had an empty feeling in my stomach. My family is dear to me. I would never consider doing something to them. I believe Lyndon was guided  by the vision of his destiny and considered the sacrifice was needed by the people.

In 1971, my discussion with Cliff Carter centered on his disgust with the murders.

      At the meeting in Abilene attended by Lucianne Goldberg, Billie Sol remarked about the mysterious circumstances that surrounded the death of the daughter of John Connally who died on her wedding night. Lucianne was familiar with the mystery. Billie Sol added that the only man LBJ was ever afraid of was John Connally, one of LBJ’s political allies, because Connally was even more ruthless than LBJ.

     As the result of Edward Miller and I meeting with Assistant Attorney General Trott he arranged for three young FBI agents to examine the agency’s file on Billie Sol to determine if the pursuit of granting immunity to him was warranted. They concluded it was and the three agents and I flew from Washington to Abilene to meet with Billie Sol to hear what he had to say. Billie Sol showed up at the meeting at a hotel with his daughter, Pam, and immediately stated he would not talk to the FBI agents and was withdrawing from negotiations to gain immunity. He was adamant about this, so the three agents departed and flew back to Washington.

      Billie Sol in his autobiography writes:

After a further series of letters, a meeting was set up at a hotel in Abilene. As the day approached, I received a series of telephone calls from my Italian friends. I was informed my discussions with the Justice Department was a mistake. They insisted that if I appeared to be going through with the discussions, my life would end. I do not know how they found out about the discussions. Now I may be dumb but I am not stupid and I do not have a death wish.

     In my letter of proffer to Assistant Attorney General Trott in which I listed in behalf Billie Sol what he would disclose I purposely omitted one startling and controversial item for fear that it would cause the Justice Department to reject outright any discussion of immunity. This was that Billie Sol had confessed to me that he had paid a $500,000 bribe to U.S. Supreme Court Justice Tom Clark when the Supreme Court was considering a case in which Billie Sol was appealing his conviction for violating Texas law. Billie Sol said that the $500,000 in cash was delivered to President Johnson on Johnson’s plane at an airport in Texas by Billie Sol and his lawyer, John Cofer. LBJ later disbursed the bribe to Justice Clark, who originally was from Dallas and was part of the Texas Mafia

Here is a summary of the case in which Estes alleged that a bribe was paid:

381 U.S. 532 (85 S.Ct. 1628, 14 L.Ed.2d 543)

Billie Sol ESTES, Petitioner, v. STATE OF TEXAS.

No. 256.

Argued: April 1, 1965.

Decided: June 7, 1965.

• opinion, CLARK
• concurrence, WARREN, DOUGLAS, GOLDBERG  
• concurrence, WARREN, HARLAN
• dissent, STEWART, BLACK, BRENNAN, WHITE  
• dissent, WHITE, BRENNAN

See 86 S.Ct. 18.

John D. Cofer and Hume Cofer, Austin, Tex., for petitioner.

Waggoner Carr, Austin, Tex., and Leon Jaworski, Houston, Tex., for respondent.

Justice CLARK delivered the opinion of the Court.

The question presented here is whether the petitioner, who stands convicted in the District Court for the Seventh Judicial District of Texas at Tyler for swindling, was deprived of his right under the Fourteenth Amendment to due process by the televising and broadcasting of his trial. Both the trial court and the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals found against the petitioner. We hold to the contrary and reverse his conviction.

     The average American citizen would be shocked upon hearing that a U.S. Supreme Court justice had taken a bribe in a case and had even written the court’s opinion in the case. No doubt that the same citizen would be shocked upon learning that another Srpreme Court justice, who had been appointed to the bench by President Johnson, was accused to accepting money then forced to resign from the court.

Here an article from politico.com on the subject:

Abe Fortas resigns from Supreme Court May 15, 1969

By Andrew Glass

05/15/2008 04:12 AM EDT

On this day in 1969, Abe Fortas, denying he had done anything wrong, resigned from the Supreme Court to return to private law practice. In stepping down, Fortas became the first Supreme Court justice to resign under threat of impeachment.

In 1968, President Lyndon Johnson nominated Abe Fortas (1910-1982), at the time an associate justice, to succeed Earl Warren as chief justice. In becoming the first such nominee to appear before a Senate committee, Fortas faced hostile questioning about his relationship with LBJ, which had improperly continued while he served on the high tribunal.

Fortas cemented his friendship with the future president in 1948 when LBJ sought the Senate nomination in Texas. He won the Democratic primary contest by 87 votes. His opponent, Coke Stevenson, persuaded a federal judge to take Johnson’s name off the general election ballot while allegations of corruption — including 200 votes cast in alphabetical order for LBJ — were investigated. But after Fortas persuaded Justice Hugo Black to overturn the ruling, Johnson managed to win the general election.

On the Senate floor, conservative senators mounted a filibuster against the chief justice nomination, using as a wedge issue Fortas’ acceptance of a $15,000 fee for a series of university seminars. When supporters could muster only 45 of the 59 votes needed to end debate, Fortas asked the president to withdraw his name — becoming the first nominee for that post since 1795 to fail to win Senate approval.

Soon, a larger problem arose. In 1966, Fortas took a secret retainer from the family foundation of Wall Street financier Louis Wolfson, a friend and former client subsequently imprisoned for securities violations. The deal provided that in return for unspecified advice, Fortas was to receive $20,000 a year for life.

Disclosure of the retainer effectively ended Fortas’ judicial career.

     John Cofer represented Billie Sol in his 1965 case before the Supreme Court. Cofer, like Fortas, was involved in rigging the 1948 election that sent LBJ to the Senate. Cofer was Mac Wallace’s attorney in the 1951 homicide trial in which Wallace was found guilty of homicide with malice aforethought in the murder of John Kinser but was awarded a suspended sentence. Cofer was Billie Sol’s attorney in his state and federal criminal cases.

     One of the more startling disclosures in Billie Sol’s autobiography is his belief that the deaths of Mac Wallace, Cliff Carter and John Cofer were not natural. Apparently each of them knew too much about LBJ’s criminal activities and LBJ’s secret financial empire.

     In 1998 California producer Lyle Sardie released a fascinating and encompassing documentary, “LBJ: A Closer Look.” It traces Johnson’s fraudulent rise to power and his behind the scene involvement in the assassination of President Kennedy. I was privileged to be among those interviewed in the documentary, which can be viewed on YouTube.

The truth will set you free.

If you allow it to.