Jump to content
The Education Forum

LBJ and Hoover knew there was a conspiracy

Ron Ecker

Recommended Posts

A webpage by Greg Burnham (link below) points out that in their 11/29/63 phone conversation, LBJ and Hoover clearly talk about a shot from the front, intended for JFK, hitting Connally because (so they assume) Connally moved. They don’t actually say “the front,” but there is no other way to interpret their words.

Hoover tells LBJ that the first and third shots hit JFK, and the second one would have hit JFK if Connally hadn’t turned and got in the way. Both men are obviously unaware that Connally was shot from behind, and of course the single bullet theory did not yet exist. Hoover tells LBJ that the third bullet was a whole bullet and rolled out of JFK’s head onto the stretcher.

This is all said after Hoover informs LBJ that the FBI had proven that one man could have fired all three shots in three seconds. So they are talking in effect about framing Oswald, knowing that there was a shooter in front, which they don't even consider worth discussing except as it relates (they assume) to Connally getting hit.

Here is the part about the shooting from the transcript at History Matters:

LBJ: How many . . . how many shots were fired?

JEH: Three.

LBJ: Any of them fired at me?

JEH: No. All three at the President . . . (snip) . . . he was hit by the first and the third . . . second hit the Governor. The third shot is a complete bullet, and that rolled out of the President’s head . . . (snip)

LBJ: Were they aiming at the President? (Note “they”)

JEH: They were aiming directly at the President. . . . (snip)

LBJ: How did it happen they hit Connally.

JEH: Connally turned . . . to the President, when the first shot was fired . . . and I think in that turning . . . it was where he got hit.

LBJ: If he hadn’t turned, he probably wouldn’t have got hit?

JEH: I think that is very likely.

LBJ: Would the President’ve got hit the second one?

JEH: No, the President wasn’t hit with the second one . . .

LBJ: I say, if Connally hadn’t been in his way?

JEH: Oh, yes . . . yes . . . the President would no doubt have been hit.

LBJ: He would have been hit three times . . .

JEH: He would have been hit three times. . . .


As if that’s not enough, Hoover wrote a memo later that day summarizing the conversation, and again makes clear that there can be only one interpretation of what was said. And this memo was addressed to several top FBI officials, which can only mean that they too were aware of or assumed a conspiracy with no discussion necessary.

The text of the memo is included on Burnham’s webpage, and here is the pertinent passage:

“The President then asked how it happened that Connally was hit. I

explained that Connally turned to the President when the first shot was fired and in that turning he got hit. The President then asked, if Connally had not been in his seat, would the President have been hit by the second shot. I said yes.”


This 11/29/63 conversation is proof that LBJ and Hoover both knew of a conspiracy, whether or not they were involved in it from the beginning. They discuss in a casual manner how “they,” more than one man, shot JFK, and how one of them shot Connally because he turned after the first shot and thereby got in the way (of what would have to be a shot from the right front).

I don't understand why this has not received more attention. I don't know of any discussion of it besides Burnham's. Why, for example, was it not pointed out in Barr McClellan's book about LBJ being behind the plot, or in "The Guilty Men" video that also tried to implicate LBJ? It would have been one more point for the History Channel's panel of so-called historians to avoid discussing in their attack on the video.

LBJ and Hoover both knew, or at least thought they knew, there was a conspiracy, yet proceeded with an "investigation" and commission aimed solely at framing a possibly innocent man as a lone gunman. The 11/29/63 phone conversation damns them both in their own words.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I tend to agree with your conclusion, there was enough confusion about what happened in Dallas during those first few days it remains possible both men were simply projecting their worst fears onto the situation. Note that LBJ asked if anyone had shot at him. Nevertheless, it's important to note that LBJ's buddy Connally shouted "My God, THEY are going to shoot us all!" after being hit.

It's also instructive to process that LBJ pressured Warren into leading the Commission under the guise that if he did not, 40 million lives could be lost in a nuclear war with Russia. This sent Warren a message loud and clear that he was to conclude that a conspiracy involving the Russians WAS NOT responsible. It has never been clarified if there was any kind of a conspiracy that would have been acceptable to Johnson. It is also worth pondering the potential threat beneath LBJ's assertion--perhaps what he was really telling Warren was that if there was evidence for a conspiracy he would make sure the American people blamed the Russians and that he would not use his office to convince them of anything different. He may very well have been holding the world hostage in order to force Warren to clear him in public of his crime. It's worth pointing out in this context that Warren was a politician first and a jurist second, and would readily sacrifice principle to save American lives. After all he was instrumental in the internment of Japanese Americans during WWII.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

So Hoover told LBJ there were three hits: a JFK back shot, a JFK head shot and a Connally shot...this doesn't suggest Hoover was talking about a 'from the front' shot.

He's saying Connolly turned and took a bullet. The sidewalk shot and the necktie shot are not mentioned. The known miss (Teague) is what made Arlen Spector compress the JFK back shot and the John Connally shot (shots) into one impossible "Single Bullet" shot. The tape records Hoover feeding LBJ the cover story, and he was concealing the forward gunman.


Link to comment
Share on other sites


Do we know that Hoover's hand written comment is from Nov. 22, 1963? What if he read it and commented on it on say Nov. 25th 1963? Wasn't that the time by which the media had already made it clear that Oswald was the President's assassin?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you Wim, that explains a lot. I generally look for consistency, internal logic, external confirming details - motivation, opportunity, cohorts - This Jimmy Sutton/Files character is telling the truth. We're lucky to have this document, this is the big one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Response directly above this refers to the full confession of BADGEMAN, the confession of Jimmy Sutton/Files available on Wim's site.

thanks again, I suggest new readers look at the confession before

trolling the threads because the confession of Jimmy Files answers many questions including the identity of

the Dal-Tex shooters and the grassy knoll assassin....

After viewing the site I would tend to side with Wim in any

slag-fest......................................Bulk Disinformation is readily available

but the heavy lifting and critical thinking is being done by people like Wim, Jim and Lee Forman.............

shanet clark

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in

Sign In Now
  • Create New...