Jump to content
The Education Forum

VIDEO - Was it Johnson ? - Part 1


Recommended Posts

Examines the Lyndon-Johnson-was-behind-the-assassination theory. ( 1st

of 3 parts)

Of course it was Lyndon Johnson. Who else could have made the FBI look at the clues which would have proven conspiracy and first ignore and then bury them later. But the problem for Lyndon's legagcy is that by doing all the evidence altering lies that he did, he introduced himself as the prime suspect, along with Hoover. But go to TSBD Sixth Floor Museum, you'll see Castro, the Mob, the CIA, the Russians introduced as suspects, but you won't see Lyndon talked about as a prime suspect.

The episode GUILTY MEN introduced Lyndon as the one, and Barr McClellan says as his lawyer (one of many of course) that he knows beyond a reasonable doubt that LBJ killed JFK.

The major smoking gun? The fingerprint left on a cardboard box in the sniper's nest which belonged to Malcolm Wallace, a killer that is tied to several murders with Lyndon Johnson. The show mentions that Lyndon had his own sister killed by Wallace, in addition, her boyfriend was killed by Wallace, and was convicted of that murder.

The fingerprint from that murder conviction is matched to a fingerprint found in the sniper's nest.

The FBI when reviewing the set of fingerprints says no match. But what would any rational person expect? The US GOVERNMENT has been lying about this coup for nearly a half century, did anyone expect the reply, Oh yes, the fingerprints match, it was obviously a simple case of the Vice President who was about to go to jail for simple fraud, murder..... so he killed JFK and as President he presided over the biggest lie in history with the Warren Commission fed absolute BS by Hoover's FBI.

LBJ and Hoover, it's really that simple.

Of course, the History Channel BURIED this show and it is not available for purchase. Jimmy Carter, Bill Moyers, Gerald Ford, Lady Bird Johnson, Jack Valenti, Gerald Ford all lined up to protest this show. It was shown for two days before it was pulled.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bill,

Do you think that LBJ would use his own hitman, a bungling one at that (though Wallace was not known to the general public), in a presidential assassination? Would he not more likely use rogue CIA agents (e.g. Cord Meyer as claimed by Hunt) or organized crime, for some measure of plausible deniability? How or why do you think Wallace got involved?

Ron

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ron, check out this description of one of three men seen in a window of the TSBD shortly before the shooting:

Heavyset man w/hat, horn-rimmed glasses & tan sportcoat. After the assassination, he was seen getting into a Rambler driven by a dark-skinned male.

Mac Wallace wore glasses.

Workers pecking on window of the TSBD pointed to a young man with horn-rimmed glasses, a plaid coat and a raincoat. Dallas Police detained this man (whom I believe was Larry Florer) and took him to the Sheriff's Office for questioning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gil,

I believe the Wallace fingerprint is probably genuine and that Wallace was there. What I can't understand is why, as it would seem to defy common sense. I suppose that Wallace being used to blackmail LBJ if necessary is a plausible explanation. But why in the world would LBJ have to be blackmailed? Also, how could conspirators using Wallace to potentially blackmail LBJ count on Wallace leaving an identifiable fingerprint? "Mac, we're doing this to blackmail Johnson, so leave something to incriminate yourself." Or, "Mac, be sure not to wear any gloves."

It's just one more mind-boggling aspect of the assassination.

Ron

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe the Wallace fingerprint is probably genuine and that Wallace was there. What I can't understand is why, as it would seem to defy common sense. I suppose that Wallace being used to blackmail LBJ if necessary is a plausible explanation. But why in the world would LBJ have to be blackmailed? Also, how could conspirators using Wallace to potentially blackmail LBJ count on Wallace leaving an identifiable fingerprint? "Mac, we're doing this to blackmail Johnson, so leave something to incriminate yourself." Or, "Mac, be sure not to wear any gloves."

It's just one more mind-boggling aspect of the assassination.

Ron

If Mac Wallace was involved in the killing of Henry Marshall (which many think he was) and the roof was about to come crashing down on the TEXAS MAFIA, then the best way out was to get LBJ in charge.

Let's just consider what LBJ would have done IF he was involved in the assassination:

First, there has to be a patsy and Oswald, who was obviously involved in intelligence, fit the bill perfectly. Oswald was down on the second floor in the lunchroom.....

He'd want to kill the investigations, and it's well documented that he set up the Warren Commission to keep the many other investigations from springing up, such as Congress, Texas......

He'd have Hoover supply whatever "evidence" he needed, and anything too damaging would disappear. Start with the Zapruder Film, buried for years because the public couldn't handle it, the Autopsy photos the property of the Kennedy family to this day, the classified sealed evidence, the idiotic documentaries which even now get confused about the simplest information, and on and on.

No one else on Earth could have pulled this off and half a century later have people still wondering about who did it. The US GOVERNMENT will never admit that LBJ killed him but the falsified evidence points directly to Hoover and LBJ.

Instead of seeing all the discrepancies as confusing, look at them as confirmation that the GUILTY MEN were at the top and had the power to make lies into facts. Then and only then, it all makes sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Instead of seeing all the discrepancies as confusing, look at them as confirmation that the GUILTY MEN were at the top and had the power to make lies into facts. Then and only then, it all makes sense.

You didn't address what doesn't make sense to me, the involvement of Wallace, a bungler who tried to kill Marshall four or five ways. Whose idea was that and why?

As already noted, a man who looked a lot like Wallace was seen leaving the TSBD. What if some ignorant cop trying to do his job had stopped this suspicious character? And then what if a couple of photographers, who were running around all over the place, took some good shots of Wallace being detained, like those three famous tramps, to go along with the gallery of lookalikes already on display from Dealey Plaza.

Why take such a chance? Wallace invited disaster in what was otherwise an obviously well planned plot. Unless he was an instrument of blackmail (but still one inviting disaster), what in the world did he have to offer the conspirators, other than a willingness to kill, no matter how long and by ever how many means it might take? Seems to me that any conspirators in their right minds would have told Wallace, "Don't call us, we'll call you."

One thing about LBJ, he didn't get where he was by being a fool. Why would he want Mac Wallace anywhere near Dallas that day? With CIA and FBI and whoever else on board, he clearly did not need him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Examines the Lyndon-Johnson-was-behind-the-assassination theory. ( 1st

of 3 parts)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fATmzROAs5E

_____________________________

Not trying to hijack this important thread but just noticed that the guy sitting in the front row wearing sunglasses and leaning forward at 8:49 bears a resemblance to the mysterious John O'Hare/William Bishop....

I'm sure it's just my over-active imagination acting up again, but thought I'd share it with y'all anyway....

FWIW,

--Thomas

_____________________________

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You didn't address what doesn't make sense to me, the involvement of Wallace, a bungler who tried to kill Marshall four or five ways. Whose idea was that and why?

As already noted, a man who looked a lot like Wallace was seen leaving the TSBD. What if some ignorant cop trying to do his job had stopped this suspicious character? And then what if a couple of photographers, who were running around all over the place, took some good shots of Wallace being detained, like those three famous tramps, to go along with the gallery of lookalikes already on display from Dealey Plaza.

Why take such a chance? Wallace invited disaster in what was otherwise an obviously well planned plot. Unless he was an instrument of blackmail (but still one inviting disaster), what in the world did he have to offer the conspirators, other than a willingness to kill, no matter how long and by ever how many means it might take? Seems to me that any conspirators in their right minds would have told Wallace, "Don't call us, we'll call you."

One thing about LBJ, he didn't get where he was by being a fool. Why would he want Mac Wallace anywhere near Dallas that day? With CIA and FBI and whoever else on board, he clearly did not need him.

Billy Sol Estes said that when Henry Marshall wouldn't take a bribe and wouldn't back off, Lyndon Johnson said "Get Rid of Him."

Since this was 1961 (memory) and Johnson was Vice President, imagine sending this clown (Mac Wallace) to kill a federal agriculture agent. Of course, the killing was a mess, but the bottom line is it was ruled a suicide, Henry Marshall supposedly took a bolt action rifle and shot himself FIVE TIMES! Johnson through Ed Clark OWNED the legal system in Texas according to Barr McClellan. Murders, bribes, threats control......

Imagine, the FBI took ALL the evidence away from the Dallas Police, Johnson took the body and limo away from Dallas, the caskets were switched between Dallas and Washington, the autopsy photos don't match the descriptions of what the Doctors at Parkland said they saw.

Now, would Lyndon Johnson care at all about using Wallace in the assassination? He knew since Hoover as head of the FBI controlled the evidence, that he could change anything he had to. And he did.

That's why we're talking about this murder almost a half century later. A corrupt government controlled by a liberal democrat, Lyndon Johnson, generated any evidence they needed to pass this by Warren Commissioin with future President Gerald Ford feeding Hoover whatever he needed to know.

It wasn't foolish for LBJ to use Wallace in the assassination. The man could be trusted to do anything, including killing JFK. There are many who believe Wallace even killed LBJ's own sister to keep her quiet.

It wasn't a foolish act by Johnson to use Wallace, it was arrogance to kill a President in front of hundreds of witnesses and realize that the witnesses could be neurtralized. And they were.

Wallace left a fingerprint but it wasn't found until 1998. LBJ had sealed all the evidence, remember?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to E. Howard Hunt, LBJ had Cord Meyer mastermind the assassination. I guess that LBJ stipulated, however, that Mac Wallace be included. It's hard to believe, but I can't deny that the evidence points to Wallace's participation.

The pieces don't quite fit, but that's why we're still talking about who did it after all these years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to E. Howard Hunt, LBJ had Cord Meyer mastermind the assassination. I guess that LBJ stipulated, however, that Mac Wallace be included. It's hard to believe, but I can't deny that the evidence points to Wallace's participation.

The pieces don't quite fit, but that's why we're still talking about who did it after all these years.

Ron,

If Wallace was present on the sixth floor of the Book Depository, and I believe he was, to me that suggests Johnson wasn't involved with the actual assassination planning but something the plotters manipulated which could then be used as leveridge against LBJ if needed.

If Wallace was there then we need to look at Loy Factor and his story. How much credibility does he have?

Forgetting his version of events just for the moment, it might be worth noting that Factor was close friends with a man named John Sawtooth. Sawtooth was a Texan legend when it came to tracking and the like. Sawtooth was the guide Paul Rothermel used when hunting. Rothermel was an expert marksman with many trophies for Boone and Crockett Club events.

Like you, I hate coincidences and the Rothermel, Sawtooth, Factor, Wallace link does bother me a little. Given who Rothermel worked for, one does wonder if some big political strings weren't being pulled here. Control being the name of the game.

Just thinking aloud really.

James

Edited by James Richards
Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to E. Howard Hunt, LBJ had Cord Meyer mastermind the assassination. I guess that LBJ stipulated, however, that Mac Wallace be included. It's hard to believe, but I can't deny that the evidence points to Wallace's participation.

The pieces don't quite fit, but that's why we're still talking about who did it after all these years.

o

Who cares who pulled the trigger? The real smoking gun lies in the evidence that was altered.

Consider the YOUTUBE Video which shows:

A witness says he saw a bullet hit JFK in the temple.

A White House Photographer says he saw pictures that showed a small bullet wound to the front side of the head (temple) and a massive wound to the back of JFK's head. BUT later these same pictures were altered to remove the massive wound in the back of the head and the small entrance wound to the front of the head.

Several of the Parkland doctors describe the massive wound to the back of JKF's head.

Then Doctor David Mantik describes the photos of the back of JKF's head that have OBVIOUSLY been altered. The best 1960's technology can not mask the forgery that took place. Then Dr. Mantik observes these photos have always been in the control of the government so whoever ordered the alterations had to be in the government. That observation rules out most of the suspects, so who had the power that could contol the investigations and alter evidence?

There's only two people who come to mind and that's Hoover in the FBI and LBJ as President.

Some of this video is from the History Channel's 2003 shows that were pulled from the air just like the subject video of THE GUILTY MEN. It really makes it too easy to reach a conclusion that only LBJ and Hoover could have pulled this off when you looks at some of this information.

NEVER FORGET that LBJ sealed most of the evidence, the autopsy photos were the property of the Kennedy Family, the Zapruder film was not seen by the general public until 1975 and was only seen then because of the Garrison investigation......

And on and on.

The details bother you but always remember the arrogance of LBJ to kill JFK in front of hundreds of people and then to neuter every dissenting witness. It shows you that they were confident they could pull it off and they did. Neither one of them were hung as they should have been but it's very dangerous having a government that can lie when it needs to and have a press that couldn't figure out something as simple as a third world coup.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to E. Howard Hunt, LBJ had Cord Meyer mastermind the assassination. I guess that LBJ stipulated, however, that Mac Wallace be included. It's hard to believe, but I can't deny that the evidence points to Wallace's participation.

The pieces don't quite fit, but that's why we're still talking about who did it after all these years.

Ron...perhaps Wallace was more then just a bumbling hit-man. The media, history, tends to portray and characterize people based on a few events in their lives. They don't always give a clear, accurate view of the reality of the person. I hate to appear to be in his corner but perhaps Mac Wallace was more competent, in some respects, then history seems to portray. In any event, competent or no, it could be the he was THE hard man that Johnson could trust. One of the very few he could trust hard or not, this side of Hell that is. Loyalty is everything in the dirty business we call politics, just like the Mafia. The other few men in Johnson's world that he trusted, may have been trustworthy but not the kind of hard man you would need to be involved in this type of operation. Toughness and loyalty might be why he was around. Everyone makes mistakes, but a totally loyal "ok" man who occasionaly screws up, is better then an outstanding man of dubious loyalty. And let's face it, I am sure we haven't even heard of all this man's "successes". It is possible that he was acting as Johnson's "representative" or manager, of some sort. Overseeing, but not running, the most unrelible aspect of the assassination; the grunts who would actually did the dirty deed. He could have been Johnson's Security Man on the job site, looking out for his master's interest and reporting to him how the events unfolded whether they met with success, or more importantly, one who could start cleaning things up right away if they met with failure (i.e.: removal of certain if not all the actors afterwards, clean up, etc.). This way Lyndon would have some eyes and ears on the ground and if they were unsucessful, someone to clean things up and someone from whom he would get an truthful view of exactly what took place. Or it could be that "LBJ is guilty" thing, which is picking up a whole lot of steam these days, is just another, the latest, limited hangout. Get all the evidence relased, put all the information anyone might be sitting on, hoping to make a buck or whatever, into the public arena, for peer review and examination. It's going to be a long time before the truth comes out that, a truth we can all agree on. It could be that it may never come out. Our country may not survive the challanges ahead and emerge in a form that would ever allow the this truth to come out or the pertainent evidence to ever be released.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm going to have to read The Men on the Sixth Floor again. As I recall, Loy Factor said that Mac was a shooter. My impression after the first reading of the book was that Factor was credible in terms of what he somehow knew about the TSBD etc., but how he said they escaped (he and Ruth Ann went down the stairs, out the back, and drove off in a car) was completely at odds with the accounts of eyewitnesses who would have seen someone descending the stairs as well as anyone leaving the back of the building, on foot and particularly in a car.

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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...