Jump to content
The Education Forum

VIDEO - Was It Johnson ? - Part 2

Recommended Posts

One thing Johnson did, which strikes me as a bit peculiar was that he commisssioned, early in Katzenbach's employment, a report about what is the extents of a vice Presidents powers.

He also appointed a couple of people. and then afterwards asked Katzenbach whether that was OK according to law. Katzenbach investigated and found it was not. Johnson then asked him to 'make it so' which I assume means find a reasonable argument for it. Katzenbach managed to do so and the appointments stood. So, I surmise that the presidency was indeed something that Johnson personally, not necessarily for any particular other interest but for himself, desired as the outcome of a long often frustrated career. Being senior, yet Vice President to Kennedy and arguably therefore also junior to Robert may have been a galling thing to wake up to every morning.

RFK resigned as AG in late 1964, and Katzenbach became acting Attorney General, which is essentially a weak position, that to someone with his integrity precluded important descicions. Only after Johnson won the Presidency and appointed Katzenbach as Attorney General could he assume full office powers. So for an important period in time there was a President who had not been elected supported, by a divided staff, and in Katzenbachs case a relatively weak post.

There was no reason for him to feel assured of a presidency beyond 1965. Was there? But, at least two years would have entitled him to a very enviable position in history.

One of the first of the still Deputy Attorney General Katzenbachs tasks was >>> to prepare a draft of the 1964 Civil Rights act.

What ensued was a process which quite possibly would have been different under Kennedy. Right off the bat they ditched a controversial yet important Kennedy component of Kennedy's Civil Rights bill. A series of compromises followed and what probably carried Johnson into his first term was the passage of that bill. The compromises continued with the 1965 voting rights bill till it also passed. Then came a third bill, which also passed.

Then Johnson dismantled a number of committees and consolidated the enforcement into one department which essentially did not have juristicton into other departments whereby the outcome was a situation of compromised Bills with no clout.


But still: what Proof exists of his involvement? This film (which is appreciated whether one believes its premise or not, particularly the footages (IMO) of the DPD, somewhere amongst all these people is Harry D. Holmes. I'd like to see him identified and see who he associates/talks with) is an argument for a position.

Part of that argument is that now, all of a sudden, the (acting) Presidency is a supreme power. This seems to be an important premise in the overall argument. By implication, President Kennedy, did not have this power. Theres something screwy about that basic premise.

(one minor correction: Byrd owned the Texas School Book Deposirory Building, not the TSBD(company).)

Edited by John Dolva
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...