Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Samantha

Samantha's Journal
Samantha's Journal
November 28, 2013

I am impressed

and a little surprised. Surprised because I was going to suggest that to you. I waited two days before responding and found myself trying instead to give you more detail. I found myself thinking that due to the fierceness of your posts you would not consider even looking at the possibility. So I was certainly wrong about that, wasn't I?

But even if you finish the book and still do not agree with certain things, I feel sure you will be amazed at the wealth of detail you learn about Johnson. I knew a lot about Johnson before this book was published. I made a point of learning more about him years ago. I believe you will be stunned at the level of corruption he practiced all of his adult life, and the number of criminal acts in which he was involved.

But I hope you let me know what you think. I have a ton of political books I have collected over the years, and I count this one as among the best.

Sam

November 28, 2013

He was a member of Johnson's legal team and had inside information

As such he was privy to confidential information, attended meetings, kept his own notes and files and was the recipient of information of a confidential information from colleagues. That is not "theorist" -- that is a person who has access to facts.

Yes, he does report there were three shooters, and I believe that as well. Wallace was actually recruited by Clark to be the primary sniper for the assassination. He had done work of this nature for Clark. You need to know the relationship between these primary principals extended over decades.

Clark told Wallace to find someone to act as a fall guy for the assassination. That is where Oswald came in, he was that designated fall guy. He had no long-term relationship with this group of people but was lured into attending a meeting of Marxists by Wallace. Wallace slowly built up the relationship and eventually asked him to participate in the assassination. Wallace and Oswald both were sitting in the sniper's nest and the plan was they would fire simultaneously, attacking Kennedy from the rear, and when the limousine reached a certain spot, that was precisely when they both were to fire. Oswald was not perceived to be "reliable" enough to sign him up to be the actual second sniper.

A further prong to the plan was to place a second sniper on the Grassy Knoll who would fire at Kennedy from the front should Wallace and Oswald not accomplish their goal. This was an experienced hit man referred to only as "Junior" and I believe his real name is not divulged. He was recommended by someone in the Government whose name I do not wish to report here. He is referred to in other places also simply as "Junior." In other words, this assassination was planned so carefully, there was no way President Kennedy would live past that limousine ride. No way.

Wallace supplied all of the bullets used that day.

When the car Kennedy was riding on was nearly at the spot where Oswald and Wallace would fire simultaneously, Oswald was so excited he could not contain himself and fired too soon. He did in fact miss. The bullet hit the payment in front of the Lincoln and ricocheted to a spot where it was never found. Wallace fired a quick second shot, aimed at the center of Kennedy's head. But it was a bit low and to the right and hit Kennedy in the shoulder blade. It was deflected and exited at the tie knot and traveled further to crack the windshield. (We have all read about that cracked windshield, but no one ever explained how that happened to my knowledge.) And this is the famous frame we have seen of Kennedy's nervous system taking over, his hands making a fist as they rise with his elbows out.

Oswald shot again and missed again (so there you go, one shooter missed twice) but he did hit Connelly. That bullet hit Connelly's back shoulder, came out at the right nipple, hit his wrist and defected to lodge in Conelly's thigh.

As the car continued to move forward, Junior saw the President still erect and fired a fourth shot. It is described in the book as a shot that Junior made while aiming right between the eyes on Kennedy's face. That was the fatal bullet which exploded his skull. That bullet fragmented as well, with bits of it flung to differed places described by McClellan. According to him, snipers often work in pairs.

I have paraphrased this actual shooting information from Blood, Money and Power , and it can be specifically located on pages 204, 205 and 206.

Regarding the fingerprints, McClellan requested and receive the print evidence from the Warren Commission. But to address your point about the Wallace knowing Oswald, details of prior meetings are discussed in the book. But there is a third possibility why the Warren Commission mentioned a palm print as opposed to a fingerprint. The palm print might have been the most prevalent print (perhaps it was on the side of the box he moved in the sniper's nest) but the fingerprints extending from that palm might have been on the bottom. This is just a guess on my part. I have shuffled many boxes in law firms, and they usually have holes in the side where one inserts their thumbs, the palms are on the side of the box, and the fingers on the bottom.... Darby's ten-page affidavit consists of 5 pages of what is clearly fingerprints.

I think it is totally fine for you to disagree with McClellan but he does not deserve to be treated so disrespectfully. This is a man that had privileged information who had a Herculean struggle to reveal what he knew to the public. I salute him for that. As I read his book the first time, he mentioned certain things that I had read before that were never explored or explained. For instance, the one eye-witness who said he thought he heard two shots fired simultaneously (that would have been Oswald's first shot and the almost immediately following shot fired by Wallace), people who said there was a shot fired from the Grassy Knoll, statements to the fact there were attendees with false Secret Service credentials -- just to name a few. The Warren Commission, one must remember, was controlled by Lyndon Johnson himself. It's final report was not unanimous. It is extremely difficult to prove a negative, if not impossible, but suffice it to say the Warren Commission did not prove Wallace acted alone. The fact it left unidentified one fingerprint for 35 years substantiates that fact.

Sam

November 26, 2013

Wallace was murdered in 1971 as a result of his exhaust being rigged

He was eliminated because he kept demanding more money from Clark. With part of the carbon monoxide fixed to flow into his car, coupled with the fact he took medicine for narcolepsy, he fell asleep at the wheel and drove off the road. He died of massive head injuries and carbon monoxide poisoning.

I seriously doubt anyone accusing Wallace of a murder would worry about defamation suits during any year. He was a hit man for Clark and even was tried and convicted for the murder of a man named Doug Kinser. McClellan also discusses Wallace's murder of Henry Marshall, which Wallace staged as a suicide.

Wallace is a man who did Johnson and Clark "dirty work" for years.

McClellan credits Wallace with being the one who recruited Oswald to participate in the assassination. Oswald was not considered to be "reliable" but Wallace was looking for -- here comes that word -- a patsy or a fall guy to take the blame.

On the day of the assassination, Wallace parked behind the depository and stood with a man named Yates who had false Secret Service credentials. To any passing observers, the two would be assumed to be there to protect the President. If anyone came too close, they directed them to move away. A little after 11:00, Wallace entered the depository, rode up to the sixth floor and rearranged some boxes with Oswald. He left the print on the box on which he sat.

All of this is reported in McClellan's book, Blood, Money & Power. I have read many articles and books on Kennedy and his assassination. This one book answered a lot of questions, and it was also part of the basis of the show on the History Channel about President Kennedy's assassination that outraged the Johnson family.

Sam

November 26, 2013

First of all, Barr McClellan was one of Johnson's attorneys, not some remote conspiracy theorist

The fingerprint evidence was obtained through the Warren Commission itself. The print had been lifted from one of the boxes stacked in the sniper's nest of the depository.

Darby was considered an expert in his field. His affidavit attaches pictures (5), and they are the pictures of the left-little finger.

Darby later also reconsidered his affidavit and identified additional match points. He was not originally given Wallace's name or the name of the case. Confirmation was sought outside of the United States since politcs was entering into the debate. The match was confirmed by French print experts, also under a blind analysis.

Frankly, McClellan had first-hand experience with Johnson and worked directly for Clark for decades. For that reason, I am inclined to take his analysis over anyone who did not have that type of direct contact with the principals and the issues.

Sam

November 25, 2013

I usually agree with Vincent Bugliosi but not this time

Was it his intention to trick the 87 year old Darby when he said the print was a palm print, not a fingerprint? I just don't get that. Darby wrote a 5 page Affidavit in 1998 and attached several exhibits. He examined a latent print, not a palm print:

"A latent fingerprint is the production of the ridges when the finger has been placed on a surface. The ridges of the finger leave a residue, body fluids and chemicals on the surface touched. The latent prints are recovered and compared to the inked prints." (Quote from p. 3 of 10 pages, of A. Nathan Darby Affidavit 9 March 1998), reprinted within Exhibits, Pictures and Documents segment at the end of Barr McClellan's book, "Blood, Money & Power.&quot

I have also read that Darby was threatened with having his credentials revoked as a result of his identification of Wallace's print.

I am going to try to get back to you later today with the other independent expert who reviewed blind this same latent print and had no knowledge with what case it was associated with yet still managed to identify Wallace's print.

But as has been said before, when experts disagree, you be the judge. So if you feel this has been discredited by Bugliosi that is your prerogative. Looking at the overabundance of evidence presented on this one subject by Johnson's lawyer himself, and reading what other experts have said, I do believe there is no doubt Wallace was a shooter that day. Bugliosi had no close personal connection with the chain of events as they evolved over years, but Barr McClellan did. He worked closely with Clark, Johnson's attorney for decades, so I believe those two are much more likely to have the most credible input on this matter.

Sam

November 25, 2013

The Warren Commission did not have factual evidence that Oswald acted alone

All of the fingerprints in the sniper's nest were identified except for one. The Warren Commission put an expedited request in to have all fingerprints in that area identified to eliminate the possibility of a second shooter. It almost succeeded but not quite. That one fingerprint remained unidentified for 35 years.

Then sometime during the late 90s it was identified as belonging to Mac Wallace, a man who was a lot of different things, but significantly a KKK sympathizer, a convicted murderer, and a long-time Johnson associate and a former marine. The fingerprint was identified by fingerprint expert A. Nathan Darby, and that same fingerprint was independently identified by a French fingerprint expert who had simply been given the print, not the name of the suspect or the name of the case being investigated. The latter confirmation was obtained to support the findings of Darby.

This information is painstakingly outlined by one of Johnson's lawyer's, Barr McClellan, father of Scott McClellan, in the book Blood, Money and Power. This was also the source of the special on the History Channel that the Johnson family angrily contested and demanded time to contradict. The people on the panel who ultimately appeared to contradict these findings did not address any of those allegations.

There are a number of documents and exhibits in the last part of the book.

Sam

November 20, 2013

Hey, Cat Savvy DU'ers -- hello from Nikita's kids! (Picture Heavy)



Remember Dane, who I now call My Great Dane? He is a Mama's Boy...probably soon moving to NJ but promises not to ever vote for Chris Christie.



and here is the beautiful Monet, a feline work of art, but if you look closely, you can barely see the shy Elise hiding behind the couch!


But there she is, the beautiful Elise named after the lovely Beethoven piece


My golden tiger-stripped Sunny, also a Mama's Boy



and Bo, the little kitten with the big personality, the last picture I have before he left for his new home -- I will always love him.

Posted to say hello to DU'ers who read and participated in the Nikita threads and to say thank you for all of your help in getting us where we are today.

Sam

Edited to add this picture of Elise that I had difficulty posting earlier:

November 18, 2013

We think somewhat alike on this subject -- here is the last paragraph of a post I made today

"Bullets and fingerprints aside, there are much larger questions to be answered: who planned the assassination, who organized the minutia of the detail, what principals participated, and why did they do it. It is an extremely healthy endeavor that we undertake in continuing to attempt to learn the answers to these questions in order to better protect our Presidents now and in the future, and additionally to hold accountable those who played a role who are today still living."

I believe the assassination was literally planned by Johnson's attorney in Texas named Edward Clark. Clark had represented Johnson since the inception of his political career, in other words for decades. Johnson had an incredible number of skeletons in his closet. While some of these skeletons have in the past made the public media, many today are just not talked about often, if ever, publicly.

Johnson was Clark's cash cow, and if and when he became President, the rewards would be astronomical for both. So Clark would protect Johnson at all costs.

Of course, Johnson was from the state of Texas and was no stranger to either the players of the military industrial complex and BIG OIL. Kennedy's failure to engage in a war against the Soviets over the Cuban missile crisis, his failure to escalate the Vietnam war into a full fledged war, the rumors in Washington that he was planning to pull out 1,000 advisors by the end of 1963 infuriated many well-placed power brokers as well as wealthy businessmen. They saw Kennedy as weak on national security and an impediment to the profits of big business. He had to go.

During Kennedy's first term, while Johnson was sitting in the Vice President's Office, he was threatened by two personal scandals, either one of which could result in his being ejected from that seat. One of them was the Billy Sol Estes scandal who was facing Federal fraud charges and who gave a lot of money to Johnson's campaigns. He also received a lot of assistance with cotton allotments and Johnson "helped" him with that. Large amounts of money and other assistance was involved in the Johnson/Estes relationship, and when Estes came up for criminal charges, Johnson was panic-stricken. The other scandal facing Johnson was his relationship with Bobby Baker who provided women for "entertainment" purposes to members in Congress. The Republicans were doing all they could to stir up these scandals and the Senate was starting hearings. Johnson knew as Vice President he faced exposure and possible expulsion should he be charged in either scandal; however, as President neither could touch him.

Add to all of this mix, Johnson and Kennedy despised each other and you have the recipe for an assassination. This is part of the answer to the question Why.

I believe the "cook" for the recipe was Edward Clark, as suggested by Barr McClellan, another attorney who work with Clark and the author of the book, Blood, Power and Money. He suggests in his book Johnson was kept in the "wood-shed" from the details. In that way, he could react convincingly when the President was assassinated and he could never reveal the details of the planning if he did not know them.

But not only for Johnson, but also for the other interested parties mentioned above, Clark planned the assassination, put the pieces together and implemented the whole operation. Oswald, I believe, was involved, but I also believe Mac Wallace, a long-time Johnson associate and hit-man, was a second shooter. A fingerprint that remained unidentified for 35 years, one found in the sixth-floor sniper's nest, was identified in the late 90s by an expert named A. Nathan Darby and independently confirmed by a French fingerprint expert, who was not supplied the name of the matter under investigation or the suspected identity of the person to whom the fingerprints belonged.

Considering the longstanding history Johnson and Clark had with Big Oil, the Military Industrial Complex, wealthy businessmen as well as expert hitmen and other nefarious people, a lot of the necessary players were easily gathered by them for participation and financing of an assassination of the President. Only the cover-up would be tricky but they also knew people who could assist with that....

Sam


November 18, 2013

A majority of the American people do not believe the Warren Commission report

When we observe a significant anniversary of the late President Kennedy's assassination, we see an accelerated appearance of more books, more specials and more articles on this very subject. Those overly protective of the United States' reputation, meaning those who work overtime to hide the truth in the interests of "national security", do not want the world to know the cause of the death of a beloved United States' president remains in question 50 years following that tragic event. The fact that the citizens of this Country are still questioning and still researching how this tragedy happened does not comport with the image the gatekeepers wish to project.

I have read many declaratory statements at this site these last few days that there is no evidence that a conspiracy existed to cause the death of the late President John F. Kennedy. I have written many posts on this subject but would simply ask this question at this time: has all of the literal evidence collected by the United States government and other key involved and/or interested parties on the Kennedy assassination been released to the public?

Sam

November 18, 2013

I do not appreciate your condescending attitude and derisive statements

"You are old enough to know better?" Really? If you ever respond to another post of mine, you need to remain civil.

You also have a flaw in your reasoning process if you believe I said anything like a single smudged fingerprint outweighs the mounts of evidence that point to Oswald as the lone killer. I was 90 percent already there in my belief Johnson played a key role, an opinion I arrived at after decades of reading many published accounts, but the identification of that fingerprint (which had gone unidentified for 35 years) as belonging to Wallace cinched, read that word again, cinched my continuing opinion. Mac Wallace was a name I was already familiar with as a man who had been convicted of murder and was a known associate of Johnson for a long period of time.

Additionally, a majority of Americans do not believe in the Warren Commission report:

"By the beginning of the new century skepticism had turned to incredulity. Opinion polls now showed that around 90 percent of Americans believed that Lee Harvey Oswald was innocent or, at most, he merely assisted in a conspiracy to kill the president." (emphasis added, quoted from the History News Network) http://hnn.us/article/8059

If that is not enough to convince you, you might like to read up on the United States House Select Committee's on Assassinations findings in 1976:

"The United States House of Representatives Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) was established in 1976 to investigate the assassinations of John F. Kennedy and Martin Luther King, Jr. The Committee investigated until 1978 and issued its final report, and concluded that Kennedy was very likely assassinated as a result of a conspiracy. However, the Committee noted that it believed that the conspiracy did not include the governments of the Soviet Union or Cuba. The Committee also stated it did not believe the conspiracy was organized by any organized crime group, nor any anti-Castro group, but that it could not rule out individual members of any of these two groups acting together.

The HSCA suffered from being conducted mostly in secret, and then issued a public report with much of its evidence sealed for 50 years under Congressional rules.[1] In 1992, Congress passed legislation to collect and open up all the evidence relating to Kennedy's death, and created the Assassination Records Review Board to further that goal." at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_House_Select_Committee_on_Assassinations.

Here are that committee's specific findings with regard to the Kennedy assassination:

" Lee Harvey Oswald fired three shots at Kennedy. The second and third shots Oswald fired struck the President. The third shot he fired killed the President.
Scientific acoustical evidence establishes a high probability that at least two gunmen fired at the President. Other scientific evidence does not preclude the possibility of two gunmen firing at the President. Scientific evidence negates some specific conspiracy allegations. (my emphasis added)*
The committee believes, on the basis of the evidence available to it, that Kennedy was probably assassinated as a result of a conspiracy. The committee was unable to identify the other gunmen or the extent of the conspiracy.
The committee believes, on the basis of the evidence available to it, that the Soviet Government was not involved in the assassination of Kennedy.
The committee believes, on the basis of the evidence available to it, that the Cuban Government was not involved in the assassination of Kennedy.
The committee believes, on the basis of the evidence available to it, that anti-Castro Cuban groups, as groups, were not involved in the assassination of Kennedy, but that the available evidence does not preclude the possibility that individual members may have been involved.
The committee believes, on the basis of the evidence available to it, that the national syndicate of organized crime, as a group, was not involved in the assassination of Kennedy, but that the available evidence does not preclude the possibility that individual members may have been involved.
The Secret Service, Federal Bureau of Investigation, and Central Intelligence Agency were not involved in the assassination of Kennedy.[4]
Agencies and departments of the U.S. Government performed with varying degrees of competency in the fulfilment of their duties. President Kennedy did not receive adequate protection. A thorough and reliable investigation into the responsibility of Lee Harvey Oswald for the assassination was conducted. The investigation into the possibility of conspiracy in the assassination was inadequate. The conclusions of the investigations were arrived at in good faith, but presented in a fashion that was too definitive." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_House_Select_Committee_on_Assassinations

My personal opinion is that Lee Harvey Oswald participated in the Kennedy assassination but there was more than one assassin. More than half of the witnesses personally interviewed about the death of our president said they heard shots from the Grassy Knoll. More than half. This fact was featured in a documentary I viewed over the weekend on Reelz, so I have no link. I do believe that Wallace was the second hitman, and that he fired from a position in front of the late President Kennedy's limousine. Because some believed Oswald was not a reliable player in his important role, and determined that President Kennedy would indeed lose his life that day, the organizers of the assassination took out an insurance policy by placing Wallace in position to fire from the front.

Bullets and fingerprints aside, there are much larger questions to be answered: who planned the assassination, who organized the minutia of the detail, what principals participated, and why did they do it. It is an extremely healthy endeavor that we undertake in continuing to attempt to learn the answers to these questions in order to better protect our Presidents now and in the future, and additionally to hold accountable those who played a role who are today still living.

Profile Information

Member since: 2001
Number of posts: 9,314
Latest Discussions»Samantha's Journal