General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: CNN Tonight: The Assassination of JFK [View all]Samantha
(9,314 posts)Additionally, that fingerprint that was found in another sniper nest in the book depository was sent to a French fingerprint expert without any description to what crime it was associated with. It took months to get his findings back, but it came back with the name Wallace. Wallace was the very person McClellan had identified in another sniper's nest (I believe on the 6th floor) that fired at Kennedy. Wallace is also the person I have heard named in books that have seen published recently. Admittedly, I have not read those books but have heard some details in promos. I keep thinking this is not new information as advertised, but points covered in McClellan's book.
The book reviews Johnson's entire career and other crimes he is believed to have committed. It is beyond belief to me that a man who functioned at the level of corruption he did for decades could ascend to the Vice President. You might want to read how Johnson won his first Congressional seat in Texas and the controversy surrounding that.
Why do I think Johnson had something to do with it? I could write for the rest of the afternoon all of my reasons, but I don't have the time to do that. You should pick up a copy of this book and judge the credibility of it for yourself. It was the basis of a special aired by the History Channel, you might remember that, and it caused a huge outcry from the Johnson family. It was decided that other people who knew Johnson should be given air time to refute all of the allegations. I eagerly tuned into that. They generally spoke about Johnson in general and addressed zero allegations contained in the book.
Johnson was about to be indicted because of two scandals, one involving Billy Sol Estes and the other I would have to again look up. Johnson was worried he might be indicted as a sitting Vice President for criminal acts about to be made public. He looked at the Office of the President as a place where he would be immune to prosecution for those scandals (I am not too sure he was correct about that, but that was his opinion). Additionally, his relationship with the Kennedy family was extremely tenuous. They despised each other, Kennedy and Johnson. And that is an understatement.
Jacqueline Kennedy did not believe the official report of how her husband met his death. She commissioned very privately a top-notch investigative firm in France to examine the assassination. She received the final report a few months later, and sealed it for I believe 50 years. I do think that is 50 years following the passing of her two children (but I can't say definitely without looking that up again). Robert Kennedy did not believe the official findings as well. That is one of the reasons he chose to run for President. He thought he could only find out the truth by winning the Presidency and gaining access to information only the President could insist upon having.
But whether one thinks Johnson was involved in the death of the late President John Kennedy or not, one cannot ignore the totally corrupt life Johnson lived and many of the crimes he was accused of committing (one exhibit in book is a copy of a court order in which the accused was convicted of murder; a subsequent notation made by the Judge issuing the order found Johnson guilty participating with the accused but noted that since Johnson was deceased by the time the trial was held, nothing could be done about Johnson's participation).
I leave you with one of the many reviews I have on this book:
"...the book offers photographs, copies of letters, insider interviews and details of fingerprints as proof that Edward A. Clark, the powerful head of Johnson's private and business legal team and a former ambassador to Australia, led the plan and cover-up for the 1963 assassination in Dallas." (Dallas Ft. Worth Star Telegram).
The overall abundance of wealth of documented evidence McClellan submits is staggering.
Sam