Just
before John
F. Kennedy was
assassinated he upset people like Clint
Murchison and Haroldson
L. Hunt when he talked about plans to submit to Congress a tax
reform plan designed to produce about $185,000,000 in additional revenues
by changes in the favourable tax treatment until then accorded the
gas-oil industry. Kennedy was particularly upset that Hunt, who had
an annual income of about $30,000,000, paid only small amounts of
federal income tax.
Madeleine
Brown
claims that she was Johnson's mistress. In her autobiography, Texas
in the Morning (1997) Brown claims
that the conspiracy
to kill Kennedy involved Lyndon
B. Johnson
and several Texas oil men including Clint
Murchison, Haroldson
L. Hunt and J.
Edgar Hoover.
This theory was supported by Craig Zirbel in his book The
Texas Connection: The Assassination
of President John F. Kennedy (1991).
Joachim
Joesten, an investigative journalist, believes that Johnson's
secretary, Bobby
Baker was involved in this plot: "The Baker scandal then
is truly the hidden key to the assassination, or more exact, the timing
of the Baker affair crystallized the more or less vague plans to eliminate
Kennedy which had already been in existence the threat of complete
exposure which faced Johnson in the Baker scandal provided that final
impulse he was forced to give the go-ahead signal to the plotters
who had long been waiting for the right opportunity."
In his book, JFK:
The Second Plot (1992), Matthew
Smith points out that: "The oil industry in Texas had enjoyed
huge tax concessions since 1926, when Congress had provided them as
an incentive to increase much needed prospecting. The oil depletion
benefits were somehow left in place to become a permanent means by
which immense fortunes were amassed by those in the industry and,
well aware of the anomaly, John Kennedy had declared an intention
to review the oil industry revenues. There was nothing in the world
which would have inflamed the oil barons more than the President interfering
with the oil depletion allowance."
In
Dick Russell's book, The Man Who Knew Too
Much (1992) Richard
Case Nagell claimed
the initial plan to assassinate President John
F. Kennedy
was financed
by Haroldson
L. Hunt and
other individuals. The operation was to be performed by a anti-Castro
group that included David
Ferrie,
Guy
Banister
and
Clay
Shaw.
According to Nagell the conspirators believed that if they set-up
Lee
Harvey Oswald,
a well-known supporter of Fidel
Castro with
links to the Soviet Union, the assassination
would result in a full-scale war against Cuba.
In
2003 Barr McClellan
published Blood, Money & Power: How LBJ
Killed JFK. In the book McClellan argues that Lyndon
B. Johnson
and
Edward
Clark
were
involved in the planning and cover-up of the assassination of John
F. Kennedy.
McClellan also named Malcolm Wallace
as one of the assassins. The killing of Kennedy was paid for by oil
millionaires such as Clint
Murchison and Haroldson
L. Hunt.
McClellan claims that Clark got $2 million for this work.
The
assassination of Kennedy allowed the oil depletion allowance to be
kept at 27.5 per cent. It remained unchanged during the Johnson presidency.
According to McClellan this resulted in a saving of over 100 million
dollars to the American oil industry. Soon after Johnson left office
it dropped to 15 per cent.
Open
Debate on the Kennedy Assassination
(L1)
Barr McClellan, Blood Money and
Power: How L.B.J. Killed J.F.K. (2003)
A fawning allegiance to Dallas and its billionaire leaders was something
that would never change throughout Lyndon Johnson's political career.
The true Texas oilmen were not the wild Glenn McCarthys of Houston
or the corporate managers of the great oil companies, the "majors."
Big Oil was in Dallas, and the most prominent members were conservative
businessmen like Clint Murchison, H. L. Hunt, Wofford Cain, and D.
H. "Dry Hole" Byrd." The wilder, less-inhibited Sid
Richardson of nearby Fort Worth was also a member. These men went
to work when oil was first discovered in the early part of the twentieth
century, and, when the "black giant" was discovered in their
back yards in 1931, they moved in. In an area of east Texas extending
over five counties, large tracts of land over the black giant were
up for grabs, and anyone with the guns and muscle could have the oil
leases. They only had to get onto the property, fight off the other
squatters and resist buyout overtures from the majors. Following remarkable
success stories in those wild and woolly days, the new rich had the
uniquely Texas right to brag nonstop, to fly their jets wherever,
to gamble whenever they felt lucky, to own football teams, and, generally,
to do whatever they damned well pleased. They did what billionaires
did - whatever they wanted to do - and, as the new cash machines,
they set the pattern for Texas culture for many yet to come.
During these
early years, a strange relationship developed between Big Oil and
Washington on three separate fronts plus a notable deference on the
fourth. First, the federal government had allowed Texas oil higher
tax deductions than any other industry in America. A strange compromise
cut in 1923 with the IRS benefited the oil business as no other. Depletion
was one of three main government subsidies to the business, and this
one was as sacred as the Alamo, saving oilmen millions by reducing
their taxes up to 27.5 per cent. Specifically, this was an expense
deduction for depletion of resources and was allowed as a reduction
of taxable income.
How
did people like Clint Murchison and H. L. Hunt become billionaires
in the 1930s?
(L2)
Marquis
W. Childs, Washington Calling (10th October, 1963)
To a friend and long-time associate who called on him the
other day President Kennedy expressed considerable bitterness on the
subject of top-bracket taxpayers who use tax exemptions to spread
propaganda of the extreme right. The President talked about two men,
each of whom is often referred to as "the richest man in the
world". One was J. Paul Getty, an oilman who spends most of his
time in England. The second was the Dallas, Texas, oilman H. L. Hunt.
Both are billionaires. Both, according to the President, paid small
amounts in federal income tax last year. These men, the President
said, use various forms of tax exemption and special tax allowances
to subsidize the ultra right on television, radio and in print.
There is
no doubt that the right-wing is heavily subsidized. On radio and television
stations across the nation free taped programs are run daily, assailing
the United Nations, attacking the graduated income tax, foreign aid,
social security and the other favorite hates of the extreme right.
One of the biggest tax benefits oilmen enjoy is the 27.5 per cent
depletion allowance. In his January tax message, the President proposed
a sharp reduction in this benefit, which has been extended to cover
a long list of minerals. The tax bill passed by the House made only
a minor change, however. The right-wing is prepared to go all out
to defeat Kennedy in 1964.
Why
was President John F. Kennedy angry about the activities of H. L.
Hunt? What did he plan to do about the tax benefits enjoyed by Texas
oilmen like H. L. Hunt?
(L3)
New
York Times (15th December, 1963)
Nowhere is oil a bigger political force than Texas, producer of 35
per cent of the nation's oil and possessor of half of its obtainable
oil reserves. As a Texan in Congress, Lyndon B. Johnson was a strong
advocate of oil industry causes - low import quotas and the 27.5 %
per cent tax allowance for depletion of oil reserves.
Did
John F. Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson agree about the 27.5 % per cent
tax allowance for depletion of oil reserves?
(L4)
Thomas
G. Buchanan,
Who Killed Kennedy? (1964)
Few Americans
suspect the dominant position oil assumes in the American economy.
Most of us probably would guess that steel or auto-manufacturing were
the chief industries of the United States, with chemicals not far
behind them. Oil investments are, however, more than these three industries
combined-more than 50 billion dollars. Almost half of this enormous
wealth is owned in Texas. Until 1901, Texas was noted chiefly for
its cattle, and it was the land of "frontier justice" which
non-Texans have been taught by Hollywood films to associate with Texas.
But on January 10 of that year, oil was found at Spindletop, just
south of Beaumont, Texas, and the State has never been the same since
that day. Easterners had a monopoly on oil before then; John D. Rockefeller
alone, through Standard Oil, controlled 83 per cent of the United
States production. But in the first year, the well at Spindletop produced
as much oil as all 37,000 Eastern wells combined, and Texas since
that time has gained almost complete monopoly of all America's own
oil resources, although Standard Oil, through its investments overseas,
still occupies a powerful position.
Texas oil,
needless to say, has in the past half-century become the focal point
of the whole State economy. So great, for instance, are the revenues
from oil alone that no State income tax is needed; individuals in
Texas pay the government in Washington, like anybody else - and hate
it - but they are exempt from paying their own State. Oil men, consequently,
run the State, with bitter factional disputes sometimes between them,
but unchallenged by outsiders.
The Texas
oil industry itself is theoretically under the jurisdiction of the
Texas Railroad Commission, which decides in advance how much oil each
producer is permitted to produce each month. It finds out, first,
how much oil will be bought by each of the big companies that own
the pipelines and, after they submit the quantity that they agree
to purchase, Texas companies are then assigned percentages of the
expected market. In this way a surplus is avoided. It is unnecessary
to add, in view of what has already been stated, that all decisions
by the Commission reflect the viewpoint of the dominant oil companies
it is meant to regulate. If it were permitted to react to public sentiment,
i.e. the interest of the consumer, it might authorize production of
sufficient oil to force the big companies to lower prices.
Now and then,
when the effects of the decisions of the oil men challenged the economy
of the whole country, efforts have been made to stop them from demanding
an unreasonable profit. Such, for instance, was the case in May, 1958,
when a Federal grand jury indicted 29 oil companies for a conspiracy
to charge outrageous prices. The charge was based on an increase in
prices which was put into effect by these oil companies in i957, at
a time when there was no oil shortage but, on the contrary, the industry
was complaining of what Morgan Davis, president of Humble Oil, had
been describing as a "burdensome surplus-producing capacity."
The excess oil available was so great that production had been varying
from 9 to 13 days a month, yet Humble Oil chose this time to increase
its price to the consumer, and its 28 competitors then followed suit.
The New York Times financial expert J. H. Carmical estimated, at that
time, that this price rise cost the United States consumer half a
billion dollars, and the public protest was so great that the oil
companies were brought to court and charged with a conspiracy to violate
price-fixing legislation. But a sympathetic judge decided that "the
evidence in the case does not rise above the level of suspicion,"
and concluded, "I have an absolute conviction personally that
the defendants are not guilty." They were all acquitted...
The process
gathered its momentum during World War II, when major aircraft factories
were built in Dallas and, with government assistance, other war production
plants, constructed for the military service, remained there. They
continued to be used in peacetime to supply the Air Force with its
bomber planes and radar. In addition, when the war had ended, Texas
as a whole and Dallas in particular made every effort to attract employers
from the North to relocate there, offering these powerful incentives:
1. Low taxes.
In addition to the fact that Texas has no personal income tax, the
corporate tax rate is lower than in most States.
2. Cheap labour.
The predominance of giant cattle farms like the King Ranch has forced
a large number of the farmers to move to the cities. The farm workers
harvesting the cotton, rice and other crops have to compete with "Wetbacks,"
migratory Mexican day labourers who work for pitifully meagre wages;
this, in turn, tends to force down the wages of the city workers in
the factories.
3. Anti-union
legislation. State laws forbid compulsory membership in a union; some
types of strike are forbidden entirely; and, where a strike is allowed,
no more than two pickets are permitted in each area of 50 feet. A
union official arrested on a picket line is prohibited by law from
holding any union office after that.
4. Natural
advantages. Access to the country's principal sources of oil, natural
gas and sulphur with reduced transportation costs.
With these
advantages to offer, Dallas managed to attract new industries to move
there, supplementing factories built during World War II, and even
these new industries tend also to be oriented toward contracts from
the various armed forces. The most important was the great aircraft
firm, Chance Vought, which made the biggest industrial relocation
in U.S. history, moving its entire plant from Connecticut to Dallas-a
transfer of 13,000 tons of equipment from that Northern State, as
well as the 1,300 most important employees (all the others were simply
left behind in Connecticut to add to the Northern unemployed). Another
major Dallas firm is Continental Electronics Manufacturing Company,
which recently built for the Navy a $40,000,000 radio transmitter,
said to be the world's most powerful, designed to communicate with
Navy submarines anywhere in the world, even when lying on the bottom
of the ocean. Texas Instruments, which has rapidly become one of the
nation's principal electronics parts suppliers, also has a large share
of defence contracts.
Despite their
frequent intervention in political campaigns in Northern States, the
Texas millionaires proclaim themselves strong advocates of what they
call "States' rights"-which, from their point of view, excludes
all outside intervention in the State of Texas. Northerners cannot
quite understand the bitterness which Texans feel against the government
in Washington, and Northern financiers in general-a feeling which
appears to be quite general in Texas. Thus, the New York Times of
October 16 , 1956 expressed astonishment that "the Governor of
Texas, a rich man and a conservative, castigates `Wall Street' in
terms used by the Daily Worker." It seems strange that men who
have benefited from a tax concession which grants them commercial
advantages no other section of the country can match, should nevertheless
feel deep resentment, first, against the businessmen in other and
less favoured industries and, second, against the Federal Government
which has granted the concession to them. Yet this has been so. The
Texas millionaires maintain that even the advantages they have are
not sufficient; that their taxes are oppressive; that the bureaucrats
from Washington are trying to take over Texas. Curiously, though,
the State of Texas is one of the principal beneficiaries of Federal
grants of one sort or another, quite apart from the tax policy which
we already have discussed-and at the same time, Texas spends so little
of her own tax money on social services that the average Texas citizen
receives less aid than those in other States. Texas, for instance,
gets more help from Washington than any other State for various child
welfare services, yet ranks no more than 44th in money spent for this
same purpose; Texas is the second State in money it accepts to help
the blind and aged, but is 40th in money spent; Texas ranks third
in its receipts from Washington for all purposes, yet 32nd in expenditures
on public education.
The men whom
the oligarchs in the State of Texas regard as their main enemies are
those who dare propose reduction of their tax concession. Frank Ikard,
a Texas Congressman, has called such persons "bombthrowing liberals."
The Texas oil men are inclined to feel that epithet is much too mild;
for them, the men who want to lower the oil depletion allowance are
nothing short of Communists, although two critics of the present level
of "depletion allowances" have been the late Republican
leader, Senator Robert Taft, and former President Harry Truman, neither
noted for pro-Communist opinions. Taft said it was "to a large
extent a gift-a special privilege, beyond what any one else can get;"
and Truman charged, "No loophole in the tax law is so inequitable."
The first serious efforts to bring the taxes of the oil industry into
closer correspondence with those of other U.S. industries were made
by the New Deal, and no one hated President Roosevelt more bitterly
than such Texans as John Nance Garner, who served as Vice-President
during Roosevelt's first term and then opposed him for the second.
When Roosevelt died in 1945, while the United States was still at
war, a San Antonio millionaire announced a cocktail party to celebrate
his death. In recent years, the chief foe of the Texas oil men has
been Democratic Senator Douglas of Illinois, who proposed to keep
the 27.5 per cent bonus for the small producers, but reduce it to
15 per cent for big ones. Douglas pointed out that there had been
one oil company in 1954 which had a net income of four million dollars
and paid only $404 in taxes, lower than the average US married couple;
that there was another company which made five million dollars and
paid no income tax at all; a third showed profits of 12 million dollars
in 1953 and yet received a $500,000 tax credit; this same company
made 10 million dollars the next year, and received another $100,000
tax credit.
To such arguments,
the Texans have responded that the national security itself depends
on their ability to guard their present rate of profit. "Oil,
gentlemen, is ammunition," a Congressional committee was assured
by General Ernest O. Thompson, Commanding General of the Texas National
Guard. "In defence," he said, "oil is a prime mover.
Why tamper with a system that... has made oil available in such quantities
that we have been able to win two wars?"
Two wars,
and so... why not a third one? Of all sections of the country, none
was more opposed to any indication that an understanding might be
reached between the President of the United States and Khrushchev,
none is more convinced that the United States not only could survive
a nuclear attack but could go on and win the war, especially if the
U.S. had made the "first strike"-and that it might be worth
it. Some of this hostility to a détente may be ascribed, of
course, to cynical self-interest, for Texas has achieved an annual
expansion, since the cold war started, more than six times greater
than the national economy has averaged; conversely, if disarmament
were actually to begin, no other section of America would suffer such
immediate disruption of its industry, since an extremely high proportion
of defence work has been concentrated in the State of Texas.
Neither cynical
self-interest nor fear, however, totally explains the attitude of
the oligarchy - or, at least, a portion of them. A major part of it
must be ascribed to boredom. These oligarchs started as gamblers and
gamblers they have remained. But in recent years there has been nothing
left on which to gamble, except perhaps the whole future of the United
States. This theory is, I think, worth some serious consideration.
They have run out of new fields to conquer in the State of Texas;
they've begun expanding. We have one of the most powerful and wealthy
oligarchies in the world, controlled-as no society has ever been before-by
men whose instincts are not those of businessmen, but gamblers. I
suggest the impact of this fact upon world history, in any country
which possesses the atomic bomb, is terrifying.
Why
does Thomas G. Buchanan believe that the Texas Oil Industry might
have been involved in the assassination of John F. Kennedy?
(L5)
Joachim
Joesten,
How Kennedy Was Killed (1968)
When District Attorney Garrison, in his statement of
September 21, 1967, made the startling disclosure that the assassination
of President Kennedy had been ordered and paid for by a handful of
oil-rich psychotic millionaires, he
didn't name any names. But I'm quite sure that all the good people
of Dallas, if any of them were privileged to hear the news, instantly
thought of their fellow-resident Haroldson Lafayette Hunt, the boss
of the immensely rich Hunt Oil Company of Dallas.
Hunt is not
only by far the richest of all the Texas oil millionaires but he is
also, and more importantly, the one with the most pronounced and most
vicious spleen. And, above all, the one who hated Kennedy most.
It so happens
that H. L. Hunt is also a longtime friend, admirer and financial 'angel'
of the most prominent Texas politician of our time, Lyndon B. Johnson,
the man who was destined to become President of the United States
automatically the moment Kennedy died. Perhaps this is the reason
why Garrison preferred not to be too specific.
What
evidence does Joachim Joesten use to claim that the
"assassination of President Kennedy had been ordered and paid
for by a handful of oil-rich psychotic millionaires"?
(L6)
Dr.
Albert E. Burke attending a meeting at the home of Haroldson
L. Hunt in
Dallas in 1961. Later he gave an account of the meeting.
I have listened to communists and other groups that can
only be called enemies, accuse us of the worst intentions, the most
inhuman ways of doing things, as the most dangerous people on earth,
to be stopped and destroyed at all costs... But nothing I have heard
in or from those places around us compared with the experience I had
in the Dallas home of an American, whose hate for this country's leaders,
and the way our institutions worked, was the most vicious, venomous
and dangerous I have known in my life. No communist ever heard, no
enemy of this nation has ever done a better job of degrading or belittling
this country. That American was one of this nation's richest and most
powerful men!
It was a
very special performance by a pillar of the American community, who
influences things in his community. It was a very special performance
because in that living room during his performance - in which he said
things had reached the point where there seemed to be "no way
left to get those traitors out of our government except by shooting
them out" during that performance, there were four teenagers
in that room to be influenced. His views were shared on November 22,
1963.
Interestingly,
the man accused of that crime claimed to be a
Marxist, a communist. But my host assured me - when I objected
to his remarks - that he believed as he did because he
was anti-communist!
What happened
in that home in Dallas, of one of America's richest and most powerful
men, shashed that goal of America as a united country for the four
teenagers in on that conversation that night.
Why
does Dr. Albert E. Burke believe that Haroldson L. Hunt was involved
in the assassination of John F. Kennedy?
(L7)
Madeleine
Brown,
interviewed on the television programme, A Current Affair (24th
February, 1992)
On Thursday
night, Nov. 21, 1963, the last evening prior to Camelot's demise,
I attended a social at Clint Murchison's home. It was my understanding
that the event was scheduled as a tribute honoring his long time friend,
J. Edgar Hoover (whom Murchison had first met decades earlier through
President William Howard Taft), and his companion, Clyde Tolson. Val
Imm, the society editor for the now-defunct Dallas Times Herald, unwittingly
documented one of the most significant gatherings in
American history. The impressive guest list included John McCloy,
Richard Nixon, George Brown, R. L. Thornton, H. L. Hunt and a host
of others from the 8F group. The jovial party was just breaking up
when Lyndon made an unscheduled visit. I was the most surprised by
his appearance since Jesse had not mentioned anything about Lyndon's
coming to Clint's. With Lyndon's hectic schedule, I never dreamed
he could attend the big party. After all, he had arrived in Dallas
on Tuesday to attend the Pepsi-Cola convention. Tension filled the
room upon his arrival. The group immediately went behind closed doors.
A short time later Lyndon, anxious and red-faced, reappeared I knew
how secretly Lyndon operated. Therefore I said nothing... not even
that I was happy to see him. Squeezing my hand so hard, it felt crushed
from the pressure, he spoke with a grating whisper, a quiet growl,
into my ear, not a love message, but one I'll always remember: "After
tomorrow those goddamn Kennedys will never embarrass me again - that's
no threat - that's a promise."
Who
does Madeleine Brown think was involved in planning the assassination
of John F. Kennedy?
(L8)
Madeleine
Brown,
Texas in the Morning (1998)
Just a few
weeks later (after the assassination) I mentioned to him that people
in Dallas were saying he himself had something to do with it. He became
really violent, really ugly, and said it was American Intelligence
and oil that were behind it. Then he left the room and slammed the
door It scared me.
According
to Madeleine Brown, who did Lyndon Johnson believe was behind the
assassination of Kennedy?
(L9)
Jim
Marrs, Crossfire: The Plot that Killed Kennedy (1990)
Madeleine
Brown, reported to be Johnson’s mistress for twenty years, has
publicly stated that Johnson had foreknowledge of the assassination.
But did Johnson really have enough power to initiate the assassination
and force literally dozens of government officials and agents to lie
and cover up that fact? Probably not.
What
reasons does Jim Marrs give for not believing Madeleine Brown's theory
about the assassination?
(L10)
Gary
Mack published an account of Madeleine Brown's story on 14th May,
1997.
Madeleine
has claimed over the years that she attended a party at Clint Murchison’s
house the night before the assassination and LBJ, Hoover and Nixon
were there. The party story, without LBJ, first came from Penn Jones
in Forgive My Grief. In that version, the un-credited source
was a black chauffeur whom Jones didn’t identify, and the explanation
Jones gave was that it was the last chance to decide whether or not
to kill JFK. Of course, Hoover used only top FBI agents for transportation
and in the FBI of 1963, none were black. Actually, there is no confirmation
for a party at Murchison’s. I asked Peter O’Donnell because
Madeleine claimed he was there, too. Peter said there was no party.
Madeleine even said there was a story about it in the Dallas Times
Herald some months later (which makes no sense), but she had not been
able to find it. Val Imm (Society Editor of the Dallas Times Herald)
told Bob Porter (of the Sixth Floor Museum at Dealey Plaza staff)
recently she had no memory of such an event and even looked through
her notes - in vain.
Could LBJ
have been at a Murchison party? No. LBJ was seen and photographed
in the Houston Coliseum with JFK at a dinner and speech. They flew
out around 10pm and arrived at Carswell (Air Force Base in northwest
Fort Worth) at 11:07 Thursday night. Their motorcade to the Hotel
Texas arrived about 11:50 and LBJ was again photographed. He stayed
in the Will Rogers suite on the 13th floor and Manchester (William
Manchester - author of The Death of a President) says he was up late.
Could Nixon have been at Murchison’s party? No. Tony Zoppi (Entertainment
Editor of The Dallas Morning News) and Don Safran (Entertainment Editor
of the Dallas Times Herald) saw Nixon at the Empire Room at the Statler-Hilton.
He walked in with Joan Crawford (Movie actress). Robert Clary (of
Hogan’s Heroes fame) stopped his show to point them out, saying
“. . . either you like him or you don’t.” Zoppi thought
that was in poor taste, but Safran said Nixon laughed. Zoppi’s
deadline was 11pm, so he stayed until 10:30 or 10:45 and Nixon was
still there.
Does
Gary Mack believe Madeleine Brown's story (L6) about what happened
the night before the assassination?
(L11)
Barr McClellan, Blood Money and
Power: How L.B.J. Killed J.F.K. (2003)
Soon after, there was another private meeting at Johnson's ranch.
The vice president was certain he would be dumped, and he had to know
what Clark was planning. He needed to know when action would be taken.
After all, two years had passed and the politics for Johnson had only
worsened. Something had to be done.
Clark was
not about to let Johnson know any of the details. The assassination
had to be a complete surprise to Johnson. Under no circumstances would
he know what was planned. This time, when Johnson called for Clark,
the lawyer decided to "woodshed" the vice president. The
process was like taking a child out behind the woodshed to paddle
him until he learned to do the right thing. In the case of witnesses
for lawsuits, the woodshedding was to be sure they said the right
thing, that they told the correct story before a jury. What the witness
said and did had to be shaded just right...
Clark had
one more worry detail, a small one in the overall scheme of things
but an important one. He knew how pleased, even ecstatic, Johnson
would be when the assassination occurred. He wanted Johnson to react
with surprise and then express the correct condolences for the Kennedy
family with appropriate assurances to the nation. The best approach
for Johnson would be the usual one, to say and do nothing. As things
turned out, Johnson would react in good form except on three minor
but telling occasions. As Clark had feared, Johnson would overreact.
Why
did Edward A. Clark not give Lyndon Johnson details of the planned
assassination?
(L12)
Phil
Brennan, Some
Relevant Facts About the JFK Assassination (2003)
There's an explosive new book that lays out a very detailed - and
persuasive - case for the probability that the late President Lyndon
Baines Johnson was responsible for the assassination of President
John F. Kennedy.
I
say persuasive because the author, Barr McClellan, was one of LBJ's
top lawyers, and he provides a lot of information hitherto unknown
to the general public - much more of which he says is buried in secret
documents long withheld from the American people....
McClellan
and others before him have discussed the fact that LBJ faced some
pretty awful prospects, including not only being dumped from the 1964
ticket but also spending a long, long time in the slammer as a result
of his role in the rapidly expanding Bobby Baker case - something
few have speculated about because the full facts were never revealed
by the media, which didn't want to know, or report, the truth...
Bobby Kennedy,
called five of Washington's top reporters into his office and told
them it was now open season on Lyndon Johnson. It's OK, he told them,
to go after the story they were ignoring out of deference to the administration.
And from that
point on until the events in Dallas, Lyndon Baines Johnson's future
looked as if it included a sudden end to his political career and
a few years in the slammer. The Kennedys had their knives out and
sharpened for him and were determined to draw his political blood
- all of it.
In the Senate,
the investigation into the Baker case was moving quickly ahead. Even
the Democrats were cooperating, thanks to the Kennedys, and an awful
lot of really bad stuff was being revealed - until Nov. 22, 1963.
By Nov. 23,
all Democrat cooperation suddenly stopped. Lyndon would serve a term
and a half in the White House instead of the slammer, the Baker investigation
would peter out and Bobby Baker would serve a short sentence and go
free. Dallas accomplished all of that.
Bobby
Baker was Lyndon
Johnson's secretary and political adviser. In November 1963 Baker
was under investigation for corruption. Why do some people believe
this case played an important role in the assassination of President
John F. Kennedy?
(L13)
Bobby
Baker, interviewed in 1990.
Clint Murchison
owned a piece of Hoover. Rich people always try to put their money
with the sheriff, because they're looking for protection. Hoover was
the personification of law and order and officially against gangsters
and everything, so it was a plus for a rich man to be identified with
him. That's why men like Murchison made it their business to let everyone
know Hoover was their friend. You can do a lot of illegal things if
the head lawman is your buddy.
Clint
Murchison was a Texas oil billionaire. What is the significance of
the comments made by Bobby Baker?
(L14)
Peter
Dale Scott, Deep Politics and the Death of JFK (1993)
According to President
Kennedy's secretary, Evelyn Lincoln, Bobby Kennedy was also investigating
Bobby Baker for tax evasion and fraud. This had reached the point
where the President himself discussed the Baker investigation with
his secretary, and allegedly told her that his running mate in 1964
would not be Lyndon Johnson. The date of this discussion was November
19, 1963, the day before the President left for Texas.
A Senate
Rules Committee investigation into the Bobby Baker scandal was indeed
moving rapidly to implicate Lyndon Johnson, and on a matter concerning
a concurrent scandal and investigation. This was the award of a $7-billion
contract for a fighter plane, the TFX, to a General Dynamics plant
in Fort Worth. Navy Secretary Fred Korth, a former bank president
and a Johnson man, had been forced to resign in October 1963, after
reporters discovered that his bank, the Continental National Bank
of Fort Worth, was the principal money source for the General Dynamics
plant.
What
motives did Lyndon Johnson have for wanting John F. Kennedy dead?
(L15)
Matthew
Smith, JFK: The Second Plot
(1992)
Interestingly, there
were several arrests made in the Dal Tex building (on the 22nd November,
1963). The third man arrested there was extremely interesting. He
was Jim Braden, also known as Eugene Hale Brading, a known Mafia courier.
He said he had had an appointment to meet Lamar Hunt, son of H.L.
Hunt, the oil millionaire, on oil business. Braden was with a friend,
Morgan H. Brown, who bolted when he heard he had been taken in for
questioning. A man with 30 arrests to his record, Braden had been
staying at the Kabanya Motor Hotel, where Jack Ruby - who was to kill
Lee Harvey Oswald in the Police Headquarters basement two days after
the assassination - had met some of his Chicago friends the night
before the President was killed. Braden was not detained. Five years
later, however, Braden was to turn up in Los Angeles when Senator
Robert Kennedy was murdered.
What
was Jim Braden's connection with the H. L. Hunt? What is Matthew Smith
suggesting in this account?
(L16)
John
Kelin, review of Noel Twyman's book, Bloody Treason (1998)
When Twyman finally
names his real villains, we recognize three men whose involvement
has been alleged for years: Lyndon Johnson, J. Edgar Hoover, and H.L.
Hunt. The author says they acted from that oldest of motivations,
self-preservation, and that "they had the the power and the money
to make it happen and cover it up." It is amusing, in a sick
sort of way, when Twyman says that Hoover seems to be the one person
involved who had no redeeming qualities. "I have searched the
literature and ... if there was something likable about him I haven't
found it."
What
does John Klein mean when he says Lyndon Johnson, J. Edgar Hoover,
and H.L. Hunt acted from that "oldest of motivations, self-preservation"?
(L17)
Edward
Jay Epstein,
Esquire Magazine (December, 1966)
In January of 1964 the Warren Commission learned that Don B. Reynolds,
insurance agent and close associate of Bobby Baker, had been heard
to say the FBI knew that Johnson was behind the assassination. When
interviewed by the FBI, he denied this. But he did recount an incident
during the swearing in of Kennedy in which Bobby Baker said (in January,
1961) words to the effect that the s.o.b. would never live out his
term and that he would die a violent death.
What
did Don B. Reynolds accuse Bobby Baker of saying in January, 1961?
(L18)
Matthew
Smith, JFK: The Second Plot
(1992)
Another group which
hated the President and which merited investigation was the extreme
right-wing John Birch Society. Centred on Dallas, the group made no
secret of its disdain for the Kennedy administration, in fact it advertised
it well. To its members, the young President was a Communist-lover,
and, in their world, that represented just about the worst thing anybody
could be. In their vocabulary, to call anybody a name like that represented
using real venom. That was reaching down the barrel to find the biggest
of all insults. Some John Birch members were oil barons, and the oil
men made up an overlapping group which, when it came to its opinions
of the President, had a great deal in common with the Society. The
oil industry in Texas had enjoyed huge tax concessions since 1926,
when Congress had provided them as an incentive to increase much needed
prospecting. The oil depletion benefits were somehow left in place
to become a permanent means by which immense fortunes were amassed
by those in the industry and, well aware of the anomaly, John Kennedy
had declared an intention to review the oil industry revenues. There
was nothing in the world which would have inflamed the oil barons
more than the President interfering with the oil depletion allowance.
In the minds of many, the conspirators could very easily have come
from the ranks of either the John Birch Society or the oil men, which
is not to say they didn't belong to both groups.
Why
does Matthew Smith believe that the Texas oil industry and the John
Birch Society were both involved in the assassination of John F. Kennedy?
Available from Amazon
Books (order below)
