Posted on 03/31/2014 2:11:05 AM PDT by Berlin_Freeper
...Lyndon Johnson was a loutish psychopathic willing to do anything to advance his rise to power. His rise was fueled by graft, corruption, and murder. Yes, murder. LBJ's hitman, Malcolm Wallace, had killed seven other people in Johnson's rise to power, including LBJ's own sister, Josefa Johnson.
...As the rift between Kennedy and hardliners widened, into the void stepped Lyndon Johnson. Never to let opportunity go to waste, LBJ found the ultimate solution to his Bobby Baker scandal that was coming to a boil on Capitol Hill. LBJ's days were numbered, and he was facing possible prison. Kennedy was already showing signs that Johnson would be dumped from the 1964 ticket. With his ruthless drive for power, and RFK as the likely successor to the JFK legacy, LBJ would be out in the cold, except of course, if he could pull off the crime of the century, kill JFK, and garner public support in the process.
...For many years, Johnson was a neighbor and a close confidante to J. Edger Hoover, Director of the FBI. Normally, people like him would be in jail, but in LBJ's case, he held much sway with Hoover and the justice system. JFK, however, planned to force Hoover out in 1965 with the mandatory retirement at 70 for all federal employees.
... Johnson's mistress, Madeleine Brown, told investigators years later that Johnson told her that evening, "After tomorrow, those goddamn Kennedys will never embarrass me again. That is no threat. That is a promise."
...LBJ was in the pale blue Lincoln in the motorcade, two cars back from the President's car. LBJ was seen to be ducking low in his car as it approached Elm Street even before the shots were fired. He knew the shots were coming, and he was trying to take cover.
(Excerpt) Read more at renewamerica.com ...
LOL ... what consensus ... him and his dog?
LBJ was idiot that ruined the country.
Yeah I agree ... it’s a consensus of the crazies, and their pets, of course ... :-) ...
“Consensus” - the judgment arrived at by most of those concerned.
[Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary]
It’s certainly not the consensus of the public ...
Mr. Lukens seems unfamiliar with history. I noticed years ago that many/most of the JFK assassination conspiracy books blamed LBJ.
“It’s certainly not the consensus of the public ...”
Neither was the earth being round at one time. The consensus of the public has given us glowbull whining too.
While 50% of those who occupied our White House this century were capable of having innocent Americans killed to advance their careers, I suspect the percentage in the previous century was dramatically less. That level of evil is extremely rare. I despise LBJ, but the accusation is absurd.
I wasn’t the one who made the assertion ... :-) ...
http://www.rrauction.com/Oswalds-wedding-band-that-he-left-his-wife.html
Absurd, perhaps, when it comes to evidence. But hardly absurd in terms of the man's capabilities.
LBJ was an evil man; thoroughly amoral and quite capable of ordering the death of JFK...and anybody else who got in his way.
You mean his Great Society programs and Civil Right act which morphed into anti-white affirmative action which gives us today out and out anti white racism throughout the Federal Govt. Plus the disastrous 1965 immigration act which opened up the floodgates to the 3rd world
LBJ was the original Democrat vote buyer raiding the Treasury to buy votes or at least on a mega scale
A common question to ask is “Who stood to benefit most from JFK’s death?” LBJ.
e·merge
verb (used without object), e·merged, e·merg·ing.
1. to come forth into view or notice, as from concealment or obscurity
It’s a modifier of “consensus” ... thus consensus is the operative word.
“Emerging ?”
If all you are going to do is read the headline, at least don’t screw that up!
I have said it for years. This guy was never above murder to get political expedience. He did it before Kennedy’s death, so why not this death?
This person Wallace is the key.
In a nutshell...
Yea, I know but just whispering it deserved a response for those who buy that. :)
Science in itself demands non-adherence to consensus, despite what Al and Barry tell us. Thoery is the bedrock of science and consensus can only be driven by facts either proved or disproved by the facts derived by investigating said theories, honestly and openly. It is what they call peer review.
Peer review during the dark ages was at the stake and sadly peer review today is at the end of a government grant.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.