Posted on 11/22/2013 5:43:03 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
Richard Nixon thought Lyndon Johnson killed John F. Kennedy, according to legendary political operative Roger Stone.
“Richard Nixon told me in 1982 that he immediately knew who Jack Ruby was when he saw him shoot Oswald,” Stone told The Daily Caller in an extensive interview.
Stone’s new book The Man Who Killed Kennedy: The Case Against LBJ is currently tearing up the Amazon bestseller list and even earned praise from Ron Paul.
Among other revelations, Stone told TheDC that Nixon hired Jack Ruby as a House committee informant at Johnson’s request years prior to the Kennedy assassination, which occurred 50 years ago today.
“Nixon said, ‘The damn thing is, I knew this Jack Ruby. Murray [Chotiner] brought him to me in 1947, said he was one of “Johnson’s boys” and that LBJ wanted us to hire him as an informant to the Committee. We did,’” according to Stone....
(Excerpt) Read more at dailycaller.com ...
ReaganÜberAlles
Since Jul 6, 2012
53, almost 54. LOL
It’s from a poem written in 1841 by August Heinrich Hoffman. It has nothing to do with “Nazis”.
It is correctly translated as : “More than anything else”.
My usage of it means. “Reagan The Great”
Whether it was Oswald or LBJ one thing for sure is that the murderer was a commie.
What I object to are your personal insults.
If you can't rein it in, go back underwater.
2nd Division Vet is a good Freeper. This book is on the bestseller list, the topic is timely. I don’t see a problem with this. The Daily Caller is not a banned site. I suppose if you are related to LBJ this might not be on your list of favorite threads.
Not that I give a sh!t at this point, but I wonder why nobody ever discussed Bobby's mob hearings? They did this after they had gone to such pains to throw Illinois to Jack. Kennedy bungled more than Bay of Pigs; the mob lost some of their guys in the attempt to get Castro.
It wasn't just screwing up, or biting the hand that fed it. It was a betrayal, and no self-respecting gangster could allow. Was Johnson in on it? It's not hard suspect he did, though perhaps in some remote, passive way--selective blindness and informed ignorance.
I’m listening to Roger Stone on WBZ (AM 1030) right now, on the Dan Ray show. Interesting.
JFK-Bay of Pigs=1400 killed or captured to spend the rest of their lives in one of Castro's prisons.
Same Shit Different Democrat!
I was watching Where Were you When Kennedy Was Shot or some such on NBC and all interviews are with far left socialists like Jane Fonda, Steven Spielberg, Bill Clinton, Andy Young and so on. I had to turn it off. Clinton gives an irrelevant comment about the hatred of the south and goes on to disparage a girl he was in school with, claiming she said the country would be better off without Kennedy (never mind that JFK carried the south and that a commie killed him). I thought it ironic that one of the left’s own killed JFK and how proud Oswald would be today with the democratic party.
...when after all, it was you and me.
I swear, I wouldn’t put it past LBJ,...as sinister a charactor that has ever disgraced the White House, along with barry sotero hussein obama, of course.
LBJ had a clue that he was going to be dropped from the ticket in ‘64, sooooo......
If TWA Flight 800 can be swept under the rug as an onboard fuel issue, I reckon an assassination 50 years ago could be subject to the same shenanigans. I believe Oswald was the sole trigger man, but have no firm convictions regarding whether he was set up, paid, etc., or what other personalities contributed to Kennedy’s demise. The forces of evil in this world tend to be shadowy and in high places. I certainly do not trust the government to be forthcoming. Oswald was motivated by an incendiary video.
Ah...You’d be surprised..
Well yeah, LBJ. But who had the most to gain when Hinkley shot Reagan? Does that mean Bush was behind it? In his own mind, Hinkley had the most to gain. And I'm guessing Oswald, in his own mind, had the most to gain by shooting Kennedy.
That’s a good point, that’s why I for one am not ready to tar and feather LBJ on this.
“Who had the most to gain” is parroted in the JFK movie and from there it must have come from Mark Lane, Garrison, someone.
Quite a few eye opening articles out there.
IBT gets in the act:
http://www.ibtimes.com/jfk-assassination-just-who-was-lee-harvey-oswald-1474038
Dang.
You know, when you’ve studied the details of it, it comes down to the details.
The water gets muddied with conspiracy theories from cloud-cuckoo-land, conspiracy theories rooted in various prejudices, conspiracy theories designed to make any serious study of it difficult.
But if you ignore all that, and just sift through the details, discount the various theories trying to understand the motivations behind them, keep your eye on who is obstructing what, and you start to see patterns. When you’re young, its hard to believe what you see.
But after watching a whole series of scandals over the years where “the investigation is the coverup”, and seeing how its done, see what it takes to make it stick, you start to see similar patterns.
What is clear is that LBJ was, like OJ, not particularly interested in digging too deep. He said he wanted to avoid war, just as he led us into Viet Nam. If it was Cuba, Cuba is a lot closer than Viet Nam. Are we seriously to believe we wouldn’t have gone through Cuba with a steam roller if we thought they were behind it? We went through Viet Nam on a lot less provocation.
As much as I like Rush, his argument is still rooted in present-day politics and for probably good reason he is staying out of the weeds of this story. Its good that he is deflecting attempts to blame it on the south. Its good political judo to lay it at the feet of the communists. But the details are more complicated than that.
The Soviets had no motive; nothing to gain from the assassination of JFK.
Indeed, as it turned out, they didn't profit from the event.
Castro, though, did have a a motive.
I listened to Jason Lewis (radio host) tonight, he mentioned he’d read the Bugliosi Posner books so that is one point of view:
But he and others say the stuff that is so keyed in on, that JFK would not have gone into Vietnam is according to him, far from the truth. He was saying JFK got us into Vietnam.
So this is an issue to research, a lot of places, it seems almost to be an assumption that JFK would not have gone into Vietnam as LBJ did.
Also, on YouTube Nov. 5th TruNews interview with Roger Stone. Very interesting.
BTW, Johnson was not the only one with motive. He had partners.
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.