Posted on 08/20/2003 6:18:44 PM PDT by new cruelty
GULFPORT, Miss. - (KRT) - The father of the White House press secretary claims in his upcoming book, "Blood, Money & Power: How L.B.J. Killed J.F.K.," that former President Lyndon B. Johnson was behind the assassination of President John F. Kennedy.
Barr McClellan, father of White House press secretary Scott McClellan and Food and Drug Administration Commissioner Mark McClellan, is preparing for a Sept. 30 release of a 480-page book by Hannover House that 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.
Kennedy was shot and killed while throngs watched his motorcade travel through Dallas on Nov. 22, 1963. Vice President Johnson was sworn in as president shortly after on Air Force One.
"(Johnson) had the motive, opportunity and means," said McClellan, 63, who was a partner in an Austin law firm that served Johnson. The book, McClellan said in an exclusive interview at his Orange Grove home, is about "(Johnson's) role in the assassination. He was behind the assassination, how he was and how it all developed."
McClellan and his wife have lived in Gulfport since 1998, where his wife's family lives. McClellan consults for some businesses on the Coast and writes books.
McClellan said he includes information in the book that alludes to Johnson's role in the assassination. An example is a story that was told to him by the late Martin Harris, former managing partner at the law firm, as told to Harris by Clark.
McClellan writes in his book that in a 1961 meeting on Johnson's ranch outside Johnson City, Texas, Johnson gave Clark a document that may have helped the assassin:
"Johnson suddenly let Clark go. `That envelope in the car,' he said quietly, almost an afterthought, `is yours.' Stepping toward the car, he muttered, `Put it to good use.' He turned, putting his arms across Clark's shoulders, pulling him along, (and) the two walked toward the convertible.
"As they drove back to the ranch, Clark opened the envelope. It contained the policy manual for protection of the president."
Barry Bishop, senior shareholder of Clark's former law firm, defended the attorney.
McClellan's theory is "absurd," Bishop said over the phone. "Mr. Clark was a big supporter of Mr. Kennedy. The day that President Kennedy was assassinated, there was going to a be a dinner that evening in Texas. Mr. Clark was a co-sponsor of that dinner."
McClellan's book is just one of numerous conspiracy theory books that criticize the conclusion of the FBI's investigation of the assassination, that found that Lee Harvey Oswald was the lone gunman.
According to the Warren Commission's 1964 report, "Examination of the facts of the assassination itself revealed no indication that Oswald was aided in the planning or execution of his scheme."
But that hasn't stopped people from writing books that challenge the Warren Commission's findings. Other ideas about who was behind the assassination include U.S. intelligence agents, the Mafia, Nikita Khrushchev, the military-industrial complex and Cuban exiles.
So why should people believe McClellan? What makes his book different?
"The big beauty is, (readers) don't have to believe a word I say," McClellan said. "They can believe the fingerprint examiner. They can believe the exchange of memos and letters."
"The book is the evidence," said Cecile McClellan, McClellan's wife, who has edited much of the book. "When you read that book and look at those exhibits, and say, `Do I believe this?' There it is … It's like (McClellan is) a lawyer presenting this book to the jury. You make your own decision. He's putting it all out there."
The theory that Johnson was involved is "exceedingly unlikely," said John C. McAdams, who is an outspoken supporter of the Warren Commission's findings and teaches a course on the JFK assassination at Marquette University in Milwaukee. "What did he (McClellan) find in the documents, and what does it, in fact, indicate? If he's looking at all the documents everyone else is looking at, I would want to know which documents he's interpreting as L.B.J."
Eric Parkinson, president of Truman Press Inc., the parent company of Hannover House, said the book comes out at a good time.
"Now, 40 years later, it's appropriate that this additional information be brought to light. It (the book) will provide closure for a lot of people."
McClellan began working with Clark in 1966 and said he had no role in the conspiracy. But he did hear rumors about it.
"When I first started work there and was told that Clark was behind the assassination, I didn't believe it. It was, `This guy you really liked, John Kennedy - he was killed by the guy you're working for now.' I think I went into a bad case of denial."
McClellan said he learned of Clark's role several times, from Clark and others in the law firm, including while he was acting as Clark's lawyer. The case involved the 1969 application for Clark to drill an oil well and name it after himself.
At the time, McClellan said he asked Clark about the rumors he had been hearing. He said Clark talked in code, but he said, "He wanted the payoff for it. When you mention Dallas, you were talking about the assassination. We had a discussion about it. That's in the book, pretty much verbatim."
But why didn't McClellan go public with the information back then?
"When you get inside the attorney-client privilege, you find out a whole lot," McClellan said. "At the time I thought everything I learned was privileged. I've since found out that there's no privilege for lawyers who plan crimes," he said, referring to Clark.
McClellan said he left the law firm in 1982 because Clark wanted him to represent a company that would conflict with interests of McClellan's other clients. Then, he said, Clark sued him over a personal loan. McClellan counter-sued. Then the bank holding the loan sued.
"When I found out what they were going to do to me, I got mad. The gloves came off. I said, `Forget it. They're not going to get away with this anymore.'"
But it took years before McClellan was able to publish the book that he said supports his assassination theory.
Finally in 1994, the 14-year legal battle with the lawsuits ended with dismissals. By that time, Clark had been dead for two years.
McClellan said he was trying to get a book out in 1984, while Clark was alive. "He knew I was going public - from the affidavits in one of those three lawsuits," McClellan said. And he said a book agent he approached in 1984 told him to "do an investigation."
So he began.
"I wanted to be comfortable with what I knew," McClellan said. He said it took a long time to verify fingerprints with several experts and to find a publisher.
"A lot of it wouldn't have been available except that old Clark's records" were bequeathed to Southwestern University, McClellan said, making them available for research. Previously "they were stored in his private records. I'm sure if he had thought about it before he died, he would have probably thrown away a few."
McClellan had been writing bits and pieces of the book since he left the law firm. He logged numerous hours of research and 10 researchers helped him, he said.
Supporters and detractors have talked to McClellan about possible repercussions from the book, McClellan said, but he's not losing any sleep.
McClellan said he hasn't had any overt threats. He said people imply retributions, like suggesting that "I'm not going to make it in Austin. `You're going to be out of here.'"
McClellan said at least some in his family accept his work on the book.
"They said, `OK, I guess that's what Dad's doing now,'" McClellan said.
But he said he has not had the chance to ask sons Scott and Mark for their reactions.
"I assume that they know about it," McClellan said. "They know what I'm doing. They're not going to comment on it. The oldest, Mark, was then maybe 15 when I left the law firm."
When asked if he was concerned for the safety of his twin sons, Dudley, an Austin lawyer in private practice, and Bradley, a Texas state associate attorney general, McClellan said: "The Democrats are pretty much out of power, really, in the state of Texas. So as far as Republicans go, they're in good shape. My ex-wife (Carole Keeton Strayhorn) - she's the comptroller of the state of Texas. There's really none of this influence or anything like that."
I'm not even going to bother commenting on this because you have no idea what you're writting. Do some research before you even try to put a sentence together because it's getting more and more apparent you have never fired a rifle in your life.
That MC was junk then and junk now. It is no Urban legend. Those who tried to use it were reluctant to do so because they felt it to be unsafe, the sight was junk and not attached properly, the bolt was hard to work and caused the aim to be compromised, the firing pin rusted and it was not the same length as the gun ordered.
I would suggest you talk to a independent expert before trying to write something. Again, you have no idea what you're writting. By the way, the velocity of the rearward motion of the bolt was sufficient to flatten the mouth of one of the cases. Do some research.
More nonsense from the alimentary canal. I have a PO Box, do you? I have received packages that I have had to pick up at the desk because they are too large to fit in the box. I hand the clerk the yellow card placed in my box to notify me of the package, and the clerk goes in back and gets the package for me. The yellow card is all I need. I do not have to show ID, and I don't have to sign for anything. Not a very memorable event for the clerks. And nobody checks my ID before I place my key in the box and get the mail.
However, this is standard operating procedure with this investigation. Critical information and evidence is missing time after time. Certain information is revealed but rarely enough to answer any critical questions. Other information contrary to the pre-ordained conclusion or witnesses with contrary information are simply ignored in dozens or hundreds of instances. Then we are buried in irrelevencies and unnecessary details.
President Kennedy is dead and buried. Officer Tippit is dead and buried. But the conspiracy theorists live forever, feeding on contrary information, dubious witnesses and irrelevant details, refusing to acknowledge the uncomfortable but unavoidable truth. Instead, they bury it under their odious excretions of conspiracy and pollute the airwaves, leaving Oswald's grave as the only one undisturbed by mountains of crap. Excuse me while I wretch.
Jack Davis said...
Both Burroughs and Davis waited until the late 1980's to reveal these critical eyewitness accounts. More crap for the mountain.
Whoever laid out the original motorcade route was unfamiliar with the road layout at Dealey Plaza. The Triple Underpass is called the Triple Underpass for a reason. There are three distinct travel lanes, separated by raised concrete medians. The original route would have sent the motorcade through the center of the Triple Overpass. The exit to the freeway leading to the Trade Mart is only accessible from the right side of the Triple Underpass. The route the motorcade took was the only way to the Trade Mart that didn't involve driving over curbs.
Why were they going slower than normal speed for a motorcade?
Because President Kennedy requested the motorcade drive slow, so that the people of Dallas could see him better. The Secret Service argued against this, but Kennedy prevailed.
Why was the security detail reduced that day?
Two Secret Service agents normally rode on the back of the Pesidential limo. President Kennedy changed this for the trip through Dallas. Same goes for the bubble top to the limo. Kennedy wanted to be more visible to the spectators.
And so, having yet another conspiracy balloon popped, we get another post throwing out scads of manure. For example:
Nor does it help when the bodies start piling up and witnesses die at alarming rates. So a Giancana gets bumped off, maybe that is not so strange, but when around the same time Roselli is whacked, de Mohrenschield dies and William Sullivan is killed all right before testifying before the HSCA red flags go up. They aren't lowered when Nicoleti is killed and Richard Cain is killed and they are claimed to have been part of the assassination team. And this is the second round of deaths initially set off by David Ferrie's, Betty Mooney MacDonald, Gary Underhill, Darrell Wayne Garner, Hank Killam, Bill Hunter, Mary Meyer, Jim Koethe, Tom Howard, Rose Cherami, William Whaley, Dorothy Killgallen, Karen Bennett Carlin, Lt. William Pitzer, Eladio del Valle, Dr. Mary Sherman, Clyde Johnson are just some of those associated with the assassination and its figures. The probability of all these deaths being benignly explained is very low and many of them, Roselli, Giancana, Ferrie and del Valle (on the same day) cannot be easily dismissed.
Do you know anything more about the people above other than their names and that they are dead? Every single one of their deaths can be plainly explained without resorting to conspiracy theories. Many of the people listed above have nothing to do with the assassination whatsoever. The “mysterious death” list is a joke. The mountain of “evidence” exonerating Oswald is getting smellier by the post.
P.S. You left off a lot of names. Where is Lee Bowers? Albert Bogard? Thomas Davis? Gene Rodenberry? DeForest Kelly? The Klingon High Commander?
Really So Mysterious? "Strange" and "Convenient" Deaths Surrounding the Assassination
Gene Rodenberry? DeForest Kelly? The Klingon High Commander?
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.