LBJ was behind JFK's assassination, upcoming book contends

Knight Ridder Newspapers ^ | Aug. 20, 2003 | HYE JEONG

[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."

[PhilDragoo]

Regarding the toy gun, the magic bullet, the greatest marksman of all time, this account of the comments on the above referenced feat by Gunnery Sergeant Carlos Hathcock to author Craig Roberts (coauthor of One Shot One Kill about Hathcock) in Craig Roberts, Kill Zone: A Sniper Looks At Dealey Plaza, CPI, 1994 (1997 edition), pp. 89-90:

According to my friend, Gunnery Sergeant Carlos Hatchcock, the former senior instructor for the U.S. Marine Corps Sniper Instructor School at Quantico, Virginia, it could not be done as described by the FBI investigators. Gunny Hathcock, now retired [since deceased], is the most famous American military sniper in history. In Vietnam he was credited with 93 confirmed kills--and a total of over 300 actual kills counting those unconfirmed. He now conducts police SWAT team sniper schools across the country. When I called him to ask if he had seen the Zapruder film, he chuckled and cut me off. "Let me tell you what we did at Quantico," he began. "We reconstructed the whole thing: the angle, the range, the moving target, the time limit, the obstacles, everything. I don't know how many times we tried it, but we couldn't duplicate what the Warren Commission said Oswald did. Now if I can't do it, how in the world could a guy who was a non-qual on the rifle range and later only qualified 'marksman' do it?"

The Marines were not the only ones who attempted to duplicate the shots. According to Victor Ostrovsky, an Israeli Mossad agent, the Mossad also tried to reenact the shooting using the available data. Using their best marksmen and finest equipment, they also found it couldn't be done by one man, using that position, in the time allowed:

"To test their theory, they did a simulation exercise of the presidential cavalcade to see if expert marksmen with far better equipment than Oswald's could hit a moving target from the recorded distance of 88 yards. They couldn't. . .The Mossad had every film taken of the Dallas Assassination. Pictures of the area, the topography, aerial photographs, everything. Using mannequins, they duplicated the presidential cavalcade over and over again. Professionals will do a job in the same way. If I'm going to use a high powered rifle, there are very few places I'd work from, and ideally I'd want a place where I held the target for the longest possible time, where I could get closest to it, but still create the least disturbance. Based on that, we picked a few likely places, and we had more than one person doing the shooting from more than one angle. . . .During the simulation, the Mossad, using better, more powerful equipment, would aim their rifles, which were set up on tripods, and when the moment came they'd say "bang" over the loudspeakers and a laser direction-finder would show where the people in the car would have been hit, and the bullet exits. It was just an exercise, but it showed that it was impossible to do what Oswald was supposed to have done." 56 [Ostrovsky, Victor, and Hoy, Claire, By Way of Deception, New York: St. Martin's Press. 1990. pp. 141-143]

[PhilDragoo]

Both Earl Warren AND LBJ asked Hoover to investigate this. Hoover, as so often in this case, looked the other way and refused to do so. When informants told the FBI that Santos Traficante had spoken of killing Kennedy BEFORE it happened, Hoover again ignored them.

This dereliction of duty on Hoover's part vis a vis advising the Secret Service of threats on the President is the subject of Mark North, Act of Treason: The Role of J. Edgar Hoover in the Assassination of President Kennedy, New York: Carroll & Graf Publishers, Inc. 1991. 671 pp.

In addition to the threats by Santos Traficante and Joseph Milteer, Hoover covered up the threat by Carlos Marcello as reported by Edward Becker. Here is the account from John H. Davis, Mafia Kingfish: Carlos Marcello and the Assassination of John F. Kennedy, Signet, 1989, page: 122:

At this, Carlos's jovial mood changed abruptly. He jumped up from the table and, reverting to Sicilian, cried out: Livarsi 'na pietra di la scarpa! (Take the stone out of my shoe!) "Don't worry about that little Bobby sonofabitch," Marcello shouted. "He' goin' to be taken care of. . .I got--"

"But you can't go after Bobby Kennedy," Becker interrupted. "If you do, you're going to get into a hell of a lot of trouble."

"No, I'm not talkin' about dat," Carlos yelled, still standing. "Ya know what they say in Sicily: If you want to kill a dog, you don't cut off the tail, you cut off the head." He explained that you had to think of President Kennedy as a dog and Attorney General Kennedy as the dog's tail. "The dog will keep biting you if you only cut off its tail," Carlos went on, "but if the dog's head is cut off, the dog will die, tail and all."

[justshutupandtakeit]

I have read both those books and found much of the information credible.

[justshutupandtakeit]

Wow, Carlos Hathcock has spoken out about this absurdity? Gee, and I thought all we had to do was ask at our local gunshop and we would be convinced that a mediocre shot with a terrible gun with a improperly attached crappy scope and no practice could have easily made these shots. Live and learn.

Any comments, Shooter?

[PhilDragoo]

Marine Sniper

He's silent, invisible. He lies in one position for days, barely twitching a muscle, able to control his heartbeat and breathing. His record has never been matched: 93 confirmed kills. This is the story of Sergeant Carlos Hathcock, Marine sniper, legend of military lore.

One Shot, One Kill

I gave my copy of this to the Marine vet who's the mechanic for our trucks. He has a case of rifles and said, "As soon as I saw it was downhill I knew it was a conspiracy. It's very difficult shooting downhill." Echoing the remarks of Craig Roberts excerpted above.

[Destro]

I always thought LBJ was approached by a cabal and he signed off on it. In other words-it was not his idea but he agreed with the plotters motives and agreed to it. I think that is why he handed that evidence over to Clark and told him to put it to good use--in other words it was LBJs insurance agianst those that planned it. He was a willing but passive co-conspirator. Just winging a thought.

[Destro]

I said this to another poster: I always thought LBJ was approached by a cabal and he signed off on it. In other words-it was not his idea but he agreed with the plotters motives and agreed to it. I think that is why he handed that evidence over to Clark and told him to put it to good use--in other words it was LBJs insurance agianst those that planned it. He was a willing but passive co-conspirator. Just winging a thought.--That is why you get such a range of players even from both political parties.

[Destro]

One thing that puzzled me is that why did the conspirators (if a conspiracy did exist) select such a POS rifle for their patsy? In other words why did they not pick a rifle that was capable so as not to draw suspicion (i.e. the rifle was so good it had to have been the kill weapon). Also if Oswald acted alone, why did he select such a rifle when any marksman will tell you better alternatives at the same price range existed back then?

The only conclusion I can come up with (and it is my own) is that it was done to send a message. In other words it would have been a warning to agencies that Oswald was not the killer and that they should be wary of making waves for the new regime. Sort of like the old mob trick of leaving a dead fish (Godfather sleeping with the fishes sort of thing). My theory-based on nothing other than my attempt as to understand why such a useless rifle was selected.

[Destro]

can u read my #708 and add your comments in regards to my question--why that rifle?

[Destro]

I have read all you said and agree that it is true. But the Italian rifle Oswald purchased was not pristine when purchased and clearly (in my mind) not a rifle a marine would select (because he would choose something more familiar). I know Oswald may have purchased that rifle because it was cheap but I am sure rifles just as cheap were on sale at that time that a marksman would have selected. I have never understood why Oswald (if he was the lone nut shooter) selected that rifle (even if he purchased it with no clear intention at the time to shoot anyone) or if a conspiracy-why did they not select a more believable rifle? Never had that question answered to my satisfaction.

[The KG9 Kid]

You're giving Oswald too much credit on his rifle selection abilities. Military surplus WWII rifles were as common as dirt in the 50s and 60s and tens of thousands of Americans turned them into 'sporters' for hunting. That's precisely what Oswald's rifle was. It was cheap, powerful and effective -- and what he selected ended up being suitable enough. This trend continues into modern times. Witness the tens of thousands of SKS rifles that seem to turn up in just about every shooter's gun safe; I got my unfired 1951-vintage Tula Arsenal Russian SKS-45 for only $75 as a 'Curio and Relic' though it's worth a little more now.

Oswald also had a common budget handgun that he used to shoot Officer JD Tippett, too. The man didn't have a lot of money, being habitually unemployed when not commmitted to menial service labor jobs with a salary paid in 1962 dollars.

What's so suspicious here about his firearm selection?

[Destro]

You're giving Oswald too much credit on his rifle selection abilities.

And you gave him too much credit on his rifle shooting abilities.

Still an odd choice for an ex-Marine when more familiar alternatives for sale existed.

[PhilDragoo]

Regarding your question why the Mannlicher-Carcano rifle when there were other better weapons, first ask another question:

Why send a money order to Chicago for a weapon you could walk into a Dallas gun store and buy?

The postal money order was purchased when Oswald was on the clock at the Depository.

The Mannlicher-Carcano was sent to a post office box for A. Hidell which was not authorized for Oswald's use--and no one saw Oswald pick up anything from that box.

The weapon in question was a different model than the ad showed, and the lot of weapons offered was deemed defective.

Nelson Delgado testified to Oswald's repeatedly missing the target on the Marine range and getting the red flag, or "Maggie's drawers"--and he stuck to that testimony despite the FBI spending hours badgering him.

The curtain rod package was determined by testimony of Frazier and Randle and the FBI agents' measurements to have been 27"--the length of other curtain rods in the Paine garage, but too short for the longest piece of either model of Mannlicher-Carcano when disassembled.

The rifle scope had to be reshimmed before testing and then could not be adjusted properly according to Hoover.

The bolt was difficult to operate according to those designated to test it.

The trigger pull was smooth to a point, then rough, another source of complaint by the testers.

The skill of Oswald was doubted by Carlos Hathcock in this excerpt of Craig Roberts Kill Zone

Craig Roberts, Kill Zone, CPI, 1994, pages 89-90:

According to my friend, Gunnery Sergeant Carlos Hathcock, the former senior instructor for the U.S. Marine Corps Sniper Instructor School at Quantico, Virginia, it could not be done as described by the FBI investigators. Gunny Hathcock, now retired, is the most famous American military sniper in history. In Vietnam he was credited with 93 confirmed kills--and a total of over 300 actual kills counting those unconfirmed. He now conducts police SWAT team sniper schools across the country. When I called him to ask if he had seen the Zapruder film, he chuckled and cut me off. "Let me tell you what we did at Quantico," he began. "We reconstructed the whole thing: the angle, the range, the moving target, the time limit, the obstacles, everything. I don't know how many times we tried it, but we couldn't duplicate what the Warren Commission said Oswald did. Now if I can't do it, how in the world could a guy who was a non-qual on the rifle range and later only qualified 'marksman' do it?"

Craig Roberts is coauthor with Charles Sasser of One Shot One Kill on military snipers beginning with Carlos Hathcock as Chapter One. Roberts is a member of the U.S. Marine Corps Scout/Sniper Association.

The accuracy of the weapon was not the only suspicious element to the framing of Oswald.

He had no motive, admired Kennedy, never purchased any ammunition, was not witnessed carrying the weapon into the Depository or firing it (Brennan is a complete fraud, an imbecile).

The deputies who found the weapon observed "Mauser" on it, yet later that weapon disappeared. A .303 Enfield was handed down from the seventh floor or roof, and that, too, vanished.

We are left with a weapon without a fingerprint, and only had a palm print after it was taken to Oswald's body "for reference"--and the alleged print was not seen by the FBI: the FBI could not find a trace of a palm print or of its lifting by Dallas police.

And the clip seems to have disappeared, and the strap can't be accounted for--and Marina said Lee never practiced--until the FBI worked on her: then she changed her tune, again.

An additional problem is that the first two shots would have been obscured by the live oak tree--unless divine providence was doing the sighting--

Forty years on and all we really can be certain of is that Kennedy's brain escaped the stainless cylinder.

[The KG9 Kid]

"... And you gave him too much credit on his rifle shooting abilities."

If you say so.

President Kennedy is dead, and Lee Harvey Oswald shot him.

[Destro]

I appreciate your reply and understood it but it did not answer my question. My question can be asked to both supporters of the conspiracy theory and of the Oswald-Lone Gunman theory.

If it was a conspiracy theory - Why was the Mannlicher-Carcano rifle selected as the show piece rifle?? I mean if I wanted to frame someone I would have picked a more believable gun. This question works both ways-if I was a lone nut and wanted to shoot JFK I would have selected a better (or more familiar to the shooter) rifle which probably could have been purchased for about the same dollars.

I ask this question to both sides and never get a satisfactory answer.

I think I remember reading that the Mannlicher-Carcano rifle may have been selected because it was so odd it may have been memorable and thus helping secure the story as Oswald the patsy. But that sounds far fetched to me as a layman because while not common, Mannlicher-Carcano rifles were not rare either.

[Destro]

Discouting the concpiracy-If Oswald was a recreational shooter on a budget the choice ends up being the Mannlicher-Carcano rifle? When more familiar rifles to an ex-Marine were also available and as cheap?

[The KG9 Kid]

Oswald believed that he was going to be a nameless and faceless purchaser of a mail-order rifle that he saw in a sporting goods advertisement, which is why he ordered it under his brilliant pseudonym 'O.H. Lee'. His budget could afford it, and hey, it even came with a 4X scope. What he bought turned out to be pretty good. Maybe the Italian flair wooed him.

Just because someone's an ex-Marine doesn't mean they're Chuck Norris or even particuarly familiar with makes of rifles, Destro. It's not like no-one's ever heard of a Marine that bought a Lorcin before.

The age of the rifle is a non-issue. At the time he bought it, it was only a 23 year old unissued gun. I have a 51 year old military surplus rifle that looks like it was born yesterday even thought it was issued and carried for years by the same Swiss militia soldier it was issued to, and it's probably one of the most accurate guns I have especially when used with GP11 Swiss match ammo. Certainly it has the best trigger of any of the guns in my safe. It also has a Mannlicher-derived action, just like Oswald's Carcano.

It's a Swiss K31 Schmidt-Rubin straight-pull action, and the bore is like a mirror. Hard bluing all over. It's a 95% rifle that I paid $150 for, and is made just over the Alps from Italy. It's perfectly capable of doing the shooting Oswald did through the iron sights.

You're too incredulous about this.

[jws3sticks]

#370 I knew I saw that guy before 9/11. A total bad guy.

[Shooter 2.5]

It was the cheapest one with a scope.

[Destro]

Thanks Shooter. That it was the cheapest gun with a sight available is a good explanation as to why Oswald purchased it from the non-conspiracy side of the fence. Now I have to see what the pro-conspiracy side has to say on this matter.

The rifle actually helps explain a lot. If it was a lone nut, and a poor one at that then he would have used the cheapest available weapon he could buy. If a conspiracy, then a more "photogenic" and "believable" weapon would have been selected for the "patsy" so as not to make his role in the shooting questionable.