Lyndon Johnson for 2024

[Gerry Down]

LBJ sounds so nice and rational in this video. He sounds like he'd even make a good candidate for President today. Very hard to see how he could have had any part in the assassination in Dallas. He says at one point he was considering not even running in 1964. And didn't in 1968. Not exactly the profile of a power crazed lunatic that Roger Stone makes him out to be.

[Joe Elliott]

LBJ sounds so nice and rational in this video. He sounds like he'd even make a good candidate for President today. Very hard to see how he could have had any part in the assassination in Dallas. He says at one point he was considering not even running in 1964. And didn't in 1968. Not exactly the profile of a power crazed lunatic that Roger Stone makes him out to be.

President Lyndon Johnson did more for civil rights than any other president since Abraham Lincoln. By far.

Agreed to assassinate President Kennedy in November 1963 so we can have a big war in Vietnam? In November 1963, the war was simmering along at a low level. There was no need for a large war. On November 1, 1963, the dictator of South Vietnam was assassinated. This provoked North Vietnam to start raising and training the large army they would need to invade and take over South Vietnam. But in November 1963, the United States knew nothing about this future.

It is similar to the claim Roosevelt knew about Pearl Harbor but allowed it to happen, so we could be at war with Germany. And this did happen. But it only happened because Hitler did the unpredictable, declared war on the United States three days after Pearl Harbor. Had this not happen, the United States would have been at war alright, but the wrong war. Not with Germany but with Japan.

For Roosevelt and Johnson to be guilty of these conspiracies, they would both have to be psychic. Roosevelt would have to know what that most unpredictable of world leaders, Hitler would do in advance and Johnson would have to know that a large invasion of South Vietnam was looming and if it was to be held a large army would be needed.

[Jon Banks]

Most sociopaths seem “nice and rational”.

While I agree that LBJ’s work on Civil Rights and Healthcare legislation were great accomplishments, he was as corrupt a politician as Richard Nixon if not moreso.

I don’t think LBJ was part of the conspiracy to kill JFK but even he basically admitted that he was part of the coverup when he said years after leaving office that he didn’t believe Oswald acted alone.

[Richard Smith]

Robert Caro is the foremost expert on LBJ and he indicates that he has found no evidence to link LBJ to the assassination.  Somewhat surprisingly, though, he does apparently believe there was a realistic possibility that JFK would have dropped LBJ from the ticket in 1964.  Not sure that I agree, but Caro has to be given some credence on that point.  LBJ did more in his first 100 days as President than JFK did in his entire political career.  JFK's primary attribute as a politician was taking a good picture and having lots of his father's money.

[Steve M. Galbraith]

President Lyndon Johnson did more for civil rights than any other president since Abraham Lincoln. By far.

Agreed to assassinate President Kennedy in November 1963 so we can have a big war in Vietnam? In November 1963, the war was simmering along at a low level. There was no need for a large war. On November 1, 1963, the dictator of South Vietnam was assassinated. This provoked North Vietnam to start raising and training the large army they would need to invade and take over South Vietnam. But in November 1963, the United States knew nothing about this future.

It is similar to the claim Roosevelt knew about Pearl Harbor but allowed it to happen, so we could be at war with Germany. And this did happen. But it only happened because Hitler did the unpredictable, declared war on the United States three days after Pearl Harbor. Had this not happen, the United States would have been at war alright, but the wrong war. Not with Germany but with Japan.

For Roosevelt and Johnson to be guilty of these conspiracies, they would both have to be psychic. Roosevelt would have to know what that most unpredictable of world leaders, Hitler would do in advance and Johnson would have to know that a large invasion of South Vietnam was looming and if it was to be held a large army would be needed.

Part of our problem trying to reason with conspiracy believers is dealing with their "conspiracy history." They read all of these conspiracy books and uncritically accept the histories that the conspiracy authors provide. Such as LBJ's unilateral escalation of the war or that JFK was going to withdraw from Vietnam or end the Cold War (I would suggest that Moscow had a vote on that one). Oliver Stone's movie "JFK" is the perfect example of this "conspiracy history" view.

LBJ was responding, as you point out, to the increased aggression by the North, mostly through support for the Vietcong, following Diem's overthrow. Ho Chi Mingh said the biggest mistake the US made was allowing Diem to be removed. He pointed out that Diem was a popular nationalist who had opposed the French occupation and was by far the most competent and able leader the South had. After Diem was removed, the South Vietnamese government was deeply splintered and divided among various factions, mostly generals, that couldn't govern. Hanoi wisely saw this disarray and stepped up its aggression. But in November of 1963, things looked much better; certainly Diem's repression of the Buddhist was causing problems (and was one of the reasons JFK supported his removal). But the situation still seemed easily winnable since American power was so overwhelming (or seemed to be at that time).

So what was LBJ to do after this increased aggression and inability of the South to fight it off? Withdraw and let the South collapse? Or try to prevent that disaster? That was the question that JFK would have had to face. But the day of his death it was still one that was far off in the distant future. RFK said that there was no talk about leaving at that time. McNamara said the same thing. So did Dean Rusk. It wasn't even considered at that time since things seemed quite winnable.

[Steve M. Galbraith]

Most sociopaths seem “nice and rational”.

While I agree that LBJ’s work on Civil Rights and Healthcare legislation were great accomplishments, he was as corrupt a politician as Richard Nixon if not moreso.

I don’t think LBJ was part of the conspiracy to kill JFK but even he basically admitted that he was part of the coverup when he said years after leaving office that he didn’t believe Oswald acted alone.

How did he "admit" he was part of the coverup? He opined after learning about the plots against Castro in 1967 and AFTER the WC had conducted its investigation that he thought Castro was behind the assassination in retaliation for the plots against him ordered, in LBJ's opinion, by "the Kennedys."

How is that being part of a "coverup"? Of what? What did he do to "cover up" what happened? How is giving a view in 1967 that he thought Castro was behind it covering anything up?

Second: why would a amoral sociopath who has no conscience or concerns about anyone other than himself care about helping poor blacks who had no power? What was in it for him? A sociopath, certainly a white one, wouldn't give a damned about the "Negro" (to use the phrasing at that time). Hell, the white sociopaths in the South were killing and oppressing them not helping them. 

[Jon Banks]

How did he "admit" he was part of the coverup? He opined after learning about the plots against Castro in 1967 and AFTER the WC had conducted its investigation that he thought Castro was behind the assassination in retaliation for the plots against him ordered, in LBJ's opinion, by "the Kennedys."

Not true. 


...the talk turned to President Kennedy, and [Lyndon B.] Johnson expressed his belief that the assassination in Dallas had been part of a conspiracy. “I never believed that Oswald acted alone, although I can accept that he pulled the trigger.” Johnson said that when he had taken office he found that “we had been operating a damned Murder Inc. in the Caribbean.” A year or so before Kennedy’s death a CIA-backed assassination team had been picked up in Havana. Johnson speculated that Dallas had been a retaliation for this thwarted attempt, although he couldn’t prove it.

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2013/08/lbj-oswald-wasnt-alone/309486/

Johnson said he never believed Oswald acted alone. Therefore, he was aware of facts that made him suspect there was a conspiracy yet he promoted the Warren Report for political reasons, to avoid a potential World War, and to give Americans closure.

I don't see how anyone today can still doubt that the US government chose to bury rather than fully investigate the conspiratorial leads in JFK's assassination. Johnson was part of that coverup.

You folks praising LBJ sound so naïve. He was a great politician but not a saint or an exceptional humanitarian...

Second: why would a amoral sociopath who has no conscience or concerns about anyone other than himself care about helping poor blacks who had no power? What was in it for him? A sociopath, certainly a white one, wouldn't give a damned about the "Negro" (to use the phrasing at that time). Hell, the white sociopaths in the South were killing and oppressing them not helping them.

Johnson was an overt racist and he had a huge ego like President Trump.

Even as president, Johnson's interpersonal relationships with blacks were marred by his prejudice. As longtime Jet correspondent Simeon Booker wrote in his memoir "Shocks the Conscience", early in his presidency, Johnson once lectured Booker after he authored a critical article for Jet Magazine, telling Booker he should "thank" Johnson for all he'd done for black people. In "Flawed Giant", Johnson biographer Robert Dallek writes that Johnson explained his decision to nominate Thurgood Marshall to the Supreme Court rather than a less famous black judge by saying, "when I appoint a nigger to the bench, I want everybody to know he's a nigger."

https://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/lyndon-johnson-civil-rights-racism-msna305591


The fact that he accomplished things that JFK wanted to do but wasn't able to accomplish fed his ego and helped establish his Presidential legacy. He at least knew he was on the right side of history.

And LBJ's legacy would be on the level of FDR's if it wasn't marred by the Vietnam war.

He's among the most successful Presidents of the 20th Century but Vietnam is what gets remembered by Americans more than the Great Society...

[Richard Smith]

How did he "admit" he was part of the coverup? He opined after learning about the plots against Castro in 1967 and AFTER the WC had conducted its investigation that he thought Castro was behind the assassination in retaliation for the plots against him ordered, in LBJ's opinion, by "the Kennedys."

How is that being part of a "coverup"? Of what? What did he do to "cover up" what happened? How is giving a view in 1967 that he thought Castro was behind it covering anything up?

Second: why would a amoral sociopath who has no conscience or concerns about anyone other than himself care about helping poor blacks who had no power? What was in it for him? A sociopath, certainly a white one, wouldn't give a damned about the "Negro" (to use the phrasing at that time). Hell, the white sociopaths in the South were killing and oppressing them not helping them.

I don't believe LBJ was any sort of sociopath either.  He was just an effective politician.  For many years he was among a handful of Southern democrats who precluded any federal civil rights legislation from advancing because that was in his interest when running for office in the South.  When he decided to run for president, however, he realized that no southerner could win a national election tainted with a segregationist background.  So he suddenly became an advocate of Civil Rights.  That was mostly a political calculation to advance his own interest.  He may have had some empathy for those living in the type of poverty that he grew up in - which included many poor blacks - but that was secondary to his own political agenda.  And that strategy has proven wildly successful for democrats to this day since they still get 80% percent or more of the black vote. Hard to remember now but after the Civil War most blacks considered themselves to be republicans for many decades.