Important Notice: Our web hosting provider recently started charging us for additional visits, which was unexpected. In response, we're seeking donations. Depending on the situation, we may explore different monetization options for our Community and Expert Contributors. It's crucial to provide more returns for their expertise and offer more Expert Validated Answers or AI Validated Answers. Learn more about our hosting issue here.

Can skeptics find a more credible source?

credible skeptics source
0
Posted

Can skeptics find a more credible source?

0

In 1967, Jim Garrison’s case against Clay Shaw wasn’t just about Shaw. Shaw was a way to get to a much larger fish: Johnson. And Johnson knew this. The Garrison case implied Johnson was to blame for Kennedy’s assassination, and the findings in that trial actually helped lead to Johnson’s refusal to run in 1968…despite Shaw’s acquittal. At the time of the assassination and until his death, Johnson was represented by a law firm partnered by Barr McClellan, the author of “Blood, Money & Power: How L.B.J. Killed J.F.K.”. So in terms of credibility, you can’t get a better source: the very lawyers who defended Johnson against accusations of complicity. An interesting quote by the author, Barr McClellan: “When asked if he was concerned for the safety of his twin sons, he said: ‘The Democrats are pretty much out of power, really, in the state of Texas.

What is your question?

*Sadly, we had to bring back ads too. Hopefully more targeted.