16-07-2014, 08:30 AM
I'm not a subscriber to the 'LBJ did it' theory. But if I assume for the sake of argument what Ms. Mellen says is true,
her argument still falls flat. She seems to maintain that if she disqualifies Mac Wallace, she has also disqualified LBJ.
I don't think one necessarily follows the other.
If you ask, cui bono? LBJ was one of many who benefited from the assassination, like Peter Lemkin points out.
But even if LBJ was a sponsor or a facilitator, he'd have to be an idiot to use Mac Wallace for the job.
There was no arm's length between them. Their relationship was too well known. The job was too big,
too complex, too intricate.
This was not a lone-gunman project. LBJ and Wallace did not have the necessary skill set.
'
her argument still falls flat. She seems to maintain that if she disqualifies Mac Wallace, she has also disqualified LBJ.
I don't think one necessarily follows the other.
If you ask, cui bono? LBJ was one of many who benefited from the assassination, like Peter Lemkin points out.
But even if LBJ was a sponsor or a facilitator, he'd have to be an idiot to use Mac Wallace for the job.
There was no arm's length between them. Their relationship was too well known. The job was too big,
too complex, too intricate.
This was not a lone-gunman project. LBJ and Wallace did not have the necessary skill set.
'