Lyndon Baines Johnson — A liar, a cheat, a thief, a swindler and a crook

trysail

Catch Me Who Can
Joined
Nov 8, 2005
Posts
25,593



...There had been speculation for years about Johnson's relationship to that company [the "LBJ Company"]. Lady Bird had purchased one small radio station in 1943 for $17,500. Since then, thanks in part to a twenty-year-long string of strikingly favorable rulings by the Federal Communications Commission (which, among other aspects, had left Austin as one of the few metropolitan areas with only a single commercial television station), the company had burgeoned into a chain of immensely profitable radio and television stations the length of Texas, and by 1963 it owned as well 11,000 acres of ranchland and major shareholdings in nine Texas banks. Johnson had quieted the speculations by his unequivocal denials that there was any relationship. He had said, over and over, for twenty years, that the LBJ Company was entirely his wife's business and he had nothing to do with it; that, as he claimed in one of his many statements, "All that is owned by Mrs. Johnson....I don't have any interest in government-regulated industries and I never have had." But if Lyndon Johnson had no interest in the LBJ Company, why was it taking out insurance on his life? And, of course, his denials had omitted the salient fact. Texas was a community property state, and therefore since Lyndon Johnson had an interest— a half interest— in all the company's income, he had become rich. If Reynolds' statements became public, it would cast doubt on Johnson's claim that there was no connection between LBJ and the LBJ Company— and once that connection was established, the company's financial dealings would become a subject of journalistic inquiry. Johnson had arrived in Congress poor, and during his career had ostensibly had no source of income other than his government salary. He had been boasting to friends for years that he was a millionaire. By 1963, he, a man who had never held any job but his government positions— whose salary had never been more than $35,000 per year— was not merely a millionaire but a millionaire many times over...



..." 'Millionaire'— this was perhaps the first time that Johnson had ever been identified as such in print, at least in a national publication; he had perhaps never been identified in a national publication as a wealthy man, let alone a very wealthy man; for Life to do so, it must know something about his personal fortune that he had previously been able to keep hidden.

And, in fact, it did.

The magazine's investigative team had been working since the end of October [1963], and, during that time, say its leader, Associate Editor William Lambert, 'I began to pick up all these hints' about Lyndon Johnson, not merely about Johnson and his relationship with the newly rich Bobby Baker, but about Lyndon Johnson 'and the acquisition of his fortune.' Following up on hints, the team had found, in the words of Russell Sackett, one of its members and also an associate editor, that 'The deeper you got, the more serious they were; he was far richer than anyone had expected,' that he was, in fact, very rich indeed.

'I was very indignant,' Lambert said, and during the week of November 11 [1963], he had gone to the office of George P. Hunt, Life's managing editor, and said of Lyndon Johnson, 'This guy looks like a bandit to me.' Although 'bandit' is, of course, a synonym for 'robber' or 'thief,' Lambert didn't feel he was misusing the word. 'I felt that he had used public office to enhance his private wealth.' 'We're going to have to spend some money [to investigate]. I need some people, and a lot of time.' Johnson's entire financial picture should be looked into, he said. 'It was almost a net worth job, and you know that takes an enormous amount of time. I told Hunt, 'He's got a fortune, and he's been on the [public] payroll ever since he got out of college. And I don't know how he got it, but it's there.' By the time he went to see Hunt, Lambert was to recall, 'We knew he was a millionaire many times over."...


-Robert A. Caro
The Years of Lyndon Johnson: The Passage of Power
New York, N.Y. 2012.






This is an excerpt from the fourth volume of Robert A. Caro's monumental biography of the 36th President of the U.S.

I have read each volume as it emerged. With each and every volume, I have been more and more sickened and disgusted by Caro's revelations of Johnson's profound dishonesty.

The inescapable fact is that Lyndon Baines Johnson was a crook, a liar, a cheat, a thief and a blackmailer.

He cheated in every single election he ever entered— beginning as a student at obscure Southwest Texas State Teachers College— and he never stopped.




 
Last edited:
So he was a cheating asshole, what's your point? MLK was a plagiarist.

LBJ didn't do so bad on civil rights.
 
I think Trysail's point is that he's a specialist in posting the wrong thing on the wrong Web site and is a master in cut and paste and using fancy fonts and colors. Other than that, there's no "there" there.
 
Trysail, 1964 was a long, long, long time ago, in case you hadn't noticed. Goldwater lost by the way.

Do try to keep up.
 
If I was going to try to convince others of the truth of a matter, I would cite some facts. The quote you used is completely devoid of any such. The only thing I found was innuendo, accusation and opinion. Those in and of themselves prove nothing other then the political and personal outlook of the one making the statements.

I couldn't argue one way or the other about LBJ. My feelings are he probably was just what they say he was. After all it seems most politicians, ex-presidents specifically, from the great state of Texas are crooks, liars and cheats.



Comshaw
 
If I was going to try to convince others of the truth of a matter, I would cite some facts. The quote you used is completely devoid of any such. The only thing I found was innuendo, accusation and opinion. Those in and of themselves prove nothing other then the political and personal outlook of the one making the statements.

I couldn't argue one way or the other about LBJ. My feelings are he probably was just what they say he was. After all it seems most politicians, ex-presidents specifically, from the great state of Texas are crooks, liars and cheats.



Comshaw



Caro has spent the last thirty years meticulously researching and writing the four volumes of the LBJ biography.

Prior to that, he authored a universally-acclaimed, masterful biography of Robert Moses. That work has been compared to the Lytton Strachey's biography of Queen Victoria and Richard Ellman's life of James Joyce— two works that are widely regarded as setting the gold standard for biography.

He won Pulitzer Prizes for these biographies.

What Caro has found and revealed about Lyndon Johnson is simply mind-boggling. The lifelong, widespread extent of LBJ's profound, fundamental dishonesty and abuse of office is absolutely stunning.





https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Caro

 


This thread should not have been moved.


It isn't politics.


It is about one of the most thorough, universally-acclaimed biographies ever written— one that has been compared to Lytton Strachey's Queen Victoria, a literary standard.



 
Last edited:


Caro has spent the last thirty years meticulously researching and writing the four volumes of the LBJ biography.

Prior to that, he authored a universally-acclaimed, masterful biography of Robert Moses. That work has been compared to the Lytton Strachey's biography of Queen Victoria and Richard Ellman's life of James Joyce— two works that are widely regarded as setting the gold standard for biography.

He won Pulitzer Prizes for these biographies.

What Caro has found and revealed about Lyndon Johnson is simply mind-boggling. The lifelong, widespread extent of LBJ's profound, fundamental dishonesty and abuse of office is absolutely stunning.





https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Caro


I didn't question his integrity, but I did question your use of opinion rather than fact. You present no facts at all, only opinion and innuendo. You might be satisfied with accepting an opinion in place of fact, but I am not, no matter the reputation of the one giving it.


Comshaw
 
I didn't question his integrity, but I did question your use of opinion rather than fact. You present no facts at all, only opinion and innuendo. You might be satisfied with accepting an opinion in place of fact, but I am not, no matter the reputation of the one giving it.

Comshaw



I strongly suggest that you acquire and read the four volumes now completed (a fifth is most likely in the works).


There you will find your facts.


It is not opinion. The documentation (and the several bibliographies) is voluminous, thorough and detailed.





 
Illinoizzzzzz

Texas was mentioned as a state having many crooked politicians. I'm glad I'm from Illinois, they've never had a crook in office!
In fact several who studied in Illinois became great Presidents.:(:eek::confused::devil:
 
Back
Top