Roger Stone wasn't exactly a quiet figure in American politics even before he published his 2013 book. But when he released The Man Who Killed Kennedy: The Case Against LBJ, it felt like a grenade went off in the world of historical debate. People have been arguing about Dealey Plaza for decades. They look at the "grassy knoll," they talk about the CIA, and they obsess over the trajectory of the Magic Bullet. But Stone shifted the lens directly onto the man who stood to gain the most from John F. Kennedy’s death: Lyndon Baines Johnson.
It’s a heavy accusation. Murder? Maybe.
To understand why this theory persists, you have to look at the atmosphere of 1963. LBJ was a man in a corner. He was a Texas powerhouse who had been sidelined as Vice President, a role he famously hated. He was facing potentially career-ending scandals involving figures like Bobby Baker and Billie Sol Estes. Honestly, many historians agree that if Kennedy hadn't died in Dallas, Johnson might have been dropped from the 1964 ticket. He was looking at political oblivion. Instead, he ended up in the Oval Office.
The Motive: A Politician with His Back to the Wall
Why does the case against LBJ carry so much weight for skeptics? It’s mostly about the "Cui Bono" rule—who benefits? By November 1963, the relationship between the Kennedy brothers and Johnson was basically radioactive. Bobby Kennedy, the Attorney General, didn't just dislike LBJ; he loathed him. There’s a lot of evidence suggesting the Kennedys were actively looking for ways to push Johnson out.
Look at the scandals brewing. Bobby Baker, LBJ’s former right-hand man, was under intense federal investigation. Life magazine was preparing an exposé that threatened to link Johnson directly to corruption. If you're a man who has spent your whole life clawing your way to the top of the Texas and national political machines, you don't just sit back and let a couple of Ivy League brothers from Massachusetts destroy you.
Stone’s book argues that Johnson was the "linchpin" that connected several groups who all wanted JFK gone. This included the CIA, which was still reeling from the Bay of Pigs disaster, and the Texas oil barons who feared Kennedy was going to get rid of the oil depletion allowance. It’s a messy, complicated web. But Johnson is the guy at the center of the Venn diagram.
The Malcolm Wallace Fingerprint
One of the most specific, and controversial, pieces of evidence cited in The Man Who Killed Kennedy: The Case Against LBJ involves a man named Malcolm "Mac" Wallace.
👉 See also: Ethics in the News: What Most People Get Wrong
Wallace was a known associate of LBJ. He had a criminal history, including a conviction for murder in 1951, but he stayed out of prison thanks to some very high-level legal maneuvering in Texas. This is where the story gets weird. In 1998, a fingerprint expert named Nathan Darby claimed that a "latent" print found on a cardboard box on the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository matched Mac Wallace.
If that’s true, it’s a smoking gun.
However, we have to be fair. The FBI and other independent experts have since disputed that match. They say the print is too blurry to be definitive. But for those who believe in the LBJ theory, Wallace is the literal link between the assassin's nest and the Vice President’s office. It's the kind of detail that keeps researchers up at night because it's so specific. It’s not just a "vibe" or a motive; it’s a physical mark.
Was LBJ Ducking?
There is a famous photo taken during the motorcade. It shows the Vice Presidential car just seconds before the shots were fired. Some observers, including Stone, point out that Johnson appears to be ducking or leaning down before the first shot was even heard.
Is he? Or is he just leaning over to talk to someone?
The theory suggests he had "advance knowledge." If you knew a hit was coming, you’d probably duck too. This is often paired with the testimony of Madeleine Brown, a woman who claimed to be Johnson’s long-time mistress. She alleged that at a party the night before the assassination—hosted by oil tycoon Clint Murchison—Johnson whispered to her, "After tomorrow, those goddamn Kennedys will never embarrass me again."
✨ Don't miss: When is the Next Hurricane Coming 2024: What Most People Get Wrong
Now, historians generally treat Madeleine Brown’s claims with a huge grain of salt. There isn't much corroborating evidence that the party even happened the way she described it. But in the world of JFK research, her story is a cornerstone. It adds a layer of "Texas Gothic" to the whole affair. It makes LBJ look like a Shakespearean villain, plotting in the shadows of a Dallas mansion.
The Warren Commission and the Cover-Up
You can't talk about the case against LBJ without talking about how he handled the aftermath. He’s the one who created the Warren Commission. He’s the one who hand-picked the members, including Allen Dulles—the CIA director JFK had fired.
Stone argues that the Commission wasn't designed to find the truth. It was designed to "settle" the public’s nerves and pin everything on Lee Harvey Oswald as a lone nut. By controlling the investigation, Johnson could ensure that no trail ever led back to Austin or the Vice President’s office.
Think about the timeline. Johnson was sworn in on Air Force One with Jackie Kennedy standing right there in her blood-stained suit. It was a power move. He took control of the government, the evidence, and the narrative within hours. For many, that level of efficiency looks less like "duty" and more like "execution of a plan."
The Complexity of the Texas Machine
Texas politics in the 50s and 60s wasn't for the faint of heart. It was a world of "Box 13," where votes were "found" in the middle of the night to help Johnson win his Senate seat. It was a world of backroom deals and heavy-handed intimidation.
When you look at The Man Who Killed Kennedy: The Case Against LBJ, you have to see it through the lens of that specific political culture. Johnson wasn't a modern politician; he was a frontier boss. He used the "Johnson Treatment"—getting in people’s faces, looming over them, using his size and power to break their will.
🔗 Read more: What Really Happened With Trump Revoking Mayorkas Secret Service Protection
Is it a leap from political intimidation to assassination? For some, it’s a chasm. For others, it’s just a small step for a man who believed the ends always justified the means.
Actionable Insights for History Buffs
If you're diving into the rabbit hole of the LBJ theory, don't just take one book as gospel. The Kennedy assassination is perhaps the most documented event in American history, and the sheer volume of "facts" can be overwhelming.
- Read the primary sources: Go to the National Archives online and look at the declassified JFK files. Look at the actual memos between the FBI and the Secret Service from late 1963.
- Cross-reference the scandals: Look into the Bobby Baker and Billie Sol Estes cases. See how close the investigations were getting to LBJ's inner circle in October 1963. The proximity is startling.
- Analyze the geography: If you ever visit Dallas, go to Dealey Plaza. Stand where the "sniper's nest" was. Stand on the Grassy Knoll. Seeing the physical space makes the logistics of a multi-person conspiracy—or a lone gunman—much easier to visualize.
- Watch the Zapruder film with a critical eye: Don't just watch the headshot. Look at the reactions of the people in the other cars. Look at the Secret Service agents.
The case against LBJ isn't just about one man. It's about a belief that the "Deep State" of the 1960s—the military-industrial complex that Eisenhower warned us about—found a willing partner in a man who wanted the presidency more than anything else. Whether you believe Stone’s specific narrative or not, the questions he raises about power, motive, and the ruthless nature of mid-century politics remain some of the most haunting in American history.
Investigating this requires looking past the "official" story and weighing the circumstantial evidence against the documented behavior of a man who was known to do whatever it took to win. History is rarely as clean as a textbook makes it out to be. It's usually a lot messier, a lot darker, and filled with people who had everything to lose.
To truly grasp the weight of the allegations, one should examine the records of the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) from the late 70s. They concluded there was a "high probability" of a conspiracy, even if they couldn't name the names. That’s the space where the LBJ theory lives—in that gap between "we know something happened" and "we can't prove who did it."