The JFK Assassination Conspiracy Theory Is A Continuous, Self-Feeding, Perpetuating, Mystery Of Life That Relies On Denying Reality: We Can’t Handle The Truth That The Mafia Killed JFK And Our Government Let Them, And Covered It Up
I’m going to apologize up front that this may assume the moniker of the preachy article in the series, the “you can’t handle the truth” edition. Sometimes the truth is the nose on your face that you simply can’t-or don’t want to see. It is a natural human trait that we all wrestle with at times in our lives. We either overcome whatever it is or we live with it: and lament our fate.
There are apocryphal stories about that “mystery person” at work who deems food stored in the common use fridge as “fair game.” We had such a person working in a classified environment where most of us had clearances and routinely took polygraphs. Inventive people eventually used some form of laxative or hidden camera to out the person and it is almost always somebody you would never expect: and its always shocking.
We had a co-worker at Fort Huachuca who insisted that somebody hacked into his work computer and visited porn sites while he was apparently away from his desk. He was popular and well-liked. You must sign into every government computer, even the unclassified-for official use only, sensitive, but unclassified terminals-which grants permission-without restriction-on the government freedom to monitor your activity and investigate your actions should a problem arise.
It is a condition of employment-of access. The government grants you–Max Dribbler-personal access to sensitive information, but you waiver any personal protection you would ordinarily have in a court of law for the privilege to access such information. Every government civil service employee-with the possible exception of Hillary Rodham Clinton-knows this and agrees to it by signing in: even contractors.
The porn incident devolved to a he said, she said impasse and the leadership chicken poop remedy was to have everybody sign a statement acknowledging they would not abuse government computers to visit such sites while at work on government computers. An agreement a bit more specific than everybody had already signed to gain access in the first place. And-no-it did not specify you can’t look at porn, neither did it say you can’t shop on Amazon using official government resources. Up to this point those matters seemed obvious.
I refused to sign such a ridiculous abomination: my boss chewed me out and signed for me: whatevs, get over it. The co-worker was later busted for sexually abusing 12- and 14-year-old boys. People deny to this day that he could have done such a thing, despite being convicted and serving jail time: he “seemed” like such a nice guy.
Sometimes the truth hurts so much that we can’t acknowledge it. Sometimes people need help, but the compassion of others for their mental being prevents them from doing the right thing and getting them help-talking to them about it-until all of a sudden the “crap” gets real and it costs them everything.
Many times we overlook and let things ride that should be addressed immediately.
In one of my last jobs, I worked for a senior intelligence leader who later rose to the near peak of our career field that is now pretty much defined by the Director of National Intelligence, which is more of a political post, than one earned through service: it is not a career worthy long term goal for 99% of us because at least 90% of us used to be non-political and we are not the type of people who get nominated for such posts.
She was a very nice, likeable person-personable, smart, quick-witted, fun to be around. An idea or concepts person-an ENTJ-like me. We interacted daily for about a year.
But she was a liar-one of the most complex and sophisticated I’ve ever worked with-but a liar, nonetheless. I was constantly surprised-but never shocked-this is my shock face-to learn how somewhat common it was to meet so many throughout my professional life experiences. It took some time, maybe 3 or 4 blatant instances-to come to grips with that basic fact of her lying, scheming arse.
Which is righteous, as you don’t want to jump to conclusions about anybody when you are in positions of authority and responsibility, but you do so while ignoring the most important leadership element a person develops, and that is your “gut sense.”
That gut sense said she was “dirty” from about my third meeting with her. There is subject matter expertise, there is the ability to express it in the jargon of the profession, and there is too easily wielded waxing philosophic and blowing words in excess of the average human conversation that masks the glib vernacular of a blowhard.
Also, it is not unusual to see flawed personalities in what are essentially leadership positions in the government agencies or the DASDs and DUSDs (Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense, Deputy Under Secretary of Defense) in the Pentagon, who are appointed to their positions, or those who most often gain position because of attributes a person can’t control-race, sex, gender, relationships, etc. There are over 4K such positions, many of which must be confirmed by congress.
After all, they are political appointees who usually come by way of their jobs not through merit-skills, knowledge and abilities like most of the rest of us smuckatellis-although many will have those traits-but by green paper donations-money-to the political side of choice and also personal relationships.
She seemed to take no small amount of pleasure in concocting conspiratorial schemes where she solicited information that could then be used to finesse a solution against the target’s often best interest, but in pursuit of her scheme. While getting them to go along for the ride seemingly unwitting of the hook in their mouth. The proverbial going to hell and enjoying the ride.
In other instances, she might have two or three separate people working the same issue without knowledge of the overall efforts, charitably to achieve the best result through her idea of somewhat of a best athlete construct.
But if that was the objective, a more effective leadership technique might be to bring the people together who have the talent and capability to pull it off, do small-group brainstorming, develop a plan (my favorite plan of action and milestones)-oversee the effort-and drive it to fruition.
The CIA culture does raise folks a bit differently than the rest of the IC. Because our agency inherited the outfit formerly known as the National Photographic Interpretation Center (NPIC)-among others-some of which were also manned by CIA personnel-at the standup in 1996 of the National Imagery and Mapping Agency-NIMA-later the hyphenated three-letter National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency-NGA-we had a large number of CIA personnel-and still do. In the early years we had somewhat of an informal practice that made a lot of sense of having a CIA career senior as the Deputy Director.
She was an absolute disaster across a broad front of agency level issues that she left in her wake as she messed up and failed up. Even when faced with the truth of her bent of character, it took me a bit to come to grips with the fact that she was a scheming, colluding, manipulating liar. After four decades of work, more than two decades as a senior leading business units, I was slow on the uptake while extending the benefit of the doubt to a newbie in our agency while initially reticent to call her out on it.
While nonetheless pursuing constructive outcomes: but the government pays us to do the people’s business, and if the job was easy they wouldn’t have-or need-seniors leading. These problems are best faced head on. And the chips fall where they may: and they do, and I’ve been retired ever since.
I should get back on point with my topic, but the deleterious effect of such people can linger on, not only from their actions but the coterie of sycophants they gather around them to do their bidding and the deleterious circles their actions spawn: think the world’s greatest salesman-Joe Girardi-and his theory of 250. Succes leaves clues, but failure often begets more failure.
When you have somebody in a position of power who plays it fast and loose with the rules-ethics-their oath-the truth-it harms those who become part of the team who inherit such ethically challenged practices but adopt them without question based on precedent: on observed standing operating procedures.
I’ve spent far too much time on this somewhat off topic issue-with apologies-but when a command or leadership climate is sullied by leaders such as this, the deleterious effects translate into a degradation of performance of actions and righteous accountability on the part of those they touch and influence who act like and in kind. The results are predictable, in this case what happened on her watch and the failure of her recommended successor in the news here-I will leave this little gem right here, although this is also germane, as is this minor data point, and will get back to my topic with apologies for somewhat wandering around the intro to the topic.
Which may seem like gilding the Lilly in pursuit of esoterica or unclear points with a few sensational issues, of which I could relate dozens of such stories-hundreds-but the bottom line point is that leadership sets the tone-the standards for organizations-and when you have leaders who exhibit a loose regard for the truth and their oath-there is a trickle-down effect that becomes palpable and a detriment to the good order and discipline taxpayers have a right to expect from those funded by their tax dollars.
Somebody like President Obama-who endorsed and overlooked a criminal candidate like Hillary Clinton and her illegal server and emails, or her paid for and made-up hoaxes by later embracing them and endorsing them as official US government position to his team-facts-like he did on 9 December 2016. It should not surprise that those appointed under him adopted the same crass and careless disregard for their oaths of office and the truth in pursuit of what Obama identified as his political enemies.
Over the years the constant accusations and attacks and lawfare against Trump for all manner of simply made-up BS ultimately resulted in not only an elevated threat status against him, but a number of attempts to kill him, including the Butler, Pennsylvania attack where he was shot in the head.
The only president in history besides Abraham Lincoln who faced such strong and consistent angst against him was likely JFK: but that angst was not from the voters. Two of the three were assassinated, with Trump surviving a shot to the head.
What the above-the potential downstream effects of unethical leadership-has to do with the JFK Assassination is to remind dear reader about the state of affairs in the JFK Administration by summer 1963. While beloved and popular with the people, JFK had not exactly endeared himself on the hill nor with key constituents in the democrat party: Eisenhower’s military industrial complex that was focused on Cuba, Vietnam, and potential nuclear détente issues, southern states balking at civil rights initiatives, industry leaders concerned about his oil depletion policy revisions, his own FBI concerned about his very public dalliances and affairs compromising his position, and the aggressive pursuit by RFK of the mob and unions that threatened another key democrat constituency in terms of campaign donations.
Shining a light on the leadership team surrounding JFK starts with Vice President Lyndon Baines Johnson (LBJ)-a compromise, party nominated fill, back when that was a thing-to offset concerns about JFK’s Catholic faith: recall he would be the first Catholic President. LBJ would help carry important states like Texas-which was critical in the strategy.
LBJ was a man who by this time-1963-it was pretty well known-a Washington DC swamp fact-that “lying Lyndon” had cheated in the 1948 race-the so-called Box 13 scandal-that brought him to the senate. A man JFK would later describe as “patently incapable of telling the truth.”
As the campaign season headed into the summer of 1963 in full swing, rumors were swirling in DC that JFK might consider dropping LBJ from the ticket as the trial of Billie Sol Estes was completing in congress over the Agriculture Department grain scandal, as Sol Estes faced sentencing and there was talk of a subpoena to the man who appointed him: LBJ. Sol Estes was LBJ’s biggest supporter and fund raiser throughout his years in the senate: right up to the minute JFK asked for the investigation.
Sol Estes would later go public with the news that he had information on at least 8 or more killings that had been commissioned by LBJ, one of which included JFK. One of the most infamous was the killing of Henry Marshall, a Department of Agriculture inspector who was a key witness in the Sol Estes trial.
There was also the senate investigation of Johnson mentee Bobby Baker.
Many have argued persuasively against LBJ being involved in the assassination, but when it comes to powerful motives, he was pretty high on the list.
Max Dribbler
27 March 2026
LSMBTGA: Lamestream media echo chamber (LMEC-L) social media (SM) big tech tyrants (BT,) government (G) and academia (A)
If you enjoyed this article, then please REPOST or SHARE with others; encourage them to follow AFNN. If you’d like to become a citizen contributor for AFNN, contact us at managingeditor@afnn.us Help keep us ad-free by donating here.
Substack: AmericanFreeNewsNetworkSubstack
TruthSocial:@AFNN_USA
Facebook: https://m.facebook.com/afnnusa
Telegram: https://t.me/joinchat/2_-GAzcXmIRjODNh
Twitter: https://twitter.com/AfnnUsa
GETTR: https://gettr.com/user/AFNN_USA
CloutHub: @AFNN_USA