Text Excerpts From The January 1968 Jim Garrison/Johnny Carson Interview
David Von Pein
Carson......
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On January 31, 1968, on NBC-TV's "The Tonight Show", Johnny Carson
conducted a lengthy interview with New Orleans District Attorney Jim
Garrison. The purpose of the special interview was to discuss the JFK
assassination.
Mr. Garrison, as of that date in early 1968, was in the process of
putting together his extremely-lightweight case against Clay Shaw (who
was arrested by Garrison's office on the bogus charge of conspiring to
murder President John F. Kennedy on November 22, 1963).
When the Shaw trial finally took place in 1969, the jury took less than
an hour to arrive at the only possible (reasonable) verdict in the case
against Mr. Shaw -- Not Guilty.
I'd advise anyone interested in the details of JFK's assassination to
watch (or just listen to) the 1968 Garrison/Carson interview, which
lasts for about an hour and consumes the bulk of the 01/31/68 "Tonight
Show" broadcast.
It's a fascinating glimpse into history -- and, to put it quite
bluntly, it's also a rather fascinating glimpse into the mind and inner
conspiratorial thoughts of a total kook by the name of Earling
Carothers ("Jim") Garrison.
Mr. Garrison, I will admit, handles himself quite well on the NBC
broadcast with Johnny Carson....he doesn't lose his cool (even though
Mr. Carson interrupts Garrison's theory-spouting on numerous occasions,
and it becomes very evident that Johnny isn't buying one single thing
that Jim is telling him during the entire program).
Johnny Carson has been accused of being overly rough and brusk and rude
toward Garrison on the program in question. But, IMO, Johnny did not
exhibit those characteristics at all. John was very low key and, in my
view, handled himself exceedingly well under the circumstances (i.e.,
the circumstances of being placed in a position where he had to act as
an investigative reporter for the evening, instead of the late-night
comedian and witty interviewer of movie stars that America had become
accustomed to seeing since Carson began hosting "The Tonight Show" in
October of 1962).
Johnny asked some hard-hitting questions of Mr. Garrison, some of which
I'm going to write out in word-for-word fashion in just a moment.
Carson displayed a good deal of knowledge about many of the details
surrounding the JFK murder case, and (IMO) deserves nothing but
applause for his actions during his interview with Mr. Garrison.
The main reason I applaud Mr. Carson so loudly with respect to this
particular interview is because I was glad to see John ask such hard
questions which cast doubt on the notion of conspiracy in the JFK case,
instead of merely nodding in agreement with everything this fruitcake
named Garrison had to say. (Which were all things, by the way, that
haven't a shred of truth to them whatsoever re. the vast "Let's Frame
Lee Harvey Oswald As A Patsy" conspiracy plot that Garrison said was
afoot in Dealey Plaza in '63.)
The audio portion of the Garrison/Carson interview is available to
listen to (for free) at various locations on the Internet. Again, I'd
recommend looking it up. It's worth a listen.
Allow me now to print out some interesting excerpts and snippets from
that Jim Garrison interview (interjections by this author will be
denoted by the initials "DVP")......
-------------------------------------
JG (Jim Garrison) -- "We have found that the Central Intelligence
Agency, without any question, had individuals who were connected with
it involved {in the assassination of JFK}."
JC (Johnny Carson) -- "You have absolute facts and proof of that?"
JG -- "Without any question. I wouldn't say so otherwise."
~~~~~~
DVP -- Mr. Garrison had no "proof" of the above allegation re. the CIA.
He was merely theorizing. He was good at theorizing about murky,
unverifiable conspiracy plots, such as the one involving Clay Shaw, Guy
Banister, and David Ferrie. But "proving" these crackpot theories was
another matter. In short, he couldn't do it. And a jury in 1969
"proved" that Garrison couldn't do it in a court of law.
-------------------------------------
JG -- "They {the Warren Commission} concluded that Lee Oswald was the
lone assassin....and the evidence is clear that Oswald never fired a
shot....never fired a shot."
~~~~~~
DVP -- The above comment by Mr. Garrison is totally laughable. Such an
asinine remark by a person in Mr. Garrison's position at the time (that
of a District Attorney) deserves nothing but utter contempt from anyone
who has looked even superficially into the facts surrounding John
Kennedy's tragic murder.
-------------------------------------
JG -- "There was never an investigation. .... I'm not at all impressed
with the fact that they {the Warren Commission} could find no evidence
of a conspiracy. After going through their inquiry, I doubt if they
could find a streetcar if they had a transfer in their hands and it was
pointed out to them."
~~~~~~
DVP -- The above comment by Jimbo was indeed humorous, and elicited a
chuckle from Mr. Carson's studio audience. I kind of wish, though, that
Carson had followed up Jim's witticism with a comment about Mr.
Garrison not being able to locate his 'common sense'....because it's
fairly obvious that Jim had very little of that particular trait when
it came to his absurd theories concerning the JFK case.
-------------------------------------
JC -- "Now, you say 'the fact remains' again....as if it IS a fact. You
keep saying 'we know' and 'the fact is'....but that's not a fact, is
it?"
JG -- "Yes."
JC -- "What makes it a fact? Because you say so?"
~~~~~~
DVP -- A great retort by Johnny above. I loved it!
-------------------------------------
JC -- "Jim, aren't you taking inconsistencies in testimony during the
emotional time, even self-contradictory testimony, from even sometimes
the most truthful of witnesses....and using THAT as tainting everything
else that is very well explained?"
~~~~~~
DVP -- An excellent observation by Mr. Carson. And also a correct one,
IMO. Conspiracy theorists are experts at using selective pieces of
seemingly-contradictory evidence or witness statements and then
twisting those things into their own unique brand of "proof" that a
conpiracy had taken place on 11/22/63.
But the fact is that the things mentioned by Garrison (which I didn't
print out verbatim, but which prompted Johnny's comment above) were, as
John said, being used by Mr. Garrison to attempt to taint the overall
Lone-Assassin conclusion.
One thing, in particular, that Garrison is certainly dead-wrong about
(that he mentioned in the Carson interview) involves the actions and
observations of Roy Truly and Marrion Baker (who both saw Lee Oswald on
the 2nd Floor of the Book Depository approx. 90 seconds after Oswald
shot JFK from a 6th-Floor window).
Garrison erroneously assumes that since Truly and Baker saw Oswald on
the second floor shortly after the shooting, this therefore must
indicate that Oswald was innocent. But what Jim didn't tell the
audience that night in 1968 is that the Warren Commission conducted
multiple "re-enactments" of Oswald's alleged movements from the 6th to
the 2nd Floor of the building, and those re-creations proved beyond any
doubt that a person WAS capable of travelling that distance in less
than 80 seconds. Which indicates that the assassin (Oswald) could very
well have been on the 6th Floor at 12:30 PM and also on the 2nd Floor
by approx. 12:31:30 PM.
-------------------------------------
JG -- "There is no 'overwhelming' evidence that Oswald shot from the
Book Depository. The only evidence available indicates that he did
NOT."
~~~~~~
DVP -- That last line deserves a replay (just to emphasize the sheer
size of Garrison's gall at having spouted such nonsense) -- "The only
evidence available indicates that he did NOT".
Incredible, isn't it? Both times.
Mr. Garrison thinks the "ONLY evidence available" suggests that Lee
Oswald did NOT fire any shots from the TSBD. About the only thing left
to do after hearing (or reading) such total garbage from JG is to throw
up one's hands and scream "WTF?!". I think I'll go do that now. Excuse
me.
:)
-------------------------------------
JC -- "You are asking us and the American public to believe that a team
of seven gunmen carried this out with precision, firing from various
points that day in Dallas, which is a remarkable feat in itself, and
disappeared into thin air, with no witnesses who ever saw any other
gunmen or getaway vehicles....and a gigantic conspiracy in which nobody
seems to have yet proved anything....you ask us to believe that....I
find that a much larger fairy tale than to accept the findings of the
Warren Report."
~~~~~~
DVP -- Bravo, Mr. Carson! Well said! I applaud ye (again). I couldn't
have said that better myself.
-------------------------------------
JG -- "Having gone through the twenty-six volumes, Johnny, I CAN say
that it is not possible for a reasonable man to conclude that the
Warren Commission was right."
~~~~~~
DVP -- Another outlandishly-ludicrous statement by Jim G. in my
opinion, and in the opinion of a JFK assassination expert/author who
possesses probably more common sense and reasoned-thinking skills than
anybody I can personally think of -- former Deputy D.A. Vincent
Bugliosi, who made the following bold (but spot-on accurate)
declaration many years ago:
"Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone in the assassination of President
Kennedy. The evidence is absolutely overwhelming that he carried out
the tragic shooting all by himself. In fact, you could throw 80 percent
of the evidence against him out the window and there would still be
more than enough left to convince any reasonable person of his sole
role in the crime. The Warren Commission looked at a tremendous amount
of evidence and concluded that Oswald acted alone. I've studied the
evidence, and I agree." -- VB; 1986
-------------------------------------
Allow me to close this essay with the following remarks (which I think
aptly apply here, since I'm discussing a conspiracy kook named Jim
Garrison, a man who disbelieved virtually all of the actual, documented
evidence in the John F. Kennedy and J.D. Tippit murder
investigations).....
The physical evidence surrounding President Kennedy's assassination
positively supports just one single gunman by the name of Lee Harvey
Oswald. And this physical evidence (plus a boatload of circumstantial
evidence as well) is just too overpowering in size and scope to merely
be arbitrarily tossed into the trash can (as Mr. Garrison seemed to
want to do every step of the way in his so-called "investigation" of
the case in the 1960s).
And the act of casting doubt upon the validity of ALL of the "Oswald Is
Guilty" evidence, sans proof of a large amount of foul play, is merely
the cowardly act of hardened conspiracy buffs (such as the late Mr.
Garrison) who simply cannot face the raw fact that the totality of
evidence in the JFK murder case hangs Mr. Oswald as surely as the Pope
is Catholic.
David Von Pein
November 2006
========================================================
A Related Link Concerning The Jim Garrison/Johnny Carson TV
Interview......
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/d00a87bffda43219
========================================================
cdddraftsman
usually had a audience of like minded fellows to listen to his sermon ,
no objections , no comments and most important of all , no thinking on
other peoples part . This was crucial for the construct , that it
gained momentum , before people got wise to the magicians act . Once
that happened , the show is over , collapse of contruct . A good
defense laywer did , could and will tear this type of thinking process
to shreds in no time at all . It became apparent early on in the Shaw
trial that this type of shredding against Garrison's claims of
conspiracy , would not be needed . His line up of witnesses alone was
enough to doom his case without but a few questions being asked by
Shaw's defense ; Indeed 50 minutes was all it took the jury to decide
Not Guilty ....... Including in that 50 minutes was a nice lunch ,
leisurely cigarette and bathroom breaks , so you've got to stop and ask
your self , who should of been on trial ? Clay Shaw for conspiring to
kill JFK or Jim Garrison for prosecuting an innocent man , due to a
mental distortion that should have landed him in a mental institution ,
at a minimum ? However likeable the man was , after all was said and
done , many people still admired him for being persuasive , especially
when he was not telling the truth . This was one of his biggest assets
that kept his assets , so to speak , on this side of the prison bars ,
instead of the other side where he belonged .......... :-( ..........TL
Donald Willis
via the "sniper's nest"....
dw
In article <1163442802.6...@h54g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>, cdddraftsman
says...
David Von Pein
That's "KLAATU BARADA NIKTO", you clod. Can't you get anything right?!
;)
"...This Earth of yours will be reduced to a burned-out cinder..." --
Klaatu
Donald Willis
Pein says...
>
>>>> "...or Gort Beringa Nikto..." <<<
>
>That's "KLAATU BARADA NIKTO", you clod. Can't you get anything right?!
>;)
>
can tackle a few more difficult things, in separate posts....
dw
Harry...@gmail.com
Although "kook" and "fruitcake" almost convinced me.
David Von Pein
MY arguments aren't totally believable...but Mr. Garrison's kook-filled
ones are more believable? (Did I surmise that inference accurately
there, or not?)
>>> "Although "kook" and "fruitcake" almost convinced me." <<<
There ya go. ;)
Fuffy
You and Jim should have met.
Would have been a nice couple.
David Von Pein
But, should I be surprised by this lack of coherence?
Fuffy
Well, I'm not surprised you cannot see the link.
your
"Fuffy"/"HarryBud"