What do you think?
Treason From Within: The Assassination of President John F. Kennedy
The First Comprehensive Treatment of the Kennedy Assassination. The US government lied to the American people about President Kennedy's death. But, ironically it was the American people who solved the crime. Over the past half century, hundreds of researchers investigated one or more parts of the murder, often using their own expertise, such as photography, computers, science, medical expertise, and analytical skills. Taken together, their detailed work illuminated what really happened. Author Donald T. Phillips has been following the Kennedy assassination since it happened. This book begins at the end of World War II and concludes when the Warren Commission was formed. Revealed along the way is the truth about the Bay of Pigs, the Cuban Missile Crisis, the ambush in Dealey Plaza, and JFK's fraudulent autopsy. During his two years and eight months in office, President Kennedy prevented the US government from instigating a war that could have involved nuclear weapons in Vietnam, Laos, Berlin, the Soviet Union, and Cuba. He was leading the nation away from armed conflict, ending the Cold War, and setting the stage for a lasting peace with all nations. IN doing so, however, JFK was threatening long-established kopek structures within the government. So on November 22, 1963, in broad daylight, they shot him in the back and blew his brains out. It was a pre-meditated, deliberate, willful act of murder with malice aforethought. And they got away with it. No one who participated in the crime was ever brought to justice. Treason From Within answers the Who killed President Kennedy? Why was he killed? How was he killed?
- GenresPolitics
589 pages, Kindle Edition
Published September 20, 2023
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews
December 29, 2025
I used to work with Wyatt Kingseed, a fellow who was convinced that there was a conspiracy to kill JFK. Wyatt is a very smart guy; he wrote a great historical novel entitled Fredericksburg: Squandered Courage and Uncertain Allegiance. In addition, some of the retired mailmen I regularly breakfast with take the conspiracy idea seriously. This book, however, is my first serious engagement with the idea.
I can’t say the idea as presented in this book impresses me much. According to Phillips: Lyndon Johnson, J. Edgar Hoover, the CIA, the FBI, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Secret Service, the Dallas mayor and local law enforcement, several gangsters, at least a dozen Cuban exiles, and some of Jack Ruby's associates knew of the plot to kill the president. Yet none of them informed him? As Vizzini says in the Princess Bride, "Inconceivable!"
The most serious flaw in the book is that it relies almost entirely on secondary sources. This, I guess, is ok if you are already convinced of the main premise of the book. But when I went to research the books that Phillips relies on, I wasn’t overly impressed. The book he relies on most heavily is Harvey and Lee: How the CIA Framed Oswald Hardcover, by John Armstrong. Armstrong's book is a lengthy exposition of the two Oswalds theory, which is a major element in Phillips book. Texas Monthly says of this idea: "Conspiracy theories have sometimes circulated about the existence of two different 'Oswalds' or potential identity manipulation, but there is no verified evidence from official sources like the National Archives or the Warren Commission to support the claim that Lee Harvey Oswald himself possessed or used two different, legitimate U.S. birth certificates.
"The theory is so implausible that its popularity now might be taken as a sign that conspiracy research has at last hit a dead end. It’s one thing to believe that Oswald was involved in a plot; it’s another to believe that the plot began when he was thirteen."
Other books used by Phillips incled
Douglas Horne, JFK’s War with the National Security Establishment: Why Kennedy Was AssassinatedThis may be the most credible of the books used. Google AI says Horne served as the chief analyst for military records for the Assassination Records Review Board (ARRB), a federal agency established by Congress to secure the disclosure and release of JFK-related documents. This role gave him unique, direct access to primary source materials, particularly those related to the medical evidence and the autopsy.
Bernard Fensterwald, Assassination of JFK by Coincidence or Conspiracy? Critics dismiss it as a "phony" history book, suggesting Fensterwald's own potential ties to intelligence agencies make his work suspect (Google AI).
Jim Marrs, Crossfire: The Plot That Killed Kennedy. Critics argue that Marrs' work fails as reliable history because he uses sources uncritically and attempts to confuse or dilute facts to support a predetermined conclusion of a conspiracy (Google AI)
Texas in the Morning: The Love Story of Madeleine Brown and President Lyndon Baines Johnson by Madeleine D. Brown. No AI analysis available, but even a cursory search shows that Brown is not a reliable witness, as her conviction for forger shows.
Harrison Edward Livingstone Killing the Truth: Deceit and Deception in the JFK Case it is best understood as a piece of conspiracy literature rather than a vetted, reliable historical source. Google AI, it is best understood as a piece of conspiracy literature rather than a vetted, reliable historical source. Google AI
Charles A. Crenshaw, JFK: Conspiracy of Silence. Four of his fellow doctors published an article in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) claiming nothing they saw refuted the Warren Commission's findings and that Crenshaw, as a junior resident, was not close enough to the President to make the observations he claimed (Google AI).
David Talbot, The Devil's Chessboard: Allen Dulles, the CIA, and the Rise of America's Secret Government Glen C. Altschuler wrote of this book: "Animated by conspiracy theories, the speculations and accusations in his book often run far ahead of the evidence, even for those of us inclined to believe the worst about Allen Dulles."
David S. Lifton, Best Evidence: Disguise and Deception in the Assassination of John F. Kennedy. Its value lies more in its meticulous documentation of official inconsistencies, which led many people to question the Warren Commission's findings, rather than the credibility of its specific conclusion (Google AI).
Roger E. (sic, actually D.) Craig, When They Kill A President: Special Edition No AI results but numerous results on the internet questioning Craig's reliability. E.g. https://www.baylor.edu/content/servic...
Gregory Douglas Regicide: The Official Assassination of John F. Kennedy. Google AI says:
Source Credibility: The authenticity and content of the "Crowley Papers" themselves are widely disputed within the community of assassination researchers. Critics have accused Douglas of forgery and fraud, and his general credibility has been questioned.
Contradiction of Evidence: The book's narrative contradicts the vast majority of physical, forensic, and testimonial evidence that has been meticulously analyzed by multiple official government bodies over decades.
A critique of the book's reliability: https://www.assassinationresearch.com...
Double Cross: The Explosive, Inside Story of the Mobster Who Controlled America, Sam GiancanaIt serves as a valuable document of a mobster's perspective, but not necessarily an objective historical record. (Google AI)
Conclusion: much of this info is suspect. The LBJ quote, “I looked it up: one out of every four Presidents has died in office. I’m a gamblin’ man, darlin’, and this is the only chance I got" is all over the internet, but I have my suspicions about it. It is said to have been said simply to a reporter. Nobody knows who this reporter was. It also seems like a remarkably stupid thing for a politician to say. It’s possible that the unreliable book by David Talbot is the origin of the quote. Talbot's book also claims that it was widely known that Kennedy was going to remove LBJ from the ticket in 1964. "it was common knowledge in executive circles that JFK was planning on dropping LBJ from the ticket in 1964." I could not confirm this. In fact, according to Jacqueline Kennedy, JFK's focus was on preventing Johnson from becoming president in *1968*, not 1964, and he expressed fears about the country's future if LBJ succeeded him (Google AI).
The LBJ quote, "After tomorrow these goddam Kennedys will never bother me again. That’s not a threat, that’s a promise!" comes from Madeleine Brown, an even less reliable source than Talbot.
Other information seems just downright incorrect. Phillips, citing Fensterwald, claims that Abraham Bolden was framed because he wanted to testify to the Warren Commission of a Chicago assassination plot. But Wikipedia quotes Bolden as saying, "I wanted to, and I still intend to, tell the commission about the laxity and nonchalant attitude of secret service agents handling the protection of the President."[12](link: https://news.google.com/newspapers?id...). This is one place where I would have liked to have had a primary source if it contradicted the news story in the Baltimore Afro-American.
It is also incorrect that the gunshot residue test on Oswald came back negative, as reported by Phillips. In fact it came back positive on his hand, probably because Oswald murdered police officer J. D. Tippit (Phillips claims Oswald was framed for Tippit's murder). It is true that the test on his face came back negative, but "The paraffin test is no longer used in forensics because it is highly unreliable, producing many false positives and negatives. Experiments conducted by the FBI prior to the assassination and by the Warren Commission afterwards demonstrated that firing a weapon did not always result in a positive test, and a positive test did not always mean a weapon had been fired. (Google AI).
The chapter on the autopsy presented more problems for the theory of a conspiracy. Here, Drs. Humes, Boswell, Finck, and Ebersole all were in on the plot to reconstruct Kennedy's corpse to make it seem like there was a single shooter instead of the (supposedly) real number of twelve shooter. The military personnel present at the autopsy were given orders not to discuss the events of the night of the autopsy on pain of court martial and imprisonment, according to Lifton. All this was done without arousing suspicion?
Finally, the endnotes were a mess. Typically, unnumbered endnotes will tell you which page they refer back to, but these did not. Also, instead of being arranged line-by-line they were arranged in paragraph form, making them very difficult to follow.
If you ignore the conspiracy nonsense, the book is nevertheless an excellent history of the Kennedy era. There are three books I put on my to-read list:: Bay of Pigs: The Untold Story by Peter Wyden; Bay of Pigs Declassified: The Secret CIA Report on the Invasion of Cuba, by Peter Kornbluh; and Who Killed Hammarskjöld? The UN, the Cold War and White Supremacy in Africa, by Susan Williams (Phillips claims that the CIA assassinated Hammarskjold, a sensational claim to say the least. Phillips cites Armstrong's book, "Dag is becoming troublesome . . . and should be removed"—Allen Dulles).
I can’t say the idea as presented in this book impresses me much. According to Phillips: Lyndon Johnson, J. Edgar Hoover, the CIA, the FBI, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Secret Service, the Dallas mayor and local law enforcement, several gangsters, at least a dozen Cuban exiles, and some of Jack Ruby's associates knew of the plot to kill the president. Yet none of them informed him? As Vizzini says in the Princess Bride, "Inconceivable!"
The most serious flaw in the book is that it relies almost entirely on secondary sources. This, I guess, is ok if you are already convinced of the main premise of the book. But when I went to research the books that Phillips relies on, I wasn’t overly impressed. The book he relies on most heavily is Harvey and Lee: How the CIA Framed Oswald Hardcover, by John Armstrong. Armstrong's book is a lengthy exposition of the two Oswalds theory, which is a major element in Phillips book. Texas Monthly says of this idea: "Conspiracy theories have sometimes circulated about the existence of two different 'Oswalds' or potential identity manipulation, but there is no verified evidence from official sources like the National Archives or the Warren Commission to support the claim that Lee Harvey Oswald himself possessed or used two different, legitimate U.S. birth certificates.
"The theory is so implausible that its popularity now might be taken as a sign that conspiracy research has at last hit a dead end. It’s one thing to believe that Oswald was involved in a plot; it’s another to believe that the plot began when he was thirteen."
Other books used by Phillips incled
Douglas Horne, JFK’s War with the National Security Establishment: Why Kennedy Was AssassinatedThis may be the most credible of the books used. Google AI says Horne served as the chief analyst for military records for the Assassination Records Review Board (ARRB), a federal agency established by Congress to secure the disclosure and release of JFK-related documents. This role gave him unique, direct access to primary source materials, particularly those related to the medical evidence and the autopsy.
Bernard Fensterwald, Assassination of JFK by Coincidence or Conspiracy? Critics dismiss it as a "phony" history book, suggesting Fensterwald's own potential ties to intelligence agencies make his work suspect (Google AI).
Jim Marrs, Crossfire: The Plot That Killed Kennedy. Critics argue that Marrs' work fails as reliable history because he uses sources uncritically and attempts to confuse or dilute facts to support a predetermined conclusion of a conspiracy (Google AI)
Texas in the Morning: The Love Story of Madeleine Brown and President Lyndon Baines Johnson by Madeleine D. Brown. No AI analysis available, but even a cursory search shows that Brown is not a reliable witness, as her conviction for forger shows.
Harrison Edward Livingstone Killing the Truth: Deceit and Deception in the JFK Case it is best understood as a piece of conspiracy literature rather than a vetted, reliable historical source. Google AI, it is best understood as a piece of conspiracy literature rather than a vetted, reliable historical source. Google AI
Charles A. Crenshaw, JFK: Conspiracy of Silence. Four of his fellow doctors published an article in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) claiming nothing they saw refuted the Warren Commission's findings and that Crenshaw, as a junior resident, was not close enough to the President to make the observations he claimed (Google AI).
David Talbot, The Devil's Chessboard: Allen Dulles, the CIA, and the Rise of America's Secret Government Glen C. Altschuler wrote of this book: "Animated by conspiracy theories, the speculations and accusations in his book often run far ahead of the evidence, even for those of us inclined to believe the worst about Allen Dulles."
David S. Lifton, Best Evidence: Disguise and Deception in the Assassination of John F. Kennedy. Its value lies more in its meticulous documentation of official inconsistencies, which led many people to question the Warren Commission's findings, rather than the credibility of its specific conclusion (Google AI).
Roger E. (sic, actually D.) Craig, When They Kill A President: Special Edition No AI results but numerous results on the internet questioning Craig's reliability. E.g. https://www.baylor.edu/content/servic...
Gregory Douglas Regicide: The Official Assassination of John F. Kennedy. Google AI says:
Source Credibility: The authenticity and content of the "Crowley Papers" themselves are widely disputed within the community of assassination researchers. Critics have accused Douglas of forgery and fraud, and his general credibility has been questioned.
Contradiction of Evidence: The book's narrative contradicts the vast majority of physical, forensic, and testimonial evidence that has been meticulously analyzed by multiple official government bodies over decades.
A critique of the book's reliability: https://www.assassinationresearch.com...
Double Cross: The Explosive, Inside Story of the Mobster Who Controlled America, Sam GiancanaIt serves as a valuable document of a mobster's perspective, but not necessarily an objective historical record. (Google AI)
Conclusion: much of this info is suspect. The LBJ quote, “I looked it up: one out of every four Presidents has died in office. I’m a gamblin’ man, darlin’, and this is the only chance I got" is all over the internet, but I have my suspicions about it. It is said to have been said simply to a reporter. Nobody knows who this reporter was. It also seems like a remarkably stupid thing for a politician to say. It’s possible that the unreliable book by David Talbot is the origin of the quote. Talbot's book also claims that it was widely known that Kennedy was going to remove LBJ from the ticket in 1964. "it was common knowledge in executive circles that JFK was planning on dropping LBJ from the ticket in 1964." I could not confirm this. In fact, according to Jacqueline Kennedy, JFK's focus was on preventing Johnson from becoming president in *1968*, not 1964, and he expressed fears about the country's future if LBJ succeeded him (Google AI).
The LBJ quote, "After tomorrow these goddam Kennedys will never bother me again. That’s not a threat, that’s a promise!" comes from Madeleine Brown, an even less reliable source than Talbot.
Other information seems just downright incorrect. Phillips, citing Fensterwald, claims that Abraham Bolden was framed because he wanted to testify to the Warren Commission of a Chicago assassination plot. But Wikipedia quotes Bolden as saying, "I wanted to, and I still intend to, tell the commission about the laxity and nonchalant attitude of secret service agents handling the protection of the President."[12](link: https://news.google.com/newspapers?id...). This is one place where I would have liked to have had a primary source if it contradicted the news story in the Baltimore Afro-American.
It is also incorrect that the gunshot residue test on Oswald came back negative, as reported by Phillips. In fact it came back positive on his hand, probably because Oswald murdered police officer J. D. Tippit (Phillips claims Oswald was framed for Tippit's murder). It is true that the test on his face came back negative, but "The paraffin test is no longer used in forensics because it is highly unreliable, producing many false positives and negatives. Experiments conducted by the FBI prior to the assassination and by the Warren Commission afterwards demonstrated that firing a weapon did not always result in a positive test, and a positive test did not always mean a weapon had been fired. (Google AI).
The chapter on the autopsy presented more problems for the theory of a conspiracy. Here, Drs. Humes, Boswell, Finck, and Ebersole all were in on the plot to reconstruct Kennedy's corpse to make it seem like there was a single shooter instead of the (supposedly) real number of twelve shooter. The military personnel present at the autopsy were given orders not to discuss the events of the night of the autopsy on pain of court martial and imprisonment, according to Lifton. All this was done without arousing suspicion?
Finally, the endnotes were a mess. Typically, unnumbered endnotes will tell you which page they refer back to, but these did not. Also, instead of being arranged line-by-line they were arranged in paragraph form, making them very difficult to follow.
If you ignore the conspiracy nonsense, the book is nevertheless an excellent history of the Kennedy era. There are three books I put on my to-read list:: Bay of Pigs: The Untold Story by Peter Wyden; Bay of Pigs Declassified: The Secret CIA Report on the Invasion of Cuba, by Peter Kornbluh; and Who Killed Hammarskjöld? The UN, the Cold War and White Supremacy in Africa, by Susan Williams (Phillips claims that the CIA assassinated Hammarskjold, a sensational claim to say the least. Phillips cites Armstrong's book, "Dag is becoming troublesome . . . and should be removed"—Allen Dulles).
February 13, 2024
Loved it and learned new stuff
The book starts out with the why and who. Loved that part but started going a little wonky when the assassination begins. And the amount of wounds during the autopsy was bizarre. The two Oswald was plausible. But overall, a great book and will make you think again. Loved it.
The book starts out with the why and who. Loved that part but started going a little wonky when the assassination begins. And the amount of wounds during the autopsy was bizarre. The two Oswald was plausible. But overall, a great book and will make you think again. Loved it.
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews