Discussion:
WI: No J. Edgar Hoover
Add Reply
jerry kraus
2017-08-03 13:50:56 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Having a Gay bureaucrat with a genius for publicity as the first director of the FBI probably did affect the United States in a variety of ways. And, surely, it was far from inevitable that such an individual would become the first FBI director. So, suppose J. Edgar Hoover never existed. How would this change things in the United States?
The Old Man
2017-08-03 14:51:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by jerry kraus
Having a Gay bureaucrat with a genius for publicity as the first director of the FBI probably did affect the United States in a variety of ways. And, surely, it was far from inevitable that such an individual would become the first FBI director. So, suppose J. Edgar Hoover never existed. How would this change things in the United States?
If Hoover either never existed or was outed early in his career and forced out of his position, I think that you'd see the Bureau being what if has become, a lapdog for the then current administration. There'd have been no stories about the bureau's work through television, radio or pulp novels. It was through Hoover's desire for publicity that we had those, and they (I believe) led to a lot of kids going into law enforcement after school. Whatever else he was, Hoover was a strong leader who kept the bureau independent until shortly before his death.
But then also, I wouldn't have made his secret files room with a lot of other folks.

Regards,
John Braungart
jerry kraus
2017-08-03 15:02:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by The Old Man
Post by jerry kraus
Having a Gay bureaucrat with a genius for publicity as the first director of the FBI probably did affect the United States in a variety of ways. And, surely, it was far from inevitable that such an individual would become the first FBI director. So, suppose J. Edgar Hoover never existed. How would this change things in the United States?
If Hoover either never existed or was outed early in his career and forced out of his position, I think that you'd see the Bureau being what if has become, a lapdog for the then current administration. There'd have been no stories about the bureau's work through television, radio or pulp novels. It was through Hoover's desire for publicity that we had those, and they (I believe) led to a lot of kids going into law enforcement after school. Whatever else he was, Hoover was a strong leader who kept the bureau independent until shortly before his death.
But then also, I wouldn't have made his secret files room with a lot of other folks.
Regards,
John Braungart
So, would Dillinger et al. have run rampant, unchecked through the 1930's, John? Wouldn't that have fostered hundreds of other Dillinger wannabees, and might that not have threatened the stability of the nation? How about controlling business and industry during WWII? What about the Red Scare in the 1950's, in which Hoover played a significant and rather prominent role? What about the Kennedy assassination, for that matter?
The Old Man
2017-08-03 18:54:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by jerry kraus
Post by The Old Man
Post by jerry kraus
Having a Gay bureaucrat with a genius for publicity as the first director of the FBI probably did affect the United States in a variety of ways. And, surely, it was far from inevitable that such an individual would become the first FBI director. So, suppose J. Edgar Hoover never existed. How would this change things in the United States?
If Hoover either never existed or was outed early in his career and forced out of his position, I think that you'd see the Bureau being what if has become, a lapdog for the then current administration. There'd have been no stories about the bureau's work through television, radio or pulp novels. It was through Hoover's desire for publicity that we had those, and they (I believe) led to a lot of kids going into law enforcement after school. Whatever else he was, Hoover was a strong leader who kept the bureau independent until shortly before his death.
But then also, I wouldn't have made his secret files room with a lot of other folks.
Regards,
John Braungart
So, would Dillinger et al. have run rampant, unchecked through the 1930's, John? Wouldn't that have fostered hundreds of other Dillinger wannabees, and might that not have threatened the stability of the nation? How about controlling business and industry during WWII? What about the Red Scare in the 1950's, in which Hoover played a significant and rather prominent role? What about the Kennedy assassination, for that matter?
Okay, one thing at a time. Dillinger, Ma Barker, Baby Face Nelson, Bonnie and Clyde et al would have come and gone in much the same manner (if not THE same manner) as they did in our timeline. About the only thing that Hoover did during the 1930s was to show up on time for the press photographers. During the 1940s he went after the German spies and agents and during postwar period and the 1950s he did the same against the Communists. He never really went against Organized Crime because they had information about his sexual orientation that they threatened to make public.
As far as the Kennedy murder, don't get me started as that was one governmental cover-up after another. Admittedly, without him, the Bureau would have probably done even less, if that's possible.

Regards,
John Braungart
jerry kraus
2017-08-03 20:02:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by The Old Man
Post by jerry kraus
Post by The Old Man
Post by jerry kraus
Having a Gay bureaucrat with a genius for publicity as the first director of the FBI probably did affect the United States in a variety of ways. And, surely, it was far from inevitable that such an individual would become the first FBI director. So, suppose J. Edgar Hoover never existed. How would this change things in the United States?
If Hoover either never existed or was outed early in his career and forced out of his position, I think that you'd see the Bureau being what if has become, a lapdog for the then current administration. There'd have been no stories about the bureau's work through television, radio or pulp novels. It was through Hoover's desire for publicity that we had those, and they (I believe) led to a lot of kids going into law enforcement after school. Whatever else he was, Hoover was a strong leader who kept the bureau independent until shortly before his death.
But then also, I wouldn't have made his secret files room with a lot of other folks.
Regards,
John Braungart
So, would Dillinger et al. have run rampant, unchecked through the 1930's, John? Wouldn't that have fostered hundreds of other Dillinger wannabees, and might that not have threatened the stability of the nation? How about controlling business and industry during WWII? What about the Red Scare in the 1950's, in which Hoover played a significant and rather prominent role? What about the Kennedy assassination, for that matter?
Okay, one thing at a time. Dillinger, Ma Barker, Baby Face Nelson, Bonnie and Clyde et al would have come and gone in much the same manner (if not THE same manner) as they did in our timeline. About the only thing that Hoover did during the 1930s was to show up on time for the press photographers. During the 1940s he went after the German spies and agents and during postwar period and the 1950s he did the same against the Communists. He never really went against Organized Crime because they had information about his sexual orientation that they threatened to make public.
As far as the Kennedy murder, don't get me started as that was one governmental cover-up after another. Admittedly, without him, the Bureau would have probably done even less, if that's possible.
Regards,
John Braungart
John, I think we'd all like to get you started on the Kennedy assassination, this sounds rather interesting. I gather you don't buy entirely into the notion that Lee Harvey Oswald was entirely a "lone wolf", as it were. Certainly, his ever so prompt and convenient assassination by Jack Ruby, before he could really get going talking in a courtroom, does tend to lend credence to any number of conspiracy theorists. I read a novel once which proposed that Oswald, when he had been talking in Mexico to the Cuban and Russian embassies, shortly before the assassination, to try to "re-defect", was treated entirely as a joke by the embassy officials. To such an extent, that one of the officials actually told him "Hey, Lee, why don't you assassinate JFK, we'll grant you asylum and pull you out!" Just to get rid of him! They didn't think he could possibly do it! But, Oswald believed them, and the rest is history. Now, wouldn't that have been inconvenient for the Cubans and the Russians, at trial? Since many believe that Jack Ruby was actually KGB, it might explain a thing or two, hmmmmmm?
The Horny Goat
2017-08-03 21:39:25 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Thu, 3 Aug 2017 13:02:13 -0700 (PDT), jerry kraus
s treated entirely as a joke by the embassy officials. To such an extent,=
that one of the officials actually told him "Hey, Lee, why don't you assas=
sinate JFK, we'll grant you asylum and pull you out!" Just to get rid of =
him! They didn't think he could possibly do it! But, Oswald believed th=
em, and the rest is history. Now, wouldn't that have been inconvenient fo=
r the Cubans and the Russians, at trial? Since many believe that Jack Rub=
y was actually KGB, it might explain a thing or two, hmmmmmm?
Ruby was known to have Mafia associations so Occam's Razor makes it
much easier to believe that if he was hired by the Russians / Cubans
at all that it was a case of mucho moolah giving the orders rather
than as full fledged KGB.

Nothing I've about Ruby suggests that he ever gave Communism the time
of day.
jerry kraus
2017-08-04 13:18:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by The Horny Goat
On Thu, 3 Aug 2017 13:02:13 -0700 (PDT), jerry kraus
s treated entirely as a joke by the embassy officials. To such an extent,=
that one of the officials actually told him "Hey, Lee, why don't you assas=
sinate JFK, we'll grant you asylum and pull you out!" Just to get rid of =
him! They didn't think he could possibly do it! But, Oswald believed th=
em, and the rest is history. Now, wouldn't that have been inconvenient fo=
r the Cubans and the Russians, at trial? Since many believe that Jack Rub=
y was actually KGB, it might explain a thing or two, hmmmmmm?
Ruby was known to have Mafia associations so Occam's Razor makes it
much easier to believe that if he was hired by the Russians / Cubans
at all that it was a case of mucho moolah giving the orders rather
than as full fledged KGB.
Nothing I've about Ruby suggests that he ever gave Communism the time
of day.
Fair enough, Horny, then we're left, instead, with the possibility that the Mafia got rid of JFK to get his idealistic brother Bobby off their backs, as Attorney General. But what, then, exactly, is Oswald's connection to the Mafia? We know Oswald had intense communist associations -- he'd actually defected, after all! -- but what did he have to do with the Mafia? Anyone have any thoughts?
Loading...