Grizzlie Antagonist
2019-04-21 00:16:28 UTC
Trump was the would-be victim of an attempted bloodless coup d'etat.
It's actually still ongoing and, notwithstanding the violent agitation on
the street -- and in more upscale environments such as Washington,
Hollywood, and the halls of academia and in print and on the networks --
it's still bloodless.
I'm disdainful of the notion that Kennedy was the victim of a coup d'etat
for reasons that I've mentioned before: I don't think that Kennedy
amounted to any sort of threat or opposition toward what we might now call
"the deep state" and the circumstances of his death and the haphazardness
of Oswald's actions afterward -- to say nothing of Oswald's own
mercurialness and unreliability -- were too discordant to allow room for a
sophisticated conspiracy.
Most American assassinations or assassination attempts appear to have been
committed by mentally disturbed people who would have been unlikely to
have been working for larger interests.
But Lincoln's assassination -- well, there is some reason to suppose there
were larger interests involved there.
I'm basing that primarily on the ciphered message said to have been
written by Lafayette Baker, head of the National Detective Bureau at the
time, which actually sets forth details of such a conspiracy against
Lincoln which included at least one member of his own cabinet. The
message was discovered in 1957, obviously long after the end of the Civil
War and the death of members of the Lincoln administration.
The ciphered message wouldn't have been that easy for a hoaxter to concoct
and Baker's signature underneath the message was apparently confirmed as
genuine.
Baker was hardly a man of integrity, but the ciphered message doesn't
describe his own role in the affair in particularly flattering terms so
that adds some verisimilitude to it.
So I would say that the case for a conspiracy against Lincoln, if it
hasn't exactly been proven, remains open.
It's actually still ongoing and, notwithstanding the violent agitation on
the street -- and in more upscale environments such as Washington,
Hollywood, and the halls of academia and in print and on the networks --
it's still bloodless.
I'm disdainful of the notion that Kennedy was the victim of a coup d'etat
for reasons that I've mentioned before: I don't think that Kennedy
amounted to any sort of threat or opposition toward what we might now call
"the deep state" and the circumstances of his death and the haphazardness
of Oswald's actions afterward -- to say nothing of Oswald's own
mercurialness and unreliability -- were too discordant to allow room for a
sophisticated conspiracy.
Most American assassinations or assassination attempts appear to have been
committed by mentally disturbed people who would have been unlikely to
have been working for larger interests.
But Lincoln's assassination -- well, there is some reason to suppose there
were larger interests involved there.
I'm basing that primarily on the ciphered message said to have been
written by Lafayette Baker, head of the National Detective Bureau at the
time, which actually sets forth details of such a conspiracy against
Lincoln which included at least one member of his own cabinet. The
message was discovered in 1957, obviously long after the end of the Civil
War and the death of members of the Lincoln administration.
The ciphered message wouldn't have been that easy for a hoaxter to concoct
and Baker's signature underneath the message was apparently confirmed as
genuine.
Baker was hardly a man of integrity, but the ciphered message doesn't
describe his own role in the affair in particularly flattering terms so
that adds some verisimilitude to it.
So I would say that the case for a conspiracy against Lincoln, if it
hasn't exactly been proven, remains open.