Alex Jones warns of a "plan to kill" Trump that will spark a "massive civil war in this country"

[EvilEyeFleegle]

LoL..I gotta ask..do you just make this shit up,or what? Do you really believe that Manson had a political ideology..that could be described as either left or right? John Wilkes Booth?

Was a confederate sympathizer and a member of the 'Know Nothing' party

THE POLITICS OF JOHN WILKES BOOTH

"Booth's longest extant letter is entirely political in content. It echoes the libertarian rhetoric of opposition to the ''tyrant'' Lincoln, and it expresses racial fears that Lincoln's policies would keep America from being an all-white country. By assassinating the key figures in the Government, he hoped to bring about a revolution that would save the South at last and avert America's biracial future." In other words, an alt/right hero!

Every time I read one of you knuckleheads equating the Democrats of the 19th century with the Democrats of the 21st--I know I've found an idiot. In 1865, The Democrats were the Right wing..and the Republicans were the Left. If you do not know this, you are unqualified to have this discussion..if you do know this..and post otherwise, you are a deliberate liar..and unworthy of any serious consideration.

To debunk the rest of your shit:

MOSTLY FALSE

Shooter: John Wilkes Booth

John Wilkes Booth was a member of the Know-Nothing Party. However, some of his motivations for assassinating Lincoln (Booth was opposed to freeing the slaves) aligned with the Democratic Party at the time:

Those ideological differences include increasing the power of the federal government and emancipating the slaves, both things Booth was vehemently against. He was angered that the government instituted an income tax and the military draft, and that the government occasionally suspended habeas corpus, a legal protection against unlawful imprisonment. All these things, Alford says, agitated Booth.

“But Booth brought to that agitation an extremism, the passion almost of a fanatic,” Alford says. “And it was very dangerous, as we find out.”

Although Booth’s motivations may have aligned with the Democratic party of 1865, they bear little resemblance to the party’s modern positions, which have changed dramatically over the past 152 years.

In 1881, a left wing radical Democrat shot James Garfield, President of the United States – who later died from the wound.

FALSE

Shooter: Charles J. Guiteau

Guiteau gave what The Atlantic calls an “incoherent speech to a small group of black voters in New York City” in support of presidential candidate James Garfield. Guiteau then claimed that the speech — which he had originally written in support of Ulysses S. Grant — was the reason for Garfield’s election victory. The new administration, from Guiteau’s perspective, owed him an ambassadorship. When he was denied his request, Guiteau set out for revenge:

After the election, Guiteau moved to Washington to collect his imagined prize. These were the days when any ordinary citizen could pay visits to officials. Guiteau roamed the halls of the State Department and White House, imploring anyone who would listen that he deserved a diplomatic post.

[…]

He didn’t get the diplomatic job. On one visit to the State Department, Secretary of State James Blaine barked at Guiteau, “Never bother me again about the Paris consulship as long as you live.”

The words stung, and set Guiteau off on a bizarre chain of logic, which would result in his demise. Blaine was a menace to the Republican Party. To get rid of Blaine, he reasoned, he had to kill the president. After all, it was Garfield’s fault that such a man served in the State Department. Guiteau heard these instructions from God himself. It wouldn’t be an assassination, but a divinely ordained “removal.” The plan was essentially motiveless, as the the death of the president wouldn’t stand to benefit Guiteau or any Republican. “In the president’s madness, he has wrecked the once Grand Old Republican Party; and for this, he dies,” Guiteau wrote in a letter of admission.

Guiteau was not a “left wing radical Democrat” — he was a supporter of the Republican Party.

In 1963, a radical left wing socialist shot and killed John F. Kennedy, President of the United States.

MOSTLY TRUE

Shooter: Lee Harvey Oswald

Oswald was a Marxist and supported Fidel Castro and Cuba.

In 1959, Oswald travelled to Moscow in hopes of becoming a Soviet citizen. “I want citizenship because I am a communist and a worker,” he wrote in his request for citizenship. “I have lived in a decadent capitalist society where the workers are slaves.”

However, Oswald’s inclusion on this list is odd in that there is no claim that he is a Democrat.

In 1975, a left wing radical Democrat fired shots at Gerald Ford, President of the United States.

UNPROVEN

Shooters: Lynette Fromme and Sara Jane Moore

Two women in one month attempted to shoot Gerald Ford in 1975: Lynette “Squeaky” Fromme, a member of the Manson family, and Sara Jane Moore, a member of radical leftist circles in California and an FBI informant. Both women appear to have had mental health issues. For her part, Fromme appears to have been trying to impress Charles Manson. Moore may have been caught between her loyalty to the FBI and to the leftist groups she was a part of, according to Atlas Oscura:

One interpretation of Moore’s assassination attempt is that she had made a choice between the two sides—she had decided to throw her lot in with the leftists and wanted to demonstrate her allegiance. In the days before she shot at Ford, Moore called up the San Francisco Police Department and told the officers there she was considering a “test” of the president’s security system. They took away her gun; she bought another one, and with that gun in her car, sped through downtown in the hopes, she later said, of being apprehended. While she stood waiting to fire her shot, she was thinking about whether she’d be on time to pick up her son.

Moore fired a shot, which a bystander deflected by grabbing her arm. Fromme was apprehended before she fired a shot. Although both women could rightly be described as radicals, we found no evidence to show that they were Democrats. It appears that Moore and Fromme earned their place on this list thanks to a March 2010 article published by the web site Red State which compiled a list in an attempt to show that “LEFTIST ARE THE HATERS AND ASSASSINS.”

In 1983, a registered Democrat shot and wounded Ronald Reagan, President of the United States.

UNPROVEN

Shooter: John Hinckley Jr.

Another claim that seems to be supported only by speculation. John Hinckley Jr.’s assassination attempt in 1981 (not 1983 as suggested by this meme) was motivated not by politics, but by his desire to woo actress Jodie Foster. In fact, officials believe that before he shot Reagan, Hinckley stalked Jimmy Carter towards the end of his presidency.

Regardless, we contacted the History Colorado (Hinckley’s last place of residence was in the state), who told us:

We wouldn’t have voting records in our collection at all. If their affiliation happened to be mentioned in a newspaper article, we might have that, but as the relevant years for Hinckley aren’t digitized (nor do we have digital access for current Denver Post content), it would be extremely difficult to find.

We also contacted the Colorado State Archives, but they didn’t have a record of Hinckley’s purported political affiliation either.

Hinckley's Family were staunch Republicans and quite wealthy..some feel that this is what enabled Hinckley to obtain his successful insanity finding and his place at St. Elizabeth's, instead of long years in prison.


FACT CHECK: Is This List of Democrat Shooters Accurate?

If you had a point, you blew it when you tried to make your case by using Snopes as a fact checker.

So YOU say...I find it amusing that you address not a thing I posted..just a toss off remark about Snopes. I have no 'case' to make..history is clear..to those who actually study it with an open mind..and no false narrative to promote.

Where's YOUR proof?

That's what I thought.

You're a liberal. You're one of a million other hacks who simply spew out talking points you hear in the msm. If you think I'm gonna spend more than a minute or two rebutting you, think again. You're not worth it. Citing Snopes as a credible source destroys your credibility and renders you insignificant. And when you say things like "Some feel", it means you don't have any facts, just something you dreamed up. I don't need to prove you wrong because you provided nothing of value in the first place. Snopes, and your opinion. Neither are worthy of debate.

Nope..not a liberal...

Bullshit. When you start giving President Donald trump credit for everything he's doing, then you can say "Nope..not a liberal..."

Until then, that's exactly what you are: A liberal and a leftist.

Bullshit back at you! Opposition to Trump does not equal Leftist or Liberal. Neither does opposition to the Alt/right. It just proves I'm sane.

I give Trump the credit he is due..you can believe that.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Alex Jones warns of a "plan to kill" Trump that will spark a "massive civil war in this country"

"If we allow the evil people that hijack this country, the globalists, to remove Trump with all this fraud, and if we buy into the hype, and if we're not strong and if we don't speak out, if these crazy globalists that don't know when to give up actually are able to remove Trump -- I'm going to walk through the scenarios for that coming up because they mean business. They said he'd be gone by the end of December. Remember our intel from high-level congressional sources just a few months ago? This is it. And, if they're able to do that, it will cause a massive civil war in this country. Economic, physical, there'll be all sorts of permutations of it, and it will absolutely have this country descend into a nightmare.

Because I don't think they're going to be able to remove Trump with all of this made up Russia stuff, but they're clearly going to go to their next plan to kill him, and they've been warming that up. And I don't even like the different scenarios that are there of what we're going to have to do to counter-strike against this."


Always good for a laugh..until you realize that there are thousands of ignorant, inbred fools..who believe this guy!

Haha..."civil war".... Yeah, right. As if the 30 million Trumpkins would peel theirnfat asses off of their couches and do a Goddamn thing. Even voting for Trump was their way of getting their message in the spotlight without having to embarrassing themselves publicly. These people are lazy sissies.

 

[S.J.]

I note that you have taken the the time and energy to answer me twice now....but I guess facts..especially when the ones you want don't exist--are outside of your skill set.

Facts? What facts? Since you're starved for attention I'll address some of your "facts", then you can fuck off.

Do you really believe that Manson had a political ideology..that could be described as either left or right?

Well, let's see, the whole Manson "family" were a bunch of 60s anti-establishment, Nixon hating, acid popping hippies living in a commune. I strongly doubt they were conservative Republicans. More like Jane Fonda, John Kerry liberals. Same political liberal ideology.

Shooters: Lynette Fromme and Sara Jane Moore

Both well known leftists who tried to kill a Republican president.
A 45-Year-Old Mom and a Manson Girl Both Tried to Kill Gerald Ford

Hinckley's Family were staunch Republicans and quite wealthy..

That doesn't make their son staunch Republicans.

You already admitted Boothe was a Democrat. And Lee Harvey Oswald was a communist, which is what almost every elected Democrat in Washington is, so I guess you just fell flat on your face with your attempt to put me in my place. But keep searching Snopes, I'm sure you can find some verification of your whacko liberal notions there.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I note that you have taken the the time and energy to answer me twice now....but I guess facts..especially when the ones you want don't exist--are outside of your skill set.

Facts? What facts? Since you're starved for attention I'll address some of your "facts", then you can fuck off.

Do you really believe that Manson had a political ideology..that could be described as either left or right?

Well, let's see, the whole Manson "family" were a bunch of 60s anti-establishment, Nixon hating, acid popping hippies living in a commune. I strongly doubt they were conservative Republicans. More like Jane Fonda, John Kerry liberals. Same political liberal ideology.

Shooters: Lynette Fromme and Sara Jane Moore

Both well known leftists who tried to kill a Republican president.
A 45-Year-Old Mom and a Manson Girl Both Tried to Kill Gerald Ford

Hinckley's Family were staunch Republicans and quite wealthy..

That doesn't make their son staunch Republicans.

You already admitted Boothe was a Democrat. And Lee Harvey Oswald was a communist, which is what almost every elected Democrat in Washington is, so I guess you just fell flat on your face with your attempt to put me in my place. But keep searching Snopes, I'm sure you can find some verification of your whacko liberal notions there.

Charles Manson was a raging white supremacist who wanted a race war. He most certainly was no leftist.I'm sure he loved Trump.

 

[JGalt]

If you had a point, you blew it when you tried to make your case by using Snopes as a fact checker.

So YOU say...I find it amusing that you address not a thing I posted..just a toss off remark about Snopes. I have no 'case' to make..history is clear..to those who actually study it with an open mind..and no false narrative to promote.

Where's YOUR proof?

That's what I thought.

You're a liberal. You're one of a million other hacks who simply spew out talking points you hear in the msm. If you think I'm gonna spend more than a minute or two rebutting you, think again. You're not worth it. Citing Snopes as a credible source destroys your credibility and renders you insignificant. And when you say things like "Some feel", it means you don't have any facts, just something you dreamed up. I don't need to prove you wrong because you provided nothing of value in the first place. Snopes, and your opinion. Neither are worthy of debate.

Nope..not a liberal...

Bullshit. When you start giving President Donald trump credit for everything he's doing, then you can say "Nope..not a liberal..."

Until then, that's exactly what you are: A liberal and a leftist.

Bullshit back at you! Opposition to Trump does not equal Leftist or Liberal. Neither does opposition to the Alt/right. It just proves I'm sane.

I give Trump the credit he is due..you can believe that.

How so? Can you name every great thing he's done for this country, since being sworn in?

 

[S.J.]

So YOU say...I find it amusing that you address not a thing I posted..just a toss off remark about Snopes. I have no 'case' to make..history is clear..to those who actually study it with an open mind..and no false narrative to promote.

Where's YOUR proof?

That's what I thought.

You're a liberal. You're one of a million other hacks who simply spew out talking points you hear in the msm. If you think I'm gonna spend more than a minute or two rebutting you, think again. You're not worth it. Citing Snopes as a credible source destroys your credibility and renders you insignificant. And when you say things like "Some feel", it means you don't have any facts, just something you dreamed up. I don't need to prove you wrong because you provided nothing of value in the first place. Snopes, and your opinion. Neither are worthy of debate.

Nope..not a liberal...

Bullshit. When you start giving President Donald trump credit for everything he's doing, then you can say "Nope..not a liberal..."

Until then, that's exactly what you are: A liberal and a leftist.

Bullshit back at you! Opposition to Trump does not equal Leftist or Liberal. Neither does opposition to the Alt/right. It just proves I'm sane.

I give Trump the credit he is due..you can believe that.

How so? Can you name every great thing he's done for this country, since being sworn in?

Must be Jake's sock. Sounds exactly like him.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

The assassin of Lincoln was an ultra race southern conservative.

He was a Democrat (the party that gave us the KKK).

The assassin of Kennedy was a commie.

A commie, like todays Democrats (you included).

The would be assassin of Reagan was a Jody Foster fan.

And a liberal.

The would be assassin of Ford was a fan of Charles Manson, a crazy race conservative.

Manson was a liberal degenerate. Another racist from the party of the KKK.

LoL..I gotta ask..do you just make this shit up,or what? Do you really believe that Manson had a political ideology..that could be described as either left or right? John Wilkes Booth?

Was a confederate sympathizer and a member of the 'Know Nothing' party

THE POLITICS OF JOHN WILKES BOOTH

"Booth's longest extant letter is entirely political in content. It echoes the libertarian rhetoric of opposition to the ''tyrant'' Lincoln, and it expresses racial fears that Lincoln's policies would keep America from being an all-white country. By assassinating the key figures in the Government, he hoped to bring about a revolution that would save the South at last and avert America's biracial future." In other words, an alt/right hero!

Every time I read one of you knuckleheads equating the Democrats of the 19th century with the Democrats of the 21st--I know I've found an idiot. In 1865, The Democrats were the Right wing..and the Republicans were the Left. If you do not know this, you are unqualified to have this discussion..if you do know this..and post otherwise, you are a deliberate liar..and unworthy of any serious consideration.

To debunk the rest of your shit:

MOSTLY FALSE

Shooter: John Wilkes Booth

John Wilkes Booth was a member of the Know-Nothing Party. However, some of his motivations for assassinating Lincoln (Booth was opposed to freeing the slaves) aligned with the Democratic Party at the time:

Those ideological differences include increasing the power of the federal government and emancipating the slaves, both things Booth was vehemently against. He was angered that the government instituted an income tax and the military draft, and that the government occasionally suspended habeas corpus, a legal protection against unlawful imprisonment. All these things, Alford says, agitated Booth.

“But Booth brought to that agitation an extremism, the passion almost of a fanatic,” Alford says. “And it was very dangerous, as we find out.”

Although Booth’s motivations may have aligned with the Democratic party of 1865, they bear little resemblance to the party’s modern positions, which have changed dramatically over the past 152 years.

In 1881, a left wing radical Democrat shot James Garfield, President of the United States – who later died from the wound.

FALSE

Shooter: Charles J. Guiteau

Guiteau gave what The Atlantic calls an “incoherent speech to a small group of black voters in New York City” in support of presidential candidate James Garfield. Guiteau then claimed that the speech — which he had originally written in support of Ulysses S. Grant — was the reason for Garfield’s election victory. The new administration, from Guiteau’s perspective, owed him an ambassadorship. When he was denied his request, Guiteau set out for revenge:

After the election, Guiteau moved to Washington to collect his imagined prize. These were the days when any ordinary citizen could pay visits to officials. Guiteau roamed the halls of the State Department and White House, imploring anyone who would listen that he deserved a diplomatic post.

[…]

He didn’t get the diplomatic job. On one visit to the State Department, Secretary of State James Blaine barked at Guiteau, “Never bother me again about the Paris consulship as long as you live.”

The words stung, and set Guiteau off on a bizarre chain of logic, which would result in his demise. Blaine was a menace to the Republican Party. To get rid of Blaine, he reasoned, he had to kill the president. After all, it was Garfield’s fault that such a man served in the State Department. Guiteau heard these instructions from God himself. It wouldn’t be an assassination, but a divinely ordained “removal.” The plan was essentially motiveless, as the the death of the president wouldn’t stand to benefit Guiteau or any Republican. “In the president’s madness, he has wrecked the once Grand Old Republican Party; and for this, he dies,” Guiteau wrote in a letter of admission.

Guiteau was not a “left wing radical Democrat” — he was a supporter of the Republican Party.

In 1963, a radical left wing socialist shot and killed John F. Kennedy, President of the United States.

MOSTLY TRUE

Shooter: Lee Harvey Oswald

Oswald was a Marxist and supported Fidel Castro and Cuba.

In 1959, Oswald travelled to Moscow in hopes of becoming a Soviet citizen. “I want citizenship because I am a communist and a worker,” he wrote in his request for citizenship. “I have lived in a decadent capitalist society where the workers are slaves.”

However, Oswald’s inclusion on this list is odd in that there is no claim that he is a Democrat.

In 1975, a left wing radical Democrat fired shots at Gerald Ford, President of the United States.

UNPROVEN

Shooters: Lynette Fromme and Sara Jane Moore

Two women in one month attempted to shoot Gerald Ford in 1975: Lynette “Squeaky” Fromme, a member of the Manson family, and Sara Jane Moore, a member of radical leftist circles in California and an FBI informant. Both women appear to have had mental health issues. For her part, Fromme appears to have been trying to impress Charles Manson. Moore may have been caught between her loyalty to the FBI and to the leftist groups she was a part of, according to Atlas Oscura:

One interpretation of Moore’s assassination attempt is that she had made a choice between the two sides—she had decided to throw her lot in with the leftists and wanted to demonstrate her allegiance. In the days before she shot at Ford, Moore called up the San Francisco Police Department and told the officers there she was considering a “test” of the president’s security system. They took away her gun; she bought another one, and with that gun in her car, sped through downtown in the hopes, she later said, of being apprehended. While she stood waiting to fire her shot, she was thinking about whether she’d be on time to pick up her son.

Moore fired a shot, which a bystander deflected by grabbing her arm. Fromme was apprehended before she fired a shot. Although both women could rightly be described as radicals, we found no evidence to show that they were Democrats. It appears that Moore and Fromme earned their place on this list thanks to a March 2010 article published by the web site Red State which compiled a list in an attempt to show that “LEFTIST ARE THE HATERS AND ASSASSINS.”

In 1983, a registered Democrat shot and wounded Ronald Reagan, President of the United States.

UNPROVEN

Shooter: John Hinckley Jr.

Another claim that seems to be supported only by speculation. John Hinckley Jr.’s assassination attempt in 1981 (not 1983 as suggested by this meme) was motivated not by politics, but by his desire to woo actress Jodie Foster. In fact, officials believe that before he shot Reagan, Hinckley stalked Jimmy Carter towards the end of his presidency.

Regardless, we contacted the History Colorado (Hinckley’s last place of residence was in the state), who told us:

We wouldn’t have voting records in our collection at all. If their affiliation happened to be mentioned in a newspaper article, we might have that, but as the relevant years for Hinckley aren’t digitized (nor do we have digital access for current Denver Post content), it would be extremely difficult to find.

We also contacted the Colorado State Archives, but they didn’t have a record of Hinckley’s purported political affiliation either.

Hinckley's Family were staunch Republicans and quite wealthy..some feel that this is what enabled Hinckley to obtain his successful insanity finding and his place at St. Elizabeth's, instead of long years in prison.


FACT CHECK: Is This List of Democrat Shooters Accurate?

If you had a point, you blew it when you tried to make your case by using Snopes as a fact checker.

So YOU say...I find it amusing that you address not a thing I posted..just a toss off remark about Snopes. I have no 'case' to make..history is clear..to those who actually study it with an open mind..and no false narrative to promote.

Where's YOUR proof?

That's what I thought.

You're a liberal. You're one of a million other hacks who simply spew out talking points you hear in the msm. If you think I'm gonna spend more than a minute or two rebutting you, think again. You're not worth it. Citing Snopes as a credible source destroys your credibility and renders you insignificant. And when you say things like "Some feel", it means you don't have any facts, just something you dreamed up. I don't need to prove you wrong because you provided nothing of value in the first place. Snopes, and your opinion. Neither are worthy of debate.

Don't be a dumbass. If you had anything to "rebut" what snopes said, you would have done so.

Instead you bloviated and blustered, because you've got nothing. You hate snopes not because they're wrong - you hate them because they're right.

 

[EvilEyeFleegle]

I note that you have taken the the time and energy to answer me twice now....but I guess facts..especially when the ones you want don't exist--are outside of your skill set.

Facts? What facts? Since you're starved for attention I'll address some of your "facts", then you can fuck off.

Do you really believe that Manson had a political ideology..that could be described as either left or right?

Well, let's see, the whole Manson "family" were a bunch of 60s anti-establishment, Nixon hating, acid popping hippies living in a commune. I strongly doubt they were conservative Republicans. More like Jane Fonda, John Kerry liberals. Same political liberal ideology.

Shooters: Lynette Fromme and Sara Jane Moore

Both well known leftists who tried to kill a Republican president.
A 45-Year-Old Mom and a Manson Girl Both Tried to Kill Gerald Ford

Hinckley's Family were staunch Republicans and quite wealthy..

That doesn't make their son staunch Republicans.

You already admitted Boothe was a Democrat. And Lee Harvey Oswald was a communist, which is what almost every elected Democrat in Washington is, so I guess you just fell flat on your face with your attempt to put me in my place. But keep searching Snopes, I'm sure you can find some verification of your whacko liberal notions there.

As I stated....Booth was a member of the Know Nothing party..look them up..if you care. As to my 'putting you in your place' you've done quite well at that on your own. Do you think that your statement that every elected Democrat in DC is a Communist makes it so? Idiot.

Your link..did you even read it?

As for Manson..are you truly so stupid as to think that every nut has a political ideology? Do you really believe that the Democrats of the time supported the fringe elements? I was there..and they did not..at all. Your attempt to rewrite history is noted..and rejected.

Name calling and lies are all you have..which is why..in essence..why I despise the alt/right..because they are ignorant liars who think that simple repetition of their lies will give them some traction---most are not fooled.

To close....you seem to recognize only Left and Right..as though there are not any other positions one can take..or ..as many people do..take no position at all. Not everyone is either Left or Right...many don't give a fuck--and still others make up their minds issue by issue...not in lock-step to some ideology.

 

[EvilEyeFleegle]

You're a liberal. You're one of a million other hacks who simply spew out talking points you hear in the msm. If you think I'm gonna spend more than a minute or two rebutting you, think again. You're not worth it. Citing Snopes as a credible source destroys your credibility and renders you insignificant. And when you say things like "Some feel", it means you don't have any facts, just something you dreamed up. I don't need to prove you wrong because you provided nothing of value in the first place. Snopes, and your opinion. Neither are worthy of debate.

Nope..not a liberal...

Bullshit. When you start giving President Donald trump credit for everything he's doing, then you can say "Nope..not a liberal..."

Until then, that's exactly what you are: A liberal and a leftist.

Bullshit back at you! Opposition to Trump does not equal Leftist or Liberal. Neither does opposition to the Alt/right. It just proves I'm sane.

I give Trump the credit he is due..you can believe that.

How so? Can you name every great thing he's done for this country, since being sworn in?

Must be Jake's sock. Sounds exactly like him.

LoL....you are truly making me laugh...as if you just cannot address the issues..so you have to reach to some stupid conclusion..any mod can tell you..that unless Jake lives in Twin Falls Idaho...I'm just me..which is more than enough to show you as the idiot you are...I wonder..whose sock are you...and whose Johnson are you stretched over?

 

[S.J.]

He was a Democrat (the party that gave us the KKK).

A commie, like todays Democrats (you included).

And a liberal.

Manson was a liberal degenerate. Another racist from the party of the KKK.

LoL..I gotta ask..do you just make this shit up,or what? Do you really believe that Manson had a political ideology..that could be described as either left or right? John Wilkes Booth?

Was a confederate sympathizer and a member of the 'Know Nothing' party

THE POLITICS OF JOHN WILKES BOOTH

"Booth's longest extant letter is entirely political in content. It echoes the libertarian rhetoric of opposition to the ''tyrant'' Lincoln, and it expresses racial fears that Lincoln's policies would keep America from being an all-white country. By assassinating the key figures in the Government, he hoped to bring about a revolution that would save the South at last and avert America's biracial future." In other words, an alt/right hero!

Every time I read one of you knuckleheads equating the Democrats of the 19th century with the Democrats of the 21st--I know I've found an idiot. In 1865, The Democrats were the Right wing..and the Republicans were the Left. If you do not know this, you are unqualified to have this discussion..if you do know this..and post otherwise, you are a deliberate liar..and unworthy of any serious consideration.

To debunk the rest of your shit:

MOSTLY FALSE

Shooter: John Wilkes Booth

John Wilkes Booth was a member of the Know-Nothing Party. However, some of his motivations for assassinating Lincoln (Booth was opposed to freeing the slaves) aligned with the Democratic Party at the time:

Those ideological differences include increasing the power of the federal government and emancipating the slaves, both things Booth was vehemently against. He was angered that the government instituted an income tax and the military draft, and that the government occasionally suspended habeas corpus, a legal protection against unlawful imprisonment. All these things, Alford says, agitated Booth.

“But Booth brought to that agitation an extremism, the passion almost of a fanatic,” Alford says. “And it was very dangerous, as we find out.”

Although Booth’s motivations may have aligned with the Democratic party of 1865, they bear little resemblance to the party’s modern positions, which have changed dramatically over the past 152 years.

In 1881, a left wing radical Democrat shot James Garfield, President of the United States – who later died from the wound.

FALSE

Shooter: Charles J. Guiteau

Guiteau gave what The Atlantic calls an “incoherent speech to a small group of black voters in New York City” in support of presidential candidate James Garfield. Guiteau then claimed that the speech — which he had originally written in support of Ulysses S. Grant — was the reason for Garfield’s election victory. The new administration, from Guiteau’s perspective, owed him an ambassadorship. When he was denied his request, Guiteau set out for revenge:

After the election, Guiteau moved to Washington to collect his imagined prize. These were the days when any ordinary citizen could pay visits to officials. Guiteau roamed the halls of the State Department and White House, imploring anyone who would listen that he deserved a diplomatic post.

[…]

He didn’t get the diplomatic job. On one visit to the State Department, Secretary of State James Blaine barked at Guiteau, “Never bother me again about the Paris consulship as long as you live.”

The words stung, and set Guiteau off on a bizarre chain of logic, which would result in his demise. Blaine was a menace to the Republican Party. To get rid of Blaine, he reasoned, he had to kill the president. After all, it was Garfield’s fault that such a man served in the State Department. Guiteau heard these instructions from God himself. It wouldn’t be an assassination, but a divinely ordained “removal.” The plan was essentially motiveless, as the the death of the president wouldn’t stand to benefit Guiteau or any Republican. “In the president’s madness, he has wrecked the once Grand Old Republican Party; and for this, he dies,” Guiteau wrote in a letter of admission.

Guiteau was not a “left wing radical Democrat” — he was a supporter of the Republican Party.

In 1963, a radical left wing socialist shot and killed John F. Kennedy, President of the United States.

MOSTLY TRUE

Shooter: Lee Harvey Oswald

Oswald was a Marxist and supported Fidel Castro and Cuba.

In 1959, Oswald travelled to Moscow in hopes of becoming a Soviet citizen. “I want citizenship because I am a communist and a worker,” he wrote in his request for citizenship. “I have lived in a decadent capitalist society where the workers are slaves.”

However, Oswald’s inclusion on this list is odd in that there is no claim that he is a Democrat.

In 1975, a left wing radical Democrat fired shots at Gerald Ford, President of the United States.

UNPROVEN

Shooters: Lynette Fromme and Sara Jane Moore

Two women in one month attempted to shoot Gerald Ford in 1975: Lynette “Squeaky” Fromme, a member of the Manson family, and Sara Jane Moore, a member of radical leftist circles in California and an FBI informant. Both women appear to have had mental health issues. For her part, Fromme appears to have been trying to impress Charles Manson. Moore may have been caught between her loyalty to the FBI and to the leftist groups she was a part of, according to Atlas Oscura:

One interpretation of Moore’s assassination attempt is that she had made a choice between the two sides—she had decided to throw her lot in with the leftists and wanted to demonstrate her allegiance. In the days before she shot at Ford, Moore called up the San Francisco Police Department and told the officers there she was considering a “test” of the president’s security system. They took away her gun; she bought another one, and with that gun in her car, sped through downtown in the hopes, she later said, of being apprehended. While she stood waiting to fire her shot, she was thinking about whether she’d be on time to pick up her son.

Moore fired a shot, which a bystander deflected by grabbing her arm. Fromme was apprehended before she fired a shot. Although both women could rightly be described as radicals, we found no evidence to show that they were Democrats. It appears that Moore and Fromme earned their place on this list thanks to a March 2010 article published by the web site Red State which compiled a list in an attempt to show that “LEFTIST ARE THE HATERS AND ASSASSINS.”

In 1983, a registered Democrat shot and wounded Ronald Reagan, President of the United States.

UNPROVEN

Shooter: John Hinckley Jr.

Another claim that seems to be supported only by speculation. John Hinckley Jr.’s assassination attempt in 1981 (not 1983 as suggested by this meme) was motivated not by politics, but by his desire to woo actress Jodie Foster. In fact, officials believe that before he shot Reagan, Hinckley stalked Jimmy Carter towards the end of his presidency.

Regardless, we contacted the History Colorado (Hinckley’s last place of residence was in the state), who told us:

We wouldn’t have voting records in our collection at all. If their affiliation happened to be mentioned in a newspaper article, we might have that, but as the relevant years for Hinckley aren’t digitized (nor do we have digital access for current Denver Post content), it would be extremely difficult to find.

We also contacted the Colorado State Archives, but they didn’t have a record of Hinckley’s purported political affiliation either.

Hinckley's Family were staunch Republicans and quite wealthy..some feel that this is what enabled Hinckley to obtain his successful insanity finding and his place at St. Elizabeth's, instead of long years in prison.


FACT CHECK: Is This List of Democrat Shooters Accurate?

If you had a point, you blew it when you tried to make your case by using Snopes as a fact checker.

So YOU say...I find it amusing that you address not a thing I posted..just a toss off remark about Snopes. I have no 'case' to make..history is clear..to those who actually study it with an open mind..and no false narrative to promote.

Where's YOUR proof?

That's what I thought.

You're a liberal. You're one of a million other hacks who simply spew out talking points you hear in the msm. If you think I'm gonna spend more than a minute or two rebutting you, think again. You're not worth it. Citing Snopes as a credible source destroys your credibility and renders you insignificant. And when you say things like "Some feel", it means you don't have any facts, just something you dreamed up. I don't need to prove you wrong because you provided nothing of value in the first place. Snopes, and your opinion. Neither are worthy of debate.

Don't be a dumbass. If you had anything to "rebut" what snopes said, you would have done so.

Instead you bloviated and blustered, because you've got nothing. You hate snopes not because they're wrong - you hate them because they're right.

Snopes has been rebutted more times than you've used your position to bully posters.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

LoL..I gotta ask..do you just make this shit up,or what? Do you really believe that Manson had a political ideology..that could be described as either left or right? John Wilkes Booth?

Was a confederate sympathizer and a member of the 'Know Nothing' party

THE POLITICS OF JOHN WILKES BOOTH

"Booth's longest extant letter is entirely political in content. It echoes the libertarian rhetoric of opposition to the ''tyrant'' Lincoln, and it expresses racial fears that Lincoln's policies would keep America from being an all-white country. By assassinating the key figures in the Government, he hoped to bring about a revolution that would save the South at last and avert America's biracial future." In other words, an alt/right hero!

Every time I read one of you knuckleheads equating the Democrats of the 19th century with the Democrats of the 21st--I know I've found an idiot. In 1865, The Democrats were the Right wing..and the Republicans were the Left. If you do not know this, you are unqualified to have this discussion..if you do know this..and post otherwise, you are a deliberate liar..and unworthy of any serious consideration.

To debunk the rest of your shit:

MOSTLY FALSE

Shooter: John Wilkes Booth

John Wilkes Booth was a member of the Know-Nothing Party. However, some of his motivations for assassinating Lincoln (Booth was opposed to freeing the slaves) aligned with the Democratic Party at the time:

Those ideological differences include increasing the power of the federal government and emancipating the slaves, both things Booth was vehemently against. He was angered that the government instituted an income tax and the military draft, and that the government occasionally suspended habeas corpus, a legal protection against unlawful imprisonment. All these things, Alford says, agitated Booth.

“But Booth brought to that agitation an extremism, the passion almost of a fanatic,” Alford says. “And it was very dangerous, as we find out.”

Although Booth’s motivations may have aligned with the Democratic party of 1865, they bear little resemblance to the party’s modern positions, which have changed dramatically over the past 152 years.

In 1881, a left wing radical Democrat shot James Garfield, President of the United States – who later died from the wound.

FALSE

Shooter: Charles J. Guiteau

Guiteau gave what The Atlantic calls an “incoherent speech to a small group of black voters in New York City” in support of presidential candidate James Garfield. Guiteau then claimed that the speech — which he had originally written in support of Ulysses S. Grant — was the reason for Garfield’s election victory. The new administration, from Guiteau’s perspective, owed him an ambassadorship. When he was denied his request, Guiteau set out for revenge:

After the election, Guiteau moved to Washington to collect his imagined prize. These were the days when any ordinary citizen could pay visits to officials. Guiteau roamed the halls of the State Department and White House, imploring anyone who would listen that he deserved a diplomatic post.

[…]

He didn’t get the diplomatic job. On one visit to the State Department, Secretary of State James Blaine barked at Guiteau, “Never bother me again about the Paris consulship as long as you live.”

The words stung, and set Guiteau off on a bizarre chain of logic, which would result in his demise. Blaine was a menace to the Republican Party. To get rid of Blaine, he reasoned, he had to kill the president. After all, it was Garfield’s fault that such a man served in the State Department. Guiteau heard these instructions from God himself. It wouldn’t be an assassination, but a divinely ordained “removal.” The plan was essentially motiveless, as the the death of the president wouldn’t stand to benefit Guiteau or any Republican. “In the president’s madness, he has wrecked the once Grand Old Republican Party; and for this, he dies,” Guiteau wrote in a letter of admission.

Guiteau was not a “left wing radical Democrat” — he was a supporter of the Republican Party.

In 1963, a radical left wing socialist shot and killed John F. Kennedy, President of the United States.

MOSTLY TRUE

Shooter: Lee Harvey Oswald

Oswald was a Marxist and supported Fidel Castro and Cuba.

In 1959, Oswald travelled to Moscow in hopes of becoming a Soviet citizen. “I want citizenship because I am a communist and a worker,” he wrote in his request for citizenship. “I have lived in a decadent capitalist society where the workers are slaves.”

However, Oswald’s inclusion on this list is odd in that there is no claim that he is a Democrat.

In 1975, a left wing radical Democrat fired shots at Gerald Ford, President of the United States.

UNPROVEN

Shooters: Lynette Fromme and Sara Jane Moore

Two women in one month attempted to shoot Gerald Ford in 1975: Lynette “Squeaky” Fromme, a member of the Manson family, and Sara Jane Moore, a member of radical leftist circles in California and an FBI informant. Both women appear to have had mental health issues. For her part, Fromme appears to have been trying to impress Charles Manson. Moore may have been caught between her loyalty to the FBI and to the leftist groups she was a part of, according to Atlas Oscura:

One interpretation of Moore’s assassination attempt is that she had made a choice between the two sides—she had decided to throw her lot in with the leftists and wanted to demonstrate her allegiance. In the days before she shot at Ford, Moore called up the San Francisco Police Department and told the officers there she was considering a “test” of the president’s security system. They took away her gun; she bought another one, and with that gun in her car, sped through downtown in the hopes, she later said, of being apprehended. While she stood waiting to fire her shot, she was thinking about whether she’d be on time to pick up her son.

Moore fired a shot, which a bystander deflected by grabbing her arm. Fromme was apprehended before she fired a shot. Although both women could rightly be described as radicals, we found no evidence to show that they were Democrats. It appears that Moore and Fromme earned their place on this list thanks to a March 2010 article published by the web site Red State which compiled a list in an attempt to show that “LEFTIST ARE THE HATERS AND ASSASSINS.”

In 1983, a registered Democrat shot and wounded Ronald Reagan, President of the United States.

UNPROVEN

Shooter: John Hinckley Jr.

Another claim that seems to be supported only by speculation. John Hinckley Jr.’s assassination attempt in 1981 (not 1983 as suggested by this meme) was motivated not by politics, but by his desire to woo actress Jodie Foster. In fact, officials believe that before he shot Reagan, Hinckley stalked Jimmy Carter towards the end of his presidency.

Regardless, we contacted the History Colorado (Hinckley’s last place of residence was in the state), who told us:

We wouldn’t have voting records in our collection at all. If their affiliation happened to be mentioned in a newspaper article, we might have that, but as the relevant years for Hinckley aren’t digitized (nor do we have digital access for current Denver Post content), it would be extremely difficult to find.

We also contacted the Colorado State Archives, but they didn’t have a record of Hinckley’s purported political affiliation either.

Hinckley's Family were staunch Republicans and quite wealthy..some feel that this is what enabled Hinckley to obtain his successful insanity finding and his place at St. Elizabeth's, instead of long years in prison.


FACT CHECK: Is This List of Democrat Shooters Accurate?

If you had a point, you blew it when you tried to make your case by using Snopes as a fact checker.

So YOU say...I find it amusing that you address not a thing I posted..just a toss off remark about Snopes. I have no 'case' to make..history is clear..to those who actually study it with an open mind..and no false narrative to promote.

Where's YOUR proof?

That's what I thought.

You're a liberal. You're one of a million other hacks who simply spew out talking points you hear in the msm. If you think I'm gonna spend more than a minute or two rebutting you, think again. You're not worth it. Citing Snopes as a credible source destroys your credibility and renders you insignificant. And when you say things like "Some feel", it means you don't have any facts, just something you dreamed up. I don't need to prove you wrong because you provided nothing of value in the first place. Snopes, and your opinion. Neither are worthy of debate.

Don't be a dumbass. If you had anything to "rebut" what snopes said, you would have done so.

Instead you bloviated and blustered, because you've got nothing. You hate snopes not because they're wrong - you hate them because they're right.

Snopes has been rebutted more times than you've used your position to bully posters.

Snopes has been "rebutted" less times than most news sources have.

But that's not the point. You're refusing to address the content, and only attacking the messenger.

If you want to "rebut" what snopes said in this particular, then you have to prove them wrong. You can't just say "snopes", and then bluster and puff like you've "won" something.

 

[S.J.]

You're refusing to address the content, and only attacking the messenger.

You're a liar. I most certainly DID address the content. And the messenger (if you're talking about Snopes) is a well know leftist propaganda site, run by two liberals out of their home (although I think they've since been divorced). They have no credentials, no qualifications to be "fact checkers", they're liberal hacks (just like you).

 

[JakeStarkey]

Jake lives in Texas and Salt Lake City during the year, and a few weeks each year in the UK.

Fleegle, you are being pursued by a sock.

 

[GreenBean]

So we have your guarantee that there isn't a nut job Leftist out there planning to assassinate Donald Trump? Really? With the visceral hatred for Donald Trump on display everywhere including TV, it is definitely a possibility. And no I have NEVER listened to Alex Jones.

There was hate for Obama from repub KKKers and racists too and he made it for 8 years

There is no such thing as a Republican KKK - it was / is an invention of the Democratic Party and in recent years has been relegated to political insignificance, except as a talking point by the very same assholes who support the machine that created it.

 

[GreenBean]

So we have your guarantee that there isn't a nut job Leftist out there planning to assassinate Donald Trump? Really? With the visceral hatred for Donald Trump on display everywhere including TV, it is definitely a possibility. And no I have NEVER listened to Alex Jones.

If Obama, who was hated far more than Trump, was safe, Trump is even more so.

The more likely scenario some alt right group is planning on whacking El Orange-O to start 'something', whatever that might be.

It doesn't matter if you assassinate Trump - he becomes a martyr but the movement he created grows even stronger. Like Pearl Harbor - what doesn't kill us makes us stronger

 

[JakeStarkey]

The movement is dying, whether Trump survives his term.

 

[GreenBean]

Jake lives in Texas and Salt Lake City during the year, and a few weeks each year in the UK.

Fleegle, you are being pursued by a sock.

Why would someone create a sock puppet that loses every debate he gets into and only bolsters the other sides argument through his ignorance ?

 

[GreenBean]

The movement is dying, whether Trump survives his term.

Yes - just like Trump was going to lose in a landslide to the Hildebeast - lol

 

[JakeStarkey]

That alt right was a very small part of the Trump vote. It helped him over the top, but now it can do very little.

 

[Marion Morrison]

Hell, if it allows us democrats to take our states and leave the loserterians to their own idiocy. I am ok with it.

What are "your" states?