Killing Lincoln: The Real Story
|
12-10-2014, 05:56 AM
Post: #21
|
|||
|
|||
RE: Killing Lincoln: The Real Story
Of course there should have been a regular trial, with a jury of peers and the ability to speak in one's defense, and not a kangaroo military tribunal stuffed with fake testimony. And the accused should have been afforded real representation, and given enough time to prepare a proper defense. The trial was a sham. And so is much of the evidence produced to support the official story. Newspapers will be quoted, without realizing Stanton controlled the news and could plant any story he wanted. I surveyed this scene for the first time for a few months and wrote about what I discovered. It's just the beginning really, and because it is print-on-demand, I plan to keep editing and adding and improving the text. If there is anything incorrect, I will remove it and update the file. It's not a definitive account, just a brief, easily digested series of essays concerning some elements of the case. But when you line all the dots up, they point toward a conspiracy nested inside the War Department, a department that knew of Booth's kidnap plan, and undoubtedly had other double agents inside Booth's circle, none of whom were charged or brought to testify. Likewise, no one who aided Booth past Dr. Mudd's was charged, and there were many. Likewise, Corbett was not charged, although it was Conger who shot Booth, and both got reward money for killing the key to unveiling the conspiracy. Much of the crucial evidence in this case disappeared once it crossed Stanton's desk. It's simply time to stop defending Stanton's house of cards built on sand and start analyzing the who, what, when, where. But you won't find that in Bill O'Reilly's book or on the History Channel.
|
|||
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
User(s) browsing this thread: 8 Guest(s)