Trump Assassins: Off-the-Books Assets?

American Thinker ^ | 21 Sep, 2024 | Grant Baker

[Georgia Girl 2]

Many people including US Congressmen are urging Trump to supplement his detail with former special forces guys. I’ve said it for months. I do not understand why he isn’t doing it.

[FreeReign]

Stop repeating the Blackrock thing. It is unsupported and makes our side look like nutjobs.\

One video isn't a Block Rock commerical. Both videos have a War in Ukraine connection, one direct and one indirect.

[Armscor38]

People in the Trump Campaign and his inner circle were the ones who picked Butler as a venue, where an assassin with a rifle would have a direct shot at Trump and they also picked the golf course

The biggest danger to any organization is being infiltrated thus every effort must be made to check everyone to make sure this is not the case.

In times like these, it’s best to trust no one.

[MtnClimber]

Scheduled on the same day were Kamala and I think Jill Biden events. Trump’s regular SS detail were pulled off to cover those events and Trump got the D-team from DHS that had a zoom training call for training. Was that a coincidence that this happened and CNN showed up out of the blue with closeups of Trump’s head during the one time they covered a 2024 rally?

[Armscor38]

I wonder who in the Trump Campaign did the scheduling?

[MtnClimber]

The Butler PA event was supposed to be at the airport, but a car show (I think) had been scheduled so the event had to be moved. Anyone would know Trump would have several events in Pa since it is such an important swing state.

[Gaffer]

If someone wanted to facilitate Trump’s assassination, how could they go about it?

Perhaps use the FBI to identify and target certain disaffected individuals and help them in innocuous ways, like a simple “hands off” approach and monitoring. If you wanted to further the grooming, could other efforts like the CIA’s former MKUltra Program be of use? Then as opportunities close, offer schedule information, details on protection regimes and so on? Enlist elements of the MSM to help obscure actual events and time lines......

[BroJoeK]

DiogenesLamp: "I think you recognize there are unholy evil forces at the highest levers of power in our industries and in our government.
What you can't seem to grasp is that these forces extended all the way back to the 1850s."

Well... you stop far too late.
Let's also notice that the only two non-Democrats elected president between John Adams in 1796 and assassinated Abraham Lincoln (elected in 1860), both non-Democrats died in office under suspicious circumstances:

1. Whig Pres. William Henry Harrison in 1841
   
2. Whig Pres. Zachary Taylor in 1850

We can also notice the murder of Federalist Alexander Hamilton in 1804 by the then sitting Democrat Vice President.
Sure, all of these have relatively innocent explanations, but all are suspicious and all favored Democrat control over the Federal government.
Indeed, after John Adams election in 1796, the next elected non-Democrats to survive their terms in office were post Civil War,

• Republicans Ulysses S. Grant (1869-1877) and
• Rutherford Hayes (1877-1881).

But right away, then

• Republican Pres. Garfield assassinated in 1881 and
• Republican Pres. McKinley assassinated in 1901

Remarkably, the only Democrat president to ever die in office was John Kennedy, and that was arguably because he seriously opposed the Deep State "powers that be".
It's often been said that today JFK would be a Republican -- for sure he died like one.
So, is it a mere coincidence that RFK, Jr. now supports Pres. Trump?
You tell me.

In summary, since 1800:

1. 19 elected Democrat Presidents --
   • 1 assassinated, JFK,
   • 5 foiled attempted shootings.

2. 19 elected non-Democrats --
   • 3 assassinated,
   • 3 more shot but survived,
   • 3 foiled attempted shootings
   • 3 foiled bomb plots
   • 3 died in office suspiciously.

Every assassin was a Democrat, socialist and/or deep stater, and yet somehow, DiogenesLamp can only feel the threat from Republicans, never Democrats.

[DiogenesLamp]

We can also notice the murder of Federalist Alexander Hamilton in 1804 by the then sitting Democrat Vice President. Sure, all of these have relatively innocent explanations, but all are suspicious and all favored Democrat control over the Federal government. Indeed, after John Adams election in 1796, the next elected non-Democrats to survive their terms in office were post Civil War,

You are stuck on that "Democrat" thing. As I have told you repeatedly, a more accurate way of seeing it is to view people as "Hamiltonians" versus "Jeffersonians."

The Hamiltonians wanted big government, government policy set by what is favorable to the enrichment of industry and corporations, massive government spending, and government poking it's nose into things way beyond the scope of just defending the nation and administering domestic laws.

The Jeffersonians view of government was "laissez faire."

The more I have come to understand that Alexander Hamilton's view of government inevitably leads to collusion between government and industry, (Fascism) the more I think it was a tragedy that he didn't get shot sooner.

Much of our troubles with our government are built on the foundation of Hamilton's view of the role of government.

And yes, I am aware the problem goes back before 1850, but my intent was to just get you to recognize it goes back at least to 1850.

[BroJoeK]

DiogenesLamp: "The Hamiltonians wanted big government, government policy set by what is favorable to the enrichment of industry and corporations, massive government spending, and government poking it's nose into things way beyond the scope of just defending the nation and administering domestic laws.
The Jeffersonians view of government was "laissez faire.""

Jefferson's Gallatin Plan for infrastructure:

All that is 100% nonsense, just Democrat propaganda, used in the 1790s to defeat Federalist John Adams in the 1800 presidential election.
Jefferson's propaganda worked, but Jeffersonian Democrats then did not reduce the size and scope of Federal government in any way -- instead, they expanded it into ever more non-constitutional purviews.
Those included:

1. 1/3 increase in protective tariff rates,
   3/8 increase in Federal spending, before the War of 1812.
   1/2 increase in national debt between 1801 and 1816.

2. Kept and renewed Hamilton's National Bank.

3. Purchased Louisiana against constitutional objections from his own Old Republican Tertium Quid Democrats like John Randolph.

4. Unprepared by drastically reduced the military budgets before the War of 1812.

5. Undeclared Barbary Wars in the Mediterranean and Africa

6. Aggression against the Spanish in Florida.

7. Invaded the Marquesas Islands in Polynesia.

8. Waged undeclared war against pirates of the Caribbean.

9. Declared war on Britain, invaded Canada.

10. Waged "law-fare". Arrested his own former VP Burr and charged him with treason -- not for something Burr did -- but for what he allegedly might have done: declare secession in Louisiana.

11. Abolished voting rights for propertied women and freed slaves.

12. Embargoed New England trade with Britain because it hurt Federalists, not for any damage to the Brits -- there was none.

13. With his Treasury Secretary, Albert Gallatin, proposed to spend double the Federal government's annual income on "internal improvements", aka: infrastructure, canals, roads, harbor and river improvements for commerce.

All of these are actions Jefferson's Democratics did (or would have) highly criticize when done by Federalists.

So, it was all lies.

DiogenesLamp: "The more I have come to understand that Alexander Hamilton's view of government inevitably leads to collusion between government and industry, (Fascism) the more I think it was a tragedy that he didn't get shot sooner."

And there it is! The Democrat mind-set on full display -- if we can't defeat them with lies, if we can't jail them with false arrests, then let's just shoot whatever SOBs stand in our way. Yeah, that's the ticket... </sarcasm>

Seriously, FRiend, your brain is fried with Democrat group-think, and it's so deep inside that you can't even see it.
Do you wonder why non-Democrats have historically been such targets of assassination?

DiogenesLamp: "And yes, I am aware the problem goes back before 1850, but my intent was to just get you to recognize it goes back at least to 1850."

Nooooo.... the problem you see goes all the way back to the anti-Federalists of 1788, who voted against ratifying George Washington's new Constitution, and soon after became Jeffersonian Democratic-Republicans.
At the time they were called "Democratics" because of Jefferson's admiration for the "Democratic" French Revolution's guillotine and the "blood of tyrants".