The Truth Of Abraham Lincoln's Assassination Finally Revealed… And It's MUCH Worse Than We Thought

Everyone knows the story: Abraham Lincoln, assassinated by John Wilkes Booth at Ford’s Theatre in 1865. But what if that’s not the full truth? What if the real story was buried, and carefully kept hidden, for over a century? This reveal peels back the surface of one of America’s most defining tragedies to expose a deeper, darker reality. From missing documents to powerful conspirators, everything you've been told may be part of a much bigger lie. Watch closely, the truth of Abraham Lincoln's assassination finally revealed, and it's much worse than we thought.

My comment was totally tongue-in-cheek. I honestly didn’t read the article, I really hate these (mis)leading “articles“ where they don’t give you the answer at all until the very end, and everyone ends up wasting a lot of their time for a big nothing burger. I strongly suspect that if there actually was something new and substantial about the Lincoln assassination, it would’ve been all over every kind of news media out there, not just this one site.

Agree — massive wars are always ultimately about commodities and money. Lincoln was a Christan American, concerned with restoration and mercy towards the common people of the South, most of whom were not slaveholders. The upper level of European financiers were neither Christian nor concerned about social aftermaths in America. The Civil War is still being fought today as a result of their machinations behind the scenes.

One of the interesting twists when talkies suddenly made voice acting important in movies was the reaction of many viewers who -- having grown up with traditional stage performances with the emphasis on enunciation and unaided projection and then silent films where voices were irrelevant -- were shocked at naturalism when talkies took over. "That isn't acting" and "Anybody could do that" were common reactions. "Acting" meant feet firmly planted, an unaided, unamplified oratorical voice projected to the cheap seats, and clear enunciation because otherwise an actor couldn't hope to be understood.

Of course, everyone can't convey emotion through facial expression and subtleties of voice in closeup shots. Go ahead. Try it. Make a fool of yourself. It's an art form, as is oratorical declamation, and they are different art forms. Which is why so many of the iconic screen actors of the silent stage could not manage the transition to talkies, despite the new ability to do multiple shoots and extensive sound editing in post-production.

We often remark at how often the great actors of the Golden Age of Hollywood are far superior to modern movie and tv actors in enunciation and phrasing. Yes; they often speak far better than 99 percent of people speak in real life. These were classically trained actors who still reflected stage conventions. And that, of course, is extremely artificial. Most modern films and shows are striving for naturalism.

The CD of great Shakespearian actors of the pre-talkie era is doubly fascinating when one pauses to realize that most of those presentations by legends of live theater would be laughed off the stage today, except in a campy, parody movie where they are played for laughs.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.