Actually yes, and I'm not saying that just to be argumentative. Lincoln was a master at hiding exactly what he was thinking, and any biography of his will bear that out. He kept his own counsel always, and never let people know what he was thinking until he was ready to make his decision. He always did. This was the man who was arguing against an emancipation proclamation with a delegation from Chicago while at the same time he had the proclamation written, reviewed by the cabinet, ready and waiting for the proper moment to announce. So yes, I can easily see how people thought Lincoln was leaning one way only to see him go the other. Especially this early in his administration.
And when Lamon told him Pickens' and Petigru's answers, he just dismissed it.
No, I don't think he dismissed anything that anyone was telling him. I think he weighed all the information carefully before making his decision. Just because he didn't follow their advice didn't mean he dismissed it.
And the memo... you got me on that on a technicality... reinforce versus resupply, so you escaped that bullet.
But I don't think it was a technicality. The two are very different and Lincoln knew that. Which is why I really think that he believed that peace might be maintained and the South would allow the status quo to continue if he made it clear that food and supplies were all he was landing. And where he knew that a reinforcement would be a match to the powder keg.
So, you believe Lincoln thought he could sail in the harbor and maintain the status quo regardless of what anyone told him about the reality in the South?
Yes. One word answer.
Okay... if that is how you perceive him. To me, your Lincoln is very stupid. Oh, well. As long as you are happy with him.
And the alternative is...what? That Lincoln deliberately chose his path to start the war? If that was his goal there were a lot surer ways to do it. Why not dispense with the message altogether and set out to land troops first along with the food, and add some ammunition while he was at it? You can choose to believe that absent any evidence to support you. As long as you are happy.
Lincoln was a brillant politican. He may have lost the Lincoln-Douglas debates, but he set Douglas up to lose the 1860 election. That is how acute his political instincts were.
That's why your argument does not work for me no matter how expertly you parse the sources or vigorously you argue. This savvy political operator... in you defense of him, suddenly is as innocent and naive as a babe in the woods when it comes to the political crises involved at Sumter.
Does not sound like the Lincoln I have come to know and respect.
And Hays and Nicolay... knew him very well. They did not make it up and neither did Browning.
Did anyone ever answer your questions about Gitmo?
One of the points that is being missed is the sheer illogical nature of claiming that sending supplies (not reinforcements) to an established fort on Federal land to a strictly defensive garrison is a casus belli.
If anything, the firing on the Star of the West and the seige of Fort Sumter were just cause for Lincoln to attack. But he refrained until after the attack on Ft. Sumter. Fort Moultrie had already been abandoned by this point as well.