It is time for me to put in my 2 cents on this matter, as the political scene continues to be quite extreme.
It is common in history to think of political coups as being accomplished by killing (assassinating) the existing government leader.
For some reason, this line of reasoning is not followed in the United States. All assassins were lone nuts or extremists, not associated with any political opposition group. This seems to me to be highly silly.
In this, I follow the analysis of Bill Still in his 2010 documentary “The Secret of OZ.” Many other researchers in this line have come to the same conclusions, and include the Kennedy assassination in the same group as the others. The attempted assassination of Andrew Jackson in 1835 is also usually included in this list, as it was overtly political. The only presidential assassination which does not fit this pattern was the William McKinley shooting, but it definitely is part of this subject.
Four Presidents killed; one political issue.
The attempt on Jackson’s life was made on 30 Jan 1835.
Lincoln was taken out on 14 April 1865.
Garfield was wounded on 2 July 1881 and died of complications about a week later.
William McKinley was shot by an anarchist on 6 Sept 1901 and died a week later.
Teddy Roosevelt was wounded by a man who claimed to be avenging the death of McKinley on 14 Oct 1912.
And Kennedy was taken down on 22 Nov 1963.
What is the issue that ties all these deaths and attempts together?
Who controls the money supply?
It can be established that public (government) control of the money supply can lead to a prosperous economy that grows stably.
Still’s film cites Roman coinage, English tally sticks, and Colonial Scrip as examples of government-issued money that fostered economic growth and general prosperity.
The Founding Fathers were aware of the usefulness of Colonial Scrip, and started the Revolution majorly on demands from England that all debts be paid in gold, which was scarce in the colonies.
During the conflict, the colonies printed “Continentals,” a paper money, to get by during the war. This was undermined by massive English counterfeiting. When time came to write the Constitution, the rampant inflation caused by the counterfeit Continentals was still on everyone’s mind, and the Constitution only allowed the federal government to mint coins, not print paper money.
From that time until today, a largely unpublicized political battle has raged over what body would be allowed to issue paper money in the U.S.
Timeline of the Money Wars
The early Congress was persuaded to create a private bank in 1782 to issue paper money. This bank, the Bank of North America, inflated the money supply, so Congress killed it in 1785.
The next privately-owned bank allowed to issue money was chartered for 20 years in 1791. Thomas Jefferson (among others) didn’t like the idea. As time went on, it become more and more clear that it was a bad idea. After Congress refused to renew the charter in 1811, the British attacked Washington D.C. in 1812.
This pressure eventually resulted in a new private central bank being chartered for 20 years in 1816. During this period, Congress came under the thumb of private banking interests, and renewed the bank’s charter in 1836. However, Andrew Jackson vetoed the renewal.
So the bankers secretly declared war on the American people. When they could not get a new private central bank, they started the Civil War, hoping to divide the new nation and thus defeat its will to be financially independent. Lincoln printed “greenbacks” during the war, and intended to continue this practice. When it was clear the war would not divide the country, Lincoln was taken out in the spring of 1865.
After this, Congress, still firmly in the pockets of the banking interests, was persuaded to reduce the money supply in the United States, causing a depression. The Coinage Act of 1873 was passed to take silver coins out of circulation. In response to this suppression, a “greenbacker” movement was born, and also a “free silver” movement. Garfield supported these causes.
He was taken out on 2 July 1881 after being in office only a few months.
European banks continued the pressure by again demanding payment in gold, as England had done prior to the revolution. This resulted in a “panic” in 1893, and massive loss of wealth by small banks and farmers.
In 1896, William Jennings Bryan ran on an anti-banker platform. The bankers defeated him with a rumor-mongering campaign. This allowed them to pass the Gold Standard Act of 1900.
But the populace was still anti-banker and supported Teddy Roosevelt. He was shot in October of 1912 but survived.
However, Woodrow Wilson was pushed into signing the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, and we still have that system today. (The Federal Reserve is a private bank that issues all paper money in the United States.)
It is believed that Kennedy had plans to change this system. Since he was taken out, no President has seriously talked about it, though it is obvious to the public that the banking sector remains largely corrupt.
Coup D’état: Accomplished
For all intents and purposes, the banking interests won in the United States in 1913. They consolidated their power with the Kennedy assassination in 1963.
There has been much written and said about who these people really are, where they come from, what they want, and to what extent their power reaches. I just call them “criminals.” That’s basically all they are. They want to get rich without working, because they can’t work, they can’t invent, they can’t dream of anything bright or beautiful. They are locked in cages of their own designing; they have no business running a nation or a bank. The sooner we learn to handle them, the better our futures will be.