The Arterburn Radio Transmission Podcast
The Arterburn Radio Transmission is a blend of cutting edge commentary, fused with guests who are the newsmakers and trailblazers of our time. Your host Tony Arterburn is a former Army paratrooper, entrepreneur, and historian. Tony brings his unique perspective to the issues facing our country, civilization, and planet.
The Arterburn Radio Transmission Podcast
#26 Paratruther - Bankers, Booth, & Official Myths of the Lincoln Assassination with James Perloff
Renowned author James Perloff returns to Paratruther to unravel the enigmatic web surrounding the assassination of President Abraham Lincoln. With insights from his latest book, "Official Myths of the Lincoln Assassination," Perloff, joined by co-host Mr. Anderson and the legendary Don Jeffries, dives deep into the complexities and misconceptions of this historical event. Sparked by meticulous archival research from Otto Eisenschiml and modern analysis by Don Thomas, Perloff shows how their findings stand strong against mainstream historical attempts at debunking.
Our conversation scrutinizes the biases of today's historians and revisits Edwin Stanton's potential involvement in orchestrating Lincoln's assassination. By comparing Lincoln’s murder to other historical enigmas like the JFK assassination, we uncover layers of conspiracy theories involving secret societies and suspicious actions post-Lincoln's death. We also discuss controversial exhumations and how historical figures from John Wilkes Booth to Dr. Samuel Mudd continue to shape narratives today.
We further explore the far-reaching implications of Lincoln’s controversial financial decisions, including his issuance of greenbacks, and how these may have angered the banking elite of his time. Perloff and Jeffries provide a nuanced discussion around Lincoln's character and legacy, questioning the integrity of established narratives. Tune in to connect the historical dots and understand how these events influence our present and future, revealing a trajectory towards global consolidation.
All right. Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to a very special episode of Paratruther. I sometimes say that it's very special, but I couldn't have imagined five, six years ago that I would be having this conversation with the panel about. Well, it's a new book and I want to introduce our main guest is James Perloff, who you've heard before on my channel, but he is the author of all the conspiracy classic the Shadows of Power, about the Council on Foreign Relations, truth is a Lonely Warrior, thirteen Pieces of the Jigsaw, the Case Against Darwin, tornado in a Junkyard I'm just doing this off memory James COVID-19 red pill. And he's got a new book out.
Speaker 1:I'll hold it up for the camera. He's got a new book out on the Lincoln assassination. It's Official Myths of the Lincoln Assassination by James Perloff, and we're joined before I want to say hi to you, james, but we're joined with the legendary Don Jeffries, who I do America Unplugged with every week and he's host of I Protest with Don Jeffries, author of Hidden History, as well as Crimes and Cover-Ups, many other books, the unreels, and he's written extensively about Lincoln. So this is going to be a great conversation. Yes, james is holding up Crimes and Cover-Ups. And, of course, my good friend, a researcher, co-host of this program, mr Anderson, is here. Thank you for being here as well, sir.
Speaker 2:Yeah, thanks for having me. This is a real privilege.
Speaker 1:Well, James, I want to start with you. We've got a lot of ground to cover in a little bit of time, but I did not expect to see this book from you. I did not expect to see James Perloff writing a book about Lincoln. So tell me about what drove this.
Speaker 3:Sure, well, early this year I was contemplating what my next blog post should be, and you know, back in the 1990s I was studying the war between the states in some detail, read many, many books and memoirs, and I read the Rise and Fall of the Confederate Government by Jefferson Davis and the writings of Abraham Lincoln. Particularly impressed by Jefferson Davis's constitutional scholarly knowledge, I wound up writing an article for Southern Partisan Magazine about the Civil War before I moved on. But there was one book that really grabbed me. It was Otto Eisen Schimmel's book. Now this is the reprint.
Speaker 3:Why Was Lincoln Murdered? Found it on a library bookshelf and he made stunning points about the official narrative that he debunked through amazing archival research, just amazing scholarly, hands-on research that I still consider himself probably the best researcher into the Lincoln assassination, and the points he made stayed with me all over all the years. But I never actually delved into the Lincoln assassination. So I said you know what? Let me go back and reread Eisen Schimel's book and write a blog post. You know about his findings. And then I found he'd written another book in 1940 that I didn't even know about and he can't really read it. So so well. But it's um, it's just available. I'm hardbound now I'll use copies.
Speaker 3:In the shadow of lincoln's death he wrote that in 1940 and then I started well, let's see what modern authors have uh written. And I hadn't run into don's uh work on the assassination, but I read a number of authors. The one author who particularly impressed me his name is Don Thomas. I'll just hold up one of his books here on the Lincoln assassination. He wrote another one on John Wilkes Booth and I said, wow, this guy's really on the right track. He really impressed me and so I got in touch with him and I said to him I noticed you never referenced Otto Eisen Schimmel. Is there something wrong with Eisen Schimmel that you know you didn't care for? He says I've never read Eisen Schimmel and yet he had done the same thing, the same archival research on microfilm that Eisen Schimmel had done, and he reached pretty much the same conclusions. Pretty much the same conclusions. And Eisen Schimel, of course, is long gone. But Don and I have had many dozens of conversations and exchanged emails and he directed me to many resources on the Lincoln assassination I didn't know about.
Speaker 3:Now much of the 19th century information from the government archives was originally on microfilm and handwritten documents. It would take forever to get through that. Eisen Schimel did that original legwork, but Don pointed out to me that most of that is now transcribed and available in digital format. This is true for all the trials and congressional hearings that were in connection with the Lincoln assassination and there were several and also all the books and magazine memoirs that Eisen Schimmel discovered are now you can find them on archiveorg in digital format and you can word search them. And this does accelerate by about 10 times at least the research that goes into a book on the Lincoln assassination.
Speaker 3:So I started writing the blog post, but it got longer and longer. I said you know what people don't like to read long blog posts. I don't myself. And I said you know this is getting so long it's just going to collect dust on the internet. If I make it a blog post, it's got to be a book. So I turned it into a book and that's basically the story that came back.
Speaker 3:As I continued to write I really became sort of animated about finishing this book, because not only did they find out so much information that corroborated Eisen Schimmel's findings, but I also found that the modern mainstream historians have attempted to ridicule and quote-unquote debunk Eisen Schimmel and they did a really bad job of it. But a lot of people take it for granted that they've done that and that kind of ticked me off. So I have a chapter in there just about evidence, what constitutes evidence, and I go through some of the so-called debunkings of Eisen Schimo. And I wanted to bring this conversation forward because we've heard a lot about the Kennedy assassination in recent years but not that much about the Lincoln assassination, even though there's many books about it and there certainly are groups that are devotees, you know Lincoln's assassination buffs that talk about it but generally speaking, on alternative media I don't see it discussed much and I just felt these older conclusions, which were once and I can get into this, this is once pretty common talking points for people, the American people, about the truth about Lincoln's assassination.
Speaker 3:There was even I'll stop talking in a minute but there was even an NBC special on Lincoln's birthday in 1971. It's called the Killed President Lincoln. It repeated so many of the points we'll be talking about tonight, so many points Eisenstein will make. It was an Emmy nominated documentary seen by millions of people because of only three networks back then and no smartphones or laptops to distract people. So millions of people saw that. So this was pretty common conversation what happened to Lincoln. But it's been buried over the last 50 years. So I felt it was really important to bring this conversation into the realm of knowledge of this generation. Not to say I'm the only one doing that. Don Thomas and, of course, don Jeffries and, you know, a handful of other authors have continued to explore the truth about the Lincoln assassination.
Speaker 2:Yeah, james, I read the book. I really enjoyed it. It's very informative and digestible, and I remembered that chapter because they seem to go after Eisen Schimmel's like credentials they refer to him as a chemist turned avocational historian.
Speaker 2:And then you pointed out like the guy making all these points was a biology, had a bachelor in biology and a master's and was an adjunct professor. So I don't even know what points they were making. But my question is why do people like Steers and Hanchant, some of these run of the mill historians, why do they keep on stifling, like our understanding of what happened? Because a lot of the circumstantial evidence you brought about in this book that I was unaware of before for instance, the diary is a big one that was withheld.
Speaker 3:That's huge. Yeah, the suppression of John Wilkes Booth diary was huge and the elimination of pages for it and the FBI's forensic laboratory exam of it, which confirmed all of that. I think what's going on with the modern mainstream historians? We see this anti-white movement right now. We see an attack on the South.
Speaker 3:In Richmond every Confederate statue has now been removed. The last one was of General AP Hill. It's now in the Museum of Black History. It doesn't belong there. He was not a slave owner. If they put a black leader's statue in the Museum of the Confederate History, that would be considered cultural appropriation. If they did that at the original trial in 1865, because there was Confederate plot which is debunked by so much information that Eisen Schimmel found is what they're part. They're part of this whole blame the South, ridicule the South, attack the Confederacy, white privilege, et cetera. It all ties into that. And another thing I'll just say is the mainstream historians it's they honor their own. Whether we're talking about Pearl Harbor, the Korean War, the Sink of the Lusitania Spanish-American War, they still defend their ancient mainstream narratives for all these events, and that is true for the Civil War and the Lincoln assassination as well.
Speaker 1:Don.
Speaker 4:I'm going to let you come in, don, I'm gonna let you come in. Yeah, well, certainly I. I agree with, uh, what james is saying and have great respect for him. And uh, I came at this, uh, you know, quite a while, I mean, in terms of studying the lincoln assassination. I've been studying for a very long time, uh, you know, kind of it's a natural outgrowth of my work with the jfk assassination. You know, I started looking at, you know, all of these assassinations and and for a long time, know, I started looking at you know, all of these assassinations and for a long time I worshipped Lincoln, like you know everybody else in America does. And then I found a book called the South is Right that I found in the library and I started looking completely differently at him and I'm amazed.
Speaker 4:You found Eisen Schimmel's book in the library, but I think I bought it from I had to pay a lot for it. Probably it's probably been 35, 40 years ago. I think I got it from a, you know, a used, a rare used book dealer, you know, but I think, I think it might've been the I don't know if it was the first edition or not, but it seems a hard back and then I got his other book as well. So I'm very impressed with his work too and he took it much farther than than I had and I I watched the lincoln conspiracy uh, uh documentary, kind of a pop documentary. They had uh on uh, I think it was fox way back in the, but they actually on those sun pictures and they had it in the movies, actually saw the theaters and they had an accompanying book with it and uh, you know, they brought up a lot of the same points and uh, I we mentioned there's a guy named nate orlowek. I don't know if you've heard of him or not.
Speaker 4:He's uh I think he's mentioned your book, right yeah, yeah, he said I had him on my show beforehand. He's been researching this since he was a kid. So there's, there aren't lots of people out there and you don't quite have as much um gravy, I guess, as you do in terms of the JFK assassination, but there's pretty much there. There's a body count. I mentioned it in my book. It's not quite as extensive as certainly JFK's is, but when you, when you look into it again, you know that something was different. I basically agree with James, having read his book. I think this was, you know, this was an inside job, definitely. It was definitely not the Confederacy and I think the mastermind is pretty obvious.
Speaker 4:You know you can't prove it for certain, but Edwin Stanton was the secretary of war and he, he was a unique character, to say the least, and a lot of people thought he was psychotic. He supposedly kept his daughter's body in his house for a year or something after she died and you know, not exactly a normal thing to do. And he the evidence that I remember reading when it back, when I liked Lincoln, that Stanton would almost bully Lincoln. You know it seemed like he, lincoln, kind of capitulated to him all the time. I don't really know why, but Stanton kind of ran things, especially in terms of the war effort. Although the Lincoln administration was basically a war effort, there wasn't a whole lot to it beyond that. So Stanton would be the logical person to run it and he took control of whatever investigation there was right away. And he's the one that put out the flyer, a poster of Wilkes's booth famous brother Edwin Booth, instead of him, and they looked kind of alike, but they weren't the same person. So why would you do that? And, as you point out in your book, all the roads out of DC were immediately shut off or guarded, except for the most logical one, going south. And so there's so many things that happened the telecommunications, where the telegraph was down for a while, and of course the most obvious one is as much as we had the JFK assassination. You can even go now to see what happened in the Trump assassination attempt, when the Secret Service appears to have stood down completely. But they didn't have Secret Service in Lincoln's day.
Speaker 4:But he had a after and you rightly point out, he kept trying to get people to attend the theater with him and it was a guy named Major Thomas Eckert who was a very strong guy that could break pokers over his arm. Lincoln liked the idea of having him as his personal bodyguard and come with him, and he Stanton said, no, I have work for him to do. And then Eckhart Lincoln got him aside and he turned down the president himself. So I mean, this is a major in the army just telling the president no, I can't go with you. This is a victory celebration. They had won the war. This is the first time they're going to be seen in public, grant, who's the victorious commander? He begs off as well and comes up with a ridiculous excuse with his family that, as James points out in the book, was not necessary. He could have gone the next day. So all this stuff is in. I don't think you mentioned it.
Speaker 4:I believe he asked Speaker of the House Skylar Colfax to come too, and he turned it down as well. I mean, nobody, nobody wanted to be there, apparently. So which is a, needless to say, strange and he, his only protection, was a guy named John F Parker who, oddly enough, mary Todd Lincoln had hired or had approved for the position, and Parker had a very checkered career. He'd getting in trouble, constantly sleeping on the job, was basically a derelict, in many ways Not a great person to pick as your sole protection. And of course, we know what happened. You know he abandoned his post. They used to have two versions. It seems they settled on the version that he went next door to the pub and drank, but I had heard before in the past that he went downstairs to get a better view of the play. But regardless, he abandoned the post there and so he left Lincoln wide open. So from there, there's so many other things I don't know what you guys might want to know that we can comment on. But the only point of disagreement that James and I have is that I tend to believe that the man killed in Garrett's farm was not barn, was not John Wilkes Booth. But there's one way to clear that up I mean I don't know for sure that and that is to exhume the body that's buried in Greenmount Cemetery, baltimore.
Speaker 4:While I was writing Crimes and Cover-Ups Cover-Ups, one of the people I was in contact with, although she since deleted me I think she's got Trump derangement syndrome, I'm guessing, or something that COVID or something but she deleted me from Facebook. She was nice for a while. I had several conversations with her, but Booth had no natural children that he knew of. I mean, he was an actor and a ladies' man, so he might have had some illegitimate children, but none that we know of. And so this woman is his great, great-great-great-great-whatever grandniece, and she speaks for the family, and they've been trying for a very long time. They have the DNA they can match to get the body exhumed, and normally in these situations it's the family that decides. If the family wants to do it, the government's not going to stand in the way, except, apparently, in this case, where it could solve a historical mystery. The Park Service has blocked it.
Speaker 2:So again, again, it's very simple. So it's just like disagreements or between people. Yeah, yeah, I'm curious, um, because that was covered in your book as well, james about they confirmed the indian ink tattoo on his hand and a couple gold fillings. And then are you referring what? Why are you unsure that it was him? Because they also accounted for the incision on his neck and his physician originally said it looked nothing like Booth.
Speaker 4:Right, and that's one of the reasons. I believe there was a doorman at Ford's Theater years later that spoke out, and then you had the fact they had Timothy O'Sullivan, I think, a very renowned photographer uh, Timothy guard, or that was Timothy O'Sullivan, I think, but a very renowned photographer. He came on board the Montauk where the body was to uh photograph it and we've never, seen that photograph, Right and and so you know it's.
Speaker 4:And I, I mean I I don't say for sure that, I that I just think there's there questions and there's an easy way. And I, to me, my skepticism, is stoked by the fact that the National Park Service is blocking the exhumation. Because I mean this, but I think you know James touched on earlier, and I talk about this all the time because there's also an older exhumation that could be done the Meriwether Lewis. I also talked to a descendant of Meriwether Lewis when I was writing the book and they've been trying to get his body exhumed for decades and they can't do it.
Speaker 4:Same thing and this makes no sense because, again, families can have that done fairly easily if it's their wishes, but in this case somebody is blocking it. So if they want to stop the conspiracy theories, if they want to stop the speculation, in this case we could at least solve one aspect of it, because that if it was john wilkes booth, then we know finest baits and all these people were wrong and that the body that was, you know, supposed to the mummy of john wilkes booth, all that toured the country and all that we know. That's all bs, uh, but let's resolve it. I I have no dog in this hunt, it doesn't matter to me either way, but it seems to me that they could be resolved, and the fact it's not, I think, just needlessly invites more skepticism.
Speaker 1:Well, you know, an interesting side note. I remember covering in 2019 and I just this just popped in my head, but there there's a commentator that would come on to uh, left wing. Well, I guess most all media is left wing, but it would show up like phil mudd. Remember phil mudd? And phil mudd's a cia analyst and uh, what is very was very anti-trump and you know, anti-right wing, anti, uh, whatever you want. You know a traditionalist and the connection was made between Phil Mudd and his ancestor, which was Dr Mudd, who treated John Wilkes Booth, and this ties to intelligence and the establishment. I don't know if you guys have any comments on that.
Speaker 3:Well, first I was going to say that, ask Don if he wants us to grab a couple of shovels and travel down to Baltimore.
Speaker 4:It might be a way to sell more books. We'd be in the news yeah right, Crazed authors.
Speaker 3:Yeah, sure, you know people pretend kidnapping so they can get in the news. Yeah, sure, but I didn't quite get the connection. I know that Samuel Mudd, of course he was the doctor, of course that when Booth broke his leg jumping to the stage he couldn't stand a penny longer as he rode south. So he and his writing companion, david Harold, rode off course to the home of Dr Samuel Mudd, who he knew slightly in Southern Maryland, and Dr Mudd reduced the fracture after taking off Booth's boot and made a homemade cast and had a neighbor make some homemade crutches and Booth rusted up there for a little while. But people pointed out if Booth hadn't broken his leg they wouldn't have even heard of Dr Samuel Mudd. He wound up getting a life in prison sentence of hard labor as a conspirator to murder the president, although that was fortunately commuted by President Andrew Johnson before he left office. But I didn't quite get the connection between the CIA mud and Dr Mud. Do you think there's a connection there of some kind?
Speaker 1:Supposedly his ancestor. From what I researched and this is just off of memory, and from 2019, doing research for my radio show and it just it kind of stuck with me for a while and just something about the connections to the CIA and the establishment. I guess, obviously the CIA was started in 1947. I'm just saying, like the establishment order of things, if you want to connect those two and that's where you get the term my name is Mudd.
Speaker 4:Yes, exactly. Well, you know, you know, tony. I don't, I don't know, I didn't know that guy, but I do know that Dr Mudd is very much like John Tyler. John Tyler died in 1850 or something and he has a grandson that's still alive.
Speaker 4:He's almost 100 years old because he got married way way in life, had a lot of kids and they had kids late in life or whatever. Same thing with Mudd. Mudd had the same thing, I don't know, but his granddaughter, I think, was alive not that long ago. I don't know how this Mudd had the same thing, so I don't know, but his granddaughter, I think, was alive not that long ago. So I don't know how this Mudd is related to him. I'm fascinated by this stuff because it shows us how closely we connected to people that died so long ago. I mean, john Tyler was, you know I have in the upcoming American Memory Hall. I have about his very under-publicized battle against the National Bank and you know there was a great deal. You know protests from the banks. His entire administration resigned except for Daniel Webster.
Speaker 1:So these are the kind of things that I write about that are hidden in history. I just remember, like what sticks out in my mind about John Wilkes Booth is supposedly like at the end when he meets his fate and he just holds his hands up in front of his face and says useless, and that's what I that's the things I remember of the.
Speaker 1:Whatever the narrative, you know, whether it's establishment or not Um, there was. I mean, this is the thing about the, the Lincoln assassination, and it gets whitewashed and kind of uh, mythologized in so many ways, almost like you know the phrase now he belongs to the ages.
Speaker 4:He belongs to the angels, yeah.
Speaker 1:And was that Stanton?
Speaker 4:Stanton.
Speaker 1:Yeah, it was Stanton and they've correct the. Basically it was. You know, he probably said he. Now he belongs to the angels and they've reset that to. He belongs to the ages. Like again, it's mythologized and it it neutralizes and a lot of the real world. There was a conspiracy. Like the people don't like that phrase, they don't like the, they don't like anything associated with a conspiracy, but it was a conspiracy. Whether in how far it goes up the chain is a whole other matter. But there was a conspiracy not to only take out and I want you to, james, I'm going to throw it to you because it wasn't just about taking out Lincoln. I mean, they went after a sewer, they supposedly went after Andrew Johnson. Speak a little bit about the, the stuff in the periphery, you know, to the assassination of Lincoln.
Speaker 3:Well, there are dozens of anomalies in this story. One of them is a Booth selection of targets. Now, what's important to know is that after the war there was a horrible period of reconstruction for the South. In fact, I learned something from Don's book. I didn't know that Robert E Lee said he never would have surrendered to Appomattox but would have fought to the death with all those men if they knew how the South was to be subjugated.
Speaker 3:After the war, billions of bales of cotton were confiscated, carpet beggars went South. The South was totally exploited. Ridiculous taxation was put on homes. The people lost their homes to the carpet beggars, you might remember, and Scarlett O'Hara trying to save terror from taxes and gone with the wind. And that was a very real situation. And people couldn't vote for their own governors. For 12 years under military occupation, 200,000 troops and their governors were military governors appointed by the War Department. They couldn't vote.
Speaker 3:But Lincoln wanted a gentle reconciliation with the South and his second inaugural address in 1864, he said malice towards none, charity towards all and he wanted the South Southern states restored to Congress. And the radical Republicans, you have to remember, in those days it was the radical Republicans who were left wing and the Democrats were conservative, a flip from the modern perception of these two parties, of these two parties. But Lincoln wanted to bring the Democrats from the South back into Congress, the Southern states and the Radical Republicans, who meant that would be out of power and because the Northern Democrats, combined with the Southern Democrats, would outvote them. And this also meant bad news for the deep state, who the radical Republicans were the main chief representatives of. And so Lincoln was standing in the way of that plan. He'd seen enough bloodshed, enough people mourning widows. He did not want the South to be exploited and punished. It was already had its infrastructure destroyed by the war, as you well know Sherman's March to the Sea and many more examples.
Speaker 3:Now the odd thing is that Booth not only goes after Lincoln, he goes after the one other man, one of the prominent men in the administration, who was in favor of a gentle reconciliation with the South, and that is Seward, secretary of State. Seward was the only other man who an actual assassination attempt was carried out. Simultaneous to Lincoln's assassination, a Booth accomplice named Lewis Powell entered Seward's home. Seward was bedridden from a recent carriage accident. Powell stabbed him several times. He was not expected by his doctors to live, but he did. But it's interesting that the only people attacked were the only people who stood in the way of a plan of reconciling with the South instead of punishing it as a conquered land.
Speaker 3:Now there were other alleged attempted assassinations attempt on Vice President Johnson, grant Stanton, et cetera, the rest of the cabinet but none of them came off and my contention is that it happened exactly the way they wanted it to happen and I do have a chapter that's called Alleged Other Botched Assassinations. I do believe that the assassination took place with the ones that Stanton wanted to happen.
Speaker 1:Mr Anderson, I want to throw it to you. I know that you've got some notes on this as well and related to botched assassination attempts.
Speaker 2:Oh well, we recently had a podcast on JD Vance and the botched assassination attempt of Trump, and one of the first things out of the gate that captured my attention with this book was what Lincoln established the Secret Service on the day he was assassinated.
Speaker 2:But his personal bodyguard, who a lot of these accounts come from for instance him visiting Stanton at the War Department his last name was Crook and I just thought, wow, that's so. The synchronicities are just weird. I don't know why, because the guy who apparently took the shot at Trump is supposedly his last name's, crooks. But what I was interested in, james, was at the end of the book. You started talking about these other connections, potentially with the Knights of the Golden Circle and some of these other actors from New York who apparently Booth had a diamond stick pinned from and then also a swagger stick that he liked to pose with in photographs. Could you comment more on the connection and how maybe those elements of the secret society factored into this assassination attempt, which was originally just an abduction plot, even according to Booth's diary, until the day of Right?
Speaker 3:And that is commonly acknowledged, even in the mainstream media that Booth's original plan was to, in a March of 1865, the month before the assassination, booth was planning to abduct President Lincoln in his carriage. He had several accomplices in this. The idea was to carry him south and hold him as a hostage in exchange for Confederate POWs and sort of a last-ditch effort to save the south. Now, what um uh needs to be known is that, uh, one of the reasons several of his accomplices dropped out of that plot, although they would later be brought to trial and charged with plot to kill the president, uh, they dropped out because they realized that the government knew all about it and they knew through snitches, federal, you know. Just like the feds infiltrated the j6 so-called insurrection, they infiltrated boo's circle, especially because some of his southern companions had left him, and these included Northerners. And this was revealed in a lost confession of George Atzerodt, the man who was accused and hung for allegedly planning to kill Vice President Johnson. He gave a confession in which he named other accomplices which you don't read about in history books, and that confession was lost. The War Department said they couldn't find it and then in 18, sorry, 1977, it turned up in the files of his attorney, we Doster, by a family member and went on auction and it's the genuine document. But he did name New York and Northern accomplices that Booth had, and that is something that Stanton wanted to suppress. Stanton wanted to blame the Confederacy, this assassination which would make the reconstruction and exploitation of the South doubly painful. Any mention of Booth's association with Northerners was excluded and it does require a certain amount of speculation, which I do apologize in the book to my readers for, because we can't be sure. One thing we do know is that when Booth was writing South, when he was writing a pen to David Herold, he said you know, I co-signed a letter on the day of the assassination with five other men, and mainstream historians will tell you oh, the five other men, there were actually only three. There was David Herold, lewis Payne who tried to kill Seward, and George Datserat. Well, that's three. And why would Booth be telling David Herold that Herold signed the confessions? Herold would already know that. No, these are other men who Booth is acting upon. And one thing about secret societies, the Knights of the Golden Circle, an organization sympathetic to the South which one of Booth's kidnapping accomplices, michael Lachlan, definitely said he belonged to. We don't know for sure if Booth did or not, of Booth did or not, but one thing about secret society is when you take an oath, take an oath of absolute obedience.
Speaker 3:Booth changed his plans on the day of the assassination very fast. You know, on the morning of the assassination he wrote a letter to his mother, which I hope we can find quickly. Okay, booth, on the morning of the assassination, writes to his mother, who he's very close to. He says, quote dearest mother, I know you expect a letter from me. I'm sure you'll hardly forgive me, but indeed I have nothing to write about. Everything is dull. That is a bento last night. He's referring to a parade that took place in Washington DC.
Speaker 2:The illumination, yeah, the illumination, which is weird, yeah.
Speaker 3:He says everything was bright and splendid. More so my. So goes the world might mix, right. I only drop you these few lines so you know that I'm well. I've not heard from you. Excuse brevity in the haste had one from rose. That's his sister. With best love to all, I'm your affectionate john.
Speaker 3:That's the day of assassination. He doesn't know yet. He's going to assassinate, uh, president lincoln that morning. But something changes and I believe it's this meeting with these five men who've been kept hidden from us. And he's received orders as well as fantastic insight. He has fantastic information.
Speaker 3:You know one of the examples of inside information. How come he knows he only needs a one-shot Derringer? When he goes into the presidential box, he brings nothing but a knife and a single-shot Derringer. How does he know he's only going to need one bullet to get rid of the president? Has he been tipped off that the bodyguard is going to desert his post in advance and his companion, his co-accomplice Lewis Powell, attempted to kill Secretary?
Speaker 3:Seward knew all kinds of things. He knew the name of he came as a pharmacy delivery boy. He said I've got medicine, dr Verity. How does he know that Seward's physician is named Dr Verity? How did he know exactly where the staircase was? How did he know exactly where Seward's bedroom was on the third floor? He's been given inside information.
Speaker 3:It appears that Booth was given inside information by somebody on the day of the assassination, greatly facilitating the murder, and in exchange for this he was to do certain things as well. And when he went down south with Harold he said these other five men are going to meet me. And when he read the newspaper he found that not only did his letter, which is supposed to be delivered to the newspaper called the Intelligencer, was never delivered, but these other five men did meet him down south. These other five men did not carry out the assassinations that he thought was going to take place. And that's apparently what he means, and what's left of the diary, when he says the failure of the mission was due to others who did not strike.
Speaker 2:So well James you also mentioned in your book. He wrote in his diary that he had half a mind to go back to DC because he thought he could set his name right.
Speaker 3:So, which is weird, because yeah, exactly, I didn't mean to cut you off.
Speaker 2:Oh, I'm sorry.
Speaker 3:But he did say that and I always thought there was kind of a strange comment, as many people do, because if he goes back to Washington he's going to be lynched, unless he has some really strong reason to believe he has a way of claiming his name, which I presume would be to give those five names to the public. I imagine that's what's going through his head at that time. But definitely there were northern accomplices that, even mentioned by Atzer, definitely had a plan to kill Lincoln and he's called them serenaders they're going to serenade the president and these correspond to the minstrels who gave Lincoln these inscribed diamond stick pin and gold-plated swagger stick. So we don't know that it's these men, but these seem to be New York. These are definitely from New york. Um, they're definitely close to booth and seem the most likely people, but, uh, that definitely was more going on that hey. Um, then the mainstream historians like to acknowledge what's the connection?
Speaker 1:uh, and I'll throw this to to you, james, and then uh, and then to don uh the connection. You know, you, I remember something that Jim Mars said, and it always stuck with me, about Lincoln really infuriating the banking establishment by printing the greenback. It's one of the things he. There's only two presidents this is one of the things that Jim Mars brought up. There's only two presidents in history that ever printed notes directly from the Treasury without the central bank, and that was one was Abraham Lincoln and one was John F Kennedy, and they were both shot in the head in public. In your research did you find anything that would touch on this? And maybe this would have some sort of basis in the conspiracy by the secret societies to have some sort of basis in the conspiracy by the secret societies to have motivation to take out Lincoln?
Speaker 3:Well, it could set up a. I think the main motivation was to pave the way for Reconstruction, but certainly and Don has a great quote in his book rather vindictive remark from my favorite British central banker about Lincoln's use of the greenbacks. Now, the thing about the greenbacks was it. It was constitutional in the sense that it was created by the government, and the great thing about it was it didn't carry any debt with it, whereas you know the modern Fed, of course they create money from nothing, but they exchange it for bonds. So each time they create money it creates debt, but Lincoln's greenbacks did not come with any debt bond. So each time they create money it creates debt, but Lincoln's greenbacks did not come with any debt.
Speaker 3:It's said that August Belmont, who was the chief representative of the Rothschilds in America, offered Lincoln loans to finance the war at high interest and Lincoln refused. On the other hand, some people have criticized the use of the greenbacks because it did create money for nothing, did cause inflation, but also, very importantly, gave the war profiteers ready cash that didn't have to be raised from taxes. So some people criticize it from that respect. I wouldn't be surprised that it had something to do with it, but I do believe that the central purpose of getting rid of Lincoln and trying to get rid of Seward was to open the door for the brutal period of reconstruction to follow it. But Don I'm sure we'll have his own take on this.
Speaker 4:Yeah, I mean I think that the quote you're referring to, it actually was a guy was quoted in a British newspaper and I've tried, and for my new book, american Memorable, because I I'm uncomfortable with the source that is used in all the conspiracy books. That quote is in every book about Lincoln pretty much, where the people are saying that we don't know the real story. And it's a great quote. But I have not been able to really type that. Is this a real quote? Because I even tried to contact the newspaper and I got nowhere with it. So certainly I can see them saying that it makes sense. But what amazes me is having the opinion I have of Lincoln and knowing Lincoln's history.
Speaker 4:Lincoln was considered a tool of the bankers. I mean, he was a corporate lawyer. He represented the railroads. He represented the slave owners in terms of runaway slaves, not the slave, not the runaway slave. He represented the slave owners in terms of runaway slaves, not the slave, not the runaway slave. He represented the slave owners. So Lincoln was a corporate guy.
Speaker 4:This was an unlikely thing for him to do. Unless James mentioned that he might have been. That's. The ostensible reason is that he was just ticked off at the interest rates they were charging. They were charging him too much money. He got tired and said, well, I can do this and so, who knows, he was a brilliant guy. So maybe he decided to do it and he didn't realize how dangerous it was. I don't know, but certainly that could be a plausible reason, along with the radical Republicans not wanting to go easy on the South which obviously they didn't for his assassination. But I can't tell you, like I said, it would be like Joe Biden almost suddenly doing something populist-oriented. His entire career suggests otherwise. So in that case I don't know why Lincoln did that. He was killed not long after that, and so a lot of us have thought that that was one potential reason why that was a motivation for them to take him out, along with, again, the radical Republicans, who certainly wanted to have a completely different view.
Speaker 4:And, as James said, I did write a lot about Reconstruction. It has not been written about that way. People have not been told the truth about it, and so much of our world today comes from the horrors of Reconstruction. You know we would there's we had. Basically, the KKK was born out of the Reconstruction, the Jim Crow laws, separate legal, all that. You know a hundred years of that stuff and it was because of the way the South was treated, they weren't welcome to back and as Lincoln apparently was going to do, I don't know. But so all we can do is speculate at this point. And just look at, you know, we know that there are lots of these things that happen.
Speaker 4:I mentioned the newspaper editor and I've forgotten his name, but I mentioned that received a message in the middle of the play and kind of, you know, fudged about it. I don't know what that meant, but it was a little odd. And uh, certainly you have the calling card that johns wilkins booth left for andrew johnson and so many people, including mary todd lincoln. You know mary todd lincoln, much like the mother of lee harvey oswald, was one of the first conspiracy theorists in the assassination. You know she basically thought Johnson was behind it. Now I don't agree with her because the record shows that Johnson actually went against Stanton and all that afterwards and that was they tried to impeach him but and I think James suggests that I never thought of that before but that could have been a plausible way to try to implicate him when Booth left the calling card there, because it's an odd thing for him to do the day that his boss gets assassinated, and he's going to succeed.
Speaker 4:This calling card shows up from the assassin, say at least so it either. It either indicates that booth somehow knew johnson or, as james suggests, probably more likely maybe, that this was an attempt to try to uh frame him. But it but then that nobody tried to implicate him in anything stanton who didn't like him, uh, johnson didn't try to implicate him in the assassination. So who knows? But it's just one of those other little tidbits that's out there. Why is it what you know? Why was John Parker? Why was he reprimanded afterwards? And I got to tell you, james, the picture, the photograph you have of the book. I don't know where you found it, but I think I have written that there were no known photographs of him. So kudos to you for finding him.
Speaker 4:Well, it was Don Thomas, my friend Don Thomas, who, in his research found that in the Library of Congress picture of John Parker. Yeah, because he appears to basically have ultimately vanished as much as Boston Corbett, the guy who shot the man, whoever it was, whether it was Booth or not, this guy was a religious fanatic, he castrated himself, he was, you know, he really he was a piece of work and he, after the assassination, so many things happened to the people. We could talk a little bit about what happened to the, the people who was, who were in the box with Lincoln, and what happened to them. Because, again, these strange deaths that we see in the JFK assassination, they were, they were happening then and Corbett went crazy and opened fire on the legislature and then at some point he just vanished. Nobody knows what happened to him.
Speaker 3:After going to an insane asylum. Yeah, one of the things that brings it back to Stanton so many times is the way that some people were brutally punished to have nothing to do with the assassination, rudely punished who had nothing to do with the assassination, while other people were responsible. John F Parker, who deserted his post as Lincoln's bodyguard, got no punishment whatsoever. Stanton was in charge of the whole investigation, everything that happened. Andrew Johnson had just gotten to Washington in March. He was Lincoln's new vice president. He didn't even have a home in Washington yet. He didn't have the connections in Washington. He'd been spent the last three years in Tennessee. He had the connections to organize some kind of grand conspiracy, uh, as Stanton did. But Stanton didn't punish the bodyguard. The bodyguard and you made a point, by the way, that I made independently, but I find you drew the same conclusion why was it that Park was not dismissed from the bodyguard detail, or even from the Washington police after deserving his post to land in the present, be murdered, but in 1868, he was dismissed for falling asleep on duty? Now I do the same conclusion you did, even though I hadn't read your book yet, which is that Stanton had just fallen out of power. Now they could get rid of the guy. They'd have to contend with him why, who? But someone with the power of Edwin Stanton could have prevented the bodyguard from being punished. Another person wasn't punished was a guy at the bridge. John Wilkes Booth had to get across the Navy Yard Bridge out of Washington because lynch mobs were forming, and he'd done this in front of fifteen people. Everybody, it's on everybody's lips. John Wilkes Booth has killed the president. If he didn't get across that bridge he's a dead man. Somehow he got across that bridge and I can't believe he went down there believing he'd sweet talk his way past the guards, because it was a nine o'clock curfew in Washington DC had been in effect for almost two and a half years. I have the quote in my book, the exact order but you were not supposed to let anybody cross a bridge after nine o'clock. That was a standing order. But the guard let Booth go and after Booth said a couple of things and then he let David Harold Booth's writing companion, who Booth needed because Harold knew the roads of Southern Maryland very well, he let him go too. Now that's a violation of military orders. Yet Stanton doesn't punish the guy. He lets the president's assassins escape Washington DC, no punishment. And the same thing with Boston Corbett. You were just talking about Don.
Speaker 3:The detachment he went with is supposed to bring back Booth alive for trial, but against orders he shoots Booth or whoever was in the barn, mortally, wounded him. He's supposed to be court-martialed, but I don't know if I have the exact quote here from Stanton. Oh, here it is. When Corbett comes back to Washington, stanton says the rebel, meaning John Wilkes Booth is dead. The patriot lives. He saved us.
Speaker 3:Continued excitement to lay an expense. The patriot is released. He just lets Corbett go. No court-martial, which, by the way, means there'll never be an investigation of what really happened at the Garrett farm, what really happened at that barn. If there had been a court-martial, there would have been a prosecution, a defense, witnesses would have been called and they would have had to produce the gun that was allegedly fired. And by the way, I've I've mentioned this in other podcasts I've always thought it strange that a detachment of 26 enlisted men and three officers after herald had already surrendered. They've got booth out, numbered almost 30 to 1, but they're afraid to rush into that barn and get this guy who's got a broken leg yeah and so they have to set the barn on fire, which, by the way, lit at nighttime.
Speaker 3:This lights up the interior of the barn and makes booth a perfect target, or whoever. It is All right, he's cuddling on a crutch, he's moving slowly, he's a perfect target for a gunshot.
Speaker 2:And you mentioned in the book too. He was shot with a pistol and the person who supposedly shot him was carrying a carbine, which is strange. But also could you comment, because I didn't appreciate this fact before reading the book? But all this was done by a military commission and the Supreme Court later ruled in 1866 that it was unconstitutional to do it. But they just needed a six out of nine majority to sentence someone to death by hanging them very cruelly. But one of those people is Mary Surratt. Sorry if I butchered your last name.
Speaker 2:Could you comment on her, because that was one of the reasons Johnson was so mad at Stanton Come to find that there was a letter supposedly addressed to him that he never received. Correct.
Speaker 3:Yeah, well, yeah, you're talking about the conspiracy trial of the eight alleged Booth accomplices. These people were kept in prison with handcuffs, shackles on their legs, the chains between the legs only eight inches long, they could barely shuffle their feet and all except for Mary Surratt had to wear hoods over the head. They couldn't see, could barely hear. There's just one small hole for eating, eating and breathing, and the hoods didn't even come off at mealtime. This was cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth Amendment, the Bill of Rights, and it kept that way for weeks until the trial began. They didn't get defense counsel. Until it began, they didn't get their constitutional right to a trial by jury. They were treated as if it was a court martial. Stanton justified it by saying this was obviously a plot by Jefferson Davis and the Confederacy, which was just something he made up. He had no proof of that, but he used this to take away the constitutional rights of the defendants, four of whom were hung, including Mary Surratt, the first woman officially executed by the United States. The other four were sent to hard labor in prison. The four were sent. This is so crazy. They're sent as far away as possible. They were sent to fort jefferson on dry to tugas. Now this is a set of islands. It's west of key west and I didn't even know there were islands west of key west until they looked at the lincoln assassination.
Speaker 3:And stanton wasn't even satisfied with that. He made up this story about how there was some people can break into this fortress which, by the way, had hundreds of cannons and hundreds of armed sentries, and he said that to prevent them from being rescued by Southerners you have to take measures. So even at Dry Tortugas, the most remote prison imaginable, they're put in solitary confinement in a dungeon, shackled. They were put in solitary confinement in a dungeon, shackled. So every measure was taken to silence these people either being by hung or being sent to dry tortugas. It was. It was just insanity. Mary Surratt does a very good book I recommend in. My book is by Elizabeth Trindle. It's got a thousand end notes to it and she goes through Surratt's whole life and she demonstrates. The two key witnesses against her at the trial were both compelled by torture and I think Don goes into the book. One was hung by his thumbs until yes.
Speaker 3:John Lloyd until he agreed to testify. The other was a Lewis Weichmann or Weichmann, yes, and they say even put. They say even put a rope around his neck and said this is what's going to happen to you if you don't testify the way we tell you. And it was later admitted by him to others that he'd been compelled to testify against Murray Surratt. So an innocent woman went to the gallows and she was only given 24 hours to live after sentence was pronounced. This is very unusual for prisoners to be told you're sentenced to death and you die tomorrow. They had not been allowed to see spiritual counselors or priests the whole time they were jailed until this time. Just very cruel, very unusual, very bizarre treatment of these people, some of whom were proven eventually.
Speaker 3:Actually, if John Wilkes Booth's diary had been presented which it was not at the trial, it would have cleared some of these people because some of them could not even possibly have known about the assassination. Because John Wilkes Booth and what's left of his diary and the FBI forensic lab confirmed that 86 pages are missing, but what's left? He confirmed that there was no plot to assassinate Lincoln until the day of the assassination. That means that people down South like Samuel Arnold Dr Mudd, they couldn't possibly have known of a plot to kill Lincoln on the day of the assassination.
Speaker 3:So if this has been introduced as evidence which it wasn't, it was kept hidden from the public for two years is only because Stanton had a break with the head of the Secret Service, lafayette Baker. The baker went rogue, wrote his own book called the History of the Secret Service, revealed the existence of the diary. When Congress subpoenaed the diary, many pages were missing, and it wasn't John Wilkes Booth who took out those pages, it was Stanton and the War Department who had things concealed, just as they kept the diary concealed for two full years. Yeah, it was a tremendous amount of injustice.
Speaker 2:Yeah, James, wasn't there an excuse? He ripped out a couple pages to send notes to people or letters.
Speaker 3:While he was on the run, john Wilkes, booth was given some food by a Dr Richard Stewart and Booth was upset because Stewart wouldn't let him stay there. And so Booth did rip out a blank page and he said he wrote a sarcastic note to Dr Stewart saying here's $3.50 to pay you for the food you gave us. Then Booth decided it was too much so he either ripped up the note or crumpled it. He received a second note with $2.50. And when he was questioned Stewart produced that note. It was a blank page from Booth's diary.
Speaker 3:But what the FBI's forensic lab found in their forensic lab found in the 1977 investigation which, by the way, was at the request of the National Park Service they found that the 27 pages immediately 27 sheets or 54 pages immediately preceding the assassination were torn out. And these were not blank pages, but you still see the edges of the pages which had fragments of booth's handwriting on them. So these were not blank pages, because booth couldn't get a blank page to write a note to someone. Somebody else tore out these pages and it also included the financial transaction pages in this book which would show who booth was getting money from and who was giving money to.
Speaker 3:Um, this is obviously a cover-up, um, and the full truth was not known until 1977. So yeah, tremendous obstruction of justice. And I don't see how any mainstream historian can justify Stanton and the chief prosecutor, joseph Holt, withholding it from the trial. I mean, I'll stop just a second, but there's a congressman named Butler and he said why was it considered by the prosecutors to be relevant to use Booth's tobacco pipe as evidence, but not his diary? And that really drives home the point, doesn't it.
Speaker 2:Right and a whistle, apparently.
Speaker 1:That I didn't know about that I didn't know about Don. I know you have to go here shortly. We've got to wrap up the show, but do you have any thoughts on what James was saying?
Speaker 4:Yeah, yeah. I think we have to remember first of all. When they talk about it, the historians tend to just gloss over the fact that there was a conspiracy trial. They don't like to go into it because it was shameful. So if you're a kid in school, when I was a little kid in school it was Sean Wilkes Booth. I knew nothing about these other conspirators.
Speaker 4:I didn't know anything about Mary Surratt or any of these people, and but officially there was a conspiracy and so this is the only time there has been a conspiracy to kill an American president. It was, I think, a contrived conspiracy because if you look at all the people, the people, especially the ones that were sent to dry-torn fugas, I think were completely innocent. If you look at the people that were hung Mary Surratt, it's just a travesty. She had nothing to do with it other than the fact that she rented a room to John Wilkes Booth there. There's no evidence at all she had anything, any knowledge of anything. It's just really shameful episode in American history. And, as I point out in my book, you know, to the end most people thought she would be spared. They kept thinking, well, she's going to get reprieved at the last minute. And it didn't happen. Because this is a middle-aged woman being hanged.
Speaker 4:And if you look at David Herold, people realize that John Wilkes Booth was Terry Offord. It was actually my history professor. Briefly, he he called. He said that the James Wilkes Booth was like think of Brad Pitt. He was as famous as Brad Pitt. He was a matinee idol, he was a genuine celebrity. So he had fans. He had not only women but he had hangers on like David Harreld.
Speaker 4:David Harreld, I think, was a fan boy and I think he would have done anything that Booth told him to, but I don't think he had anything to do with the assassination. George Astrogoth same kind of way. He might have been a bit dimwitted, maybe an alcoholic. I don't think he was any kind of plotter and you know, supposedly he was supposed to kill Andrew Johnson but he lost his nerve or some nonsense. I said the only one of the alleged conspirators that did anything at all that you might have convicted him on was was Lewis Payne Powell, and we still that's how much we know about him. We don't even know which. You know it was a pay or power went by both of them and he's the only one that had real ties to the South and he may have. You know there is Dave McGowan, the late great Dave McGowan. I think I told you, james, you should really read his work.
Speaker 3:It's still online in the Center for Informed Learning. I read it during the course of writing my book. I did read those episodes he has. Yeah.
Speaker 4:Yeah, and it says you know he was. I don't know, I think he was. He seemed to be going in the direction where he's going to claim it was a hoax. I don't know where he was going because he he brought out a lot of good points and one of the things was that Payne Powell, who had movie star looks, he really was a good looking, big strapping guy. But you know, ok, he attacked and McGowan dissects that attack on Seward.
Speaker 4:It's kind of none of it made any sense. You say he had inside information. I don't know what McGowan was going at, but it does seem odd that he was so big and strong and Seward was frail and old and was that that he couldn't have killed him? I don't know how he managed, because he stabbed him, I don't know how many times, supposedly, and he miraculously survived. But that's the only thing that they really could have convicted any of these of the other conspirators on. Is the attack on Seward. Okay, you attack or attempted murder or whatever, and murder or whatever, and, and you know, pain himself was very adamant about you know, mrs surratt's completely innocent. This is ridiculous. You got to let her go and um, so it's really. Uh, you know I write about hidden history, I write about all the awful things our government has done, but that's certainly one of the.
Speaker 4:The worst episodes is, as james pointed out, the way they were treated with the heavy hoods placed over them, barbaric treatment that had never been seen before and hasn't been seen since, and they obviously just were going to tremendous lengths for them not to talk now, but I don't know what any of them knew, because I think they all seemed to me just to be relatively innocent. Maybe they were fans of Booth, I don't know. Maybe they agreed in private that, yeah, somebody ought to do something about Lincoln. I don't know, but it doesn't seem to me that they were any kind of people that you conspire with successfully, and so I think Booth had much higher authorities, as he said. I have half a mind to go back to Washington DC and clear my name, which I think you know. How would he do that? I don't know. But lots of questions here and I know we're running out of time, but this is a fascinating discussion and, james, I love the fact that we can discuss this and you know again, if you want to know, at least solve one aspect of it, exhume the body in Greenmount Cemetery. That'll tell you whether or not the people that say that won't solve anything else.
Speaker 4:But if that happens, though what I suspect then that will, because all the people that you know called people crazy for saying that. Then all these court historians would have to fall all over themselves. Well, how do you explain that then? But you're right, these people are committed to lies and so they're never good, even at this late, because it, let's say, you found out that it was edwin stanton and the radical republicans doing it. That's not going to affect anything today. It's going to show the court but it showed that was tremendous corruption at that time. But they're so committed to these lies they're gonna. They have to continue to say no, no, this is john wilkes, booth, an actor, and he jumps on the stage six separate tyrannus. He fractured his leg, he hobbled off. Dr mudd helped him. You know, that's that's what they want, the myth, and that's that's why I continue to write about hidden history, because there's so much out there that people don't know. And uh, was it harry elmer barnes? Professor elmer was my hero and that's where he got the term court historian from.
Speaker 4:He said what he was doing, his work, was attempting to bring history into accord with the facts.
Speaker 3:That's what I'm trying to do right him, like him, like him and charles tansell and others back in the old days. Yeah, um, I have a book um by him, harry Elmer Barnes, written in 1953. I forget the title off the top of my head, but yeah, he was one who really brought the facts to life and he found that, as you say, that the core historians would be given access to documents, glowing reviews in the New York Times book review section, while other historians who had once been prominent historians were now being like himself, were now being excluded.
Speaker 4:Absolutely, and I hate to run. I guess, if we can sign off, tony, we could talk about this for another hour easily, but I do have to, no problem.
Speaker 1:Thanks for being here. Don DonaldJeffriesmedia folks All of Don's work you can find there in his podcast I Protest. Thanks for being here.
Speaker 4:Thanks guys. Thanks, Continue again, James Take care.
Speaker 3:Continue again Don.
Speaker 1:Thank, thanks, guys, thanks, continue again, james, take care, continue again, don. Thank you, and we will wrap up here, james, we could literally go on for hours on this, but I want people to buy your book and you have other interviews to do, but I wanted to close by. This is sort of related, but I was thinking about something that Don said about Edward Stanton and how he kept his daughter in his house after she died.
Speaker 3:Yeah, I think it's about a year. I have to go back and look at that. He did some kind of weird things. Well, it's kind of the mythos around Lincoln too.
Speaker 1:You know he had his sons, tad and Willie, in the White House and Willie died of typhoid fever. Tad survived and one of the things that Lincoln did, he kept the body, willie's body, in the White House. I mean, he kept him in the I think it was the basement. He'd go visit him all the time. There's all this mythos built around Lincoln as being someone who had premonitions, around Lincoln as being someone who had premonitions and he had such melancholy that he kind of tapped into whether consciousness or whatever that he was fated for. This Did you find in your as far as, like that's why he says goodbye and other things, like he's just kind of having a forward thinking and in the realm of meeting his own fate. Did you find that in your studies?
Speaker 3:Oh, definitely. And I've got a quote from his daytime bodyguard on the day of the assassination, when Lincoln was on the way to the War Department, and just quoting Crook, his bodyguard, he said I was surprised. When later in the afternoon of the 14th, I accompanied Mr Lincoln on a hurried visit to the War Department, I found the president was more depressed than I'd ever seen him. His step was unusually slow. Mr Lincoln said to me crook. Do you know? I believe there are men who want to take my life. After I paused, he said I have no doubt that they will do it.
Speaker 3:The conviction with which he spoke dismayed me. I wanted to protest, but his tone had been so calm and sure I found myself saying instead why do you think so, mr President? Other men have been assassinated, was his reply. All I could say was I hope you're mistaken, mr President. And he says other things. And Lincoln was having dreams about being killed and he seems to almost be resigned to it in a way that this was going to happen to him. So I don't doubt that there was some kind of spiritual impact on Lincoln that was foretelling to him of the tragedy that was going to visit him.
Speaker 1:Yeah, I found that through my studies too. There's something about him and you know reading Don over the years long before I did shows with him and you held up a copy of Crimes and Cover-Ups. Don doesn't go easy on Lincoln as far as his tyrannical rule and his centralization of power and I mean the changes that he brought to the United States. He's heralded as like some kind of savior of the Union and the great emancipator, kind of savior of the union and the great emancipator. But I think if you really dig deeper you find there's a darkness there in a lot of ways, but also the humanity and the side of him that again he says he resigns to his own fate. It's a very strange story and I think there's again there's a lot to unpack there and I just want to thank you again for coming on, mr Anderson, did you have anything else to add to the conversation? Anything you want to thank you again for for coming on? Mr anderson, did you have anything else to add to the conversation? Anything you want to ask james?
Speaker 2:no, I don't just I very much enjoyed the book and, uh, it was a pleasure to be able to speak with you.
Speaker 3:So thank you, james oh well, thank you guys for having me on. It was nice to be on with uh, uh, don jeffries. Um, you know, um, uh, you and I have both been writing about hidden history and I feel that people don't think the truth They've got to. You got to peel off the lies. You know I've written a book on creation, two books on creation versus evolution, the evidence that we are actually here by God's design and not by you know, random events, that we came out of some ancient slime billions of years ago by chance processes and natural selection, things of that nature. Well, some people would say to me, some Christians would say well, all you've got to do is preach the gospel. And I say you know, there's a lot of people that listen to the gospel. We've been taught in school that we all evolved. It had nothing to do with God's creation. So to first to get the truth about God creating us and his plan for us, you first got to take away that lie that blinds people, that says we came from fish and apes and things of that nature, and scientifically, not just you know, because the Bible says this, but there's actually a ton of scientific evidence and I go into that.
Speaker 3:I have a little channel on Rumble If you look for book refuge. I've just got two videos there, but one of them is a very recent one I did. It's a PowerPoint. This summarizes eight or nine basic evidence is scientific evidence against Darwin's theory. But I've been doing PowerPoints and talks in that for a long time. I just it's kind of I appreciate that.
Speaker 2:Yeah, I appreciate that. James, Tony and I are both very outspoken Christians, so whenever we attack a subject we try to do it from that perspective. But it was funny. I watched Joe Rogan's special recently and he kind of touched on this evolution argument. You know the idea of their giant reptiles and this big burning thing came down and destroyed them and then a little shrew just did his best. And here we are. It makes no sense and he said I'll go with Christ so I can sleep better. No wonder you guys are an antidepressants. But that actually cuts into something I was interested in. Maybe you have time to discuss this a little, but I was trying to find information on how religious Lincoln was, because all the information I saw claimed he never joined a church and actually wrote an essay denying the divinity of the Bible and his political advisors later said hey, get rid of that. But it's usually coupled with him that he was a very Christian man. Can you speak to that at all? Have you found in your research?
Speaker 3:I know that Don Jeffries actually has a section in his book, the Crimes and Cover-Ups book, on Lincoln being a so-called Christian and I didn't actually get into that my book, but he does have a section on it. He would refer to god once in a while. He would say things like well, god can't be both for the north and for the south, things like that. But, um, you know, he did not strike me as a religious man. In fact, that play he went to where he shot, was on good friday, whereas a lot of people would have been in church on that particular day. Uh, he decided to go to a comedy, although he didn't really want to go. He he told William Crook he did not want to go to the theater that night. And that also shocked Crook, his bodyguard, because Link, he said.
Speaker 3:Link is well known for his love of the theater. But Link said I have to go. It's been announced that people are expecting me, but yeah, I haven't. In his writings I don't see him making references to God salvation, those things that you might expect to see on the lips of a Christian. That's something that I would need to explore more. My book is more on the forensics and the people behind the assassination Right.
Speaker 1:Well again, james, thank you so much for being here and I want to make sure you plug anything you want to plug tell people where they can find you, okay, well.
Speaker 3:Well, my website is jamesperloffnet and that's p-e-r-l-o-f-f. And uh, the book is this one. Uh, exploding the official myth of the lincoln assassination. I do have other books going back to 1988, so you can tell I've been writing for a while before there was an internet and actually my first book. I used note cards to organize the material and I didn't have a PC yet. I think I got my first PC in 1989. But the book was published in 88. And I was actually using a typewriter to write that book.
Speaker 1:I own a copy. I own one of the originals. Uh, the shadows of power. As I mentioned, we opened up the show and, and, uh, I think I have all of your books.
Speaker 2:Well, oh well, well appreciate that um, yeah, my dad is an endorsement yeah, my father really loved uh, truth is a lonely warrior. He loved your references, by the way, so I appreciate that too, the ability to go check those things yeah, I did.
Speaker 3:I think it's important for people. We're going to get people to get out of the matrix, they have to see the big picture and so if we just focus on one event, like climate change or 9-11, it's very difficult and people need to see the progression of events, the continuum. And you could include the Lincoln assassination with that Spanish-American War World, two korean war, tonkin gulf and vietnam, um, the war on terror, the gulf war of 91, 9, 11, right up to today, that the you know, and things like the creation of the fed, um, the um, the lockdowns, um, uh, all heading towards a global governance. You know, see that, with the fact that the same people behind the League of Nations, with the same people behind the UN, just a few years later, and they've always been moving this in this, this direction of consolidation, consolidating countries of Europe into the EU, and they wanted to actually make a North American into a North American union plan fell by the wayside, at least temporarily. But you can see how.
Speaker 3:Ecumenicism with religion and the consolidation of media only five companies controlling all the mainstream media. Now, in 1983, there were 50. Controversation of businesses and banks, with, you know, the Manhattan Bank, owned by the Warbirds merging with the Chase Bank, but the Rockefellerville and Chase Manhattan merged with JPMorgan and JPMorgan Chase and they merged with Bank One and fewer and fewer entities ruling banking business, the media it's all moving towards a universal system of global control, and now we see, of course, the World Health Organization is part of that. It's all moving towards less freedom and a more monolithic governance, and so understanding how that's evolved over the years is very important.
Speaker 3:So books like the ones that I've written and the ones that Don have written try to piece together the truth for people so they can see exactly how these puzzle pieces fit together. One I always use the analogy but one piece of a jigsaw puzzle doesn't tell you anything, it's just a piece of color. But if you fit it into a cold jigsaw puzzle now, you see how that piece fits into the big picture, and that's what we're trying to do. I I think that people have a better chance of understanding if they know the full picture, um lynx assassination being just one of those many jigsaw puzzle pieces I couldn't agree more and, uh, thank you.
Speaker 1:Thank you again for all of your work, thank you for this book and thank you for being here, james. Uh, mr anderson, uh, thank you for your research, sir. I just read this book and thank you for being here, james. Mr Anderson, thank you for your research, sir.
Speaker 2:I just read his book. He did the research.
Speaker 1:I know, but you've done such great research for the show. I'm thanking you. Oh, thank you, James. Appreciate you one more time and we're going to close out the show. Folks, be sure and follow James jamesperloffnet, Get some of his books. If you don't have them already, Add them to your library. Get them in print. Don't just get them in electronic form. Get them in print. Very important work, very important research. And, James, we're going to have you back on again soon. I want to talk to you off air about another subject matter I'd like to have you discuss with us Another subject matter.
Speaker 3:Really Okay, absolutely.