REBELMADMAN WEEK IN REVIEW.

9/21/25

Michael Gaddy Sep 21

READ IN APP

***** spelling, grammar and punctuation as in the original.

In a speech delivered on Lincoln’s birthday in Springfield, Illinois, in 1936, the General Secretary of the Communist Party of the USA stated that the constitution of America was neither the creation of the Republican nor the Democrats but that the Democracy created by that document was Communist at its heart.

Was he wrong?

It’s becoming more and more apparent to those with the courage to think for themselves that history does in fact repeat itself!

Seekers of the truths of history should bear in mind the fact that it was the unanimous testimony of even the Republican writers of Lincoln’s administration that at a minimum two-thirds of the people of the Northern States, from the very beginning of his administration, opposed Lincoln’s war on the South, and continued openly to oppose it until the strong oppressive Marxist machinery of the Lincoln Government controlled primarily by Edwin Staunton and William Seward, suppressed free speech and strangled the once free press. Over 300 Northern newspapers were shut down or destroyed and any who kept on supporting the truth were illegally imprisoned.

What is it the Mango Madhatter is now threatening to do with those in the media who dare to oppose him?

MOST PEOPLE REFUSE TO ACCEPT AND BELIEVE THAT THIS GOVERNMENT IS DOING THE EXACT SAME THING TO THE PEOPLE TODAY AS IT DID TO THE AMERICAN INDIAN TRIBES IN THE LATE 19th CENTURY.

1. How many treaties (contracts, compacts) full of promises did the US government make with the American Indian Tribes? A: Almost 400

2. How many treaties did the government keep? A: Zero

The U.S. Government set out to establish a series of treaties with Native tribes that would force American Indians to give up their lands and move further west onto reservations. In the spring of 1868, a conference was held at Fort Laramie, in present-day Wyoming, which resulted in a treaty with the Sioux (Brule, Oglala, Miniconjou, Yanktonai, Hunkpapa, Blackfeet, Cuthead, Two Kettle, Sans Arcs, and Santee) and the Arapaho.

The goal of the treaty was to bring peace between White settlers and the tribes, who agreed to relocate to the Black Hills in the Dakota Territory. All the tribes involved gave up many thousands of acres of land that had been promised in earlier treaties, but retained hunting and fishing rights in their older territory. They also agreed not to attack railroads or settlers.

In exchange, the U.S. Government established the Great Sioux Reservation, consisting of a large portion of the western half of what is now the state of South Dakota, including the Black Hills, which are sacred to the Sioux people.

Though the reservation land was set aside for exclusive use by the Sioux people, in 1874 Gen. George A. Custer led an expedition into the Black Hills, accompanied by miners who were seeking gold. Once gold was found in the Black Hills, miners were soon moving onto the Sioux hunting grounds and demanding protection from the U.S. Army. Soon, the Army was ordered to move against wandering bands of Sioux hunting on the range as was in accordance with their treaty rights.

The Treaty of Laramie is a great example. As Floyd Redcrow Westerman stated at a Powwow in Albany Georgia which I attended back in the late 80’s:

“The Indians discovered Columbus ”and “Custer died for your sins.”

Ward Hill Lamon, long time friend of Abraham Lincoln and known as Lincoln’s “Particular Friend” was said to have authored 3 books on Lincoln. In one of those books the passage below is included.

It has been my belief for decades that Secretary of War Stanton planned and facilitated the execution of Lincoln and have recorded and published six hours of proof on my Substack. michaelgaddy.Substack.com

Again, the below passage by Lamon offers proof of my belief.

“On the night of March 3rd, 1865,” relates Lamon, “Mr. Lincoln, with several members of his Cabinet, was at the Capitol waiting the final passage of bills by Congress in order that the President should sign them. Everybody seemed happy at the prospect of peace. A dispatch from General Grant was handed to Stanton, who read it, and handed it to the President. The telegram advised Stanton that Grant had just received a letter from General Lee, requesting an interview, with a view to re-establishing peace between the sections.

The dispatch was read by others of the party. Mr. Lincoln’s spirits rose to a height rarely witnessed. He was unable to restrain himself from giving expression to the natural impulse of his heart. He was in favor of granting lenient and generous terms to the defeated foe. Mr. Stanton fell into a towering rage; he also could not restrain himself. Turning on the President, his eyes flashing fire, he cried angrily: ‘Mr. President, you are losing sight of the consideration at this juncture, how and by whom is this war to be closed?

Tomorrow is inauguration day. Read again that dispatch. Don’t you appreciate its significance? if you are not to be President of an obedient and loyal people, vou ought not to take the oath of office. You are not a proper person to be empowered to so high a trust. You should not consent to act in the capacity of a mere figurehead. If terms of peace do not emanate from you, and do not imply that you are supreme head of the Nation, you are not needed. By doing thus you will scandalize every friend you possess.’”

“A person, thus subjected to a government they do not want, is a slave!” (Spooner)

So, I’m supposed to hate my Confederate ancestors because they fought a war against Marxism???

Even though they hated him and said so publicly, Lincoln’s Marxist Republican Party associates had to turn him into a martyred hero in order to cover their blatant crimes in a war waged not only on the South but the North and Border states as well.

The apotheosis of Lincoln was nothing but a political scheme made to obscure the truth from the people and that apotheosis is still being played on the people to this day.

Many Americans have been living a lie for 165 years and most lack the courage to let go of the myth and embrace the truth!

What did Wendell Phillips think of Abraham Lincoln before the blatant apotheosis after his death but before his cabinet facilitated his execution?

Not only in private life but in public speeches Wendell Phillips spoke of President Lincoln in the most uncomplimentary terms.

On August 1, 1862, Wendell Phillips said to his audience:

“As long as you keep the present turtle (Lincoln) at the head of affairs you make a pit with one hand and fill it with the other.

I know Mr. Lincoln. I have been to Washington and taken his measure. He is a first-rate second-rate man; that is all of him. He is a mere convenience and is waiting, like any other broomstick, to be used.”

In a speech made at Music Hall, New Haven in 1863, Philips said: “Lincoln was badgered into emancipation. After he issued it he said it was the greatest folly of his life. It was like the Pope’s bull against the comet.”

What did the Republican press in New York think of Abraham Lincoln in 1862?

“Compare the state papers, messages, proclamations, orders, documents, which preceded or accompanied the War of Independence, with those of President Lincoln’s papers. These are cold, lifeless, dead. There has not been a line in any government paper that might not have been issued by the Czar of Russia or by Louis Napoleon of France.

The state papers of the War of Independence were inspired by the highest, the most generous emotion of the human heart-love of freedom. The state papers of President Lincoln were inspired by the meanest, the most selfish—the passion for conquest Is it strange that in tone and spirit, Lincoln’s state papers should resemble those of the Czar of Russia? Both men stood on a despot’s platform. Our state papers during this eventful period (the war of conquest on the South) are void of genius and enthusiasm for the great doctrine on which this government was founded. Faith in human rights is dead in Washington.” New York Independent, August 9, 1862.

Wonder why we weren’t taught this at Karl Marx high school or university? Is this why Lincoln was executed by his own party?

On an ofiicial visit to Washington, February 23, 1863, Richard H. Dana who represented the government as an attorney wrote Thomas Lathrop as follows: “I see no hope but in the army ; the lack of respect for the President in all parties is unconcealed. The most striking thing is the absence of personal loyalty to the President. It does not exist. He has no admirers. If a convention were held tomorrow he would not get the vote of a single State. He does not act or talk or feel like the ruler of an empire. He seems to be fonder of details than of principles, fonder of personal questions than of weightier matters of empire. He likes rather to talk and tell stories with all sorts of people who come to him for all sorts of purposes, than to give his mind to the many duties of his great post.

This is the feeling of his Cabinet. He has a kind of shrewd common sense, slip-shod, low-leveled honesty that made him a good Western lawyer, but he is an unutterable calamity to us where he is. Only the army can save us.”

This was the way attorney Dana and many other Republicans saw Mr. Lincoln before the movement to turn him into a saint after his execution.

In 1860, slavery had been constitutional for 71 years and had just been reaffirmed by the Supreme Court in 1857. (Dred Scott v Sanford)

Yet, allegedly, the misnamed Civil War was instigated by Abraham Lincoln to abolish slavery with bullets and canons instead of writing a law banning slavery. Therefore, for 165 years my ancestors, their monuments, flags and music have been declared racist even though their acts were at the time constitutional.

Now, before you cite firing on Fort Sumpter as the reason to go to war make sure you understand blockading a seaport is an act of war. (Anaconda Plan)

Therefore above we see a precedent which says the government can invade your property kill you and steal your property for following the constitution.

At what point is this Marxist government going to declare the ownership of firearms (Second Amendment) illegal and all those who own them to be “Racists” or cultists?

The precedent has been set and there is a moron at the helm who has openly stated: “Take the Guns First, DUE PROCESS, Second.”

If you think the courts will defend your rights just ask the people of Missouri what happened to their “Second Amendment Protection Act” in the federal courts?

People, all one has to do to see government for what it really is in its entirety, all that is required is that we read the definition of government. Nowhere in the definition does it state or even intimate the people are in control!

1. To rule over by right of authority.

2. To govern a nation.
Synonyms: reign
Antonyms: obey

3. To exercise a directing or restraining influence over; to guide the motives governing a decision.
Synonyms: superintend, supervise, conduct, influence, sway, control

4. To hold in check; control.

5. To serve as or constitute a law for
the principles governing an entity.

If there are truly valid reasons for going to war, why has there not been one declared In accordance with the constitution in 84 years?

Granting “war powers” to the executive branch is amending the constitution without following constitutional provisions for doing so.

How many trillions of dollars have been spent on these wars and into whose pockets did they go while a huge price in blood was paid by those who were lied to by their government?

And the South gets blamed for slavery! What if the wonderful “founders” would have followed Virginia’s instead of New York’s policy on slavery?

After the beginning of the disputes which led to the American Revolution, the Virginia convention, which assembled the 1st of August, 1774, and took upon itself the actual management of the affairs of the colony, adopted among its first acts, a resolution to import “no more slaves, nor British goods, nor tea.” Practically this resolution put an end forever to the African slave trade so far as Virginia was concerned, and its abolition was subsequently confirmed during the war of the Revolution by a more formal act passed by the legislature in the year 1778, prohibiting the importation of slaves from any quarter, whether by sea or land, and providing that all brought into the State in violation of the law should be free.

Conversely, ships were fitted out in the port of New York (first called New Amsterdam), for the slave trade at an early period, and the merchants of that city engaged in it without scruple; some of them continued to be so engaged until the traffic was prohibited by Congressional enactment.

Albert J. Nock saw it coming 90 years ago:

“What we and our more nearly immediate descendants shall see is a steady progress in collectivism running off into a military despotism of a severe type. Closer centralization; a steadily growing bureaucracy; State power and faith in State power increasing, social power and faith in social power diminishing; the State absorbing a continually larger proportion of the national income; production languishing, the State in consequence taking over one “essential industry” after another, managing them with ever-increasing corruption, inefficiency and prodigality, and finally resorting to a system of forced labour. Then at some point in this progress, a collision of State interests, at least as general as that which occurred in 1914, will result in an industrial and financial dislocation too severe for the asthenic social structure to bear; and from this the State will be left to “the rusty death of machinery,” and the casual anonymous forces of dissolution will be supreme.”

From the Lady Antifederalist most believed was written by Elbridge Gerry. (Part one)

“Mankind may amuse themselves with theoretick systems of liberty, and trace its social and moral effects on sciences, virtue, industry and every improvement of which the human mind is capable; but we can only discern its true value by the practical and wretched effects of slavery; and thus dreadfully will they be realized, when the inhabitants of the Eastern States are dragging out a miserable existence, only on the gleanings of their fields; and the Southern, blessed with a softer and more fertile climate, are languishing in hopeless poverty; and when asked, what is become of the flower of their crop, and the rich produce of their farms—they may answer in the hapless stile of the Man of La Mancha,”—The “steward of my Lord has seized and sent it to Madrid.”—Or, in the more literal language of truth, The exigencies of government require that the collectors of the revenue should transmit it to the Federal City.

Animated with the firmest zeal for the interest of this country, the peace and union of the American States, and the freedom and happiness of a people who have made the most costly sacrifices in the cause of liberty,—who have braved the power of Britain, weathered the convulsions of war, and waded thro’ the blood of friends and foes to establish their independence and to support the freedom of the human mind; I cannot silently witness this degradation without calling on them, before they are compelled to blush at their own servitude, and to turn back their languid eyes on their lost liberties—to consider, that the character of nations generally changes at the moment of revolution.

And when patriotism is discountenanced and public virtue becomes the ridicule of the sycophant—when every man of liberality, firmness and penetration who cannot lick the hand stretched out to oppress, is deemed an enemy to the State—then is the gulph of despotism set open, and the grades to slavery, though rapid, are scarce perceptible—then genius drags heavily its iron chain—science is neglected, and real merit flies to the shades for security from reproach—the mind becomes enervated, and the national character sinks to a kind of apathy with only energy sufficient to curse the breast that gave it milk, and as an elegant writer observes, “To bewail every new birth as an increase of misery, under a government where the mind is necessarily debased, and talents are seduced to become the panegyrists of usurpation and tyranny.”

He adds, “that even sedition is not the most indubitable enemy to the public welfare; but that its most dreadful foe is despotism which always changes the character of nations for the worse, and is productive of nothing but vice, that the tyrant no longer excites to the pursuits of glory or virtue; it is not talents, it is baseness and servility that he cherishes, and the weight of arbitrary power destroys the spring of emulation.”

If such is the influence of government on the character and manners, and undoubtedly the observation is just, must we not subscribe to the opinion of the celebrated Abbé Mablé? “That there are disagreeable seasons in the unhappy situation of human affairs, when policy requires both the intention and the power of doing mischief to be punished; and when the senate proscribed the memory of Cæsar they ought to have put Anthony to death, and extinguished the hopes of Octavius.”

Self defense is a primary law of nature, which no subsequent law of society can abolish; this primæval principle, the immediate gift of the Creator, obliges every one to remonstrate against the strides of ambition, and a wanton lust of domination, and to resist the first approaches of tyranny, which at this day threaten to sweep away the rights for which the brave sons of America have fought with an heroism scarcely paralleled even in ancient republics. It may be repeated, they have purchased it with their blood, and have gloried in their independence with a dignity of spirit, which has made them the admiration of philosophy, the pride of America, and the wonder of Europe. It has been observed, with great propriety, that “the virtues and vices of a people when a revolution happens in their government, are the measure of the liberty or slavery they ought to expect.

An heroic love for the public good, a profound reverence for the laws, a contempt of riches, and a noble haughtiness of soul, are the only foundations of a free government.”

Do not their dignified principles still exist among us? Or are they extinguished in the breasts of Americans, whose fields have been so recently crimsoned to repel the potent arm of a foreign Monarch, who had planted his engines of slavery in every city, with design to erase the vestiges of freedom in this his last asylum. It is yet to be hoped, for the honour of human nature, that no combinations either foreign or domestic have thus darkened this Western hemisphere.

On these shores freedom has planted her standard, dipped in the purple tide that flowed from the veins of her martyred heroes; and here every uncorrupted American yet hopes to see it supported by the vigor, the justice, the wisdom and unanimity of the people, in spite of the deep-laid plots, the secret intrigues, or the bold effrontery of those interested and avaricious adventurers for place, who intoxicated with the ideas of distinction and preferment have prostrated every worthy principle beneath the shrine of ambition. Yet these are the men who tell us republicanism is dwindled into theory—that we are incapable of enjoying our liberties—and that we must have a master.—Let us retrospect the days of our adversity, and recollect who were then our friends; do we find them among the sticklers for aristocratick authority? No, they were generally the same men who now wish to save us from the distractions of anarchy on the one hand, and the jaws of tyranny on the other; where then were the class who now come forth importunately urging that our political salvation depends on the adoption of a system at which freedom spurns?” ~Mercy Otis Warren

After several years of oppression and unconstitutional acts perpetrated by the Federalist/Monarchist who had created the government which they now controlled under the constitution they wrote in 1787, began to be exposed for the tyranny they were imposing on the people using the hammer of government to smash the Rights of the people.

Leading this opposition were Thomas Jefferson and James Madison who like all good politicians had switched political alliances for personal gain.

But, instead of calling for a new constitutional convention to restructure the government, both Jefferson and Madison decided rather than replace the corrupt principles of that government they would seek to control it. Thus the Democratic Republican Party was formed which controlled the government in theory until 1825.