Supporters of President Donald Trump protest in the Capitol Rotunda on Jan. 6, 2021.
A screenshot of Trump’s Truth Social post.
General Eisenhower with the first NATO flag in October 1951
U.S. Army Photo
THINK SWING VOTERS
DEMOCRATS…..STOP applying your ideology against the Treasonous Republican Party that was taken over by Christian Neo-Confederates who WORKED the Red States through the Southern Baptist Evangelical Crusade, and want to REVERSE all the advances of Dr. of Divinity, Martin Luther King, and, make White Christians prosperous……..AGAIN!
Many Americans who vote for Trump are members of
THE PROSPERITY G)SPEL
The PG does not want to see White Europeans PROSPER. They do however want to see White Russians – PROSPER – because they launched a Holy Crusade against Secular Europe. The New Southern Traitors HATE Canada and Mexico, along with half the Citizens of the United States. After THEY launched a Holy Confederate Thug against NATO, and the people of Europe, these fake Christians are thoroughly HATEDS BY MOST EUOPEANS. Why would they – LOVE TRUMP?
The American people were once unanmous in their LOVE for Europe.
WHAT THE FUCK HAPPENED?
Why did the children and grandchildren of WW2 Veterans – who fought under General Eisenhower – turn into Traitors carrying the Confederate flag into our Nations Capitol -p that hundred of millions World Citizens used to LOVE?
How many millions of Europeans, Canadians, Mexicans, and South Americans….HATE the Christian MAGA base, and see that the
SOUTH HAS RISEN – AGAIN?
Trump said the fact Erik the Red landing in Greenland
DOES NOT MATTER.
Why then does planting the American Flag in Greenland matter? What matter is….General Lee SURENDERED his sword He lost the Civil War. Study the history of John Fremont who co-founded the Republican Party. Do you LOVE John’s abolitionists ways? Do you
LOVE NATO?
If you do, adopt Fremont’s flag, and form a group that adopts the Fremont flag to rally MORE LOVE FOR EUROPEANS around.
Allow the European Union to HELP YOU. Ask your family and friends if THEY LOVE OR HATE FREMONT’S FLAG! Ask your elected leaders, and those who are running for office, for backing. Put an end to the Evil Schism the Sons of the South have created….OVER JESUS – who LOVES NATO as much as President Eisenhower did. Jesus hates
GREEDLAND!
John Presco
President: Royal Rosamond Press
EXTRA! Just watched Trump hold up pics of brown killer illegal aliens that millions of while Europeans – HATE! He threatens to send in Federal troops to root out hateful BROWN CRIMINALS and send them to their country of origin. Right-wing Europeans Neo-Nazis back Trump. Do they thing Putin will also help them FREE their nation of…NON-WHITES!
On this day, January 20, 2026, at 2″46 PM…..I declare The Trumpire of Hate is launching a Race War against the NATO People.
“Divide and conquer!”……WITH MURDER AND HATE…is the old motto of
GENERAL LEE!
John C. Frémont didn’t form a separate “New American Freedom Party,” but rather became the first presidential candidate for the newly formed Republican Party in 1856, running on a strong anti-slavery platform focused on “Free Soil, Free Men, and Frémont,” effectively championing a vision of American freedom against slavery’s expansion. He helped establish the Republican Party in opposition to the Kansas-Nebraska Act and the extension of slavery, becoming a symbol for the burgeoning “Free Soil” movement.
EXTRA! Just wastched Trump hold up brown killer illegal aliens that millions of while Europeans – HATE! He threatens to send in Federal trops to root out hateful BROWN CRIMINALS and sent them to their country of origin. Right-wing Eruoepa Neo-Nazis back Trump. Do they thing Putin will also help them FREE their nation of…
NON-WHITES>
General Fremont Flag (1841): History of the Rocky Mountain Eagle
USA Flag Co.
October 28, 2025
The Rock Mountain Eagle: General Fremont’s Unique 26-Star Banner (1841)
Gen. John C. Fremont unfurled the General Fremont flag from the Rocky Mountains summit when he and his small party were on their way to California.
General John C. Fremont, who, at the head of an exploring expedition, had reached the Pacific coast early in 1846, received verbal orders from Washington to turn back in May.
He made his way to Slitter’s Fort, which was on the site of the present city of Sacramento, where he established headquarters and raised a flag that had but one star in the canton.
On June 15, he captured a Mexican post at Sonoma Pass. On July 4, at a meeting of the Americans at Sonoma, under his advice, they proclaimed the independence of California and declared war against Mexico.
General Fremont did not then know that United States troops, under the command of General Taylor, had invaded Mexico early in the previous March.
THINK SWING VOTERS
DEMOCRATS…..STOP applying your ideology against the Treasonous Republican Party that was taken over by Christians Neo-Confederates who WORKED the Red States through the Southern Baptist Evangelical Crusade who wants to REVERSE all the advamces of Dr. of Divinity Martin Luther King – and make White Christians prosperous. Many American who vote for Trump arec ult members of
PROSPERITY GODPRL
The PG does not want to see White Europeans PROSPER. They od however want to see White Russians – PROSPER – because they launched a Holy Crusade against Secular Europe. The New Southern Traitors HATE Canda and Mexico, aloing with half the Citizens of the United States. After THEY launched a Holy Confederate against NATO and the people of Europe, these fake Christians ar…
THOOURLY HATEDS BY EUOPEANS.
The American people were on ce unanmous in their LOVE for Europe.
WHAT THE FUCK HAPPENED?
How many millions of Europeans, Candadians, Mexicans, and South Americans….HATE the Christian MAGA base?
Support for Russia among American Christians isn’t universal but is concentrated within specific conservative and Christian nationalist circles, who admire Putin as a strong leader defending traditional values against Western secularism, while the majority of American evangelicals generally oppose Russia’s actions, especially the invasion of Ukraine, and sympathize with Ukraine’s evangelicals. This support stems from shared stances on LGBTQ+ rights and traditional family values, with some evangelicals viewing Putin and the Russian Orthodox Church as allies, despite broader opposition to Russia’s geopolitical actions.
Is the enemy of their enemy really their friend? Why American evangelicals’ veneration of Vladimir Putin is so dangerous
Michael Bird
Posted 4 Mar 20244 Mar 2024, updated 13 Mar 202413 Mar 2024
I can still remember the days when American evangelicals championed the cause of liberal democracy against the Soviet Union and its communist authoritarianism. In some Christian circles, in fact, the Soviet Union was often touted as the “Gog and Magog” of biblical prophecy — nations in the east who would garrison the satanic forces as they prepared for their final and futile war against the armies of God (Revelation 20:7-9; Ezekiel 38:2).
I can also recall how President Ronald Reagan was enthusiastically embraced by American evangelicals in the 1980s, despite his somewhat dubious moral pedigree as a divorced Hollywood actor, not least because he promised that America would win the Cold War and the godless communists would not triumph.
When European Communism collapsed between 1989 and 1991, and Russia opened itself up to the world, American evangelicals rushed into Russia with gusto to connect with their persecuted peers and to proclaim the gospel in cities that had never before heard the Christian message. The American evangelist Billy Graham visited Russia in 1992 and preached at a mass rally of 100,000 people in Moscow.
Many American evangelical groups had been active in Russia and Ukraine until restrictions tightened in the 2000s. I have American evangelical friends who have adopted children from Russian and Ukrainian orphanages, bolstering the connection between evangelicals and the former Soviet Republics.
How, then, did we reach the point where many American evangelicals support both the oppressive regime and military aggression of current Russian President Vladimir Putin? I think the answers are complex and must be viewed through the lens of the culture wars raging in the United States.
Our kind of strongman
Vladimir Putin is considered by many American evangelicals to be the defender of an ethnically homogenous “Christian society”. Putin himself is admired because he purports to protect the Russian people and Russian Orthodox Christianity against the predations and designs of those European elites who push secularism, multiculturalism, and pro-immigration polices — which are often portrayed as little more than a Trojan horse for an insidious process of Islamisation.
One must appreciate, here, the degree to which Putin is driven by history, or perhaps nostalgia, and how that resonates with American evangelicals. For Putin, the mythology of Russia’s origins and rise — quite evident in his interview with Tucker Carlson — is the driving force behind his political ambitions. Russia is the third Rome, the heartland of Orthodox Christianity, the conquerors of Napoleon and the Nazis. Russia, the heartland of Eurasia, is pitted against the debauched and dangerous West, who are the historic foes of the proud people of the European east and the Asian steppes. Rather than prostrated and pauperised, Putin wants to see Russia returned to its greatness — the greatness of Peter and Catherine.
Moreover, Putin remembers the dissolution of the Soviet Union. He was in Dresden seeking direction from his superiors amidst the chaos unfolding in Germany. When his KGB detachment asked for assistance, they were told, “Moscow is silent.” It is this silence that haunts Putin and he seeks to correct it with the furious roar of Russian power in their traditional spheres of influence. This is why Putin has written, “the demise of the Soviet Union was the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the century”. Not because Soviet communism was the ideal system, but because its collapse brought chaos, destruction, and weakness.
Want the best of Religion & Ethics delivered to your mailbox?
Sign up for our weekly newsletter.Email addressSubscribe
Your information is being handled in accordance with the ABC Privacy Collection Statement.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
One of the main reasons why many American evangelicals idolise Putin is because he has bent history to the force of his will, decapitated all opposition, defied the liberality of the West, championed the heritage and hopes of his own country, and refuses to be humiliated by the West. While many American evangelicals will struggle with the icons and liturgy of Russian Orthodoxy, the idea of a nation built on “Orthodoxy, Autocracy, and Nationality” — a motto of Tsarist Russia — is easily translatable into the American vernacular as “God, Trump, and MAGA”.
Putin therefore represents, in many ways, the realisation of the MAGA dream: God and country restored to their rightfully told history and their divinely appointed hegemony.
I’ve had American evangelicals tell me in person that while they acknowledge Putin’s brutality and authoritarian lawlessness, they are willing to overlook these vices because “there are no gay pride parades in Russia”. Moreover, they say, if Putin is opposed by the secularist European Union and a progressive president like Joe Biden, then, as the saying goes, the enemy of our enemy is our friend!
To American evangelicals, Putin is strong man who is ruthlessly effective at keeping Russia Russian and many want an American version of the same — even if the violence and suppression of dissent needs to be toned down somewhat, in their estimation.
Russian support for Trump
Russia has lent its support to Donald Trump at several crucial junctures — including, crucially, during the 2016 US presidential election — which predisposes many American evangelicals to view Putin as an ally, a comrade in arms.
The irony, however, is that Putin himself evidently does not view Trump as a kindred spirit or ally, much less some kind of “Manchurian candidate”. Rather, Trump is merely expedient, a means to Putin’s end. Trump’s isolationism is conducive to Russia’s territorial ambition and foreign activities in places like Syria and Africa. Besides that, the chaos Trump creates in America’s domestic politics and international relations suits Putin’s desire for the decline of the Western superpower.
How is it, I often wonder, that American evangelicals cannot see that Russian support for Trump is predicated on blatant self-interest, not any kind of shared ideological or civilisational struggle?
The gospel according to Fox
American evangelicals, it turns out, are more formed in their view of the world by conservative media and social media bubbles — with their pro-Russian slant — than by any other source.
There are a number of American pastors I know well who are either “Never Trumpers” or self-described “moderate Republicans”. These pastors are routinely sent conspiracy theories masquerading as news stories by members of their congregation, no doubt in order to turn them into Trump supporters. When these pastors refuse the invitation, I know several who have had their congregants turn on them with a fury, accuse them of treason, or even heresy, and spread all sorts of lurid rumours about them. Some have left Christian ministry altogether as a result of such harassment.
I once visited a church in New Orleans where a fist fight had broken out in a men’s Bible study over Trump ten minutes before I arrived. The poor pastor was still in the process of trying to calm everybody down.
Here’s the problem: a pastor may speak to their congregation about God, faith, and ethics for around one hour a week, but members of the congregation are consuming on average 10-20 hours of right-wing media (to say nothing of social media) during that same week. As a result, the convictions of many American evangelicals are more informed by Fox News or Newsmax than any series of sermons on the teachings of Jesus. While American evangelicals are not monolithic, they did vote for Trump en masse, because they believed he would defend Christian America even if he was not the best exponent of it.
Seduced by a convenient lie
Just last week I spoke with a Ukrainian Christian friend, who is originally from Donetsk but now lives in Poland and works for an American evangelical para-church ministry. He told me that while his colleagues are supportive of him and Ukraine’s struggle against the Russian invasion, he occasionally has to deal with Americans evangelicals who are pro-Putin and support Putin’s war in Ukraine. He tells me that they have simply bought into Putin’s propaganda, regurgitated through talking heads like Tucker Carlson; he says they have been seduced by the lie because the lie fits their view of the world.
I’m someone who identifies as an evangelical, in the broad and global tradition of people like the British abolitionist William Wilberforce, the Anglican preacher John Stott, the Kenyan ecumenical leader Samuel Kobia, Canadian climate scientist Katharine Hayhoe, and Singapore theologian Simon Chan. I do not recognise this version of American evangelicalism and its veneration of Putin. Like any form of idolatry, it frightens me — after all, as the Bible repeated tells us, people have a tendency to become what they worship.
Rev. Dr Michael Bird is Deputy Principal and Lecturer in New Testament at Ridley College in Melbourne. His most recent book, co-authored with N.T. Wright, is Jesus and the Powers: Christian Political Witness in an Age of Totalitarian Terror and Dysfunctional Democracies.
Vice President Harris and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy met Saturday at the Munich Security Conference in Germany Saturday morning to discuss aggression from Russia and how the U.S. and its allies would respond.
New Jessie Scouts Unmask Spies
Posted on April 16, 2021 by Royal Rosamond Press
- I have been trying to form The New Jessie Scouts to do battle with the enemy within.
Seer Jon
The House committee investigating the January 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol believes former Energy Secretary Rick Perry is the author of a text message to former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows that was turned over to the committee that called for encouraging Republican-led states to cast their Electoral College votes for Donald Trump in the 2020 presidential election regardless of the outcome of the popular vote, according to CNN.
Jessie Scouts and BLM | Rosamond Press
From Austria to Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, the Netherlands, Norway and Sweden, Russian diplomats have been expelled from several European countries in the past few months over Moscow’s increasingly aggressive spying tactics.
https://products.gobankingrates.com/r/e48f149e71a19f66115d5f5c8edaefd8?subid=
The United States is on a War Footing now that our troops are in harms way. Anything that looks like TREASON, should be dealt with the same way the Union Army dealt with Insurrectionist Lovers of Slavery. I’m for bringing back THE IRON CLAD OATH and have all the Oath Keepers sign it. ALL OF THEM! That is Rick Perry and his wife with neo-Confederates. Get out of Fremont’s Party – you treacherous snake in the grass!
I have turned back the hands of time, not to please the neo-Confederate Fake Christians, but the Radical Republicans who nominated my kin to be the first Republican Presidential Candidate. John Fremont had foreign fighters on his side, and on the side of black slaves. If any foreigner, whose Nation belongs to NATO, wants to join the Jessie Scouts, then I will make that possible.
I wish the best to President Zelensky. May he and our Vice President remain UNITED in the coming fight! We will prevail. The moment for all Americans to stand by the American Flag, and the Bald Eagle, came when Zelensky and Harris stood together. These are TRUE PATRIOTS. I strip that title from any Republican who backed, and still backs, the JAN 6 INSURRECTUION!
TRAITORS!
John Presco ‘Republican Candidate For Governor of Oregon’
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ironclad_Oath
Beside us, Ukraine’s president was already climbing out of his vehicle wearing body armour and a helmet and heading across a strip of wasteland towards the trenches.
This week, as western governments escalated their warnings about the threat of all-out war with Russia, Volodymyr Zelensky decided to drop-in on some of the Ukrainian soldiers who could be right in the path of any invasion.
The visit was part of the president’s own, two-pronged offensive: showing support for his country’s troops on the one hand, whilst warning allies in the West that trying to “appease” Moscow over Ukraine was dangerous.
For two days, we followed Volodymyr Zelensky as he criss-crossed the country.
By plane and helicopter, we moved from military drills to the actual conflict line and from land into the Azov Sea as the West pumped up the volume on its war-warnings.
Meant to deter Russia, its alarm appears to have been ignored.
The idea of Russia bombing Kyiv into submission still seems far-fetched – more damaging to Vladimir Putin than of any possible benefit. But violence in those parts of eastern Ukraine already controlled by Russian-backed forces has suddenly picked-up.
The New Army of the Potomac
Posted on January 8, 2021 by Royal Rosamond Press
This morning I awoke at 5:A.M. determined to BORN AGAIN the Army of the Potomac so that never again will our elected leaders cower on their knees in the Sacred Chamber of The United States Senate. I turn on my T.V, to see the news about the death of a Capitol policeman. I am then hearing about the special jurisdiction of the District of Columbia has, that prevented the calling of the National Guard to come to the rescue of The People’s Choice – that most Republican’s claim were not legally elected to office. Their President LIED AGAIN saying he called the National Guard – right away – at the first sign of trouble! Why should the majority of Real American Voters have to SWALLOW ONE MORE LIE from a mortal being, who thinks he is a god. Trump – IS INSANE!
Mr. Insane wanted to send OUR Army into Portland to restore law and order. Donald Trump watched the mob violence – very carefully – looking for a good excuse to be a BIG MAN to his rabid base. He wanted them to see real troops battling rioters in the street. He wanted to hear their praise and read their CONGRADULATIONS on twitter and facebook. Trump gave the VIOLENT INSTECTIONISTS a guarantee that he would back them with the Army, the Navy, and the Marines! In hours, this MANIAC will be – IMPEACHED! This is – TREASON!
After President Joe Biden, and Vice President, Kamala Harris, are sworn in, I would like to see them give birth to THE NEW ARMY OF THE POTOMIC that was created when Republican President Abrahm Lincoln passed the Thriteenth Ammendment, and FREED me and women who were taken hostage and made slaves. The Abolitionist Repubican Party RIGHTED THE WRONG our founding Father’s made, when they did not free the slaves – NOR GIVE WOMEN – the right to vote. Our FLAWED Constitution was signed by men who debated about freeing the slaves. Did they consider giving the vote to half of our young Nation?
I declare the republican Party – DEAD! Let the remnants of this party co-founded by my kindred, John Fremont be born this day in the District of Columbia. Let the citizen who live in this district be allowed TO VOTE so that they can own the power to come to the aid of ALL citizens who come under attack. Donald Trump invited people to the DC to commit acts of violent insurrection. If the citizens of DC knew the sacred building in their district would be left UNGUARDED, they might have marched to this Symbol of Freedom – and surrounded it!
The Marin Shipmates | Rosamond Press
I see the New Army of the Pontomac holding an anuel parade down Pennsylvania. I presented the video of the Native Americans in Chile doing the goosetep to Prussian band music. I told the startled members of this Black Panther group, that no black American should be denied access to any empowerment any white man enjoys anywhere in this world. To quote President Biden…
“Enough is enough!”
Let’s have the parade that King Donald wanted – only for himself! Let us hold a annual parade of the People’s Army – FOR ALL THE PEOPLE!
Freedom!
John Presco
Chile Military Parade, with Chilean Commentator – YouTube
Prussian Colony In California | Rosamond Press
District of Columbia home rule is District of Columbia residents’ ability to govern their local affairs. As the federal capital, the Constitution grants the United States Congress exclusive jurisdiction over the District in “all cases whatsoever”.
At certain times, and presently since 1973, Congress has allowed certain powers of government to be carried out by locally elected officials. However, Congress maintains the power to overturn local laws and exercises greater oversight of the city than exists for any U.S. state. Furthermore, the District’s elected government exists at the pleasure of Congress and could theoretically be revoked at any time.
A separate yet related controversy is the District’s lack of voting representation in Congress. The city’s unique status creates a situation where D.C. residents do not have full control over their local government nor do they have voting representation in the body that has full control.
In 2015, D.C. became a member of the Unrepresented Nations and Peoples Organization.[1]
Commanders of the Army of the Potomac at Culpeper, Virginia, 1863. From the left: Gouverneur K. Warren, William H. French, George G. Meade, Henry J. Hunt, Andrew A. Humphreys, George Sykes
Black Panther Party Gallery and Museum | Rosamond Press
District of Columbia home rule – Wikipedia
Army of the Potomac – Wikipedia
Schumer calls for 25th Amendment to be invoked after Capitol riots | TheHill
Saving Dottie Witherspoon | Rosamond Press
Radical Democracy Party
Posted on July 16, 2020by Royal Rosamond Press
I belong to a Black Panther group, and in response to a gentleman who said no white man would put down the KKK, I googled the Radical Republicans who specifically targeted the KKK, as did President Grant. Then I found the missing link I have been looking for for twelve years, or more. My kin, John Fremont, became a second Presidential Candidate when the Radical Democracy Party was formed – with the sole purpose of getting Lincoln to drop out of the race!
WHAT!?
The Radical Republicans hated Lincoln who betrayed their ideals on all men being free. Many of these Radicals were Turners, members of the German Turnverein. immigrants who fled to America after they lost their Revolution in Europe. Three of my grandfathers appear to have been Turners. It also looks like the New York Turner Rifles – were sabotaged! They were given smooth bore rifles and allegedly rifled rifles “later on”. I don’t buy it! They were ordered into open fields where they had an extreme disadvantage, The Traitors were able to shoot them at twice the range. Cannon fire waited for them in one field, and they are described as cowards – who ran! They were arrested for not following orders. Their service was up and they were due back in New York – for the elections. Montgomery Blair claims he lost to “foreigners”. How many others would lost thanks to the Germans?
I believe the Blair family set the Turner Rifles up for failure – so other Turners all over America would not join the War Against Slavery. Fremont was the first Presidential Candidate for the Republican, and lost. I have read articles that said Lincoln did not want to defeat the Confederacy. He believed they would come back into the Union if a show of force occurred. However, because the Radicals cited the Monroe Act, I suspect the Blairs and Lincoln were waiting for the French and British to enter the war on the side of the Confederacy. He would surrender, and the Turners would be destroyed – along with Fremont!
The Speaker of the House has a suspicion Trump will not leave office if her loses. He has stabbed Vindman in the back. I believe neo-Confederates put Trump in office. I would like to see the formation of the New Turner Rifles that will be located in Oakland California and St. Louis. Sone have suggested statues of Lincoln should be hauled down.
John Presco
President: Royal Rosamond Press
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radical_Democracy_Party_(United_States)
The National Security Council sent a list of allegations about Lt. Col. Alex Vindman to the Pentagon after he testified before the House in impeachment proceedings against President Donald Trump, according to one person who has seen the document and two others briefed on it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/20th_New_York_Volunteer_Infantry_Regiment
Many of the new party’s supporters did not necessarily want it to stand in the election. Rather, the hope was that the formation of a new party would cause Lincoln not to gain the Republican nomination.[10] Although this did not occur, Frémont maintained over the course of his campaign that he would drop out if Lincoln did likewise, in favor of a candidate whose platform more closely matched the ideals of the Radical Republicans.[11]
Frémont gained the support of a number of prominent abolitionists. However, the majority of Radical Republicans continued to support Lincoln as it was felt that Frémont could not win and that supporting him would split the abolitionist vote in favor of the Democrat candidate George McClellan.[12] Additionally, many were less than enthusiastic about the party platform with its compromises aiming to attract Democrats.[13] Frémont continued these overtures during his campaign.[14] As the campaign failed to gain momentum, many abolitionists urged Frémont to withdraw his nomination. No major newspaper supported Frémont.[15] However, some Democrat supporting newspapers such as the New York World did talk up Frémont’s credentials in order to disunite Republicans.[16] Confederates as well as Democrats took a close interest in Frémont’s campaign, hoping it could help McClellan win in November.[17]
Withdrawal[edit]
Frémont and Cochrane dropped out of the race on September 21, 1864. In a letter to The New York Times, Frémont wrote that it had become increasingly clear that the Democrats could not be trusted on the issues of union or abolition. As such, he did not want to act as a spoiler against Lincoln.[18] At the same time, Frémont remained critical of Lincoln, writing that “his Administration has been politically, militarily and financially, a failure, and that its necessary continuance is a cause of regret for the country”.[19] In another letter to the same paper written one week previously, but published in the same edition, he wrote that the ideas of the Radical Democracy Party would nevertheless be pursued.[20] It has been speculated that Frémont’s withdrawal may have been part of a deal with Lincoln whereby the more conservative Postmaster General Montgomery Blair was removed from his post.[21]
Most Radical Democracy Party supporters went on to support Lincoln in the general election,[22] though there were some exceptions to this, notably Wendell Philips.[23] The party itself was finished, having only formed to run a candidate in the 1864 election.
The upcoming November, 1862 Congressional elections influenced President Lincoln’s handling of military operations in the Western Theatre. Lincoln was not so much concerned with a major victory in the Trans-Mississippi Theatre as he was with avoiding the loss of political supporters for the Union Cause in the western border states like Missouri, Kentucky and Tennessee. He instructed his commanders to respect the private property rights of supporters and rebels alike unless military necessity required otherwise. This admonition even extended to interfering with slavery in those states. Lincoln had ordered Gen. Fremont to revoke his proclamation of August 30, 1861 which imposed military control over the government of Missouri, authorized the confiscation of rebel private property and freed slaves owned by Confederate supporters. When Fremont attempted to stir up opposition to the President’s order, Lincoln had him removed in spite of strong pressure from the German-American community in St. Louis. Lincoln gained support for his moderate policies by telling his Abolitionist supporters about the Union company composed of Kentucky recruits that had gone home upon learning of Fremont’s proclamation.
Some military commanders including Gen. Steele took notice of the abolitionist zeal on the part of the German-American troops. In a letter to General Halleck on November 1, 1861 Steele reported that, ” The German Regiments of my command are to be kept here [Helena] until after the election –Osterhaus’ Division. They are Abolitionists and are probably to vote for Blow rather than Blair. This was told to me by an unsophisticated German officer.” Although Steele allowed state election commissioners to come into his camps to count the votes cast by his German-American units, he would not allow them to return home to vote. As expected, most of the men of the German Brigade cast their votes for Blow, the Radical Republican Congressional candidate from St. Louis. Steele professed to be unconcerned with the radical Republican views of his German-American units, but since taking command of Osterhaus’ troops, he had favored his moderate Republican and Democratic friends from Iowa with commands and promotions over the German -American officers from St. Louis. Later Blair would contest the election results claiming that many non-citizens voted in the election.
Mr. Lincoln seemed to be equally driven by his loyalty to the Blairs and his concerns for executive privilege. After the 1864 Republican National Convention in Baltimore, Congressman Thaddeus Stevens and former Secretary of War Simon Cameron visited President Lincoln. Stevens demanded: ‘In order that we may be able in our State to go to work with a good will I want you to make us one promise…that you will reorganize your cabinet, and leave Montgomery Blair out of it.”30 The two hour meeting was tense and intense. Colonel R. M. Hoe related the President finally gave his answer, in substance as follows, towering up to his full height, and delivering his words with emphatic gestures, and intense earnestness of speech:
“Mr. Stevens, I am sorry to be compelled to deny your request to make such a promise. If I were even myself inclined to make it, I have no right to do so. What right have I to promise you to remove Mr. Blair, and not make a similar promise to any other gentleman of influence to removed any other member of my cabinet whom he does not happen to like? The Republican party, wisely or unwisely had made me their nominee for President, without asking any such pledge at my hands. Is it proper that you should demand it, representing only a portion of that great party? Has it come to this that the voters of this country are asked to elect a man to be President – to be the Executive – to administer the government, and yet that this man is to have no will or discretion of his own. Am I to be the mere puppet of power – to have my constitutional advisers selected for me beforehand, to my manhood to consent to any such bargain – I was about to say it is equally degrading to your manhood to ask it.”
Historian Allan Nevins wrote: “The Radicals who hated Montgomery Blair were quite as numerous as the Moderates who hated Chase, and their detestation was quite as fervent. The judicious [William P.] Fessenden had fairly well represented the idea of party harmony. Could Lincoln find a replacement for Blair who would equally typify restraint and unity? The President felt liking and respect for Blair, just as he felt respect (though not liking) for Chase, but he did not approve the man’s quarrelsome and malignant streak. Once when Blair was denouncing the Radicals as selfish and vindictive, Lincoln rebuked him. ‘It is much better not to be led from the region of reason into that of hot blood, by imputing to public men motives which they do not avow.’”31
In the spring of 1864 a fringe group of radical abolitionists nominated General John C. Frémont as their candidate for President. Although Frémont and supporters did not campaign actively, they threatened to siphon votes from the Republican-Union tickets. Historian Allan Nevins noted that by the summer, “Montgomery was now disliked in every quarter. He had been barred from the Union League; a radical committee including George S. Boutwell and John Covode had lately demanded his dismissal; Henry Wilson wrote Lincoln that his retention would cost tens of thousands of votes. Men spoke of the Blairs as ‘a nest of Maryland serpents.’ On September 22nd, [Zachariah] Chandler, accompanied by David H. Jerome, later governor of Michigan, had a private interview with Lincoln. He announced the complete success of his labors; he had gotten Fremont out of the race, though not by the means he had expected.”32 Frémont had dropped out without conditions; the conditions were imposed by the Radical Republicans like Michigan Senator Chandler with whom he was negotiating.
Although there appears to have been no quid pro quo on Frémont’s part that he would drop out of the race if Montgomery Blair dropped out of the cabinet, it was clearly the goal of Chandler that Blair must go if Frémont quit. According to biographer Benjamin Thomas, the evidence suggest that Chandler “obtained Lincoln’s assent to such a bargain; for in a letter to his wife he wrote: “The President was most reluctant to come to terms but came.” Chandler’s subsequent negotiations with Frémont have never been completely clarified, but Frémont apparently would have no part of the bargain. On September 22 he renounced his candidacy, however, and Lincoln accepted Blair’s resignation the next day.” Blair told Navy Secretary Gideon Welles and Attorney General Edward Bates as they were leaving the President’s office: “I suppose you are both aware that my head is decapitated – that I am no longer a member of the Cabinet.’”33
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montgomery_Blair
The influence of Blair’s critics was considerable. Criticism of Blair escalated in the autumn of 1863 after Blair made a speech in which he damned Radical Republicans. Journalist Noah Brooks wrote: “The speech, which was an elaborate defense of the alleged conservative policy of the President, was also a bitter arraignment of prominent members of the Cabinet, Senators, and Representatives. The speech was subsequently issued in pamphlet form and created considerable stir in Washington, and among the President’s real friends in Maryland
http://www.mrlincolnandfriends.org/the-cabinet/montgomery-blair/embed/#?secret=ls6tEyf0bn
Confederate Sons of the Beast in Mexico
Posted on June 19, 2012 by Royal Rosamond Press
John Fremont and the Radical Republicans (who were forty-eighters) wanted the Confederate Traitors to take the Iron Clad Oath because they were still conspiring with with royal rulers who hate democracy.
Here is a video that bid present day parasites of The Beast to whine and wail over their loss to the Radical Aboltionist Republican Party co-founded by my kindred, John Fremont. I suspect Lincoln and Blair supressed Fremont’s zeal to drive out the Beast, send it back to Europe, lest America be forever at war with the royal houses. Sending our troops to die in WW1 was a big mistake because it was a war between royal kindred wearing many crowns – they all close kin to the Emperor and Empress of Mexico. We should have drafted the grandsons of Confederate Traitors – only – and sent them to fight for their beloved royalty.
Jon Presco
In April 1866 John Bigelow, the U.S. Minister to France, after continuous pressure and polite threats, reaches an understanding with Napoleon: the troops in Mexico will be brought home in three stages, the last being set on November 1, 1867. On July 30 Napoleon proposes a new agreement to Maximilian: in exchange for half the revenues of the customs of Tampico and Vera Cruz, he is prepared to withdraw his troops not immediately but, yes: in three stages, the last on November 1, 1867.
In a speech at Bordeaux in 1852, Napoleon III famously proclaimed that “The Empire means peace” (“L’Empire, c’est la paix”), reassuring foreign governments that the new Emperor Napoleon would not attack other European powers in order to extend the French Empire. He was, however, thoroughly determined to follow a strong foreign policy to extend France’s power and glory, and warned that he would not stand by and allow another European power to threaten its neighbour. He was also a partisan of a “policy of nationalities” (principe des nationalités) re-casting the map of Europe, sweeping away small principalities to create unified nation-states, even when this seemed to have little relevance to France’s material interests. In this he remained influenced by the themes of his uncle’s policy, as related in the Mémorial de Sainte-Hélène, such as Italian unification and a united Europe. These two factors led Napoleon to a certain adventurism in foreign policy, in the opinion of some contemporaries, although this was tempered by pragmatism.[22]
Eight world rulers (heads of the beast) are listed in Revelation 17,11: 1. Nebuchadnezzar (Dan. 2,38), 2. Cyrus (Isa. 44,28), 3. Alexander the Great (Dan. 8,21), 4. Augustus (Luk. 2,1), 5. Charlemagne, 6. Napoleon I, 7. Napoleon II (the second Napoleon to rule, known to history as Napoleon III), 8. Napoleon III (the third of this name to rule, who according to Revelation 17,8 is to come up out of the abyss through the effects of Satanic power).
New Virginia Colony
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
The New Virginia Colony was a colonization plan in central Mexico, to resettle ex-Confederates and any other immigrants from any nation.[1] and other Americans after the American Civil War. The largest settlement was Carlota, approximately midway between Mexico City and Veracruz, although other settlements were planned near Tampico, Monterrey, Cuernavaca, and Chihuahua.[2]
The venture was conceived by Commodore Matthew Fontaine Maury. Because of his work for the Confederate Secret Service, Maury was unable to return home to Virginia.[3] Maury, as an internationally famous oceanographer, and navy man was a long-time friend of Maximilian and had been awarded a Medal by Maximilian before the civil war. Maximilian had also been head of the Austrian navy and awarded Maury the medal for his work in oceanography. Maximilian liked Maury and his idea of inviting Confederates and anyone else to resettle in Mexico, and offered land grants to any who would come and stay. Slavery had not been allowed in Mexico before Maximilian arrived and still was not allowed so no settler could bring in any slaves into Mexico. The new Emperor was also eagerly seeking settlers from Germany, Austria, and France, as part of his strategy to rebuild and Europeanize Mexico.[4]
Maury explained a network of planned settlements to Maximilian who liked what was suggested. These were to be primarily in the agricultural regions surrounding Mexico City, but also in the northern areas around Monterrey and Chihuahua. American “colonization agents” were appointed to districts, and Maury began to prepare surveys for the proposed colonies. One of Maury’s colleagues was explorer and archeologist William Marshall Anderson, whose brother, U.S. Brevet Major General Robert Anderson, commanded the Union soldiers at Fort Sumter. Two others had worked under Maury when he was the superintendent of the U.S. Naval Observatory. His eldest son, Col. Richard Launcelot Maury, had also emigrated to Mexico. Maury had plans for his entire family to eventually move there to a colony. Virginia was war-torn, “go back? –to what!” declared Maury.[5]
Confederate Generals such as Fighting Joe Shelby, John B. Magruder, Sterling Price, and Alexander W. Terrell made their way down to Mexico after the war.[6]
Throughout this period, Maximilian’s regime was under attack by the Indian and mestizo leaders Benito Juárez and Porfirio Díaz. From 1865 onward, Juárez and Díaz were covertly supplied from a US Army depot in El Paso, Texas. In 1866 Napoleon III withdrew the French troops that had been supporting Maximilian, and many of the New Virginia colonists soon followed or were killed by bandits or anti-Maximilian partisans.[7]
Maximilian was shot in 1867, and the New Virginia Colony settlements mostly vanished. The peak population of these settlements is not known, but seems to have been no more than a few thousand.
Humpty Dumpty
Mexico: the French Intervention and the 2nd Empire, 1862-1867.
The threat that the U.S. poses has always been hanging as a sword of Damocles over the intervention. Only the Civil War had made it possible, and, from its start, Napoleon has sought to support the Confederacy against the Unionists. According to John Slidell, the South’s commissioner to France, the Emperor was “convinced of the propriety of the general recognition of the Confederate States by European Powers, but that the commerce of France and the success of the Mexican Expedition would be jeopardized by a rupture with the United States, that, in case of trouble with that country, no other Power than England possessed a sufficient navy to give him efficient aid in a war on the ocean which, however, he did not anticipate, if England would join with him in recognition.” The English were not prepared to do so, and Napoleon never dared to openly support the South, though warships were built in Bordeaux for the Confederate navy.
For reasons we’ve seen before, the Union was fiercely opposed to the establishment of an empire in Mexico. On April 4, 1864, the Senate and the House of Representatives had passed a resolution in opposition to the recognition of it, and, although no action could be undertaken at the moment, Napoleon was repeatedly informed of the position of the United States by its Secretary of State, William Seward. Maximilian’s envoy, Señor Arroyo, sent to Washington with a view to obtain this recognition, wasn’t even received.
And now, things take a turn for the worse. On April 9, 1865, General Lee surrenders to the Union Army, and the Civil War comes to an end. Suddenly the scene of military interest shifts to the Rio Grande. 60,000 Union soldiers are massed upon the frontier. And although the support is as yet official nor open, the ranks of the Liberals are reinforced by volunteers from the U.S.
NEXT PAGE
PREVIOUS PAGE
To raise the spirits, the sovereigns decide to make a big thing of Independence day, 15 September. A promenade in the capital on a carpet of flowers, followed by a Te Deum in the cathedral, a grand ceremony on the Plaza Mayor, and a ball, the most brilliant since their arrival in Mexico. It is a complete failure. On their “Champs Elysees” from Chapultepec to the city only a handful of people could be bothered to come and watch the imperial coach pass by. When they arrive at the vast and almost empty Plaza Mayor, small separate groups, under the windows of the palace and in the shadow of the cathedral, start crying “Death to the Emperor! Death to Carlotta! Death to the French!”.
That evening, in a magnificent robe set with precious stones, the Empress presides over the ball. Without a smile. She probably didn’t hear it, but she must certainly have guessed what was whispered: “What an insolence, what a clumsiness, above all. I bet that tomorrow, the courier leaving for Europe will be laden with acrid remarks on the inconsiderate sovereigns that parade about while people die at the foot of their palace”.
And the day holds yet another surprise for the sorely tried Empress. With his taste for the symbolic, and regardless of his wife’s feelings about the matter, Maximilian has chosen independence day to sign the adoption papers of two grandsons of the liberator and first emperor of Mexico: the 2-year old Augustín and the 15-year old Salvador de Iturbide. The first one to be raised in Chapultepec to be the heir to his throne, the second one assumedly to be kept in reserve.
If the Emperor expects to regain the enthusiasm of his people by linking his name to that of the freedom fighter and establish a “Mexican” dynasty, he is wrong again. But the American newspapers are happy to inform their readers of yet another crime of the Austrian usurper: kidnapping. Poor Maximilian simply can do no good.
“We are here, I can assure you, my good father and dear mother, in a miserable country, completely different from what one imagines in France (…) Not at all wanting to be pessimistic, one is forced to recognise that it goes wrong. Between them, the emperor and the empress make mistakes as if vying with each other and one hears words that may be translated and summarised in one only: ‘leave!’ Every day, they lose in consideration. I was going to say prestige, but it is a long time since they had any left and that surprises me not at all (…). They have no wish and no understanding except for childish things, for regulating the style of the breeches and the dress one wears at court. The only functionary that is very occupied, and really very seriously, is the master of ceremonies. Everything that touches on etiquette is of an unequalled importance and regulated, most of the time, by the emperor and the empress themselves. On top of that, he makes a fuss about little trifles that vexes and irritates the feelings by throwing a certain ridicule on those who commit them. Certainly, everything is not lost, but there is a lot to do if one wants to regain the ground lost.” The Comte de Béarn is not the only one to speak such harsh words.
But there is also another side, which might offer a chance to stem the tide. On June 28 U.S. General Sheridan reports to General Grant: “Kirby Smith, Magruder, Shelby, Slaughter, Walker and others of military rank have gone to Mexico. Everything on wheels -artillery, horses, mules etc.- have been run over into Mexico. Large and small bands of rebel soldiers and some citizens, amounting to about 2,000, have crossed the Rio Grande into Mexico (…) The rebels who have gone to Mexico have sympathies with the Imperialists, and this feeling is undoubtedly reciprocated.”
The Imperial government, as well as individual landowners, encourages refugees from the north to come and develop the agricultural resources of the country. A plan is devised for a colony of Confederates in the province of Sonora which, obviously, would form a formidable bulwark against a threat from the north. Napoleon is all for it, and promises every facility and assistance. All that is missing is the signature of Maximilian. But the Emperor who, for no intelligible reason at all, is still hoping on a recognition of his empire by the U.S., is against it, and so another chance of salvation is thrown away.
“God helps that our sovereign opens his eyes, because by holding them closed, everything goes wrong”, sighs the Grand Marshal Almonte. But as his empire is going downhill, the sovereign closes them even firmer.
Not only the Americans are nagging Napoleon to put an end to his Mexican escapade; on 7 March 1865 the Duc de Morny, the man who so completely dominated the Corps Législatif, inconveniently dies. In him, Napoleon loses a valuable safety valve on the boiling kettle of French politics. In the beginning of 1866, Napoleon has to send the Baron Saillard to Mexico with the notification that the Corps Législatif can no longer free funds for the maintenance of the troops in Mexico, and that he therefore is forced to withdraw them as soon a possible.
For any sensible man, this would have been a gift from heaven. Here is a golden opportunity to get out of the mess and return home without loss of face. Now Maximilian can, and righteously so, publicly accuse Napoleon of breaching the agreement that is the fundament of the empire. But his answer is as stupid as it is dignified: “Monsieur mon frère, Your Majesty considers himself (…) not able to observe the solemn treaties that he has signed with me hardly two years ago, and he has disclosed this with an honesty that cannot do him but honour. I am too much your friend to want to be (…) the cause of a danger for Your Majesty or his dynasty. I propose therefore, with a cordiality equal to yours, that you withdraw immediately your troops from the American continent. On my part, guided by honour, I will seek to come to terms with my compatriots in a loyal way and worthy of a Habsburg (…)
When he comes to his senses after a good night’s sleep, he hastily sends his secretary, Félix Eloin, to Europe. He is glacially received in Paris, where the Emperor “didn’t even once shake hands” with him. The audience in Brussels with Charlotte’s brother, Leopold II (her father has died last December) was less unfriendly, but equally fruitless.
More delegations and representatives are sent on missions to Rome and Vienna, all of them to no avail. Almonte, returned to grace, -Max pays him the ambiguous compliment “the best that Mexico has produced”- has another go in Paris, but has to report back to the same effect as the message conveyed through Saillard.
In April 1866 John Bigelow, the U.S. Minister to France, after continuous pressure and polite threats, reaches an understanding with Napoleon: the troops in Mexico will be brought home in three stages, the last being set on November 1, 1867. On July 30 Napoleon proposes a new agreement to Maximilian: in exchange for half the revenues of the customs of Tampico and Vera Cruz, he is prepared to withdraw his troops not immediately but, yes: in three stages, the last on November 1, 1867.
And Napoleon means business: he instructs Bazaine formally to advance Maximilian’s government no more funds, and to pay only the auxiliary force. The Mexican army may dissolve.
To everyone it is as clear as day that the French are shutting up shop, and that the empire is finished. To everyone, except to Their Imperial Majesties, who have by now completely lost their way in cloud-cuckoo-land.
Rosamond Press 
Leave a comment