POLITICS: When Is a Coup Not a Coup? When It Gets Overturned – USSA News

 

(This article contains the new CIA song)

by Mary W Maxwell (Mary’s Substack)

In November 1963, when I was lucky to be 16 years old, the government of my dear country suffered a coup d’etat. In July 2025, when I was lucky to be 78 years old, the coup-makers finally got identified and accused. So now it is possible for the good life – the heady life that we were living under Kennedy — to get a second chance.

Today, it’s official: a group of criminals – whose forebears have probably been running the world for centuries, behind the scenes – did the coup. They killed “JFK.” For six decades we were not able to make that statement. We were weak and afraid. So we refrained from calling it a coup. It was merely an assassination. And we let the coup makers name the shooter: “Lee Harvey Oswald.” Age 24. What a joke.

There are flaws in the US Constittution that allowed the bad situation to last for six decades. And there are flaws in human nature that caused us to cling to lies, rather than to get down to business and restore citizen power(which is the US’s claim to fame, is it not?). In this article I attempt to explain all that, and also suggest some steps we should take.

The Constitution

In 1787, some guys — well, it wasn’t gals, was it – got together in “Convention Hall “ in Phildelphia. They wanted to solidify ths new nation, the United States of America. After winning the war of Independence against Britain (1775-1783), we had a rough document, “The Articles of Confederatiion.” It confederated the 13 states that had been separate colonies. Now, in 1787, the plan was to create a more tangible national “thing.”

But not fully national. The states were to remain sovereign. Thus ‘the Framers’ in Philadelphia created a document, to be ratified by the people in their states, that would settle the exact powers of the federal government. Once ratified, that document would be the final authority, specifying the rights of citizens, of states, and of “the feds.” This piece of parchment made history, and numerous other countries imitated it.

The Framers built in what looked to be sufficient checks and balances to prevernt a tyranny from developing. History had taught them that potential tryants need reining in, or else they will inevitably expand their powers. So the Framers broke the federal government into three branches and hoped each would be jealous of its turf. An incursion of the Executive onto the turf of the legislature could be met by impeachment. (“Out you go, Buddy,”) Unconstitutional behavior by the legislature could be met by an prder from a Supreme Court to stop doing that.

I suppose the Constitution, aka the Parchment, should have put limits on personal wealth. After all, the super-rich can pay anyone to help them avoid the law. It looks to me that the super-rich do in fact do this. They pay legislators (Congresspersons) to write laws that advantage them. They pay federal courts and prosecutors to leave them alone. They pay publicists to keep their reputation shiny and bright. Most of the Framers were theselves wealthy; this may explain why money hardly gets a mention in the parchment.

Another fault is that the Constitution does not spell out a certain fact of social existence — that people need to act together for their society. This did not need to be spelled out in 1787 as it was already flourishing. Your occupational role was something to be proud of. For example, Henry Wadsworth Longfellow (1807-1882) wrote the following in his poem “The Village Blacksmith”:

“…. His brow is wet with honest sweat, He earns whate’er he can, And looks the whole world in the face, For he owes not any man….

“Week in, week out, from morn till night, You can hear his bellows blow;
You can hear him swing his heavy sledge,With measured beat and slow…..”

At the moment we have many groups in society that barely communicate with one another. And “employment” means you feel you’re working for the one boss or the one huge corporation, not for your fellow man. Today’s old Constitution does not take these issues into account.

We can’t go into it here, but even some clear directions written into the Constution are flouted by government. An example is the fact that Article I, section 8, which lays out the grants of power to Congress (e.g. it may legislate on the coining of money or the raising of an army) does not grant any power to regulate health. In my view, “orders” coming from the CDC (Centers for Disease Prevention and Control) regarding medicine are plainly unconstitutional.

In regard to the United States’ failure to correct the coup d’etat of 1963, I think general corruption of the pollical players is the simple cause. Our cultural respect for secrecy is also a cause.

Human Nature

Respect for secrecy is also part of of human nature. We bow to the holders of secrets, thinking perhaps that the very fact that they have secrets means they are important and worthy.

Indeed “bowing to” is very prevalent in the species Homo sapiens and is mainly instinctive. Hence it usually operates unconsciously. As soon as we receive the signal that triggers us to respect secret-holders, we bow without even realizing that this is a bit daft. (MIghtn’t they be holding a secret plan to harm us?)

In our modern culture there is also a constant throwback to the ancient instinct to close ranks. The clever term “national security” is standardly used by someone who wants to conduct an illegal or unconstitutiol actvity. Members of the public feel that to interfere with this imaginary object – national security – would be seen as disloyalty to country. And therefore, it may leave one almost ostracized by angry neighbors.

In regard to the assassination of President Kennedy, however, I suspect that our willingness to accept a national-secuirty justification for exempting leaders from accountability is mainly based on fear. As there was no outstanding American who was willing to shout “Inside job, inside job,” your basic ordinary Joe hardly dared say it. He could have been arrested, right?

Wrong. The brilliant First Amendment of the US Constittion (part of the Bill of Righs) makes it definitely OK for you to yell anything along the lines of “Sinful government, sinful government!” In fact you should win a medal of honor if you do so, based on noticing genuinely sinful government.

And now there is also the reality of behind-the-scenes control of whistleblowing. Everyone knows that some whistelblowers die “in unexplained circumstances.” A few of them have commited ‘suicide’ by shooting themselves in the head – twice – a physical impossibility.

Unrelatedly, I want to mention how important it was in my career to have found out (initially from Carol Rutz, in 2005) that we have many sadists who are protected by government agencies such as the CIA. This is quite odd, and is outrageous. Why is it happening? I am not sure but two possibilies come to mind.

One is that the reason we had a coup in 1963 and have had a secret government for the 62 following years, is that persons who are sadistic are the ones who founded world government. The other is that the practical demands of running a secret government lead to ever more need for the top dogs to use cruelty in their reign. They know they are vulnerable to aattck by the multitude and will do anything to avoid that. “Cut off a child’s fingers? No problem.”

As for the human nature of authority, we all seek direction and protection from a parental figure. The baby is born completely dependent. It has mechnisms in the brain to seek approval from the elders by being obedient. Moreover, it has mechanism for mimicry — what we see others doing, we do. Our culture today is doing some pretty stupid things but the easiest way to cope with that is to give in. Or at least conformity is a smart thing to do in the short term despite its being lethal, perhaps, in the long term. We need to talk about all this.

Can We Get Back to Where We Were, Pre-coup?

As far as I know, with some caveats about the unreliability of history books, American society was joyous in 1963. There was a reasoble amount of control over our government. Leaders in other fields — artists, priests, journalists, philosophers — could wield a megaphone when necessary. This is no longer true. Good voices get silenced.

The social acceptance of deception, whether practiced by businesses or by officials, has been a major cause of our troubles and I say it has to be eliminated. =Continuing on with it would be ridiculous. Truth about facts, about reality, is the mens of balancing the society. Whatever is happenng, especially by the powerful – since they are the ones most able to perform forbidden deeds – needs to be on the table for discussion.

Sure, it takes guts to say something unpopular, but you might quickly make it become popular by saying it.

The peculiar thing that happened a few days ago, in Juy 2025, and which has blasted me with hope, is that ordinary use of the law — by a JFK assassination researcher, Jefferson Morley — suddenly worked. Well, not exactly suddenly; he had been trying since 2003 to procure some information, using the Freedom of Information Act. He wanted to confirm that a CIA man had been dealing with Lee Harvey Oswald well in advance of the famous day in Dallas, November 1963.

Yes. The relevant document is now released. That fellow, Mr Joannides, did deal with Oswald. This, I am sure, automatically rules out the official narrative that Oswald was a communist (or something like that) who made a personal decision to kill Kennedy. The name Oswald shuld be expunged from our discussion of the case. The spotlight should move to Joannides. He was most likely setting the stage (in January 1963) for a narrative of a lone gunman. This narrative would – and certainly did – keep the public from noticing an internal coup d’etat.

Essentially, the CIA has admitted its guilt, by hiding the relevant document in Joannides’ personnel file. This is wonderful and is cause for rejoicing but it must not stop there. The CIA will have to admit its guilt openly. (Note: I am using the term ‘CIA’ loosely to mean our hidden government, That also includes FBI and the US Secret Service.) Possily some immunity could be offered to peole who will bare their souls.

We have plenty of good law on the books to deal with governmental crime. Honest! I will list that elsewhere. I want to wrap up the thesis that a coup can be undone.

Yesterday a friend sent me the notice from Jeff Morley’s website (JFKfacts.org) stating this great news about the Joannides file. I immediately left a comment under the article. I said I will now “stick it” to the CIA regarding a case I work on, the Boston Marathom bombing. We know that the boy who is on Death Row, Jahar Tsarnaev, is about as guilty as Lee Harvey Oswald – I mean he’s not guilty.

Jahar and his killed-by-the-FBI bro, Tamerlan, were in contact with CIA and/or FBI, as informants. Many immigrants are manipulated into doing dirty work for the feds. Jahar is still alive and could talk, but the Boston federal court has ordered him to be kept under SAMs, “special administrative measures” meaning no contact with the outside wordl except his parents and his “Public Defender.” Come on, Bostonians, see my book “Stop Lying about the Marathon Bomnbing, Or Else.” It’s also a free PDF.

Anyway, after I announcd a plan to stick it to the CIA, a song started to come to me, to the tune of Camptown Races: “Let’s all stick it to the CIA.” Please make this sing go viral. And if you can perform it, please let me know at [email protected]. It captures the new arrangement of People Power. It’s also a mini-compendium of conspiracy theory:

“Sticking It to the CIA”, by Mary Maxwell. [This is the tune to use]:

1. Let’s all stick it to the CIA, Doo dah, doo dah.

Morley did it for J.F.K., oh doo dah day.

For twen-ty years he knocked on the door, Doo dah, doo dah.

Representative Luna then gave him the floor, oh doo dah day.

“Lee Harvey” met with CIA. Congress has revealed their works.

So let’s grab a pen and make a list, of what else got done by those jerks.

2. Tonkin Gulf was LBJ’s false-flag, Doo dah, doo dah.

He’d started a war to kill our own, back in Nineteen Sixty-three.

Reagan’s CIA sent cocaine to the ghettos, in Ir-an-Con-tra.

But Porter Goss put the kibosh on hearings, so Ollie walked away scot free.

In the Nineties, Clinton and Ren. did Waco and OKC.

Who cares if McVeigh and Yeakey paid the price, It’s for “National Se-cur-ity.”

3. Meanwhile, Allen Dulles was doing mind control, (like MK–Ul-tra).

So the CIA bet we’d be dumb enough, to take Nine-Eleven lying down.

Yep, it seems we’re plenty thick, blam-ing “A-rabs.”

But don’t you worry, we have learned our lesson. Anna Luna wears the crown.

We’ve had “school shootings” here and there (Ask me about Sandy Hook.)

But by God, in the Twenties, Covid smartened us up, and now we’ll bring those bastards to book.

AND NOW WE’LL BRING THOSE BASTARDS TO BOOK.

Please credit Stephen Foster and the 2^nd South Carolina String Band

Mary’s Substack is free today. But if you enjoyed this post, you can tell Mary’s Substack that their writing is valuable by pledging a future subscription.

The post When Is a Coup Not a Coup? When It Gets Overturned appeared first on Gumshoe News.