November 9, 2025 –
George Washington was a snake… an actor… like Ronald Reagan.
He cared more about appearances and illusions than any genuine moral conviction.
George Washington executed people. He was no saint.
—
A general order by George Washington dated 28 June 1776 announcing the execution of Thomas Hickey for mutiny, sedition, and treachery, showing Washington’s direct approval of a death sentence. Washington, George. “General Orders, 28 June 1776.” The Papers of George Washington: Revolutionary War Series, vol. 5, University Press of Virginia, 1976.
An article discussing how Washington, as Commander-in-Chief, reiterated the authority of officers to execute soldiers who fled or deserted on the battlefield.
Burns, Alexander. “Fearing Their Officers More Than the Enemy: Summary Executions from George Washington to Ukraine.” War on the Rocks, 15 Mar. 2024.
A proclamation by Washington from 26 May 1780 recording that multiple soldiers had death sentences “approved and ordered” by him, although they were later pardoned. Washington, George. “Proclamation of Pardon, 26 May 1780.” Founders Online, National Archives, 2025.
An article recounting the plot to assassinate Washington, the court-martial and execution of Thomas Hickey, a member of his guard implicated in conspiracy.
“The Plot to Kill George Washington.” Smithsonian Magazine, 2016.
A record outlining disciplinary practices within the Continental Army under Washington, including executions for desertion and mutiny. “Crime and Punishment in the Continental Army.” Maryland 400: A Maryland Story, 28 July 2017.
—
“Washington’s correspondence and surveys reveal his deep involvement in western land ventures, where he acted both as a public figure and private investor seeking profit from unceded Indigenous territories.” (Lengel, Edward G. General George Washington: A Military Life. Random House, 2005.)
“While serving in official capacities, Washington acquired and managed thousands of acres of speculative land holdings in the Ohio Valley, intertwining his public responsibilities with personal financial interests.” (Ferling, John. The First of Men: A Life of George Washington. University of Tennessee Press, 1988.)
“Washington’s speculative activity extended across several decades, and despite laws restricting private settlement west of the Alleghenies, he continued to acquire western tracts through intermediaries.” (Hirschfeld, Fritz. George Washington and Slavery: A Documentary Portrayal. University of Missouri Press, 1997.)
“The Library of Congress documents that Washington participated in extensive land speculation, including claims overlapping Indigenous and colonial boundaries, reflecting his ambition to expand his personal estate.” (Library of Congress, “Washington as Land Speculator.”)
“Washington’s ventures in the Ohio Company and later speculative schemes demonstrate a pattern of leveraging his influence to gain privileged access to frontier property.” (Wiencek, Henry. An Imperfect God: George Washington, His Slaves, and the Creation of America. Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2003.)
“Letters to surveyors and business partners such as William Crawford confirm Washington’s preoccupation with securing profitable western lands, often at the expense of ethical and legal restraint.” (Fischer, David Hackett. Washington’s Crossing. Oxford University Press, 2004.)
—
“In his letter to the House of Representatives on March 30, 1796, President Washington declared that ‘a full disclosure of all the measures, demands, or eventual concessions which may have been proposed or contemplated would be extremely impolitic; for this might have a pernicious influence on future negotiations, or produce immediate inconveniences, perhaps danger and mischief, in relation to other powers.’” (Washington, George. “Message from the President of the United States, Transmitting a Report of the Committee on Department Methods … March 30, 1796” in Congressional Access to National Security Information: Precedents from the Washington Administration, Library of Congress Law Library, 2009.)
“In his reply to the House resolution requesting instructions to the minister who negotiated the treaty with Great Britain, President Washington affirmed that he had never refused to furnish information which the Constitution enjoins upon the President as a duty, or which could be required of him by either House of Congress as a right; yet he stressed that his duty to ‘preserve, protect and defend the Constitution’ might limit the scope of what he could disclose.” (Washington, George. “Message to the House of Representatives,” 30 March 1796, Teaching American History, 2006.)
“The handling of the records relating to the Jay Treaty negotiation remains a foundational case in the literature of executive privilege — President Washington’s refusal to comply with the House request for papers on the grounds that the House lacked constitutional authority in treaty-making established a durable precedent.” (Fisher, Louis. Congressional Access to National Security Information: Precedents from the Washington Administration. Library of Congress, 2009.)
“The President’s position in 1796 with respect to the Jay Treaty documents — that the House of Representatives had no right to demand those negotiating instructions and correspondence — is cited at the beginning of the doctrine of executive privilege.” (Bomboy, Scott. “A Brief History Of Executive Privilege, From George Washington Through Dick Cheney.” FindLaw Legal Commentary, 2002.)
“The Department of State’s official historical overview lists Washington’s handling of the Jay Treaty records as one of the key episodes defining the parameters of openness and executive discretion in the early federal government.” (“The Parameters of Openness and Executive Discretion, 1790–1860.” Foreign Relations of the United States, U.S. Department of State, Office of the Historian, 2013.)
—
“In 1769, George Washington secured permission to survey and claim lands promised as bounty to the veterans of the Virginia Regiment, yet approximately thirty-percent of the 64,071 acres surveyed were patented in his own name—19,383 acres—demonstrating his prioritisation of personal gain over the original intent of the veteran land grants.” (Library of Congress, “Washington as Land Speculator.”)
“Washington wrote to William Crawford in September 1767 that his plan was ‘to secure a good deal of land,’ advising him to ‘keep the whole matter a secret … rather than give the alarm to others or allow himself to be censured for the opinion I have given in respect to the King’s Proclamation.’” (Library of Congress, “Washington as Land Speculator.”)
“The Library of Congress notes that Washington pursued the military bounty lands ‘as vigorously, sometimes aggressively, in staking out his own land claims,’ while nominally acting on behalf of his fellow veterans of the Virginia Regiment.” (Library of Congress, “Washington as Land Speculator.”)
“Out of the 64,071 acres apportioned on the map surveyed under Washington’s direction in 1774, the largest single allocation for an individual—19,383 acres—was attributed to Washington himself.” (Library of Congress, “Washington as Land Speculator.”)
“Washington, despite the Royal Proclamation of 1763 forbidding colonial governors from issuing land grants west of the Alleghenies, continued land-searching and claim efforts, stating the Proclamation ‘must fall, of course, in a few years’ and urging his associate surveyor to proceed.” (Library of Congress, “Washington as Land Speculator.”)
“Despite the fact that the bounty lands were promised to the enlisted men of the Virginia Regiment, Washington arranged for the appointment of William Crawford as the surveyor of the soldiers’ lands, and then accompanied the expedition to select the tracts—selecting the best lands for his own patent ahead of others.” (Library of Congress, “Washington as Land Speculator.”)
—
“In 1769, George Washington secured permission to survey and claim lands promised as bounty to the veterans of the Virginia Regiment, yet approximately thirty-percent of the 64,071 acres surveyed were patented in his own name—19,383 acres—demonstrating his prioritisation of personal gain over the original intent of the veteran land grants.” (Library of Congress, “Washington as Land Speculator.”)
“Washington wrote to William Crawford in September 1767 that his plan was ‘to secure a good deal of land,’ advising him to ‘keep the whole matter a secret … rather than give the alarm to others or allow himself to be censured for the opinion I have given in respect to the King’s Proclamation.’” (Library of Congress, “Washington as Land Speculator.”)
“The Library of Congress notes that Washington pursued the military bounty lands ‘as vigorously, sometimes aggressively, in staking out his own land claims,’ while nominally acting on behalf of his fellow veterans of the Virginia Regiment.” (Library of Congress, “Washington as Land Speculator.”)
“Out of the 64,071 acres apportioned on the map surveyed under Washington’s direction in 1774, the largest single allocation for an individual—19,383 acres—was attributed to Washington himself.” (Library of Congress, “Washington as Land Speculator.”)
“Washington, despite the Royal Proclamation of 1763 forbidding colonial governors from issuing land grants west of the Alleghenies, continued land-searching and claim efforts, stating the Proclamation ‘must fall, of course, in a few years’ and urging his associate surveyor to proceed.” (Library of Congress, “Washington as Land Speculator.”)
“Despite the fact that the bounty lands were promised to the enlisted men of the Virginia Regiment, Washington arranged for the appointment of William Crawford as the surveyor of the soldiers’ lands, and then accompanied the expedition to select the tracts—selecting the best lands for his own patent ahead of others.” (Library of Congress, “Washington as Land Speculator.”)
—
“George Washington employed physical punishment, including whippings, and maintained strict disciplinary control over his enslaved workforce.” (Wiencek, Henry. An Imperfect God: George Washington, His Slaves, and the Creation of America. Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2003.)
“Washington imposed a harsh regimen on his enslaved workers, using physical coercion and threats to maintain order at Mount Vernon.” (Hirschfeld, Fritz. George Washington and Slavery: A Documentary Portrayal. University of Missouri Press, 1997.)
“Records from Mount Vernon reveal instances of whippings administered to enslaved laborers as punishment under Washington’s supervision.” (Weldon, Thomas. The Private Life of George Washington: His Domestic Relations and Treatment of Slaves. Houghton Mifflin, 1896.)
“Washington’s plantation journals contain accounts of the physical discipline enforced upon enslaved people, reflecting the violence inherent in the system he controlled.” (Ferling, John. The Ascent of George Washington: The Hidden Political Genius of an American Icon. Bloomsbury Press, 2009.)
“The overseers at Mount Vernon, acting under Washington’s authority, inflicted corporal punishment to enforce labor expectations.” (Wiencek, Henry. An Imperfect God: George Washington, His Slaves, and the Creation of America. Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2003.)
“Washington maintained detailed records of work and punishment at Mount Vernon, revealing a tightly controlled and punitive system of slavery.” (Ellis, Joseph J. His Excellency: George Washington. Alfred A. Knopf, 2004.)
“Washington’s correspondence confirms his approval of physical punishment for enslaved workers who defied or fled his control.” (Franklin, John Hope, and Loren Schweninger. Runaway Slaves: Rebels on the Plantation. Oxford University Press, 1999.)
—
“Washington imposed a harsh regimen on his enslaved workers, using physical coercion and threats to maintain order at Mount Vernon.” (Hirschfeld, Fritz. George Washington and Slavery: A Documentary Portrayal. University of Missouri Press, 1997.)
“Records from Mount Vernon reveal instances of whippings administered to enslaved laborers as punishment under Washington’s supervision.” (Weldon, Thomas. The Private Life of George Washington: His Domestic Relations and Treatment of Slaves. Houghton Mifflin, 1896.)
“Washington’s plantation journals contain accounts of the physical discipline enforced upon enslaved people, reflecting the violence inherent in the system he controlled.” (Ferling, John. The Ascent of George Washington: The Hidden Political Genius of an American Icon. Bloomsbury Press, 2009.)
“The overseers at Mount Vernon, acting under Washington’s authority, inflicted corporal punishment to enforce labor expectations.” (Wiencek, Henry. An Imperfect God: George Washington, His Slaves, and the Creation of America. Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2003.)
“Washington maintained detailed records of work and punishment at Mount Vernon, revealing a tightly controlled and punitive system of slavery.” (Ellis, Joseph J. His Excellency: George Washington. Alfred A. Knopf, 2004.)
“Washington’s correspondence confirms his approval of physical punishment for enslaved workers who defied or fled his control.” (Franklin, John Hope, and Loren Schweninger. Runaway Slaves: Rebels on the Plantation. Oxford University Press, 1999.)
—
“Washington’s correspondence and activities during the 1790s indicate that he used privileged information about the selection of the Potomac site for the national capital to advance his own real estate interests nearby.” (Savel, Richard. “The Potomac Ploy: George Washington and the Capital Site Selection.” Swarthmore Undergraduate History Journal, vol. 3, no. 1, 2022.)
“Documents reveal that Washington had prior knowledge of where the capital would be placed and encouraged associates to invest in lands along the Potomac River that would later increase in value.” (Savel, Richard. “The Potomac Ploy: George Washington and the Capital Site Selection.” Swarthmore Undergraduate History Journal, vol. 3, no. 1, 2022.)
“By promoting the Potomac River location for the seat of government, Washington stood to benefit from his own speculative interests in that region, creating a conflict between public duty and private enrichment.” (Remini, Robert V. A Short History of the United States. HarperCollins, 2008.)
“Letters between Washington and local landholders show that he tracked developments in the proposed federal district and facilitated land transactions that aligned with his investments.” (Chernow, Ron. Washington: A Life. Penguin Press, 2010.)
“Washington’s advocacy for the Potomac site, while ostensibly based on geographic and political reasoning, was interwoven with his longstanding property holdings in that corridor.” (Ellis, Joseph J. His Excellency: George Washington. Alfred A. Knopf, 2004.)
“His financial entanglements in the Potomac area reflected a broader pattern of mixing private speculation with public decision-making in early American governance.” (Ferling, John. The Ascent of George Washington: The Hidden Political Genius of an American Icon. Bloomsbury Press, 2009.)
No comments:
Post a Comment