They were at the height of their popularity when they were scrapped by GM et al - you seem to be more influenced by lingering GM PR than any actual history. For example, can you give any accounting whatsoever for your claim that
"No one in power in the US wanted to protect the Streetcars in the 1920s to the 1970s"
"the hatred of Streetcars was greater in Urban America among the Upper Middle Class then it has ever been in Rural America"
"The hatred of Streetcars by the Upper Middle Class did not end in the 1960s"
"...even then they was massive objections to keeping the Streetcars...but the powers that be, they hated streetcars that much".
This is nonsense - cities loved them. They were economical, and they worked. And you seem to think that bribes are required for illegal activity (antitrust has nothing to do with bribes) or that a running total of offenses is what determines guilt ("most of their actions were legal even under the Sherman Anti-trust act" ). They were guilty of antitrust - coordination with other companies to put still other companies out of business - and that is historical fact:
"Every person who shall monopolize, or attempt to monopolize, or combine or conspire with any other person or persons, to monopolize any part of the trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, shall be deemed guilty of a felony..."
What can't be accounted for is the leniency of their sentences, given the enormous scope and damage of their actions, which is where I'm certain bribes did come into play.
Finally, if you want to challenge mayors of two CA cities who saw the great GM conspiracy destroy their public rail systems, be my guest. Tom Bradley was my mayor for 18 years and the entire time he was regarded as a straight shooter. Unless you have can prove you know more about Los Angeles public transportation than he did, you have not a leg to stand on.
= new reply since forum marked as read