Is Seven Days in May, a book and then a movie from the 1960s, relevant for now?

The book was published in 1962. I was 7 at the time.  The movie came out in 1964.  I don't think I ever saw it in the theater, but I watched it on TV several times, perhaps before I read the book, which I believe I did in Junior High School, though my memory is very imprecise on these details. The book is about a plot by the military to overthrow the government.  It was very much steeped in the politics of then, as the Wikipedia entry details.

I thought of Seven Days in May by considering some questions about January 6 that to my knowledge haven't been asked, the enormous coverage of that event notwithstanding. As Trump was Commander in Chief at the time, why didn't the January 6 plot come from within the government, either some element of the military or a different element from the intelligence services?  I will leave it to the reader to puzzle over this one and come up with answers of the reader's own choosing.  Now, take the hypothetical where a plot of this sort actually was possible.  If you compare it to the plot that actually happened, does it make it seem that the execution of that plan was quite amateurish, in spite of the terror and violence it did produce?  Here I will weigh in with my own view.  That's how it seemed to me.

Now I want to get at how the events of January 6 impacted the views of those higher up in the military as well as those in the then Republican establishment who are now on the outs with Trump; Mike Pence comes to mind here.  But to do that let's take a step back to earlier and what the views in the military were then.  

It has been quite a while since I stopped watching the News Hour on PBS.  Judy Woodruff was the host then and the Tea Party was very much in the vernacular.  I became overly frustrated with interviews which had one Democrat and one Republican.  The latter invariably stonewalled and the questioner, out of an attempt at fairness, didn't hold the person's feet to the fire.  I didn't need the aggravation.  But before I quit watching, I recall seeing on many occasions a high ranking military official on the show. Invariably the person would say that in their official capacity they are non-partisan and would not take sides in any political debate.  Does that remain true today or did the events of January 6 change that in a particular way?

As a total outsider to all of this, I can only speculate as to the answer.  But I think it likely that insiders have, at the least, posed similar questions for themselves.  It seems prudent, one would think, to see if the normal processes would prevent Trump getting reelected. In that case no Seven-Days-in-May-like plot would be needed, so none should be attempted.  But recent events suggest that the normal processes have played themselves out.  So what now?

Let me speculate a little more, albeit in the form of a question.  Suppose that there is some group of insiders who have hatched such a plot, President Biden is aware of this, and these insiders have arranged to give the President deniability.  Would that be a reason to stay in the race for reelection, the very poor debate performance and low polling numbers notwithstanding?  

In the Seven Days in May story, the good guy is President Jordan Lyman and the bad guy is the egotistical general and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff James Mattoon Scott.  Do we have a similar situation today, but with the good guy and bad guy roles reversed?