Expanding the JFK conversation for 2017

In light of recent developments, from Pizza-gate to President-elect Trump’s dismissal of the CIA’s daily briefings and its reported findings on Russian interference in the 2016 election, I want to expand the scope of the JFK Facts discussion to include these current events.

JFK documents withheld
Still secret JFK records, by agency

The point goal is not to engage in partisan politics around Trump. This blog welcomes people of all political points of view who are interested in the JFK story. I simply want to keep the question, “Will President Trump continue the JFK cover-up?” front and center from now until October 26, 2017.

Trump’s fondness for conspiracy theories and his emerging feud with the CIA may well shape  decisions to come about full JFK disclosure in 2017.

One reader called me yesterday to suggest that Vladmir Putin might favor full JFK disclosure as a way of implicating the CIA in the assassination of JFK and thus impugning America’s reputation for democratic government. I hadn’t thought of that but it is a possibility worth considering. If Trump is disdainful of CIA reporting he might favor full JFK disclosure, not for historical reasons, but to advance his geopolitical goal of better relations with Russia.

I hasten to add harming the CIA is NOT why I favor full JFK disclosure. On the contrary, I think full JFK disclosure will demonstrate control of secretive agencies like the CIA and FBI and redeem America’s oft-abused democratic traditions. A continental nation needs an intelligence service but it needs an intelligence service that obeys the law and the intent of Congress; that is accountable for past misdeeds; and that does not torture, kidnap or assassinate perceived enemies.

In any case, I welcome readers thoughts (and links) about: Trump and transparency, about Trump and the CIA; and about White House counsel to-be Donald McGahn, who may make key decisions about enforcement of the JFK Records Act;


30 thoughts on “Expanding the JFK conversation for 2017”

    1. While I’m not well informed regarding Cicero I think he and JFK had more in common than an uncommon ability to express themselves verbally.

      “I have always been of the opinion that unpopularity earned by doing what is right is not unpopularity at all but glory”

      Not invading Cuba during the bay of pigs or the Cuban missile crisis were not popular. But I’m glad to still be here.

  1. Expanding the conversation.

    I just read David Talbot’s interview of Chris Hedges, the book ‘Unspeakable’.
    It short circuited my mind. I knew some of the stuff but put into this perspective with more info…
    I feel the need to re-read it and process.

    1. They do mention JFK briefly in the book. Hedges mentions Watergate as the point of change regarding loss of faith in government/corporate takeover. Talbot contends it was the JFK Assassination. Hedges points out JFK’s death was covered up but Nixons crimes were exposed yet he was pardoned.
      JFK was the last President to confront big bidness/the power elite. E.G. US Steel, the Federal Reserve (issuing government money!), the oil depletion allowance.
      He had his brains blown out in broad daylight in a major US city in front of witnesses.
      Nixon resigned facing impeachment for trying to manipulate the cia to cover for him and being outed by them.
      They were both victims.
      A personal analysis from limited reading.

  2. The comment attributed to Allen Dulles regarding JFK who “thought he was President,” speaks volumes as to loci of real power. Power centers shift depending on circumstances of historical import. Now, the power lay in the Electoral College to wisely select the President of the United States, which, according to popular votes should be Hillary Clinton. The majority of people in America DO NOT WANT TRUMP AS THEIR PRESIDENT! Oddly, it was a minority of people who decided that the 35th President (John F Kennedy) would die; and thus, who the 36th President would be – Lyndon B Johnson. America is no different than other national governments that have come and gone – corporate and political corruption and unethical conduct and control of the teeming masses is a necessary safeguard to law and order. We can’t have people all willy-nilly actually directly electing a President; but, we ARE willing to let the government dictate to US how one of our Presidents was assassinated. If there is one tie-in to JFK assassination and the 2016 election, it is this: The holder of the office of POTUS is, again, illegitimate.

  3. In an earlier post I had requested that Jeff refrain from topics other than JFK. I was wrong. I believe it is worth scrutinizing the current CIA/TRUMP conflict. I find it fascinating that within days of Trumps announcement that the CIA would have less influence that they have had in the past via the daily intelligence briefing moving to being a Vice Presidential duty that the CIA would risk disclosure of methods and sources in their current cyber war with Russia while events from 53 years ago remain protected to protect those long gone.

    1. I agree with whoever posted about the current state of affairs relating back to the JFK Assassination. JFK’s death and the cover up surrounding it initiated a lack of faith in Our Government that has only been exacerbated by the deaths of RFK, MLK, Vietnam, Watergate, the October Surprise, Iran Contra, the 1st Iraq invasion, 9/11, WMD’s, the Great Recession and more.
      That the topics of today should be discussed somewhere, everywhere, is basic to democracy and freedom of speech.
      Everywhere is unrealistic though. We’ve passed rational discussion by many in many places. While always a touchy subject at work nobody’s been saying anything unless a co workers leanings are already known. I don’t get out much anymore but would imagine it’s taboo in a bar unless your looking for a fight. R’s, D’s, everybody should be Free to express their opinion no matter how relevant or not and the opportunity to learn from those of others without fear of recrimination.
      I’ve read recently the PE does not agree with total freedom of speech regarding the internet, and, it’s thus moving it’s base to Canada. Thanks to Jeff I maybe have the opportunity to say this while I still can: In relation to theoretically cutting out my tongue out mister pe Fuck You.

  4. 9 of the 10 EC voters requesting the brief are democrats, one Texas Republican elector has resigned rather than vote, another refuses to vote for him. In light of recent developments might more join them? The MSM seems obstinate on the subject at the moment. Is silence acceptance? Jesus, is the future of Our nation not in the balance?

    Thank you to Mr. Douglas Caddy via the education forum for the link.


    Will the JFK connection be “Forgive My Grief”?


    The last two presidents that tried to confront the CIA did not fare well. The one who did so regarding Russia (Peace and Communism at the time as opposed to Business and Globalization now ???) was killed by a ‘lone nut” in Dallas.

  5. The CIA would still have the ability to request certain files remain sealed. My fear is that Trump will use them as leverage in some kind of deal with the CIA, to get their support for some kind of shady maneuver.

    Ronnie, some members of the Electoral College have just requested to be briefed on the intelligence regarding Russia. So, who knows what will happen?

    Greg, you don’t know that. That might be your opinion, but now we’ll never know.

  6. Charles, if you really do think Sanders would rather see Trump as president as opposed to Hillary, you couldn’t be more deluded.

      1. Charles, in every election, regardless of party, there are voters who refuse to vote in the general election, or vote for the opposite party, if their preferred candidate loses. You may be right. However, the opportunity for that fact to change the outcome would not have existed without the hacking.

        To answer your question from your previous comment, it is far more likely the hacking came from outside this country. My best argument is the size, scope, and cost of the hacking, and the fact that it benefited only one party. I’ll link for you an article from the New York Times, but I wonder if you trust the source.


        The most pressing question, not being asked, is whether or not this country wants to reward Russia’s efforts.

        1. Mr. Rowell writes: “My best argument is the size, scope, and cost of the hacking, and the fact that it benefited only one party.”

          Is this not the very hallmark of a conspiracy theory?

          1. I would say that the “hallmark of a conspiracy theory” is the outright refusal to believe the most obvious answer. Which one of us fits that bill?

            Another hallmark would be that the degree to which a person refuses to condemn an obvious transgression is dependent upon the degree to which that same person’s team benefits.

            One of these days, when you’re alone in the dark, you’ll realize that Trump used you. He conspired with a foreign power to get elected president. Now he’ll govern for his own benefit, to your detriment. And, finally, he turned you into an accessory after the fact. Das vidanya, comrade.

          2. “Russian hacking” Is just the Democrats version of Birtherism.

            Mr. Rowell hallucinates that I am a Trump supporter, fantasizes about my being alone in the dark, used, and concludes with trolling red-baiting.

            Welcome to JFKFacts! Infowars for a New Generation!

        2. Charles, I apologize for assuming you were a Trump supporter. That won’t happen again. I also apologize for any other offense I may have given, be it real or perceived. At the heart of our disagreement is the question as to whether or not the government is telling the truth about Russia’s interference in our election.

          I understand the initial reluctance to take as face value ANYTHING that comes from the government. After all, without that instinct, this website wouldn’t exist.

          How is it in the interest of the intelligence community to lie about the Russian hacking? Below, RonnieWayne has supplied us with a relatively comprehensive list of CIA perfidy, out of respect I won’t duplicate it here. In each and every instance listed, therein lies a clear incentive to lie, deny and cover up.

          In this case, however, there seems to be no incentive in going public, especially if it’s true. It makes it harder to retaliate, antagonizes the incoming administration, and reminds everyone of our governments’ interference in the elections of other countries. I’m sure that all over the world there is a significant segment of the population experiencing a deep sense of satisfaction in our having joined that particular club.

          1. No incentive to lie? Really? Trump seems intent to reverse US support to Saudi and Qatari sponsored Jihadi insurgencies esp in secular Syria. CIA and Clinton both up to their necks in this stuff. That’s a FACT.

  7. I didn’t campaign for Trump, but let’s face it, our chances of seeing these records released in full are much greater than they were if Clinton had been elected.

  8. Full JFK disclosure will NOT demonstrate control of secretive agencies, it will demonstrate mutual interest.

    What intelligence service in world history obeys the law and the intent of Congress or is accountable for past misdeeds; and that does not torture, kidnap or assassinate perceived enemies?

    Do you really believe Russia hacked emails or is it more likely they were leaked by a Sanders type to undermine the NeoCon endorsed Clinton? Show me some evidence. Until then, any concern for truth in news is just somebody else’s free fire zone.

    When there is accountability for the mass media and government officials over lying about WMDs in Iraq I might start to believe you again but in the meantime, you have contaminated JFK research with needless and, in my opinion, misguided partisanship like most other researchers before you.

    For all we know, keeping the documents buried may be the price paid to save the new President’s life considering the multitudes of public calls for his assassination or an electoral college coup. It surprises me you have not condemned those threats, which resonate so strongly with those made against JFK from the public and within the military/intel community itself.

    Maybe you just haven’t yet gotten around to doing so but to me, those threats are the most obvious link between this election and the JFK story.

    1. “When there is accountability for the mass media and government officials over lying about WMDs in Iraq I might start to believe you again but in the meantime, you have contaminated JFK research with needless and, in my opinion, misguided partisanship like most other researchers before you.”

      Oh for chrissakes. Guess everyone but you Charles knows Cheney was at the CIA everyday getting them to make shyte up about the WMDs. Gimme a break.

      Where’s that vaunted “personal responsibility” of the right? Take some sometime, will ya?

      1. Bogman, you misunderstand where I am coming from. I have no belief in the inherent virtue of left or right. I see no functional difference between Rs and Ds

        In my opinion Cheney is a war criminal along with many others in that administration. Both Clintons and Obama also meet my criteria. My only political faith is in the rule of law itself. The real poison is to be found in the deep state which is not limited to one Party.

        Justice for JFK and the American people will only be found through a national consenus. Emotional and irrational partisanship on irrelevant issues only serves to fracture, distract and alienate much needed support.

        Your words “guess everyone but you” is a tell for cognitive dissonance. But if y’all find emotional satisfaction in demonizing everyone you disagree with, don’t let me stop you. The U.S. itself is not immune to the same forces and commercial interests which have fostered civil war around the world. I think many responsible and measured foreign observers think you are well on your way. The risk is certainly not zero.

        1. “Justice for JFK and the American people will only be found through a national consenus. Emotional and irrational partisanship on irrelevant issues only serves to fracture, distract and alienate much needed support.”

          Completely agree on the above, Charles. My response was in reaction to the appearance that you were blaming MSM and unnamed govt officials regarding the WMDs hoax. There was someone at the top directing that hoax and that was Cheney. So appreciate you acknowledging that fact.

          We are a divided country. But when I speak to people without mentioning politics, I find myself liking them, and respecting their values and outlook.

          Political discussion divides us. Not quite sure why our often shared American outlook disappears whenever politics enters the fray. We could simply decide what we agree is a valid issue to address, then compromise our way to a solution. It appears the citizenry is instead manipulated by emotion for someone else’s gain and all we get is gridlock and/or craziness.

          It doesn’t help that the full truth of the JFK assassination has never been revealed, which I believe was the source of the culture wars that reverberate to this day.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Scroll to Top