JFK Assassination Expert Reacts to Trump’s Effort to Declassify Files, and What You Should Expect

You first wrote about the. JFK assassination. for The Washington Post in the. spring of 1995. So that's 30 years. correct of serious reporting. on one topic, which is admittedly. a vast topic, but still one topic. Yes. Yeah. What's it like to. see this announcement? I mean, those of us who've been. calling for the release of these. records for more than a decade. This is a great and promising. moment, but there are still pitfalls. ahead. And I want to emphasize that,

you know, this is not something. that can be done with the stroke of. a pen. The powers of these secret agencies. are strong and we actually. kind of see their influence even on. Trump's statement. So it's important to know, you. know, what we've learned in the. recent past kind of the context. of these latest developments. and you know, what is possible. under this order, but a lot. is now possible. So that's a great development. Thank you for saying that, because.

it's it is complicated. I mean, a president can come in and. say, as this president just did, I. want to see the documents and I want. the public to see the documents. But there's a distance between that. and seeing the documents. So if you wouldn't mind walking. us through what the process is for. getting this material. So the president's order, you know, orders a plan. within 15 days from four. top officials, two of. whom are acting and two of whom are. Trump appointees, to come up with a plan for.

declassification in. the president's order. Section three of the president's. order contains a loophole. which to me could be interpreted. as saying the CIA director. could overrule any decision. that that comes out of this. declassification effort. That's a pretty big loophole that. needs to be plugged or, you know, disavowed because. the agencies cannot have final. control over the release of this. material. Right. They've been resisting full. disclosure since the day.

President Kennedy died. That's the day that the CIA's lies. began. CIA officials began lying about. what they knew about Lee Harvey. Oswald within hours of. President Kennedy's murder. And they've been obfuscating, lying, deceiving, covering up evading. ever since. So that kind of. bureaucratic behavior, it's. not going to stop just because. President Trump said something on a. piece of paper. They are going to. continue to fight a rearguard. effort to prevent full. disclosure of CIA records related.

to President Kennedy's. assassination. So we need to be. vigilant. We need to identify the documents. are important and set some. benchmarks to show is. this effort really obtaining. the results? Is it really going to. be successful at obtaining. full JFK disclosure? So what you've got. the perspective on this question. How many times. has the Congress, for example, or previous administrations, called for disclosure of these. documents? This is not the first.

time. No. The 1992 JFK. Records Act passed unanimously. by Congress. Think of that, right. When's the last time Congress passed. something unanimously? That law said that all JFK records. had to be made public within 25. years, except in the rarest of. circumstances. That was the language. So 25 years. after 1992, 2017, that deadline arrived. It came to President Trump. and he caved in to the CIA's demands.

for continuing secrecy. So that was a very clear. expression of the will of the people. and the will of Congress. And they've just blown the deadline. They don't really care to be seen. They don't care that people see them. violating the law around JFK. records. Yes, clearly they don't. And, you know, they violated. even more basic law when they. apparently participated in the. murder of a sitting president. So, I mean, these are lawless. Yeah. I mean, you know, obviously. But where are these documents?

Do you have any idea? So. Well, there's two places. There's 3600 plus. documents that are held by. the National Archives that contain. redactions. Those are in the possession. Those documents should be very easy. to review and release quickly. if they're serious about about. declassification and full. disclosure. So then there's records. Those records were identified by the. JFK Assassination Review Board in. the 1990s, which did. a great job of obtaining and.

declassifying a million pages. of JFK records. So we've had a huge advance. in historical knowledge since the. 1990s. And what that showed. us was the existence of. other JFK records. that the review board never knew. about, often because the. CIA deceived them. So we need a capacity. to get those records that are in the. National Archives right now. But we also need to go out and get. the records that are known to exist. that are not yet in that collection.

So there's two big bodies of records. that are out there and a serious. declassification effort will get. both of them. And I am assuming the. second set that you refer to are at. the CIA. CIA and FBI. Yes. And other agencies. to. Will we know whether we've received. the entire corpus or not? You know, when we start seeing. documents, it's pretty. easy to establish some benchmarks.

about, you know, what are the most. important records. And, you know, we will see in both categories. Have those documents come into the. record. So if. we if we monitor the process, we should be able to say, is this. serious or not? You know, I think that, you know, the president has ordered. a plan in 15 days. I don't think that means we're going. to get documents in 15 days. And so, you know, but if we. don't get documents within 30.

days of the plan, then you got to start saying this. thing has been taken, has. gone off the rails. Well, but I mean, it's kind of. abrupt. I mean, that's you know, it's only been 62 years. Maybe they haven't had time to kind. of prepare everything. Yeah. Yeah, exactly. Okay. What what's. your guess as to why they're holding. so tightly? And I can just say, I'm. sure you know this, but as of last. month, there was. pressure in Washington to appoint or.

not appoint certain people based on. the likelihood they would push for. declassification of these documents. In other words, there are federal. bureaucrats right now for whom. withholding these documents is a. high priority. Well, I just think that's amazing. What do you think that is? I think the only explanation. is that the CIA has something to. hide and they'd rather be seen as. defying the law than releasing. the information. I mean, that tells you something. right there. And, you know, we can. go into the specifics of,

you know, some of the key documents. that are out there that that are. important to be to be. produced soon. Okay. And but until that happens, you know, we can't be sure. that it's going to happen. Millions of Americans are still. clinging to their New Year's. resolutions, but some goals. transcend the flipping of the. calendar. Being prepared should always. be a goal when a crisis. hits. The last thing you want is to. be scrambling for something basic. like medication.

And that's why the GAO's case. changes the game. The GAO's case is your personal. emergency supply of lifesaving. medications, antibiotics, critical. prescriptions, things you're. actually going to need when. pharmacies are not available. The GAO's case is protection is. totally necessary. So what's your planning for the rest. of this year? Make emergency. preparedness a top priority. We don't know what's coming next. We do know preparation beats. panic every single time. So with the scale of peace of mind, knowing that you are ready for.

whatever happens, go to GAO's. case.com. Enter the code. Tucker to make sure. you have the right meds on hand. when you need them, which. is at the moment when you can't get. them. Jace I. mean, not knowing. much about the process, but just. employing common sense, you'd think, well, you know, six. years you've had time to scrub the. stuff that's incriminating. Are we confident that these. documents still exist? Yes. I mean, the documents that I'm. talking about in the are in the. National Archives collection. I mean, they're in the possession of.

National Archives today. They could go get them this. afternoon. The documents that are not yet in. the collection, those are known. to exist and I mean. known to exist, you know, as. of recently. So, you know, if they're not. produced, if we find evidence. they've been destroyed, then we have. pretty good evidence that, you know, that the cover up is continuing. But these are documents that. are known to exist. This isn't a fishing expedition. This is a search for. JFK records that have not been put.

on the public record by the CIA. and the FBI. But whose existence has been. verified. So it's not like it's. not like it's up to the current. leadership of the CIA to define. what the documents are. We know what the documents are. It's a matter of them handing them. over. And if they don't hand him over, it'll be because the new CIA, CIA director John Ratcliffe, has. said, I don't want to hand him over. and we'll know that. Yeah. And, you know, it was. interesting to me that in. Ratcliffe's confirmation hearings, he was not asked about JFK.

files, which makes me think. that it's not a priority of Tom. Cotton and the Senate Intelligence. Committee. It seemed like they were. staying away from the subject, you know, which, like you noted, had been central to the idea that. Amaryllis Fox might take a job at. the CIA to oversee this. You know, so, you know, there's got to be a. commitment from Ratcliffe. to make sure that this happens. And I don't think that he's ever. said anything by JFK files. You may know differently, but I've. never seen anything. So he has no position as far as I.

can tell. No. I mean, he is you know, he's. a loyal Trump guy. Yeah. And Trump has been talking about. this for years. He's bitter that he was talked. out of releasing those files. by Mike Pompeo, said. CIA former CIA director under him. He's mad about that. He said that in. public. Yeah. And so I you know, it's hard. for me to believe that Ratcliffe. would withhold, you. know, especially something that we. know exists. I just don't I just don't see that.

happening. So before. So you're aware of the Amaryllis. Fox, Kennedy. Yeah, I mean. I know since. So will you tell us what you know. about that? Well, it's just, you know, I know. from the news reports that RFK. Jr. Floated the idea of having her go to. CIA and kind of oversee. the process to get to the bottom. of the JFK assassination was the. quote that I saw. So, you know, you. need to have a bureaucratic person. to ride herd on this because the. first two years are going to be very. reluctant. So that's a good idea.

You know, whether it's her I mean, a former CIA officer, that's. somebody who would be qualified, who. knows that building and would be. able to to do that, somebody else. could do it as well. But you're going to need a point. person. The way it's set up now, it looks. like. NSC advisor Mike Walls. will probably be the point person. along with the attorney general. So as that takes shape, you know, that's a key thing. is what's the real commitment.

to ride herd on this as opposed. to just issue. a piece of paper and then let the. bureaucracy do what it does? Right. It seems like it's going to be kind. of hard to get out of it. Yeah, because there are informed. people, like what's like and. especially you paying attention. Yeah. I'm a little less confident on. the Martin Luther King assassination. files. And I think of of. all of these crimes, there are. three. There's the murder of Bobby.

Kennedy, the murder of JFK, the. murder of MLK. I think that story is. the official story is the least. plausible. I mean, it's actually ridiculous. that he was murdered by a prison. inmate acting alone but. without a job. But somehow that. prison inmate winds up going. to Canada, then the U.K. then is heading to South Africa with. two forged foreign passports. And he did that all by himself. Like, that's just I mean, come on. Yeah. And so clearly, there was a. conspiracy to murder Martin Luther. King. I mean, I don't think any. normal person.

thinks otherwise. And certainly knows. The details. So are we going to. fight? Like, what do you think we're. going to find there? You know, I don't know those. records as well. But the fact that that their secret. I mean, you know, we don't need. to argue about the conclusions. The point is we need the records. and then then we can have an. informed debate. But right now, we have no informed. debate, especially about MLK, but even about JFK. and America. We don't have all the. records. So, you know,

it's the CIA is very. good and its allies in. the establishment media are very. good at changing. the subject and getting us to argue. about things that are not really. germane. The point is, the law is. very clear. The CIA has blown the deadline. and this material should be made. public. All of it. If it's trivial, so be it. You know, I'm not saying I'm right. about how I interpret these records. Put it out there and you can decide. if I'm right. That's right. What are the chances that.

we get full disclosure in the next. month or two or what. seems like full disclosure? And every media story says, see, there's nothing there. If we get the documents that I'm. talking about, that will. not be a credible narrative. And let me and let me cite a couple. of examples, Tucker, because Thank. you. This isn't a fishing. expedition. Okay. So in one of the key. documents that's still redacted, unbelievably, in my view, is a memo that Arthur Schlesinger.

wrote to JFK after the Bay of. Pigs. Kennedy was very disillusioned with. the CIA. He felt they were trying to. dictate policy to him. And he talked about reorganizing the. CIA in the. words that are often quoted, breaking up the CIA and scattering. it to the winds rain. So this was actually a concrete. expression of that impulse. We need to do something about an. agency that's out of control. Arthur Schlesinger writes up his. thoughts. He's got a security. clearance, does a very careful study. of CIA operations.

In that memo to Kennedy. There is still almost an entire. page redacted. So the CIA is censoring. criticism, criticism of. itself by the White House, and we're not allowed to see that 61. years later. So Schlesinger's. memo, it's not about the events that. happened in Dallas. It's about the alienation of Kennedy. and the CIA. That's a that's a very basic. test. If we don't get that document, the.

whole thing's a joke. Okay. It's that simple. But is it is it legal to criticize. the CIA still? Well, that's what that's what this. document raises the question. Right. If somebody knows the. contents of that of that. censored page and came. to me and said, Jeff, I'll tell you. what's in there. You know, under the law right now, they would be taking a certain legal. risk. But, you know, that's a. that's a fact. And, you know, when a. JFK whistleblower approached me a. couple of years ago and I wrote. about this on JFK Facts last.

year, you know, he. described to me a secret. CIA facility in Northern Virginia. where he had worked as a contractor. And he said there's a JFK archive. in there. He had seen it. He had talked to the people, to the. woman who ran it, who controlled. access to it. He saw what was on. the on the on the shelves there. So, you know. That guy was it was. risky for him to talk to me. And it took a long time for me to.

convince him to come forward. And he only came forward after. a couple of years when he realized. nothing was happening. You know, there was no prospect. of the CIA coming clean. So that's important. I'll tell you something else that's. good about President Trump's. order. I think it makes it easier for. any whistleblowers to come forward. And I'd like to say, if there are. people out there who have access to. classified information, you know, consult your lawyer. But I think President Trump's order. effectively, well, it.

reduces their risk about talking. about things that are classified. because the president's saying we. want all of this out. That carries some weight. So that that. in itself is an important. development. Yeah, I mean, it's I mean, when I reported something about. the contents of the JFK files two. years ago and Mike Pompeo's lawyer. called me the next day to threaten. me. They had that was that was an. amazing story. And and it goes to show you. that, you know, talking about this.

stuff, you can be threatened with. legal action. That's still possible, you know. So that threat needs to be. removed. And I hope the president's. order has done that. You know, and the people can feel. that this is perfectly legitimate. to talk about. There are no real. national security concerns in this. material except for the fact that. the assassination of a president. is a national security concern. Right? Well, sure. But, I mean, if if you. think that the public's. trust in the CIA is a national.

security imperative, in other words, if people doubt us, Americans. will die. I mean, I think that's what they tell. themselves, you know, that that. preserving myths. about their agency. are like, you know, like a. legitimate goal of government. But yeah. And so, you know, crazy. Yeah. So another story. which I reported on JFK Facts last. year before. President Kennedy was assassinated. in November 1963, the CIA. had Lee Harvey Oswald under.

surveillance for four years. By November 21st, 1963. They had compiled 180. pages of material on Oswald, his personal life, his political. beliefs, his contact with a KGB. officer, his arrest. They had all of that. At the time, Kennedy was leaving for. Dallas. CIA counterintelligence. chief James Angleton knew that. Oswald was in the Dallas area. in the first week of November of. 1963. That pre assassination.

Oswald file was not completely. declassified until April 20th, 23. That's how sensitive this is, is. And they're very good at keeping. this stuff off the public record. And, you know, now. when you go to people in. in the mainstream media, they won't. report on Oswald's pre assassination. and say, they were just covering. their assets. They make excuses for the CIA. instead of saying, hey, you had 180. pages on the guy, you know.

Was that extreme negligence, intentional negligence or actual. complicity? You know, and we don't we don't. know. But that file is. the pre assassination. Oswald file is one of the most. significant things to come out in. recent years for sure. So was that given over to the. investigators of the Warren. Commission? No. When the when the Warren Commission. interviewed CIA. Director John Macone and Deputy. Director Richard Helms behind. closed doors,

only the Warren Commission members. there were Allen Dulles and Gerald. Ford and John Sherman Cooper. was there for a little bit. They lied. I mean, they they committed perjury, especially Helms, and said. we didn't have any information. about Oswald before the. assassination. Minimal information. That was the line. So in their. in their mind, a 180. page file on Oswald, that. was minimal information. Pay no attention and don't hold.

us accountable for, you know, missing the fact that this guy. killed the president. We're sorry, Mrs. Kennedy, but. that's just the way life is. That's their attitude. It's it's bland arrogance. And we see it to this day. We'll tell you about an amazing. documentary series from our friend. Sean Stone called All the. President's Men the Conspiracy. Against Trump. It is a series of interviews. with people at the very heart of. the first Trump term, many of whom are close to the heart. of the second Trump term.

This is their stories about what. permanent Washington tried to do to. them. In many cases, send them to. prison for the crime of supporting. Donald Trump. Their words have never been more. relevant than they are now. Steve Bannon. Kash Patel. I'm in there. Even All the. President's Men, The Conspiracy. against Trump and you will find it. only on TV and Tucker carlson.com. Highly recommended.

What do you suppose is. still being classified from the. investigation into Robert F. Kennedy's death? You know, I wrote a book about. James Angleton, the. counterintelligence chief, who was. the the. Oswald? Well, the Oswald file from 1959. to 1963. Angleton told the church committee. kind of off the record that he. believed RFK had been killed by. organized crime figures.

So there's the body. of records from the L.A. Police Department. The CIA had people. in the LAPD who helped. control the investigation of the. assassination and exclude. marginalize witnesses who didn't. say what the government wanted. said. The RFK documents are. a problem because they're. not in one place, and. it will take a little bit of effort. to collect them. And it's good that the president. wrote in 45 days, not 15.

days, for those documents, because. it's going to take a little more. work. That's a reasonable delay. in light of, you know, getting. you know, getting finding and. getting and releasing those. documents. Do you how would you assess. the likelihood that. the murder of Bobby Kennedy was not. what they told us? It was a lone. nutcase called Sirhan Sirhan, shooting him with a 22 in. the kitchen in the Master Hotel. You think there's more there? I mean, you have you have.

the testimony of the coroner. who was hyper aware. that the JFK autopsy was a. joke and a fraud. And Dr. Noguchi said. that Kennedy's head wound. was a contact wound, that the gun. had been close to Kennedy's head. when the shot was fired. Well, Sirhan Sirhan was never that. close to RFK. So that alone. is kind of indisputable, factual. evidence of a deficiency at. a minimum, in the official story.

So also, I think, you know, in. the lung and I'm not an expert on. RFK assassination, but when. you see how CIA assassination. operations worked and the kind of. techniques that they used, you can't rule out that. Sirhan was under some kind of, you know, mind control program. I mean, they had a mind control. program, and it was designed to do. things like this committed act, and you have no memory of it. So we know they were working on that. technology.

Could it have been applied here? That's why we need the records so. that we can assess. Is that a real. possibility? Certain restaurants are Hans and his. aides. Now he's still in prison. He's still alive. And the one part of his story that's. never changed and. it seems credible to me, is that he. has no memory of of. shooting Bobby Kennedy. Yeah, I mean, it's a striking. detail. Yeah, I would say. I mean, you maintain the same. story for, you know, almost 60. years. Yeah. I think it has.

a little bit more credibility. Final question. Thank you for taking. this time. Did since you've been. working on this. for so long and. you did come out of, you know, the. most prominent. of the mainstream media, The. Washington Post Have. you been slandered. as a nut case conspiracy. theorist? I always wondered, like, what do they do with you exactly? Because you're not coming from the. fringes, you're coming from the. right, from the middle, the. establishment. I mean, you know, you've been. attacked. Yeah. I mean, the the problem that.

they have is that I don't have a. conspiracy theory, so the label of. conspiracy theories just doesn't. apply. And the other thing is, you. know, nobody can deny. the stuff that I'm talking about. Let me mention another JFK document. that's very important and I think. will interest you. One of the things it's test that's. withheld and is in the JFK. collection right now is the. testimony of James Angleton. in 1975 to the Church Committee. about the Israeli. nuclear program. This is 113 page document,

and it's heavily redacted to. this day. And the redactions. clearly pertain to. Israel. Now, is this an assassination. related document? Absolutely. The Assassination Records Review. Board said this is an assassination. related document. It meets the. statutory definition. Okay. If the president in this effort. are serious, that testimony. will be declassified because. Angleton controlled the Oswald file. on the one hand and he was. a contact with the Israelis on the.

other. So it belongs. in the public record. That's another test of. is this serious effort. So let me ask you, why in the world would the Dimona. project the Israeli nuclear program, which has never officially been. admitted by anybody but Israel, what would that conceivably have. to do with the assassination of. JFK? Well, it it relates to.

what Angleton was doing in 1963, okay. There were profound conflicts. between Israel and the. Kennedy White House over the. nuclear program. Kennedy was pressing for on site. inspections, which the Israelis. resisted because on. site inspections would have realized. that they had a bomb making program. So this was a real bone of. contention between the Israeli. government and the Kennedy. administration in the summer of. 1963, at a time. when hours when Angleton controlled.

the Oswald files. So just the juxtaposition. of those facts means. that everything about it should be. on the public record. And and Angleton, who was the counter Intel chief. of CIA? Yeah. James Jesus Angleton. He. Well, that's quite amazing. Did he support, you know, his view. of the Israeli nuclear program? I mean, it's very hard. to tell sometimes from this. testimony given all the redactions.

But yeah, that's you know, was. he secretly supporting Israel. against JFK? That's one of the questions that. that needs to be answered by full. disclosure. So why would he be asked. about that in a congressional. hearing? That's quite amazing. Well, because in in 1975, the CIA work had been. revealed to be running assassination. programs, to be running a mine. control program, to be. spying on the antiwar movement, spying on Americans.

So, you know, he was hauled. before and Congress, who was. completely in the dark, had been duped or wanted to be. duped. You know, suddenly their eyes. woke up and they had to explain to. their constituents, hey, what have. these guys been doing in our name? And so Angleton was called in. and this was all, you know, executive session testimony. So he was grilled about lots. of things about domestic spying, about the Israeli nuclear program, about the JFK assassination. Interestingly enough, he was not. questioned about Oswald because even.

the church committee did not know. the extent of the assassination. surveillance of Oswald. That's only something we've learned. since the 1990s. It's it is. I mean, I have no idea what the. truth is, of course. But it is interesting that one. of the only major. policy changes that. Lyndon Johnson made in the year. after the president's. murder was, you know, on the Israeli nuclear program, which he accepted. I guess. Yeah. But yeah, basically.

he dropped he dropped the demand for. onsite inspections. He dropped the demand that the. that AIPAC be classified. as a domestic lobby. And, you know, there. was really no accountability after. that. And the story only emerged, you know, ten years later when. the when the when the church. committee started pressing Angleton. for some explanations. So I had I had no idea until. you just told me that that was. actually a feature of those. hearings. And so, of course, I mean, the. public, as the American public has.

an absolute right to know what's. in that exchange 50 years. later. Yeah. And, you know, and this. is a tough call for for. for the president because he's going. to get very strong pushback from. his national security apparatus, supported by the CIA, supported by Israeli. interests, to say, no, you can't. talk about that. That's not permitted. You know, you can't. Don't do that. It's just it's frustrating as an. American citizen. You know, I don't I don't have any.

kind of real agenda here other than. it's, you know, my country. I'm a shareholder in America, as are you. And I think we have an. absolute moral right and a legal. right to know. to know this 50 years later. So. Right. Well, I really appreciate. your taking all this time, Jefferson. Morley. And I hope you don't mind if if we. check in with you, you know, to see. if your name is fulfilled. Like I say, there's some very. clear benchmarks to figure out, is. this working or not? And, you know, are people holding up.

the process and and and obstructing. the president's wishes or. are they, you know, are they really. going along? And so the proof is in the pudding. You know, the president's sentiment. is great. It's great that a president has. committed to this. It's amazing that no president has. committed in this way before. But we'll take it. I'm not I'm not a supporter. of President Trump. But on this. issue, he's absolutely right. And we need to follow through on. what he said. Amazing. Thank you very much.

Thank you, Tucker. Let's talk again. Thank you.