Biden postpones release of JFK assassination files, citing pandemic-related delays

By Amy B Wang

October 23, 2021 at 11:45 a.m. EDT

President Biden has further postponed the release of secret government files related to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, citing delays caused by the coronavirus pandemic. The files had originally been scheduled to be released by next week. They will now be released in two batches — one later this year and another in late 2022, Biden said in a White House memo Friday.

According to the memo, the postponement came at the recommendation of the national archivist, who said the pandemic “has had a significant impact on the agencies” responsible for reviewing each redaction in the documents.

“The Archivist has also noted that ‘making these decisions is a matter that requires a professional, scholarly, and orderly process; not decisions or releases made in haste,’” Biden wrote, adding that he agreed the agencies needed more time.

“Temporary continued postponement is necessary to protect against identifiable harm to the military defense, intelligence operations, law enforcement, or the conduct of foreign relations that is of such gravity that it outweighs the public interest in immediate disclosure,” the president said.

Biden said some documents will be released on Dec. 15 of this year, but not earlier “out of respect for the anniversary of President Kennedy’s assassination,” which took place Nov. 22, 1963. The remaining documents will undergo an “intensive 1-year review” and be released by Dec. 15, 2022.

Under the 1992 John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Collection Act, all assassination records should have been publicly disclosed within 25 years — or by October 2017 — but postponements were allowed in instances that national security concerns outweighed the public interest in disclosure. The National Archives notes about 88 percent of the records have been released since the late 1990s.

President Donald Trump in 2017 announced he planned to publicly disclose the remaining JFK files, only to delay the release of some of the files for national security reasons, setting a new deadline of Oct. 26, 2021. In 2018, Trump did end up authorizing the disclosure of 19,045 documents, about three-quarters of which still contained some redactions.

Jefferson Morley, the editor of JFKFacts.org who in 2003 sued the CIA for records related to the Kennedy assassination, said he was outraged by Biden’s decision to further postpone the release, calling it the “covid dog ate my homework” excuse.

Morley had maintained a countdown clock to Oct. 26 on his website, detailing how much time remained until “Biden will decide … about the last of the secret JFK files.”

“Let’s not make hasty decisions? After 29 years of stonewalling, they don’t want to make a hasty decision,” Morley said dryly in an interview. “They are saying very clearly they do not intend to obey the law … it’s a ruse.”

Morley, who is also a former Washington Post staff writer, said Congress needs to step in.

Earlier this month, some members of Congress wrote to Biden urging him to fully release all of the JFK files, including 520 documents that remain withheld from the public and 15,834 documents that were previously released but are partially or mostly redacted. The letter was signed by Democratic Reps. Anna G. Eshoo (Calif.), Steve Cohen (Tenn.), Jim McGovern (Mass.), Jamie Raskin (Md.), Sara Jacobs (Calif.), Joe Neguse (Colo.) and Raul Grijalva (Ariz.).

“Democracy requires that decisions made by the government be open to public scrutiny,” the lawmakers wrote. “Yet excessive secrecy surrounding President Kennedy’s assassination continues to inspire doubt in the minds of the American public and has a profound impact on the people’s trust in their government.”

Biden on Friday said the need to protect records “has only grown weaker with the passage of time” and that he agreed it was critical the U.S. government “maximizes transparency.”

“Almost 30 years since the Act, the profound national tragedy of President Kennedy’s assassination continues to resonate in American history and in the memories of so many Americans who were alive on that terrible day,” Biden wrote. “It is therefore critical to ensure that the United States Government maximizes transparency, disclosing all information in records concerning the assassination, except when the strongest possible reasons counsel otherwise.”

What Biden is keeping secret in the JFK files

The censored files may offer insights into Cold War covert ops, but don’t expect a smoking gun about the assassination.

Part of a file from the CIA, dated Oct. 10, 1963, details "a reliable and sensitive source in Mexico" report of Lee Harvey Oswald's contact with the Soviet Union embassy in Mexico City.

By BRYAN BENDER

10/24/2021 02:43 PM EDT

President Joe Biden has once again delayed the public release of thousands of government secrets that might shed light on the 1963 assassination of President John F. Kennedy.

He also said that the National Archives and Records Administration, the custodian of the records, needs more time to conduct a declassification review due to delays caused by the coronavirus pandemic.

The decision, which follows a delay ordered by President Donald Trump in 2017, means scholars and the public will have to wait even longer to see what remains buried in government archives about one of the greatest political mysteries of the 20th century. And the review process for the remaining documents means Biden can hold the release further if the CIA or other agencies can convince him they reveal sensitive sources or methods.

Public opinion polls have long indicated most Americans do not believe the official conclusion by the Warren Commission that the assassination was the work of a single gunman, Lee Harvey Oswald, a former Marine who once defected to the Soviet Union and who was shot to death by a nightclub owner Jack Ruby while in police custody.

A special House committee in 1978 concluded “on the basis of the evidence available to it, that President John F. Kennedy was probably assassinated as a result of a conspiracy.”

But longtime researchers almost uniformly agree that what is still being shielded from public view won’t blow open the case.

“Do I believe the CIA has a file that shows former CIA Director Allen Dulles presided over the assassination? No. But I’m afraid there are people who will believe things like that no matter what is in the files,” said David Kaiser, a former history professor at the Naval War College and author of “The Road to Dallas.”

His book argued that Kennedy’s murder cannot be fully understood without also studying two major U.S. intelligence and law enforcement campaigns of the era: Attorney General Robert Kennedy’s war on organized crime and the CIA’s failed efforts to kill communist dictator Fidel Castro in Cuba (with the Mafia’s help).

Still, Kaiser and other experts believe national security agencies are still hiding information that shows how officials actively stonewalled a full accounting by Congress and the courts and might illuminate shadowy spy world figures who could have been involved in a plot to kill the president.

What’s still hidden?

Portions of more than 15,000 records that have been released remain blacked out, in some cases a single word but in others nearly the entire document, according to the National Archives.

The records were collected by the Assassination Records Review Board, which was established by Congress in the 1992 JFK Records Act.

The independent body, which folded in 1998, was headed by a federal judge and empowered to collect classified information from across the government that might have bearing on Kennedy’s murder and make public as much as possible after consulting with the agencies where the intelligence originated. It also had legal authority to overrule recalcitrant agencies.

A large portion of the JFK collection came from the probe by the House Select Committee on Assassinations in 1978, which investigated the murders of President Kennedy and the 1968 assassination of Martin Luther King Jr. The panel also delved into a series of U.S. intelligence and law enforcement activities in the early decades of the Cold War as part of its probe.

The creation of the review board ultimately led to the release of thousands of files. But the board also postponed the release of other documents until 2017, when Trump used his authority to further delay full public disclosure.

Much of what has yet to be released involves intelligence activities during the height of the Cold War that likely had no direct bearing on the plot to kill Kennedy but could shed light on covert operations.

One heavily censored file involves a CIA plot to kill Castro. Another is a 1963 Pentagon plan for an “engineered provocation” that could be blamed on Castro as a pretext for toppling him. Then there’s a history of the CIA’s Miami office, which organized a propaganda campaign against Castro’s Cuba.

Other redacted files are believed to contain new CIA information about the 1972 break-in at the Democratic National Committee in Washington’s Watergate Hotel by former CIA operatives that led to the resignation of President Richard Nixon.

But some could reveal more about the events leading up to the assassination itself.

Researchers are keenly interested in the personnel file of the late George Joannides, a career CIA intelligence operative who staffers on the House investigation in the late 1970s believe lied to Congress about what he knew about a CIA-backed exile group that had ties to Oswald.

A federal appeals court in 2018 upheld the CIA’s rejection of a lawsuit by researcher Jefferson Morley to obtain the file.

Another partially released file contains information about how the CIA may have monitored Oswald on a trip he purportedly took to Mexico City ahead of the assassination.

The files could reveal more of “what the CIA was doing in New Orleans, some more info about Mexico City and likely even some revelations about the CIA role in Watergate,” said Larry Schnapf, a lawyer and assassination researcher.

Morley, who has filed multiple lawsuits to force disclosure, believes the CIA is covering up for individuals who may have had a role in Kennedy’s death or knew who was responsible and wanted it hidden from the public to protect the agency.

He says the CIA’s refusal to comply “can only be interpreted as evidence of bad faith, malicious intent, and obstruction of Congress.”

A spokesperson for the CIA, which accounts for the majority of the withheld records, declined to address the charge, saying only that the agency will comply with the law and the president’s directive.

When will the secret files be revealed?

Biden did set in motion the release of some of the remaining records.

Continue reading at POLITICO

President Biden has delayed full release of withheld JFK assassination related documents

Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies on the Temporary Certification Regarding Disclosure of Information in Certain Records Related to the Assassination of President John F. Kennedy

Section 1. Policy. In the President John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Collection Act of 1992 (44 U.S.C. 2107 note) (the “Act”), the Congress declared that “all Government records concerning the assassination of President John F. Kennedy . . . should be eventually disclosed to enable the public to become fully informed about the history surrounding the assassination.” The Congress also found that “most of the records related to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy are almost 30 years old, and only in the rarest cases is there any legitimate need for continued protection of such records.” Almost 30 years since the Act, the profound national tragedy of President Kennedy’s assassination continues to resonate in American history and in the memories of so many Americans who were alive on that terrible day; meanwhile, the need to protect records concerning the assassination has only grown weaker with the passage of time. It is therefore critical to ensure that the United States Government maximizes transparency, disclosing all information in records concerning the assassination, except when the strongest possible reasons counsel otherwise.

Sec. 2. Background. The Act permits the continued postponement of disclosure of information in records concerning President Kennedy’s assassination only when postponement remains necessary to protect against an identifiable harm to the military defense, intelligence operations, law enforcement, or the conduct of foreign relations that is of such gravity that it outweighs the public interest in disclosure. Since 2018, executive departments and agencies (agencies) have been reviewing under this statutory standard each redaction they have proposed that would result in the continued postponement of full public disclosure. This year, the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) has been reviewing whether it agrees that each redaction continues to meet the statutory standard. The Archivist of the United States (Archivist), however, has reported that “unfortunately, the pandemic has had a significant impact on the agencies” and NARA and that NARA “require[s] additional time to engage with the agencies and to conduct research within the larger collection to maximize the amount of information released.” The Archivist has also noted that “making these decisions is a matter that requires a professional, scholarly, and orderly process; not decisions or releases made in haste.” The Archivist therefore recommends that the President “temporarily certify the continued withholding of all of the information certified in 2018” and “direct two public releases of the information that has” ultimately “been determined to be appropriate for release to the public,” with one interim release later this year and one more comprehensive release in late 2022.

Sec. 3. Temporary Certification. In light of the agencies’ proposals for continued postponement under the statutory standard, the Archivist’s request for an extension of time to engage with the agencies, and the need for an appropriate review and disclosure process, I agree with the Archivist’s recommendation. Temporary continued postponement is necessary to protect against identifiable harm to the military defense, intelligence operations, law enforcement, or the conduct of foreign relations that is of such gravity that it outweighs the public interest in immediate disclosure. Accordingly, by the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including section 5(g)(2)(D) of the Act, I hereby certify that all information within records that agencies have proposed for continued postponement under section 5(g)(2)(D) shall be withheld from full public disclosure until December 15, 2022.

Sec. 4. Interim Release. Any information currently withheld from public disclosure that agencies have not proposed for continued postponement shall be reviewed by NARA before December 15, 2021, and shall be publicly released on that date. Out of respect for the anniversary of President Kennedy’s assassination, such release shall not occur before December 15, 2021.

Sec. 5. Intensive 1-Year Review. (a) Over the next year, agencies proposing continued postponement and NARA shall conduct an intensive review of each remaining redaction to ensure that the United States Government maximizes transparency, disclosing all information in records concerning the assassination, except when the strongest possible reasons counsel otherwise. This review shall include documents within the assassination records collection designated as “not believed relevant” by the Assassination Records Review Board established under the Act, but nonetheless placed within the collection by the Assassination Records Review Board.
(b) Any information that an agency proposes for continued postponement beyond December 15, 2022, shall be limited to the absolute minimum under the statutory standard. An agency shall not propose to continue redacting information unless the redaction is necessary to protect against an identifiable harm to the military defense, intelligence operations, law enforcement, or the conduct of foreign relations that is of such gravity that it outweighs the public interest in disclosure. In applying this statutory standard, an agency shall:
(i) Accord substantial weight to the public interest in transparency and full disclosure of any record that falls within the scope of the Act; and
(ii) Give due consideration that some degree of harm is not grounds for continued postponement unless the degree of harm is of such gravity that it outweighs the public interest.
(c) For any record containing information that an agency proposes for continued postponement beyond December 15, 2022, the agency shall provide, no later than December 15, 2021:
(i) an unclassified letter, to be signed by the head of the agency, providing a written description of the types of information for which the agency is proposing continued postponement and reasons for which the agency is proposing continued postponement of such information;
(ii) an unclassified index identifying for each such record the reasons for which the agency is proposing continued postponement of information in such record; and
(iii) a specific proposed date identifying for each such record when the agency reasonably anticipates that continued postponement of information in such record no longer would be necessary or, if that is not possible, a specific proposed date for each such record identifying when the agency would propose to next review again after December 15, 2022, whether the information proposed for continued postponement in such record still satisfies the statutory standard for postponement.
(d) NARA shall review each proposed redaction, no later than September 1, 2022, in consultation with:
(i) The Department of Defense if the agency proposing the redaction asserts an anticipated harm to the military defense;
(ii) The Office of the Director of National Intelligence if the agency proposing the redaction asserts an anticipated harm to intelligence operations;
(iii) The Department of Justice if the agency proposing the redaction asserts an anticipated harm to law enforcement; and
(iv) The Department of State if the agency proposing the redaction asserts an anticipated harm to the conduct of foreign relations.
(e) The relevant consulting agency, as designated pursuant to subsection (d) of this section, shall provide its assessment to NARA as to whether the information proposed for continued postponement satisfies the statutory standard for such postponement. In reviewing a proposed redaction, NARA or the relevant consulting agency, as designated pursuant to subsection (d) of this section, should consult with the agency that proposed the redaction.
(f) If NARA does not agree that a proposed redaction meets the statutory standard for continued postponement, it shall inform the agency that proposed the redaction. After consultation with NARA, the agency that proposed the redaction may, no later than October 1, 2022:
(i) withdraw the proposed redaction; or
(ii) refer the decision on continued postponement to the President through the Counsel to the President, accompanied by an explanation of why continued postponement remains necessary to protect against an identifiable harm to the military defense, intelligence operations, law enforcement, or the conduct of foreign relations that is of such gravity that it outweighs the public interest in disclosure.
(g) If NARA agrees that a proposed redaction meets the asserted statutory standard for continued postponement, the Archivist shall recommend to the President, no later than October 1, 2022, that continued postponement from public disclosure of the information is warranted after December 15, 2022.
(h) At the conclusion of the 1-year review, any information still withheld from public disclosure that agencies do not propose for continued postponement beyond December 15, 2022, shall be released to the public on that date.
(i) At the conclusion of the 1-year review, each unclassified letter described in subsection (c)(i) of this section and each unclassified index described in subsection (c)(ii) of this section shall be disclosed to the public on December 15, 2022, with any updates made to account for any information initially proposed for continued postponement that is not postponed from public disclosure beyond December 15, 2022.

Sec. 6. Digitization and Democratization of Records. (a) Since the 1990s, more than 250,000 records concerning President Kennedy’s assassination — more than 90 percent of NARA’s collection — have been released in full to the public. Only a small fraction of the records contains any remaining redactions. But many records that have been fully disclosed are inaccessible to most members of the public unless they travel to NARA’s location in College Park, Maryland.
(b) The Archivist shall issue a plan, no later than December 15, 2021, to digitize and make available online NARA’s entire collection of records concerning President Kennedy’s assassination.
(c) The Archivist shall provide additional context online about the records that have been withheld in full under sections 10 and 11 of the Act — primarily documents containing tax-related information of the Internal Revenue Service or the Social Security Administration — that are not subject to the Presidential certification requirement under section 5 of the Act.

Sec. 7. Publication. The Archivist is hereby authorized and directed to publish this memorandum in the Federal Register.

JOSEPH R. BIDEN JR.

Full announcement HERE

The Capehart case: What is the CIA hiding?

by Santa Barbara News-Press Editorial October 10, 20210 comment

The FBI’s Other Secret Warrant Abuses

OPINION

More evidence that the bureau abuses the FISA court process.

By WSJ Editorial Board

Oct. 5, 2021 6:53 pm ET

Congress has failed to reform federal surveillance laws, despite the FBI’s 2016 abuse of a secret court to spy on the Trump presidential campaign. The latest report from Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz on the FBI’s other surveillance abuses is more evidence of the need to overhaul the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.

Mr. Horowitz’s 2019 report found the FBI had gulled the FISA court into letting it spy on former Trump aide Carter Page by presenting false information. The scandal inspired the Horowitz team to conduct a broader audit of FBI compliance, and the results are damning.

Opinion: Potomac Watch

FBI Fisagate/A Bigger IRS/Mavericks v. Progressives

The FBI must abide by what are known as Woods Procedures that include a file supporting every factual assertion in a warrant application. As the IG notes, surveillance warrants are among the Justice Department’s “most intrusive investigative authorities” and must be “scrupulously accurate.”

The IG’s preliminary look last year into a sample of 29 wiretap applications said the FBI couldn’t locate Woods files for four applications, and the IG found errors in the remaining 25. As last week’s full report explains, the FBI and Justice have since acknowledged the 29 applications contained a total of 209 errors. These range from typographical (38) and date (42) errors, to unsupported facts (17), misidentified sources of information (15), and deviations from source documents (93).

The IG also found 209 examples in the 29 applications of the FBI failing to provide “adequate documentation to support factual assertions.” In all “there were over 400 instances of non-compliance with the Woods Procedures.”

Most alarming are the four errors that DOJ and the FBI admit were “material”—serious enough to have potentially changed the FISA court’s determination of “probable cause” to issue a warrant. The errors related to three applications in which the FBI omitted important or relevant information about targets, or provided outdated or unverified facts.

In response to the IG’s preliminary findings last year, the FBI reviewed more than 7,000 FISA applications from January 2015 to March 2020, and the IG reports that for 183 of them “the required Woods File was missing, destroyed, or incomplete.” This is supposed to be America’s premier law-enforcement body.

The IG criticizes an FBI culture that believes it is above the rules, and he devotes an entire section to spanking its leadership for its reaction to the 2020 preliminary findings. While FBI director Christopher Wray instituted some reforms, the agency minimized the findings with statements that “appeared to display a tolerance for error.”

No one has taken responsibility—including Mr. Wray, on whose watch many of these mistakes happened. He has proposed more reforms to the very (Woods) reforms instituted 20 years ago to improve FBI behavior. Sure.

Introducing the Constitution’s independent Article III judges into intelligence collection in the executive branch was always a mistake, as we wrote in the 1970s. The system dilutes accountability for wiretaps, letting the court and FBI blame each other for mistakes and political abuses like those in 2016.

Congress should abolish the FISA court and return authority to the law enforcement leaders making surveillance decisions. Then hold them accountable, including jail time for abuses.