
Trump administration releases new JFK assassination records
Many of the files related to the JFK assassination have already been disclosed, including a tranche of 13,000 documents released during the Biden administration. Many of the documents released Tuesday had been previously redacted, however.
Trump said on Monday that 'people have been waiting for decades' to see the 80,000 pages of records related to Kennedy's assassination. Soon after taking office, he signed an executive order directing the public release of thousands of files related to the assassinations of Kennedy, Robert F. Kennedy and Martin Luther King Jr.
The documents were posted to the website of the National Archives Tuesday evening. It may take some time before researchers who have studied the JFK assassination can go through the newly posted 1,123 documents, which were identified only by record numbers and no descriptions.
But there's no indication the files will contain any bombshells, according to one man who's seen many of the records already.
Tom Samulok was a deputy director of Assassination Records Review Board, a government panel formed in the 1990s to study records related to the assassination. He and a team of dozens re-examined troves of documents for public release between 1994 and 1998.
From what he reviewed, there isn't anything to change the current conclusion of Kennedy's assassination: that a lone gunman, Lee Harvey Oswald, was responsible for his death.
'The collection of records that we reviewed, the vast majority of which were released — some were kept classified in whole or in part — if that's what we're talking about, then there is no smoking gun,' he told CNN in a phone interview.
'If there had been anything that cut to the core of the assassination, the Review Board would have released it in the mid-'90s. So there is a sense of what the records are,' he went on.
Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard said in a statement that the records contain 'approximately 80,000 pages of previously classified records that will be published with no redactions.'
There are additional documents, she said, that are 'withheld under court seal or for grand jury secrecy, and records subject to section 6103 of the Internal Revenue Code, must be unsealed before release.'
The National Archives is working with the Justice Department to expedite the unsealing of those records, she added.
Larry Sabato, a political scientist at the University of Virginia who wrote 'The Kennedy Half-Century: The Presidency, Assassination, and Lasting Legacy of John F. Kennedy,' warned that the public could be disappointed in the lack of revelations.
'I'm just telling you that we will learn things,' Sabato said. 'But it may not be about the Kennedy assassination and people who are expecting, you know, to crack the case after 61 years, are going to be bitterly disappointed.'
Kennedy's assassination has long fueled conspiracy theories, some of which Trump has given voice to himself. That is part of why the Review Board that Samulok helped lead was created — to assess whether records related to the assassination could be made public.
Samulok acknowledged he hasn't seen all of the records that could potentially be released.
For example, last month the FBI said it had discovered about 2,400 new records related to the JFK assassination from a new records search following Trump's executive order.
There could also be other records at additional agencies that also haven't been released, Samulok said, that would make up a new bucket of documents previously unseen by his commission.
And he said there could still be points of interest in the remaining records that would help fill in gaps of existing knowledge, including information from the CIA related to Oswald's movements ahead of the November 22, 1963, assassination.
In 2023, the National Archives concluded its review of the classified documents related to the assassination, with 99% of the records having been made publicly available, CNN has previously reported.
President Joe Biden then released a memo certifying that the archivist had completed the review and affirmed the remaining documents authorized to be declassified had been released to the public — meeting a previously set deadline.
Despite past pledges from presidents, including Trump, to release those records, the CIA, Pentagon and State Department still have documents they've refused to release. The justification for those documents remaining classified largely stems from efforts to protect the identities of confidential sources who are still alive, or might be alive, and protecting methods.
During Trump's first term, he agreed not to release the full tranche of records related to Kennedy's assassination at the request of national security agencies. But Trump on the 2024 campaign trail said he would release the remaining documents.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Atlantic
26 minutes ago
- Atlantic
Censorship for Citizenship
This is an edition of The Atlantic Daily, a newsletter that guides you through the biggest stories of the day, helps you discover new ideas, and recommends the best in culture. Sign up for it here. Not that long ago, believe it or not, Donald Trump ran for president as the candidate who would defend the First Amendment. He warned that a 'sinister group of Deep State bureaucrats, Silicon Valley tyrants, left-wing activists, and depraved corporate news media' was 'conspiring to manipulate and silence the American people,' and promised that 'by restoring free speech, we will begin to reclaim our democracy, and save our nation.' On his first day back in office, Trump signed an executive order affirming the 'right of the American people to engage in constitutionally protected speech.' If anyone believed him at the time, they should be disabused by now. One of his most brazen attacks on freedom of speech thus far came this past weekend, when the president said that he was thinking about stripping a comedian of her citizenship—for no apparent reason other than that she regularly criticizes him. 'Because of the fact that Rosie O'Donnell is not in the best interests of our Great Country, I am giving serious consideration to taking away her Citizenship. She is a Threat to Humanity, and should remain in the wonderful Country of Ireland, if they want her,' he posted on Truth Social. This must have been exhilarating to O'Donnell, who received a brief new grant of relevance and told the Irish broadcaster RTE, 'I am very proud to be opposed to every single thing he says and does and represents.' But once the exhilaration subsides, the fundamental idea is very disturbing: Trump appears to view both free speech and U.S. citizenship as conditional, things he can revoke based on his own whims. Writing off the threat to O'Donnell as just another instance of Trumpian trolling—or an attempt to distract from fatal flooding in Texas, dozens of incomplete trade deals, or intramural MAGA battles over Jeffrey Epstein —is tempting. And the odds that Trump would actually successfully strip O'Donnell of her passport seem slim. But that doesn't mean the threat is irrelevant. What in particular set Trump off here is unclear—he and O'Donnell have been feuding for years—but by all indications, the answer is simply that she has exercised her freedom of speech to jab him. Perhaps this should go without saying, but native-born American citizens like O'Donnell generally cannot be stripped of their citizenship. (Citizens can, however, choose to relinquish their citizenship—something that has become a somewhat popular option for people wishing to avoid U.S. taxes, including former U.K. Prime Minister Boris Johnson, a New York native.) A president can't just decide that he wants to take it away. In other recent cases where the Trump administration has attempted to suppress speech, officials have at least claimed that they have evidence of criminality (though that's not to say even that was a legitimate standard; such accusations are also dangerous, and judges have dismissed them). With O'Donnell, Trump isn't even pretending she has crossed some sort of criminal line. He's also not (yet) taking action, but Trump often uses initially brash and outlandish threats as a way to acclimate the populace to his overreaching, as I wrote in the January 2024 issue of The Atlantic: 'When a second-term President Trump directs the Justice Department to lock up Democratic politicians or generals or reporters or activists on flimsy or no grounds at all, people will wring their hands, but they'll also shrug and wonder why he didn't do it sooner. After all, he's been promising to do it forever, right?' I wish this argument had aged worse. Trump has begun talking more frequently about revoking citizenship as a means of punishing political speech. He has mused about using the tool against political opponents, including the New York mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani, alleging potential fraud, and his former buddy Elon Musk, who had the temerity to insult him. Both of these men are naturalized, which makes their citizenship marginally easier to remove—though, again, not for simple speech. The administration has also been pursuing denaturalizations of citizens whom it believes it can prove lied on their application, which is an established legal basis for stripping their legal status. Even if Trump doesn't normalize taking away citizenship, he is continuing to entrench the idea that the government—or, really, just the president on his own—can punish citizens who criticize it, or him. That's been one of the most prominent themes of his term so far: He has banished the Associated Press from some White House spaces simply for refusing to adopt his preferred terminology, extorted law firms that employed lawyers involved in the criminal cases against him, and demanded huge payouts from news organizations. He'll continue as long as he's successful. 'If we don't have free speech, then we just don't have a free country,' Trump said in a campaign video posted in 2022. 'It's as simple as that. If this most fundamental right is allowed to perish, then the rest of our rights and liberties will topple just like dominos one by one. They'll go down.' Here are three new stories from The Atlantic: Today's News President Donald Trump announced a new weapons-transfer plan for Ukraine and threatened to impose high tariffs on Russia if a peace deal is not reached in 50 days. The Supreme Court allowed the Trump administration to move forward with dismantling the Education Department and firing nearly 1,400 workers. Twenty-four states and the District of Columbia sued the Trump administration for withholding more than $6.8 billion in education funding, which helps pay for free or low-cost after-school programs and assistance for students learning English. Dispatches Evening Read The AI Mirage By Ian Bogost 'I'm not going to respond to that,' Siri responded. I had just cursed at it, and this was my passive-aggressive chastisement. The cursing was, in my view, warranted. I was in my car, running errands, and had found myself in an unfamiliar part of town. I requested 'directions to Lowe's,' hoping to get routed to the big-box hardware store without taking my eyes off the road. But apparently Siri didn't understand. 'Which Lowe?' it asked, before displaying a list of people with the surname Lowe in my address book … The latest version of Siri has 'better conversational context'—the sort of thing that should help the software know when I'm asking to be guided to the home-improvement store rather than to a guy called Lowe. But my iPhone apparently isn't new enough for this update. I would need cutting-edge artificial intelligence to get directions to Lowe's. More From The Atlantic Read. Alert the incels! The rest of us love Pamela Anderson, and we will always love her, Caitlin Flanagan writes. Let go. And let your kid climb that tree, Henry Abbott writes. It could actually make them safer. Play our daily crossword.
Yahoo
27 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump Backs Bondi, Blames Dems For Epstein List Fiasco
President Donald Trump has sought to calm growing divisions within his political base by defending Attorney General Pam Bondi and dismissing renewed scrutiny over the handling of Jeffrey Epstein-related documents. Trump took to social media over the weekend and posted to support Bondi, writing that Bondi is 'doing a FANTASTIC JOB!' Trump claimed in his post that the Epstein 'client list,' which has recently been claimed nonexistent by the Department of Justice (DOJ), was created by previous Democratic leaders. 'For years, it's Epstein, over and over again. Why are we giving publicity to Files written by Obama, Crooked Hillary, Comey, Brennan, and the Losers and Criminals of the Biden Administration…' wrote the President. 'They created the Epstein Files, just like they created the FAKE Hillary Clinton/Christopher Steele Dossier that they used on me, and now my so-called 'friends' are playing right into their hands. Why didn't these Radical Left Lunatics release the Epstein Files? If there was ANYTHING in there that could have hurt the MAGA Movement, why didn't they use it?' Trump also berated a reporter last week when asked about the handling of the Epstein documents, indicating that more important things were to be focused on than Epstein. 'And are people still talking about this guy, this creep?' Trump questioned. 'That is unbelievable.' These statements from the President come shortly after a joint memo from the DOJ and FBI claiming that there is no evidence supporting conspiracy theories about Epstein's death or the existence of a so-called 'client list.' However, the claims made by the FBI and DOJ directly contradict Bondi's previous statement, in which she claimed to have the client list ready for review. 'It's sitting on my desk right now to review. That's been a directive by President Trump,' she said in February when asked about the client list. Bondi has since attempted to clarify these comments, claiming that she meant to review more than just Epstein's files. 'I did an interview on Fox, and it's been getting a lot of attention because I said I was asked a question about the client list, and my response was, it's sitting on my desk to be reviewed – meaning the file along with the JFK, MLK files as well. That's what I meant by that,' she explained, per CNN. Despite the attempt at clarification, many political activists have now called for changes within the Trump administration. 'Blondi [sic] has been very DAMAGING to the admin and she has damaged public trust in the DOJ. She is hurting President Trump and his staff/advisors,' wrote Laura Loomer on social media. 'She lied on national TV and needs to be held accountable for harming the Trump admin and public trust.' Similarly, Tucker Carlson called out Bondi's claims, adding that he now believes that the government does not have 'much relevant information about Jeffrey Epstein's sex crimes.' 'Rather than just admit that, Pam Bondi made a bunch of ludicrous claims on cable news shows that she couldn't back up, and this current outrage is the result,' he explained during an interview with NBC News. Currently, there has been no indication made by the White House about plans to move on from Bondi, with many expecting the attorney general to retain her role for the foreseeable future.

Wall Street Journal
29 minutes ago
- Wall Street Journal
The Benefit of Ebbing EVs
Helping Ukraine against a weakened Russia coincides nicely with the demise of electric vehicles, wind turbines and solar panels ('Trump Calls Out the Putin Charade,' Review and Outlook, July 9). Freed-up U.S. manufacturing capacity can go to missile systems and ammunition primarily for sale to Europe and use by Ukraine. General Motors has shown such versatility by producing tens of thousands of tanks and armored vehicles in World War II and 30,000 ventilators during the Covid pandemic. It's time to heed Rahm Emanuel's rule: You never want a serious crisis to go to waste. William J. Doyle