"Congress had ordered in 1992 that all remaining sealed files pertaining to the investigation into Kennedy’s death should be fully opened to the public through the National Archives in 25 years, by Oct. 26, 2017, except for those the president authorized for further withholding.
The US law allows the president to keep material under wraps if it is determined that harm to intelligence operations, national defense, law enforcement or the conduct of foreign relations would outweigh the public’s interest in full disclosure.
More than 2,800 uncensored documents were posted to the National Archives website on October 26 following the order, but approximately 18,000 remaining CIA records are to be released “on a rolling basis,” with “redactions in only the rarest of circumstances,” by the end of the review on April 26, 2018, the White House said in a statement.
CIA Director Mike Pompeo was a lead advocate in arguing to the White House for keeping some materials secret, one senior administration official said. Trump was resistant but “acceded to it with deep insistence that this stuff is going to be reviewed and released in the next six months,” according to the official." SF
---------------
I used to do a lot of DoJ funded expert witness testimony for the defense in national security cases. In the US if you are charged and are indigent in terms of ability to pay lawyers, the government provides a legal team for you that is often from the Federal Public Defenders office in the district where the trial is held. These lawyers are fully funded and staffed and are every bit as good as the DoJ US Attorney's people and staff. They hire expert witnesses as needed. My function was always the same. As a court accepted expert on the ME. Islam and intelligence I had the job of studying the exhibits provided under "discovery" and providing the judge and both legal teams reports as to the case against the accused. I then testified about my reports.
I found it to be the case that the CIA is so sensitive about its fearsome reputation for operational skill that it would do anything needed to protect that reputation. That included willingness to compromise (through DoJ) on sentencing if only I would not testify as to their frequent ineptitude.
In the case of the FBI, a desire to be thought of as the nation's guardian angel sometimes made them do bizarre things. In one case two FBI agents conspired with a DoJ prosecutor to bribe a pair of witnesses with witness fees to falsely testify against an accused. This was on a success based understanding. In other words the foresworn witnesses would be paid if the man was convicted. The US attorney discovered this through financial audits and informed the US Defender.
With this in mind I find it very easy to believe that what CIA and FBI want suppressed forever in the Kennedy papers is evidence of their own failures in the matter rather than conspiracy evidence.
Why would Pompeio have backed that suppression urging DJT to not release everything? The CIA knows that nobody is easier to recruit than a Director from outside the intelligence world who is looking to be accepted at Langley. pl
https://southfront.org/under-cia-pressure-trump-blocks-full-release-of-kennedy-assassination-docs/
I concur. However, I would argue that the investigation of the crime of assassination be distinguished from the reactions of institutional stakeholders such as the CIA, FBI, SS & etc. There are many odd things surrounding Oswald, from his time as a Marine to his murder by a Mafia hanger-on. I found Talbot’s book “Brothers” to be a valuable perspective from inside the WH family regarding Robert’s own anti-Castro operation - seems you can’t have enough competition in making bad ideas worse. And there is meaning to be found in our fixation with the event until today, as a many-element lens onto ourselves.
Posted by: ked | 30 October 2017 at 09:38 AM
Agreed. So many aspects of the Cuba Project (and its sequelae) were mishandled, mismanaged and outright bungled that there is strong motive to keep as much of that derogatory material out of sight. Forever, if possible.
Posted by: Virginia Slim | 30 October 2017 at 11:16 AM
We're on the same page about the skeezy doings of the CIA etc. not being indicators that they were involved in the conspiracy. Neither were the capabilities of the conspirators. They had been provided willingly by the CIA when Castro was the target. The issue is the politically motivated restraints the CIA placed on response to the known danger. In the months preceding Dallas, appearances by JFK in the mob strongholds Chicago and Tampa had been cancelled for security reasons.
Jack Ruby was a jobber in the mob's efforts to free Tampa boss Santos Trafficante when he was imprisoned in Havana. His relationship with the mob was not trivial. Trafficante became a key player in Operation Mongoose.
A mob-centered conspiracy is sure to be disappointing to those who have become vested in fitting the assassination into Grand Historical Narratives.
Posted by: Thirdeye | 30 October 2017 at 05:16 PM
So where does LBJ fit into all of this (mob centered)?
Posted by: J | 30 October 2017 at 07:25 PM
LBJ involvement is a theory driven more by a sense of drama and grand narrative than by anything grounded in facts or reasoning. Convenient straw man for Warren Commission advocates.
Posted by: Thirdeye | 30 October 2017 at 09:37 PM
Thank you....
I just found time to read this. Your analysis reinforces my original "gut" reaction about why some of the files were held back. I don't think this is any different from any other bureaucracy--i.e., school boards, school administrators, cigarette manufacturers, car manufacturers, etc., etc. etc.
It always to cover their butts and help them maintain their public image.
Posted by: DianaLC | 01 November 2017 at 01:58 PM
why wouldn't the Cosa Nostra / Mafia / Mob qualify as grand historical narrative? the relationship to the OSS goes back to WWII security ops in NYC. I recommend Havana Nocturnes &/or The Mafia in Havana as a window into that element of the story.
Posted by: ked | 01 November 2017 at 02:24 PM
Col. Lang,
I am curious as to whether you have ever considered the potential Israel angle, and if so, what you think of it.
I have not dived deeply into it yet, but in summary, the premise seems to be that Israel went after JFK and RFK because:
"1 The Kennedys want Israel inspected for nuclear weapons. RFK also had information and testing done around Dimona showing the Uranium there had come from the US’s Nautilus projec, since it was the only uranium in the world enriched to that high a % at that point in time. It was all over the area.
2 The Kennedys supported Palestinians right of Return.
3 They wanted Israel’s foreign lobbies to register as foreign agents"
http://www.ancreport.com/report/jfk-2891-new-files-released-say/
Posted by: Adrian Norman | 02 November 2017 at 05:31 PM
Well I believe our host did contribute to 'Divert!: NUMEC, Zalman Shapiro and the diversion of US weapons grade uranium into the Israeli nuclear weapons program'. Although that was published well after the Michael Piper published his book 'Final Judgement', which has recently been republished in two volumes in a sixth (and presumably final) edition. Noteworthy that Piper's thesis has been endorsed by Colonel John Hughes-Wilson with his impeccable military intelligence establishment background.
Interesting comment by Homer Echevarria, Holt says he delivered the fake secret service IDs to Echevarria. So whilst Holt was participating in "an incident was going to be created which could be laid at the door of pro-Castro Cubans." Echevarria was clearly involved the actual assassination plot. Really my interest is now only in how the two plots intersected, that said Holt himself cannot really determine who around him was involved in which.
Posted by: LondonBob | 03 November 2017 at 05:24 AM
London Bob
"Well I believe our host did contribute to 'Divert!: NUMEC, Zalman Shapiro and the diversion of US weapons grade uranium into the Israeli nuclear weapons program'." Did I? I don't remember anything about that. Remind m. pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 03 November 2017 at 08:11 AM
Amazon has a Patrick Lang credited as writing the introduction and Michael Scheuer as writing the preface.
Posted by: LondonBob | 03 November 2017 at 11:49 AM
London Bob
It must be me. Any good? pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 03 November 2017 at 12:50 PM
Don't know, got recommended it by Amazon. Just surprised to see it covered as a topic so had look at the reviews etc.
Posted by: LondonBob | 06 November 2017 at 08:37 AM