Asking AI" Was J Kenneth McDonald a Well-Regarded Historian?

[Benjamin Cole]

Question for AI: J Kenneth McDonald, who was chief CIA historian in 1992, was he highly regarded?

J. Kenneth McDonald was highly regarded both within the CIA and among the broader historical community for his leadership in professionalizing the CIA’s History Staff and steering its "openness" initiatives in the 1990s.

His reputation is defined by several key contributions:

Pioneer of Transparency: As Chief Historian in 1992, he was a central figure in the CIA's transition toward greater public disclosure. He oversaw the "openness program" initiated by then-DCI Robert Gates, managing a staff of historians with complete access to agency files to identify and prepare documents for declassification.

Scholarly Rigor: Peers and successors have praised his work for its "rigorous and insightful critiques". He is credited with providing vital cooperation to the State Department’s Foreign Relations of the United States (FRUS) series, helping to ensure a more complete documentary record of American foreign policy.

Editor of Foundational Works: He served as the Editor-in-Chief for the CIA Cold War Records series, which included high-profile publications such as CIA Documents on the Cuban Missile Crisis, 1962.

Academic Standing: Beyond his 14-year tenure as Chief Historian, he had a distinguished academic career and remained active in the field as an American academic, frequently appearing on platforms like C-SPAN to discuss Cold War intelligence.

---

J. Kenneth McDonald, who served as the Chief Historian of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) from roughly 1980 to 1994, was affiliated with several academic institutions during his career, primarily focusing on history and maritime studies.

His primary academic affiliations included:

George Washington University: He served as a professor at the university.

U.S. Naval War College: He held the King Chair of Maritime History.
Oxford University: He earned a DPhil (Doctor of Philosophy) from Oxford.

While working as the CIA's Chief Historian, he also worked closely with the State Department's Office of the Historian in reviewing documents for the Foreign Relations of the United States (FRUS) series.

---30---

But Fred Litwin and Tom Graves say McDonald committed unfathomable bungles, in prominently and unequivocally  identifying Clay Shaw as a "highly paid CIA contract source" in a 1992 report on the CIA---a report commissioned by the CIA.

Why? Litwin says he read all the underlying documents in the HSCA's 64 boxes of papers, microfilm, and ephemera---but he did it online. (No word on whether all the records are truly online. Beyond that, many documents are online but not digitized, meaning word searches are sometimes flummoxed.) So. nit finding the right documents, Litwin ventures McDonald erred.

Tom Graves suggests McDonald's work was "cobbled together."

Well, truth can be stranger than fiction, so perhaps the McDonald made an incredible bungle, and right in his own wheelhouse. I wouldn't take odds on that, rather quite the opposite, but each to his own.

However...Litwin's contention that that he never seen the "underlying documents" for McDonald's contention, and ergo McDonald erred...seems thinner than Karen Carpenter.

Maybe Litwin would better say, "I have not been able to locate the documents that grounded McDonald's work."

Maybe Litwin should try harder, or ask the CIA Public Affairs staff to retract the statement of the CIA historian, that Shaw was a "highly paid contract source."

[Fred Litwin]

Please don't put words in my mouth. His staff prepared that report and they made a couple of mistakes. That's all.

[Michael Capasse]

Please don't put words in my mouth. His staff prepared that report and they made a couple of mistakes. That's all.

That's quite an assumption for an agency that doesn't write it down.
Did you find any, "...hieroglyphics that only two people knew what they meant..."?

[Fred Litwin]

I have no idea what you are talking about.

Benjamin: What about the mistake that Paul Hoch found in the Macdonald report?

fred

[Benjamin Cole]

FL--

Yes, I think Paul Hoch found an error in McDonald's report.

But the McDonald 1992 report prominently identified Clay Shaw as a "highly paid contract source" on a highly inflammatory topic---in a report commissioned by the CIA.

This is not some whack-job by lefties or Jeff Morley dog-whistling "Mossad did it."

You see McDonald's record. He was no stranger to national security-foreign affairs. 

Your position, that you have not seen the underlying documents, ergo McDonald is in error---will, just doesn't hold water.

Why don't you be honest? Say something like, "I have not looked through the 64 HSCA boxes of documents, microfilm that McDonald and his staff did. I have tried to review the materials online, and have not found the underlying documents that would justify NcDonald's assertion that Shaw was a 'highly paid contract source.' There it stands."

You need not add that McDonald was a highly regarded historian deeply familiar with national defense and security issues. Maybe he erred. Or maybe you are shooting in the dark?

[Fred Litwin]

Benjamin:  His staff erred and they erred twice in that document. Paul Hoch found the other error. We know there is an error because there is no such thing as a "contract source."

Find me one CIA document that uses that terminology.

The segregated collection is online and there are no underlying documents that support MacDonald. Just the opposite -- there are many documents
that say Shaw was NOT paid.

fred

[Tom Graves]

Tom Graves suggests McDonald's work was "cobbled together."

Would you prefer "fabricated"?

[Benjamin Cole]

FL--

Of course there is such a thing as a CIA  "contract source." It is the same as a "contract agent."

McDonald was free to use nomenclature as he saw fit, and did not have to subscribe to certain specific bureaucratic definitions.

As it stands, do you verify you never looked through the 64 physical boxes of HSCA materials that McDonald and his staff did?

BTW, McDonald and his staff looked at other materials in addition to the 64 boxes.



Have you also reviewed all the records that McDonald reviewed at CIA headquarters and the Warrenton Records Center?

Are you confident those records, in the CIA HQ and the Warrenton Records Center are also online? Are you saw each one in your online searches?

I gather you are shooting in the dark.

You are doing the CT-thing...leaping to conclusions with partial information, following your biases.

Well, it is JFKA research, so have had it. A rather low bar to participate.