Hold onto your hats Boys & Girls, Trump's releasing the final JFK files!

[Steve M. Galbraith]

I checked the news today on what used to be a reputable news site(news.com.au) and is now more of a sensationalized type newspaper but I digress, what was near the top of the page was the following.

The attention getting headline caught my interest.



What followed was just another "nothingburger" Yawn!



JohnM

So the bombshell is a file that mentions an article that was published in a radical left publication in 1967? This is new? Claims made 58 years ago? My guess is that this file was released decades ago. Why withhold it?

Seems the US media, so far (it's early), has been more responsible. Was the Aussie story right next to one about reptilian lizard people secretly controlling the world?

[John Mytton]

So the bombshell is a file that mentions an article that was published in a radical left publication in 1967? This is new? Claims made 58 years ago? My guess is that this file was released decades ago. Why withhold it?

Seems the US media, so far (it's early), has been more responsible. Was the Aussie story right next to one about reptilian lizard people secretly controlling the world?

Was the Aussie story right next to one about reptilian lizard people secretly controlling the world?

Hahahaha! No generally it hasn't sunk to those depths but many a time the click bait headlines don't accurately reflect the content.

JohnM

[Royell Storing]

  That being your watering hole for "News", explains a lot of your previous positions. How about just finding another watering hole? 

[John Mytton]

  That being your watering hole for "News", explains a lot of your previous positions. How about just finding another watering hole?

Making assumptions based on assumed facts from limited resources sums up your belief system.

I have access to multiple news sites that I have bookmarked and by cross referencing news across a multitude of sources keeps me up to date.

A small sample in my news folder.

https://www.abc.net.au/
https://www.smh.com.au/
https://www.bbc.com/news
https://www.usnews.com/
https://edition.cnn.com/
https://www.nytimes.com/international/

JohnM

[Richard Smith]

I checked the news today on what used to be a reputable news site(news.com.au) and is now more of a sensationalized type newspaper but I digress, what was near the top of the page was the following.

The attention getting headline caught my interest.



What followed was just another "nothingburger" Yawn!



JohnM

If the media simply reports that there is nothing much new in the files, no one is going to read their stories.  There is also an unfortunate desire on the right to relate the JFK assassination to the "deep state" efforts against Trump.  As in they want the CIA and others to have conspired to kill JFK as an example that the "deep state" is out to get presidents.   I have no doubt that there was a concerted effort to undermine the Trump administration during his first term.  That has no relevance to whether there was a conspiracy involving the highest levels of the government to assassinate JFK.  Much of what they are reporting appears to be a product of ignorance.  Some of the reports that I saw focused on the fact that the FBI/CIA had been tracking or were "aware" of Oswald before the assassination as though this were new and significant information.  Oswald had defected to the USSR and was a known political nut.  Of course the FBI/CIA were interested in him for that reason.  That is not evidence, however, that they were conspiring with or grooming him for the assassination.

[Steve M. Galbraith]

If the media simply reports that there is nothing much new in the files, no one is going to read their stories.  There is also an unfortunate desire on the right to relate the JFK assassination to the "deep state" efforts against Trump.  As in they want the CIA and others to have conspired to kill JFK as an example that the "deep state" is out to get presidents.   I have no doubt that there was a concerted effort to undermine the Trump administration during his first term.  That has no relevance to whether there was a conspiracy involving the highest levels of the government to assassinate JFK.  Much of what they are reporting appears to be a product of ignorance.  Some of the reports that I saw focused on the fact that the FBI/CIA had been tracking or were "aware" of Oswald before the assassination as though this were new and significant information.  Oswald had defected to the USSR and was a known political nut.  Of course the FBI/CIA were interested in him for that reason.  That is not evidence, however, that they were conspiring with or grooming him for the assassination.

It's fascinating (like viewing a car accident sort of way) watching the conspiracy Left and conspiracy Right get together on this. It's obvious they loathe one another but their conspiracy crusade forces them to join up, make peace, makes them hold their noses (watch Jefferson Morley on Tucker Carlson or Glenn Beck; he really looks like he wants to be elsewhere). When the MAGA Right says "They got JFK like they tried to get Trump" the conspiracy Left sort of looks the other way, pretends they didn't hear it. JFK, for them, is a saint; he was going to "end" the Cold War and expose the crimes of the "deep state" and CIA. But Trump is the anti-christ, a fascist and there's no way they are going to defend him.

[Jon Banks]

So far, most of the documents published have been previously published but with redactions.

We're now seeing unredacted versions of some documents that have previously been released.

As noted by others, not all of the files have been published. Where are the rest?