Democrats decry ‘sloppy and rushed' release of JFK files during task force hearing
'We've got to have transparency so that we can learn to be better, so that we can hold agencies accountable. But being reckless with this sensitive information is also not the way to do it,' said Rep. Summer Lee (D-Pa.) during a hearing focused on the flood of so-called 'JFK files.'
'Unfortunately, the rollout of documents that we've seen so far has been sloppy and rushed. The release didn't really give us a smoking gun, but it did produce plenty of collateral damage,' Lee said.
An executive order from President Trump prompted the National Archives to release thousands of files related to Kennedy's killing. Through unredacted documents, hundreds of Social Security numbers and other personal data were made public, putting some living individuals named in the records at risk.
Though Democrats on the committee largely said there was value in examining previously classified information, Lee and others sounded alarm about the risks of releasing materials without regard for personal data.
'We know that in the past the government has over-classified documents. … Over-classification at the expense of transparency is something we should all take seriously. But also note that it's incredibly serious and a delicate subject,' said Rep. Robert Garcia (D-Calif.), the ranking member of the House Oversight Committee's Task Force on the Declassification of Federal Secrets.
Later in the hearing, Garcia stressed his concern that 'a lot of personal information' had been released during the document rollout that has 'actually caused harm to folks.'
John Davisson, senior counsel and director of litigation at the Electronic Privacy Information Center, testified that the National Archives were aware that the documents included sensitive personal information – and completed the document release 'without taking the steps that are ordinarily taken to redact that information and to ensure the privacy is protected.'
'There's a whole host of harms that can come from that,' Davisson said, pointing out the possibility of identity fraud and other issues.
The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) in a release acknowledged that files went out without redactions and contained the personal identification information of some living individuals. Along with the Social Security Administration, NARA said it's now working 'to protect the individuals who may be affected from their information being exploited.'
Officials at the White House have also said there's a plan in place to help those affected by the document release, according to the Associated Press, but Davisson argued that significant harm can still happen in the meantime.
Also testifying before the committee was Oliver Stone, the American filmmaker behind the 1991 political thriller 'JFK,' which stoked conspiracy questions surrounding Kennedy's death.
'I ask the committee to reopen what the Warren Commission failed miserably to complete. I ask you … to reinvestigate the assassination of this President Kennedy from the scene of the crime to the courtroom,' Oliver Stone told lawmakers in his opening statement, contending that the CIA's 'muddy footprints are all over this case.'
But Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas), another of just five Democrats on the 12-member subcommittee, stressed that the latest flood of documents does not contradict the Warren Commission's conclusion that Lee Harvey Oswald was the lone gunman in the assassination.
'While I value government accountability and transparency like most of my colleagues, nearly all of the previously classified JFK assassination files are now public and show no evidence of a CIA conspiracy,' Crockett said.
'But what I find funny about this hearing is that the Republicans are here litigating whether CIA agents lied 60 years ago, but aren't doing anything about the CIA director lying to Congress just six days ago,' she added, decrying that Trump administration officials who controversially used a Signal group chat, arguing they were 'carelessly discussing classified military plans.'
Task force Chair Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.) pitched the document release as a 'historical day' for transparency.
'With the recent efforts made to declassify over 80,000 pages of classified documents, fighting against the request for redactions—combined with prior releases under the previous administration—we have an unprecedented opportunity to peel back the layers of that dark day and lay bare the facts for all to see and for the first time in many years we are seeing complete cooperation between the U.S. government enterprise,' Luna said in her opening remarks.
Jefferson Morley, editor of the JFK Facts blog, and James DiEugenio, author of books on the assassination, were additional witnesses who raised questions about the investigations and long-held conclusions about the case.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
12 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Switzerland moves to strengthen its competitiveness after US tariffs
ZURICH (Reuters) -Switzerland is intensifying efforts to strengthen its attractiveness as a business location, its government said on Wednesday, after being hit with some of the highest U.S. tariffs worldwide. Efforts will focus on regulatory relief for Swiss companies, and new rules incurring high costs for businesses could be pushed back, the government said in a statement. U.S. President Donald Trump this month imposed U.S. import tariffs of 39% on Swiss goods, though pharmaceuticals and some other sectors have so far been spared the duties. "(The government) wants to decisively press ahead with its economic policy agenda and is focusing on reducing the regulatory burden on companies," the government said. Geographical diversification and Swiss companies' access to alternative international markets should also be strengthened, the statement said. The new U.S. levies currently affect around 10% of Swiss goods exports, and could have potentially severe consequences for some companies, the government said. Switzerland does not anticipate a recession akin to the global financial crisis or the pandemic, it added. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
The Hill
13 minutes ago
- The Hill
Trump doesn't have to quit UNESCO again because we never lawfully rejoined
President Trump recently announced that the United States was quitting the United Nations Economic, Social, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) for the third time. This is good news – UNESCO has championed gender ideology in education, discriminatory DEI policies, and the entire litany of woke doctrines. It has also worked to erase Jewish history in the Holy Land. But the administration did not need to bother with formally withdrawing from the treaty — from a constitutional perspective, the U.S. hasn't been a member at least since Trump first quit it in 2017. When Biden sought to rejoin the Paris-based agency in 2023, he neglected to seek authorization from Congress. No one made a big deal of it then, but it means that, for domestic law purposes, the U.S. never actually rejoined. This is an important point with implications for numerous international organizations, especially as the administration sets out on an agenda of U.N. reform. Membership in international organizations was not supposed to be a political revolving door. Congress authorizes membership at the outset. After the U.S. leaves, a whole new congressional authorization must be obtained by any president wishing to rejoin. Under the Constitution, the president can only bring the country into a treaty with the 'consent' of two-thirds of the Senate. That is a substantial hurdle, and deliberately so: Commitments to foreign countries can be harder to pull out of than domestic ones. They can become a way of imposing obligations on the country that are then out of reach of the democratic process. In the 20th century, presidents have often relied on the approval of a majority of both Houses instead, a dubious practice but now widely followed. When the U.S. first joined UNESCO in 1946 (and the World Health Organization in 1948), President Truman was acting pursuant a law passed by both Houses authorizing him to do so. But Congress did not reauthorize Biden's reentry to UNESCO. Instead, he treated the 1946 authorization as a lifetime membership, when in fact it was only a one-time pass. If the U.S. quit a treaty that the Senate had ratified — say the NATO treaty — then a decision to rejoin would be subject to a new requirement of advice and consent. Congressional authorization is a stand-in for Senate ratification and should be subject to the same rules. Consider a parallel case: If a president fires a senate-confirmed appointee, and he or a subsequent president wishes to return him to the same post, no one would argue that he could do so simply on the grounds that the Senate had previously confirmed him. Indeed, Andrew Jackson's Attorney General resigned from his position, and was then reappointed to it — only to be rejected by the Senate. As a statutory matter, the 1946 agreement on UNESCO allowed the president to 'accept membership' — not accept, and accept, and accept again. If a congressional authorization is good for infinite rounds of quitting and rejoining, it makes getting out of international agreements harder than getting in – exactly the opposite of what the Framers intended. The argument of perpetual authorization was invented by Jimmy Carter, who purported to rejoin the International Labor Organization in 1980 based on a 1934 authorization. President Bush neglected to seek congressional approval when he rejoined UNESCO in 2002, nearly two decades after Reagan quit. Neither instance attracted much attention, and two modern actions do not prove a constitutional rule. There is a good argument for the Trump administration having withdrawn from UNESCO as if it were a member — to avoid any doubt or subsequent quibbling. But the administration should clarify that it is 'quitting' only out of an excess of caution, and does not see the U.S. as properly joined, which is consistent with its nonpayment of any dues. To avoid abuse by future administrations, Congress should repeal the antiquated authorizations for UNESCO and WHO, which Trump also announced withdrawal from. If a subsequent president wants to rejoin, he should have to sell it to Congress on the organization's existing records, not the hopes and dreams of the 1940s.
The Hill
13 minutes ago
- The Hill
Senate Democrats launch radio ad attacking GOP over cuts to rural radio funding
The Senate Democrats' campaign arm is launching a new radio ad Wednesday attacking Republicans for slashing funding for rural radio stations as a part of more than $1 billion Republicans made in cuts to public broadcasting in their recissions package. 'Thank you for listening to your local radio station. But stations like these might not be around for long,' a narrator says in the 30-second ad, which was first shared with The Hill. 'Last month in D.C., Republican Senators cut radio funding, voting to end weather alerts, community news and our way to stay connected,' the narrator continued. 'Rural America relies on radio. But Republican politicians left us behind.' They added, 'We can't trust them to fight for us.' The ads are being aired in recognition of National Radio Day, and they're expected to run in rural stations in Alaska, Iowa, Maine, North Carolina, Ohio and Texas, all of which Senate Democrats are eyeing as potential pick-up opportunities next year. 'Rural communities rely on local radio to stay connected on everything from local news to lifesaving alerts about severe weather — but Republican Senators left them behind,' Maeve Coyle, a spokeswoman for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC), said in a statement. 'Republican senators will be forced to explain to their constituents why they're robbing the programs that support their communities in order to pay for a giveaway to billionaires,' she added. President Trump signed a recissions package last month, which rescinds around $9 billion Congress had previously approved for funding for the Corporation of Public Broadcasting (CPB), which helps fund NPR and PBS and its affiliates, and global aid programs. CPB is contending with more than $1 billion in cuts alone. Federal funding makes up a smaller percentage of the money NPR and PBS rely on, but rural stations have already warned it will impact them more severely since it makes up a higher proportion of their overall funding. Republicans have attacked NPR and PBS, arguing they're liberally biased and their programs push 'radical left positions,' which its leaders have pushed back on. Contending with the cuts, the CPB announced it would begin to shut down, with its president Patricia Harrison saying in a statement 'we now face the difficult reality of closing our operations.'
