10,000 pages of records related to the 1968 assassination of Robert F. Kennedy are released
WASHINGTON (AP) — Approximately 10,000 pages of records related to the 1968 assassination of Sen. Robert F. Kennedy have been released.
The Friday release continues the disclosure of national secrets ordered by President Donald Trump. Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard says in a statement the RFK files' release will 'shine a long-overdue light on the truth.'
Gabbard says, 'Nearly 60 years after the tragic assassination of Senator Robert F. Kennedy, the American people will, for the first time, have the opportunity to review the federal government's investigation thanks to the leadership of President Trump.'
The U.S. National Archives and Records Administration posted roughly 229 files containing the pages on its website.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Times
31 minutes ago
- New York Times
Is Civil War Coming to Europe?
Whether the debate is occasioned by a polemical book or a movie like last year's 'Civil War,' I consistently take the negative on the question of whether the United States is headed for a genuine civil war. In those debates it's usually liberals warning that populism or Trumpism is steering the United States toward the abyss. But with European politics the pattern is different: In France and Britain, and among American observers of the continent, a preoccupation with looming civil war tends to be more common among conservatives. For years, figures associated with the French right and French military have warned of an impending civil conflict driven by the country's failure to assimilate immigrants from the Muslim world. (The great reactionary novelist Michel Houellebecq's 'Submission' famously imagines this war being averted by the sudden conversion of French elites to Islam.) Lately there has been a similar discussion around Britain touched off by an essay by the military historian David Betz that argues that multicultural Britain is in danger of tearing itself apart, and lately taken up by the political strategist, Brexit-campaign architect and former Boris Johnson adviser Dominic Cummings in an essay warning that British elites are increasingly fearful of organized violence from nativists and radicalized immigrants alike. When I've written skeptically about scenarios for an American civil war, I've tended to stress several realities: the absence of a clear geographical division between our contending factions; the diminishment, not exacerbation, of racial and ethnic polarization in the Trump era; the fact that we're rich and aging and comfortable, not poor and young and desperate, giving even groups that hate each other a stake in the system and elites strong reasons to sustain it; the absence of enthusiasm for organized communal violence as opposed to lone-wolf forays. Does the European landscape look different? On some fronts, maybe. Tensions between natives and new arrivals are common on both sides of the Atlantic, but ethnic and religious differences arguably loom larger in Europe than they do in the United States: There is more intense cultural separatism in immigrant communities in suburban Paris or Marseilles than in Los Angeles or Chicago, more simmering discontent that easily turns to riots. At the same time, British and French elites have been more successful than American elites at keeping populist forces out of power, but their tools — not just the exclusion of populists from government, but an increasingly authoritarian throttling of free speech — have markedly diminished their own legitimacy among discontented natives. This means that neither under-assimilated immigrants nor working-class whites feel especially invested in the system, making multiple forms of political violence more plausible: pitting immigrant or native rebels against the government, or pitting immigrants against natives with the government trying to suppress the conflict, or, finally, pitting different immigrant groups against one another. (English cities have already played host to bursts of Muslim-Hindu violence.) Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
Yahoo
32 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Elon Musk Slams Trump's Spending Bill: ‘A Disgusting Abomination'
A serious rift has erupted between Elon Musk and President Trump over the massive government spending bill the president has urged Congress to pass. Musk, who donated nearly $275 million toward Trump's 2024 election campaign, on Tuesday posted on X an unambiguous denunciation of the bill, which is called the One Big, Beautiful Bill Act. More from Variety London Mayor Sadiq Khan Hails 'Adolescence' for Having 'Mainstreamed' Conversation About 'Epidemic' of Violence Against Women Jon Stewart Tackles Elon Musk's Exit From the Trump Administration: 'This Guy Has Seen Some S--' Elon Musk Says New York Times Is 'Lying Their Ass Off' About His Alleged Drug Use; Newspaper Defends Coverage 'I'm sorry, but I just can't stand it anymore. This massive, outrageous, pork-filled Congressional spending bill is a disgusting abomination,' Musk wrote. 'Shame on those who voted for it: you know you did wrong. You know it.' The tech mogul wrote that the bill 'will massively increase the already gigantic budget deficit' and that 'Congress is making America bankrupt.' Musk, the world's richest person, also posted a warning that voters would 'fire all politicians who betrayed the American people' in the 2026 midterm elections. On May 28, Musk announced the he would end his tenure as a 'special government employee' — leading the White House's Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE — after 128 days. Per the U.S. Department of the Interior, a person cannot serve in such a role for more than 130 days in a consecutive year. Sen. Ran Paul (R-Kentucky) was among those chiming in to agree with Musk. 'We have both seen the massive waste in government spending and we know another $5 trillion in debt is a huge mistake. We can and must do better,' he wrote, quoting Musk's post. Trump, on Truth Social, earlier in the day slammed Paul, writing 'Rand Paul has very little understanding of the BBB, especially the tremendous GROWTH that is coming. He loves voting 'NO' on everything, he thinks it's good politics, but it's not. The BBB is a big WINNER!!!' At a White House press briefing, Fox News correspondent Peter Doocy asked press secretary Karoline Leavitt 'how mad do you think President Trump is going to be' about Musk's comments? Leavitt responded that Trump 'already knows where Elon Musk stood on this bill. It doesn't change the president's opinion. This is one big, beautiful bill, and he's sticking to it.' The One Big, Beautiful Bill Act passed the Republican-controlled House but has yet to clear the Senate. The legislation would make Trump's 2017 tax cuts permanent (with wealthy Americans benefiting the most) and increase funding for the U.S. military and immigration enforcement. In addition, the version that passed the House cuts funding for health, nutrition, education and clean energy programs. Musk has criticized the 'Big Beautiful Bill' before, but using tamer terminology. Last week, for example, Musk criticized Trump's 'massive spending bill' in an interview with CBS's 'Sunday Morning,' saying the legislation 'undermines the work' of DOGE. Best of Variety What's Coming to Netflix in June 2025 New Movies Out Now in Theaters: What to See This Week 'Harry Potter' TV Show Cast Guide: Who's Who in Hogwarts?
Associated Press
33 minutes ago
- Associated Press
Federal judge blocks Florida from enforcing social media ban for kids while lawsuit continues
TALLAHASSEE, Fla. (AP) — A federal judge has barred state officials from enforcing a Florida law that would ban social media accounts for young children, while a legal challenge against the law plays out. U.S. District Judge Mark Walker issued the order Tuesday, blocking portions of the law from taking effect. The measure was one of the most restrictive bans in the U.S. on social media use by children when Gov. Ron DeSantis signed it into law in 2024. The law would ban social media accounts for children under 14 and require parental permission for their use by 14- and 15-year-olds. In his order granting the preliminary injunction sought by the groups Computer & Communications Industry Association and NetChoice, Walker wrote that the law is 'likely unconstitutional,' but acknowledged that parents and lawmakers have 'sincere concerns' about social media's effects on kids. Walker wrote that the prohibition on social media platforms from allowing certain age groups to create accounts 'directly burdens those youths' rights to engage in and access speech.' While siding with the industry groups' claims that the law limits free speech, Walker allowed a provision to go into effect requiring platforms to shut down accounts for children under 16, if their parent or guardian requests it. Parents — and even some teens themselves — are growing increasingly concerned about the effects of social media use on young people. Supporters of the Florida law have said it's needed to help curb the explosive use of social media among young people, and what researchers say is an associated increase in depression and anxiety. Matt Schruers, the president and CEO of the industry association CCIA, praised the judge's order blocking the law. 'This ruling vindicates our argument that Florida's statute violates the First Amendment by blocking and restricting minors — and likely adults as well — from using certain websites to view lawful content,' he said in a statement. 'We look forward to seeing this statute permanently blocked as a violation of Floridians' constitutional right to engage in lawful speech online.' A spokesperson for Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier defended the law and the state's efforts to insulate kids from social media at a time when platforms like TikTok, Instagram and Snapchat seem almost impossible to escape. 'Florida parents voted through their elected representatives for a law protecting kids from the harmful and sometimes lifelong tragic impacts of social media. These platforms do not have a constitutional right to addict kids to their products,' Uthmeier's press secretary Jae Williams said in a statement. 'We disagree with the court's order and will immediately seek relief in the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals.' ___ Kate Payne is a corps member for The Associated Press/Report for America Statehouse News Initiative. Report for America is a nonprofit national service program that places journalists in local newsrooms to report on undercovered issues.
