Lawrence Schnapf

The text of the resolution creating this new sub-committee would give it the power to receive classified information that is usually only made available to the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. this along with subponea power could be powerful tool for any investigation into the JFK Records Act. The subcommittee will have at least 5 democrats. Meanwhile, I have been told by the Oversight Committee staff that Jamie Raskin will be the ranking member. He has signed all the letters that Representative Steve Cohen (D-TN) sent to President Biden asking for full release of the JFK Records. So it appears we may have an ally on the democratic side of the committee.

@Michael Griffith Since the GOP is calling this a new Church Committee, I'm working on trying to get them to form a Hart-Schweiker group like we had with the Church Committee that could focus on the JFK Act. stay tuned.

CAN WE ELEVATE THIS DISCUSSIONAND TAKE IT OUT OF THE PARTISAN BROADSIDES? This is supposed to be about the JFK Records Act. @Matt Allison you're polluting this thread with your DNC talking points and turning this thread into a political debate. You might comments might as well be from a Bot because they are like a programmed message. Let's elevate this Massie and Carlson are American citizens. they consider themselves patriots. They dont work for our country's enemies. they disagree with the democratic leaders and policies. You can certainly be suspicious of Massie's motives but instead of polluting this thread with your hatred, how about suspending your disbelief and see what happens. Maybe-just maybe- our behind the scenes work will surprise you. If you guys continue to spout your political animus, I'm going to leave this thread and provide updates on our JFK Records work to another platform. This conversation is really turning too ugly for me.

@Benjamin Cole Perhaps the reason why the Senate has not been anxious to create a Church II committee is reflected by Kim Strassel's WSJ piece on December 29th that said "Memories are short, but Republicans might recall that the Church Committee did far more harm than good. It exposed a few dumb Central Intelligence Agency plots, but at the cost of allowing the left to attack and undermine the U.S. intelligence mission in ways that weakened our capabilities. " See https://www.wsj.com/articles/house-republicans-plan-a-committee-on-censors-and-snoops-gop-free-speech-fbi-requests-subcommittee-11672354486 Unfortunately, this view has become the conventional wisdom in many circles. The committee was also blamed for the deaths of agents.

i dont understand why some of you persist to debate Trump, the russian mafia or January 6th. Isnt this thread about if Tucker Carlson and the possibility that the GOP-controlled House may be willing to conduct oversight hearings.

the evolving modified limited hangout

@Kirk Gallaway Thanks for alerting me to the need to clarify my comments. I was, of course, referring to the attitudes and obstacles in Congress as opposed to those of the electorate. I dont necessarily disagree with your commentary on the elections themselves but that is not what I was trying to explain-apparently inartfully. Historically, the republicans in congress were the defenders of the intelligence community and law enforcement agencies as part of being the "law and order" party while the democratic congress was skeptical of the agencies and particularly attuned to the civil rights abuses. However, since the Trump era and continuing into the Biden Administration, the parties have switched 180 degrees so that the GOP is now more receptive to investigations that could expose abuses or ove-reach by these entities while the congressional democrats view these agencies as having protected the nation against unlawful actions or over-reach by Trump while he was in office. Hence, from a tactical standpoint, with the GOP taking control of the House, the Oversight Committee (or possibly the Judiciary Committee if the so-called new church-style committee is established) may now provide potential opportunities for getting hearings on the JFK Act regardless of their motivations. Another example of the enemy of my enemy becoming my friend. You asked how Biden could be possibly be embarrassed. An oversight hearing this past fall on how the executive branch has failed to comply with the JFK Act would have necessarily focused on Biden's 2021 order that relied on non-statutory grounds for postponement and the other procedural violations since it was the operative order and he is the sitting President. While the Trump orders were also unlawful, they did not pose potential risk to Biden. The democratically-controlled House Oversight Committee was reluctant to hold a hearing that could possibly cast a bad light on Biden before the mid-terms. We also sent letters to the Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee asking for an oversight hearing but received no response. For the same reasons as discussed above, i dont think the Senate will prove to be receptive this year although we will continue trying. Over my 38 years of practicing law, I have had a lot of experience working to get legislation passed or regulations adopted. But the reversal of attitudes towards law enforcement (in the form of the FBI) and intelligence community has been remarkable to me . This is the real politik we are confronting as we try to get an oversight hearing. we're like a scrambling QB looking for an open receiver and the GOP may be the best receiver we have right now unless the field changes.

Ben- there will be dems on the House "church committee". let's see if the committee is actually formed and who its members are before he start making wagers on the outcome. Several of us are deep into the process behind the scenes. Let's see how this turns out.

we've had a role reversal Dems now protect FBI and intelligence agencies because they think they saved the nation from Trump and wont hold hearings that will aide the GOP narrative about the Deep State. Likewise, they dont want to hold hearings that could embarrass Biden. That is the real-politic we are dealing with right now.

first, the House rules have to be passed- no assurance the moderates will agree to this. then, we need to see who is on the committee. so let's chill with the gratuitious political comments until the committee is formed.

let's see where this goes. it is possible we may be able to hijack this for our purposes. I have two parallel tracks going on with the Oversight Committee- through the Democratic staff and the new GOP team.

Gerry Down - drugging is not the reason LHO was a lousy shot in Russia. this was consistent theme in his life beginning with his poor record in the Marines. He was not well coordinated. Reportedly, even driving was a challenge for him.

I suspect the documents released via FOIA in the 1970s and 1980s will not be part of the Collection. And Remember that the MFF only has a fraction of the records in the JFK Collection. Most of the MFF documents are from the settlement of an AARC lawsuit that resulted in release of records (that is why AARC is visible on most of the pages).

technically the president's certification. others made the decision for him. we basically had a manchurian candidate for the four postponements since 2017.

I cant discuss the legal procedural aspects yet but there will be some news after the holidays....

Based on my FOIA litigation, Trump had no clue what was going on with the postponements. while he was tweeting that the records would be all released, the 13th draft of a letter from the Archivist to the POTUS recommending 3.5 year postponement was being negotiated. Both Trump and Biden simply signed the orders. The NSC and White House Office of Counsel were the principal players in deciding what documents were to be postponed. Yes- the entrenched bureaucracy still rules.

I dont know why the research community did not take action after the Trump postponements but things are different this time. we have a team that has weekly strategic meetings and Judge Tunheim who just finished his term as the chief judge for the federal district court for the district of Minnesota- is working with us. she did not have to write her own separate letter to the President so I will take her letter at face value for now and try to enlist her as an ally.

Matt Allison- great! In the spring of 2021, I sent a letter to Peters and Portman which fell on deaf ears probably because i was not a constituent and I had not yet learned the value of having prominent signatories in such circumstances. Below is an excerpt which was obviously written before Biden's 2021 and 2022 memos. Feel free to use it as as model or ignore it. I have placed brackets around some of the info that needs to be updated. I believe the new deadline for notifying NARA of further proposed redactions is May 23, 2023. "In October 2017, former chairs of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Senators Charles E. Grassley and Patrick J. Leahy, co-sponsored Senate Resolution 281 (SR 281)1 which urged President Trump to “allow for the full public release of all remaining records pertaining to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy” and “to reject any claims for the continued postponement of the full public release of those records.” SR 281 was subsequently referred to the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs (the “Committee”) on October 4, 2017. Although the Resolution died in Committee, the public’s interest in the assassination of President Kennedy has not. Unfortunately, [both Presidents Trump and Biden have now twice] not only failed to honor the intent of SR 281 but have also failed to comply with the specific requirements of the President John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Collection Act of 1992 (“JFK Act”) when they each twice certified further postponements of thousands of documents. At no time has either President or the Archivist of the United States made the required document-by-document finding based on “clear and convincing evidence” that one or more of the enumerated grounds for postponement existed as well as why those grounds outweighed the public’s right to the records. Congress provided that all assassination records should be released in 2017 except in extraordinary circumstances. Yet [four] years and passed since that date and the public has been deprived of the remaining information that has been identified by a federal entity to be related to President Kennedy’s assassination. After the passage of fifty-[eight] years it is time that this information sees the light of day (subject to, of course, any lawful proper exemptions that might apply). Accordingly, I am respectfully requesting that you hold oversight hearings on the failure of the Executive Branch to comply with the JFK Records Act as soon as possible especially given that no later than [April 26, 2021], all federal agencies are required by law to notify the Archivist as to whether any objections will be asserted to the release of the remaining JFK Records."

Mark Shaw's new book has more detail about Cooper's doubts through one of his aides.

Jim- another equivocal response to two important programs by Tucker. The parsing of his words is so suspicious and unnecessary. When Carlson said the CIA was "involved" or had a "hand", I think that he was referring to a plot was hatched at the operational level and not in the executive suites. Given how loosely the case managers had to supervise the exile groups to preserve deniability and that it is hard to determine where the former mafia allies ended and the exile groups began, it is quite possible one of these groups pulled this off and the CIA s hiding as an organization how it let this happen. Especially if management may have been aware of rumors of such plots and didnt do any ground truthing ... just like how Hoover ignored field reports of alleged threats from Hoffa, Trafficante and Marcello. anyway, I will see what further I can learn from carlson's chief researcher.

we have been trying to cobble together a bi-partisan coalition. The Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs chaired by Senator Gary Peters also has oversight jurisdiction over the JFK Act so we have been working that committee on a parallel track with the House Oversight Committee. Have to keep alot of stuff close to the vest because of the sensitivity of conversations but rest assured we are pushing all buttons that we have access to try to make a Congressional oversight hearing a reality. This will be a multi-month process. In the meantime, if any of you have a representative or senator that sits on one of either these committees, please send me a private note at Larry@schnapflaw.com. If you dont know and want to check, simply google the name of the committee and you will be able to check the committee rosters. Does not matter if they are democrats or republicans. the key is to make connections with committee members...

yes- we are like a QB looking for the open passing lanes.

This is letter the Senator sent to the President as a follow-up to Judge Tunheim's letter. Another step in building a coalition to get an oversight hearing.

Joe Backes- you have no idea what it will take to get the rest of the records released. You are way out of your league. we are now in the world of real politic. If you want to undermine the chance of getting the records released, keep up your asinine rants and political bromides. So how about you focus on what you know and do best- mining the the JFK Collection.

I've been in touch with Judge Griffin every few months. Unfortunately, he remains convinced that notwithstanding the CIA lies, that LHO was the lone gunman and that Ruby shot LHO to defend the honor of the Jewish people...if you can believe that!