Biden, Garland: JFKA "Accessories After the Fact"? JFK Records

[Benjamin Cole]

Are President Biden and AG Merrick Garland the latest "Accessories After The Fact" in the JFKA?  

Of course, that was the title of Sylvia Meagher's still-great book on the Warren Commission, a must-read even yet. 

Meagher contended, and IMHO was right, the purpose of the WC was to posit an expedient answer to the JFKA, to be promulgated by mass media. So the WC helped conceal the true assassins---that is, the Warren Commissioners were "accessories after the fact." (Some contend Dulles was before the fact, but let that go).  

Today, President Biden and AG Merrick Garland are the latest "accessories after the fact."

They have suppressed the JFK Records in perpetuity, through a claim of executive authority to keep documents from the public forever, if need be. And as ultimately decided by the chief executive, not the Congress.  (I defer to MFF and Larry Schnapf on the details, but my understanding is if MFF and Schnapf cannot prevail in court---including through the kangaroo DC Court of Appeal---then the JFK Records are buried as long as the Chief Executive says so.)

In particular, it is known that Biden and Garland are suppressing records regarding CIA'er and DRE-funder George Joannides' actions in New Orleans in 1963, ardently sought by JFKA scholar Jeff Morley. Of course, we don't know what we don't know---there may be other, far more revealing records. 

How on earth are the 60-year-old Joannides records, regarding domestic activities in New Orleans, still justifiably kept from the public by Biden and Garland? 

Beyond cavil, Biden and Garland are actively concealing evidence that could reveal or point to the true assassins of JFK. They are obstructing justice, if not legally then ethically and morally. 

Who can deny Biden and Garland are "accessories after the fact"  in the JFKA? 

 

 

[W. Niederhut]

Oh, come on, mods...  Geez... 🙄

How many more redundant threads is Ben Cole allowed to start here on the same subject of Biden pulling a Donald Trump by declining to release the JFK Records?

Meanwhile, our original forum thread (from 2020) on the subject of Trump's historic 2017 decision to block the release of the JFK Records, when they were finally due for release, has been banished to another board.

Edited April 12, 2023 by W. Niederhut

[John Cotter]

16 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said:

Are President Biden and AG Merrick Garland the latest "Accessories After The Fact" in the JFKA?  

Of course, that was the title of Sylvia Meagher's still-great book on the Warren Commission, a must-read even yet. 

Meagher contended, and IMHO was right, the purpose of the WC was to posit an expedient answer to the JFKA, to be promulgated by mass media. So the WC helped conceal the true assassins---that is, the Warren Commissioners were "accessories after the fact." (Some contend Dulles was before the fact, but let that go).  

Today, President Biden and AG Merrick Garland are the latest "accessories after the fact."

They have suppressed the JFK Records in perpetuity, through a claim of executive authority to keep documents from the public forever, if need be. And as ultimately decided by the chief executive, not the Congress.  (I defer to MFF and Larry Schnapf on the details, but my understanding is if MFF and Schnapf cannot prevail in court---including through the kangaroo DC Court of Appeal---then the JFK Records are buried as long as the Chief Executive says so.)

In particular, it is known that Biden and Garland are suppressing records regarding CIA'er and DRE-funder George Joannides' actions in New Orleans in 1963, ardently sought by JFKA scholar Jeff Morley. Of course, we don't know what we don't know---there may be other, far more revealing records. 

How on earth are the 60-year-old Joannides records, regarding domestic activities in New Orleans, still justifiably kept from the public by Biden and Garland? 

Beyond cavil, Biden and Garland are actively concealing evidence that could reveal or point to the true assassins of JFK. They are obstructing justice, if not legally then ethically and morally. 

Who can deny Biden and Garland are "accessories after the fact"  in the JFKA? 

 

 

Well said, Benjamin. I agree.

[Benjamin Cole]

I would welcome return of your excellent post on Trump's 2017 decision back into this space. 

8 minutes ago, W. Niederhut said:

Oh, come on, mods...  Geez... 🙄

How many more redundant threads is Ben Cole allowed to start here on the same subject of Biden pulling a Donald Trump by declining to release the JFK Records?

Meanwhile, our original forum thread (from 2020) on the subject of Trump's historic 2017 decision to block the release of the JFK Records, when they were finally due for release, has been banished to another board.

I welcome return of your excellent 2020 post on Trump back into this space. 

 

 

[Benjamin Cole]

1 minute ago, John Cotter said:

Well said, Benjamin. I agree.

Thanks John. I always welcome your civil commentary, even when we disagree, which happens. We only learn when we try to appreciate other people's viewpoints. 

[Matt Allison]

Yes, I see how this works now; should I start a thread called "Why Didn't the Fascist War Criminal Putin Tell His Manchurian Candidate Trump to Release the JFK Records?" LOL

[W. Niederhut]

5 minutes ago, Matt Allison said:

Yes, I see how this works now; should I start a thread called "Why Didn't the Fascist War Criminal Putin Tell His Manchurian Candidate Trump to Release the JFK Records?" LOL

Great idea, Matt.

And I'll follow up with a series of new JFK Assassination Board threads with titles like, "Were Trump, Barr, and Pompeo Accessories After the Fact in JFK's Murder?"

and, "Why Were Trump's Fox News Propagandists Silent About Trump's Suppression of the JFK Records?"

[Benjamin Cole]

10 minutes ago, Matt Allison said:

Yes, I see how this works now; should I start a thread called "Why Didn't the Fascist War Criminal Putin Tell His Manchurian Candidate Trump to Release the JFK Records?" LOL

Thank you for your comment. 

I think, beyond cavil, Biden and Garland are presently "accessories after the fact" in the JFKA. 

If you think there are aspects of Trump's rotten decision in 2017 to suppress the JFK Records that are again newsworthy, I encourage you to post as much. 

For example, were the arguments that Trump's AG made grafted into the Biden-Garland fait accompli? I would welcome such insights. 

[Mark Knight]

Ben,

Please give me some justification as to why these multiple threads on the failure to release the JFK records should NOT be combined into a single thread.

Sell me.

Convince me.

Because as of this moment, W's comment about redundancy is striking a chord with me. In fact, redundancy is the only reason I decided to view this thread.

Persuade me it's not redundant...if you can.

[Benjamin Cole]

9 minutes ago, Mark Knight said:

Ben,

Please give me some justification as to why these multiple threads on the failure to release the JFK records should NOT be combined into a single thread.

Sell me.

Convince me.

Because as of this moment, W's comment about redundancy is striking a chord with me. In fact, redundancy is the only reason I decided to view this thread.

Persuade me it's not redundant...if you can.

The EF-JFKA is about the only place on the web, along with Jeff Morley's excellent JFK Facts website, to have much interest in the JFK Records Act, and the current suppression of the records. 

Surely in this EF-JFKA, a full airing of this topic is worthy, even if sometimes done a little awkwardly. 

I have endeavored to track the history what happened after the JFK Records Act in digestible chunks. Tried to follow through the Clinton and Obama years, Trump and now the Biden Administration. (For whatever reason, not much happened in Bush Jr. years. I am no fan of either Bush, btw). 

The EF-JFK is not like an old-fashioned newspaper, with limited space. The EF-JFKA is an accordion--it can expand.

No one is forced to read my threads and eventually they will recede into the background. 

What harm is done by my examinations of this very timely topic? Who is harmed? No one. 

Obviously, some EF-JFKA participants have raised partisan sentiments. Such sentiments are unwarranted. 

The documents in the JFK Records are being permanently buried now, right in front of us. 

Is there a more important topic in the EF-JFKA? This is not a topic for full examination? This is a time for partisan sentiments? 

Are you allowing partisan sentiments to enter the decision-making process? 

 

[Mark Knight]

1 minute ago, Benjamin Cole said:

The EF-JFKA is about the only place on the web, along with Jeff Morley's excellent JFK Facts website, to have much interest in the JFK Records Act, and the current suppression of the records. 

Surely in this EF-JFKA, a full airing of this topic is worthy, even if sometimes done a little awkwardly. 

I have endeavored to track the history what happened after the JFK Records Act in digestible chunks. Tried to follow through the Clinton and Obama years, Trump and now the Biden Administration. (For whatever reason, not much happened in Bush Jr. years. I am no fan of either Bush, btw). 

The EF-JFK is not like an old-fashioned newspaper, with limited space. The EF-JFKA is an accordion--it can expand.

No one is forced to read my threads and eventually they will recede into the background. 

What harm is done by my examinations of this very timely topic? Who is harmed? No one. 

Obviously, some EF-JFKA participants have raised partisan sentiments. Such sentiments are unwarranted. 

The documents in the JFK Records are being permanently buried now, right in front of us. 

Is there a more important topic in the EF-JFKA? This is not a topic for full examination? This is a time for partisan sentiments? 

Are you allowing partisan sentiments to enter the decision-making process? 

 

I'm not discounting the importance of the issue.

I'm not taking a partisan point of view.

Starting multiple threads on the same topic, in most forums, is called "flooding," and most forums have rules against "flooding."

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said:

The EF-JFKA is about the only place on the web, along with Jeff Morley's excellent JFK Facts website, to have much interest in the JFK Records Act, and the current suppression of the records. 

Surely in this EF-JFKA, a full airing of this topic is worthy, even if sometimes done a little awkwardly. 

I have endeavored to track the history what happened after the JFK Records Act in digestible chunks. Tried to follow through the Clinton and Obama years, Trump and now the Biden Administration. (For whatever reason, not much happened in Bush Jr. years. I am no fan of either Bush, btw). 

The EF-JFK is not like an old-fashioned newspaper, with limited space. The EF-JFKA is an accordion--it can expand.

No one is forced to read my threads and eventually they will recede into the background. 

What harm is done by my examinations of this very timely topic? Who is harmed? No one. 

Obviously, some EF-JFKA participants have raised partisan sentiments. Such sentiments are unwarranted. 

The documents in the JFK Records are being permanently buried now, right in front of us. 

Is there a more important topic in the EF-JFKA? This is not a topic for full examination? This is a time for partisan sentiments? 

Are you allowing partisan sentiments to enter the decision-making process? 

 

I agree with you, Ben. This topic needs as much coverage as possible. Its really the thread titles that people will find via search engines. By having multiple threads with relevant titles, it will inevitably get more people reading about it. I am happy that the people involved are being called out and exposed. By combining into the one thread you will lose some exposure. 
 

Obviously I see that some are bellyaching about it. Is it really that hard to scroll past? Or ignore a thread? Its so easy. Come on folks. 
 

@Mark Knight

[Benjamin Cole]

19 minutes ago, Mark Knight said:

I'm not discounting the importance of the issue.

I'm not taking a partisan point of view.

Starting multiple threads on the same topic, in most forums, is called "flooding," and most forums have rules against "flooding."

Well, I am running out of steam on this topic anyway.  My flood may be a trickle soon. 

I am rather aghast that some appear to want to give Biden-Garland a pass for partisan reasons and what-about-isms. 

I can't think of a more important topic presently in the JFKA arena. 

 

[Lawrence Schnapf]

Ben- 

The MFF lawsuit was filed in the northern district of california (SF). DOJ wisely did not seek an change of venue to DC District court and the matter is being defended by the DOJ office in the SF. If there is an appeal, it would go to the 9th circuit, not DC Circuit.

Importantly, the Biden December order provided for the development of "transparency plans" by agencies that would establish event-driven conditions for records that are further postponed after June 23rd. Unfortunately, the Transparency Plans do not comply with the strict requirements of the JFK Records Act and  would essentially remove the President from future declassification decisions (also in violation of the Act) and delegate that task to the National Declassification Board.

 We filed an amended complaint last week to specifically addess these points along with including new details provided to us by researchers on how NARA has handled requests for JFK assassination records. Oral argument has been pushed back to June 29th. 

   

[Mark Knight]

Right now, the MFF lawsuit is the most important tool in the arsenal to attempt to get these records released.

NO ONE that I've seen on this forum wants to see anyone "deep-six" those documents...Ben's "partisan" accusations aside. I fully support what the MFF is doing. 

But UNLESS you're bringing us news about what the MFF lawsuit is accomplishing, as Mr. Schnapf is doing above, or unless you're bringing us news about a new move by the current administration that hasn't been reported on already, then the only thing you're doing is re-airing previous complaints.

Since none of us on this forum, except the ones involved in the MFF lawsuit, can bring about the change we seek, and pushing a plethora of posts rehashing the same arguments accomplishes zero.

There are two things you can do if you don't like the status quo: You can accept what you don't like, or you can take action to change the status quo. Anything else is wasted motion. That goes for anything that affects your life. The MFF is taking action. And I support them 100%. I think the Biden administration is wrong. But whining about what they're doing doesn't change a damn thing.

Nor does opening 15 separate threads repeating the same complaints.