The Trump/Napolitano/Carlson JFK connection

[James DiEugenio]

Attorney Mark Adamczyk weighs in on a controversy that the MSM will not touch. But the rightwing opinion makers will.

Mark was one of the first and most important commentators on how Trump and Biden voided the JFK Act.

Here, it gets amplified.

https://www.kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-articles/the-trump-napolitano-carlson-connection-on-jfk

[Benjamin Cole]

8 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

Attorney Mark Adamczyk weighs in on a controversy that the MSM will not touch. But the rightwing opinion makers will.

Mark was one of the first and most important commentators on how Trump and Biden voided the JFK Act.

Here, it gets amplified.

https://www.kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-articles/the-trump-napolitano-carlson-connection-on-jfk

JD--

Thanks for posting this reminder of one of the great crimes of our time---the snuff job on the JFK Records Act. 

Surely, this is one issue everyone in the EF-JFKA can agree upon. There is no excuse for suffocating the records now. 

But, as pointed out in the excellent article by Mark Adamczyk, there is no penalty for what has happened to the JFK Records Act. 

Perhaps what Trump and Carlson say is true: The remaining records would indeed illuminate the CIA's role in the JFKA, and who knows?---maybe possibly in the RFK1A too. 

 

[James DiEugenio]

Well, that is one way to look at what has happened to the denuding of the JFK Act.

And it just seems odd that both the Napolitano and Carlson stories would jibe to that degree.

But with what Biden has done, I think it will be years before we ever find out what is in those files.  Some "transparency plan".

Edited June 6 by James DiEugenio

[Roger Odisio]

3 hours ago, Benjamin Cole said:

JD--

Thanks for posting this reminder of one of the great crimes of our time---the snuff job on the JFK Records Act. 

Surely, this is one issue everyone in the EF-JFKA can agree upon. There is no excuse for suffocating the records now. 

But, as pointed out in the excellent article by Mark Adamczyk, there is no penalty for what has happened to the JFK Records Act. 

Perhaps what Trump and Carlson say is true: The remaining records would indeed illuminate the CIA's role in the JFKA, and who knows?---maybe possibly in the RFK1A too. 

 

Biden's jurisdiction over JFK record release is limited; It covers only executive branch records.  He has no say over other government records such as those held by Congress. Nor over records held by nongovernmental entities. Example: the Darnell and Weigman films currently being hidden by NBC.

Section 12 (b) of the Act specifies the circumstances under which the search and release of records shall end.  It reads:

^The remaining provisions of this Act shall continue in effect until such time as the Archivist certifies to the President and the Congress that all assassination records have been made available to the public in accordance with this Act."

"Remaining provisions" refers to all sections of the Act except those pertaining to the appointment and operation of the Review Board under 12 (a). 

Thus it is NARA's Archivist's job to tell Biden and Congress when all records have been released. No matter what Biden and the CIA think they have done with the "transparency plan", they have no authority to end all record release.

Bill and Larry are currently pressing this point in the MFF lawsuit.

The problem is, in his initial order Judge Seeborg never mentioned 12 (b) and argued that no one, including NARA, has a job to do to get the records released after the ARRB closed its doors 26 years ago.  I'm not kidding. A blatant misreading of the Act.

Bill and Larry then pointed to 12 (b) and apparently caught the judge flatfooted. He simply repeated his claim the NARA has not job post ARRB and moved on. I don't know where that process now stands.  Perhaps Bill or Larry can explain.

Point is, the process of releasing records has several facets and all bear watching.

 

[Matt Cloud]

2 hours ago, Roger Odisio said:

Biden's jurisdiction over JFK record release is limited; It covers only executive branch records.  He has no say over other government records such as those held by Congress. Nor over records held by nongovernmental entities. Example: the Darnell and Weigman films currently being hidden by NBC.

Section 12 (b) of the Act specifies the circumstances under which the search and release of records shall end.  It reads:

^The remaining provisions of this Act shall continue in effect until such time as the Archivist certifies to the President and the Congress that all assassination records have been made available to the public in accordance with this Act."

"Remaining provisions" refers to all sections of the Act except those pertaining to the appointment and operation of the Review Board under 12 (a). 

Thus it is NARA's Archivist's job to tell Biden and Congress when all records have been released. No matter what Biden and the CIA think they have done with the "transparency plan", they have no authority to end all record release.

Bill and Larry are currently pressing this point in the MFF lawsuit.

The problem is, in his initial order Judge Seeborg never mentioned 12 (b) and argued that no one, including NARA, has a job to do to get the records released after the ARRB closed its doors 26 years ago.  I'm not kidding. A blatant misreading of the Act.

Bill and Larry then pointed to 12 (b) and apparently caught the judge flatfooted. He simply repeated his claim the NARA has not job post ARRB and moved on. I don't know where that process now stands.  Perhaps Bill or Larry can explain.

Point is, the process of releasing records has several facets and all bear watching.

 

This really isn't an accurate description of either the law or the facts here.  

 

This letter from the Public Interest Declassification Board may help better to orient.

 

September 27, 2021

 

Dear President Biden:

In 1992, Congress passed the John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Collection Act (JFK Act), which required all federal agencies and offices to identify, organize, and transfer copies of all records related to the assassination to the custody of the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). On behalf of the members of the Public Interest Declassification Board (the Board), I respectfully encourage you to instruct agencies to make the maximum public release of the remaining classified records subject to the JFK Act.

Although the JFK Act broadly required the public disclosure of Kennedy assassination records under NARA’s custody, it permitted an independent Assassination Records Review Board (ARRB) to review and approve temporary postponements of public disclosure following narrow and specified exemption criteria.

When temporary disclosure postponements approved by the ARRB expired on October 26, 2017, the JFK Act permitted agencies to request extended postponements. Then-President Trump approved postponements for approximately 14,000 records through October 26, 2021.

We understand that agencies are asking you to extend the postponement of public disclosure for parts of many records subject to the JFK Act.

The Board is charged under section 703(b) of the Public Interest Declassification Act of 2000, as amended, to promote the fullest possible public access to a thorough, accurate, and reliable documentary record of significant United States national security activities to respond to the interest of the public in national security matters, and to advise the President on the declassification of historically important records. Consistent with this duty and to abide by the letter and spirit of the JFK Act and bolster the American people’s confidence and trust in their government, the Board unanimously recommends that you limit any further postponements of public disclosures of the Kennedy assassination records to the absolute minimum.

The Board stands ready to assist and support you in increasing transparency and public access to this chapter in our nation’s history.

Very respectfully,

 

 

Ezra Cohen

Chair

 

https://www.archives.gov/files/pidb/recommendations/pidb-potus-letter-jfk-assassination-records.pdf

 

In addition, the archives website summarizes:

JFK Assassination Records Processing Project - 2022 Update

 

Summary

The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) has created a dedicated team to process previously withheld John F. Kennedy assassination-related records to comply with President Biden’s Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies on the Temporary Certification Regarding Disclosure of Information in Certain Records Related to the Assassination of President John F. Kennedy, requiring disclosure of releasable records by December 15, 2022.

NARA published an additional 1,491 documents in full on December 15, 2021. 

Over the past year, NARA and the agencies proposing continued postponement of  documents previously withheld under section 5 of the JFK Act conducted an intensive review of each remaining redaction to ensure that the United States Government maximizes transparency. Any information withheld from public disclosure that agencies do not propose for continued postponement beyond December 15, 2022, will be released to the public on that date.

There are 515 documents that remain withheld in full pursuant to sections 10 and 11 of the John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Collection Act (JFK Act) and are not subject to the 25-year disclosure requirements and the President’s certification to withhold certain records, established under section 5 of the JFK Act.

https://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/processing-project-2022

 

 

By the way, were any JFK files at Mar-a-Lago I wonder?  Anyone know?

 

[Benjamin Cole]

1 hour ago, Matt Cloud said:

This really isn't an accurate description of either the law or the facts here.  

 

This letter from the Public Interest Declassification Board may help better to orient.

 

September 27, 2021

 

Dear President Biden:

In 1992, Congress passed the John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Collection Act (JFK Act), which required all federal agencies and offices to identify, organize, and transfer copies of all records related to the assassination to the custody of the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). On behalf of the members of the Public Interest Declassification Board (the Board), I respectfully encourage you to instruct agencies to make the maximum public release of the remaining classified records subject to the JFK Act.

Although the JFK Act broadly required the public disclosure of Kennedy assassination records under NARA’s custody, it permitted an independent Assassination Records Review Board (ARRB) to review and approve temporary postponements of public disclosure following narrow and specified exemption criteria.

When temporary disclosure postponements approved by the ARRB expired on October 26, 2017, the JFK Act permitted agencies to request extended postponements. Then-President Trump approved postponements for approximately 14,000 records through October 26, 2021.

We understand that agencies are asking you to extend the postponement of public disclosure for parts of many records subject to the JFK Act.

The Board is charged under section 703(b) of the Public Interest Declassification Act of 2000, as amended, to promote the fullest possible public access to a thorough, accurate, and reliable documentary record of significant United States national security activities to respond to the interest of the public in national security matters, and to advise the President on the declassification of historically important records. Consistent with this duty and to abide by the letter and spirit of the JFK Act and bolster the American people’s confidence and trust in their government, the Board unanimously recommends that you limit any further postponements of public disclosures of the Kennedy assassination records to the absolute minimum.

The Board stands ready to assist and support you in increasing transparency and public access to this chapter in our nation’s history.

Very respectfully,

 

 

Ezra Cohen

Chair

 

https://www.archives.gov/files/pidb/recommendations/pidb-potus-letter-jfk-assassination-records.pdf

 

In addition, the archives website summarizes:

JFK Assassination Records Processing Project - 2022 Update

 

Summary

The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) has created a dedicated team to process previously withheld John F. Kennedy assassination-related records to comply with President Biden’s Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies on the Temporary Certification Regarding Disclosure of Information in Certain Records Related to the Assassination of President John F. Kennedy, requiring disclosure of releasable records by December 15, 2022.

NARA published an additional 1,491 documents in full on December 15, 2021. 

Over the past year, NARA and the agencies proposing continued postponement of  documents previously withheld under section 5 of the JFK Act conducted an intensive review of each remaining redaction to ensure that the United States Government maximizes transparency. Any information withheld from public disclosure that agencies do not propose for continued postponement beyond December 15, 2022, will be released to the public on that date.

There are 515 documents that remain withheld in full pursuant to sections 10 and 11 of the John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Collection Act (JFK Act) and are not subject to the 25-year disclosure requirements and the President’s certification to withhold certain records, established under section 5 of the JFK Act.

https://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/processing-project-2022

 

 

By the way, were any JFK files at Mar-a-Lago I wonder?  Anyone know?

 

MC-

I rather suspect Trump was unable to get his hands on authentic JFKA files. 

He was only the elected President and Commander in Chief. He was not able to see the files he wanted---just like President Nixon was not. 

[Matt Cloud]

Just now, Benjamin Cole said:

MC-

I rather suspect Trump was unable to get his hands on authentic JFKA files. 

He was only the elected President and Commander in Chief. He was not able to see the files he wanted---just like President Nixon was not. 

Oh I see.  Well, guess what? We gotta little case down in Florida that's going to settle the matter.  Hang on to your hat.

[Benjamin Cole]

4 minutes ago, Matt Cloud said:

Oh I see.  Well, guess what? We gotta little case down in Florida that's going to settle the matter.  Hang on to your hat.

MC-

Do have an idea that Trump was able to obtain some authentic JFKA files, and then took them to Mar-a-Lago?

That is a fascinating idea...but I tend to doubt it. How would Trump ever get his hands on the true, authentic JFKA files? 

[Matt Cloud]

1 minute ago, Benjamin Cole said:

MC-

Do have an idea that Trump was able to obtain some authentic JFKA files, and then took them to Mar-a-Lago?

That is a fascinating idea...but I tend to doubt it. How would Trump ever get his hands on the true, authentic JFKA files? 

Oh I have more than an idea.  I might well have been involved in it.  However, the issue of obtaining and declassifying/releasing are too different things. As the current controversy indicates doesn't it?  In any case, if the president asks for it, I think we still live in a country where the agencies have to comply, no?  Could that be what was in all those boxes?  Or perhaps it really is just Iran war plans.  Bear in mind, too, the JFKA is part of a much bigger story.  You might call it a giant counter-intelligence trap, run over decades.  

Curious thing -- the official at NARA -- and I've said this here before -- responsible for the administration of the boxes that went to MAL, is a former colleague of mine on the Hill.  After he left CIA, he and I worked together with Moynihan and he wrote the Public Interest Declassification law in 2000.  Indeed he gutted it in last-minute wrangling as the 2000 election controversy was underway.  That's something we're still dealing with, obviously.  He resigned btw the day the classified docs were "found" at Biden's.  Interesting.  

I do agree it's most likely Nixon was short-circuited in his "requests" -- by Watergate.  "That should tell you a lot," to quote Deep Throat.  But there was more to happen with respect to the story.  So he was pre-mature.  But now, things have changed and the process of disclosure, which has been going on all this time, whether you see it that way or not, is reaching its climax.

As I said, hang on to your hat.  

 

 

[Benjamin Cole]

14 minutes ago, Matt Cloud said:

Oh I have more than an idea.  I might well have been involved in it.  However, the issue of obtaining and declassifying/releasing are too different things. As the current controversy indicates doesn't it?  In any case, if the president asks for it, I think we still live in a country where the agencies have to comply, no?  Could that be what was in all those boxes?  Or perhaps it really is just Iran war plans.  Bear in mind, too, the JFKA is part of a much bigger story.  You might call it a giant counter-intelligence trap, run over decades.  

Curious thing -- the official at NARA -- and I've said this here before -- responsible for the administration of the boxes that went to MAL, is a former colleague of mine on the Hill.  After he left CIA, he and I worked together with Moynihan and he wrote the Public Interest Declassification law in 2000.  Indeed he gutted it in last-minute wrangling as the 2000 election controversy was underway.  That's something we're still dealing with, obviously.  He resigned btw the day the classified docs were "found" at Biden's.  Interesting.  

I do agree it's most likely Nixon was short-circuited in his "requests" -- by Watergate.  "That should tell you a lot," to quote Deep Throat.  But there was more to happen with respect to the story.  So he was pre-mature.  But now, things have changed and the process of disclosure, which has been going on all this time, whether you see it that way or not, is reaching its climax.

As I said, hang on to your hat.  

 

 

"Oh I have more than an idea.  I might well have been involved in it."---MC

Well if Trump has secreted to Mar-a-Lago bona fide JFKA docs, and they tell the tale, I am not only holding onto my hat, but on the edge of my seat, with my eyes and ears the size of saucer plates. 

That will be quite the story, if it pans out. 

Good luck to you. 

 

 

[Roger Odisio]

2 hours ago, Matt Cloud said:

This really isn't an accurate description of either the law or the facts here.  

 

This letter from the Public Interest Declassification Board may help better to orient.

 

September 27, 2021

 

Dear President Biden:

In 1992, Congress passed the John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Collection Act (JFK Act), which required all federal agencies and offices to identify, organize, and transfer copies of all records related to the assassination to the custody of the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). On behalf of the members of the Public Interest Declassification Board (the Board), I respectfully encourage you to instruct agencies to make the maximum public release of the remaining classified records subject to the JFK Act.

Although the JFK Act broadly required the public disclosure of Kennedy assassination records under NARA’s custody, it permitted an independent Assassination Records Review Board (ARRB) to review and approve temporary postponements of public disclosure following narrow and specified exemption criteria.

When temporary disclosure postponements approved by the ARRB expired on October 26, 2017, the JFK Act permitted agencies to request extended postponements. Then-President Trump approved postponements for approximately 14,000 records through October 26, 2021.

We understand that agencies are asking you to extend the postponement of public disclosure for parts of many records subject to the JFK Act.

The Board is charged under section 703(b) of the Public Interest Declassification Act of 2000, as amended, to promote the fullest possible public access to a thorough, accurate, and reliable documentary record of significant United States national security activities to respond to the interest of the public in national security matters, and to advise the President on the declassification of historically important records. Consistent with this duty and to abide by the letter and spirit of the JFK Act and bolster the American people’s confidence and trust in their government, the Board unanimously recommends that you limit any further postponements of public disclosures of the Kennedy assassination records to the absolute minimum.

The Board stands ready to assist and support you in increasing transparency and public access to this chapter in our nation’s history.

Very respectfully,

 

 

Ezra Cohen

Chair

 

https://www.archives.gov/files/pidb/recommendations/pidb-potus-letter-jfk-assassination-records.pdf

 

In addition, the archives website summarizes:

JFK Assassination Records Processing Project - 2022 Update

 

Summary

The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) has created a dedicated team to process previously withheld John F. Kennedy assassination-related records to comply with President Biden’s Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies on the Temporary Certification Regarding Disclosure of Information in Certain Records Related to the Assassination of President John F. Kennedy, requiring disclosure of releasable records by December 15, 2022.

NARA published an additional 1,491 documents in full on December 15, 2021. 

Over the past year, NARA and the agencies proposing continued postponement of  documents previously withheld under section 5 of the JFK Act conducted an intensive review of each remaining redaction to ensure that the United States Government maximizes transparency. Any information withheld from public disclosure that agencies do not propose for continued postponement beyond December 15, 2022, will be released to the public on that date.

There are 515 documents that remain withheld in full pursuant to sections 10 and 11 of the John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Collection Act (JFK Act) and are not subject to the 25-year disclosure requirements and the President’s certification to withhold certain records, established under section 5 of the JFK Act.

https://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/processing-project-2022

 

 

By the way, were any JFK files at Mar-a-Lago I wonder?  Anyone know?

 

Matt,

What kind of nonsense is this?  You say my post isn't an accurate description of the law or facts. But you don't cite any mistakes.

Instead you post an innocuous  letter to Biden from the Public Interest Declassification Board that you say "may help to better orient", whatever that means. 

This board was created by Congress in 2000, in legislation separate from the JFK Act, to advise presidents about declassification of all kinds of national security matters.  It was originally supposed to last only 4 years but kept getting renewed until its sunset provision was dropped.  They have no particular expertise in the JFK Act as the way they mangle the Act in the letter you posted shows. 

The letter simply recommends that Biden hold postponements of record releases to a minimum. I'm sure Biden got many of those kind of recommendations from others too and ignored them all.  Are you making some point? 

You add some stuff from NARA designed to make it look like they're following the law, when anyone who has dealt with them or followed their performance in the MFF law suit can see through that.

In short your ridiculous and false assertion is followed by two nonsequitors in search of a point to make.

Tell me, Matt. What's the definition of a JFKA record and where can I find that definition?

 

 

[Matt Cloud]

11 hours ago, Roger Odisio said:

Matt,

What kind of nonsense is this?  You say my post isn't an accurate description of the law or facts. But you don't cite any mistakes.

Instead you post an innocuous  letter to Biden from the Public Interest Declassification Board that you say "may help to better orient", whatever that means. 

This board was created by Congress in 2000, in legislation separate from the JFK Act, to advise presidents about declassification of all kinds of national security matters.  It was originally supposed to last only 4 years but kept getting renewed until its sunset provision was dropped.  They have no particular expertise in the JFK Act as the way they mangle the Act in the letter you posted shows. 

The letter simply recommends that Biden hold postponements of record releases to a minimum. I'm sure Biden got many of those kind of recommendations from others too and ignored them all.  Are you making some point? 

You add some stuff from NARA designed to make it look like they're following the law, when anyone who has dealt with them or followed their performance in the MFF law suit can see through that.

In short your ridiculous and false assertion is followed by two nonsequitors in search of a point to make.

Tell me, Matt. What's the definition of a JFKA record and where can I find that definition?

 

 

"Biden's jurisdiction over JFK record release is limited; It covers only executive branch records.  He has no say over other government records such as those held by Congress."

False.  With respect to government documents, the issue is more classification; less so possession.  Classification is a function of Executive Branch authority, with a small exception for the "born classified" material as defined in the Atomic Energy Act.   Congress is not holding documents here.  They are in NARA possession now.

"Nor over records held by nongovernmental entities. Example: the Darnell and Weigman films currently being hidden by NBC."

Yes, some materials may be in private hands, but I would not discount the possibility of duplications within NARA records.

"Section 12 (b) of the Act specifies the circumstances under which the search and release of records shall end.  It reads:

^The remaining provisions of this Act shall continue in effect until such time as the Archivist certifies to the President and the Congress that all assassination records have been made available to the public in accordance with this Act."

"Remaining provisions" refers to all sections of the Act except those pertaining to the appointment and operation of the Review Board under 12 (a). 

Thus it is NARA's Archivist's job to tell Biden and Congress when all records have been released. No matter what Biden and the CIA think they have done with the "transparency plan", they have no authority to end all record release."

Again, I'll cite the letter from Ezra Cohen of the Public Interest Declassification Board:

"Although the JFK Act broadly required the public disclosure of Kennedy assassination records under NARA’s custody, it permitted an independent Assassination Records Review Board (ARRB) to review and approve temporary postponements of public disclosure following narrow and specified exemption criteria.

When temporary disclosure postponements approved by the ARRB expired on October 26, 2017, the JFK Act permitted agencies to request extended postponements. Then-President Trump approved postponements for approximately 14,000 records through October 26, 2021."

Relevant "stake-holding" agencies have requested, as permitted under the JFK Records Act, to postpone full release of certain documents. This request was "honored" you might say by President Trump, and then President Biden.  Your statement that "[Biden and the CIA] have no authority to end all record release," is not exactly accurate.  The President may decide to "approve temporary postponements of public disclosure following narrow and specified exemption criteria," as defined under the JFK Records Act.

 

Edited June 7 by Matt Cloud

[Andrew Iler]

The main problem is that no one has confronted the issue regarding section 12(b) of the Act and the continuing operability of section 6 (section 6 is the only legally mandated criteria for postponing the release of assassination records). 

This all started with the October 26, 2017 “Gannon Memo”, wherein Office of Legal Counsel Curtis Gannon wrote:

“In light of section 5(g)(2)(D), the authority to withhold assassination records under section 6 expires on October 26, 2017. At that point, each remaining record "shall be publicly disclosed in full.. unless the President certifies" that continued postponement is necessary to protect against identifiable harm to national security, law enforcement, or foreign affairs, and that the harm outweighs the public interest in disclosure. JFK Act § 5(g)(2)(D).”

What followed this legal opinion by Gannon and continues to this day, is the belief that section 6 is no longer operable law. 

Ok… now read section 12(b). 

“(b) OTHER PROVISIONS.-The remaining provisions of this Act shall continue in effect until such time as the Archivist certifies to the President and the Congress that all assassination records have been made available to the public in accordance with this Act.” 

THE REMAINING PROVISIONS (not dealing with appointments to or operations of the ARRB) SHALL CONTINUE IN EFFECT … UNTIL ALL RECORDS HAVE BEEN MADE PUBLIC.

So the elephant question in the room is… Does section 6 of the Act have anything to do with the appointments or operation of the ARRB.
 

If the answer is “yes, section 6 deals with appointments and operations of the ARRB”, then section 6 is toast.
 

If the answer is “no…. section 6 has nothing to do with the appointments or operation of the ARRB”, then section 6 continues to be operable law. 

Very clearly, section 6 makes no mention whatsoever to the ARRB, its appointments or its operations. 

So what does this mean?

It means that Curtis Gannon’s memo was and continues to be wrong. It provided erroneous legal advice to the President, which has directly resulted in both Presidents Trump and Biden failing to apply the statutory postponement criteria to the remaining secretly held records. 

Some may argue that section 6 does not apply to the President. But this too is incorrect, since section 9(d)(1) of the Act (which grants the President sole and non-delegable authority over the records once the ARRB has issued a Final Determination for a record), states that the President has to apply section 6 criteria to all postponement decisions. Thankfully, even Judge Seeborg breathed life into section 9(d)(1) when he recognized it in his first order as the authorizing provision that grants the President sole and non-delegable authority over the records. 

The only official with authority to postpone assassination records is now the President.  
 

The “Rule Against Surplusage” Canon of Statutory Interpretation states, “If possible, every word and every provision is to be given effect (verba cum effectu sunt accipienda). None should be ignored. None should needlessly be given an interpretation that causes it to duplicate another provision or to have no consequence.”  

If section 6 remains operable law, then if not to the President, to whom does section 6 apply? 
 

Put another way, how can section 6 remain operable, yet apply to no official?

Have any of the four versions of the complaint made this argument in order to protect the continuing operability of section 6 of the Act? 

This issue goes directly to any argument that the plaintiffs might have made against President Biden’s transparency plan and his failure to apply the mandated section 6 postponement criteria. 

Please forgive my ignorance…. (because I’m not an American attorney), but if an argument is not pleaded in a complaint, can it be a live issue for adjudication and can it be an appealable issue? Can a judge decide an issue that is not pleaded in a complaint or in an amended complaint?

This is also why obtaining copies of all of the ARRB Final Determination Notices for all postponed records was imperative. It is surprising, shocking even, that no one has filed a FOIA request to obtain copies of all ARRB Final Determination notices for all of the records that continue to be held in the secret segregated collection. 

There is also another real problem… and that is the fact that NARA, the agencies and the Executive Office of the President have all failed to comply with the JFK Records Act in respect to filing Identification Aids for each assassination record when each postponement decision is made. This makes tracking records, decisions and reasons all but impossible.

Sections 5 (periodic review), 6, 9(d)(1) and 12(b) are together the primary sections of the Act that mandate continuing discreet ministerial duties imposed on the President. 

Section 9(d)(1) is the only section in the JFK Records Act that places an explicit and discreet ministerial duty on the President to:

1. issue an identification aid for each postponed assassination record;

2. only postpone based on section 6 criteria; and 

3. provide written unclassified reasons for each record for which public disclosure is postponed.

It should also be noted that Judge Seeborg acknowledged the continuing application of section 9(d)(1) of the JFK Records Act, when he found that 9(d)(1) restricted the President’s authority to only Executive Branch Records. 

It is surprising that I can’t find any mention of section 9(d)(1) in the original complaint and it appears that Judge Seeborg couldn’t identify any allegations that would amount to non-compliance with respect to the President’s ministerial duties either. In his July 14, 2023 Order, he wrote, 

“Since none of the actions challenged are ministerial, there is no jurisdiction to grant injunctive or mandamus relief against the President here. Nor do Plaintiffs state a claim for declaratory relief. Because these are failures of law and any amendment would be futile, Counts 1 and 2 are dismissed without leave to amend.”

[Matt Cloud]

19 minutes ago, Andrew Iler said:

 

The main problem is that no one has confronted the issue regarding section 12(b) of the Act and the continuing operability of section 6 (section 6 is the only legally mandated criteria for postponing the release of assassination records). 

This all started with the October 26, 2017 “Gannon Memo”, wherein Office of Legal Counsel Curtis Gannon wrote:

“In light of section 5(g)(2)(D), the authority to withhold assassination records under section 6 expires on October 26, 2017. At that point, each remaining record "shall be publicly disclosed in full.. unless the President certifies" that continued postponement is necessary to protect against identifiable harm to national security, law enforcement, or foreign affairs, and that the harm outweighs the public interest in disclosure. JFK Act § 5(g)(2)(D).”

What followed this legal opinion by Gannon and continues to this day, is the belief that section 6 is no longer operable law. 

Ok… now read section 12(b). 

“(b) OTHER PROVISIONS.-The remaining provisions of this Act shall continue in effect until such time as the Archivist certifies to the President and the Congress that all assassination records have been made available to the public in accordance with this Act.” 

THE REMAINING PROVISIONS (not dealing with appointments to or operations of the ARRB) SHALL CONTINUE IN EFFECT … UNTIL ALL RECORDS HAVE BEEN MADE PUBLIC.

So the elephant question in the room is… Does section 6 of the Act have anything to do with the appointments or operation of the ARRB.
 

If the answer is “yes, section 6 deals with appointments and operations of the ARRB”, then section 6 is toast.
 

If the answer is “no…. section 6 has nothing to do with the appointments or operation of the ARRB”, then section 6 continues to be operable law. 

Very clearly, section 6 makes no mention whatsoever to the ARRB, its appointments or its operations. 

So what does this mean?

It means that Curtis Gannon’s memo was and continues to be wrong. It provided erroneous legal advice to the President, which has directly resulted in both Presidents Trump and Biden failing to apply the statutory postponement criteria to the remaining secretly held records. 

Some may argue that section 6 does not apply to the President. But this too is incorrect, since section 9(d)(1) of the Act (which grants the President sole and non-delegable authority over the records once the ARRB has issued a Final Determination for a record), states that the President has to apply section 6 criteria to all postponement decisions. Thankfully, even Judge Seeborg breathed life into section 9(d)(1) when he recognized it in his first order as the authorizing provision that grants the President sole and non-delegable authority over the records. 

The only official with authority to postpone assassination records is now the President.  
 

The “Rule Against Surplusage” Canon of Statutory Interpretation states, “If possible, every word and every provision is to be given effect (verba cum effectu sunt accipienda). None should be ignored. None should needlessly be given an interpretation that causes it to duplicate another provision or to have no consequence.”  

If section 6 remains operable law, then if not to the President, to whom does section 6 apply? 
 

Put another way, how can section 6 remain operable, yet apply to no official?

Have any of the four versions of the complaint made this argument in order to protect the continuing operability of section 6 of the Act? 

This issue goes directly to any argument that the plaintiffs might have made against President Biden’s transparency plan and his failure to apply the mandated section 6 postponement criteria. 

Please forgive my ignorance…. (because I’m not an American attorney), but if an argument is not pleaded in a complaint, can it be a live issue for adjudication and can it be an appealable issue? Can a judge decide an issue that is not pleaded in a complaint or in an amended complaint?

This is also why obtaining copies of all of the ARRB Final Determination Notices for all postponed records was imperative. It is surprising, shocking even, that no one has filed a FOIA request to obtain copies of all ARRB Final Determination notices for all of the records that continue to be held in the secret segregated collection. 

There is also another real problem… and that is the fact that NARA, the agencies and the Executive Office of the President have all failed to comply with the JFK Records Act in respect to filing Identification Aids for each assassination record when each postponement decision is made. This makes tracking records, decisions and reasons all but impossible.

Sections 5 (periodic review), 6, 9(d)(1) and 12(b) are together the primary sections of the Act that mandate continuing discreet ministerial duties imposed on the President. 

Section 9(d)(1) is the only section in the JFK Records Act that places an explicit and discreet ministerial duty on the President to:

1. issue an identification aid for each postponed assassination record;

2. only postpone based on section 6 criteria; and 

3. provide written unclassified reasons for each record for which public disclosure is postponed.

It should also be noted that Judge Seeborg acknowledged the continuing application of section 9(d)(1) of the JFK Records Act, when he found that 9(d)(1) restricted the President’s authority to only Executive Branch Records. 

It is surprising that I can’t find any mention of section 9(d)(1) in the original complaint and it appears that Judge Seeborg couldn’t identify any allegations that would amount to non-compliance with respect to the President’s ministerial duties either. In his July 14, 2023 Order, he wrote, 

“Since none of the actions challenged are ministerial, there is no jurisdiction to grant injunctive or mandamus relief against the President here. Nor do Plaintiffs state a claim for declaratory relief. Because these are failures of law and any amendment would be futile, Counts 1 and 2 are dismissed without leave to amend.”

Section 5(G)(2)(d) provides:

Each assassination record shall be publicly disclosed in full, and available in the Collection no later than the date that is 25 years after the date of enactment of this Act, unless the President certifies, as required by this Act, that— (i) continued postponement is made necessary by an identifiable harm to the military defense, intelligence operations, law enforcement, or conduct of foreign relations; and (ii) the identifiable harm is of such gravity that it outweighs the public interest in disclosure.

 

This leaves full disclosure to the discretion of the President, even after 25 years, as it must under Article 2 of the Constitution.  There's nothing "erroneous" about that interpretation, as reflected in the OLC memo.

Edited June 7 by Matt Cloud

[Robert Reeves]

Isn't it interesting a macho forthright piece of work like Trump got sh*tscared and pulled the release of the records?

Someone spoke to Trump in a very frank manner that persuaded him there is a serious risk to national security should he allow the files to be released, it must be on that level of severity. Yet there's hardly any curiosity from the mainstream media. 

Pompeo btw.

High level popular curious media types that are actually curious to know what is in the remaining files, so start posing questions, they get threatened with consequences should they openly discuss on mainstream tv any links to the CIA's involvement in the assassination. Aka, Tucker Carlson. But, Oswald did it!

Go back to bed America. Your government has figured out how it all transpired. Go back to bed, America. Your government is in control again.