Blog

The crucial JFK file that was not released and still remains secret

Crucial information was missing from the JFK assassination files released by the Trump administration on Tuesday, according to an expert.

The transcript of the first conversation between president Lyndon Johnson and CIA Director John McCone after the 1963 assassination has still not been released to the public, author James Johnston told USA Today. 

The document could help answer questions about any possible involvement from Cuba in the Kennedy’s killing, since the president had famously tried to use the CIA to kill communist dictator Fidel Castro. 

McCone has previously been accused of keeping ‘incendiary’ information from the Warren Commission that probed the assassination, as reported by Politico. 

The sensitive information revolved around the existence of plots to assassinate Castro, which put the CIA ‘in cahoots with the mafia.’

Without this information, the Warren Commission never looked at whether Oswald could have had accomplices in Cuba or elsewhere who wanted JFK dead as retaliation for trying to kill Castro.

McCone’s cover-up was claimed to be ‘benign’ because he and other top CIA officials wanted the commission to focus on Lee Harvey Oswald, who they truly believed acted as a lone shooter. 

More than 63,000 pages of records related to the 1963 assassination of president Kennedy were released Tuesday following an order by President Donald Trump, many without the redactions that had confounded historians for years and helped fuel conspiracy theories.

The US National Archives and Records Administration posted to its website roughly 2,200 files containing the documents. 

They included typewritten reports and handwritten notes spanning decades, including details of a top CIA agent who claimed the deep state was responsible,  Oswald being a ‘poor shot’ and that Secret Service had been warned Kennedy would be killed in August, three months before the murder.

Keep reading

Europe Goes Full Totalitarian And Puts The Entire Western World At Risk

It’s happening again. Europe is once again going totalitarian and this time there’s a decidedly familiar communist stench. The outcome was predictable for many of us in the alternative media and the situation is only going to get worse in the next few years, but what does this mean for the rest of the world? With the European elites casting off their humanist masks and going outright Orwellian, what kind of chaos can we expect to unfold?

First and foremost I want to point out a key piece of irony here – For decades in the US we heard the tiresome argument that our 2nd Amendment gun rights are meaningless because they are “unnecessary in maintaining our freedoms”. Anti-gun rights activists and politicians commonly used Europe as their sterling example:

“If gun rights are so important for freedom, then what about the Europeans? They have strict gun laws and they’re not losing their rights…”

As Americans who understand what it means to fight a rebellion against tyranny and win, our response to this claim has always been the same: “Just give it time…”

Of course, we were right and they were wrong. I’m sure a large number of people among the 95% of EU and UK citizens that are disarmed are probably wishing desperately for firearms right about now. The reasons why are numerous and horrifying.

The Downward Spiral Into 1984

In the EU and UK there has been a slow burn on censorship the past ten years which has recently exploded into a California Palisades level inferno of speech restrictions. Door to door enforcement has increased as the public speaks out against multicultural polities. The excuse is always the same – Native Europeans are not allowed to criticize third world integration because it “might hurt people’s feelings”.  Any opposition to mass immigration is labeled “hate speech”.

Movements for national identity and border security are regularly attacked in the media. In France and Germany globalist officials are attempting to make it impossible for conservative leaning political parties to participate in elections.

In Romania they have succeeded in disrupting the normal voting process, arresting populist candidate Calin Georgescu after he won the first round of presidential elections. EU controlled authorities have ruled that he will not be allowed to run again.  And for those that think he was blocked due to Russian interference, well, they just blocked the candidacy of another conservative candidate simply because she criticized the EU.  Romania is also tightening rules for online speech in an effort to silence public dissent.

In true dystopian fashion, the powers-that-be call this “protecting democracy”.

Keep reading

Judge Demands DOJ Reveal Classified Information on Deportation Flights: Report

US District Judge James Boasberg reportedly pressed Department of Justice lawyers about their refusal to turn around planes carrying migrants being deported under the Trump administration’s invocation of the 1789 Alien Enemies Act during a tense Monday courtroom confrontation.

The standoff began Saturday when Judge Boasberg temporarily halted deportations of suspected Tren de Aragua gang members, Resist the Mainstream reported.

DOJ attorneys are said to have informed the judge that two planes were already airborne—one bound for Honduras and another for El Salvador—when his order was issued.

Although Boasberg verbally directed the planes to return, this instruction was not included in his written order, creating a point of contention that dominated Monday’s hearing.

Keep reading

Texas Senate Passes Bill To Ban Hemp-Derived THC Products As New Poll Shows Voters Support Keeping Market Legal

The Texas Senate has approved a bill that cannabis advocates and stakeholders say would effectively eradicate the state’s hemp industry, prohibiting consumable products derived from the plant that contain any amount of THC.

This comes as a new poll shows overwhelming public support for keeping consumable hemp products legal, while strictly regulated.

With the backing of Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick (R)—who held a press conference criticizing the hemp market on Wednesday after visiting stores that sell cannabinoid products—the hemp ban legislation from Sen. Charles Perry (R) passed the full chamber in a 24-7 vote.

Under the bill, only non-intoxicating CBD and CBG items could be sold, even though hemp with up to 0.3 percent THC by dry weight was legalized at the federal level in 2018. Supporters argue that re-criminalizing cannabis with any traces of THC is necessary to close a loophole in the state’s own hemp law that’s allowed for the proliferation of businesses selling intoxicating products.

“For those that argue that this should just be more regulation and tax, there’s not enough tax that we can collect that will deal with the behavioral health issues and the addictions that we currently face,” Perry said on the Senate floor. “It would be in the billions. It’s unenforceable because every day a new product hits the shelf that was at the whim of a chemist.”

“What they have created and what they’re doing is akin to K2 and Spice and bath salts of the past that we as a legislature voted out of existence as soon as possible,” he said. “The effect of what this drug is doing to the people that are involved in it—contrary to what you hear—is devastating lives. It’s generational. It is creating psychosis. It’s creating paranoia.”

Senators approved a series of amendments from the sponsor on the floor on Monday, including one that would require all consumable hemp products to be tested and federal Drug Enforcement Administration- (DEA) certified labs based in Texas.

Another Perry amendment that was adopted mandates that consumable hemp products be registered with the state Department of State Health Services (DSHS). Each product registration would carry a $500 fee, and they could not could not contain any non-cannabinoid mood-altering ingredients or additives. It would be a Class B misdemeanor to sell an unregistered product.

The body also passed an amendment to make it a felony offense for to operate a hemp manufacturing or retail business without a license or permit.

Keep reading

Let’s talk about…the JFK files released!

Last night Donald Trump’s administration released two-thousand files, totaling over 60,000 pages, pertaining to the assassination of President John F Kennedy.

You can read them all here.

The files are in seemingly no order, with no index or search system, so combing through them will take a while.

The National Archive press release claims these are “all records previously withheld for classification”, but that’s then admit that’s not technically true [emphasis added]:

In accordance with President Donald Trump’s directive of March 17, 2025, all records previously withheld for classification that are part of the President John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Collection are released. The National Archives has partnered with agencies across the federal government to comply with the President’s directive in support of Executive Order 14176. As of March 18, 2025, the records are available to access either online at this page or in person, via hard copy or on analog media formats, at the National Archives at College Park, Maryland. As the records continue to be digitized, they will be posted to this page.

This is only the digitized ones, the undigitized ones are all available as well, you just have to go to the national archives in Maryland to see them. They’ll put those on the internet too, just as soon as they’re done digitizing them. Honest

Of course, the process of “digitizing the records” and the weeks it’s expected to take “historians and experts” to go over the files keeps the narrative open. They can add new files as they see fit to steer the conversation.

So far the media coverage has been exactly as you’d expect, with a quasi-religious repetition of the Official Story best exemplified by the pathetically predictable New York Times, where Adam Nagourney headlines simply:

Here’s what to know. (Oswald still did it.)

Propaganda so laughable you wonder if they’re really trying…and perhaps they’re not.

Social media reactions have been as you’d expect, too.

Republicans claim this is a case of “promises made, promises kept”. Democrats claim there’s no new information here, it’s just the same files Biden released with parts unredacted.

As is usually the case, it’s likely neither is entirely correct.

Keep reading

Majority Of Utah Voters Support Legalizing Marijuana, Poll Finds As GOP Leader Downplays Reform Prospects

A majority of Utah voters support legalizing adult-use marijuana in the state, according to a new poll.

The survey from Noble Predictive Insights, which was commissioned by the nonprofit Keep Utah Medical, found that 52 percent of registered Utah voters would support a ballot initiative to end cannabis prohibition, while 38 percent would oppose it.

Support for legalization was highest among Democrats (76 percent), followed by independents (61 percent) and Republicans (41 percent).

“YES wins the left and the middle and divides the right. In a red state like Utah, that’s enough to get to a solid—though not overwhelming—margin of victory,” the polling firm said in a memo.

“Over the last decade, major political victories came from a populist-traditionalist coalition: The GOP’s wings would coalesce, form a majority together, and govern. If legalization were to win, the coalition would be built from left to right—a progressive minority joining with the center and Republican moderates. This is possible—but it requires careful execution.”

Alex Iorg, co-founder of Keep Utah Medical, told ABC4 that while the results of the poll indicate that an adult-use measure could also narrowly pass, the organization is not currently planning to lead such a proposal.

“I believe the majority now support recreational use because they see it as an easier option [than] Utah’s current medical program,” he said.

“We need to make the medical program easier to navigate. Rural, disabled, and other patients need telemedicine just like [they] can do for other medications,” he said. “Out-of-state recreational dispensaries have more advertising rights than Utah in-state medical pharmacies. We have to level the playfield.”

Here’s the text of the survey question posed to voters: 

“Currently, medical marijuana is legal in Utah, but some Utahns still obtain marijuana illegally for medical and recreational purposes. Would you support or oppose a ballot initiative that legalized marijuana for all purposes—including recreational use?”

The survey involved interviews with 609 registered Utah voters from March 11-13, with a +/- 3.97 percentage point margin of error.

Asked about the prospect of advancing adult-use legalization in Utah, House Speaker Mike Schultz (R) said he has a “huge problem with turning Utah into a recreational state.”

“It’s not going to happen,” he said.

Keep reading

Blue Privilege: Courts Give Police The Right To Lie And Slander

To serve and protect, police are allowed to slander and destroy. Cops in many states and localities have acquired the right to lie about their shootings, searches, and practically anything else. Police have routinely planted drugs, guns, and other evidence to incriminate innocent people, while police labs have engaged in wholesale fraud blighting tens of thousands of lives.

From a trickle to a torrent

Supreme Court rulings turned a trickle of police perjury into a torrent. In 1967, the Supreme Court, in the case of McCray v. Illinois, gave policemen the right to keep secret the name of their “reliable informant” they used to get search warrants or target people for arrest. Law professor Irving Younger observed at the time: “The McCray case almost guarantees wholesale police perjury. When his conduct is challenged as constituting an unreasonable search and seizure … every policeman will have a genie-like informer to legalize his master’s arrests.” The Supreme Court created a judicial playing field on which police were the only witnesses who can safely lie.

In 1983, the Supreme Court ruled that government officials are immune from lawsuits even when their brazen lies in court testimony resulted in the conviction of innocent people. The court fretted that “the alternative of limiting the official’s immunity would disserve the broader public interest.” Honest government was not one of the “broader public interests” the court recognized that day.

In 1992, Myron Orfield, a Minnesota state representative and University of Minnesota law professor, conducted a confidential survey of Chicago judges, prosecutors, narcotics agents, and public defenders on Fourth Amendment issues. One Chicago prosecuting attorney observed that “in fifty percent of small drug cases [police] don’t accurately state what happens.” Twenty-two percent of Chicago judges surveyed reported that they believed that police are lying in court more than half of the time they testify in relation to Fourth Amendment issues; 92 percent of the judges said they believed that police lie at least “some of the time.” Thirty-eight percent of the Chicago judges said they believed that police superiors encourage policemen to lie in court. One judge did not even know how perjury was defined under the Illinois Criminal Code. After Orfield read him the technical definition, the judge replied: “Then there is sure a hell of a lot of perjury going on in this courtroom.”

In 1994, the Mollen Commission reported that “the practice of [NYPD] police falsification in connection with such arrests is so common in certain precincts that it has spawned its own word: ‘testilying.’” Federal appeals court chief judge Alex Kozinski observed in 1995: “It is an open secret long shared by prosecutors, defense lawyers and judges that perjury is widespread among law enforcement officers.” Former San Jose, California, police chief Joseph McNamara observed that “hundreds of thousands of law-enforcement officers commit felony perjury every year testifying about drug arrests.”

Keep reading

Florida Lawmakers Approve Bills To Outlaw Psychedelic Mushroom Spores

Florida House and Senate panel have approved sweeping agriculture legislation that, among other changes, would explicitly outlaw the distribution of psychedelic mushroom spores and mycelium.

Members of the House Housing, Agriculture and Tourism Subcommittee voted at a hearing Tuesday to advance a bill, HB 651, from sponsor Rep. Kaylee Tuck (R). The nearly 150-page measure would make a variety of adjustments to Florida’s agricultural laws, including around agricultural lands, utilities and wildlife management.

With respect to psychedelics mushrooms, it would make it illegal “to transport, import, sell, offer for sale, furnish, or give away spores or mycelium capable of producing mushrooms or other material which will contain a controlled substance, including psilocybin or psilocyn, during its lifecycle.”

Violating the proposed law would be a first-degree misdemeanor, carrying a maximum of one year in jail and a $1,000 fine.

A companion bill, SB 700, which contains the same mushroom provisions, has been introduced in the Senate by Sen. Keith Truenow (R). It was amended and approved unanimously last week by the Senate Appropriations Committee on Agriculture, Environment and General Government.

Prior to reporting the bill favorably on Tuesday, the House panel adopted a striking amendment that made a number of changes to the underlying bill, though the amendment did not substantively affect the provision dealing with spores and mycelium.

Psilocybin and psilocin are the two leading psychoactive compounds in psychedelic mushrooms. Although spores typically do not contain psilocybin or psilocin themselves, they eventually produce fruiting bodies—mushrooms—that do contain the psychedelic compounds.

Because the spores don’t contain any controlled substances, the federal government deems them legal.

“If the mushroom spores (or any other material) do not contain psilocybin or psilocin (or any other controlled substance or listed chemical), the material is considered not controlled,” Terrence Boos, the Drug Enforcement Administration’s (DEA) Drug and Chemical Evaluation Section chief, said in a memo last year. (Using a similar rationale, Boos has said that marijuana seeds are considered federally legal hemp because they themselves don’t contain THC.)

In Florida, a legislative report for HB 651 similarly notes that “spores do not contain any psilocybin properties themselves and therefore could be considered legal under current law.”

To prevent that, the proposal would clarify as illegal any spores or mycelium that could produce psilocybin or psilocin at any time in their development.

Members of the House panel did not mention the broad agriculture legislation’s psilocybin provisions during Tuesday’s hearing.

Keep reading

Trump Is Right To Push Back Against Judicial Supremacy

Did President Trump ignore an order from U.S. District Court Judge James Boasberg in Washington, D.C., to halt the deportation of hundreds of alleged terrorists and gang members this weekend? No.

Would it have been constitutional if he had? Yes.

For too long, we have accepted without question the fallacious notion that the federal judiciary has the exclusive power of constitutional interpretation, and that the states and the other branches of the federal government are bound to accept whatever the courts decide. This myth of “judicial supremacy” has thrown the constitutional system devised by our Founders out of balance, and it needs to be rejected.

The current case, which concerns whether a federal judge can prevent the removal of foreigners whom the Executive Branch has determined are part of a terrorist organization, is the perfect opportunity to reassert the Founders’ view of the power of constitutional interpretation — a view that was shared, and acted upon, by presidents Andrew Jackson and Abraham Lincoln. It now seems the Trump administration is reviving this long-lost view, and it’s about time.

Here’s what happened. Over the weekend, the Department of Homeland Security deported scores of alleged members of the violent Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua, which the Trump administration designated a terrorist organization in January. On Saturday, Trump invoked the Alien Enemies Act (AEA) and declared an “invasion” by members of Tren de Aragua, ordering their immediate removal in accordance with the AEA. They were arrested, along with other alleged gang members in the country illegally, and flown to El Salvador, where El Salvador President Nayib Bukele has agreed to imprison them on behalf of the United States.

Judge Boasberg, a virulently anti-Trump judge with a long history of questionable judicial activism, acting on a request from the ACLU and the Marc Elias-led lawfare firm Democracy Forward, issued a temporary restraining order in hopes of stopping the deportations. There was no hearing, just a blunt command from Boasberg to halt these deportations for two weeks and prepare for a hearing — as if Executive Branch policy, even on sensitive matters of national security, can simply be dictated by an inferior court judge.

Unfortunately for Boasberg and the ACLU, two of the deportation flights had already taken off and were outside U.S. territory by the time the judge’s written order was issued on Saturday evening. (A third flight departed later that night but it carried foreign nationals that were deported on grounds other than Trump’s designation of Tren de Aragua as a terrorist organization, so Boasberg’s order was irrelevant.) 

Keep reading

In Internal Documents, Columbia Grad Student Union Spells Out Demands for ‘Sanctuary Campus’ Free From Public Safety Patrols and Protest Records

Columbia University’s graduate student union is demanding the Ivy League institution establish a “sanctuary campus” where public safety officers are barred from patrolling “organizing spaces, including classrooms.” The union, which is embroiled in active contract negotiations with Columbia, also wants the school to provide free “legal support” for student visa holders, destroy “all records” related to campus protest participants, and sue the Trump administration “and other anti-immigrant actors.”

Student Workers of Columbia, which boasts roughly 3,000 members and is affiliated with the United Auto Workers, shared an internal document outlining the demands during a Saturday Zoom meeting, which the Washington Free Beacon attended. The document, written by a “working group” of the union’s international members, cites the “unprecedented detainment of former student-worker Mahmoud Khalil by the Department of Homeland Security while in a Columbia University apartment building and the ongoing presence of ICE around campus” before making “immediate demands of Columbia University.”

Keep reading