Well important information about the November in Dallas Lancer conference coming up. Just to
let you know. Virtual tickets are now available for in person and for the
online both or one or the other if you like. There's also a student
price of a thirty nine ninety nine, but you must show proof of being
a student if you attend. Tickets are on sale right now online at Assassination
Conference dot com. The date is November twenty second to the twenty fourth of
twenty twenty four at the Hotel Dallas Marriotte Downtown. Room prices start at one
hundred and sixty nine dollars per night. Book a room at the Marriotte.
There's reservations if you dial one eight hundred two two eight nine two nine oh
or two one four nine seven three nine thousand and mention the November in Dallas
conference Group rate. One other special thing for listeners of the O'Kelly effect if
you use code o'celly ten for ten percent off your ticket online. You can
get a discount there. You Chilly Effect is sponsored by Wallstreet Window dot com
and listeners like You, Yeah Yeah and a Media Jack once again live on
the sixth day of June twenty twenty four, allegedly according to that thing we
call a calendar, and this the o'celly effect again here live on a Thor's
day. So welcome to it, and I'm real happy to get straight to
it now. I know we were a little late on the live stream,
but if you're catching the podcast, you don't care and don't know, so
it's all right. Who do I have with me for this particular hour of
discussion. Well, it's not going to be much of a discussion. I
need an update from the vice president of the Mary Farrell Foundation, the editor
in chief of the jfk fax blog but also author of various books, individual
who I've referenced on the show many many times and had on the show a
couple of times to talk about things like, oh, I don't know suing
the CIA, Okay, over the Joe and Edes case, if that doesn't
ring a bell. Obviously, I'm talking about mister Jefferson Morley and more than
happy to have him here to discuss guess what the lawsuit right now, the
Mary Farrell Foundation versus the Biden administration. Even though I pointed out that,
you know, the presidential administrations in the past have had their interesting histories here.
Well, let's talk about what's happening today. The Biden administration still dragging
its feet over guess what the stuff that was deemed to be released in the
nineteen nineties, the Assassination Records Review Board. We got away twenty five years
to see documentation, and in twenty seventeen Trump didn't release it all, and
then a few years later Biden didn't release it all. And well, we'll
get filled in right now. I mean, we've talked about this before with
Larry Hancock, with Jefferson Morley, with the law. Let's see, Larry
Schnapp was on here. I think I couldn't get Bill Simpach, but I
got Larry on here to talk about it, and I had other people discussing
this on this show. But the latest regarding this whole situation, once again
from the vice President of the Mary Farrell Foundation, Jefferson Morley, again author
of many, many books. Go check them out. I'll give you some
links in the show notes. Mister Morley. First off, how you doing
tonight. I'm good, Chuck, Thanks for having me. Really happy to
have you here because I want to get it straight from the horse's mouth,
and no offense, mister Morley. But in that case, you are a
horse, because you're a workhorse here when it comes to getting documentation out getting
information out there, not just your own written work, but your work with
the Mary Farrell Foundation. So what is happening currently with the Biden vi the
Mary Farrell Foundation, or maybe it's the other way around in the legal case.
So, on May twenty eighth, the Mary Farrell Foundation filed its latest
brief in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in California seeking to overturn some rulings
that the District Court Judge Richard Seaborg had issued in our case. So last
year, Judge Seaboorg throughout several of our contentions that we made about the Biden
administration's failure to enforce the JFK Records Act, and the judge kind of gave
wide latitude, saying the president has the discretion to do whatever he wants with
JFK records, And our argument was no. The JFK Records Act of nineteen
ninety two was written very carefully to circumscribe the president's power and mandate that certain
procedures had to be followed load when it came to the review and the release
of records government records related to the assassination of JFK. So in this appeal,
we took issue with the judge and we asked the appellate court, the
higher court, to overturn the judge is ruling that President Biden was had the
discretion to issue an executive order last June which basically turns over all questions about
the release of JFK documents to the CIA and the NSSAY. And our contention
is that that's not compliant with the law and that the judge, the lower
the district court judge was wrong in ruling against us. So we're hoping that
a three judge panel will review this matter and overturn what we think is the
plain language of the law circumscribing the president's discretion when it comes to JFK assassination
records. So, just to remind people listeners of the law in this case,
the nineteen ninety two JFK Records Act said that all assassination related information and
possession of the government should be released, and it's set a twenty five year
sunset for that provision. So in twenty seventeen, all of the records that
had been reviewed under that law were supposed to be released in full. That
didn't happen in twenty seventeen under President Trump, it didn't happen in twenty twenty
one or twenty twenty two under President Biden, and under Biden's executive order last
June, it still didn't happen. And in fact, Biden turned over to
the CIA and the NSA authority and the final decision over what of the last
JFK records will be made public. Now people ask, well, how many
records are still secret? You know, that's our best guess is that it's
about thirty four hundred records. AFK records still contain the dection. But that
thirty four hundred doesn't include JFK records which are known to exist, that are
out there that the government has never acknowledged and has never put into the collection.
So this is why we filed the losses, because we're trying to get
the court to step in and say, you know, the government has to
enforce the law in this case, which it clearly is not doing. If
seven years after the legislative deadline, there's still thousands of JFK files out of
public view, you know that's the laws not being enforced. The laws is
defunct, really, right, So let me ask you a question here,
because just to clarify what you were just saying, all right, and it
may be forcing you to repeat what you just said a little bit, maybe
a slightly different way, but let's just make this very clear. In ninety
two, the law is passed, okay, So an executive office is created
right within the executive branch of the government to determine the release of these records.
Right. That doesn't mean that all of them got released, but they
went through a very long process and even extended the life of the committee in
order to determine what should be released. And then that sunset was set for
twenty five years later, which turns out to be twenty seventeen. Many of
us were waiting for twenty seventeen, not knowing who the president would be,
not caring who the president would be, because this was a matter of law.
Whatever was withheld in ninety two, ninety three, ninety four, whatever
was going to be withheld should be released then, okay. Right, So
Trump is in there and he kind of kicks the can down the road and
pushes it a couple more years, gives them more time because an appeal was
made to MN by various agencies right to hold off. So he kicks the
can down the road, and we end up with President Biden. President Biden
not only kicks the can down the road, but turns over through an executive
order allegedly the power once again to determine what can and cannot be released back
to the CIA, which the law in the first place, the spirit and
the letter of the law seemed to me to do exactly the opposite. Take
it out of their hands through a process and determine that these things should be
released. Now, am I missing something here? No? No, No,
that's exactly right, Chuck. Is the law was designed to force records
that had not been you know, it was thirty years after the assassination.
Most of the records related from the Morn Commission and the House Select Committee on
Assassinations and the Church Committee, all the investigations of the JFK story. Ninety
percent of those records were still secret thirty years later. And the reason was
that these agencies, primarily CIA and FBI, but a lot of executive branch
agencies had JFK material and they just said, we're not going to release it.
So the law, the nineteen ninety two law, was a very strong
law. It was a very good law. It was a common sensical law,
which is, all information about this subject, the assassination of a president,
should be made public. I mean, that's like, that's a no
brainer. And that's why the law was passed unanimously by Congress in ninety two.
Now, you know, and due to public pressure. Let's just make
this clear too, due to public pressure. So now by the time twenty
five years later came along, the public pressure was off, and both Trump
and Biden just acquiesced to these CIA demands that we have to have more secrecy
because of national security. Now, Chuck, I've read these records carefully.
Okay, there may be in a few, very few handful of cases,
there may be genuine, you know, current national security information that should not
be made public, but not in three thousand documents. Okay. The overwhelming
majority of these classification and redactions that we're still seeing in the JFKA records are
not to hide any genuine national security information. They're to protect these agencies from
embarrassment. It's that simple. The national security you know, rationalization is just
that it's an excuse to hide things that you know are not in the interests
of the CIA or the FBI. But to release that information would not harm
national security. It would just inform the American people what was really going on.
Right, But these agencies have the power to outlast presidents and get their
way, And so you know, what we're trying to do through the Mary
Farrell Foundation and through JFK Facts is force the courts to hold the executive branch
accountable and say the plain meaning of the law that has to be administered by
the president is that all JFK records should be made public as soon as possible,
not indefinitely, not someday far in the future when the CIA decides it's
okay with them. They all need to be released now. So that's what
you know, that's what we're trying to do in court, and that's the
message I'm conveying at JFK Facts on Substack, you know where we you report
on this lawsuit and on new developments in the JFK case all the time.
Is somebody has to establish accountability here, and that's what we're trying to do.
That's you know, we're in court the judge has rejected some parts of
our lawsuit, but other parts. I should say this, you know,
while we are appealing certain aspects of the judges ruling, in other instances,
the judge has said we can go to you know, to trial with the
government on certain issues. So at the same time that we're appealing things that
the judge opposed us on, we are also proceeding in court with discovery with
the government to you know, find out more about the documents that have not
been produced, the documents that have been destroyed, and really re established the
accountability that was envisioned when Congress passed the JFK records. If you don't mind,
I have a couple of live questions actually from UH from chat and also
from Skype, UH, and I'll read them as they're written, if you
don't mind. UH. But who does the National Archivist work for executive branch
or legislative or both? Is the National Artivist is an executive branch agency.
So the archivist is appointed by the president, and there's a new archivist who
is appointed in the past year. So you know, this is a problem,
is that the archivist really has no choice but to go along with presidential
decisions and we have. You know, we support the National Archives because they
are the source of our nation's history. They're the custodian and in general they
do a good job. But if the President or the CIA says they want
something to go a certain way. You know, the National Archives is a
relatively small federal agency and they just don't have the cloud to make the stand
up for the public interest and full disclosure. That's why we went to court.
Another question that arrives to me on Skype, which is really interesting,
and bear with me a moment, because this is a bit of a complex
issue in my mind, what are the chances that the hold up on releasing
documents is currently due to the fact that no one alive or active in the
agencies at this point even fully understand what should be held as secret and what
should not. In other words, have people already retired or died off that
would have actually known the difference between what is safe to release and what is
not. And this is part of the larger problem why they're being so resistant.
That's exactly the way the question was written, I think I understand is
meaning to you, Yes, you know, it's a fair question, but
I think that you know, the CIA, it's obvious, but it's worth
repeating, is an intelligence agency, so they have institutional memory. The people
at the CIA who are controlling these documents, I believe, fully understand their
importance. I don't think they're unaware or ignorant. I think that the knowledge
of the importance of these documents has been handed down over the years through the
CIA, So I don't While it is true that there are very few living
people, in fact, no living people at the CIA who are around in
nineteen sixty three, that doesn't mean that they don't understand the importance of these
records. I would say, to the contrary, the fact that they are
so determined to maintain secrecy over so many records for so long a period after
the event itself, to me, indicates that, you know, they fear
disclosure. They don't want to make this information public for some reason. And
to me, the only reason that makes sense is after all this time,
is that they fear embarrassment or damage to the CIA or the FBI or whatever
it is. That's to me, that's the only explanation that makes sense.
Okay, Look, and for live listeners, by all means, if you
want to add in a couple of more questions. I don't want to barrage
mister Morley with them, but if you have a few more that are relevant,
by all means, go into the live chatroom at Ocelli dot com if
you click on the listen live button. There's a chat room there, and
you can even drop it in there anonymously if you like, not an issue
any question that you have while I'm speaking with them. And I do have
one more here, which is kind of directed at me because I reported something
but mention your name when I reported it on the show a while back.
So here's the thing before the last deadline. This is the way it's written.
Before the last deadline. Chuck reported on something after being at a press
conference that Jeff Held it calls you, Jeff. I guess he knows you.
Anyway, the Jeff Held stating that there was a meeting with the CIA
and mainstream news sources previous to the deadline date and release of some documentation.
And I guess they're wanting to see if you would verify that or explain that.
Yeah, please, yeah, let me let me say what the caller
is talking about. And it's a good question. It's an important question.
So what I reported in December twenty twenty two was that I held a press
conference about latest revelations from the jaf K files and the impending Biden release.
What the CIA did was they contacted four major Washington news organizations Washington Post,
New York Times, CBS News, and NBC News, and they offered the
reporters off the record briefings in which they presented their views about what I was
saying. Okay, but not for attribution. This is the CIA's tactic is
they tell the reporters, off the record, here's what you know, here's
what's really going on, but you can't quote us. But if you want
to use that information, So the reporters feel flattered, like, oh,
you know, I'm talking to the CIA. I can't quote them, but
I can count on the fact that their information is accurate or so this is
what the CIA hopes to achieve, and this is how they get their views
into major news organizations articles and reporting without having to be quoted by name or
being held accountable for the claims that they are making. And so what happened
in December twenty twenty two was the CIA was denying certain factual statements that I
made, but only off the record, so I could never say I could
never say, you know, if the Washington Post or the CBS News reported
something and said according to the CIA, I couldn't respond and say, no,
that's not true. They cleverly take themselves by not being allowing themselves to
be quoted, they still get their perspective into the news reports without you even
knowing that. It's like CIA approved information. So this is kind of the
clever media streated ategy that they had for maintaining their own credibility. And I
reported, you know, I tried to expose this because this is the way
that they manipulate the press. Well, I was. I attended the zoom
press conference that you did, right. And here's the thing. A couple
of days previous to that news conference, I was given a heads up from
somebody who I do not name, but I happen to know someone that works
for CNN. And they didn't just give me their word. They gave me
some other interesting evidence that they had been involved in a meeting that mostly focused
on television producers of sorts. Okay, people that are involved in the production
of television news and news programming. Let's call it and guess what. They
had a meeting with TV people that the CIA conducted where they gave them the
same kind of information exactly the same kind of thing you're talking about with the
Washington Beeple. Well, they did this with the East Coast elements of a
bunch of TV assets, let's call them. Okay, are you aware of
that meeting? Have you ever heard of that? I have not. I
mean, if somebody among your readers knows about that, please contact me at
JFK Facts because that's the kind of thing we like to report on, is
how does the CIA, you know, covertly intervene in public discussion to you
know, get their point of view across and try and discredit other people who
actually have factual information. So if if my friend who let's let's just say
hypothetically worked with Don Lemon at one point, if if my friend who does
listen to my show who did that, wanted to contact you, how would
he get in touch with you? You can always get in touch with me.
You can DM me on Twitter, Jefferson Morley. You can email me
at Morley J M. O. R L E. Y J at gmail
dot com. Okay, And you can always reach me through the through the
about page on the website. Absolutely, and I'm going to give you guys
links to the website and also to mister Morley's Twitter and a few other things
in the show notes. And also I'm going to try and get that dropped
into the chat room at o'chelly dot com. If you have information about this
or other things that might revolve around these types of meetings, I think mister
Morley would be very interested in hearing it and also is aware of how to
protect a source as a journalist. Okay, so do that? What's that?
I'm sorry, I do know how to do that. Yes, well,
all inquiries will be held in complete confidence, right, so I wanted
to just make that clear for listeners, okay, and we'll give you the
links to that, like I said in the show notes. So as it
stands right now, though this appeal is with the Ninth Circuit, do we
have a date as to when it might be heard? Are there any particulars
to further report that are more up to date, because quite honestly, until
November again, I don't think we're going to see the major electronic media have
anything to say, and who knows if they will say anything around the sixty
first anniversary now of the assassination, but you know that some programming will be
dedicated to it. Now. As to whether it's you know, the garbage
of Hey, the Warrant Commission generally got it right, don't forget somehow or
other, or you know whatever, Jerald Posner being dragged out once again,
something like that. Outside of that, i'm goohead. So it's very hard
to tell with the courts how long the appellate court will take to decide.
You know, it could it could be It's very variable. It could be
a few weeks, it could be a few months. So the lawyers basically
told me, you know, just sit tight, It'll come when it comes.
So we really don't know too much about that. What I will say
is we are proceeding on the other parts of the court case, and I
want people to there's one aspect of the case that I think really has a
lot of potential for really telling us something very new, and that is we
are investigating the destruction of secret Service records. In nineteen ninety five, I
had Vince Palamara on my show. He's the Secret Service expert, and you
know, this was a he agreed. This was a very egregious case of
record destruction, and it happened relatively recently. It didn't happen sixty years ago.
It happened only thirty years ago. But that doesn't mean that a lot
of people involved, who were involved are still alive. And at JFK Facts
we are. We've just finished an excellent series which I would recommend to all
readers or potential leaders, called Trail of Destruction. And in the Trail of
Destruction series, Chad Nagel, who's a staff writer for the site, documents
twelve instances in which government agencies destroyed JFK files or information after the assassination.
And the series really brings home to you the scope of how hard people were
in the government were trying to hide what they knew about the events that led
to the assassination. And this wasn't in one agency. This was in the
White House, the CIA, the FBI, the Defense Intelligence Agency, Army
Intelligence, the doctors did JFK's autopsy. The Trail of Destruction is really wide,
and it's really impressive, and it goes to show you the links to
which people went to hide the real story, and it underscores the importance of
what we're doing now, which is to try and recover the real history,
right because the effort to hide the real story is so systematic and it's been
continuous. What's interesting here, by the way, if you go to jfkfax
dot substack dot com Trail of Destruction, if you go and search that,
I put a link for it in the live chat room and I'll include it
in the show notes. I believe it's a multi part series you can follow
on the substack. But also we covered on this show with Carmine Savastano the
proof that the d IA okay an agency not often mentioned, guess what destroyed
seemingly everything only within a few years of the assassinations. It was all gone
by like nineteen seventy three or something. I think my memory doesn't serve me
entirely. Well there, but do you have any comment about that? Yeah?
No. In our series, one of the one of the one of
the stories that we tell is that Chad Nagel tells is the story that Carmine
tells about how the DIA destroyed all of its Oswald records by nineteen seventy two.
So yeah, it's another instant. Yeah, sorry, I said seventy
three, but by seventy two it was already destroyed. Yeah, okay,
So and you know, and and and note that these are intelligence entities,
so Army Intelligence, Defense Intelligence Agency, CIA, SDI. You know,
they're destroying information about the accused assassin. I mean, there's only one possible
inference you can make, which is that they had that they were hiding damaging
information, although there would be no reason if the information wasn't damaging, why
would you destroy it? You know, there would be no reason to destroy
it. So that's that's what has happened, you know, consistently over the
years. And that's why it's so important to establish the principle that the JFK
Records Act established that all assassination related records should be preserved and made public,
right right, Okay, So look, before I wind up letting you go,
because I don't want to take up too much of your time, I
know you're very busy, not not only with you know, podcasting and authoring
books, and you got a lot going on. And I really hope that
I'm going to run into you in Dallas in November, because I'm going to
be there with the Lancer con Prince I. I. I hope that you'll
somehow attend that as well, because every time I see you do a presentation,
it's always valuable information, you know. Just really quickly, a couple
of things. One is, I have a question uh from chat and they
they also kind of dovetail with something I wanted to ask you about. So
yeah, I'll start there. Let's see where is it now? Sorry I
lost track of it for a second. You know, the blind guy,
the blind guy operating stuff live. You know, what are you gonna do?
Yes, just just one second, I'll get it. Uh, well,
let me ask you this other question while I'm looking. You know,
I brought this up to that, uh, you know, the the tail
end, the final blow sort of to the to the Joe and Edes lawsuits.
Somebody didn't believe me when I said that it was Brett Kavanaugh who ruled
against you in that case and kind of put that to sleep. I wonder
if you wouldn't mind commenting on that really quickly. First of all, is
that true? That is that a true statement I made? And secondly about
it? Go ahead, yeah, definitely. So just to recap the story,
In two thousand and three, I sued the CIA for the records of
a CIA officer named George joann Edes who worked in the Miami station in nineteen
sixty three and who handled whose Cuban agents had contact with Lee Harvey Oswald before
the assassination, and who generated propaganda about Oswald before and after Kennedy's assassination.
So Joeann Eedes was a guy and operations officer who was very closely linked to
the events that led to the assassination, Oswald's anti as a pro castro activist,
Oswald's trips to Mexico City. Johannid's was a guy who was in a
position to know all about this and his his His work for the CIA in
nineteen sixty three was concealed from the War and Commission and from the House Select
Committee on Assassinations and only emerged in the nineteen nineties when the JFK Review Board.
He got a few documents. So after that I sued the CIA for
the rest of his files in two thousand and four and then again in two
thousand and eight. I was got favorable court rulings that compelled the CIA to
release more information about this, so that loss was still going on in two
thousand and seventeen, some fourteen years later after it had been filed, and
it came up one last time for review by the DC Appellate Court, and
there was a three judge panel. One of the judges was Brett Kavanaugh,
one was a judge appointed by President Trump, and one was a judge appointed
by President Reagan. And Kavanaugh and the Trump judge ruled against me. Karen
Henderson, the judge appointed by President Reagan, issued a very vigorous defense dissent
in my support of my case, saying that I was completely right and that
the court should rule my favor. But Kavanaugh and the other judge ruled against
me, and that effectively ended the litigation and made certain that we wouldn't get
any more of it. And here's one more part of the story. Jug
this is true. The day that Brett Kavanaugh issued that ruling was the day
that President Trump appointed Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court. Yes, the exact
same day. Yes, So yeah, let me let me let me say
one more thing about that. Earlier in the lawsuit, back in twenty eleven,
one aspect of the case came up to the appellate court and Kavanaugh was
on that free judge panel as well. And in that case, in that
ruling, Kavanaugh said that I was right and that all these documents should have
been made public. So Kavanaugh ruled in my favor once, But when it
came up a second time and he was on the brink of going to the
Supreme Court, he actually changed his mind. And he and and and and
he and he turned his back on his own decision and found grounds to rule
against me. And what that told me, Chuck, was that, you
know, Brett Kavanaugh, when it was like, you know, he could
weigh in on half of a journalist like me who had a good claim,
you know, he would do it. But when you know, when everything
was at stake, his life ambition to go to the Supreme Court, Brett
Kavanaugh was not going to rule against the CIA at that point, you know,
because that would have risked his you know, that would have risked too
much, would have risked his life ambition. Yeah, during a time when
he was under greater scrutiny, in other words, is when his opinion suddenly
changed for a more favorable point of view to the Central Intelligence Agency. Just
coincidental act, Okay, anybody recognized the tongue in cheek as I said that.
Okay, so last last thing about this, just really quickly for a
listener who might say, well, who the hell's George joan Edes anyway,
point out something. When the HSCA was getting liaisons together to deal with different
agencies, they were told, look, we don't want people that were involved
in any way, shape or form with previous investigations or the case previously.
We need fresh personnel to deal with this, right, and George Joanides had
previous knowledge. Was clearly a guy, from what we can tell, who
should have had plenty of knowledge on the case and should have been disqualified from
being a liaison with the HSCA. Not only that, but you know,
mister Blakey had contended for many years that that couldn't be true because that would
have meant the CIA had lied to him directly, because he was supposed to
be assured that these people had no prior connection to the case. Am I
just pulling this out of thin air, mister Morlears, Oh no, no,
that's exactly what happened when I when I, when I told the story
of who Joan Edes was to Bob Blakey, he changed his mind and he
recanted. Up until that point, he had said for twenty years that he
felt that the CIA had cooperated with his investigation, and some people on his
staff didn't like that and didn't think that was true, but Blakey insisted that
it was when he heard the Jornid story that they had actually given him a
liaison with a guy who was deeply implicated in the you know, in the
CIA's knowledge of Oswald. He felt totally betrayed and understood that he had been
duped in a very serious way by the CIA and by Joean Ede. So,
you know, Blakey himself, the head of a congressional investigation into the
assassination, changed his mind about the CIA's integrity around the assassination story, base
solely on the Joanneedi story because clearly it had been deceived in their level of
cooperation specifically regarding this case. So okay, now, last thing, and
this does come from the listener, and this will be the last thing,
and then I'll let you go because, like I said, I know you're
busy, and I really appreciate you taking the time to update us and also
fill in some gaps for people that had questions. Last thing is uh,
and I'm going to preface this by saying that, you know, the public
pressure that was placed on Congress in order to get that unanimous passing of the
law. And it is a law, not some you know, it's not
some policy change. It was a law. Okay, it's not optional,
it's a law. So here's the thing. That law came about in huge
response to public pressure that was placed. Not only now everybody points to the
JFK film and that final slide that says, you know, the ha CAA
records they're going to be withheld until twenty twenty nine, and people said,
what this can't be okay, But that was part of the outrage. The
other part of the outrage. And you know, full credit to people that
were local to me at the time because I used to live in New Jersey
and New York in that area. You know, people that were involved in
my area, like Bill Kelly and people like that were out there trying to
get these documents released. For years. There were people working constantly to put
pressure on legislative representatives to get something done regarding these records and the release of
them on a wide scale. And it was the release the documents or I
forget what the phrases were, but there were buttons, There was a campaign.
There was a lot of activity here even before Oliver Stone's film. Now,
when you combine these two things together, it created a noticeable public pressure
on Congress to pass this bill. Now, as you said in you know,
the thirty years that have now gone by since then, we have a
situation where the pressure is much lower. But at the time this was the
pressure that made things work. Now, this goes along with the question from
the listener, is there anything that we can do to assist in putting pressure
on the executive branch or even the legislative branch to honor the spirit and letter
of the JFK Records Collection Act. And that's exactly how they said it.
What do you say you have to say about that? Here's the answer.
Yes, And I urge people to follow JFK facts on substack, because there
is an effort afoot on Capitol Hill to do something about the JFK Records Act,
and we are prepared to support that if it's a strong, effective measure,
and the signs are good stimistic about that. So what people can do
is uh to support the effort, is is go to JFK backs and follow
the story look for developments about an initiative on Capitol Hill where we will be
lobbying, you know, for an effective measure to implement full JFK disclosure.
Also, people can go to the Mary Feral website Maryferreal dot org and that's
Mary Farrell is F E R R E L L Maryferreal dot org. And
we have a page about the JFK lawsuit. People can educate themselves about the
issues there and they if they want to support the legal effort financially, they
can also donate. So there are avenues to support full JFK disclosure, both
in court and in Congress. And you know, this is active and going
on today. It's not you know, something that's gonna happen or something that
happened long in the past. We are working on this every day. So
people can help by going to those two websites. There you have it,
and I will provide you guys with a link in the show notes to the
website, the Mary Farrell page for you to get educated further. And also
JFK fax the substack page. I'm gonna have multiple links to that, specifically
the one about evidence destruction but I'll also add another and I've got one last
question from the live chat room if you don't mind, and we'll leave it
at this because this is specific to Joe and Edes. Since we brought it
up, they now have there's still questions in my mind about all this,
by the way, and obviously you too, Otherwise you wouldn't have continuously sought
more records if all the questions were answered. Okay, anyway, let's see,
Uh, he was running a CIA operation in the United States, Joe
and Edes. Uh, I guess op babysitter. Isn't that illegal? Okay,
this is the question the way it's written. Sorry, George was running
a CIA operation in the United States op op babysitter. I don't know.
But anyway, isn't that illegal? Question Mark? Yeah, it was.
But at that time, the CIA just ignored the law that said they couldn't
run operations on US soil. The justification was foreig nationals right, that that
these operations were actually being conducted in Cuba, and so they weren't they weren't
directed at Americans. I mean, it's a it's a nonsensical rationalization for a
blatant violation of the law. Right well again, it was the far to
me, I shorthanded by saying it's the foreign nationals justification, where it's we're
running this against people that actually belong to a foreign state and the operation is
against that foreign state. But you know, when you come back at them
and say, well, yeah, but US soil is US soil? Okay,
Uh, you don't get a good answer on this. This is just
well that's the way that was, you know, no, right, and
I mean, you know the fact is I mean and this is this is
part and person of the JFK story. You know, the CIA enjoyed impunity
from the law, and they were not They did not feel bound by the
law, even when the law quite explicitly, you know, barred them from
mounting operations on US soil. Right, they just didn't obey. And so
you know, we're now we're left with how do we deal with the consequences
of that impunity? And the only the only real practical solution is you know,
full disclosure. We just need to know everything that hap happen. You
know, we can't change the past. We can't make the CIA to obey
the law in the past. All we can do is get all of the
record, you know, so that the people know the full story of whatever
happened. Right, we're there yet, And that's and that's the bottom line
here, and that's the point of the whole thing and the reason why the
JFK Records Collection Act needs to be honored. Okay, it's just that simple.
It is the law of the land. It should not be uh,
you know, basically overturned by executive order. This is not the way this
is supposed to go. And that's what the lawsuit is about, in my
mind, in layman's terms. So there you go. And once again I've
been speaking with Jefferson Morley, who is the editor in chief of the JFK
Facts website first of all, but also the sub stack. There's going to
be links to both of those things, the vice president of the Mary Farrell
Foundation, which there will be multiple links to Maryferrell dot org pages in the
show notes. And thank you once again, mister Morley for taking the time
with us today to update us on the current status of the lawsuit which is
now sitting in the ninth Circuit in California. And hopefully we will see some
results and some movement very very soon. And we're even going to provide you
with, you know, a couple of links. Maybe we can all add
a little more pressure and turn up the heat once again. I don't know
if we're going to get the Oliver Stone slash, you know, release the
records moment that we got in the nineties, but we could still do a
hell of a lot better than what's being done right now. So let's get
to it people, And that's what I say. So again, thanks so
much, mister Morley. And what is the latest book that do you have
a book about to come out or My latest book is called Scorpions Dance,
and it's the story of the CIA and Watergate, right, so I think
readers will be interested in that. It's really about this very complex relationship between
President Richard Nixon and CIA Director Richard Hilms, which I show was really this
relationship is what gave us the Watergate scandal. And for people who are interested
in JFK, these two men were also very interested, secretly privately in the
Kennedy assassination and its causes. So the JFK story actually influences is in the
background of the story of Watergate and the fall of President Nixon. So for
listeners who are interested in JFK, the CIA, Watergate, these types of
subjects. My book Scorpions Dance came out in twenty twenty two. Will I
think the revelation and incorporate the layatest information, the latest revelations and really shed
new light on the Watergate scandal. We did talk about it on the show
here when the book was new, and I have a copy behind me on
my shelf. It's one of the things that, yes, indeed, I
do retain on that shelf I talk about all the time. And it is
an interesting, very interesting book, well written. Of course, it's well
written. It's Jeff Jeff Morley's an excellent writer, but it's actually loaded with
a lot of interesting information and some new information that I wasn't fully aware of.
Maybe we can arrange for a short chat about it again before November comes
around, because I certainly wouldn't mind touching on that subject again and talking about
how the assassination continued to affect a lot of things even a decade later,
you know, as all that was going down. So yeah, go ahead,
sorry, I'd love to do that. Check it's a longer discussion that
is worth know its own show. But yeah, how the JFK story continued
to resonate and affect politics long after it had happened exactly. That's a that's
a very interesting story. So yes, I'd love to come back on and
talk about that sometimes. Well, let's try and arrange that before November.
But until then, go to JFK Facts either JFK facts dot com the website,
or you can go to the substack, which is uh, let's see,
I think it's substack dot JFK facts. Let me let me double check
that address real fast, good, go ahead, Sorry, it's jfkfacts dot
substack dot com. That's it. There you go, JFK Facts one word
dot substack dot com. And again, one of the specific links, I'm
gonna give you a slash trail of destruction, the destroyed. Okay, that's
the way the link comes up. And that's one of the subjects that we
talked about tonight. The destruction of files, yes, the destruction of evidence,
yes. And how about the disclosure of it. Oh yeah, we
covered that too. So again, my guest was Jefferson Morley. I thank
you guys for listening, and uh, I am merely o'chilly, and we
are not responsible we're getting stupidity, which might exsue dot Com Radio network.
Go ahead, call it about the JAFA assassulation. Right, well, what
do you want to know Tody Baker's wild claim Oswald girlfriends he knew Ruby and
Barry answer weapons? Really? I imagine I could claim I have four wheels.
It doesn't make me a wagon. But okay, on the building and
I'm trying to prevent the murder of John Kennedy. Come on now, has
a real effort on the Davey assassination. Go to Amazon dot com enter Judith
Baker in her own words. You'll get the results for a digital copy of
a book where Walt Brown utilizes her own words and the known evidence in the
case to get at well a different perspective. Let's say you can get Judith
Barry Baker in her own words from the author himself if you request it by
contacting doctor Brown at k I A S J F K at aol dot com.
It's a fun book and it actually dissects the many, many fantastic claims
Judith Barry Baker in her own words in Denial Secret Wars with air Strikes and
Tanks by Larry Hancock, Secret wars became a staple of US covert operations and
are still happening today. Larry Hancock's book In Denial rips the cover off many
of them. Using new files. It exposes things about the Bay of Pigs
that no one has ever written about before. Revelation through conversation, Oh Chili
dot com, wall Stream Window dot com, going to Chuck O'Kelly. You're
Shakra Shelley. You know it's Sharkra Shelley. You are about doing partin upon
the great brusade. The eyes of the world are upon you. The hopes
and prayers of liberty loving people everywhere march with him, in company with our
brave allies and brothers in arms. On the other front. Your tax will
not see an easy one. Your enemy is well trained, well equipped,
and battle heartened. He will fight that man demand. The tide has turned.
The free men of the world are marching together to fingering so really quickly.
I want to give you some information about the conference coming up in Dallas,
and this just after speaking with Jefferson Morley. I want to let you
know that virtual tickets are currently on sale as well as in person tickets and
special student discount price is available forty bucks, but you got to show proof
of your student status if you go to the conference and do that. Tickets
are for sale at Assassination Conference dot com. That's the website and it is
November twenty second to twenty four of twenty twenty four at the Hotel Dallas Marriott
Downtown. Special room prices are available. To book a room, call the
Marriotte Reservations at one eight hundred two two eight nine two nine zero or two
one four nine seven nine nine thousand and mention the November in Dallas conference group
rate. Additionally, if you'd like to get ten percent off your tickets,
you can use the code Ocelli ten for ten percent off your tickets at Assassination
Conference dot com. In addition, we got one other special thing to add
to this. If you would like assistants finding discount flights to the conference or
activities for the spouse to do in Dallas, you can reach out to Gabby's
Getaway Adventures through Facebook or email Gabby's Getawayadventures at gmail dot com is the email
address, or look for it on Facebook if you like. You can get
discounts on all kinds of stuff for your tourist needs there going to Dallas,
whether it is at the conference or separate from it. So there you go,
November twenty second to twenty four, right in line with the historical dates
in Dallas, Texas at the downtown okay, the Downtown Dallas Marriott Hotel,
and that'll be November twenty second to twenty four. Tickets are available now at
Assassination conference dot com And one more time, o'celle ten is your discount code
for ten percent off your tickets