Will Pres. Biden release the JFK Files?

[Steve M. Galbraith]

That may be true. If so, my idea becomes even more relevant. BTW, Morley will never do it since this would prevent him from making baseless claims.

For Morley this is all about Joannides. I don't think he's promoting it for any other reason. From there he wants to connect things directly to Counter Intelligence and specifically Angleton. And then to a anti-FPCC operation that used/manipulated Oswald.

As to baseless claims: that's an understatement. He once said - but withdrew it later - that Angleton should have been charged with "criminal negligence" for his failure to tell the Secret Service about the threat that Oswald posed to JFK. C'mon, that's silly.

[Jon Banks]

This so-called "deep state" never assassinated a single foreign leader. Not one.

Did they try? Yes but they - the CIA - were ordered or directed to do so by presidents. Castro most notably. Eisenhower reportedly approved a plan to assassinate Lumumba but the plan was not carried out and he was murdered by others.

I'm not going to defend the truly awful things done by the CIA during the Cold War. But almost all of it was done under directions by the president or with their knowledge. This wasn't a "rogue agency" acting on its own. And to argue from "the CIA tried to kill Castro therefore they killed JFK" is such a reach that it's remarkable that anyone tries to make it. Killing a foreign dictator is completely different than killing your own leader. That should be obvious.

The CIA in the era of Dulles and Helms almost certainly went rogue a number of times. I'll grant you that the CIA today is more bureaucratic and less inclined to "go rogue" than in the 50s and 60s but there are reasons to think that some employees at the CIA went rogue against President Trump.

President Truman disagreed that the CIA wasn't a rogue agency and called for them to be reined in after JFK was killed.

President Eisenhower warned about the Military Industrial Complex

President Reagan I believe really had no idea what was going on during Iran-Contra. His VP, George HW Bush, likely knew more about Iran-Contra because he had a more intimate relationship with the CIA.

I would define the "Deep State" as a combination of High-Ranking NatSec people, Defense Industry people, some members of the Press, and wealthy oligarchs like Rupert Murdoch and George Soros for example.

To me, the 'Deep State' is just a group of unelected elites who are able to manipulate and influence policy decisions related to national security and foreign policy without being held accountable. I do believe that sort of Power Elite exists within the US and began sometime in the early 20th century (predating the creation of the CIA).

[Jon Banks]

For Morley this is all about Joannides. I don't think he's promoting it for any other reason. From there he wants to connect things directly to Counter Intelligence and specifically Angleton. And then to a anti-FPCC operation that used/manipulated Oswald.

As to baseless claims: that's an understatement. He once said - but withdrew it later - that Angleton should have been charged with "criminal negligence" for his failure to tell the Secret Service about the threat that Oswald posed to JFK. C'mon, that's silly.

Morley seems to be onto something with Joannides, who was the CIA's liason for the HSCA.

Why would they choose him as the liason without disclosing his connection to the DRE? That seems rogue.

Also, the CIA confirmed that Joannides had a second home in New Orleans but hasn't disclosed the specific dates that he lived there or visited New Orleans in 1963.

https://jfkfacts.org/cia-admits-joannides-had-a-residence-in-new-orleans/

Given that he was running the DRE operation in 1963, it's not only possible but probable that he was familiar with Oswald prior to JFK's assassination.

I don't think it's a smoking gun proving a conspiracy of course but I do think it's embarrassing for the CIA and other agencies to admit that the President's alleged assassin was under surveillance leading up to November 1963...

[W. Tracy Parnell]

For Morley this is all about Joannides. I don't think he's promoting it for any other reason. From there he wants to connect things directly to Counter Intelligence and specifically Angleton. And then to a anti-FPCC operation that used/manipulated Oswald.

As to baseless claims: that's an understatement. He once said - but withdrew it later - that Angleton should have been charged with "criminal negligence" for his failure to tell the Secret Service about the threat that Oswald posed to JFK. C'mon, that's silly.

Right. My forthcoming book will have a chapter on some of his claims about Phillips even though, as you say, Joannides/Angleton is his current focus.

[Gerry Down]

Bringuier said he had no contacts with the CIA, that in particular he never knew Joannides who was reportedly the liaison between the CIA and the DRE, the anti-Castro group the CIA funded and that Bringuier was a member of. But Bringuier said he informed the Miami headquarters of the DRE about the Oswald encounters before the assassination. In fact, on August 21, 1963 he issued a press release warning the US government about the dangers Oswald posed.

Again, Joannides was the liaison between the CIA and the DRE; so did Miami tell him about what Bringuier reported? If Bringuier said Oswald was a threat wouldn't they tell Joannides? And Did Joannides (or someone in the CIA) hear about Oswald? Oswald appeared on radio and TV. One would think the CIA would notice all of this activity on his part.

The Bringuier press release is here: https://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh19/html/WH_Vol19_0097a.htm

This is good info. Joannides files (the ones the CIA wont release) so would contain his contact with the Miami DRE and the info they were receiving from Carlos Bringuier on Oswald. All this would have been in Joannides possession prior to the assassination. But I don't see any evidence that Joannides or the CIA were directing anything based on this info.

Joannides might simply have been a receptacle of information that just happened to be coming in about Oswald.

[Steve M. Galbraith]

This is good info. Joannides files (the ones the CIA wont release) so would contain his contact with the Miami DRE and the info they were receiving from Carlos Bringuier on Oswald. All this would have been in Joannides possession prior to the assassination. But I don't see any evidence that Joannides or the CIA were directing anything based on this info.

Joannides might simply have been a receptacle of information that just happened to be coming in about Oswald.

There are a couple of good pieces here (below) on this matter. It include exchanges between Dale Myers and Morley on Morley's claims about Bringuier and what he knew, told Miami, et cetera. They're from Myers's site.

The first:  http://jfkfiles.blogspot.com/2008/06/last-word-bringuier-joannides-and-dre.html

And here: http://jfkfiles.blogspot.com/2008/02/cia-vs-jefferson-morley.html

Bringuier emphasizes that by the summer of 1963 that his New Orleans delegation of the DRE was quite small - him and 2-3 younger Cubans, received no money from Miami (or the CIA), and that he was running it himself on his own time. So it's entirely conceivable to me that Joannides was focused on handling the Miami contingent and the NO delegation was dismissed as meaningless. And again, Bringuier says he never met Joannides.

[Jon Banks]

There are a couple of good pieces here (below) on this matter. It include exchanges between Dale Myers and Morley on Morley's claims about Bringuier and what he knew, told Miami, et cetera. They're from Myers's site.

The first:  http://jfkfiles.blogspot.com/2008/06/last-word-bringuier-joannides-and-dre.html

And here: http://jfkfiles.blogspot.com/2008/02/cia-vs-jefferson-morley.html

Bringuier emphasizes that by the summer of 1963 that his New Orleans delegation of the DRE was quite small - him and 2-3 younger Cubans, received no money from Miami (or the CIA), and that he was running it himself on his own time. So it's entirely conceivable to me that Joannides was focused on handling the Miami contingent and the NO delegation was dismissed as meaningless. And again, Bringuier says he never met Joannides.

So you think it's totally not a problem that the CIA brought Joannides out of retirement to be the liason for the HSCA without disclosing his relationship with the DRE?

The CIA also continues to fight against declassifying files related to Joannides despite the fact that he died years ago.

Jeff Morley wants to know if Joannides spent time in New Orleans in 1963. That question seems relevant to JFK Assassination research. And for reasons that we don't currently know, the CIA won't answer the question...

[Steve M. Galbraith]

So you think it's totally not a problem that the CIA brought Joannides out of retirement to be the liason for the HSCA without disclosing his relationship with the DRE?

The CIA also continues to fight against declassifying files related to Joannides despite the fact that he died years ago.

Jeff Morley wants to know if Joannides spent time in New Orleans in 1963. That question seems relevant to JFK Assassination research. And for reasons that we don't currently know, the CIA won't answer the question...

Re Joannides: It may be a problem; it may not. It shouldn't have been done. As you probably know, Blakey was furious when he found out. Rightly so.

I'll crib from Myers and echo his view (AMSPELL was the code name for the DRE):
"That is why the CIA records on George Joannides could prove to be valuable. As Mr. Morley rightly points out, “[During the 1978 HSCA investigation,] Joannides did not take the opportunity to say that the accused assassin had been in contact with his assets, rather, he concealed his working relationship with the DRE in 1963. He provided only a handful of miscellaneous AMSPELL documents to investigators… In fact, four decades after the fact, the most important AMSPELL records are missing from CIA archives – perhaps intentionally.”

However, Mr. Morley is also right to point out, and perhaps emphasize more than he has, that “…As a result [of the gap in AMSPELL records], it is hard to draw any firm conclusions about the contacts between the DRE and Oswald…” [Our Man in Mexico City, page 177]."

So release the material.

Questions: Wouldn't Joannides, if he had gone to NO, have met with Bringuier to get more information on Oswald? Bringuier insists that he never met Joannides. And if the DRE in Miami told Joannides about this Bringuier/Oswald encounter before the assassination why do the records show they told him about it afterwards? Isn't once enough?

I just don't think there's any there there. Oswald was a nobody and I simply don't see the CIA having any interest in him for any reasons.