Trump Defends Release of Unredacted JFK Assassination Files, Faces Legal Action
Former President Donald Trump is standing by his administration’s decision to release unredacted secret documents pertaining to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, despite the inclusion of Social Security numbers and other sensitive personal information of potentially hundreds of individuals, including former congressional staffers.
Trump addressed the controversy on Friday from the Oval Office, stating, "I said, release, we even released Social Security numbers. I didn’t want anything deleted." He framed his decision as a matter of transparency and suggested a belief that many of the individuals whose information was included were deceased.
"They said, ‘Sir, what about Social Security?’ ‘Oh, people are long gone,’" Trump recounted. He argued that deleting information would have raised suspicions and fueled conspiracy theories. "If you don’t delete it, if you do delete it, people are going to say, ‘Why did you delete it, there’s something in there.’ So we gave Social Security. And we gave everything."
However, Trump’s assumption about the individuals being deceased has proven to be inaccurate. Joseph diGenova, a former top Justice Department official and Trump campaign lawyer, is very much alive and is taking legal action against the National Archives for releasing his personal information.
"I intend to sue the National Archives," diGenova declared. "They violated the Privacy Act." DiGenova, who served as the U.S. attorney in Washington, D.C. during the Reagan administration, explained that the information about him in the JFK files originated from his involvement with the Church Committee in the 1970s. The Church Committee investigated alleged misdeeds by the CIA and other U.S. intelligence agencies. He confirmed he has filed his lawsuit and taken steps to protect his credit rating and accounts from theft.
DiGenova’s lawsuit highlights the legal implications of releasing sensitive personal information without consent. The Privacy Act of 1974 explicitly prohibits federal agencies from disclosing records without the written consent of the individual, particularly when it involves the publication of sensitive data.
James Johnston, another former Church Committee staffer, has also reported that his personal information, including his Social Security number, was made public in the files released by the National Archives and Records Administration. This further underscores the potential harm caused by the unredacted release.
Beyond defending the release of the JFK documents, Trump indicated he intends to follow a similar approach with documents related to the 1968 assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. "We’re doing it with Dr. Martin Luther King, too. They’re preparing all of that. They’re going to release everything. And whoever else we want…We really have nothing to hide," he proclaimed.
Despite acknowledging the potential controversy surrounding the JFK files, Trump downplayed their significance. "I don’t think there’s anything that’s earth-shattering, but you’ll have to make that determination," he stated. He also confirmed that the JFK files comprise approximately 88,000 pages of documents, with additional files scheduled for release. "Everything is out there. Totally open," Trump asserted.
The decision to release these unredacted files has ignited a debate about the balance between transparency and individual privacy. While proponents of transparency argue that the public has a right to know the full details surrounding these historical events, critics emphasize the potential harm that can be inflicted by exposing sensitive personal information.
The release of Social Security numbers, for instance, increases the risk of identity theft and financial fraud. Individuals whose information has been compromised may face significant challenges in protecting their credit and financial accounts. Furthermore, the publication of personal information can expose individuals to unwanted attention, harassment, and even physical harm.
The lawsuits filed by diGenova and others could set a precedent for future cases involving the release of sensitive government information. The courts will have to weigh the public interest in transparency against the individual’s right to privacy. The outcome of these legal battles could have significant implications for how government agencies handle sensitive information in the future.
It remains to be seen whether the release of the JFK and Martin Luther King Jr. assassination files will uncover any new information that significantly alters our understanding of these events. However, the controversy surrounding the unredacted release has already raised important questions about the ethical and legal responsibilities of government agencies in protecting individual privacy. The potential consequences for those whose personal information has been exposed are significant, and the debate over transparency versus privacy is likely to continue for some time. The decision to release the files reflects Trump’s broader approach to governing, often prioritizing transparency and challenging established norms, even at the risk of legal challenges and criticism. The long-term impact of this decision remains to be seen.
