Some charge that the FBI photograph of the classified documents on a carpeted floor at Mar-a-Lago during its search and seizure there were staged to suggest improper handling.
Thursday, September 1, 2022
Search and seizure
Friday, August 26, 2022
Disinformation on Classified Information
Some defenders of former President Trump’s taking classified documents with him after he left the White House are running a disinformation campaign. They say there can’t be anything criminal in this because Trump declassified the documents. This is irrelevant under applicable criminal laws.
Scott R. Anderson of Brookings Institute posted a good piece on LawFare about this, “Does It Matter What (If Anything) Trump Declassified?” https://www.lawfareblog.com/does-it-matter-what-if-anything-trump-declassified. I thought it might be a good to review the law on this blog. In later posts, I will get into the declassification of the JFK records.
The criminal laws on disclosing national security information are not related to the security classification system, except for evidentiary purposes. The criminal laws ask whether the disclosed information relates to the national defense. They are not geared to what might be stamped on the documents. Those stamped classifications, like Confidential, Secret, and Top Secret, are creatures of Executive Orders. Government employees may be barred from having access to them, e.g., denied a security clearance, fired for mishandling them, or enjoined from making the information public. But government employees may not be put in jail for violating the Executive Orders.
There is wisdom behind this result. A joke told in Germany during WWII was of two men talking. The first whispered that they had to be careful because their friend Fritz had just been arrested for what he said. “What was the charge?” the second man asked. “Disclosing state secrets,” the first answered. “Fritz was a carpenter. He didn’t know any state secrets. What did he say?” the second asked. The first man looked around to make sure no one overheard and whispered, “Hitler is a fool.”
The principle laws are these:
• Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information. 18 U.S.C. 793.
• Gathering or delivering defense information to aid a foreign government. 18 U.S.C. 794.
• Disclosure of classified information. 18 U.S.C. 798. Note however that the words “classified information” as used here do not refer to the security classifications established by executive order but rather to “communications intelligence,” such as “code, cipher, or cryptographic system.”
• Communication of restricted data. 42 U.S.C, 2274. “Restricted data” is data concerning (1) design, manufacture, or utilization of atomic weapons; (2) the production of special nuclear material; or (3) the use of special nuclear material in the production of energy. Communication of such information with intent or reason to believe it will injure the United States or secure an advantage for a foreign government is a crime.
• Receipt of restricted data. 42 U.S.C. 2275. This essentially criminalizes spying to get atomic secrets and requires intent.
• Protection of identities of certain United States undercover intelligence officers, agents, informants, and sources. 50 U.S.C. 3121. Criminalizes disclosure of the identity of covert agents.
Several hypotheticals illustrate how these work. I’ll start with the strictest, restricted data. An independent researcher who has never worked for the government or read a classified document on atomic bombs nevertheless publishes accurate information on how to make one. 42 U.S.C. 2274 makes it a crime if he publishes his paper with intent to injure the United States or to help a foreign government.
18 U.S.C. 798 is basically aimed at communications codes. Disclosing information about the cryptographic systems of the United States. is a crime. If such information falls into your lap, say you’re a reporter, and you publish it, you have violated the law. Atomic energy information and communications intelligence are considered dangerous genies. Once they are let out of the bottle, the government can’t put them back.
50 U.S.C. 3121 on disclosing agent identities is odd in several respects. First, it applies only to the identities of agents that are obtained from “classified information.” However, it does not define that term. It seems likely that it was intended to apply to information that was classified under an Executive Order, but since it doesn’t define the term, who knows what it means. Presumably, if the agent himself tells someone that he is working for the government, the person receiving that information is free to disclose it. This is an odd result. Second, although the title says it applies to “sources,” it apparently only applies to human sources. It does not apply to disclosures about how powerful a spy satellite's telescope might be. Third, although the title says it applies to undercover intelligence officers, the text only applies to “covert agents.” The CIA, for one, assiduously distinguishes between “case officers,” who are employees, and “agents,” who are not employees. As I recall, this law was amended as a result of the assassination of a CIA station chief after his name was published. But the text of the law wouldn’t seem to apply to that assassination.
The two most frequently used national security laws are 18 U.S.C. 793 and 794. The second law is aimed at what everyone thinks of as spying. It is a crime to gather national defense information to aid a foreign government or injure the United States. For example, it is November 1941, and two people are taking pictures of the naval ships at Pearl Harbor. One is a tourist who takes the pictures to show his friends back in Iowa. The second photographer will send his photographs to those in Japan who are planning the December 7 attack. In neither case is classified information involved. The first man has done nothing wrong. The second has committed a crime.
Section 793(a), (b), and (c) overlap with Section 794. Section 793(d) applies to someone with lawful access to defense information who passes it to someone not authorized to have it. The section also applies to someone with lawful possession of such information who refuses to return it when asked. Subparagraph (e) applies to someone who leaks information. And subparagraph (f) applies to a person who, through gross negligence, lets someone else acquire national defense information and to any person who fails to report such a loss.
The bottom line is that declassifying a document doesn’t mean the document is no longer subject to the criminal laws. Take the hypothetical of a person who doesn’t know the document was declassified and who delivers it to a foreign power. He has the requisite criminal intent. The document is stamped Top Secret. If the information in the document aids the foreign power or if the United States is harmed by its being passed on, why shouldn’t the person be charged as a spy? With respect to the boxes of classified documents kept at Mar-a-Lago, the claim that Trump had standing orders to declassify any document that left the White House is no defense if those documents in fact contain national defense information.
Wednesday, August 10, 2022
Beware the Golden Rule of Assassination
I wrote this as an op ed on January 3, 2020 and submitted it to several publications. None was interested. I chalked it up to how little editors understand history. However, now with the arrest of an Iranian on suspicion that he planned to assassinate John Bolton in retaliation for Soeleimani's killing, I wanted to publish it somewhere. This blog seemed appropriate.
Beware the Golden Rule of Assassination
Qasem
Soleimani of
This is the
first time in history that the
It is never
clear who will pay the price of assassination, but a price will surely be paid. I make an historical case-in-point in my
book, Murder, Inc., The CIA under John F. Kennedy. The title comes from something former
president Lyndon Johnson said to a reporter.
When asked about President Kennedy’s assassination, Johnson said he
thought
The
parallels between recent events with respect to
The National Security Council analyzed Castro’s threat and concluded that he might order the sabotage of an American oil refinery in Latin America or the assassination of an American businessman or diplomat there. However, it did not know the CIA was involved in a possible assassination plot against Castro. Thus, it did not take his threat literally. It did not think he would try to assassinate the president, and it did not warn the FBI or Secret Service.
The CIA’s
assassination plot against Castro continued.
It was meeting with the assassin, offering him a poison pen and
promising him sniper rifles, at the very moment President Kennedy was
assassinated in
Murder,
Inc. concludes that President Kennedy authorized the CIA plot and that
President Johnson approved the CIA’s covering it up from the
Sunday, July 10, 2022
The Red Scare
Earl Warren clearly did not want his commission to stray into the subject of Communism. But his reasons for this are not so clear.
In an
earlier post, I pointed out that author Philip Shenon wrote in his book that
Silvia Duran agreed to come to the
Why was this? Warren and other members of the commission had the unpleasant experience of “Red-baiting” during the McCarthy era with claims that Communists had infiltrated government. Naturally, those commission members would not want to be accused of doing the same thing in investigating Kennedy’s assassination, at least not without good reason.
On the other hand, the introduction of the Warren Report does seem to parrot Nicholas Katzenbach’s memorandum to the White House onThursday, July 7, 2022
Radio interview
Dale Johnson of KFOR-FM in Lincoln, Nebraska, interviewed me recently. He was particularly fascinated by my books account of what the CIA was doing with respect to Cuba in the last week of Kennedy's life. You can listen to the interview on the station's website for the next several weeks.
Friday, June 10, 2022
November 18 in Tampa
My earlier installments on the files from the National Archives of Mexico prompted me to take a second look at Vincent T. Lee and Gilberto Policarpo Lopez.
Several
articles on Vincent Lee in the Tampa Times caught my eye. He got his start in Tampa, where
In
There is
nothing in the
John
Kennedy visited
What was
unusual about the visit, however, was that he spent almost an equal amount of
time at a military facility, MacDill Air Force Base. Kennedy rarely wasted time
on military bases. His charisma paid far better dividends when he was exposed
to civilian crowds. But MacDill was headquarters of the U.S. Strike Command. Its quick reaction forces might be needed if
the CIA pulled off its planned coup in
The White
House had been worried about demonstrations by pro and anti- Castro elements in
However, in
the same
The point is the same that I make in Murder, Inc. With few exceptions, the investigation of Kennedy's assassination veered away from leads suggesting a foreign conspiracy.
Thursday, June 9, 2022
A Second Look at the Files from the National Archives of Mexico - Part III
A single page in the Duran files hints that the files of the Direccion Federal de Seguridad (DFS or Federal Security Directorate) once held more provocative information that has not been made public. It is page 43 and shown at the bottom left of this posting. It is a redacted photograph that is labeled "Alvarado Ugarte" but is in fact Gilberto Policarpo Lopez. As will be explained, Gilberto ALVARADO Ugarte was thoroughly investigated, and his claim was deemed a fabrication. (Spanish convention puts the surname second and the mother's name last. To avoid confusion, American intelligence services put the surname in all capital letters. By American convention his name was Gilberto Ugarte Alvarado). In contrast, suspicions about Gilberto Lopez were never investigated by American intelligence or the Warren Commission. However, this one page suggests Mexican authorities may have investigated him.
The story of Alvarado is legend. He showed up at the U.S. embassy in Mexico City on November 25, 1963, with a wild tale of being in the Cuban consulate on September 18, 1963, and seeing a Cuban pay Oswald to kill Kennedy. Despite the fact that the FBI and CIA knew Oswald was in New Orleans on September 18, President Lyndon Johnson received in-person briefings from CIA Director John McCone on the latest developments on the Alvarado matter for several days. Later, Alvarado retracted the allegation and even later retracted the retraction. Nonetheless, the allegation consumed a great deal of CIA and FBI time and resources in the days after the assassination.
Lopez's story is different. He came to the DFS's attention at about the same time as the sole passenger on a commercial flight to Cuba on November 27, but the flap over Alvarado may have distracted American and Mexican authorities from investigating Lopez more aggressively. He had been raised in Cuba but was an American citizen. He moved to Florida as an adult and was living in Tampa on November 18, 1963, when John Kennedy visited. Two days later, he obtained a tourist visa from the Mexican consulate in Tampa and headed west.
The border between Texas and Mexico was closed upon word of Kennedy's assassination on November 22. When it reopened around midnight, Mexican authorities recorded that Lopez entered Mexico as a passenger in private car. They would later give the FBI a list of the drivers of those cars together with their make and engine number. (While engine numbers are harder to change, they are not as useful for investigators as license plates). Nothing was ever done with this information. The FBI made no attempt to determine who drove Lopez across the border that night.
Lopez arrived in Mexico City in the late afternoon of November 25, the same day that Alvarado showed up at the U.S. embassy. Two days later, on the evening of November 27, Lopez flew to Havana as the only passenger on a Cubana airlines flight with a crew of nine. The CIA and FBI first learned about Lopez on December 3, and on December 5 Mexican authorities gave the CIA a photograph of him as he was about to board the Havana flight.
Inexplicably, except for a check of U.S. files on Lopez, the CIA and FBI let the matter drop. Mexican authorities seemed concerned however. The very purpose of closing the border on the afternoon of November 22 was to prevent Kennedy's assassin and any accomplices from escaping to Mexico. For this reason, Lopez's entry that night aroused suspicions. Mexican authorities also reported to the CIA that they had "lost" track of him between the time he entered from Texas and his appearance at the airport five days later.
In late February 1964, Mexican federal police (not DFS) told the CIA that Lopez had been "involved" in Kennedy's assassination. Strange at it seems, the CIA did not ask for details. However, it finally began asking the FBI to investigate Lopez's life in Florida. Among other things, the FBI learned that Lopez had been at the house of the head of the Tampa Fair Play for Cuba Committee on November 17, the day before Kennedy's visit to the city, waiting for a phone call from Cuba that would give him the go ahead to return. FBI investigators were not told the reason for the investigation, i.e., Lopez's possible connection to the Kennedy assassination.
This brings us to page 43 of the Mexican Archives' file on Silva Duran. That page is below on the left. It reads Alvarado Ugarte and Gilbert. It shows a man in a shirt or jacket with a checked pattern and hands on a counter. His face has been redacted. The CIA photograph of Gilberto Policarpo Lopez taken before he boarded the flight to Havana on the night of November 27 is on the right. Comparing the checked pattern of the shirt and the collar line reveals the two images to be the same. The CIA image has simply been cropped from the original. The question is what more do DFS files in Mexico contain on Lopez that has not been made public. Did DFS save the passenger manifest of the flight? It usually did. Did the CIA tell DFS that Mexican police said Lopez was involved? Did DFS investigate?
![]() |
| Mexican Archives Redacted |
![]() |
| CIA Gilberto Policarpo Lopez |
Wednesday, June 8, 2022
A Second Look at the Files from the National Archives of Mexico - Part II
The signed statement of Silvia Duran in the files is interesting, if for no other reason, because it has been unavailable for so many years. When the Warren Commission staff went to Mexico City in April 1964, Duran was the prime witness it wanted to interview. Commission staff lawyer David Slawson says this repeatedly in his notes on the staff trip. He wrote that the staff did review the "interrogation" (singular). However, because of difficulties in finding an acceptable way of taking Duran's testimony under oath in Mexico, the staff planned to fly her to the United States to testify. This never happened. According to author Philip Shenon, Duran agreed to it, but Chief Justice Earl Warren vetoed the idea because "she was a communist and we [the Commission] don't talk to communists." This wasn't quite true though. The Commission heard from Vincent Lee of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee. He might not have been a card-carrying communist, but he obviously supported Fidel Castro, and the FPCC was taken over by the Communist Party after Lee resigned.
The importance of Duran's testimony to the Warren Commission was that she talked to Oswald on his visit to the Cuban consulate in Mexico, filled out a visa application for him, and gave him her telephone number. But those facts were eventually established from other sources. Plus, the notion that Duran, a Mexican national who was the ambassador's secretary, would have been given the nefarious assignment of dealing with Oswald for assassination is preposterous. The Warren Commission's staff's interest in interviewing her stemmed from a lawyerly concern for authenticating evidence about what Oswald said at the Cuban consulate. Indeed, the CIA later told the Commission that only in the most exceptional case would KGB-trained case officers meet with clandestine agents in an embassy. That was not a very clandestine way of running a spy operation.
Still, two things do stand out in DFS (the Mexican security service) files on Duran's interrogation. First, in a list of questions to be asked during the interrogation, DFS notes that Duran had had a romantic affair with Carlos Lechuga when he was Castro's ambassador in Mexico. The DFS note says that the affair led Lechuga's wife to file for divorce. The affair presumably ended when Castro moved Lechuga to New York in 1962 where he became the Cuban representative at the United Nations.
(As an aside, according to the New York Times of November 15, 1962, Lechuga means "lettuce" in Spanish. This once led the Guatemalan ambassador to the O.A.S. in a fit of undiplomatic pique to express disdain for the Cuban's communism: "You are not a lettuce, you are a beet, brown on the outside and red on the inside.")
The relationship may nonetheless have been a potential diplomatic embarrassment if Duran was arrested in connection with the assassination. For one thing, John Kennedy had been following a so-called two-track policy that fall. On the one hand, the CIA was plotting to overthrow Castro in a coup. On the other hand, the U.S. ambassador to the U.N., William Attwood, was secretly exploring rapprochement with Castro through Lechuga. The U.S. wouldn't want to risk exposure of this secret in an interrogation of Duran. The CIA's Thomas Karamessines cabled the station chief in Mexico to stop Duran's arrest although this was not his claimed reason. He testified he feared Duran might reveal the Soviets and/or Cubans were behind the assassination. He said he wanted to buy time before such news hit the press. Documents in the DFS file also suggest that Lechuga himself tried to block the interrogation, but then his reasons may have been more personal.
A final puzzle raised by the interrogation is that Duran seems to deny the romantic relationship with Lechuga. She says they were just friends. But if this is what she was saying, DFS didn't believe it. According to David Slawson, the Commission staff was told the affair was a fact. If the DFS had proof of the affair and if Duran was denying it, much more attention should have been paid to the discrepancy. Was Duran lying to protect Lechuga and her own reputation? Probably. But, if she would lie about that, why believe what she said on the far more significant subject of the assassination of the President of the United States? The DFS did not seem to realize this.
In the end, although the DFS files on Duran don't alter the Warren Commission's narrative of Oswald's actions in Mexico City, they do shed light on the quality and limits of its investigation.
Monday, June 6, 2022
A Second Look at the Files from the National Archives of Mexico - Part I
A second look at the files on the Kennedy assassination at the National Archives of Mexico reveals documents that deserve scrutiny. These will be discussed in a series of posts.
At the outset, it is noted that the two files, one labeled the John Kennedy file and the other the Silvia Duran file, contain duplicates. In some instances, documents in the Kennedy file have redactions while those in the Duran file are reproduced without redactions. Passenger manifests are an example. In addition, the documents that have been made public hint of the existence of others that Mexico has not made public.
This post
deals only with the documents on Vincent
Theodore Lee. He had been the head of the national office of the Fair Play for
Cuba Committee in
Lee is the
subject of documents at pages 31-36 (the handwritten numbers at the bottom
right of the pages) and relate to his trip to
The records
of Lee’s flights from
I don’t know if DFS gave these documents to the CIA or FBI in 1963 although presumably it did. Nor do I know if they are in the JFK collection at the U.S. National Archives. If not, then this is a small example of how other countries may possess documents related to the Kennedy that are not in the National Archives’ collection. (If any reader knows they are in the collection, please leave a comment).
However,
the main takeaway as far as my book Murder, Inc. is concerned is that the FBI
had wrapped up its own report on the assassination on
Tuesday, April 26, 2022
Assassination Records from the National Archives of Mexico
The National Archives of Mexico furnished me these PDFs of two files from the Direccion Federal de Seguridad, DFS or Federal Security Directorate, related to the assassination of President Kennedy. The first is a file labeled John F. Kennedy. I've uploaded it here: John Kennedy file The second is the DFS file on Silvia Duran, a Mexican employed at the Cuban Consulate in Mexico City. I've uploaded it here: Silvia Duran file The documents raise more questions than they answer. The passenger manifests for Eastern Airlines flights from Mexico City to New Orleans on November 23, 1963m are an example. It isn't clear why the DFS connected these with the assassination. Moreover, the names of the passengers are deleted in the John Kennedy file but not in the Silvia Duran file. However, maybe crowdsourcing the documents can produce answers.
A Spanish-speaker has furnished this description of the John Kennedy file:
1. There is no analysis. It's mostly memorandums of interviews of people of interest to the authorities on November 23rd, a few before that day and some after.
2. Memos have many illegible pages, but specially the November 23rd ones read like a ‘round-up the usual suspects’, ask them a set of 39 questions (‘you and who else killed Kennedy, how much were you paid? etc.), and release them with thanks for their time.
3. There are also bus travel manifestos, including the Oswald October 2nd return.
4. There is the 40 page long hand written account of the ‘Protection of the President of the US’ going back to the XIX century which is in the Lee Oswald file that Gus Russo obtained and made public.
5. The files begins with a table with justifications for deletions, and finishes with news paper clips of President Kennedy’s life and obituaries.
Note. The faint typing on many of the documents makes it impossible to use Google Translate for translating the documents. But if you find something of interest, please let me know by commenting.
Sunday, January 30, 2022
Assassination Records at the National Archives of Mexico
Tuesday, June 15, 2021
Letter to Embassy of Mexico for Records
Although Lee Harvey Oswald spent eight days in Mexico two months before President Kennedy's assassination and although the government of Mexico had records of his visit and its own investigation after the assassination, those records have never been made public. The Warren Commission asked but didn't get them. The Assassination Records Review Board asked but didn't get them. Since declassification of the still-classified U.S. records are to be reviewed for release this fall, I decided to ask again for the records from Mexico. Here is my letter:
Attachments: Gilberto Lopez
Sunday, November 29, 2020
A Tribute to Moses Aleman
Moses “Moe”
Aleman passed away on
Moses
Aleman was born in
Moe later
discovered that the FBI was not to his liking and left for a career in security
for the Federal Aviation Administration.
Yet he always remembered that day in November 1963 when he helped
protect the President of the
Because Moe
was such an interesting person and because his life story was so exceptional, I
wanted to write more about him in Murder, Inc., but that would have been
off topic. He made a small but
important contribution to the theme though.
A CIA source in
The CIA asked the FBI to run an investigation in Tampa on him. Moe got the assignment. He was never told the reason for the investigation, however. He first learned that from me. I sent him his old reports, which had been declassified and put in the National Archives collection on Kennedy’s assassination.
Moe’s work is
relevant to my book because the FBI never told the Warren Commission about the
Cuban American, his suspicious travel, or the allegation that he was involved
in the assassination. The Warren Commission never saw Moe’s
reports. These were facts that the CIA
and FBI didn’t want the Warren Commission to have. They didn’t fit with the narrative of Oswald
as acting alone that the Warren Commission planned to lay out to the
public. Did the two agencies act with
the implicit or explicit approval of the White House? Probably.
That is, in plainer terms, the episode suggests a cover up to avoid
disclosing Kennedy’s own attempts to assassinate Fidel Castro. He was, as President Lyndon Johnson would later
say, running a “Murder, Inc. in the
And this brings me to a final reason that Moses Aleman’s story was important to my narrative. He typified most of the FBI and CIA officers I encountered personally or through their reports in researching the book. They were competent and professional. They did not withhold or destroy documents, as some did, or distort disquieting information to protect careers or reputations. Moses Aleman did his duty in the highest traditions of government service.
Saturday, November 21, 2020
Interview on BYU Radio
Marcus Smith did this interview that was aired on BYU Radio on November 6, 2020. The interview is particularly interesting because Mr. Smith had read the book in detail.
Thursday, May 28, 2020
Book Talk
Murder, Inc., Book Talk





