thejfkfiles.com

Tag: HSCA

  • How the CIA Infiltrated the JFK Investigation & Uncovered a Mole

    How the CIA Infiltrated the JFK Investigation & Uncovered a Mole

    The 2025 declassified files reveal that the CIA didn’t just cooperate with the HSCA-they embedded a handler to steer it.

    🚪 Watching the Watchers

    In 1976, after public pressure reignited interest in JFK’s assassination, Congress formed the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) to investigate new leads.

    The public believed this committee would be independent.
    What they didn’t know was that the CIA was already inside the room.

    The newly released files from 2025 confirm:
    George Joannides, a senior CIA officer with ties to anti-Castro exile groups, was quietly placed as the Agency’s liaison to the committee-without revealing his past.

    🕵️‍♂️ George Joannides: The Ghost in the Records

    In 1963, Joannides was the case officer for the DRE (Directorate of Revolutionary Exiles)-the same anti-Castro group that had contact with Oswald in New Orleans.

    But in 1978, when the HSCA began digging into Oswald’s Cuban ties, guess who was sent to “assist” the investigation?

    George. Joannides.

    The committee was never told of his past involvement with the very groups they were probing.

    📁 The 2025 Files Reveal the Deception

    A series of memos and internal CIA routing slips now declassified show:

    • Joannides’ appointment was intentionally crafted to limit the HSCA’s access to sensitive files
    • He was given “selective disclosure” instructions
    • A legal memorandum from CIA counsel reads: “Joannides has operational familiarity with the areas under HSCA inquiry. This can be used to our procedural advantage.”

    📞 Misdirection in Real Time

    The HSCA investigators asked Joannides directly whether any CIA officers had connections to the Cuban exile groups in 1963.

    His answer, according to a 2025 transcript:

    “Not to my knowledge.”

    Which, the new files confirm, was an outright lie.

    🔥 Why It Matters

    The HSCA ultimately concluded there may have been a conspiracy in JFK’s assassination-but the full truth was always out of reach.

    Now we know why.

    One of the CIA’s own was infiltrating the investigation from within, redirecting the flow of information and protecting key operations from exposure.

    🔚 Controlled from Within

    The 2025 documents don’t just prove the CIA hid information from Congress.

    They show that Congress was manipulated in real time-by someone who knew exactly what to hide and how to do it.

    The watchdog was compromised.

    The truth, once again, was managed-not revealed.

  • George Joannides: The CIA Ghost Behind Oswald’s Cuban Connection

    George Joannides: The CIA Ghost Behind Oswald’s Cuban Connection

    The 2025 JFK files confirm that the CIA’s liaison to anti-Castro groups was hiding a direct link to Lee Harvey Oswald-and misled Congress about it.

    🚪 The Handler No One Talked About

    When the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) began investigating JFK’s murder in the late 1970s, the CIA assigned a man named George Joannides to serve as their liaison to the committee.

    What no one knew at the time-what the CIA actively concealed-was that Joannides wasn’t just some bureaucrat.

    He was the officer directly managing a group that had contact with Lee Harvey Oswald months before the assassination.

    And in 2025, we finally got proof that his role was deliberately buried.

    🕵️‍♂️ The Revelation: The DRE, Oswald, and Joannides

    In 1963, Joannides was the CIA case officer handling the Directorio Revolucionario Estudiantil (DRE)-a Cuban exile group funded and directed by U.S. intelligence. This group was involved in anti-Castro propaganda, paramilitary ops, and disinformation campaigns.

    Here’s what the 2025 files confirm:

    • In August 1963, Oswald had a now-infamous street confrontation in New Orleans with members of the DRE.
    • He was handing out pro-Castro “Fair Play for Cuba” pamphlets when a fight broke out.
    • The incident was publicized in local media, and Oswald later appeared on a radio show alongside a DRE member.

    What no one realized at the time:

    The CIA was paying those DRE members.
    And George Joannides was their handler.

    📁 What the CIA Hid

    When Congress reopened the JFK investigation in the 1970s, the CIA could have-and should have-disclosed Joannides’ involvement with the DRE.

    Instead:

    • They brought Joannides out of retirement to act as liaison, without revealing his prior connection.
    • They didn’t tell the HSCA that he had managed the group Oswald clashed with.
    • They refused to turn over internal files on the DRE’s CIA funding and activities.

    The result? Congress was questioning a witness who was actually a key player in the story-and didn’t know it.

    🧩 What the 2025 Files Reveal

    New memos and cables confirm:

    • Joannides’ active role in managing the DRE’s budget, propaganda efforts, and field operations in 1963.
    • His involvement in framing the DRE’s media response to the Oswald encounter.
    • That internal CIA records about Joannides were deliberately withheld from investigators in the ’70s, and again during the 1990s JFK Records Review Board process.

    These weren’t bureaucratic oversights. This was systematic suppression.

    🚨 Why It Matters

    If Oswald’s only connection to Cuban politics was his love of Castro, the official story holds. But these documents show something more complex:

    • He interacted directly with a group run by the CIA-a group that publicly battled him in the press.
    • The CIA then placed the man running that group in charge of shielding information from the government’s investigation.

    And now, with the 2025 documents, that trail is undeniable.

    🔚 Conclusion: The Puppetmaster in the Shadows

    George Joannides isn’t a household name.

    But in the shadows of the JFK assassination, he’s one of the most important players we were never supposed to know about.

    His story raises a brutal question:

    How can we ever trust an investigation when the people controlling the evidence were part of the story themselves?

    The truth wasn’t hidden in plain sight-it was actively buried by the people paid to uncover it.