I testified at a congressional hearing on the JFK files — that was a mistake
'Dear Ms. Alexis Coe: The Task Force on the Declassification of Federal Secrets requests your testimony ...'
It was such a dignified pseudo-summons. I might have framed it, had the actual hearing — unsubtly and inaccurately titled 'The JFK Files: Assessing Over 60 Years of the Federal Government's Obstruction, Obfuscation, and Deception' — not devolved into a bleak farce.
Of course, I was honored to be invited by the House Committee on Oversight and Reform. But I knew the odds weren't in my favor: I was the lone witness called by the minority party, the only historian, the only woman cast in this made-for-YouTube morality play — pitted against Fox News regulars and their pick-me understudies: Reps. Jim Jordan, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Nancy Mace — primed to attack, regardless of the subject matter.
The five witnesses invited by the majority were all alive in 1963, decades before I was born. Over time, their theories appear to have hardened like volcanic glass and, for apparent true believers, were just as impervious to fact. Our written statements diverged starkly — though mine was conspicuously absent from the hearing's website for 36 hours, posted only after a special request.
Still, hope — or perhaps hubris — lingered in my historian's heart. I truly didn't realize I was more decoy than foil until I took the oath.
After that, it was undeniable: Congress is dominated by deeply unserious people wielding serious power.
Most members didn't even bother to show up. Rep. Robert Garcia of California was the lone Democrat on the dais; a handful of Republicans sat spaced out in the raised committee seats, dwarfed by the empty expanse around them.
The few questions posed were lazy and largely rhetorical. Rep. Mace, of South Carolina, breezed in long enough to barrel through a brief tirade about government secrecy before demanding 'Was this a cover-up, yes or no?' — of everyone but me.
Between the members and the witnesses loomed a screen with a remote witness; he struggled to stay upright and awake. But he wasn't the main image. That distinction belonged to a grinning Tucker Carlson — patron saint of Republican grievance — front and center in a bizarre group photo that lingered for half the hearing. It wasn't an official slide; it was just a juvenile, irrelevant flex from a staffer.
I wished I'd been allowed to make corrections throughout the hearing. The first witness — a long-retired dentist who had been a young resident in the Dallas emergency room where President John F. Kennedy died — set the tone. His testimony blended medical minutiae with conspiracy: Then-Vice President Lyndon B. Johnson, he claimed, was too calm to be innocent.
They understood archives the way toddlers understand taxes: not at all, and mostly through tantrum. They dismissed Ambassador Caroline Kennedy's actual record of transparency and early release — she's shared documents related to her assassinated father, said yes to countless research requests and generally bent over backward for historians. The majority's witnesses never used her honorific. Never mind that nothing substantial had surfaced since the last release of archival material related to the JFK assassination. They felt entitled to more, more, more.
The committee's chairwoman, Rep. Anna Paulina Luna of Florida, reveled in it. She waxed rhapsodic about how Donald Trump was the most transparent president ever, threatened to shake down Russia for documents and cast American archivists as CIA co-conspirators.
None of that is true, but I take particular umbrage at the many attacks government-employed librarians faced during the hearing. Of course, none were present to explain how they are overworked, underfunded and operating within a gutted system increasingly strained by political interference. Yet they embody everything government should be: ethical, methodical, devoted to public service. I know this because their work enables my own.
Rep. Luna didn't want to hear that. No Republican did. To serve their points, they'd cherry-pick my quotes to weaponize and flatten — sometimes referring to me as 'the historian' or 'Coo,' a new-to-me mispronunciation of my last name.
Garcia asked me one question. I used the time I had to fact-check and, since I clearly couldn't beat 'em, tried to join them: If we all agreed that the CIA behaved badly in the 1960s — like J. Edgar Hoover's obsessive surveillance and sabotage of Martin Luther King Jr. — why not give the upcoming MLK release the same scrutiny?
That's when Rep. Garcia — the lone Democrat on the dais — claimed to agree but cut me off and promptly left the hearing to his conservative colleagues.
Fortunately, I'd pregamed with a thorough statement they absolutely hated. I reminded them of the exquisite irony — they mark their own papers private — and that history has consistently taken a dim view of enablers who shield demagogues from accountability, excuse their abuses and help consolidate their power. I did mean to inspire: The last time a demagogue held this much sway in Congress, it ended in censure. At the time, a young senator saw the way the wind was blowing — and stepped out in front of it. His name was John F. Kennedy. The other guy? Joseph McCarthy.
After the hearing, a few staffers apologized. Mostly, though, I faced a lot of people's backs. When an actual archivist appeared, Luna introduced him to every witness except me.
By that time, the feeling was mutual. I preferred the conspiracy theorists, too. At least they believed in something.
So do I. Everything I do, including testifying, is an expression of my patriotism. I'm still down for the American Experiment — but I'm convinced the 119th Congress will do nothing to protect it. Its performance will end soon enough, but the damage won't.
This article was originally published on MSNBC.com
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsweek
26 minutes ago
- Newsweek
War Powers Act Explained as Thomas Massie, Ro Khanna Push House Resolution
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. A bipartisan group of House lawmakers, led by Republican Representative Thomas Massie of Kentucky and Democratic Representative Ro Khanna of California introduced a War Powers Resolution Tuesday, just days before President Donald Trump authorized a military strike on three key nuclear facilities in Iran. The War Powers Resolution of 1973 was enacted to limit the president's ability to commit U.S. armed forces to hostilities abroad without Congressional consent. The current legislative push invokes the act's provisions and highlights persistent congressional frustration over what many see as executive overreach in the deployment of military force. Khanna called for Congress to return to Washington, D.C., to vote on the measure, which he said Sunday had up to 50 co-sponsors across both parties. Why It Matters The House resolution spotlights a critical debate over constitutional war powers at a moment when U.S. involvement in Middle Eastern conflicts risks escalation. Lawmakers are seeking to reinforce Congress's authority to declare war amid rising tensions between Iran and Israel and amid U.S. military actions that, according to critics, may exceed presidential powers. The House initiative mirrors concurrent moves in the Senate, where Democratic Virginia Senator Tim Kaine and others have advanced parallel resolutions to restrict executive military action in Iran without legislative consent. This legislative surge reflects mounting concerns about the scope and legality of recent U.S. military activity abroad. United States Capitol Building, Washington DC, October 27, 2024. United States Capitol Building, Washington DC, October 27, 2024. Getty What To Know Massie introduced the War Powers Resolution on Tuesday, emphasizing that the U.S. Constitution vests the power to declare war with Congress, not the President. Massie invited participation from lawmakers across the aisle, underscoring bipartisan concern about unauthorized military actions, Newsweek previously reported. Khanna quickly co-sponsored the measure and publicly called for Congress to reconvene and vote. "Stopping Iran from having a nuclear bomb is a top priority, but dragging the U.S. into another Middle East war is not the solution," Khanna said in a press release. "Trump's strikes are unconstitutional and put Americans, especially our troops, at risk," Khanna said. "Congress needs to come back to DC immediately to vote on Rep. Thomas Massie and my bipartisan War Powers Resolution to ensure there is no further conflict and escalation." "Americans want diplomacy, not more costly wars. We need to deescalate and pursue a path of peace," Rep. Khanna concluded. The resolution has garnered support from 50 House members, including Representatives Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Rashida Tlaib, and Pramila Jayapal. The list remains heavily Democrat, though more Republicans may break with the party in the coming days as the aftermath of Trump's military strikes continue to play out. What People Are Saying Rep. Ro Khanna, Democrat of California, said in an official statement "Stopping Iran from having a nuclear bomb is a top priority, but dragging the U.S. into another Middle East war is not the solution. Trump's strikes are unconstitutional and put Americans, especially our troops, at risk. Congress needs to come back to DC immediately to vote on Rep. Thomas Massie and my bipartisan War Powers Resolution to ensure there is no further conflict and escalation. Americans want diplomacy, not more costly wars. We need to deescalate and pursue a path of peace." President Donald Trump wrote in a Truth Social post, in part: "Congressman Thomas Massie of Kentucky is not MAGA, even though he likes to say he is. Actually, MAGA doesn't want him, doesn't know him, and doesn't respect him. He is a negative force who almost always Votes "NO," no matter how good something may be. He's a simple minded "grandstander" who thinks it's good politics for Iran to have the highest level Nuclear weapon, while at the same time yelling "DEATH TO AMERICA" at every chance they get." What Happens Next The House War Powers Resolution is scheduled for a mandatory floor vote within 15 days under the chamber's rules. Parallel debates are ongoing in the Senate. As U.S. lawmakers weigh the resolution, the outcome may set new precedents for executive military authority and the balance of war powers between Congress and the White House.
Newsweek
36 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Map Shows US Military Presence in Middle East as Iran Weighs Retaliation
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Following U.S. airstrikes on three nuclear facilities in Iran on Saturday night, the Islamic Republic is weighing its response, which, among other options, could include targeting American assets in the region. Iranian Foreign Minister Seyed Abbas Araghchi on Sunday condemned the strikes, warning they would have "everlasting consequences," and said Iran reserves "all options to defend its sovereignty, interests and people." Why It Matters Tehran's reaction to the U.S. bombing and joining Israel in its war against Iran, will be critical for determining whether it leads to a major regional or international conflict. Its options are widely considered to include retaliation against U.S. forces in the region as well as choking a major global oil supply route, the Strait of Hormuz. Trump on Saturday evening announced what he described as a "very successful attack" against three Iranian nuclear sites at Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan The president's decision came after Israel and Iran have exchanged consistent strikes since June 13. Israel had urged the U.S. to target Iran's nuclear facilities, saying Tehran was moving close to creating a nuclear weapon. Iran maintains its nuclear program is for civilian purposes—not for weapons. The U.S. is Israel's closest ally and provides billions of dollars in military aid each year. The strikes, meanwhile, have also sparked concerns from some Democrats and some Republicans about a wider war breaking out—with some lawmakers accusing the president of violating the U.S. Constitution with the strikes. Elsewhere in the Middle East, the U.S. maintains some strategic military bases, as well as partnerships and temporary presence across several countries. What To Know Called "Operation Midnight Hammer," Saturday's strikes on the three Iranian nuclear sites mark the first direct involvement of America in the escalating war between Iran and Israel. The U.S. dropped over dozen Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOP) bombs, using its stealth B-2 bombers to strike Fordow. President Donald Trump has warned of further military action if Iran does not now pursue peace. He had previously threatened to attack if Iran did not agree through negotiations to curb its nuclear program, which the U.S. and Israel say is aimed at building nuclear weapons—something Iran denies. Israel welcomed and applauded Trump's involvement. Over the past two decades, the U.S. military has maintained a significant presence across the Middle East, with major operations in Afghanistan and Iraq and deployments throughout the region for training, counterterrorism, and strategic support. While several countries support U.S. military operations through personnel transfers and joint activities, the U.S. also maintains larger, formal military bases in Bahrain, Djibouti and Qatar. In addition, the U.S. has bases in Turkey. In addition, there are a number of embassies in the region, notably none in Iran, Syria, and Yemen. Shahram Akbarzadeh, director of the Middle East Studies Forum of Australia's Deakin University, told Reuters following the strikes that the U.S. "has made itself a legitimate target of Iranian retaliation." Military personnel and equipment have been moving into the region over the past few days, with reports of the U.S. sending largest military aircraft in the world, C-5m Super Galaxy, to Saudi Arabia. Multiple destroyers are positioned in the nearby seas. The Pentagon declined to provide any comment to Newsweek. In this Sunday, Jan. 24, 2016 file photo, Iraqi soldiers participate in a training exercise with American and Spanish trainers, which includes live ammunition, at Basmaya base, 40 kilometers southeast of Baghdad, Iraq. In this Sunday, Jan. 24, 2016 file photo, Iraqi soldiers participate in a training exercise with American and Spanish trainers, which includes live ammunition, at Basmaya base, 40 kilometers southeast of Baghdad, Iraq. AP Photo/Karim Kadim What People Are Saying President Donald Trump: "Iran's key nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated. Iran, the bully of the Middle East, must now make peace." He added: "Remember, there are many targets left. Tonight was the most difficult of them all, by far, and perhaps the most lethal." Iranian Foreign Ministry on Sunday: "The war-mongering and lawless regime of the United States of America is held fully responsible for the dangerous consequences and far-reaching implications of this egregious act of aggression and heinous crime." The Atomic Energy Organization of Iran (AEOI): "It is unfortunate that this action—clearly against international law—has taken place with the indifference and, in some cases, complicity of the International Atomic Energy Agency. The Atomic Energy Organization of Iran assures the noble Iranian nation that, despite the enemies' evil conspiracies, it will not allow the peaceful development of this national industry—born from the blood of nuclear martyrs—to be derailed." What Happens Next? Iran, led by Supreme Leader Ali Ayatollah Khamenei, must decide on the country's response, ranging from possible retaliation to negotiations. The Iranian Parliament has voted to in support of closing the Strait of Hormuz, one of the world's most critical oil transit chokepoints, according to media reports. Any final decision on retaliation, however, is up to Khamenei.
Miami Herald
an hour ago
- Miami Herald
Full List of Congress Members Backing War Powers Resolution Against Trump
Representatives Thomas Massie, a Kentucky Republican, and Ro Khanna, a California Democrat, introduced a bipartisan House resolution last week in a bid to curb President Donald Trump's ability to escalate tensions with Iran. After the U.S. military carried out strikes on three Iranian nuclear sites on Saturday, Massie told CNN that he believed the resolution would have enough co-sponsors to "be able to force a vote unless [House Speaker Mike] Johnson pulls some shenanigans." Trump on Saturday evening announced what he described as a "very successful attack" against three Iranian nuclear sites at Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan The president's decision came after Israel and Iran have exchanged consistent strikes since June 13. Israel had urged the U.S. to target Iran's nuclear facilities, saying that Tehran was moving close to creating a nuclear weapon. Iran maintains that its nuclear program is for civilian purposes—not for weapons. The strikes have sparked concerns from some Democrats and some Republicans about a wider war breaking out—with some lawmakers accusing the president of violating the U.S. Constitution with the strikes. Massie and Khanna introduced their War Powers Resolution in an effort to prohibit U.S. military involvement in Iran last Tuesday, amid the backdrop of escalating tensions with Iran. "The Constitution does not permit the executive branch to unilaterally commit an act of war against a sovereign nation that hasn't attacked the United States," Massie said in a press release announcing the resolution. "Congress has the sole power to declare war against Iran. The ongoing war between Israel and Iran is not our war. Even if it were, Congress must decide such matters according to our Constitution." Khanna shared similar concerns in a statement emailed to Newsweek on Sunday after the strikes on Iran moved forward. "Stopping Iran from having a nuclear bomb is a top priority, but dragging the U.S. into another Middle East war is not the solution. Trump's strikes are unconstitutional and put Americans, especially our troops, at risk," the congressman said. "Congress needs to come back to DC immediately to vote on Rep. Thomas Massie and my bipartisan War Powers Resolution to ensure there is no further conflict and escalation." Senator Tim Kaine, a Virginia Democrat, introduced companion legislation to the House resolution the day before his House colleagues. "It is not in our national security interest to get into a war with Iran unless that war is absolutely necessary to defend the United States. I am deeply concerned that the recent escalation of hostilities between Israel and Iran could quickly pull the United States into another endless conflict," the senator said in a press release. Representative Ro Khanna, a California DemocratRepresentative Thomas Massie, a Kentucky RepublicanRepresentative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a New York DemocratRepresentative Val Hoyle, an Oregon DemocratRepresentative Rashida Tlaib, a Michigan DemocratRepresentative Pramila Jayapal, a Washington DemocratRepresentative Donald Beyer, a Virginia DemocratRepresentative Lloyd Doggett, a Texas DemocratRepresentative Greg Casar, a Texas DemocratRepresentative Ayanna Pressley, a Massachusetts DemocratRepresentative Delia Ramirez, an Illinois DemocratRepresentative Summer Lee, a Pennsylvania DemocratRepresentative Ilhan Omar, a Minnesota DemocratRepresentative Jesus "Chuy" Garcia, an Illinois DemocratRepresentative Nydia Velazquez, a New York DemocratRepresentative James McGovern, a Massachusetts DemocratRepresentative Chellie Pingree, a Maine DemocratRepresentative Mark Pocan, a Wisconsin DemocratRepresentative Veronica Escobar, a Texas DemocratRepresentative Paul Tonko, a New York DemocratRepresentative Becca Balint, a Vermont DemocratRepresentative Bonnie Watson Coleman, a New Jersey DemocratRepresentative Henry "Hank" Johnson, a Georgia DemocratDelegate Eleanor Holmes Norton, a Washington, D.C., DemocratRepresentative Sara Jacobs, a California DemocratRepresentative Janice Schakowsky, an Illinois DemocratRepresentative Lateefah Simon, a California DemocratRepresentative Christopher Deluzio, a Pennsylvania DemocratRepresentative Gwen Moore, a Wisconsin DemocratRepresentative Mike Thompson, a California DemocratRepresentative Yassamin Ansari, an Arizona DemocratRepresentative Bennie Thompson, a Mississippi DemocratRepresentative Luis Correa, a California DemocratRepresentative Betty McCollum, a Minnesota DemocratRepresentative Marcy Kaptur, an Ohio DemocratRepresentative Mark DeSaulnier, a California DemocratRepresentative Stephen Lynch, a Massachusetts DemocratRepresentative Andre Carson, an Indiana DemocratRepresentative Mary Gay Scanlon, a Pennsylvania DemocratRepresentative Joaquin Castro, a Texas DemocratRepresentative Maxwell Frost, a Florida DemocratRepresentative Al Green, a Texas DemocratRepresentative Debbie Dingell, a Michigan DemocratRepresentative Jamie Raskin, a Maryland DemocratRepresentative Melanie Stansbury, a New Mexico DemocratRepresentative Sylvia Garcia, a Texas DemocratRepresentative Teresa Leger Fernandez, a New Mexico DemocratRepresentative Diana DeGette, a Colorado DemocratSenator Tim Kaine, a Virginia Democrat Jennifer Kavanagh, senior fellow and director of military analysis at Defense Priorities told Newsweek: "Iran has several options when it comes to retaliation, but will need to weigh them carefully. A stronger response may be useful for signaling Tehran's continuing resolve to internal and external audiences but it could also bring further U.S. military action and deeper U.S. involvement. Iran could target U.S. military bases and personnel in the Middle East." President Donald Trump on Truth Social on Saturday evening: "ANY RETALIATION BY IRAN AGAINST THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA WILL BE MET WITH FORCE FAR GREATER THAN WHAT WAS WITNESSED TONIGHT. THANK YOU!" Iranian Foreign Minister Seyed Abbas Araghchi wrote on X, formerly Twitter, on Sunday: "The United States, a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council, has committed a grave violation of the UN Charter, international law and the NPT by attacking Iran's peaceful nuclear installations. The events this morning are outrageous and will have everlasting consequences. Each and every member of the UN must be alarmed over this extremely dangerous, lawless and criminal behavior. In accordance with the UN Charter and its provisions allowing a legitimate response in self-defense, Iran reserves all options to defend its sovereignty, interest, and people." Iran's foreign minister said after the attack that his country reserves "all options to defend its sovereignty." The U.S. military is preemptively preparing for any attack from Tehran in response. It's unclear whether the War Powers Resolution sponsored by Khanna and Massie, which aims to curb Trump's ability to take military action against Iran, will move forward in the House. However, with Republican control of both chambers of Congress, it is not widely expected to succeed. Related Articles Video of Bernie Sanders Reacting to Trump's Iran Strike Live Goes ViralJD Vance Issues Warning on Trump Admin's 'Biggest Red Line' for IranPutin Ally Says Countries Now Ready to Supply Iran With Nuclear Weapons'Operation Midnight Hammer': What We Know About the Iran Strikes 2025 NEWSWEEK DIGITAL LLC.
