RFK Jr. reveals shocking secrets about A-list celebs and his sex life in explosive diary entries
Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a man known for mingling with political figures and Hollywood stars alike, has had strong and often controversial opinions about the famous faces he's encountered.
His recently uncovered secret diaries reveal candid thoughts on A-listers like Tom Hanks, Bruce Willis, Bill Clinton, and even his own family members.
The diaries, which came to light in 2013 after the death of his second wife, Mary Richardson Kennedy, offer a raw and unfiltered glimpse into the life of the environmental advocate and scion of the Kennedy dynasty.
In an entry from February 2000, Kennedy describes his encounter with Tom Hanks, calling the actor a 'chronic complainer.' He writes, 'I thought the guy was a chronic complainer when he seemed to have the best luck on Earth.'
Despite Hanks' immense success, Kennedy seemed unimpressed by the actor's attitude, which he found less than gracious.
Kennedy also had strong words for former ABC anchor Paula Zahn, whom he met in January 2000. In his diary, he writes, 'TV with Paula Zahn who has always been sweet to me, but turns out to be a right wing zealot or an innocent who has swallowed all the tripe that the GOP propaganda machine produces daily.'
But it's not just celebrities who came under Kennedy's scrutiny. His diaries also reflect his disillusionment with former President Bill Clinton, especially after Clinton pardoned financier Marc Rich in 2001.
Kennedy, once an admirer of Clinton, writes, 'He has sold out all who believed in him for trinkets and whatever else he got for those pardons.'
He also notes his attempts to bring attention to the bombing of Vieques, Puerto Rico, a matter that he felt Clinton's administration neglected.
Kennedy's thoughts on Bruce Willis, which he shared after meeting the actor on a 1999 trip to Los Angeles, are also revealing. He describes Willis as "slim and strong — almost slight" compared to his on-screen tough-guy image.
Kennedy also writes about a conversation with Rob Reiner, who referred to Willis as "a libertarian of sorts and was Republican."
The diaries also document personal moments, including a conversation with Alec Baldwin in which the actor expressed concern about his divorce from Kim Basinger. "He is very worried about their child," Kennedy wrote in an entry from 2001.
Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s family, too, did not escape his candid assessments. He expressed disdain for his cousin Caroline Kennedy's husband, Edwin Schlossberg, calling him a 'financial genius' who mishandled the estate of his late aunt, Jackie Kennedy Onassis.
'He considers himself a financial genius,' Kennedy wrote. 'A textbook example of how not to handle an estate. Not a penny was sheltered.'
Along with these celebrity and political critiques, the diaries also provide insight into Kennedy's personal struggles.
He admitted to being "a slave to wild impulses" and "powerful demons" when it came to his sex life, with coded references to sexual encounters in the diaries.
'The codes corresponded to sexual acts, with 10 meaning intercourse,' revealed a confidant of his late wife, Mary. The diaries detail these personal transgressions alongside descriptions of Kennedy's family life, travel, and environmental activism.
Kennedy's revelations, published by The New York Post, add another layer to his public persona, showing a man caught between fame, politics, and personal turmoil. The diaries, filled with his most private musings, give us a glimpse into the complexities of RFK Jr. as both a public figure and a private man.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Express Tribune
a day ago
- Express Tribune
US judge orders release of pro-Palestinian activist Khalil
Columbia University graduate Mahmoud Khalil speaks to media after being released from immigration custody in Jena, Louisiana, U.S. June 20, 2025. Photo:REUTERS Listen to article Columbia University graduate Mahmoud Khalil walked out of a Louisiana immigrant detention center on Friday, hours after a judge ordered his release, a major victory for rights groups that challenged what they called the Trump administration's unlawful targeting of a pro-Palestinian activist. "Although justice prevailed," he said upon his release in the rural town of Jena, "it's long, very long overdue. And this shouldn't have taken three months." On March 8 Khalil, a prominent figure in pro-Palestinian protests against Israel's war in Gaza, was arrested by immigration agents in the lobby of his university residence in Manhattan. President Donald Trump, a Republican, has called the protests antisemitic and vowed to deport foreign students who took part. Khalil became the first target of this policy. After more than three months unjustly detained by the Trump administration, Mahmoud Khalil is finally free. He can go home, hug his wife, and hold his baby. He never should've been detained. As we celebrate his release, we will never stop working to defend human rights --… — Amnesty International USA (@amnestyusa) June 21, 2025 Protesters, including some Jewish groups, say the government wrongly conflates their criticism of Israeli actions in Gaza with antisemitism and their advocacy for Palestinian rights with support for extremism. After hearing oral arguments from lawyers for Khalil and the Department of Homeland Security, US District Judge Michael Farbiarz of Newark, New Jersey, ordered DHS to release him from custody at a jail for immigrants in rural Louisiana by 6:30 p.m. (2330 GMT) on Friday. Farbiarz said the government had made no attempt to rebut evidence provided by Khalil's lawyers that he was not a flight risk or a danger to the public. "There is at least something to the underlying claim that there is an effort to use the immigration charge here to punish the petitioner," Farbiarz said, referring to Khalil as he ruled from the bench, adding that punishing someone over a civil immigration matter was unconstitutional. Khalil is the latest in a string of foreign pro-Palestinian students arrested in the US since in March who have subsequently been released by judges. They include Mohsen Mahdawi and Rumeysya Ozturk. A legal permanent resident of the US, Khalil says he is being punished for his political speech, in violation of the Constitution's First Amendment. Khalil condemned antisemitism and racism in interviews with CNN and other news outlets last year. 'No one is illegal' Noor Zafar, senior staff attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union, which supported the activist, said: "Today's ruling underscores a vital First Amendment principle: The government cannot abuse immigration law to punish speech it disfavors." The Syrian-born activist plans to return to New York to be with his wife, Dr. Noor Abdalla, and their infant son, who was born during Khalil's 104 days in detention. "This ruling does not begin to address the injustices the Trump administration has brought upon our family, and so many others," Abdalla said in a statement. Mahmoud Khalil is free. May his release lead to the release of all who are detained and incarcerated from the US to Palestine, in ICE facilities and in prisons. And may his courage inspire us to remain steadfast in fighting for Palestinian liberation. — Jewish Voice for Peace (@jvplive) June 21, 2025 "Today we are celebrating Mahmoud coming back to New York to be reunited with our little family and the community that has supported us since the day he was unjustly taken for speaking out for Palestinian freedom." The White House condemned the decision to release Khalil, saying he should be deported for "conduct detrimental to American foreign policy interests" and fraudulently obtaining a student visa. "There is no basis for a local federal judge in New Jersey —who lacks jurisdiction — to order Khalil's release from a detention facility in Louisiana," White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson said in a statement. "We expect to be vindicated on appeal." The immigration proceedings against Khalil continue. Khalil, wearing a keffiyeh and raising his right fist as he approached journalists outside the detention center, condemned what he called the Trump administration's racist immigration policies. He said he was leaving behind hundreds of men housed at the detention center who should not be there. "The Trump administration are doing their best to dehumanize everyone here," he said outside the gates of the facility. "No one is illegal, no human is illegal." Khalil said that his time in detention had changed him. "Once you enter there, you see a different reality," he said. "A different reality about this country that supposedly champions human rights and liberty and justice." Separate charge The Louisiana immigration judge in his case had denied his asylum request on Friday, ruling he could be deported based on the government's allegations of immigration fraud, and denied a bail hearing. Farbiarz's decision rendered the bail request moot. Like others facing deportation, Khalil has avenues to appeal within the immigration system. Farbiarz is also considering Khalil's challenge of his deportation on constitutional grounds, and has blocked officials from deporting Khalil while that challenge plays out. Earlier this month, Farbiarz ruled the government was violating Khalil's free speech rights by detaining him under a little-used law granting the US secretary of state power to seek deportation of non-citizens whose presence in the country was deemed adverse to US foreign policy interests. On June 13, the judge declined to order Khalil's release from a detention center in Jena after Trump's administration said Khalil was being held on a separate charge that he withheld information from his application for permanent residency. Khalil's lawyers deny that allegation and say people are rarely detained on such charges. On June 16, they urged Farbiarz to grant a separate request from their client to be released on bail or be transferred to immigration detention in New Jersey to be closer to his family in New York. At Friday's hearing, Farbiarz said it was "highly unusual" for the government to jail an immigrant accused of omissions in his application for permanent residency. Khalil, 30, became a US permanent resident last year, and his wife and newborn son are US citizens. Trump administration lawyers wrote in a filing on Tuesday that Khalil's request for release should be addressed to the judge overseeing his immigration case, an administrative process over whether he can be deported, rather than to Farbiarz, who is considering whether Khalil's March 8 arrest and subsequent detention were constitutional. Reporting by Jonathan Allen and Luc Cohen in New York; Additional reporting by Kathleen Flynn in Jena, and Andrew Hay and Kanishka Singh, Angela Christy; Editing by Nick Zieminski, David Gregorio and William Mallard
Express Tribune
2 days ago
- Express Tribune
US appeals court rules Trump retains control of California National Guard
demonstrator raises his hand holding flowers as members of the National Guard stand in formation outside a federal building during the No Kings protest against U.S. President Donald Trump's policies, in Los Angeles, California, U.S., June 14, 2025. Photo; REUTERS/ Listen to article A US appeals court let Donald Trump retain control on Thursday of California's National Guard while the state's Democratic governor proceeds with a lawsuit challenging the Republican president's use of the troops to quell protests in Los Angeles. Trump's decision to send troops into Los Angeles prompted a national debate about the use of the military on US soil and inflamed political tension in the country's second most populous city. On Thursday, a three-judge panel of the San Francisco-based 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals extended its pause on US District Judge Charles Breyer's June 12 ruling that Trump had unlawfully called the National Guard into federal service. Trump probably acted within his authority, the panel said, adding that his administration probably complied with the requirement to coordinate with Governor Gavin Newsom, and even if it did not, he had no authority to veto Trump's directive. "And although we hold that the president likely has authority to federalize the National Guard, nothing in our decision addresses the nature of the activities in which the federalized National Guard may engage," it wrote in its opinion. Newsom could still challenge the use of the National Guard and US Marines under other laws, including the bar on using troops in domestic law enforcement, it added. The governor could raise those issues at a court hearing on Friday in front of Breyer, it said. In a post on X after the decision, Newsom vowed to pursue his challenge. This fight doesn't end here. — Gavin Newsom (@GavinNewsom) June 20, 2025 "The president is not a king and is not above the law," he said. "We will press forward with our challenge to President Trump's authoritarian use of US military soldiers against our citizens." Trump hailed the decision in a post on Truth Social. "This is a great decision for our country and we will continue to protect and defend law-abiding Americans," he said. "This is much bigger than Gavin, because all over the United States, if our cities, and our people, need protection, we are the ones to give it to them should state and local police be unable, for whatever reason, to get the job done." Breyer's ruling was issued in a lawsuit against Trump's action brought by Newsom. Breyer ruled that Trump violated a US law governing a president's ability to take control of a state's National Guard by failing to coordinate with the governor. It also found that the conditions set out under the statute to allow this move, such as a rebellion against federal authority, did not exist. Breyer ordered Trump to return control of California's National Guard to Newsom. Hours after Breyer acted, the 9th Circuit panel had put the judge's move on hold temporarily. Amid protests and turmoil in Los Angeles over Trump's immigration raids, the president on June 7 took control of California's National Guard and deployed 4,000 troops against Newsom's wishes. Trump also ordered 700 US Marines to the city after sending in the National Guard. Breyer has not yet ruled on the legality of the Marine Corps mobilization. At a court hearing on Tuesday on whether to extend the pause on Breyer's decision, members of the 9th Circuit panel questioned lawyers for California and the Trump administration on what role, if any, courts should have in reviewing Trump's authority to deploy the troops. The law sets out three conditions by which a president can federalize state National Guard forces, including an invasion, a "rebellion or danger of a rebellion" against the government or a situation in which the U.S. government is unable with regular forces to execute the country's laws. The appeals court said the final condition had probably been met because protesters hurled items at immigration authorities' vehicles, used trash dumpster as battering rams, threw Molotov cocktails and vandalized property, frustrating law enforcement. The Justice Department has said once the president determines that an emergency exists that warrants the use of the National Guard, no court or state governor can review that decision. The appeals court rejected that argument. The protests in Los Angeles ran for more than a week before they ebbed, leading Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass to lift a curfew she had imposed. In its June 9 lawsuit California said Trump's deployment of the National Guard and the Marines violated the state's sovereignty and US laws that forbid federal troops from participating in civilian law enforcement. The Trump administration has denied that troops are engaging in law enforcement, saying they are instead protecting federal buildings and personnel, including US Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers. The 9th Circuit panel is comprised of two judges appointed by Trump during his first term and one appointee of Democratic former President Joe Biden.
Business Recorder
2 days ago
- Business Recorder
Trump to decide on US action in Israel-Iran war within two weeks, White House says
WASHINGTON: President Donald Trump will decide in the next two weeks whether the U.S. will get involved in the Israel-Iran air war, the White House said on Thursday, raising pressure on Tehran to come to the negotiating table. Citing a message from Trump, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters: 'Based on the fact that there's a substantial chance of negotiations that may or may not take place with Iran in the near future, I will make my decision whether or not to go within the next two weeks.' The Republican president has kept the world guessing on his plans, veering from proposing a swift diplomatic solution to suggesting the U.S. might join the fighting on Israel's side. On Wednesday, he said nobody knew what he would do. A day earlier he mused on social media about killing Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, then demanded Iran's unconditional surrender. The threats have caused cracks in Trump's support base between more hawkish traditional Republicans and the party's more isolationist elements. But critics said that in the five months since returning to office, Trump has issued a range of deadlines - including to warring Russia and Ukraine and to other countries in trade tariff negotiations - only to suspend those deadlines or allow them to slide. 'I think going to war with Iran is a terrible idea, but no one believes this 'two weeks' bit,' Democratic Senator Chris Murphy said on the social media platform X. 'He's used it a million times before to pretend he might be doing something he's not. It just makes America look weak and silly.' Leavitt told a regular briefing at the White House that Trump was interested in pursuing a diplomatic solution with Iran, but his top priority was ensuring that Iran could not obtain a nuclear weapon. She said any deal would have to prohibit enrichment of uranium by Tehran and eliminate Iran's ability to achieve a nuclear weapon. 'The president is always interested in a diplomatic solution … if there's a chance for diplomacy, the president's always going to grab it,' Leavitt said. 'But he's not afraid to use strength as well I will add.' Bypassing congress? Leavitt declined to say if Trump would seek congressional authorization for any strikes on Iran. Democrats have raised concerns over reports on CBS and other outlets that Trump has already approved a plan to attack Iran, bypassing Congress, which has the sole power to declare war. Leavitt said U.S. officials remained convinced that Iran had never been closer to obtaining a nuclear weapon, saying it would take Tehran just 'a couple of weeks' to produce such a weapon. Israel-Iran air war enters second week as Europe pushes diplomacy Leavitt's assessment contradicted congressional testimony in March from Trump's intelligence chief, Tulsi Gabbard. She said then that the U.S. intelligence community continued to judge that Tehran was not working on a nuclear warhead. This week, Trump dismissed Gabbard's March testimony, telling reporters: 'I don't care what she said. I think they were very close to having one.' On Wednesday, Trump lieutenant Steve Bannon urged caution about the U.S. joining Israel in trying to destroy Iran's nuclear program. Israel bombed nuclear targets in Iran on Thursday and Iran fired missiles and drones at Israel after hitting an Israeli hospital overnight, as a week-old air war escalated and neither side showed any sign of an exit strategy. Leavitt said Trump had been briefed on the Israeli operation on Thursday and remained in close communication with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. She said Iran was in 'a deeply vulnerable position' and would face grave consequences if it did not agree to halt its work on a nuclear weapon. Iran has been weighing wider options in responding to the biggest security challenge since its 1979 revolution. Three diplomats told Reuters that Trump's special envoy Steve Witkoff and Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi have spoken by phone several times since Israel began its strikes last week.
