New files show connection between CIA and Lee Harvey Oswald

Newly released documents are peeling back layers of secrecy surrounding the CIA’s murky ties to Lee Harvey Oswald before the tragic assassination of President John F. Kennedy on November 22, 1963.

Newsmax reported that a House Oversight Committee task force has unearthed files suggesting the CIA knew far more about Oswald than they’ve admitted for over six decades, raising serious questions about transparency and possible cover-ups.

Let’s rewind to the early 1960s, when the CIA, despite rules against domestic spying, had agent George Joannides stationed in Miami, managing anti-Castro propaganda and guiding a group of Cuban students opposed to Fidel Castro.

This group, known as the Directorio Revolucionario Estudiantil (DRE), clashed physically with Oswald just months before Kennedy’s death. Oswald, a known supporter of Castro’s regime, was on their radar.

Uncovering Hidden Ties to Anti-Castro Groups

Here’s where it gets sticky: DRE members knew of Oswald’s pro-Castro stance and even reported that he offered to infiltrate his own group, the Fair Play for Cuba Committee, possibly as a double agent. The DRE kept their CIA handler, referred to as “Howard,” in the loop on all activities. If the agency claims ignorance, how do they explain this cozy relationship?

Fast forward to 1964, when the Warren Commission concluded Oswald acted alone in Kennedy’s assassination—a finding many have questioned ever since.

The CIA doubled down, insisting they had no involvement or prior knowledge of any plot. Sounds like a convenient story, doesn’t it?

By 1976, the House Select Committee on Assassinations revisited the case, determining there was likely a conspiracy involving Oswald, though they couldn’t pinpoint the other players. That’s a far cry from the lone-gunman narrative. Why the discrepancy, and what was being hidden?

Enter the 1990s, when the CIA told the Assassination Records Review Board they had no records on anyone named “Howard,” dismissing the alias as a mere routing indicator.

Yet, recent documents from Joannides’ own file reveal he used the false name “Howard Mark Gebler” on a driver’s license. That’s not just a clerical error; that’s deliberate obfuscation.

In a twist of irony, the CIA awarded Joannides a career commendation medal in 1981 for his work with Cuban exile groups and even for liaising with the House Assassinations Committee. Praising someone for stonewalling an investigation? That’s the kind of bureaucratic audacity that makes taxpayers cringe.

Chairwoman Anna Paulina Luna, R-Fla., didn’t mince words on this: “This confirms much of what the public already speculated: that the CIA was lying to the American people, and that there was a cover-up.” She’s not wrong—decades of denials are crumbling under the weight of these files. When trust in institutions is already shaky, this kind of secrecy fuels the fire.

Public Deserves Answers, Not Excuses

Researcher Jefferson Morley, a longtime voice on the Kennedy case, added, “It’s a breakthrough, and there’s more to come.”

He’s spot on to demand the government explain itself, especially when the burden of proof now lies with them. Why should Americans accept vague excuses when hard evidence suggests otherwise?

Let’s be clear: these documents don’t prove the CIA orchestrated Kennedy’s murder. They do, however, expose a troubling pattern of withheld information and questionable dealings with groups tied to Oswald. That alone warrants skepticism of the official narrative.

Thanks to executive orders from President Donald Trump pushing for the release of assassination files, this task force was formed to dig into federal secrets.

Their work, led by Luna, forced the CIA to comb its archives, revealing Joannides’ alias and role as deputy chief of psychological warfare in Miami. It’s a start, but only a start.

For too long, the public has been fed a sanitized version of history while critical details were buried under claims of national security. If the CIA truly had nothing to hide, why the aliases, the denials, and the missing records? Americans deserve straight answers, not bureaucratic smoke and mirrors.