The Hill. Powell: Trump tariffs will ‘delay’ progress against inflation

by Tobias Burns - 03/19/25 3:29 PM ET

Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell warned Wednesday that President Trump’s new tariffs will likely make it harder for the central bank to bring prices down.

While Powell did not mention the president by name, he told reporters Tuesday that the Fed is bracing for import taxes to impede its fight against inflation.

“I do think with the arrival of the tariff inflation, further progress may be delayed,” Powell said.

He pointed out that a new Fed economic forecast released Wednesday “doesn’t really show further downward progress on inflation this year, and that’s really due to the tariffs coming in.”

Powell’s comments came after the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC), the Fed panel responsible for setting interest rates, declined to bring down borrowing costs after a two-day meeting in Washington, D.C.

The Fed was widely expected to keep rates steady despite mounting concerns about the state of the economy and the impact of Trump’s trade agenda.

Powell described economic uncertainty as “unusually elevated,” which poses a challenge to the Fed as it attempts to get ahead of potential price increases.

The New York Fed’s survey of consumer expectations recently showed increasing pessimism about households’ financial prospects. The University of Michigan’s benchmark survey of consumer expectations fell off a cliff in February and showed year-ahead inflation expectations increasing to nearly 5 percent in March.

The National Federation of Independent Business survey evinced a similar gloom among small business owners earlier this month.

Inflation as measured by the Labor Department’s consumer price index (CPI) is at a 2.8 percent annual increase, while the Commerce Department’s personal consumption expenditures (PCE) price index is at 2.5 percent.

In their economic models, Fed economists are working to separate out the inflation that’s expected to come from Trump’s tariff policies from the price pressures that are originating elsewhere in the economy. Powell said Wednesday that the labor market is not currently a source of inflation.

“It is going to be very difficult to have a precise assessment of how much of inflation is coming from tariffs and from other [sources],” Powell said. “Goods inflation moved up significantly in the first few months of the year, and trying to track that back to actual tariff increases … is very, very challenging.”

Powell also said that layoffs across the federal government — another major initiative by the Trump administration — are not having a significant effect on the national economy.

“The layoffs that are happening here are certainly meaningful to the people involved and may be meaningful to a particular neighborhood or region or area, but at the national level are not significant yet. But we don’t know. We don’t know yet how far that will go,” Powell said.

Powell warns Trump tariffs may hinder Fed's inflation goals

+++++++++++++

The Hill. Manchin, Romney join board of directors for top budget watchdog

Former Sens. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) and Joe Manchin (I-W.Va.) are joining the board of directors for the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, a prominent Washington, D.C.-based think tank focused on fiscal policy.

Maya MacGuineas, the president of the organization, said in a statement Wednesday that the additions underscore “the committee’s longstanding commitment to fostering bipartisan solutions to our nation’s fiscal decline and working to put forward solutions for America’s elected leaders.”

“Both former senators have been staunch advocates for responsible budgeting, but more than that, they have not shied away from working across the aisle to find solutions that can bridge the ideological divide and get America pointed in the right direction.”

During their time in Congress, both Romney and Manchin, who left the Democratic Party to become an Independent last year, introduced legislation aimed at establishing a fiscal commission to explore ways to tackle the nation’s debt. They were also known for splitting from their parties on legislation due to fiscal concerns.?

“Importantly, both have worked together on common-sense reforms to address our rising debt, including advocacy for trust fund reform to shore up Social Security and Medicare and introducing legislation and leading the effort to establish a fiscal commission to focus on coming up with workable solutions,” MacGuineas said Wednesday.

Romney and Manchin join a list of other widely known political figures like former Ohio Gov. John Kasich (R) and former Sen. Heidi Heitkamp (D-N.D.), as well as Erskine Bowles, as directors on the board.

Romney, Manchin join Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget

+++++++++++++++++++++++++

The Hill. Why Trump’s antitrust agenda could spell trouble for Big Tech

by Julia Shapero - 03/20/25 6:00 AM ET

The Trump administration is moving forward with several Biden-era antitrust lawsuits, policies and positions, signaling a continued focus on aggressive antitrust enforcement that could spell trouble for Big Tech.?

Despite President Trump’s seemingly close relationship with tech leaders in his second term, his administration doesn’t appear keen to let up on antitrust enforcement, which has increasingly taken aim at the industry’s biggest players in recent years.?

“Overall, what we’re seeing is largely continuity between the Biden and Trump antitrust regimes,” said Nidhi Hegde, executive director at the American Economic Liberties Project, a non-profit that advocates for strong antitrust enforcement.?

The Department of Justice (DOJ) indicated earlier this month that it is still seeking a breakup of Google, even after Trump hinted that he might oppose such a move last fall.?

While the then-presidential candidate suggested in October that a breakup was ? “dangerous”?and could stand to benefit China, his DOJ largely maintained the Biden administration’s proposal, which would require Google to divest from its Chrome browser.?

“The Trump DOJ affirming its commitment to the structural breakup of Google, structural remedies, it was a big signal that we are going to see in continuity from one administration to another,” Hegde told The Hill.?

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC), which leads the administration’s antitrust policy alongside the DOJ, also said in February that it would continue to use the merger guidelines established in 2023 under former President Biden. ?

While FTC Chair Andrew Ferguson noted in a letter to agency staff last month that the guidelines are not “perfect,” he said they are largely a “restatement of prior iterations,” emphasizing the importance of stability.?

“Stability across administrations of both parties has thus been the name of the game,” Ferguson said, adding, “I have been asked a number of times about the fate of the 2023 Guidelines now that I am Chairman. I think the clear lesson of history is that we should prize stability and disfavor wholesale.”?

The DOJ also sued to block a merger between Hewlett Packard Enterprise and Juniper Networks shortly after Trump took office. The Biden administration had been preparing a challenge and met with top company officials in November, according to the Wall Street Journal.?

Jon Dubrow, U.S. antitrust lead at law firm McDermott Will & Emery, said in a statement to The Hill that he expected to see “some greater change on the merger review front,” including the administration pulling back from the Biden-era guidelines.?

However, he noted that FTC commissioner Melissa Holyoak and Gail Slater, the newly confirmed head of the DOJ’s antitrust division, have indicated the administration “will be less hostile” to mergers and acquisitions.?

Ferguson also reportedly told major CEOs at a closed-door meeting last week that the FTC does not aim to stand in the way of mergers, seemingly trying to separate himself from former FTC Chair Lina Khan’s hardline stance.?

“If we think conduct or merger is going to hurt Americans economically, I’m taking you to court,” Ferguson said, according to Axios. “But if we don’t, we’ll get the hell out of the way.”?

The antitrust push isn’t entirely unexpected for Trump, whose administration brought several major antitrust cases in his first term.?

The Google case?was initially filed during Trump’s first term. The DOJ sued the tech giant in 2020, accusing it of maintaining an illegal monopoly over online search. A federal judge sided with the government last August.?

Trump’s FTC also brought an antitrust case against Meta, Facebook and Instagram’s parent company, that is set to go to trial in April. ?

Big Tech firms have been a key target of antitrust enforcement under both Trump and Biden, another area of “continuity,” Dubrow noted. ?

The Biden administration followed up on the Trump-era lawsuits with a second Google antitrust case in 2023, in addition to cases against Amazon and Apple.?

However, Dubrow emphasized?that there is more of a “focus on content moderation potentially limiting competition for ideas and free speech” under the current administration.?

Ferguson announced last month that the FTC was launching a probe into large tech firms’ content policies and users bans, suggesting their actions could amount to illegal censorship.?

The heavy scrutiny of the tech industry stands in contrast to Trump’s apparent alignment with Silicon Valley. Tech executives have taken on key roles in his administration, although none are as prominent and controversial as Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk.?

Musk is leading Trump’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), as it seeks to cut large swaths of government spending. So far, this has included major cuts to the federal workforce and federal funding and grants.?

Outside of government, the tech industry has also cozied up to Trump. Numerous tech leaders met with the president at Mar-a-Lago before he took office and gave million-dollar donations to his inauguration. ?

Several tech titans, including Musk, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, Amazon founder Jeff Bezos, Apple CEO Tim Cook and Alphabet CEO Sundar Pichai, joined Trump at his inauguration, receiving prime seats for the swearing-in ceremony.?

Since taking office, Trump and Vice President Vance have both signaled an interest in scaling back regulation in favor of innovation, especially on artificial intelligence (AI), in a key win for tech firms. ?

Just under two months into office, it remains to be seen where antitrust enforcement will end up under Trump. The White House on Tuesday fired the two Democratic commissioners on the FTC, sparking immediate backlash.?

“We have seen this administration take big swings at changing all kinds of policies throughout the government,” Dubrow said.?

“Perhaps their decision not to carve back on the guidelines indicates that the Trump antitrust team will continue more closely to the Biden progressive antitrust agenda than I would have predicted a few months ago,” he continued. “But the proof will be when we see the types of cases this administration brings, or does not bring, over the next year or two.”?

Why Trump’s antitrust agenda could spell trouble for Big Tech

++++++++++++

The Hill. Murkowski: Republicans quiet out of fear ‘they’re going to be taken down’

by Al Weaver - 03/19/25 2:58 PM ET

Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) says that few Senate Republicans are willing to speak out against actions by the Trump administration and Elon Musk because most fear for their political lives.

Murkowski, one of the foremost centrists in the GOP conference, told reporters Tuesday that many of her colleagues are scared of the attacks she and others who have been willing to buck Trump and the party have faced. That is why they are unwilling to take steps that put them out of line and in the crosshairs of Trump supporters and conservatives.?

“I get criticized for what I say, and everybody else is like, ‘How come nobody else is saying anything?’ Well, figure it out, because they’re looking at how many things are being thrown at me, and it’s like, ‘Maybe I should just duck and cover,’” Murkowski said during an appearance at the Alaska State Capitol in Juneau.?

“That’s why you’ve got everybody just zip-lipped, not saying a word because they’re afraid they’re going to be taken down — they’re going to be primaried, they’re going to be given names in the media,” she continued. “We cannot be cowed into not speaking up.”

Murkowski added that she is still trying to figure out how exactly to deal with the Trump White House. She noted she has no plans to speak out against the administration “at every opportunity,” calling that approach “not constructive.”?

She added, though, that she plans to stand up and “stiffen my spine” against both sides of the aisle when needed, even if she draws the ire of Musk, who has moved to slash large swaths of agencies via the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) and his financial might.

“I’m going to have to figure out where I can work with him, and I’m going to have to stiffen my spine and take the slings and arrows when people say, ‘Why aren’t you a better Republican? And if not, get out of the party?’” she said. “Until Alaskans tell me, ‘Lisa — it’s just not working anymore,’ I am going to give you every last breath that I have, and I am going to try to solve every last little problem.”?

“I’m not going to compromise my own integrity by hiding from my words when I feel they need to be spoken. I’m going to take the criticism that comes,” Murkowski continued. “It may be that Elon Musk has decided that he’s going to take the next billion dollars that he makes off of Starlink and put it directly against Lisa Murkowski, and you know what? That may happen.”

Murkowski has largely been supportive of Trump’s Cabinet and administration nominees. The lone one she voted against was Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s selection to lead the Pentagon.?

Murkowski is not up for reelection until 2028. She defeated a fellow Republican in 2022 to win a fourth term in office.

Lisa Murkowski: Senate Republicans fear political backlash

+++++++++++

The Hill. Pence’s advocacy group finds its footing in Trump’s second term

by Emily Brooks - 03/20/25 6:00 AM ET

Former Vice President Mike Pence’s advocacy organization, Advancing American Freedom, is seeking to find the right balance during President Trump’s second term.

So far, it’s made a splash in being one of the few conservative organizations to publicly oppose Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s confirmation, and it’s torn into Trump’s proposed tariffs.?

But at the same time, it doesn’t want to fall into being “Never Trump” – a category that would get it largely dismissed by the bulk of the right.

“It can sound, at times, like it’s adversarial. We don’t intend for it to be adversarial. We intend for it to be entirely independent,” said Tim Chapman, president of Advancing American Freedom. “We intend for it to be something that, when functioning, can really, actually make the administration better.”

I talked to Chapman about that strategic challenge: How do you critique a president with whom the founder had a major falling out (for those who need a reminder: January 6th, Pence’s presidential bid, Pence declining to endorse Trump) — while also maintaining influence among the right in Trump’s Washington??

The headwinds go beyond the personal bad blood between Trump and Pence. Advancing American Freedom is holding to traditional, Reagan-eque conservatism, publicly rejecting populist instincts on economics and trade while being highly skeptical of new alliances with former Democrats.

“We’re obviously in a populist age, and there is a lot about populism on the right that’s being commended and is good. But there’s also parts of the populist right that really are veering from where conservatives have been for so long on issues that are really important, whether they’re national security issues, or whether it’s a strong economy, or even some areas in the in the socially social conservative sphere,” Chapman said.

The majority of other organizations on the right, meanwhile, have either embraced those aspects of Trumpism or kept their critiques to themselves.

“A lot of groups that used to exist as independent, outside entities that kind of advised Republican leadership on conservative policy, have ceased to be those kind of independent, outside entities,” Chapman said. “And a lot of them have adopted a framework more of cheerleading what the administration is doing, no matter what the particular policy is.”

Not Advancing American Freedom. The organization advocated against Kennedy’s confirmation based largely on concerns with how he would handle abortion issues. In one letter to senators, the group called on them to “reject the nomination of any pro-abortion nominees to serve at HHS.”

Last week, it launched a project tracking the status of Trump’s many announced tariffs?— and including the organization’s overwhelmingly critical position on each proposal.

Pence himself has been getting more vocal in pushing back at Trump, too.

Here’s one example: In an swipe at the market downturn reaction to Trump’s tariffs, Pence posted?a screenshot comparing the increase in the S&P 500 in Trump’s first term and its decline in his second term, flaunting that the “Trump-Pence” administration’s economic policies “without broad based Tariffs” encouraged growth – “worked for America before and will again!”

And in a speech in North Palm Beach, Fla. last week, Pence drew a contrast with Trump on sending aid to Ukraine, CBS 12 News reported.

“For me, the decision, ultimately, is grounded in the fact that I have no doubt that if Vladimir Putin overruns Ukraine, it’s only a matter of time before he crosses a border that our men and women in uniform are going to have to go fight him,” Pence said. “We need to continue to stand firm.”

Pence leaned in on building his organization after his presidential run and is focused on being “a constructive part of the dialog,” Chapman said.

But the former vice president’s organization is sure to applaud some efforts of the Trump administration, too.

Last week, it endorsed?a project launched by the Republican Study Committee,?the largest conservative caucus in the House, to codify Trump’s executive actions into law.

Paul Teller, Executive Vice President of Advancing American Freedom and former RSC Executive Director, said in a statement: “Let’s set into statute the great initiatives to shrink spending, kill regulations, and otherwise recede the federal government from the everyday lives of Americans.”

But Chapman sees risks in the Department of Government Efficiency’s (DOGE) extreme government-slashing efforts: “It needs to not only shine a light on the areas where we can get better bang for our buck and where we can cut spending, but then it has to tee those areas up for Congress to act. And I’m worried that it’s doing a great job on the former, but not a very good job on the latter objective yet.”

The “euphoria” of Trump’s new administration, Chapman said, is the political reality right now – but he does not see it as a permanent environment.?

“Just because there’s an unwillingness right now to kind of throw a warning sign on some of these policies from a lot of politicians, does not mean that there is not a need for it from outside entities that have the ability to be independent and to call balls and strikes,” Chapman said. “And so we’re trying to fill that void.”

I’m Emily Brooks, House reporter at The Hill, here with a weekly look at the wider right-wing ecosystem, influences and debates in Washington, D.C. Let me know what you’re about to launch, what is on your calendar, and who is making moves: ebrooks@thehill.com

JFK POSTING FRENZY — Soon after the Trump administration released a dump of files on former President John F. Kennedy’s assassination, a single page from an internal memo went viral in conservative circles on social media. It described a former intelligence agent named Gary Underhill?had allegedly told people that “a small clique within the CIA was responsible for the assassination,” and was later found dead in his apartment in what authorities?deemed a suicide.

A who’s who of conservative media influencers?— Charlie Kirk, Tim Pool, Liz Wheeler, Alex Lorusso, Nick Sortor, Colin Rugg, and more — breathlessly shared the screenshot, even as some admitted they did not understand the context.

The problem? The allegations are nearly 60 years old. The memo was quoting an article from the 1967 issue of Ramparts magazine, and it goes on to detail biographical facts about Underhill and his named friend, arms dealer Samuel Cummings. Redacted?versions of the document were included in previous JFK document dumps, including in 2017 and 2018 under Trump, and 2022 under former President Biden.?

What’s new is that Tuesday’s document dump had a fully unredacted?version of that document revealed new details not about Underhill’s claims, but about Cummings, including that his arms companies were owned by the CIA.

The episode is a classic demonstration, though, of how tidbits of information can quickly go viral and make a major impact in online right spaces, with the personalities rushing to post regardless of the context.

The reaction from Republican officials, meanwhile, has been more guarded. House Oversight Committee Chair James Comer?(R-Ky.) and Rep. Anna Paulina Luna?(R-Fla.), who is leading the panel’s task force on declassifying federal secrets, praised the Trump administration’s release of the files, with Comer saying Trump “has the most transparent administration in history.”

FURTHER READING: The JFK Files are out. Here’s what experts are looking for, from the Washington Post … What’s in the New Kennedy Files? Spies. State Secrets. No Second Gunman, from the New York Times.

THREE MORE THINGS…

1. DAILY WIRE CEO SHUFFLE?— Daily Wire’s Jeremy Boreing will step down from his role as co-CEO “to focus on creative projects for the company,” the company announced. Former Daily Wire breakout star Brett Cooper, who cut ties with the company before starting her own wildly successful YouTube channel in January, posted quite the side-eye meme in response?to the news. The company was valued at $1 billion?in a 2023 capital raising round, Axios previously reported. Also, among the Daily Wire’s fans: Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.), who had the company’s Ben Shapiro?and Matt Walsh?as his guests during Trump’s address to Congress.

• KARI LAKE, the new head of the now-shuttered Voice of America, reportedly “accosted” her former Senate opponent, Sen. Ruben Gallego?(D-Ariz.), at the new private member’s club Ned’s in Washington, D.C. The Bulwark reports?that as Gallego went for a handshake, Lake asked him: “How does it feel to be bought and paid for by the cartels?”

• LAWMAKERS GRAPPLE WITH TRUMP JUDICIARY ANTAGONISM — Republican lawmakers are conflicted over how to respond to Trump’s confrontational standoff with the federal judiciary, which drew a rare public rebuke Tuesday from Chief Justice John Roberts, my colleague?Alex Bolton reports.

Pence’s advocacy group finds its footing in Trump’s second term

+++++++++

The Hill. GOP chairs ‘very concerned’ over report of Trump changing military commands

by Emily Brooks - 03/19/25 6:38 PM ET

The Republican chairs of the House and Senate Armed Services committees issued a joint statement on Wednesday criticizing the idea of the U.S. drastically changing its military combatant command structure, saying they “will not accept” those changes without coordination with Congress and other agencies.

The statement marks one of the first major instances of Republican lawmakers pushing back on President Trump in his second term.?

House Armed Services Committee Chair Mike Rogers (R-Ala.) and Senate Armed Services Committee Chair Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) responded to an NBC News article?published Tuesday that said the Pentagon is considering giving up its role as NATO’s supreme allied commander Europe, or SACEUR as part of restructuring of commands and headquarters.

“U.S. combatant commands are the tip of the American warfighting spear. Therefore, we are very concerned about reports that claim [the Defense Department] is considering unilateral changes on major strategic issues, including significant reductions to U.S. forces stationed abroad, absent coordination with the White House and Congress,” the two chairs said.

“We support President Trump’s efforts to ensure our allies and partners increase their contributions to strengthen our alliance structure, and we support continuing America’s leadership abroad. As such, we will not accept significant changes to our warfighting structure that are made without a rigorous interagency process, coordination with combatant commanders and the Joint Staff, and collaboration with Congress. Such moves risk undermining American deterrence around the globe and detracting from our negotiating positions with America’s adversaries,” Rogers and Wicker said.

The statement indicated that the chairs of the powerful committees, who oversee the crafting of annual military and defense authorization bills, could use the power of the purse and other legislative tools to combat such a change, should the Trump administration move forward with it.

The U.S. has had a four-star general oversee NATO military operations in Europe for 75 years, NBC reported. The current SACEUR, Army Gen. Christopher G. Cavoli, is also the head of U.S. European command and has overseen support to Ukraine.

Updated on March 20 at 5:30 a.m. EDT

Republican chairs oppose NATO command structure changes

+++++++++

NEWSNATION. What JFK files have been released, and what have we learned?

• The thousands of files are difficult to search through
• No concrete evidence of a conspiracy has been found
• There may be more files that are still to be released

Steph Whiteside

Updated: Mar 19, 2025 / 03:06 PM CDT

NewsNation’s?Ross Coulthart?will host a special report, “Declassified: The JFK Assassination,” this Saturday at 8p/7C. Find out how to watch at?NewsNationNow.com.

(NewsNation) — Following up on a promise from President Donald Trump, the National Archives released thousands of documents related to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy.

Many of the documents are handwritten or blurred due to age and difficult to search, so historians and journalists are still pouring through them to uncover new details, but here is what is known so far.

The White House said Tuesday that more documents would be released Wednesday.

JFK files don’t highlight conspiracy theories: Ross Coulthart

What files were released?

Exactly what information is new and what is old is difficult to determine. Investigative journalist Gerald Posner told NewsNation the release was a document dump and a “master class” in how not to release documents.

“They don’t tell you what’s new in them,” he said.

The only way to clearly tell what information is new is to compare the documents to older versions previously released by the National Archives, a laborious process.

The documents also were not classified or sorted in any way, so it could take days to determine what new information was actually released.

Was there a ‘smoking gun?’

So far, there hasn’t been any “smoking gun” that would validate decadesold conspiracies about the assassination, but independent journalist Jefferson Morely told NewsNation the files don’t debunk conspiracies either.

“They undermine the official story that one man alone killed the president for no reason,” Morely said.

NewsNation contributor Ross Coulthart also notes that a document clearly laying out a planned conspiracy is unlikely to exist, and people would be unlikely to admit in no uncertain terms to taking part in one.

“Just because it’s not written down on paper doesn’t mean the evidence doesn’t point to more than one shooter,” Coulthart said.

What are people looking for in the files?

The main conspiracy theories around the Kennedy assassination have centered around the identity or number of the shooters and the motivation behind the shooting.

Many theorize that Lee Harvey Oswald was not the shooter and was set up or that he was one of multiple shooters and will be searching for evidence of that in the files.

People will also be looking for references to the CIA, FBI, Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Mafia, which have all been accused of being behind the assassination, either individually or as part of a larger conspiracy.

Many are also interested in how much intelligence the U.S. or other countries, including Mexico, had on Oswald prior to the shooting.

What has been learned so far?

Coulthart noted the documents also provide a glimpse into the bigger picture of Cold War clandestine actions, including the U.S. being behind the deaths of leaders who were deemed a threat to America’s goal of stopping communism.

Another revelation was the number of CIA agents placed overseas as State Department employees, said to be about 1,500. The CIA has historically used State Department employment as a cover for agents, but a 1961 memo to Kennedy revealed the number was beginning to be seen as a threat to the ability of the agency to control its own policy.

Morely also noted that the documents suggest that CIA surveillance of Oswald prior to the assassination was more extensive than previously known.

Were there redactions?

Announcing the release of the documents, Trump promised no redactions, but that does not appear to have been true.

Posner noted that some redactions include Social Security numbers for still-living individuals.

There are also redactions related to files on the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr. because they are related to information that was sealed by a judge for 50 years. Despite executive orders to release information, those files cannot be made public for another two years.

Will there be more documents?

All the files released have come from the National Archives. A question remains on if or how files from other agencies, including the CIA and FBI, would be made public.

Following Trump’s executive order, the FBI conducted a review and found 2,400 unreleased records relating to the JFK assassination. Those were not included in Tuesday’s drop, and there has been no information on if or when they could be released.

In addition to the Kennedy files, Trump also promised the release of files related to the assassinations of Robert F. Kennedy and Martin Luther King Jr. A release date for those files has not yet been announced.

Will the files shift trust in government?

The files are being released in the name of transparency, but Posner said he doubts they will satisfy those who think the government is hiding something.

The fact that information has been kept secret for so many decades despite public questions about the official narrative may lead people to think incriminating files are still being obscured, he told NewsNation.

“The average person thinks they must have been hiding something to keep them hidden for so long,” Posner said. “So people think maybe they’re destroyed or kept elsewhere in government.”

JFK files: What's new and what have we learned? | NewsNation

++++++