How this woman believes this to be a good idea is beyond me. Is it deliberate or is she really that many fruit loops short of a box? Can we please try to let the libs have a monopoly on political stupidity without tripping over our own feet? I know she's hardly representative of the majority but, good grief. Immediate upload without review after being provided the docs directly by the Russian ambassador. Sure. Why not?

My office just received word from the @RusEmbUSA that the ambassador from Russia to the United States will be hand delivering the @GovernmentRF’s findings on who assassinated JFK to my office.

This is a 350 page document.

We will be uploading these documents as soon as we…

— Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (@RepLuna) October 14, 2025

"My office just received word from the @RusEmbUSA that the ambassador from Russia to the United States will be hand delivering the @GovernmentRF's findings on who assassinated JFK to my office.

This is a 350 page document.

We will be uploading these documents as soon as we receive them working with @jeffersonmorley to ensure that the American people have direct access to them immediately.

It is important to note that Congress attempted to obtain these files in the 90's and was denied. We have been given access to them now for the first time in history."

Who cares she's hot and on the right.

Why would we want our government to memory hole whatever infonthe Russians are giving us about JFK? This might be BS but why keep their claims a secret?

Bob Knights Liver said:

---

Why would we want our government to memory hole whatever infonthe Russians are giving us about JFK? This might be BS but why keep their claims a secret?

---

Didn't say it should be kept a secret. But the way it's being done, without apparent review or validation, is stupid. I'm sure that everything that the Russian ambassador has decided to give directly to Anna Paulina, of all people, is super legit.

But, whatever. Kinda thought we had a higher standard for common sense but if not, it is what it is.

Bob Knights Liver said:

---

Why would we want our government to memory hole whatever infonthe Russians are giving us about JFK? This might be BS but why keep their claims a secret?

---

I like you. Am trying to figure out why I should be upset by this.

Rossticus said:

---

Bob Knights Liver said:

---

Why would we want our government to memory hole whatever infonthe Russians are giving us about JFK? This might be BS but why keep their claims a secret?

---

Didn't say it should be kept a secret. But the way it's being done, without apparent review or validation, is stupid. I'm sure that everything that the Russian ambassador has decided to give directly to Anna Paulina, of all people, is super legit.

But, whatever. Kinda thought we had a higher standard for common sense but if not, it is what it is.

---

While you likely have a point, the government only has themselves to blame for things like this. If they would be open and honest with the American people, you wouldn't have circus sideshows like this happening. Or if you did, people wouldn't give them the time of day.

Remember when we had an actual laptop that 50+ intelligence officers knowingly discredited as "Russian disinformation" all to help their political candidate of choice? I'm sure their review of these documents would be just as trustworthy.

In before the Democrats say the Russian documents prove that Trump was the second shooter on the grassy knoll!

YellAg2004 said:

---

Rossticus said:

---

Bob Knights Liver said:

---

Why would we want our government to memory hole whatever infonthe Russians are giving us about JFK? This might be BS but why keep their claims a secret?

---

Didn't say it should be kept a secret. But the way it's being done, without apparent review or validation, is stupid. I'm sure that everything that the Russian ambassador has decided to give directly to Anna Paulina, of all people, is super legit.

But, whatever. Kinda thought we had a higher standard for common sense but if not, it is what it is.

---

While you likely have a point, the government only has themselves to blame for things like this. If they would be open and honest with the American people, you wouldn't have circus sideshows like this happening. Or if you did, people wouldn't give them the time of day.

Remember when we had an actual laptop that 50+ intelligence officers knowingly discredited as "Russian disinformation" all to help their political candidate of choice? I'm sure their review of these documents would be just as trustworthy.

---

I'd hope that the Trump admin has managed to successfully establish at least a basic foundation for trustworthy intelligence that it can depend on for given tasks. But, to your point, if that's not the case then it wouldn't really matter.

Still, given the current incentive Russia has to eff with the US and create discord I'd prefer not to allow them an in. Whatever they're up to, this isn't being done out of consideration for the American citizenry or towards the benefit of the US.

Yes!

These will be great documents to have when she has the Warren Commission members under oath!

Rep. Luna appears to suggest that she intends to bring in members of the Warren Commission as part of her JFK investigation pic.twitter.com/9oLjt9rqlJ

— Acyn (@Acyn) February 11, 2025

LMFAO

At this point, people just need to let it go. We have been told so many different stories on the assassination that who can believe anything anymore.

We all know who did it.

Apollo79 said:

---

Who cares she's hot and on the right.

---

There are rules around here

Florida Rep. Anna Paulina Luna speaks out after years-old footage of MAGA swimsuit goes viral https://t.co/IFN0QV34a6 pic.twitter.com/iGSJOI93cK

— New York Post (@nypost) August 15, 2024

The algorithm rewards the outlandish.

My rep never gets attention, but he doesn't need it.

I'm with you on the unprofessional behavior from pur leaders, like the instagram style photoshoot for Epstein binders. I feel like that's been going on for several years now.

Colonel Kurtz said:

---

We all know who did it.

---

Well, it wasn't Oswald.
He only played a part in it.

I'm not really understanding why you're upset about this? If there's information that could come out why not at least look at them.

If they're bunk, then they're bunk.

Seems to be where modern culture is trending, and leadership is following suit instead of setting examples. I guess I'm just getting old and crotchety.

annie88 said:

---

I'm not really understanding why you're upset about this? If there's information that could come out why not at least look at them.

If they're bunk, then they're bunk.

---

My main gripe is that it's basically going straight from Russia, to being made publicly available online, via a US rep, without any analysis, research, vetting. I'd rather this go through someone in the Trump administration via a less sensational and half-assed process. Ask yourself why Russia is suddenly volunteering this? And via Anna Paulina? It just feels off.

350 pages to give us "the name of who did it"?

Something tells me this will be just another theory and claims and quasi-conclusion.

Ghost91 said:

---

350 pages to give us "the name of who did it"?

Something tells me this will be just another theory and claims and quasi-conclusion.

---

It's a very long name

Rossticus said:

---

annie88 said:

---

I'm not really understanding why you're upset about this? If there's information that could come out why not at least look at them.

If they're bunk, then they're bunk.

---

My main gripe is that it's basically going straight from Russia, to being made publicly available online, via a US rep, without any analysis, research, vetting. I'd rather this go through someone in the Trump administration via a less sensational and half-assed process. Ask yourself why Russia is suddenly volunteering this? And via Anna Paulina? It just feels off.

---

Russia isn't suddenly volunteering this. It was offered to past administrations and deals with their research into Oswald when he was in the Soviet Union. The reason it's being delivered to Paulina is that she leads the House Oversight Committees's Task Force on the Declassification of Federal Secrets

I guess what I meant was, why are they suddenly volunteering it AGAIN, in the midst of a particularly contentious period between the US and Russia? Why so persistent, and why have past administrations, including Trump's first, turned them down? What's their interest in continuing to try and push this, and why are we now interested after previously not being interested in what they're selling?

My suspicion is that past administrations weren't interested because the people involved in whatever happened to JFK were still involved in the agencies. If there is dirty laundry, they wouldn't want it aired.

And specifically with Trump in his 1st term, he allowed a lot of those same people to make recommendations for cabinet/staff. It was a giant part of his undoing. He's gone about it completely differently this time.

Rossticus said:

---

annie88 said:

---

I'm not really understanding why you're upset about this? If there's information that could come out why not at least look at them.

If they're bunk, then they're bunk.

---

My main gripe is that it's basically going straight from Russia, to being made publicly available online, via a US rep, without any analysis, research, vetting. I'd rather this go through someone in the Trump administration via a less sensational and half-assed process. Ask yourself why Russia is suddenly volunteering this? And via Anna Paulina? It just feels off.

---

Who do you want doing the "analysis, research, vetting?" And for heaven's sakes, WHY? Its raw data. It may have some validity, and may not. Let's all see it and decide for ourselves.

Giving it to a bureaucrat is far more sensationalizing than releasing it to the public and letting it stand or fall on its own. There's absolutely NOTHING here to have a gripe about unless you're worried about what's in it and don't want that to get out.

Bob Knights Liver said:

---

Why would we want our government to memory hole whatever infonthe Russians are giving us about JFK? This might be BS but why keep their claims a secret?

---

They must have found the front pew in St. Michael's Church, Fort Walton, Kansas.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EaCOn_PWsAAMx_o?format=jpg&name=large

The second shooter has been identified as Gracie Knoll.

OP - what are you afraid of?

mjschiller said:

---

OP - what are you afraid of?

---

I get it. Not fear, probably just frustration. It's a no lose scenario for Russia.

At best it's a distraction for us. At worst, it is going to lead to more screaming conspiracy theorists from all the usual talking heads and continue to drive in that "I don't trust anyone anymore" nail that is getting pounded deeper into our country every single day. Some are going to immediately latch onto whatever it says, if it benefits their world views. And things may get rowdy for a while.

All the while it forces the admin's attention elsewhere, even if for a bit, away from the fact that Trump is probably on the precipice of finally granting Long range munitions to Ukraine.

Personally, I think it is a pretty obvious tactic to continue to delay and distract the admin away from the war over there literally every single day possible. The Russians are launching armored drives again last couple of days after a long break away from them. They got smashed of course, as they almost always do these days. Every day Trump is distracted by the media here, is a win for Putin.

This, but not because of any Ukrainian impact. Kennedy was shot 20ish years before I was born so zero fear of the truth or any repercussions stemming from it. And IF we could validate the full accuracy and authenticity of everything provided then I'd give zero effs. But, given who we're dealing with, it's just as likely (if not more likely) to be riddled with disinformation and misinformation as it is to be legit.

And, let's be honest, the modern American public isn't exactly a discerning consumer of information. So, you're looking at an opportunity for an external, and currently hostile, government to create distraction, distrust, and conflict for both the American public and potentially the Trump administration. We're opening the door to lending validity to what could be complete bullisht and from which nothing positive will likely result.

Sure, if you believe it should be shared with the public then go for it, but do what you can to identify any inconsistencies, likely disinformation, etc. Annotate it, provide context, and frame it both for what it is and what it's not. We've seen libs and deep state seeding disinfo and misinfo at every turn to harm Trump and the country for years, painting it as incontrovertible fact, while idiot masses lap it up. Why aren't we at least willing to scrutinize a data dump from a foreign government who's equally likely to be attempting the same thing.

Maybe I'm not giving Americans enough credit but COVID, Jan 6, Biden Laptop, Russiagate, etc. etc. don't leave me much faith that proper skepticism will be maintained when consuming this. It's coming from a country who has a vested interest in effing with us. They obviously have an angle. So, from my perspective, don't trust AND verify.

But, most seem to think it's much ado over nothing. I'm more than willing to assent to the possibility that I'm being overly and unnecessarily cautious and outright overthinking this. Thanks to everyone for the engagement and discussion.