Recently, the U.S. National Archives released previously classified documents related to JFK’s assassination, fulfilling a promise from Donald Trump. While excitement surrounds the 2,182 documents and 63,000 pages, they do not change the consensus that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone. Additionally, claims about former CIA agent Gary Underhill’s involvement in a conspiracy have resurfaced, but the referenced documents are not new and have been available since 2017, revealing little beyond already known information.
Newly Released JFK Assassination Archives: What You Need to Know
The highly anticipated archives regarding the assassination of John Fitzgerald Kennedy, who served as the President of the United States from 1961 to 1963, have finally been made public. On the night of March 18 to 19, the U.S. National Archives released these documents online, fulfilling a promise made by Donald Trump, who signed the declassification decree just a month prior, vowing to “reveal everything” about the circumstances surrounding the former president’s murder.
Despite the excitement, the released documents have not altered the long-standing consensus that Lee Harvey Oswald acted independently in the assassination that occurred on November 22, 1963, while Kennedy was riding in a motorcade in Dallas. Historians and journalists recognize that it will take time to analyze the extensive collection of 2,182 documents and 63,000 pages released this week and to compare them with previously available materials.
Debunking the Myths Surrounding Gary Underhill
On social media, some users are suggesting that they have unearthed a new lead involving Gary Underhill, who is described as a former CIA agent. He allegedly claimed that a “clique of people in the CIA” orchestrated JFK’s assassination and expressed fears for his safety. Reports state that he was later found dead from a gunshot wound to the head, ruled as a suicide. This narrative has gained traction among pro-Trump influencers, with some posts garnering over a million views across various platforms, including X.
However, this so-called “new” document is far from unprecedented; it has actually been accessible since 2017 on the U.S. National Archives website and was not part of the 1% of undisclosed sensitive documents held back during Joe Biden’s administration. A closer examination reveals that Underhill, also known as John Garrett Underhill Jr., a former U.S. Army captain from World War II, had voiced concerns about his life and speculated—without substantiating evidence—that the CIA was involved in JFK’s assassination.
This document summarizes an article from the American publication ‘Ramparts,’ which chronicled Underhill’s allegations. The magazine was known for amplifying conspiracy theories regarding JFK’s death before it ceased publication in the 1970s. Furthermore, Underhill’s narrative has been revisited in various articles, including one in Playboy, which is accessible through CIA archives and is not classified.
While there are some differences between the 2017 and 2025 documents—specifically that some previously redacted sections have now been revealed—the new information pertains to financial aspects related to companies affiliated with the CIA, not groundbreaking revelations regarding JFK’s assassination.
Donald Trump had previously indicated that approximately 80,000 pages would be impacted by these new releases. However, researchers point out that the majority of these documents were already accessible, albeit in less clear versions, including the ones related to Gary Underhill. Journalist and author Philippe Labro noted that while major revelations are unlikely, these documents may shed light on the inadequacies of the CIA and FBI in tracking Lee Harvey Oswald.
In conclusion, BBC journalist and fact-checking expert Shayan Sardarizadeh succinctly summarized the situation: “I expect that the ‘truth seekers,’ who don’t even read two pages of the JFK files, will flood platforms with a plethora of outdated and publicly known information to maximize engagement.” His prediction proved accurate, as many continue to share and amplify the same familiar narratives.