Democratic White House contender Robert Kennedy Jr. recently blamed the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) for the assassination of his uncle, President John F. Kennedy, in 1963.
Kennedy Jr., the son of assassinated Sen. Robert F. Kennedy, made the allegation on Sunday with John Catsimatidis on WABC 770 AM’s “Cats Roundtable.” Theories around JFK’s assassination have endured throughout the decades, with many others speculating that the CIA, former President Lyndon B. Johnson, the mafia, the Soviet KGB, Jackie Onassis Kennedy, or the Fidel Castro regime—or some combination thereof—were involved in his death.
“There is overwhelming evidence that the CIA was involved in his murder. I think it’s beyond a reasonable doubt at this point,” Kennedy said about the November 1963 incident in Dallas, Texas. “The evidence is overwhelming that the CIA was involved in the murder, and in the cover-up,” he also said.
Kennedy made reference to the book, “JFK and the Unspeakable,” penned by James Douglas, for some of his assertions. The book theorized that Kennedy was assassinated because he sought peacemaking during the Cold War and was then killed by his own security apparatus.
The federal government concluded during its Warren Commission Report that shooter Lee Harvey Oswald was the lone suspect in the assassination. They said there was no credible evidence to suggest that he was part of a wider assassination conspiracy.
Oswald was shot and killed by alleged Chicago mob associate Jack Ruby two days after Oswald was accused of the assassination. Ruby would be later convicted of the murder and sentenced to death, but he died in prison several years later.
The CIA has long denied any involvement in the former president’s death. An article published on the intelligence agency’s website (pdf) says that it was a “lie” that connected the CIA “to the Kennedy assassination,” alleging it was part of a Soviet KGB “disinformation” campaign and then cast aspersions against director Oliver Stone’s 1991 film “JFK, ” which strongly suggested that the CIA and other federal officials may have been involved in the assassination.
“Unfounded assertions of CIA complicity were bolstered inadvertently by a series of investigations of the Intelligence Community in the 1970s. The 1975 Rockefeller Commission report was followed by the 1976 report of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence and the 1979 report of the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA),” that article stated.
“All examined the CIA’s activities both before and after Kennedy’s assassination, and, in the case of HSCA, specifically looked into Shaw’s supposed role as a high-ranking operative,” it added, referring to businessman and military officer Clay Shaw, who was arrested and charged on March 1, 1967, with conspiring to kill President Kennedy. Two years later he was acquitted by a jury.
The article stated: “The bottom line in each instance gave no credence to any of [local District Attorney Jim] Garrison’s allegations about Shaw and the CIA. Inexorably, however, the mere fact that such questions were asked helped fashion Garrison into something of a prophet in the public mind.” Garrison’s allegations were prominently featured in the “JFK” film.
The Epoch Times has contacted the CIA for comment.
Other Claims
Kennedy Jr.’s claims on Sunday aren’t the first time he’s floated the notion that the CIA killed his uncle. He’s also claimed in the past that his father wasn’t killed by Sirhan Sirhan, a Palestinian man who supported communism.
“I also hope that the governor will consider the overwhelming evidence that Sirhan is not my father’s killer,” Kennedy Jr. wrote for the San Francisco Chronicle in 2021.
He wrote: “For many years, I accepted the orthodoxy that Sirhan was responsible. After all, dozens of eyewitnesses in the Ambassador Hotel pantry saw him fire his gun from just a few feet in front of my father. But in 2016, my father’s close friend, Paul Schrade, persuaded me to read Los Angeles County coroner Thomas Noguchi’s autopsy report and to listen to audio recordings and review other evidence indicating that Sirhan could not have been the murderer.”
Kennedy went on to say that Sirhan fired two shots at Kennedy, an upstart senator from New York who was running as a Democrat in 1968, and one of the bullets, he said, struck Schrade in the head. The other bullet hit a door jamb. He then fired more shots, hitting several other bystanders, Kennedy Jr. alleged.
However, none of those bullets struck his father, Kennedy Jr. said, floating the theory that the four shots that hit his father “were from within a few inches, with two leaving gun powder residue in the wounds, suggesting that the assassin was standing close behind my father, shielding his weapon with his body while all attention focused on Sirhan.”
He also alleged that Los Angeles police investigators “bullied and badgered eyewitnesses to change their statements regarding the number of shots and to silence those who say they saw Cesar draw and shoot his gun and those who reported conspirators dashing from the scene.”
Thane Eugene Cesar, he said, was the individual who killed his father. Before the Sirhan shooting, Cesar—a recently hired security guard—grabbed Kennedy by the elbow and steered him toward Sirhan, he said.
“Bedeviled by questions about his involvement in my father’s murder, Cesar fled to the Philippines. I was in negotiations with him in 2018, before reports of his death in September 2019. After first agreeing to meet with me, he gradually escalated his price to $25,000 for the privilege of interviewing him,” Kennedy said.
Kennedy, an environmental lawyer and writer, declared his candidacy for president several weeks ago. A recent Fox News poll showed that 19 percent of voters favored him.
Article from our premium news partners at The Epoch Times. Image by Gage Skidmore, CC BY-SA 3.0, via Wikimedia Commons.
Safeguarding Your American Dream: Discover the Power of America First Healthcare
In today’s economy, healthcare costs remain one of the biggest threats to financial stability and family security. Americans work hard to build a better life, yet rising medical expenses can quickly erode savings, force tough trade-offs, and even push families toward debt or bankruptcy. Medical bills continue to rank as the leading cause of personal bankruptcy in the United States, with millions facing underinsurance or unexpected out-of-pocket burdens that no one plans for. Many turn to government-run marketplace plans under the Affordable Care Act, hoping for relief, only to discover that what appears affordable on paper often delivers higher long-term costs, limited real protection, and coverage that may not align with personal values or family needs.
America First Healthcare stands out as a private insurance agency dedicated to helping conservatives and families secure better coverage and better rates through customized, values-aligned options. By conducting free insurance reviews, the agency uncovers hidden gaps in existing policies and connects clients with private alternatives that emphasize personal responsibility, small-government principles, and genuine affordability—often delivering up to 20% savings while providing stronger protection for the American Dream.
The allure of marketplace plans is easy to understand: open enrollment periods, premium tax credits for many households, and the promise of “comprehensive” benefits mandated by law. Yet recent data reveals a different reality, especially after the expiration of enhanced premium subsidies at the end of 2025. Enrollment for 2026 dropped by more than one million people compared to the prior year, with many shifting to lower-tier bronze plans to keep monthly premiums manageable.
These plans feature significantly higher deductibles—averaging around $7,500 nationally—and greater cost-sharing requirements. Families who once paid modest amounts after subsidies now face average premium increases of $65 or more per month, even as they accept plans that leave them responsible for thousands in upfront costs before meaningful coverage kicks in.
High deductibles create a dangerous barrier to care. Studies show that people in such plans are less likely to seek timely treatment for chronic conditions, attend preventive screenings, or fill necessary prescriptions. A seemingly minor illness or injury can balloon into major expenses when patients delay care until problems worsen. For a family of four, a single hospitalization, cancer diagnosis, or unexpected surgery can easily exceed the deductible, triggering coinsurance and out-of-pocket maximums that still leave substantial bills. One recent analysis noted that some proposed changes could push family deductibles toward $31,000 in future years, further exposing households to financial risk.
Beyond the numbers, marketplace plans often carry structural limitations. Coverage for certain critical services may include waiting periods or narrower networks that restrict access to preferred doctors and specialists. Preventive care is required to be covered without cost-sharing, but everything else—lab work, imaging, specialist visits, or ongoing treatment—typically waits until the deductible is met. This reactive model contrasts sharply with the proactive, holistic approach many families prefer, especially those focused on wellness, early intervention, and maintaining health to enjoy life rather than merely reacting to illness.
Values alignment represents another growing concern. Government-influenced plans operate within a framework shaped by federal mandates and political priorities that may not reflect conservative principles of limited government, personal freedom, and ethical stewardship. Families who want to direct their healthcare dollars toward providers and benefits that honor traditional values sometimes find marketplace options feel misaligned, forcing a compromise between affordability and conviction.
Private alternatives, by contrast, offer year-round flexibility without the restrictions of open enrollment windows. Independent agents can shop across a wider range of carriers to design plans tailored to specific family needs—whether that means lower deductibles for frequent medical users, broader provider networks, or add-ons that support wellness and preventive services from day one. Clients frequently report more stable premiums that do not automatically escalate each year, along with genuine cost savings once the full picture of deductibles, copays, and coverage depth is considered.
Take the experience of real families who made the switch. Amanda C. shared that her new plan felt “way better” than what she had through the marketplace. Johnny Y. noted his previous coverage kept increasing annually until he found a more stable private option. Sofia S. expressed delight with her plan and began recommending it to others. These stories echo a common theme: when families move beyond one-size-fits-all government marketplaces, they often discover customized protection that better safeguards both health and finances.
Founder Jordan Sarmiento’s own journey underscores the stakes. In 2021, a six-day hospitalization generated a $95,000 bill. Under a well-structured private “Conservative Care Coverage” plan, his out-of-pocket responsibility would have been just $500. That stark difference illustrates how thoughtful planning and private options can prevent a medical event from becoming a financial catastrophe.
Practical steps exist for anyone questioning their current coverage. Start with a no-obligation review of your existing policy to identify gaps—high deductibles, limited critical-care benefits, or escalating premiums. Compare total projected costs (premiums plus potential out-of-pocket expenses) rather than monthly premiums alone. Consider family health history, anticipated needs, and lifestyle priorities. Private agencies can present side-by-side options that include stronger wellness incentives, broader access, and plans built on shared values of self-reliance and freedom.
In an era when healthcare inflation continues to outpace general cost-of-living increases, relying solely on marketplace solutions carries growing risk. Families who proactively explore private alternatives frequently achieve meaningful savings while gaining peace of mind that their coverage truly works when needed most.
America First Healthcare makes this exploration straightforward through its free review process. Families and individuals receive personalized guidance to close coverage holes, reduce unnecessary expenses, and secure plans that align with conservative principles—protecting wallets, health, and the American Dream without government overreach. Many who complete a review discover they can enjoy better benefits for less, often saving up to 20% while gaining the customization and stability that marketplace plans struggle to deliver.
Ultimately, protecting your family’s future requires looking beyond the marketing of “affordable” government options. By understanding the long-term costs hidden in high deductibles, shifting coverage tiers, and values mismatches, Americans can make empowered choices. Private, values-driven insurance offers a smarter path—one that rewards diligence, supports wellness, and delivers real security. For those ready to move beyond the limitations of traditional marketplace plans, a simple review can reveal options designed to serve families, not bureaucracies. The American Dream thrives when individuals and families retain control over their healthcare decisions, and thoughtful private coverage plays a vital role in making that possible.