JFK Jr. largely lived in the shadow of his late father, President John F. Kennedy. 35 years after his father’s death, JFK Jr. also had a similar fate to an early, tragic death.
The late attorney rarely talked about his father. When he was a young boy, the boy largely known as “John John” was asked about what happened to his father. He responded, “He’s going to heaven.”
He broke his silence about the effect of his father’s death in an interview with ABC’s Prime Time Live. “That act, that day does not have much to do with my life. My father’s life has to do with my life,” he recalled.
How Old Was JFK Jr. When His Father Died?
JFK Jr. was 2 years old when John F. Kennedy was assassinated. His father’s funeral was held on his 3rd birthday.
One of the most famous photos from the funeral was when the toddler was saluting his father’s casket as it was passing by. “I was standing by him,” archbishop Philip Hannan told historian William Manchester. “I saw the reaction of the people across the street. It was an instantaneous reaction. They broke down. I had heard Mrs. Kennedy say ‘John, salute.’ I knew then that this was probably the most poignant picture of the century.”
Throughout his life, JFK Jr. refused to talk about his father’s death. Historian Steven M. Gillon, who was friends with the George magazine founder for 18 years, recalled to People, “It was a topic that John did not discuss. The only topic that was absolutely off-limits.”
“John said, ‘I don’t understand why people are so fascinated with my father’s death,’” Gillon recalls. “He couldn’t understand why people focused so much energy on it. He wanted to remember his father for the life that he lived, and that’s how he wanted others to remember him.”
Gillon also said that JFK Jr.’s life trajectory eerily paralleled his father’s and theorized he would go for a presidential run if he lived. “A lot of the family mystique revolved around his father, the emotional connection that the public had to John’s father,” Gillon says. “John was his father’s son. John was the only one who could have carried his family legacy into the future. All the expectations for that were placed on him.”
“John’s father is frozen in time,” says Gillon, “and now John is too. We can’t see how he would have evolved.”
“The other layer to the tragedy is that, by 1999, he figured out who he is. And what he discovered is yes, he wants to go into politics. He wants to be his father’s son. But he dies just at the moment when he discovers who he is. The one thing John will always share with his father is this sense of what might have been.”
Once Upon a Time: The Captivating Life of Carolyn Bessette-Kennedy
Shortly after 10 p.m., press secretary Pierre Salinger stepped before reporters in a makeshift pressroom at the Statler Hotel. For the first time he acknowledged that Patrick had a breathing ailment, identifying it the way doctors did, as “idiopathic respiratory distress syndrome.” Playing down the seriousness, he explained that the condition was not uncommon in premature infants. But he acknowledged it was “a cause for concern.” He told reporters it would be four days before doctors could “make a final diagnosis.”
A reporter pressed Salinger on the outlook for the baby: “Is it on the danger list?”
“I would not say that,” Salinger replied.
“Would anybody else?” the reporter ventured.
“Well,” Salinger snapped, “nobody that I talked to has.”
He then revealed that Patrick was baptized soon after birth, prompting a reporter to ask why so quickly.
“I would rather not comment on that,” Salinger answered.
In his suite at the Ritz-Carlton, Jack called Jackie twice around midnight. Wishing to keep her spirits up, he tilted his words toward the positive. “The President assured Mrs. Kennedy,” the United Press International reported, “that everything was all right.”
His calls had the intended effect. Jackie’s mother, Janet Auchincloss, arrived at the hospital late in the evening and visited Jackie around midnight. She told a reporter that her daughter was in “remarkably good condition” and “awfully happy that everything was going well.”
During the night, an enterprising photographer with a telephoto lens sneaked upstairs in a building opposite Children’s and found a window in line with Patrick’s room. While chief resident James Hughes hovered over the incubator, the photographer clicked off a series of shots.
Days later a grainy black-and-white image dominated the cover of Life magazine under the headline: “Hospital Vigil over the Kennedy Baby.” The photograph through the cross panes of Patrick’s window showed an unnamed doctor—Hughes—in scrubs and a white mask, head bowed, looking down at what was the baby’s incubator, though all that was visible on the cover was a fuzzy black smear in the lower-right corner. Standing beside Hughes was a nurse, her starched white cap perched high on her head, her face an indistinct blur.
A four-photo spread inside the magazine was blurrier than the image on the front: doctors and nurses moving about, their heads dark splotches against a gray-lighted background.
The magazine’s report featured one more image, a particularly intrusive one. A Life photographer had managed to shove his way into a Children’s Hospital elevator with President Kennedy for a candid, closeup shot that filled a full page. In the photo the beleaguered president is pinned against the elevator’s back wall, shoulders hunched, arms crossed, eyes staring downward. The headline read “. . . A Worried Father Visits His Stricken Son.”
Neither Hughes nor the nurse had any idea they were under press surveillance while looking after Patrick. Hughes learned of his anonymous fame only after the edition hit newsstands: “Somebody called us and said you’re on the cover of Life magazine.” Hughes embraced his anonymity. He had no wish to go public. “There was nothing magical about the moment,” he explained. “It isn’t as if I held up a newborn baby for the world to see. I was there attending as best we could as this kid struggled for breath.”
John F. Kennedy Jr and his wife, Carolyn Bessette, were one of the most prominent celebrity couples of the 90s.
The couple dominated headlines and front pages with their chic style and lavish socialite life, but all eyes were on him since he was the only son of President John F. Kennedy. However, their love story was tragically cut short. The couple, alongside her sister Lauren, were killed in a plane crash off the coast of Martha’s Vineyard on July 16, 1999, on their way to a wedding.
JFK Jr.’s net worth was reportedly $100 million at the time of his death, according to Celebrity Net Worth. He worked as a New York City Assistant District Attorney for nearly four years and launched George magazine in 1995.
JFK Jr. inherited a considerable amount of wealth from his mother, Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis’ will. At the time of John F. Kennedy’s death, Jacqueline was bequeathed $25,000.00 from her late husband.
What was Carolyn Bessette’s net worth?
Carolyn Bessette’s net worth has not been made public, but it’s assumed that her net worth could be combined with her husband’s.
Who inherited JFK Jr.’s money?
JFK Jr.’s will was made public right after his death. JFK Jr. left his estate to his wife, Carolyn, per his will. “I give all my tangible property (as distinguished from money, securities, and the like), wherever located, other than my scrimshaw set previously owned by my father, to my wife, Carolyn Bessette-Kennedy,” it read.
“I give and devise all my interest in my cooperative apartment located at 20-26 Moore Street, Apartment 9E, in said New York, including all my shares therein and any proprietary leases with respect thereto, to my said wife, Carolyn.’” The will stated that if Carolyn were also to die, John’s sister Caroline and her children were next in line to inherit his personal possessions.
It was revealed that he gave money from the trust to 14 family members and friends, as well as his father’s presidential library and Reaching Up, a charity Kennedy founded in 1985 to help people who are developmentally disabled.
The only item that was written down in his will was John’s beloved scrimshaw set—sailor’s carvings made from whales’ teeth. It belonged to John F. Kennedy, who was assassinated three days before his JFK Jr.’s third birthday. He listed his nephew, Jack Schlossberg, as the recipient.
Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi plans to endorse Jack Schlossberg, John F. Kennedy’s grandson, in the Democratic primary race for New York’s 12th Congressional District, a source familiar confirmed to CBS News Saturday.
The endorsement has been in the works for weeks, a person familiar said, but has not yet been announced publicly.
The 33-year-old Schlossberg, the son of Caroline Kennedy and first cousin of Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., announced his campaign in November.
Jack Schlossberg, grandson of late President John. F Kennedy, speaks to members of the New York State Nurses Association outside Mount Sinai West on Jan. 12, 2026, in New York City.
Edna Leshowitz / Getty Images
The online political commentator joined a highly competitive field of Democratic candidates fighting to replace retiring Rep. Jerry Nadler. The field includes state Assemblymen Alex Bores and Micah Lasher, as well as attorney George Conway and journalist Jami Floyd.
Schlossberg campaigned with President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris in the 2024 election cycle in an effort to help them connect with young voters, and is running a progressive campaign with an emphasis on social media.
If he wins, Schlossberg would be at least the seventh member of the extended Kennedy family to serve in Congress.
New York’s 12th Congressional District is a wealthy, Democratic-leaning area, made up of Manhattan’s Midtown, Upper East Side, and Upper West Side.
The New York Times was first to report the news of Pelosi’s planned endorsement.
Starting New Year’s Day, some food-stamp recipients around the U.S. will be banned from using the government nutrition assistance to buy candy, soda and other foods.
Indiana, Iowa, Nebraska, Utah and West Virginia are the first of at least 18 states to enact waivers prohibiting people enrolled in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, from purchasing certain foods. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins have urged states to strip foods regarded as unhealthy from the $100 billion federal program.
“We cannot continue a system that forces taxpayers to fund programs that make people sick and then pay a second time to treat the illnesses those very programs help create,” Kennedy said in a statement in December.
The efforts are aimed at reducing chronic diseases such as obesity and diabetes associated with sweetened drinks and other treats, a key goal of Kennedy’s Make America Healthy Again effort.
Confusion for SNAP recipients?
But retail industry and health policy experts said state SNAP programs, already under pressure from steep budget cuts, are unprepared for the complex changes, with no complete lists of the foods affected and technical point-of-sale challenges that vary by state and store. And research remains mixed about whether restricting SNAP purchases improves diet quality and health.
The National Retail Federation, a trade association, predicted longer checkout lines and more customer complaints as SNAP recipients learn which foods are affected by the new waivers.
“It’s a disaster waiting to happen of people trying to buy food and being rejected,” said Kate Bauer, a nutrition science expert at the University of Michigan.
The new restrictions are the latest source of concern for SNAP recipients. Food aid distributed under the program, which is used by 42 million Americans, was interrupted during the 43-day U.S. government shutdown. Reliance on food stamps typically surges during economic downturns, such as the sharp slump that followed the outbreak of COVID-19 in 2020.
Nearly 62% of SNAP participants are in families with children, while roughly 37% are in households with older adults or people with disabilities, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a nonpartisan think tank.
Roughly 14% of U.S. households reported food insecurity on average between January and October, up from 12.5% in 2024, according to Purdue’s Center for Food Demand Analysis and Sustainability.
While the prevalence of food insecurity around the U.S. fluctuates month to month, the overall rate had been declining since 2022, when an average of 15.4% of households were food insecure as inflation hit 40-year highs following the pandemic.
Retailers fear impact
A report by the National Grocers Association and other industry trade groups estimated that implementing SNAP restrictions would cost U.S. retailers $1.6 billion initially and $759 million each year going forward.
“Punishing SNAP recipients means we all get to pay more at the grocery store,” said Gina Plata-Nino, SNAP director for the anti-hunger advocacy group Food Research & Action Center.
The waivers are a departure from decades of federal policy first enacted in 1964 and later authorized by the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008, which said SNAP benefits can be used for “any food or food product intended for human consumption,” except alcohol and ready-to-eat hot foods. The law also says SNAP can’t pay for tobacco.
In the past, lawmakers have proposed stopping SNAP from paying for expensive meats like steak or so-called junk foods, such as chips and ice cream.
But previous waiver requests were denied based on USDA research concluding that restrictions would be costly and complicated to implement, and that they might not change recipients’ buying habits or reduce health problems such as obesity.
Under the second Trump administration, however, states have been encouraged and even incentivized to seek waivers – and they responded.
“This isn’t the usual top-down, one-size-fits-all public health agenda,” Indiana Gov. Mike Braun said when he announced his state’s request last spring. “We’re focused on root causes, transparent information and real results.”
How many people are affected
The five state waivers that take effect Jan. 1 affect about 1.4 million people. Utah and West Virginia will ban the use of SNAP to buy soda and soft drinks, while Nebraska will prohibit soda and energy drinks. Indiana will target soft drinks and candy. In Iowa, which has the most restrictive rules to date, the SNAP limits affect taxable foods, including soda and candy, but also certain prepared foods.
“The items list does not provide enough specific information to prepare a SNAP participant to go to the grocery store,” Plata-Nino wrote in a blog post. “Many additional items — including certain prepared foods — will also be disallowed, even though they are not clearly identified in the notice to households.”
Marc Craig, 47, of Des Moines, said he has been living in his car since October. He said the new waivers will make it more difficult to determine how to use the $298 in SNAP benefits he receives each month, while also increasing the stigma he feels at the cash register.
“They treat people that get food stamps like we’re not people,” Craig said.
SNAP waivers enacted now and in the coming months will run for two years, with the option to extend them for an additional three, according to the Agriculture Department. Each state is required to assess the impact of the changes.
Health experts worry that the waivers ignore larger factors affecting the health of SNAP recipients, said Anand Parekh, a medical doctor who is the chief health policy officer at the University of Michigan School of Public Health.
“This doesn’t solve the two fundamental problems, which is healthy food in this country is not affordable and unhealthy food is cheap and ubiquitous,” he said.
Tatiana Schlossberg, the granddaughter of late President John F. Kennedy, has died shortly after announcing she had a terminal cancer diagnosis, the JFK Library Foundation said Tuesday.
“Our beautiful Tatiana passed away this morning. She will always be in our hearts,” read a message from her family on the institution’s Instagram account, alongside an image of Schlossberg.
Schlossberg, 35, who had a career as an environmental journalist, wrote in an essay published by The New Yorker last month that she had been diagnosed with acute myeloid leukemia in 2024, shortly after the birth of her second child. She underwent grueling treatment, including chemotherapy and bone marrow transplants, but the cancer returned and she was eventually given a prognosis of one year to live, she wrote.
Tatiana Schlossberg speaks at an event in New York City in on Sept. 9, 2019.
A planned Christmas Eve jazz concert at the Kennedy Center, a holiday tradition at the Washington, D.C., performing arts center dating back more than 20 years, has been canceled.
The show’s host, musician Chuck Redd, told The Associated Press he called off the performance after the White House announced last week that President Trump’s name would be added to the facility — drawing pushback from Democratic lawmakers and some scholars, who say the change violates the law. According to the White House, the president’s handpicked board approved the decision to rename the institution the Trump-Kennedy Center. The revised name later appeared on the building’s facade.
“When I saw the name change on the Kennedy Center website and then hours later on the building, I chose to cancel our concert,” Redd told The Associated Press in an email Wednesday. Redd, a drummer and vibraphone player who has toured with everyone from Dizzy Gillespie to Ray Brown, has been presiding over holiday “Jazz Jams” at the Kennedy Center since 2006, succeeding bassist William “Keter” Betts.
The Kennedy Center did not immediately respond to an email seeking comment. The center’s website lists the show as canceled.
President John F. Kennedy was assassinated in 1963, and Congress passed a law naming the center as a living memorial to him. The law explicitly prohibits the board of trustees adding any additional memorials to the site.
The decision to rename the center has drawn steep criticism from congressional Democrats and some members of Kennedy’s family. Democratic Rep. Joyce Beatty of Ohio sued over the renaming Monday, calling it a “flagrant violation of the rule of law” and noting that the name can’t be changed without an act of Congress.
The center’s president, Richard Grenell, who was appointed by Mr. Trump, hasargued that the center’s status as a memorial to Kennedy wasn’t changed.
Mr. Trump, a Republican, has been deeply involved with the center named for an iconic Democrat after mostly ignoring it during his first term. He has forced out its leadership, overhauled the board while arranging for himself to head it and personally hosted this year’s Kennedy Center honors, breaking a long tradition of presidents mostly serving as spectators.
Numerous artists have called off Kennedy Center performances since Mr. Trump returned to office, including Issa Rae and Peter Wolf. Lin-Manuel Miranda canceled a planned production of “Hamilton.”
It’s normal for parents, or anyone, to have questions about vaccinations — but what happens if your pediatrician urges a shot that’s under attack by the Trump administration?
That’s getting more likely: The nation’s leading doctors groups are in an unprecedented standoff with federal health officials who have attacked long-used, lifesaving vaccines.
The revolt by pediatricians, obstetricians, family physicians, infectious disease experts and internists came to a head when an advisory panel handpicked by Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. urged an end to routine newborn vaccination against hepatitis B, a virus that can cause liver failure or liver cancer.
That vaccine saves lives, helped child infections plummet and has been given safely to tens of millions of children in the U.S. alone, say the American Academy of Pediatrics and other doctors groups that vowed Tuesday to keep recommending it.
But that’s not the only difference. That Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices now is examining possible changes to the entire childhood vaccination schedule, questioning certain ingredients and how many doses youngsters receive.
Pushing back, the American Academy of Pediatrics has issued its own recommendations for youngsters. Other medical groups — plus some city and state public health departments that have banded together — also are issuing their own advice on certain vaccines, which largely mirrors pre-2025 federal guidance.
This article is part of AP’s Be Well coverage, focusing on wellness, fitness, diet and mental health. Read more Be Well.
“We owe our patients a consistent message informed by evidence and lived experience, not messages biased by political imperative,” Dr. Ronald Nahass, president of the Infectious Diseases Society of America, told reporters Tuesday.
But Nahass acknowledged the inevitable consumer confusion, recounting a relative calling him last weekend for advice about hepatitis B vaccination for her new grandbaby.
“Most Americans don’t have a Cousin Ronnie to call. They are left alone with fear and mistrust,” he said, urging parents to talk with their doctors about vaccines.
New guidelines without new data concern doctors
Hepatitis B isn’t the only vaccine challenge. Kennedy’s health department recently changed a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention webpage to contradict the longtime scientific conclusion that vaccines don’t cause autism. Federal agencies also moved to restrict COVID-19 vaccinations this fall, and are planning policy changes that could restrict future flu and coronavirus shots.
But when it comes to vaccine advice, “for decades, ACIP was the gold standard,” said Dr. Jake Scott, an infectious disease physician and Stanford University researcher.
The panel once routinely enlisted specialists in specific diseases for long deliberations of the latest science and safety data, resulting in recommendations typically adopted not only by the CDC but by the medical field at large, he said.
Last week’s meeting of Kennedy’s panel, which includes vaccine skeptics, marked a radical departure. CDC specialists weren’t allowed to present data on hepatitis B, the childhood vaccine schedule or questions about vaccine ingredients. Few of the committee members have public health experience, and some expressed confusion about the panel’s proposals.
At one point, a doctor called in to say the panel was misrepresenting her study’s findings. And the panel’s chairman wondered why one dose of yellow fever vaccine protected him during a trip to Africa when U.S. children get three doses of hepatitis B vaccine. The hepatitis B vaccine is designed to protect children for life from a virus they can encounter anywhere, not just on a trip abroad. And other scientists noted it was carefully studied for years to prove the three-dose course offers decades of immunity — evidence that a single dose simply doesn’t have.
“If they’ve got new data, I’m all for it — let’s see it and have a conversation,” said Dr. Kelly Gebo, an infectious disease specialist and public health dean at George Washington University, who watched for that. “I did not see any new data,” so she’s not changing her vaccine advice.
Committee members argued that most babies’ risk of hepatitis B infection is very low and that earlier research on infant shot safety was inadequate.
Especially unusual was a presentation from a lawyer who voiced doubt about studies that proved benefits of multiple childhood vaccines and promoted discredited research pointing to harms.
“I don’t think at any point in the committee’s history, there was a 90-minute uninterrupted presentation by someone who wasn’t a physician, a scientist, or a public health expert on the topic — let alone someone who, who makes his living in vaccine litigation,” said Jason Schwartz, a vaccine policy expert at Yale University.
By abandoning data and the consensus of front-line doctors, the ACIP is “actively burning down the credibility that made its recommendations so powerful,” added Stanford’s Scott. “Most parents will still follow their pediatricians, and AAP is holding the line here. But the mixed messages are precisely what erode confidence over time.”
Parents already have a choice — they need solid guidance
Trump administration health officials say it’s important to restore choice to parents and to avoid mandates. That’s how the panel’s hepatitis B recommendation was framed — that parents who really want it could get their children vaccinated later.
Parents already have a choice, said Dr. Aaron Milstone of the American Academy of Pediatrics. The government makes population-wide recommendations while families and their doctors tailor choices to each person’s health needs.
But many doctors don’t — or can’t — do their own lengthy scientific review of vaccines and thus had relied on the ACIP and CDC information, Yale’s Schwartz noted.
They “rely on trusted expert voices to help navigate what is, even in the best of times, a complicated landscape regarding the evidence for vaccines and how best to use them,” he said.
That’s a role that the pediatricians and other doctors groups, plus those multistate collaborations, aim to fill with their own guidelines — while acknowledging it will be a huge task.
For now, “ask your questions, bring your concerns and let us talk about them,” said Dr. Sarah Nosal, of the American Academy of Family Physicians, urging anyone with vaccine questions to have an open conversation with their doctor.
___
The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Science and Educational Media Group. The AP is solely responsible for all content.
Scientists say the problem is that they are often doing just the opposite by relying on preliminary studies, fringe science or just hunches to make claims, cast doubt on proven treatments or even set policy.
Dr. Daniel Jernigan, who resigned from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in August, told reporters Wednesday that Kennedy seems to be “going from evidence-based decision making to decision-based evidence making.”
It was the latest example of the Trump administration’s challenge to established science.
U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr. speaks during the Western Governors’ Association meeting Thursday, Nov. 20, 2025, in Scottsdale, Ariz. (AP Photo/Rebecca Noble)
U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr. speaks during the Western Governors’ Association meeting Thursday, Nov. 20, 2025, in Scottsdale, Ariz. (AP Photo/Rebecca Noble)
In September, the Republican president gave out medical advice based on weak or no evidence. Speaking directly to pregnant women and to parents, he told them not to take acetaminophen, the active ingredient in Tylenol. He repeatedly made the fraudulent and long-disproven link between autism and vaccines, saying his assessment was based on a hunch.
“I have always had very strong feelings about autism and how it happened and where it came from,” he said.
“The discussion that has been brought up regarding safety is not based on evidence other than case reports and anecdotes,” said Dr. Flor Munoz, a pediatric infectious disease expert at Baylor College of Medicine and Texas Children’s Hospital.
Scientists say the process of getting medicines and vaccines to market and recommended in the United States has, until now, typically relied on gold standard science. The process is so rigorous and transparent that much of the rest of the world follows the lead of American regulators, giving the OK to treatments only after U.S. approval.
This April 1, 2025 photo shows the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention building in Atlanta. (AP Photo/Ben Gray, file)
This April 1, 2025 photo shows the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention building in Atlanta. (AP Photo/Ben Gray, file)
Gold standard science
The gold standard can differ because science and medicine is complicated and everything cannot be tested the same way. That term simply refers to the best possible evidence that can be gathered.
“It completely depends on what question you’re trying to answer,” said Dr. Jake Scott, an infectious disease physician and Stanford University researcher.
What produces the best possible evidence?
There are many different types of studies. The most rigorous is the randomized clinical trial.
It randomly creates two groups of subjects that are identical in every way except for the drug, treatment or other question being tested. Many are “blinded studies,” meaning neither the subjects nor the researchers know who is in which group. This helps eliminate bias.
It is not always possible or ethical to conduct these tests. This is sometimes the case with vaccine trials, “because we have so much data showing how safe and effective they are, it would be unethical to withhold vaccines from a particular group,” said Jessica Steier, a public health scientist and founder of the Unbiased Science podcast.
Studying the long-term effect of a behavior can be impossible. For example, scientists could not possibly study the long-term benefit of exercise by having one group not exercise for years.
Instead, researchers must conduct observational studies, where they follow participants and track their health and behavior without manipulating any variables. Such studies helped scientists discover that fluoride reduces cavities, and later lab studies showed how fluoride strengthens tooth enamel.
But the studies have limitations because they can often only prove correlation, not causation. For example, some observational studies have raised the possibility of a link between autism risk and using acetaminophen during pregnancy, but more have not found a connection. The big problem is that those kinds of studies cannot determine if the painkiller really made any difference or if it was the fever or other health problem that prompted the need for the pill.
Real world evidence can be especially powerful
Scientists can learn even more when they see how something affects a large number of people in their daily lives.
That real-world evidence can be valuable to prove how well something works — and when there are rare side effects that could never be detected in trials.
Such evidence on vaccines has proved useful in both ways. Scientists now know there can be rare side effects with some vaccines and can alert doctors to be on the lookout. The data has proved that vaccines provide extraordinary protection from disease. For example, measles was eliminated in the U.S. but it still pops up among unvaccinated groups.
That same data proves vaccines are safe.
“If vaccines caused a wave of chronic disease, our safety systems — which can detect 1-in-a-million events — would have seen it. They haven’t,” Scott told a U.S. Senate subcommittee in September.
The best science is open and transparent
Simply publishing a paper online is not enough to call it open and transparent. Specific things to look for include:
— Researchers set their hypothesis before they start the study and do not change it.
— The authors disclose their conflicts of interest and their funding sources.
— The research has gone through peer review by subject-matter experts who have nothing to do with that particular study.
— The authors show their work, publishing and explaining the data underlying their analyses.
— They cite reliable sources.
This transparency allows science to check itself. Dr. Steven Woloshin, a Dartmouth College professor, has spent much of his career challenging scientific conclusions underlying health policy.
“I’m only able to do that because they’re transparent about what they did, what the underlying source resources were, so that you can come to your own conclusion,” he said. “That’s how science works.”
Know the limits of anecdotes and single studies
Anecdotes may be powerful. They are not data.
Case studies might even be published in top journals, to help doctors or other professionals learn from a particular situation. But they are not used to making decisions about how to treat large numbers of patients because every situation is unique.
Even single studies should be considered in the context of previous research. A new one-off blockbuster study that seems to answer every question definitively or reaches a conclusion that runs counter to other well-conducted studies needs a very careful look.
Uncertainty is baked into science.
“Science isn’t about reaching certainty,” Woloshin said. “It’s about trying to reduce uncertainty to the point where you can say, ‘I have good confidence that if we do X, we’ll see result Y.’ But there’s no guarantee.”
Doing your own research? Questions to ask
If you come across a research paper online, in a news story or cited by officials to change your mind about something, here are some questions to ask:
— Who did the research? What is their expertise? Do they disclose conflicts of interest?
— Who paid for this research? Who might benefit from it?
— Is it published in a reputable journal? Did it go through peer review?
— What question are the researchers asking? Who or what are they studying? Are they making even comparisons between groups?
— Is there a “limitations” section where the authors point out what their research cannot prove, other factors that could influence their results, or other potential blind spots? What does it say?
— Does it make bold, definitive claims? Does it fit into the scientific consensus or challenge it? Is it too good or bad to be true?
___
AP Medical Writers Lauran Neergaard in Washington and Mike Stobbe in New York contributed to this report.
___
The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Department of Science Education and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The AP is solely responsible for all content.
This weekend, 35-year-old Tatiana Schlossberg, a granddaughter of former President John F. Kennedy, announced she has terminal cancer. CBS News medical contributor Dr. Celine Gounder has a breakdown of the diagnosis.
The granddaughter of late President John F. Kennedy, Tatiana Schlossberg, announced Saturday that she has less than a year to live amid a cancer diagnosis.
The 35-year-old journalist published an essay in the New Yorker magazine, writing that ten minutes after she gave birth to her second child, a baby girl, in May 2024, doctors noticed her white-blood-cell count “looked strange.”
She wrote in the magazine that she was diagnosed with acute myeloid leukemia, with a rare mutation called Inversion 3, shortly afterward. Schlossberg, who has been married to Dr. George Moran since 2017, wrote that she couldn’t believe this was happening.
Caroline Kennedy, former U.S. ambassador to Australia, left, seen with her husband, Edwin Schlossberg, center left, and her children Tatiana Schlossberg, center right, and Jack Schlossberg.
Steven Senne / AP
“I had a son whom I loved more than anything and a newborn I need to take care of,” she wrote.
Schlossberg said after several clinical trials and two transplants, her doctor told her he could keep her “alive for a year, maybe.”
Another tragedy hits the Kennedy family
The second of Caroline Kennedy and Edwin Schlossberg’s three children, Schlossberg said she received care at Memorial Sloan Kettering in New York City. She wrote searingly in her essay of the guilt she felt over another tragedy hitting the famous Kennedy family.
“For my whole life, I have tried to be good, to be a good student and a good sister and a good daughter, and to protect my mother and never make her upset or angry. Now I have added a new tragedy to her life, to our family’s life and there’s nothing I can do to stop it,” she wrote.
Caroline Kennedy, who served as the U.S. ambassador to Australia and Japan, lost her father, President John F. Kennedy, when he was assassinated on Nov. 22, 1963, by Lee Harvey Oswald — the same day, 62 years later, her daughter published her essay announcing her cancer diagnosis. She also lost her uncle Bobby Kennedy when he was shot and killed in 1968 while he was campaigning.
Her mother, Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis, died in 1994 at age 64 following a diagnosis of Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma. Her brother, John F. Kennedy Jr., died in a plane crash off the coast of Massachusetts in 1999.
Sen. Edward Kennedy, left, is joined at the John F. Kennedy Library in Boston by Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis,right, and her children Caroline Kennedy and John Kennedy, Jr., at the announcement of the creation of an annual “John F. Kennedy Profile In Courage Award.”
David Tenenbaum/ AP
Collecting memories
Schlossberg spends a portion of her essay writing about her family’s dismay regarding the nomination and confirmation of her cousin Robert F. Kennedy Jr. as Secretary of Health and Human Services. She spoke about how he cut nearly half a billion dollars for research into mRNA vaccines and slashed funding from the National Institutes of Health. She wrote that hundreds of National Institute of Health grants and clinical trials were canceled.
She wrote that she worries millions of women might not get the care they deserve after she was given a dose of misoprostol to stop her postpartum hemorrhage. Because the drug is part of medication abortion, it is currently under review at the Food and Drug Administration, she wrote, due to her cousin’s urging.
Schlossberg mostly focused on writing about her family, how she is going to miss living life with her husband, and what would happen to her two young children growing up without their mother.
“Mostly I try to live and be with them now,” she wrote in The New Yorker. But she says that it is harder than it seems and tries to fill herself up with memories of her children, which she hopes she can carry with her after she is gone.
“Sometimes I trick myself into thinking I’ll remember this forever, I’ll remember this when I’m dead,” Schlossberg wrote.
Tatiana Schlossberg, left, granddaughter of late U.S. President John F. Kennedy, her husband, George Moran, center, and brother Jack Schlossberg in 2018
John F. Kennedy’s grandson, Jack Schlossberg, is running for Congress, launching a campaign to replace retiring Democratic Rep. Jerry Nadler.
The 32-year-old Democratic influencer announced his candidacy on his Instagram page, saying in part, “There is nowhere I’d rather be than in the arena fighting for my hometown. Over the next eight months, during the course of this campaign, I hope to meet as many of you as I can. If you see me on the street, please say hello. If I knock on your door, I hope we can have a conversation. Because politics should be personal. Thanks more to come soon, and I’ll see you on the trail New York 12.”
NEW YORK (AP) — Sally Kirkland, a one-time model who became a regular on stage, film and TV, best known for sharing the screen with Paul Newman and Robert Redford in “The Sting” and her Oscar-nominated title role in the 1987 movie “Anna,” has died. She was 84.
Her representative, Michael Greene, said Kirkland died Tuesday morning at a hospice in Palm Springs, California.
Friends established a GoFundMe account this fall for her medical care. They said she had fractured four bones in her neck, right wrist and left hip. While recovering, she also developed infections, requiring hospitalization and rehab.
“She was funny, feisty, vulnerable and self deprecating,” actor Jennifer Tilly, who co-starred with Kirkland in “Sallywood,” wrote on X. “She never wanted anyone to say she was gone. ‘Don’t say Sally died, say Sally passed on into the spirits.’ Safe passage beautiful lady.”
Kirkland acted in such films as “The Way We Were” with Barbra Streisand, “Revenge” with Kevin Costner, “Cold Feet” with Keith Carradine and Tom Waits, Ron Howard’s “EDtv,” Oliver Stone’s “JFK,” “Heatwave” with Cicely Tyson, “High Stakes” with Kathy Bates, “Bruce Almighty” with Jim Carrey and the 1991 TV movie “The Haunted,” about a family dealing with paranormal activity. She had a cameo in Mel Brooks’ “Blazing Saddles.”
Michael Douglas, left, and Sally Kirkland appear with their awards for best actor for “Wall Street” and best actress for “Anna,” at the 45th Annual Golden Globe Awards in Beverly Hills, Calif., on Jan. 24, 1988. (AP Photo/Reed Saxon, File)
Michael Douglas, left, and Sally Kirkland appear with their awards for best actor for “Wall Street” and best actress for “Anna,” at the 45th Annual Golden Globe Awards in Beverly Hills, Calif., on Jan. 24, 1988. (AP Photo/Reed Saxon, File)
Her biggest role was in 1987’s “Anna” as a fading Czech movie star remaking her life in the United States and mentoring to a younger actor, Paulina Porizkova. Kirkland won a Golden Globe and earned an Oscar nomination along with Cher in “Moonstruck,” Glenn Close in “Fatal Attraction, Holly Hunter in “Broadcast News” and Meryl Streep in “Ironweed.”
“Kirkland is one of those performers whose talent has been an open secret to her fellow actors but something of a mystery to the general public,” The Los Angeles Times critic wrote in her review. “There should be no confusion about her identity after this blazing comet of a performance.”
Kirkland’s small-screen acting credits include stints on “Criminal Minds,” “Roseanne,” “Head Case” and she was a series regular on the TV shows “Valley of the Dolls” and “Charlie’s Angels.”
Born in New York City, Kirkland’s mother was a fashion editor at Vogue and Life magazine who encouraged her daughter to start modeling at age 5. Kirkland graduated from the American Academy of Dramatic Arts and studied with Philip Burton, Richard Burton’s mentor, and Lee Strasberg, the master of the Method school of acting. An early breakout was appearing in Andy Warhol’s “13 Most Beautiful Women” in 1964. She appeared naked as a kidnapped rape victim in Terrence McNally’s off-Broadway “Sweet Eros.”
Sally Kirkland arrives at the Multicultural Motion Picture Association annual Oscar week luncheon in Beverly Hills, Calif., on Feb. 22, 2008. (AP Photo/Matt Sayles, File)
Sally Kirkland arrives at the Multicultural Motion Picture Association annual Oscar week luncheon in Beverly Hills, Calif., on Feb. 22, 2008. (AP Photo/Matt Sayles, File)
Some of her early roles were Shakespeare, including the lovesick Helena in “A Midsummer Night’s Dream” for New York Shakespeare Festival producer Joseph Papp and Miranda in an off-Broadway production of “The Tempest.”
“I don’t think any actor can really call him or herself an actor unless he or she puts in time with Shakespeare,” she told the Los Angeles Times in 1991. “It shows up, it always shows up in the work, at some point, whether it’s just not being able to have breath control, or not being able to appreciate language as poetry and music, or not having the power that Shakespeare automatically instills you with when you take on one of his characters.”
Kirkland was a member of several New Age groups, taught Insight Transformational Seminars and was a longtime member of the affiliated Church of the Movement of Spiritual Inner Awareness, whose followers believe in soul transcendence.
She reached a career nadir while riding nude on a pig in the 1969 film “Futz,” which a Guardian reviewer dubbed the worst film he had ever seen. “It was about a man who fell in love with a pig, and even by the dismal standards of the era, it was dismal,” he wrote.
Kirkland volunteered for people with AIDS, cancer and heart disease, fed homeless people via the American Red Cross, participated in telethons for hospices and was an advocate for prisoners, especially young people.
The actors union SAG-AFTRA called her “a fearless performer whose artistry and advocacy spanned more than six decades,” adding that as “a true mentor and champion for actors, her generosity and spirit will continue to inspire.”
Fiction has a way of probing the reality of a particular moment in history that you can’t always get from pure fact. Whether it’s a tale of historical fiction or something altogether imagined but imbued with political truth, the best political novels tend to resonate on a deep emotional level, affecting the reader and imparting a sense of the stakes beyond what can be gleaned from mere dates, figures and even the events themselves.
To that end, here’s a brief list of must-read political novels from the past hundred years that have something vital to impart about the world we live in today. They span a range of countries and contexts, but all address the world’s most looming issues in unique and engaging ways. This list is by no means intended to be comprehensive, so feel free to let us know what essential titles we’ve missed.
It’s easy to imagine cutlery clinking, chandeliers sparkling and two icons staring at each other. On June 5, 1961, John F. Kennedy and Jackie Kennedy dined with Queen Elizabeth II and the Duke of Edinburgh at Buckingham Palace. It wasn’t a state banquet, but instead a highly formal dinner in the midst of a European tour. All accounts agree on one thing: the evening was anything but carefree, with extraneous guests shunned and personal sensitivities ruffled. In his book Q: A Voyage Around the Queen, British journalist Craig Brown meticulously recounted the waltz of the evening that Camelot came to Buckingham.
According to Brown, Jackie Kennedy had requested the presence of her sister, Lee Radziwill, and her brother-in-law, Polish Prince Stanislaw Albrecht Radziwill, at the dinner. Initially considered undesirable because the former had already been divorced once and the latter twice, Elizabeth II finally relented and extended the invitations after “much hesitation.” However, the sovereign’s strong position enabled her to exact revenge in her own way. According to writer Gore Vidal, a close friend of Jackie Kennedy, the monarch deliberately withheld invitations from Princess Margaret and Princess Marina of Greece and Denmark, whom the American first lady had expressly asked to meet. The result, Brown wrote, was an evening of “dreary platitude” that left the first lady unimpressed. “No Margaret, no Marina, no one but every Commonwealth agriculture minister they could find,” she was quoted as saying.
Yet it was in the midst of this staid ceremony that a moment of connivance between the two women is said to have arisen. The Queen is said to have asked Jackie Kennedy about her recent tour of Canada, leading the first lady to confide how “exhausting” it was to perform for hours on end, and Elizabeth II, “looking conspiratorial,” according to Brown, replied: “With time, you become astute, you learn to take it easy.” The line alone sums up a royal philosophy of public survival: Allowing yourself a side exit, a detour, an airlock—in short, keeping your breath to last. According to Vidal, Jackie found the exchange with the sovereign “rather laborious.” When Vidal later reported the phrase to Princess Margaret, she reportedly retorted, with acid phlegm: “But that’s why she’s here.”
Queen Elizabeth II and Jacqueline Kennedy on June 5, 1961 at Buckingham Palace
Bettmann / GettyImages
This little sound bite says a lot about the era and the contrast the two iconic women embodied. On the one hand, there was Jacqueline Kennedy-Onassis, who had then only recently moved into the White House and was astonishingly modern. On the other, a monarch in a woolen suit, crown on her head, who had reigned over traditions for the past decade. Should this be seen as a rivalry? Not necessarily, as their relationship continued without public drama. Jackie Kennedy returned to see the Queen in 1962, and after JFK’s assassination, Elizabeth II honored the late President’s memory in the presence of Jackie and the children. But Elizabeth’s simple advice has endured through the ages, applicable to many public figures, precisely because it sheds light on the intimate mechanics of charisma. Grace isn’t just magnetism, it’s also technique. And at Buckingham, as at the White House, it’s an essential survival skill.
The Secret Service agent who jumped onto President John F. Kennedy’s car after he was shot in 1963 has just two words that he wants people to remember: “I tried.”
Clint Hill’s 1975 interview with 60 Minutes correspondent Mike Wallace helped the former agent come to terms with the assassination of JFK, he told “60 Minutes: A Second Look” host and CBS News correspondent Seth Doane. Wallace was the first person Hill spoke with in detail publicly about the horrific events of Nov. 22, 1963.
Images from that day show Hill climbing atop the presidential limousine to protect first lady Jacqueline Kennedy. Hill blamed himself for JFK’s death at the time of his interview with Wallace, saying that if only he’d reacted “five-tenths of a second faster,” the president would be alive.
Doane asked if Hill, now 92, still blames himself.
“Well, maybe there was something I could have done,” Hill said. “I don’t know anymore.”
Hill on working to come to terms with the Kennedy assassination
Hill was 43 and recently retired when he did his 1975 interview with Wallace. Twenty years after that, Wallace wrote to Hill and asked for another interview. Hill wrote a letter back to Wallace.
Mike Wallace (at right) interviews former agent Clint Hill and Gwen Hill. Image dated October 14, 1975. New York, NY.
Photo by CBS via Getty Images
“My interview with you on 60 Minutes in 1975 turned into much more of an emotional experience than I thought possible,” Hill wrote at the time. “It did turn out to be a cathartic experience for me and helped me release feelings that had been pent up for a long time.”
Hill told Doane that he thinks if it hadn’t been for his interview with Wallace, he “would have just lingered in a horrible situation and never come out of it, probably.”
To this day, Hill said he still hasn’t completely forgiven himself.
“My dad drilled into me that when you’re given an assignment to do, you do it ’till it’s fully finished,” Hill told Doane. “I had an assignment to keep the president and Mrs. Kennedy alive. I only kept one of them alive. One died on my watch.”
Hill gets hundreds of letters after 60 Minutes interview
Hundreds of viewers sent in mail after Hill’s interview with 60 Minutes. Those letters were passed on to Hill. Until five years ago, he didn’t remember those letters. But when he was preparing to sell his home in 2019, Hill’s wife, Lisa McCubbin Hill, said they should short through old belongings.
They found a battered black trunk in the garage with 17 years of presidential knick knacks, a stack of framed photos, and hundreds of letters. The couple brought around 25 of the letters along with them when they moved to California. There was one in particular that Hill wanted to read to “60 Minutes: A Second Look.”
“It is a day I shall never forget, nor shall I forget the people so deeply involved in the events of that day. And as I watched you on 60 Minutes, I wanted to reach out and wrap you in my arms to offer some comfort,” Hill read from the letter. “But no one who suffered that tremendous loss that day can even feel comfort, and I know you feel that.”
“It offered me, like she said, I wish she could wrap her arms around me and get my thoughts to go away about that day,” he said. “And I do, too. They never will.”
Never been broadcast: What “no other reporter would have asked” Hill
The new episode of “60 Minutes: A Second Look” included audio from Hill’s interview with Wallace that had never before been broadcast. While the “Secret Service Agent #9” broadcast in 1975 lasted just 16 minutes, 60 Minutes podcast producer Julie Holstein worked with CBS News archivists to find hours of film recorded during the production of the story.
Holstein found a recording of Wallace asking Hill a question that she says “no other reporter would have asked” Hill in 1975.
“What do you do about, about some of the private occasions when they want nobody else to know what’s going on? If they’re, whether it’s in the White House or whether it’s in a hotel out of town, or…and you know, you know what I’m talking about and you know who I’m talking about,” Wallace said in recordings from the archives.
Gwen Hill, Clint Hill’s first wife, who died in 2021, can be heard clearing her throat. Clint Hill wiggles around. His mic scratched his chest.
“Nobody knows about those occasions,” Hill said in the 1975 recording.
Wallace pressed Hill: “You do. How do you manage it?”
Seth Doane is an award-winning CBS News correspondent based in Rome, Italy since 2016. Doane has covered terrorist attacks and breaking news across Europe, traveled with Pope Francis as part of his coverage of the Vatican, and has reported on issues ranging from migration to climate change.
Jason Carter, the grandson of former President Jimmy Carter, and Jack Schlossberg, the grandson of former President John F. Kennedy, kicked off the second night of the Democratic National Convention on Tuesday. Carter said his grandfather, who is about to turn 100, wished he could be at the convention. Schlossberg said Harris is a leader who shares his grandfather’s “energy, vision and optimism for our future.”
Be the first to know
Get browser notifications for breaking news, live events, and exclusive reporting.
Here’s a look at the life of environmental and human rights activist Ethel Kennedy, the widow of Robert F. Kennedy.
Birth date: April 11, 1928
Birth place: Chicago, Illinois
Birth name: Ethel Skakel
Father: George Skakel, businessman
Mother: Ann (Brannack) Skakel
Marriage: Robert F. Kennedy (June 17, 1950-June 6, 1968, his death)
Children: Rory, 1968; Douglas, 1967; Matthew, 1965; Christopher, 1963; Mary, 1959; Michael, February 27, 1958 – December 31, 1997; Courtney, 1956; David, June 15, 1955 – April 25, 1984; Robert Jr., 1954; Joseph II, 1952; Kathleen, 1951
Education: Manhattanville College of the Sacred Heart, 1949 (now called Manhattanville College)
Established an organization called Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights, which supports the causes championed by Robert F. Kennedy.
Met Robert Kennedy though his sister, Jean.
Her nephew, Michael Skakel, was convicted in 2002 of the 1975 murder of his neighbor, Martha Moxley. In 2018, the Connecticut Supreme Court vacated Skakel’s conviction and ordered a new trial. Prosecutors announced they would not retry Skakel in October 2020.
1955 – Ethel’s parents, George and Ann Skakel, are killed in an airplane accident.
1959 – Campaigns for Robert’s brother, John F. Kennedy, during his run for the presidency.
1961-1964 – Robert Kennedy serves as attorney general of the United States.
1964 – Robert Kennedy is elected to the US Senate to represent New York.
March 16, 1968 – Robert Kennedy announces he will run for the Democratic presidential nomination.
June 5, 1968 – Robert Kennedy is shot while campaigning in Los Angeles. He dies on June 6 at the age of 42.
WASHINGTON—After a vagrant emerged from the darkness along the highway and beckoned toward the vehicles with his wickedly sharp blade, President Joe Biden directed his motorcade to pullover and pick up a blood-soaked hitchhiker, sources reported Thursday. “Wow, that poor guy with the meat cleaver sure looks like he could use a ride,” said Biden, who told Secret Service agents to stop the presidential limousine and scoot over to make room for the strange man who had blood dripping off his face and clothes and appeared to wear no shoes. “Had a rough night, haven’t you, fella? Well, we can take you as far as 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. If you need to go further than that, you’re on your own.” At press time, the hitchhiker, who was revealed to be the ghost of the late President John F. Kennedy, had reportedly killed Biden as revenge for living in his cursed former home.
Biden Announces Nation Can Stay Up Till 9:30 Tonight
Screenshot: Wall Street Silver X Video/@WallStreetSilv
The former Fox News host Tucker Carlson offered up some grim analysis of what the 2024 presidential election cycle might bring, noting that every power center in America is trying to stop Donald Trump from winning “like when they killed Kennedy.”
It’s a sobering take from the media giant, asserting that Democrats, Republicans, the media, and intelligence agencies, along with numerous other entities, are working in concert to stop the man who stands as the overall favorite amongst voters.
“You have Trump … all the liberal polls are showing him leading the race, beating Joe Biden in the battleground states,” Carlson said in a podcast interview with Redacted News host Clayton Morris.
“So like, they can’t let him win, but if they don’t let him win, then it’s just super obvious that all this democracy stuff was fraudulent and that it’s not a democracy, it’s an oligarchy run by the richest people,” he continued.
Carlson contends that one man trying to lift the veil on this was Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT) “back when he was a free man … telling the truth.”
That’s when the interview pivots to a frightening outlook and analysis of what is happening right before our eyes.
Tucker Carlson on fire:
“It’s not a democracy; it’s an oligarchy run by the richest people. When they eliminated Kennedy, which they did, they could pretend everything was fine But after this election, there’s no pretending everything is fine.” pic.twitter.com/UY6QbXJlbk
Carlson: They’ll Do Anything To Stop Trump ‘Like When They Killed Kennedy’
Carlson, in the interview with Morris, was asked what his political instincts were telling him was going to happen in 2024. He began by pointing out that “every power center in the country” was working together to stop Trump.
Every power center, and now that this is becoming obvious, he contends, the truth is being revealed.
“And so at that point, like the veil’s off, we can’t pretend anymore,” Carlson said. “Like when they killed Kennedy – which they did – they could kind of pretend like everything’s fine.”
“But after this election, there’s no pretending, everything’s fine. Everyone will know,” the former Fox News host continued. “And it is a little bit like you get kidnapped, you get thrown in the back of the car and all of a sudden the kidnapper turns around and lowers his mask and you see his face. And that’s not a good thing because once you see his face, he has to kill you because you know who he is.”
America’s kidnapper has been revealed in the form of a power-hungry, elitist cabal, desperately trying to stop a man of the people.
Tucker is such a dangerous and powerful voice of truth for the establishment.
Carlson has long been a believer that the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) was involved in the assassination of John Fitzgerald Kennedy.
In fact, he recently offered a detailed analysis of why he believes President Richard Nixon was removed from office (Watergate) because he specifically knew that the CIA was involved in Kennedy’s assassination and was asking too many questions.
“On June 23, 1972, Nixon met with the then–CIA director, Richard Helms, at the White House,” Carlson explained. “During the conversation, which thankfully was tape-recorded, Nixon suggested he knew ‘who shot John,’ meaning President John F. Kennedy.”
“Nixon further implied that the CIA was directly involved in Kennedy’s assassination, which we now know it was,” he added. “Helms’s telling response? Total silence.”
Ron Paul, the former Republican presidential candidate and libertarian icon, like Carlson, has asserted that Kennedy was “murdered by our government.”
Ron Paul on the first @Timcast question: JFK’s assassination was a coup by Dulles and LBJ, Progressivism and the founding of the Federal Reserve laid the groundwork pic.twitter.com/t7pTI0F34W
Carlson also told Redacted News that if the entrenched deep state were actually trying to preserve democracy, they’d leave the 2024 presidential contest up to the voters.
“I kind of don’t know how we get along after this election unless they decelerate and, and just, and just do what they should do,” he said. “Which is like, look, we don’t like Trump. Here’s why we don’t think he’s good for the country. Here’s why we think Joe Biden’s great. Here’s why America make your choice.”
“But I don’t think they are going to do that. They’re morally obligated to do that, but they won’t. And it’s incumbent on them to do that,” Carlson continued. “Stop charging him with bulls*** crimes that your own people skate on.”
Tucker believes that the only way to move on in this country is to “have a free and fair election for the first time in a while, since 2016.”
What do you think about this? Let us know in the comments section.
Now is the time to support and share the sources you trust. The Political Insider ranks #3 on Feedspot’s “100 Best Political Blogs and Websites.”
Rusty Weiss has been covering politics for over 15 years. His writings have appeared in the Daily Caller, Fox News, Breitbart, and many more.
FREE NEWS ALERTS
Subscribe to receive the most important stories delivered straight to your inbox. Your subscription helps protect independent media.
By subscribing, you agree to receive emails from ThePoliticalInsider.com and that you’ve read and agree to our Privacy policy and to our terms and conditions.
