Recent declassified documents have revealed that the CIA had a closer relationship with Lee Harvey Oswald than previously admitted, including his involvement in a covert operation overseen by George Joannides, a CIA officer specializing in psychological warfare based in Florida. These disclosures, emerging from the JFK Records Act, indicate that Oswald, often portrayed as a lone gunman, was in contact with CIA-funded anti-Castro Cuban groups like the DRE (Directorio Revolucionario Estudiantil) before the November 22, 1963, assassination of President John F. Kennedy. Joannides, as deputy chief of the CIA’s Miami branch, directed psychological operations aimed at destabilizing Castro’s regime, and Oswald’s documented interactions with these groups suggest he may have been an asset or informant. This connection lends credence to theories that Kennedy’s assassination was not the act of a solitary disgruntled individual but a calculated psychological operation orchestrated by elements within the CIA, often referred to as the “deep state,” to manipulate public perception and shift political power.

The notion that Kennedy’s assassination served a broader liberal agenda hinges on the political context of 1963 and the subsequent actions of Lyndon B. Johnson (LBJ). Kennedy’s presidency, while progressive in rhetoric, faced criticism from liberal factions for its cautious approach to civil rights and social reforms, as well as his reluctance to escalate U.S. involvement in Vietnam. LBJ, upon assuming the presidency, rapidly advanced the Great Society programs and the Civil Rights Act of 1964, initiatives that had stalled under Kennedy due to political gridlock and his measured leadership style. Some conspiracy theorists argue that the deep state, frustrated by Kennedy’s resistance to aggressive Cold War policies and his perceived softness on communism, saw LBJ as a more pliable leader to enact a liberal domestic agenda while expanding military commitments abroad. The CIA’s prior knowledge of Oswald, combined with its history of covert operations, fuels speculation that the assassination was a psychological operation designed to traumatize the nation, consolidate power, and pave the way for LBJ’s legislative push.

However, this narrative remains speculative and contentious, as the newly released documents do not explicitly prove CIA orchestration of the assassination or a direct link to a liberal agenda. Critics argue that the CIA’s contact with Oswald could reflect routine intelligence-gathering rather than a sinister plot, and Joannides’ role may have been limited to managing anti-Castro operations without foreknowledge of the assassination. Moreover, LBJ’s liberal policies could be seen as a pragmatic response to the era’s social unrest rather than evidence of a deep state conspiracy. Still, the CIA’s decades-long obfuscation of its ties to Oswald, including Joannides’ deceptive conduct during congressional inquiries, deepens public mistrust and keeps alive the idea that Kennedy’s death was a psychological operation to realign U.S. policy. Until further evidence emerges, the revelations provide tantalizing but inconclusive support for claims of a deep state agenda, leaving the assassination’s true motives shrouded in mystery.