Transcript of 124-10185-10195_multirif.pdf
==================================================
Page 1
==================================================
File #
ko l ~ Mm- 3z4l
Serial Scope:
F-41,19-27, 20-32
xeibased under tne JohnF. Kennedy
Assassination Records CollectionAct of
992 (44USC 2107 Note) Case#t:Nw
aa60x Date: 03-18-2026
NWF886u8 Doc1a32989820-Page-
==================================================
Page 2
==================================================
Routing
FD-4 (Rev. 420881)
Date 6/8/83
To: 0 Director
Att :
FILE #
D SAC Title
ASAC
#teh
Supv.
Agent
SSS
Rotor
Steno
Typist
RE: M
Room
Acknowledge For Information Return assignment card
Assign D Reassign Handle Return flle serial
Bring file Initial & return
Call me Leads need attention Return with action taken
Correct Open case Return with explanation
Deadline Prepare lead cards Search and return
Delinquent Prepare tickler See me
Discontinue Recharge file D serial Type
Expedite
File Send to
The following file (s) have been retained in
SAC Safe for some period of time; however space
is now at a premium_ File (s) are being returned
to appropriate supervisor for review ana for
determination as to whether file may be destroyed ,
placed in closed files , or in Supervisor S safe,
if one available
Pu Suttb &tka
Ue
Ied Aewu A b%mi N
Y
i
Fci Uhen
psk V
Qccrdglh fzse`
A SAC Neteles_
See reverse side Office
GPO 1982 0 391-714
"5ak_ MaintainEL
IoPSERAAL
NWN 88608 Docld:32989820_Page 2
Slip
8uD
Luclseed 6
Aaf
7e/
7M Nices
7 Lanlea
16q a7 5
Mnntni&
As
==================================================
Page 3
==================================================
Krf
CHQO1.66
RR PH MX
DE HQ #0[66 2302222.
Zny IEEEEE
R
1722c3z (AUG 84
M, D IRECT OR FBI
To FBI MIAM I ROUTINE
PER SONAL MTEE IO
RBI; PHIL ADEL
PWnteoprze /
ATTN:~SSRA KLAUS RokR
"LAS .E F T 0
QRGA NIZED CR
IME REcE8tke TRA INING CONFERE NCE " SEPTEM BER 25-27 ,
1984, BETHE HEM PE NNSYLVANIA.
RE BUREAu TELETYPE to AL BA NY AUGUST 15 1984.
REBWIEL IN ITED VAR Ious EA ST COA ST FIELD D IVISIONS To SE ND
NIZED C IME SUPERV ISOR $ A n, AGE NTs ASSIGNDRET0 Or GA NIZED
ME MATTERS To ABOVE 'TRA INING
cLwFERENcE;
A IMAR Y THRUST
OF THIS CONFERENCE WIL BE' THE LCN Am NARICOT ICS VIOLATIONS_
InVIEI' OF THE FACT HAT THE MIAM I DJVISION HAS VAR fqus
MEMEER S CF EaSt COA ST LcN' FAMIIES RESID ING WITHIN THEJR
DIVISIOIN An THE GEOGR
'APHIQ RoLE
FORIDA PLAYS In THE s0ub
'1p?
744,21
SdNCHE_ Indb}
RINIZE fiVad_
AUe 17 134
3 MWAMI
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 3
vecz
al
&ebral
3317
165 - /v/9 {
4LA
==================================================
Page 4
==================================================
0}
Kaai) ,
+EGGE {W 0 DE Hq0166 UnqAs E F
#as
WRCOTICS TRAFFICKING AFFEC? Ing THE EAST COA ST MIAM I ,IS
REQUE STED _ To DE SIGNATE ATTENEEs To ABOVE CO NFERE NEEF IH
NUM BER 0F A GE NTS ATTEN InG TKIS CONFERE NCE IS BEInG LEFT T0
TKE_DISCRFT Ion 0F SA C M IAMI,
SSRA KAUS R OHR , ALLE NTOW N SHOLD BE ADVISED OF THE
NAMES 0F ATTENEES TO THIS TR ANING CONFERE NCE; (6
2
BT
L
#C [66
AE2
Zeva/
'#;
#i
nl
Nmnn
K 'LLQV
Va '48
Ay
~,329222 MM?/RM TKS
4L-72913
NW 88618 Docld:32989820 Pagg
RA ,
33/7
L t-
1; -1v14 K
==================================================
Page 5
==================================================
Routinc Slip (Copies to Offices Check
0-7 12-17-73)
To: 5
1LEGAT:'
7 Albanv Hou ston Oklahoma Cily Bpirul Allmu Quergue Indli:ulapolis Qluatha ixe7i
Alexandria Jack sun Ph ladelphia Xon: Anchorage Jacksonville ]' &nix Rrasila
a1lantat Kausas Cily pjushren [ucncs Aires
Ballimore Knoxville Poctl 'rcus Birmingham Lils Vegas Rictmwond Kong
Rosion Littie Rock Sacranento Iondon
Buffalo E.os Anlgeles Sl Louis Jadrid
Futtc Louis ille Salt Take Cily Martia
Charlotlc Mcmphis San Anton Niexico City
Chie Miami San iego Otiswa
Ciucinnati Mil wavkee San 'Franeisco Paris
(}eyeland Minneapolis San Juan Rome
Cxlumhia Mobile Sarunn&h Singapor8
DJallas Newark Seztle Tel Aviv
Dcnvc'r New aven Springheld 'Tokyo
New Orlcuns Taip #
as0 New }ork City Washia gton Field
tbnolula Norlolk Quantico ~Rouae
G4 Dnookow appqanemqe
E: "auS-CEexttos_on
Z54
Yas /977.
IRECTORS APPEARANCE BEFORE
COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES
7
DECEMBER 10 , 1975
tzky)
bl 3247
Relenlion For appropiiata
For infonalion J oplional aclion Sutrop, by
Thc enclosed 'is fr yur information: If uscd in a iulure repoit, eoonccal &ll
sourccs, CJ paraphrase conlenls.
Enclosed are corrected pages from reporl of' SA
dated
Remorks:
ReButel to al1 SACs and Legats
1
12/10/75 _
Enclosed for each Office and Legat is
one copy of the transcript 0f questions which
were asked Mr Kelley during captioned appearance ,
along with Mx . Kelley 's answers to those questions
ISEARCHED_
SERIALIZED_ INDEXED_
FILED
Enc: (1)
Bufile
JAN 2 "iy/o
Urfile E?l_WAiMl
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page
aal
Jle
cago
exoil
Sou plis Ried]
==================================================
Page 6
==================================================
TusLte
Vol. 20
Ykys `
Iluited Statrr Seuatte
Report of Proceedings
Hearing held before
Select Comittee to
Study Governmental Operations
With Respect to Intelligence Activities
INTELLIGENCE INVESTIGATION
Wednesday , December 10 , 1975
Washington, DC
SEARCHED_ INDEXEd _
(SERIALIZED FILED_
Jan 2 15/0
F2LCIAm WARD & PAUL
410 FIRST STREET, S. E.
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20003 66-3346 _ ?/
(202) 544-6000
MW 88608 Docld: 32989820 Page 6_
@hpe
==================================================
Page 7
==================================================
L
1 C @ N = € n I
8
1 2 STATEMENT OF PAGE
1
3
The Honorable Clarence M_ Kelley ,
4 Direcotor Federal Bureau of Inve-
stigation 2451
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
1
12
0
0
13
14
15
16
17
18
1
19
i
20 L
21
4
22
1
23
2
8 24
25
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 7 Page
==================================================
Page 8
==================================================
AHW / smnl 2447
7
INTELLIGENCE INVESTIGATION
1
8
1 2
1 3 Wednesday , December 10 , 1975
4
5 United States Senate,
6 Select Committee to Study Governmental
Operations with Respect to
8
Intelligence Activities ,
9
Washington , D_ C .
The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:10
10
0 'clock a.m. , in Room 318 , Russell Senate Office Building ,
11
1
the honorable Frank Church (Chairman of the Committee)
12
4
1
13
presiding.
Present: Senators Church (presiding) Hart of Michigan ,
14
Mondale, Huddleston
1
Hart of Colorado , Baker , Goldwater and
15
Mathias _
16
Also present: William G _ Miller, Staff Director; Frederidk
17
A. 0. Schwarz
1
Jr., Chief Counsel; Curtis R. Smothers Minority
18
1
19 Counsel; Paul Michel , Joseph diGenova , Barbara Banoff Frederidk
8
Baron , Mark Gitenstein, Loch Johnson , David Bushong , Charles
20
|
Lombard _ John Bayly, Charles Kirbow
1
Michael Madigan, Bob
21
3 22
Kelley, John Elliff, Elliot Maxwell, Andy Postal, Pat Shea ,
1
Michael Epstein and Burt Wides , Professional Staff Members _
23
1
8 24
The Chairman . The Committee' s witness this morning is
25
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 8
7
==================================================
Page 9
==================================================
smn 2 2448
1
1 the Honorable Clarence Mg Kelley , the Director of the Federal
8
1 2 Bureau of Investigation.
1
3 Mr _ Kelley was appointed Director in July of 1973 in a
4 troubled time for the FBI His experience as an innovative
5 law enforcement administrator in charge of the Kansas City
6 Police Department for over ten years , and his previous work as
7
a Special Agent 0f the FBI have made him uniquely qualified
8
to leaa the Bureau_
9 The Select Committee is grateful for the cooperation
10 extended by Director Kelley in the course of its inquiry over
11 the past months The Committee is also impressed by the
1
12 openness of the FBI' s witnesses before this Committee , ana
0
0
13 their willingness to consider the need for legislation to
14 clarify the Bureau S
intelligence responsibility.
15 It is important to remember from the outset that this
16 Committee is examining only a small portion of the FBI' s
17 activities Our hearings have concentrated on FBI domestic
18 intelligence operations. We have consistently expressed
our
1
19 admiration and support for the Bureau S criminal investigative
i
20 and law enforcement work , and we recognize the vital importance L
21 of counterespionage in the modern world But domestic
4
22 intelligence has raised many difficult questions _
1
23 The Committee has also concentrated on the past rather
0
24 than on present FBI activities. The abuses brought to light
8
25 in our hearings occurred years and even decades before Directoy
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 9 Page
==================================================
Page 10
==================================================
To~
1
1
Kelley took charge.
8
The Staff has advised the Committee that under Director
1 2
1 3
Kelley the FBI has taken significant steps to rethink previous
policies ana to establish new safeguards against abuse _ The 4
5 FBI is now placing greater emphasis on
foreign related intelli-
gence operations , and less on purely domestic surveillance.
6
7
The FBI is working more closely with the Justice Department in
8
developing policies and standards for intelligence _ These
are welcome developments
9
Nevertheless , many important issues remain unresolved.
10
Therefore_ we have invited Director Kelley to share with the
11
1
Committee his views on some of the considerations the Congress
12
8
should take into account in thinking about the future of 0
13
FBI intelligence_ Among these issues are whether FBI surveil-
14
lance should extend beyond the investigation of persons
15
likely to commit specific crimes ; whether there should be
16
outside supervision or approval before the FBI conducts certain
17
types of investigations or uses certain surveillance techniques
18
1 whether foreign related intelligence activities should be
19
i strictly separated from the FBI ' s domestic law enforcement
20 L
functions and what should be done to the information already
21
in the FBI files and that which may go into those files in 3 22
1
the future
23
2
The Committee looks forward to a constructive exchange
8 24
of views with Director Kelley this morning , with Attorney
25
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 10 Page
==================================================
Page 11
==================================================
sm 4 2450 _
L
1 General Levi tomorrow ana with both the FBI ana the Justice
8
2 Department in the next months as the Committee considers !
1
3 recommendations that will strengthen the American people' s
4
confidence in the Federal Bureau Of Investigation _ That
5
confidence is vital for the effective enforcement of Federal
6 law and for the security of the nation against foreign
7 espionage _
8
Director Kelley , we are pleased to welcome you and if
9
you woula have a preparea statement you woula like to lead off
10
with, please proceed
11
1
12
8
0
13
14
15
16
17
18
1
19
9
20 L
21
4
22
1
23
2
8 24
25
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 11 Page
==================================================
Page 12
==================================================
smn 5 2451
1 STATEMNT OF THE HONORABLE CLARENCE M_ KELLEY ,
8
1 2 DIRECTOR, FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
1 3 Mr _ Kelley. Thank you very much , Senator Church ana
gentlemen _ 6
I welcone the interest which this Committee has shown in
6 the FBI ana most particularly in our operations in the intelli
7 gence ana internal security fields _
8 I share your high regara for the rights guaranteed by the
9 Constitution and laws of the United States Throughout my
10 35 year career in law enforcement you will find the same insis
11 tence , as has been expressed by this Committee, upon programs
1
12 of law enforcement that are themselves fully consistent with
8
1
13 law .
14 I also have strongly supported the concept of legislative
15 oversight . In fact, at the time my appointment as Director of
16 the FBI and was being considered by the Senate Judiciary
17 Comittee two and one half years ago , I tola the members of
18 that Connmittee of my firm belief in Congressional oversight
3
19 This Committee has completed the most exhaustive study
i
20 of our intelligence and security operations that has ever been
|
21 undertaken by anyone outside the FBI other than the present
4
22 Attorney General At the outset, we pledged our fullest
1
23 cooperation and promised to be as candid and forthright as
2
24
possible in responding to your questions and complying with yoyr
8
25 requests_
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 12 Page
==================================================
Page 13
==================================================
smn D
1 I believe we have lived up to those promises .
8
2 The members and staff of this Committee have had unprece- 1
1 3 dented access to FBI information_
4 You have talked to the personnel who conduct security-typel
5 investigations and who are personally involved in every facet
6 of our
day-to-day intelligence operations.
7 You have attended numerous briefings bY FBI officials who
8 have sought to familiarize the Committee and its staff with
9 all major areas of our activities and operations in the nationall
10 security and intelligence fields
11 In brief you have had firsthand examination of these
{
12 matters that is unmatched at any time in the history of the
8
0
13 Congress _
14 As this Committee has stated , these hearings have , of
15
necessity, forcused largely on certain errors and abuses I
16 credit this Committee for its forthright recognition that the
17
hearings do not give
a full or balanced account of the FBI ' s
18
record of performance _
3
19 It is perhaps in the nature of such hearings to focus
i
20 on abuses to the exclusion of positive accomplishments of the
|
21
organization_
9 22
The Counterintelligence Programs which have received the
1
23
lion S share of public attention and' critical comment constituted
2
an infinitesimal portion of our overall work.
8 24
25 4 Justice Department Committee which was formed last year
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 13
==================================================
Page 14
==================================================
smn 7 2453
1
1 to conduct a
thorough study of the FBI s Counterintelligence
8
{ 2 Programs has reported that in the five basic ones it found
1
3 3,247 Counterintelligence Programs were submitted to FBI
4 Headquarters from 1956 to 1971 - Of this total, 2,370 ,
5 less than three fourths , were approved.
6 I repeat , the vast majority of those 3 ,247 proposals were
7 being devised , considered , and many were rejected , in an era
8 when the FBI was handling an average of 700 , 000 investigative
9 matters per year.
10 Nonetheless , the criticism which has been expressed
11 regarding the Counterintelligence Programs is most legitimate
{
12 and understandable .
0
1
13 The question might well be asked what I had in mind when
14 I stated last year that for the FBI to have done less than it
15 did under the circumstances then existing would have been an
16 abdication of its responsibilities to the American people.
17 What I said then , in 1974 , and what I believe today , is
18 that the FBI employees involved in these programs did what they
2
19 felt was expected of them by the President , the Attorney General ,
i
20 the Congress ana the people of the United States _
L
21 Bomb explosions rocked public and private offices and
9
22
buildings ; rioters led revolutionary extremists laid seige
1
23
to military, industrial, and educational facilities; and
2
24
killings, maimings _ and other atrocities accompanied such
8
25 acts Of violence from New England to California .
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 14
by
==================================================
Page 15
==================================================
smn 8 2454
1
1 The victims of these acts were human beings _
1
men , women ,
8
1 2 and children_ As is the case in time of peril_ whether real or
1
3 perceived,
1
they looked to their Government , their elected and
4 appointed leadership, and to the FBI and other law enforcement
5 agencies to protect their lives, their property, and their
6 rights_
7 There were many calls for action from Members of Congress
8 and others , but few guidelines were furnished _ The FBI and other
9 law enforcement agencies were besieged by demands , impatient
10 demands , for immediate action _
11 FBI employees recognized the danger; felt they had a
1
12 responsibility to respond; and in good faith initiated actions
0
1
13 designed to counter conspiratorial efforts of self-proclaimed
14 revolutionary groups 1
and to neutralize violent activities _
15 In the development and execution of these programs
16 mistakes of judgment admittedly were made
17 Our concern over whatever abuses occurred in the Counter-
18 intelligence Programs ana there were some substantial ones
1
19 should not obscure the underlying purpose of those programs _
9
20 We must recognize that situations have occurred in the
L
21 past and will arise in the future where the Government may well
5 22 be expected to depart from its traditional role, in the FBI' s
1
23 case , as an investigative and intelligence-gathering
2
8 24 agency , and take affirmative steps which are needed to meet
25 an imminent threat to human life Or property.
NWV 88608 Docld: 32989820 Page 15
==================================================
Page 16
==================================================
smn 9 2455
L
1 In short, if we learn a murder or bombing is to be carried
8
2 out now , can we truly meet our responsibilities investigating 1
1
3 only after the crime has occurred , or should we have the
4
ability to prevent? I refer to those instances where there is
5 a strong sense of urgency because of an imminent threat to
6 human life.
7
Where there exists the potential to penetrate and disrupt ,
8 the Congress must consider the question Of whether or not such
9 preventive action should be available to the FBI _
10 These matters are currently being addressed by a task
11 force in the Justice Department , including the FBI ,
1
12 and I am confident that Departmental guidelines and controls cal
0
1
13 be developed in cooperation with pertinent Committees of Congreks
14 to insure that such measures are used in an
entirely responsibl
15 manner.
16
Probably the most important:' question here today is what
17 assurances I can give that the errors and abuses wnich arose
18 under the Counterintelligence Programs will not occur again?
2
19 First, let me assure the Committee that some very sub-
i
20 stantial changes have been made in key areas of the FBI' s
L
21 methods of operations since I took the oath of office as
9
22 Director on July 9 , 1973 .
1
23
Today we place a high premium on openness , openness
2
24
both within and without the service.
8
25 I have instituted a program of open , frank discussion
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 16
by
Page
==================================================
Page 17
==================================================
smn 10 2456
in the decision-making process which insures that no future
8
2 program or major policy decision will ever be adopted without a 1
1
3 full and critical review of its propriety.
4
Participatory management has become a fact in the FBI _
5
I have made it know throughout our Headquarters and
6 Field Divisions that I welcome all employees _ regardless of
7 position or degree of experience, to contribute their thoughts
8 and suggestions
1
and to voice whatever criticisms or
9 reservations they may have concerning any area of our operations_
10 The ultimate decisions in the Bureau are mine , and I take
11
full responsibility for then_ My goal is to achieve maximum
1
12
critical analysis among our personnel without in any manner
8
0
13
weakening or undermining our basic command structure
14 The results of this program have been most beneficial , to
15 me personally, to the FBI ' s disciplined performance , and to
16 the morale of our employees_
17 In addition, since some of the mistakes of the past
18 were occasioned by direct orders from higher authorities outsiap
2
19 the FBI, we have welcomed Attorney General Edward Levi S
i
20
guidance, counsel
1
and his continuous availability, in his
L
21
own words , a 'lightning rod' to deflect improper requests_
5 22
Within days after taking office, Attorney General Levi
1
23
instructed that I immediately report to him any requests
2
24
or practices which, in my judgment , were improper or which ,
8
25
considering the context of the request, I believed presented
NW 88608 Docld: 32988820 Page 17
"as
==================================================
Page 18
==================================================
smnll 2457
1 the appearances of impropriety
8
! 2 I am pleased to report to this Comittee as I have to the
1
3 Attorney General that during my nearly two and one half years as
4 Director under two Presidents and three Attorneys General
2 no
5 one has approached me or made overtures, directly
or otherwise ,
6 to use the FBI for partisan political
or other improper
7 purposes .
8 I can assure you that I woula not for a moment consider
9
honoring any such request.
10 I can assure you , too, in my administration of the FBI
11 I routinely bring to the attention of the Attorney General and
12 the Deputy Attorney General major policy questions
1
including
8
0
13 those which arise in my
continuing review of our operations and
14 practices _ These are discussed openly and candidly in order
15 that the Attorney General can exercise his responsibilities
16 over the FBI _
17 I am convinced that the basic structure of the FBI today
18 is sound _ But it would be a mistake to think that integrity
1
19 can be assured through institutional means _
i
20 Integrity is a human quality. It depends upon the
L
21 character of the person who occupies the office 0f the
4
22 Director and every member of the FBI under him_
1
23 I am proud of the 19,000 men and women with whom it is
2
24 my honor to serve today. Their dedication, their professionalilsm
1 8
25
their standards
1
ana the self-discipline which they personally
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 18
only
Page
==================================================
Page 19
==================================================
sm 12 2458
demand of themselves and expect of their associates are the
8
1 2 nation s ultimate assurance of proper and responsible conduct
1 3 at all times the FBI _
4 The Congress and the members of this Committee in
5 particular have gained a great insight into_ the. problems
6 confronting the FBI in the security and intelligence fields ,
7 problems which all too often we have left to resolve without
8 sufficient guidance from the Executive Branch or the Congress
9 itself.
10 As in all human endeavors , errors of judgment have been
11 made . But no one who is looking for the cause of our
1
12 failures shoula confine his search solely to the FBI , or even
8
0
13 to the Executive Branch.
14 The Congress itself has long possessed the mechanism for
15 FBI oversight; yet, seldom has it been exercised_
16 An initial step was taken in the Senate in 1973 when the
17 Committee on the Judiciary established a Subcommittee on FBI
18 Oversight. Hearings had been commenced , and we were fully
3
19 committed to maximum participation with the members of that
i
20 Subcommittee.
L
21 I laud their efforts. However , those efforts are of very
9
22 recent origin in terms of the FBI s history.
1
23 One of the greatest benefits Of the study this Committee
2
24 has made is the expert knowledge you have gained of the complex
8
25
problems confronting the FBI _ But I respectfully submit that
NWV 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 19
by
==================================================
Page 20
==================================================
2459
smn 13
1_ those benefits are wasted if they do not lead to the next 8
! 2
a step that I believe is absolutely essential
7 a legislative
1
3 charter, expressing Congressional determination Of intelligence
4 jurisdiction for the FBI _
5
Action to resolve the problems confronting us in the
security and intelligence fields is urgently needed ; and it
7 must be undertaken in a forthright manner. Neither the Cangres
nor the public can afford to look the other way , leaving it to
the FBI to do what must be done as too often has occurred in
10 the past.
11 This means too that Congress must assume 2
continuing rolel
1
12 not in the initial decision-making process but in the review ofl
8
0
13 our performance
14 I woula caution against
a too-ready reliance upon the
15 courts to do our tough thinking for us, Some proposals that
16 have been advanced during these hearings woula extend the role
17 of the courts into the early stages of the investigative
18 process and thereby woula take over what historically have
2
19 been Executive Branch decisions .
9
20 I frankly feel that such a trend , if unchecked , woula |
21 seriously undermine the independence of the Judiciary and cast
9 22 them in a role not contemplated by the authors of our
1
23 Constitution_ Judicial review cannot be a substitute for Con-
2
8 24 gressional oversight or Executive decision_
25 The FBI urgently needs a clear ana workable determination
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 20
step,
==================================================
Page 21
==================================================
14 2460 T
of our jurisdiction in the intelligence field, a jurisdictional
8
1 2 statement that the Congress finds to be responsive to both
1 3 the will and the needs of the American people.
4 Senators , first and foremost, I am a police officer ,
a
5 career police officer. In' my police experience , the must
6 frustrating of all problems that I have discovered facing
law enforcement in this country, Federal _ state, and local , is
8 when demands are made of them to perform their traditional
9 role as protector of life and property without clear and
10 understandable legal bases to do sO
11 I recognize that the formulation of such a legislative
1
12 charter will be a
most precise and demanding task_
8
0
13 It must be sufficiently flexible that it does not stifle
14 the FBI' s effectiveness in combating the growing incidence
15 of crime and violence across the United States _ That charter
16 must clearly address the demonstrated problems of the past ;
17 yet, it must amply recognize the fact that times change and
18 sO also do the nature ana thrust of our criminal and subversive
1
19 challenges
i
20 The fact that the Department of Justice has commenced L
21 the formulation of operational guidelines governing
our
5
22 intelligence activities does not in any manner diminish the nee
1
23 for legislation. The responsibility for conferring juris-
2
8 24 diction resides with the Congress _
25 In this regard , I am troubled by some proposals which
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 21
==================================================
Page 22
==================================================
Smn 15 2461
question the neea for intelligence gathering , suggesting that
8
1 2 information needed for the prevention of violence can be
L
3 acquired in the normal course of criminal investigations
4 As a practical matter, the line between intelligence
5 work and regular criminal investigations is often difficult
6 to describe_ What begins as an intelligence investigation may
7 well end in arrest and prosecution of the subject_ But there
8 are some fundamental differences between these investigations
9 that shoula be recognized, differences in scope , in objective
10 and in the time of initiation In the usual criminal case , a
11 crime has occurred ana it remains only for the Government to
12
identify the perpetrator and to collect sufficient evidence
8
1
13 for prosecution. Since the investigation normally follows
14 the elements of the crime , the scope of the inquiry is
15 limited and fairly well defined_
16 By contrast, intelligence work involves the gathering Of
17 information
8
not necessarily evidence _ The purpose may well be
18 not to prosecute, but to thwart crime or to insure that the
1
19 Government: has enough information to meet any future crisis
8
20 or emergency - The inquiry is necessarily broad because it
L
21 must tell uS not the nature of the threat, but also whether
53 22 the threat is imminent , the persons involved, and the
1
23 means by which the threat will be carried out_ The ability
0
24 of the Government to prevent criminal acts is dependent on: 8
25 our anticipation of those criminal acts _ Anticipation,
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 22
only
Page
==================================================
Page 23
==================================================
smn 16 2462
1
in turn, is dependent on advance information , that is, intelli-
8
1 2 gence _
1
3 Certainly, reasonable people can differ on these issues _
4 Given the opportunity, I am confident that the continuing need
5 for intelligence work can be documented to the full satisfactio
6 of the Congress We recognize that what is at stake here is not
7 the interests of the FBI , but rather the interests of every
8 citizen of this country- We recognize also that the resolution
9 of these matters will demand extensive and thoughtful
10 deliberation by the Congress _ To this end , I pledge the
11 complete cooperation of the Bureau with this Committee or
1
12 its successors in this important task
4
0
13 In any event , you have my unqualified assurance as
14 Director that we will carry out both the letter and the spirit
15 Of such legislation as the Congress may enact:
16 That is the substance of my preparea statement.
17 I would also like to say extemporaneously that I note
18 that on this panel are some gentlemen who were on the Judiciar_
1
19 Committee Which heard my testimony at the time I was presentea
8
20 to them for candidacy as Director of the FBI _ At that time
|
21 I took very seriously the charge which may possibly result
5 22 in the deliberation of this Committee and of the full Senate
1
23 I have been well aware of the problems of the FBI since that
2
24 time _ I have also been well aware of the capabilities of
8
25 the FBI to discharge those responsibilities. I don 't take
NWV 88608 DocId:32989820 Page 23
==================================================
Page 24
==================================================
smn '1 / 24u)
1
them lightly- I am of sufficient experience and age that I
8
2 have pledged myself to do what is good and proper _ I say this 1
1
3 not as a self-serving statement but in order that we might
4
place in context my position within the FBI _ I coula seek
5 sanctuary and perhaps a safe sanctuary by saying during the
6
period these things occurrea I was with the local police
7
department in Kansas City, Missouri_ Prior to that time ,
8 however
1
I was in the FBI
9
During the time I was with the FBI , during the time I
10 was with the police department , I continued throughout that
11
period a close acquaintance with and a strong affection for
1
12 the FBI _
8
1
13 I only want to point out that based on those years , based
14 on those observations we have here a very fine and very
15 sensitive ana a very capable organization_ I feel that there
is much that can still be done - I know that we are not withou
16
fault. I know that from those experiences I have had _ We
17
will not be completely without fault in the future _ But I
18
1
19 assure you that we look upon this inquiry, we look upon any
9
mandate which you may feel you have_
1
that you should look at
20 L
21
this is good and proper, ana we do not intend
Lt On I only want
5 22
to place in your thinking the fact that you have here a
1
23
matchless organization, one which I continue to say was
2
not motivated in some of these instances , and in most Of
8 24
them , and I cannot justify some , that the motivation was of the
25
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 24
==================================================
Page 25
==================================================
Smn 18 2464
L
best . I am not pleading, as does a defense attorney . I am
8
1 2 putting in your thinking RY objective observations as
1 3 a citizen who is somewhat concerned about the future of this
4 organization_ It is too precious for us to have it in
5
a condition of jeopardy.
Thank you very much .
G
The Chairman. Thank you , Director Kelley.
8
I want to turn first to Senator Hart who won t be able
9 to remain through the whole morning. I think he has one
end t. 1 10 question he woula like to ask_
11
{
12
8
1
13
14
15
16
17
18
1
19
8
20 L
21
4
22
1
23
2
8 24
25
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 25
only
Page
==================================================
Page 26
==================================================
WARD ; GSH
2465
'IA Op8n
5
'ap
'2/104
2 1 Senator Hart of Michigan. Thank you , Mr Chairman
8
2 Senator Mathias and I have Judiciary Committee hearings at 10.30_ 1
1
3 Iahve several questions
1
and I'm sure they 11 be
coverea by others
1
but the ones that I have is a result of 4
5
reading your testimony and listening to it this morning, and
6 it relates to your comment at the foot 0f page 10 and at the
7 of 11_
8 There you are indicating that you caution us about
9
extending the court's role in the early stages 0f investigation_
10 suggesting that this might take us beyound the role comtemplated
11 for the courts under the Constutution
1
12 Now as you have said, aside from the so-called national
0
0
13
security wiretap problem, the main focus of our discussions
14 and concern has been on the possibility requiring court
15 approval for the use of informants , informants directed to
16
penetrate and report on some group _
17 And one of the witnesses yesterday , Professor Dorsen
18
pointed our that really those informants are the most pervasivel
19
type of an eavesdropping device- It is a human device. It's
20
really , an informant is really more intrusive on mY privacy
21
than a bug or a tap because he can follow me anywhere _ He
22 can ask me questions to get information the government would
23
like to have_
24 Now we certainly involve the courts in approval of the
25
wiretaps for physical searches with the intent of the drafters
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 26
top
Page
==================================================
Page 27
==================================================
2466
1
osh of the Constitution to have a neutral third party magistrate
8
1 2
screen use of certain investigative techniques_ Ana the
1
3 informant is such a
technique He functions sort of like a
4 general warrant, and I don't see requiring court approval
5 would violate the role envisaged for the courts
6 And as I leave , I would like to get your reactions to
7
my feelings
8 Mr Kelley. I do not feel that there is any use of the
9 informant in intrusion, Which is to this extent objectionable
10 It has of course been approved, the concept of the informant ,
11 by nuerous court decisions _
1
12 Let uS go down not to the moral connotation of the use
8
1
13 of the informant_
14 I think, as in many cases , that is a matter of balance _
15 You have only very few ways of solving crines You have
16 basically in the use of the informant , I think, the protection
17 of the right of the victin to be victimized _ You have within
18 the Constitution certain grants that are under ordinary
2
19 circustances abrogation of rights _ The right Of search and
i
20 seizure, which, of course, can't be unreasonable , but none- L
21 theless , you have the right.
3 22 I think that were We to lose the right of the informant ,
1
23 we woula lose to a great measure our capability of doing our
2
8 24 job
25 NOw I'm not arguing with you , Senator
1
that it is not an
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 27
why
==================================================
Page 28
==================================================
2467
L
unusual procedure _ I'I not even going to say that it is not
8
2 an intrusion, because it is _ But it has to be one I think 1
1 3 that is by virtue of the benefits must be counted _
4 We don like to use it. We don 't like the problems that
5
are attendant . We take great care
6 NOw you say about the court having possibility taking
jurisdiction over then and guiding. I think that possibly we
8 coula present the matter to the court but what are they going
9 to do insofar as monitoring their effort? Are going to
10 have to follow it all the way through?
11 Also , there is/ of course, urgency in the other contacts
1
12 Must the court be contactea for each and approval of the court
0
1
13 given for each contact?
14 There are a great many problens insofar as administration
15 of it.
16 I frankly feel, and again , all I can do is give you ty
17 idea
Tt I frankly feel that there is a satisfactory control over
18 the informants as we now exercise it today- Yes , there are
1
19 going to be some who will get beyond our control, but this
i
20 is going to happen no matter what you do
L
21 Senator Hart of Michigan _ Well, I appreciate your
5 22 reaction
1
23 I was not suggesting that there is consideration here to
2
24
prohibit infornants I was
reflecting
a view that I felt and
8
25 hold that the use of an informant does require some balance, as
NWV 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 28
gsh
't
they
==================================================
Page 29
==================================================
2468
1
CT sh you yourself said, and I woula be more comfortable with a 8
1 2 third party making a
judgment
as to whether the intrusion is
1
3 warranted by the particular circumstance But I do understand
4 your position_
5
Thank you Mr Chairman
The Chairman . Thank you , Senator Fart
G
(Senator Hart leaves the hearing room . )
8
The Chairman Senator Baker do you have questions?
9
Senator Baker Mr . Chairman, thank you very much
10 Mr Kelley , I have a great respect for you and your
11 organization ana I personally regret that the organization is
1
12 in political distress , but we 've both got to recognize that
8
1
13 it is, along with other agencies and departments of the
14 government _
15 I think you probably would agree with me that even though
16 that is extraordinarily unpleasant and in many respects
17 unfortunate , that it also has a plus side That is, it gives
18 us an indication of our future direction and the opportunity ,
1
19 at least, to improve the level of competency and service Of
8
20 the government itself L
21 With that hopeful note, woula you be agreeable then to
4 22 volunteering for me any suggestions you have on how to improve
1
23 the responsiveness of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, or
2
8 24 indeed , for any other law enforcement agencies of the governmen
25 to the Congress , to the Attorney General, to the President, and
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 29 Page
==================================================
Page 30
==================================================
2469
1
beyond that, would you give me any suggestiors you have on
1 2 how you would provide the methods the access , the documents
1
3 the records , the authority, for the Congress to perform its
4 essential, I believe, essential oversight responsibility to
5 see that these functions , these delicate functions are
being
6 undertaken, properly?
7
And before you answer, let me tell you two or three thing$
8
I am concerned about_
9 It hasn ' t been long ago that the FBI Director was not
10 even confirmed the Senate of the United states I believe
11 are the first one to be confirmed the Senate of the
1
12 United States I think that is a movement in the right
0
1
13 direction _ I think the FBI has taken on a stature that , an
14 additional importance that requires it to have closer supervisipn
15 and scrutiny uS
16 At the sane tine I rather doubt that we can become
17 involved in the daily relationship between you and the Attorney
18 General -
!
19 Therefore, I tend to believe that the Attorney General
i
20 needs to be more directly involved in the operations of the
L
21 FBI _
5 22 I would appreciate any comments on that.
1
23 Second I rather believe that major decisions of the
2
24
intelligence cornunity and the FBI ought to be in Writing , so 8
25 that the Congress can, if it needs to in the future, take a
NW 88608 Docld: 32989820 Page 30
gsh
by
by you
by
==================================================
Page 31
==================================================
2470
GS
1
6 1 look at these decisions and the process by which were
1 2 made to decide that you are or you are not performing your
1
3 services diligently.
4 I don 't think you can have oversight unless you have
5
access to records , and in many cases records don t exist
6 and in some cases the people who made those decisions are nOw
7 departed and in other cases you have conflicts_
8 Iow would you suggest' then that you improve the quality
9 0f service of your agency? Fow would you propose that you
10 increase the opportunity for oversight of the Congress of the
11 United States? What other suggestions do you have for improving
{
12 the level of law enforcement in the essential activity that
0
0
13 is required?
14 Mr Kelley. I would possibly be repetitious in answering
15 this Senator
1
but I get a great deal of pleasure fro telling
16 what I think is necessary and what I hope that I have followed ,
17 one which is beyond my control, but Tvhich I think is very
18 inportant is that the position of Director, the one to which
3
19 great attention should be in choosing the ian who will
i
20 properly acquit himself _
L
21 I feel that the Judiciary Committee , at least in going
4
22 over me , dia a pretty good job I feel that it is most
1
23 necessary that care be taken that his philosoply , his means
2
8 24 of management , his facility to adapt to change , his tendency
25 toward consulting with other members of the official family,
NW 88608 Docld:32939820 Page 31
they
paid
==================================================
Page 32
==================================================
2471
L
1 that he be willing to, for example_
1
go through oversight with
8
1 2
no reticence , and that I think that he should be chosen very
1
3 carefully.
4 I think further that he should be responsible for those
5
matters which indicate impropriety or illegality_
6 Senator Baker Coula you stop for just a second? Who
does he work for? Does the Director, in your view work for
8 the President of the United States , for the Attorney General,
9 for the Justice Department , for the Executive Branch?
10 Who does the executive of the FBI , the Director 0f the
11 FBI, be responsible to,_ Tho should he be responsible to?
1
12 Mr _ Kelley_ Jurisdictionally , to the Attorney General,
8
0
13 but I think this is such an important field of influence that
14 it is not at all unlikely that we can expand it to the
15 judiciary, the legislative , and of course, we are under the
16 Attorney General
17 Senator Baker Do you have any problems with the idea
18 of the President of the United States calling the Director of
3
19 the FBI and asking for performance of a particular task?
i
20 Does that give
you any difficulty? Or do you think that
|
21 the rela tionship between the FBI Director ana the President
4 22 is such that that is desirable , or should it be conduited
1
23 through the Attorney General?
2
8 24 Mr Kelley. I think it should be in the great majority
25 of the cases conduited through the Attorney General There
NW 88608 Docld:32939820 32 Page
==================================================
Page 33
==================================================
2472
ash
1
8 has been traditionally some acceptance of the fact that if
8
1 2 the President wants to see and talk with the Director, he
1
3 Iay do call him directly _
4 It has been my practice in such an event to thereafter
5 report to the Attorney General, whoever it might be, that I
6 have been called over ana I discussed and was told _ And this
7 was revealed in full to then _
8 Senator Baker I suppose we could pass a statute that
9 says the President has to go through the Attorney General,
10 although I rather suspect it would be a little presumptuous
11 But to go the next step , do you think it is necessary
1
12 for the pursuit of effective oversight on the part of the
0
1
13 Congress _ to have some sort of document written, or at least
14 sone sort: of account of a Presidential order or an order of
15 the Attorney General given to a Director of the FBI?
16 Do you think that these things need to be handled in
17 a more formal Way?
18 Mr Kelley. Personally, it would be my practice in
3
19 the event I receive such an order to request that it be
8
20 documented: This is a protection as well as a clarification
L
21 as to whether or not it should be placed as part of legislation
9 22 I frankly would like to reserve that for some more considera-
1
23 tion .
2
8 24 I don t know whether it would be, but I think that it
25 can be worked very easily.
NW 88608 Docld:3298p820 33
S0 ,
Page
==================================================
Page 34
==================================================
2473
gs]
9 1 Senator Baker Mr Kelley, Attorney General Levi , I
8
2 believe , has already established some sort of agency or 1
1 3 function within the Department that is serving as the equivalent
4 I suppose , of an Inspector General of the Justice Departient ,
5 including the FBI
6 Are you familiar with the steps that Mr Levi has
7 taken in that respect? I think he calls it the Office of
8 Professional Responsibility.
9 Wr . Kelley. Yes , sir, I'm familiar with it.
10 Senator Baker Do you have any comment on that? Mill
11
you give us any observations as to whether you think that
1
12
will be useful, helpful or whether it will not be useful or
6
13
helpful, how it affects the FBI , how you visualize your 0
relationship to it in the future?
14
15 Mr Kelley. I don t object to this, which is to some
extent an oversight within the Department of Justice under the 16
17
Attorney General -
Frankly, it just cane out I have not considered it 18
1
19
completely, but to the general concept , yes , I very definitely
i
subscribe
20 6
21
Senator Baker How woula you feel about extending that
5 22
concept of government-1ide operation , a national Inspector
1
General who is involved with an oversight of all of the 23
1
agencies of government as they interface with the Constitutionally
8 24
protected rights of the individual citizen? Would you care 25
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 34 Page
==================================================
Page 35
==================================================
2474
10 1 to comment on that, or would you rather save that for a while? 8
1 2 Mr _ Kelley. I would like to reserve that one
1 3 Senator Baker I'm not surprised_ Would you think about
4
it and let uS know what you think about it?
5 Mr . Kelley . I will_
6
Senator Baker _ All right_ Mr Chairman , thank you very
7
much
8 The Chairman_ Senator Huddleston
'9 Senator Huddleston Thank you , Mr Chairman
10 Mr Kelley, you describe on page 4 the conditions that
11 existed when nuch of the abuse that we have talked about during
1
12 this inquiry occurred, indicating that the people within the
8
1
13 Bureau felt like they were what was expected of them
14 the President , the Attorney General, the Congress and
15 the people of the United States _
16 Does not this guggest that there has been a reaction
17 there to prevailing attitudes that night have existed in the
18 country because of certain circumstances rather than any
1
19 clear and specific direct instructions that might have been
i
20 received from proper authorities? Ana if that is the case, L
21 is it possible in developing this charter
1
this guideline,
5
22 to provide for that kind of specific instruction?
1
23 Mr . Kelley. I think S0 , yes _ I think that they can
2
8 24 logically be incorporated and that T U
25 Senator Huddleston You can see there would be a continufng
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 35
gsh
doing
by by
Page
==================================================
Page 36
==================================================
2475
ah
|
1 danger if any agency is left to simply react to whatever the
1 2 attitudes may be at a specific time in this country because
1
1 3 Mr Kelley . Senator; I don't contemplate it might be
4 a
continuing danger , but it certainly woula be_ a very acceptable
5 guidepost whereby we can, in the event such a need seems
6 to arise, know what we can do _
7 Genator Huddleston Well, in pursuing the area which
8 Senator Hart was discussing, that is whether or not we can
9 provide sufficient guidelines would replace a decision by the
10 court in determining what action might be proper and specific
Wn
11 ally in protecting individual's rights, can t we also
1
12 provide the restrictions and guidelines and the various
8
0
13 techniques that might be used?
14 For instance, supposing we do establish the fact, as
15 has already been done , that infornants are necessary and
16 desirable _ How do we keep that informant operating within the
17 proper limits so that he in fact is not violating individual
18 rights?
3
19 Mr Kelley . Mell, of course, much of the reliance must
i
20 be placed
on the agent and the supervision of the FBI to assure L
21 that there is no infringement of rights'.
4 22 Senator Huddleston _ But this is an aware we ve gotten
1
23 into some difficulty in the past. We have assumed that the
1
8 24 particular action was neces that there was a present
25 threat that some intelligence prograns should be initiated , but
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 36
sary,
==================================================
Page 37
==================================================
2476
1
1 ~~h 12 in many cases it has gone beyond what would appear to have been 8
1 2 necessary to have addressed the original threat
1
3 How do we keep within the proper balance there?
4
Mr Kelley. Well, .actually, it' s just about like any
5
other offense _ It is an invasion of the other individual's
6 right ana it is bY an officer and an FBI agent is an officer.
7 There S the' possibility of criminal prosecution against him_
8 This is one which I think might flow 1f he counsels
9 the informant
10 Now insofar as his inability to control the infornant,
11 I don t suppose that would warrant prosecution, but there is
1
12 still supervisory control over that agent ana over that
0
0
13 informant by insisting that control is exercised on a continuin-
14 basis
15 Senator Huddleston _ It brings
up an interesting point
16 as to whether or not a law enforcenent agency ought to be
17 very alert to any law violations of its own members or anyone
18 else
2
19 If a White House official asks the FBI or someone to do
i
20 something unlawful, the question seens to me to occur as to L
21 whether or not that is not a violation that should be reported
5 22 by the FBI
11
23 Mr Kelley. I think that any violation which comes to
2
8 24 our attention should either be handled us or the proper
25 authority_
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 37
by
Page
==================================================
Page 38
==================================================
2477
gsh
L
1 Senator Fuddleston But that hasn t been the case in the
L 2 past _
1
3 Mr Kelley. Mell, I don t know what you re referring
4 to but I would think your statement is proper
5
Senator Hucdleston Well, we certainly have evidence
of unlawful activity taking place in various projects that
have been undertaken , which certainly were not brought to
8 light willingly by the FBI or by other law enforcement agencies
9 The question that I I really concerned about is as
10 we attempt to <raw a
guideline and charters that would give
11 the Agency the best Elexibility that they may need a wide
1
12 range of threats , how do we control what happens within each
0
1
13 of those actions to keep them from going bezond what
Ena 2 14 was intended to begin with?
15
16
17
18
1
19
i
20 6
21
4 22
1
23
2
8 24
25
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 38
2
==================================================
Page 39
==================================================
AHW/ smnl
t 3 2478
1 Mr . Kelley . You re still speaking of informants _
8
1
2
Senator Huddleston. Not only informants but the agents
1
3 themselves as they go into surveillance, wiretaps , or whatever
4 intelligence gathering techniques_
5 The original thrust of my question was , even though we
6 may be able to provide guidelines of a broad nature , how do
we control the techniques that might be used, that int themselves
8 might be used , that in themselves might be a serious violation
9 of the rights_
10 Mr. Kelley. Well, first, I don 't know whether it' s
11 germane to your question but I do feel that it should be pointed
{
12 out that the association to the relationship between the
8
0
13 informant and his agent handler is a very confidential one _
14 and I doubt very seriously whether we could have any guide-
15 lines , where there might be an extension Of any monitors here
16 because thereby you do have a destruction of that relationship
17 Insofar as the activities of agents , informants' or others
18 which may_be illegal , we have on many occasions learned 0f
2
19 violations of the law on the part of informants , and either
i
20 prosecuted ourselves , through the reporting of it to the
L
21 United States Attorney, or turned it over to the local authority-
9
22 We have done this on nany a time many occasions Insofar
1
23 as our own personnel _
1 we have an internal organization, the
2
8 24 Inspection Division , which reviews this type of activity, and
25 if there be any violation, yes , no question about it, we would
NW 88608 Docld:32983820 Page 39
==================================================
Page 40
==================================================
smn 2 2479
1 pursue it to the point of prosecution_
8
2 Senator Huddleston _ But it coula be helped periodic L
1
3 review _
4 Mr. Kelley. We do , on an annual basis , review the
5 activities of our 59 offices through that same Inspection
6 Division, and they have a clear charge to go over this as well
7 as other matters
8 Senator Huddleston . Mr . Kelley , you pointed out the
9 difference in the approaches when gathering intelligence, in
10 gathering evidence after a crime has been committed.
11 Woula there be any advantage , or would it be feasible to
1
12 attempt to separate these functions within the Agency, in the
0
0
13 departments_
1
for instance, with not having
a ixing of
14
gathering intelligence and gathering evidence? Are the techniques
15 definable and different?
16 Mr - Kelley. Senator, I think are compatible. I
17 see no objection to the way that are now
being handled
18 on a management basis _ I think, as a matter of fatt, it is
1
19 a very fine association whereby the intelligence, stemming as
i
20 it does from a
substantive violation, is a natural complement _
L
21 Senator Huddleston. Now another area , the FBI furnishes
4
22
information to nuerous government agencies
1
23 Is this properly restricted and controlled at the present
2
24 time in your judgment as to just who can ask the FBI for
8
25 information, what kind Of information they can ask for, and
NW 88608 Docld:32988820 Page 40
by
they
they
==================================================
Page 41
==================================================
Smn 5
2480
1
who might also be inclined to call the Director and ask him
8
2 to do specific things?
1
1 3 Coula there be some clearcut understanding
as to whether
4 or not the Director would be obligated to undertake any such
5 project, that just anybody at the White House might suggest?
6 Mr _ Kelley. It's very clear to me that request must
7 come from Mr _ Buchen 8 office, ana that it be , in any case ,
8 wherein it is a request for action. that it be followed with
9 a letter So requesting
10 This has come up before during the Watergate hearings ,
as
11 I think it has been placed very vividly in our minds , in
1
12 take care that you just don t follow the request of some
8
0
13
underling who does not truly reflect the desire Of the Presidert.
Senator Huddleston. Just one more question about
14
15
techniques , aside from the guidelines of authority on broad
16
projects undertaken _
Woula it be feasible from time to time in a Congressional
17
oversight committee , woula be able to discuss with the Department 18
I
19
with the Bureau various techniques so that they could have
i
some input as to whether or not these actions are consistent
20 L
21
with the overall guidelines , to start with, and consistent
9
22
with the very protections?
1
23
Mr _ Kelley. Senator, I have already said to the
2
oversight committee of the Senate that SO far as I can now
8 24
25
see, the only thing that would be withheld is the identity of
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 41
any
==================================================
Page 42
==================================================
smn 3
2481
L
1 probably even more importantly, what restrictions can be put
8
1 2 on the use of that information once it has been supplied
1
3 the FBI?
4 Mr Kelley. I think SO , Senator.
5
Senator Huddleston You think there are proper restrictidns
6 now?
7 Mr . Kelley. I don't know that we can ourselves judge
8 in all cases whether or not there is gooa ana sufficient reasor
9 for an Agency to inquiry. I think that there shoula be a
10 very close delineation by the agencies as to what they re
11 going to ask for, but I think that we do have sufficient rules
1
12 that at least to us we are satisfied.
8
1
13 Senator Hudaleston_ You re confident that the information
14 your agency supplies is not being misused , to the detriment
15 of the rights of any individuals _
16 Mr. Kelley. Senator, I'm only confident in what I
17 do myself_ I would say that I am satisfied:
18 Senator Hudaleston. I was wondering whether some
1
19 inclusion ought to be made in whatever charter is made as to
i
20 who specifically can request, what limits ought to be "placed
L
21 on what the request , and what can do with it after they
3 22 it_
1
23 Mr _ Kelley. Yes
2
24 Senator Huddleston. I have some concern about the fact
8
25 that in intelligence gathering,
you gather, you are just
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 42
by
they
get
Page
==================================================
Page 43
==================================================
smn 4
2482
bound to gather a great deal of information about some
8
2 individual that is useless as far as the intent of the intelli- 1
1
3 gence gathering is concerned , but might be in some way embarras-
4 sing or harmful to the individual, whether or not there' s any
5 effort to separate this kind 0f information out of a person S
6 file that is really initiated for a purpose , for a specific
7 purpose unrelated to this information.
8 Is there any effort, or coula any direction be given to
9 doing that?
10 Mr _ Kelley. We woula be very happy to work under the
11
guidelines
or rules or anything else to purge material which
1
12 is extraneous , irrelevant, or for any other reason objection-
8
0
13 able .
14 Senator Huddleston. And how about the length of time
15 that these files are kept in the agency?
16 Mr _ Kelley. We are willing to work within that framework
17 too_
18 Senator Huddleston . I think that might be done _
1
19 NOw , I think in developing the chain Of command , So to
i
20 speak , it certainly woula be very difficult to prevent the
L
21
President of the United States from calling up the head 0f
4 22 the FBI or anyone else and discussing any law enforcement
1
23 problem he might sO desire, and perhaps even
give direction
2
24 to the agency - 8
25 But how about that? What about White House personnel
NW 88608 Docld:32988820 Page 43
==================================================
Page 44
==================================================
smn 6 2483
L
1 informants_ We '11 aiscuss techniques
we 11 discuss our
8
1 2 present activities. I think this is the only way that we can
1
3 exchange our opinions and get accomplished what you want to
4 accomplish and what I want to accomplish _
5 Senator Huddleston _ I feel that is an important aspect
6 of it because even though you have a charter which gives broad
7 direction for all the guidelines and to the types of projects
8 that .enter into it, if we don t get down to specifics
8
such
9 things as how intelligence is to be collected how evidence
10 is to be collected , what is done after it is collected, this
11 type of thing , it seems to me we are leaving
a wide gap
1
12 again for the Bureau to assume that it has total instruction
8
0
13 and total permission to move in a certain direction ana go
14 beyond what is intended or what was authorized_
15 Thank you , Mr _ Chairman , and Mr - Director
16 The Chairman Senator Goldwater?
17 Senator Goldwater. Mr - Kelley , as part of the FBI
18 electronic surveillance of Dr _ several tapes of
I
19 specific conversations , ana later a composite King tape were
i
20
produced _
L
21 Are these tapes still in the possession of the FBI?
5
22 Mr _ Kelley. Yes , sir.
1
23 Senator Goldwater. Have they been reviewed by you?
2
24 Mr . Kelley. No , sir.
8
25 Senator Goldwater. Have they been reviewed by any of your
NW 88608 Docld:32984820 44
King ,
Page
==================================================
Page 45
==================================================
2484
1
staff, to your knowledge?
2 Mr . Kelley. Senator, I think that they have been reviewed
3 I know that at least some have reviewed it within the area of
4
this particular section- There has been no review of them
5 since I came to the FBI , I can tell you that.
6 Senator Goldwater. Would these tapes be available to
7 the Committee if the Committee felt they would like to hear
8 them?
9
Mr. Kelley. This
1
Senator Goldwater , is a matter which id
10 of, as I said before
1 some delicacy, and there would have to
be a discussion of this in an executive session
11
The Chairman _ I might say in that connection that the
12
Committee staff gave some consideration to this matter and
13
decided that it would compound the original error for the
14
staff to review the tapes because that would be a still
15
further invasion of privacy, and So the staff refrained from
16
insisting
on obtaining the tapes , believing that it was
17
unnecessary , and quite possibly improper, in order to get at
18
what we needed to know about the King case_ 19
So the staff did refrain, and for that reason the issue
20
never came to a head . I just wanted to lay that information
21
before the Senator.
22
Senator Goldwater. I realize that' s a prerogative of
23
the staff, but it' s also the prerogative of the Committee if,
24
and I'm not advocating it, if we wanted to hear them to
25
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 45
==================================================
Page 46
==================================================
CSMM
smn 8
2485
L
1 ourselves whether Mr Hoover was off on a wila goose chase
8
2 or whether there was , in effect, some reason. Again, I am 1
1
3
not advocating it, I am merely asking a question_ woula
4 be available if the Committee took a vote to hear then and
5 decidea on it.
6 Mr - Kelley. I don 't think it would be within my juris-
diction to respond to this , Senator. It woula have to be the
8 Attorney General
9 Senator Goldwater. I see
10 NOw , are these tapes and other products of surveillance
11
routinely retained even after an individual ceased to be a
1
12 target of inquiry?
0
0
13 Mr . Kelley . are retained usually for ten years _
14
Senator Goldwater. Ten years _
15
Mr _ Kelley. Yes , sir.
16
Senator Goldwater. What is the future value, 1f any ,
17 to the Bureau of retaining such information?
18 Mr - Kelley. If there be guidelines that set out a
1
19 destruction or erasure we will abide by it. We will, on those
9
20 occasions where we think that matters might come up within
L
21
that period of time which may need the retention 0f them , we
5
22
will express our opinion at that time , but other than that
1
23 we would be guided by guidelines _
2
24 Senator Goldwater. Is it your view that legitimate
8
25 law enforcement needs should outweigh privacy considerations
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 46
They
They
Page
==================================================
Page 47
==================================================
9
2486
T
with respect to retention of such information , or do we need
8
1 2 the clear guidelines
on the destruction of these materials
3 when the investigation purposes for which they were collected
4 have been served?
5 Mr . Kelley. We feel that there shoula be a good close
6 look at the retention Of material, and we would of course like
7
to have an input _ But we welcome consideration of this .
8 Senator Goldwater_ That is all I have , Mr . Chairman_ Thank
9 you very much .
10 The Chairman _ Thank you , Senator.
11 Senator Mondale?
1
12 Senator Mondale - Mr Director, it seems to me that the
8
0
13 most crucial question before the Congress is to accept the
14 invitation of the FBI to draw Congressionally imposed lines ,
15 limits of authority So the FBI will know clearly what you can
16 and cannot do , so you will not be subject to later judgments
P
17 and the question is, where should that line be drawn?
18 As you know , in 1924 when the FBI was created, and
1
19 Mr - Stone later became the Chief Justice, he drew the line at
i
20 criminal law enforcement_ He said that never again will we L
21 go beyond the authority- imposed upon us to get into political
4 22 ideas . We will stay in the area of law enforcement _
1
23 Would you not think it makes a 'good deal of sense to
2
24 draw the guidelines in a way that your activities are 8
25 restricted to the enforcement of the law, investigations of
NW 88608 Docld:329839820 47 Page
==================================================
Page 48
==================================================
smn 10
2487 7
1 crime, investigations of conspiracies to commit crime rather
8
1 2 than to leave this very difficult to define and control area
1
3 of political ideas?
4 Mr - Kelley. I don't know whether I understand your last
5 statement of involving the area of political ideas _ I say that
6 I feel that certainly we should be vested and should continue
7 in the fiela of criminal investigations as an investigatory
8 objective - These are conclusions , of course , which are based
9 on statutes in the so-called security field , national or
10 foreign _
11 These are criminal violations _ I feel that they should
1
12 be in tandem . I feel, having worked many years in this
8
1
13 atmosphere that you have more ears and eyes and you have
14 more personnel working together, covering the same fields _
15 I do not think there should be a separation Of the intelligence
16 matters, because it is a concomitant: It naturally flows
17 Erom the investigation of the security matters and the
18 criminal .
1
19 Senator Mondale _ Mr . Kelley , what Mr: Stone saia was
i
20
this, that the Bureau of investigation is not concerned
6
21 with tical or other opinions of individuals. It is
5 22
concerned only with such conduct as is forbidden by the laws
1
23 of the United States. When the police system goes beyond
2
24 these limits , it is dangerous to proper administration of
8
25
justice and human liberty.
NWV 88608 Docld: 32984820 Page 48
poli
==================================================
Page 49
==================================================
smn 11
2488
1
Do. you object to that definition?
8
2 Mr - Kelley. I think that life has become much more 1
1
3
sophisticated and we have added to the so-called policeman S
4 area of concern some matters which were probably not as importaht
5 at that time _ I think that the fact that the FBI has been in
6 touch with the security investigations and the gathering of
7 intelligence is something which has proved to be at times
8 troublesone ana given uS great concern , but it is a viable,
9
productive procedure _
10 I don t know what Mr . Stone was
thinking of entirely
11 of this course, but I can tell you about the procedure today:
1
12 Senator Mondale _ You see , I think you recognize, if
8
13
that further step is taken , as you re recommending here , that 1
at that point it becomes So difficult to guarantee, and in
14
15
fact, in my opinion, impossible to guarantee that we won 't
see a recurrence of some of the abuses that we seen in
16
the past , and I don' t know how you establish any kind of
17
meaningful oversight on a function as nebulous as the one 18
1
19
you ve just defined.
i
If the FBI possesses the authority to investigate
20 L
21
ideas that they consider to be threats to. this nation' s
4 security, particularly in the light of the record that we have
22
1
seen how that definition can be stretched to include practi-
23
2
cally everybody , including moderate civil rights leaders,
1 8 24
war dissenters and SO on , how on earth can standards be developed
25
NW 88608 Docld: 32983820 Page 49
've
==================================================
Page 50
==================================================
sm 12
2489
1
that would provide any basis for oversight?
8
2 How can you , from among other things , be protected from 1
3
criticism later on that you exceeded your authority
or didn't
4
do something that some politician tried to pressure you into
5
doing?
6 Mr _ Kelley . It might well be , Senator, that ten years
7 from now a Director of the FBI will be seated here ana will be
8
criticized for doing that which today is construed as very
9
acceptable _
10
Senator Mondale. Correct_ And I have great sympathy
for the predicament the FBI finds itself in _
11
{
12
Mr _ Kelley. And the Director
0
Senator Mondale _ And the Director especially, and that is 1
13
I think it's in the interest of the FBI to get these lines
14
as sharply defined as possible, SO that when you are pressured
15
to do things ,
1 or when , after the fact, people with good 20/20
16
hindsight can criticize you or the Bureau , that you can say
17
well, here are the standards that you gave uS , and they specific
18
2 ally say this, and that is your answer We have to live by
19
i
the law. If we don t define it specifically,it seens to me
20 L
21
that these excesses coula reoccur, because I don't think it' s
3 possible to define then , and the FBI i5 inevitably going to
22
1
be kicked back and forth, depending on personal notions of what
23
2
you should have done _
8 24
Don t you fear that?
25
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 50
L
why
Page
==================================================
Page 51
==================================================
smn 13
2490
1 Mr _ Kelley. Not too much, Senator. I think we learned a 8
1 2 great lesson by virtue of Watergate , the revelations that have
1
3 cOme up as a result of this Committee' s inquiries , the fact
4 that I think that we have a different type of spirit today
5 in the Bureau
1
the fact that, as I said before you came
6 that I think the Bureau is a matchless organization, and they
are eager to do that which is vital and proper
1
and the fact
8 that we are getting a number of very fine young people in the
organization, people of the other ethnic backgrounds than we
10 had years ago . I think there is a greater understanding in
11 the Bureau today 0f what is the proper type of conduct _
1
12 We may not be able to project this on all occasions ,
8
1
13 because we must equate this with the need and with our
14 experience , but if the precise guidelines be the goal _
1
you' re
15 going to have trouble If, on the other hand _ there be a
16
flexibility, I think that we can work very well within those
17
guidelines _
18 Senator Mondale. I think, as you know I don 't think
3
19 there is a better trained or higher professionally qualified
i
20 law enforcement organization in the worla than the FBI_ I
L
21
think we all agree it is superb _ But the problem has been ,
y 22 from time to time , that when you go beyond the area of
1
23
enforcing the law into the area of political ideas, that you
2
24 are subject to and in fact you leave the criminal field, you 8
25 get into politics_ And that is where , it seems to me, that the
NW 88608 Docld:32988820 Page 51
in,
==================================================
Page 52
==================================================
smn 14
2491 1
great controversy exists , and where you are almost inevitably
8
2 going to be subjected to fierce criticism in the future_ no 1
1
3 matter how you do it. Once you get into politics , you get
4 into trouble_
5 Mr _ Kelley. I agree to that, and I point out that in almost
6 every branch of the government an in every part, as a matter
of fact, every segment of our society, there are some who devia e
8 from the normal course I feel that within the Bureau there is
less likelihood of this to happen , and I think that working
10 with you we can at least make some achievements that will be
11
significant.
1
12 NOw , whether it be lasting , I don 't think s0 , but I
8
0
13
think we ve made a good start-
14 Senator Mondale . In your speech in Montreal on August
15 9th , you saia we must be willing to surrender a small measure
16 of our liberties to preserve the great bulk of them -
17
Which liberties did you have in mind?
18 Mr Kelley. Well, 0f course , this speech has been mis-
1
19 understood many , many times _
9
20 Senator Mondale. Well , I want you to have a chance to
6
21 clear it up .
1 22 Mr . Kelley. All that was intended here was a restatement
1
23 of the approach Which the courts historically have used in
2
24
resolving most issues of Constitutional importance , and its
8
25
recognition that rights are not susceptible to absolute
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 52 Page
==================================================
Page 53
==================================================
smn 15
2492
1
protection. It's a matter of balance Even in the Fourth
8
2 Amendment , for example, which protects the right of privacy, it 1
1
3 does not prohibit searches and seizures . I mention, it only
4 refers tp those that are unreasonable _
5 I came from the police fiedd. What is more restrictive
6 to more people than traffic regulation? But what would be
more chaotic is of you did not have traffic regulation_ We
8 do have to in order to love in the complexities and
9 intricacies of today' s life, have to give up some 0f our
10 rights _
11 Some may construe this as an extravagant statement _ If it
1
12 is OS , I wish to say that I only was pointing out that there
0
0
13 has to be a balance.
14 Senator Mondale . So that when you say we have to give
15 up some liberties , or as you just said, some rights , what you
16 mean let me ask. Let me scratch that and ask again, you
17 have to give up some tights_ Which rights would you have uS
18 give
19 Mr _ Kelly. Well under the Fourth Amendment you would
20 have the right for search and seizure.
21 Senator Mondale _ You wouldn 't give up the Fourth Amend -
22
ment right.
23 Mr _ Kelley. Oh , no not the right.
24 Senator Mondale What right do you have in mind?
25 Mr _ Kelley. The right to be free from search and seizufe_
NW 88608_Docld: 32982820 Page 53
up?
==================================================
Page 54
==================================================
Smn 16 2493
1
1 Senator Mondale. There S no such right in the Consti-
8
2 tution _ You can have such seizures, but they must be reasonabl
1 3 under court warrant.
4 Did you mean to go beyond that?
5
Mr . Kelley. That's right.
6 Senator Mondale _ That you should be able to go beyond
7 that?
8 Mr - Kelley. No , no . I do not mean that we should ever
9 go beyond a Constitutional right guarantee _
10 Senator Mondale _ Well , woula you say , Mr Kelley, that
11 that sentence might have been inartful in your speech?
1
12 Mr . Kelley. I said that if it was misunderstood, I
8
13 made a mistake, because I should never make a statement which 0
14 yes , it was inartful
Senator Mondale I think I know about your record in
15
16 law enforcement well enough to tell you that I think you were
17
saying some- thing different , that it was taken to mean something
18
different than I think you intended:
1
19 What you are saying is that in the exercise of your law
i
enforcement powers , the rights of individuals is determined
20 L
21
by the laws and the courts , but the courts in the handling
3 22 of those issues , have to balance rights and other values
1
23
That' s what you" re essentially saying, is that correct?
2
24 Mr _ Kelley. Senator, I ought to have you write my
8
25
speeches so that I don 't have any misunderstandings _ I didn 't
NW 88608 Docld: 32980820 Page 54
==================================================
Page 55
==================================================
smn 17 2494
1
understand that to be at the time anything that was unusual -
8
2 I have to admit that maybe I made a mistake_
1
1 3 Senator Mondale _ What you are saying in effect is that
4
in effect, the rights of the American people can be determined
5
not by the Director of the FBI but by the courts and by the
law .
6
7 You meant that.
8 Mr . Kelley. Indeed , yes , sir.
Senator Mondale _ All right.
9
end t. 3 Thank you .
10
11
1
12
8
0
13
14
15
16
17
18
I
19
9
20 |
21
5 22
1
23
2
8 24
25
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 55
==================================================
Page 56
==================================================
WARD: GSH
2495
CIA _Open
12/80/75
Tape 4
1 The Chairman. Senator Hart.
8
2 Senator of Colorado _ Mr - Kelley, in response to 1
1
3 a question by Senaotr Mondale , one of his first questions about
4 laying down guidelines , it seems to me what you were saying was
5 we could work together. That is to say the Bureau and the
Congress , down guidelines that woulc not unreasonably
hamper you from investigations of crime control in the
8 country.
9 But I think implicit in his question was also an area
10 that you didn t respond to , and that is how do you , what kind
11 of guidelines do you down to protect you ana the Bureau
1
12
from political pressure, the misuse of the Bureau by political
0
0 13 figures particularly in the White House?
14 And we had indications that at least two of your
15 predecessors , if not more, obviously were corrupted and Mr
16 Gray was under great pressure from the White House to use
17 the facilities af the Bureau and their' capabilities to accomplilsh
18 some
plititcal end _
1
19 Well, it seems to me you were arguing in favor of fewer
i
20
restrictions so you could get on with your job, but that is
6
21 not what Senator Mondale and the rest of us are interested in_
9
22 What kind of restrictions can we down to protect you
1I
23
from political pressures? I'd be interested in that sign of thel
2
24
coin, if you would.
8
25 Mr _ Kelley. I would welcome any
guidelines which would
NW 88608 Docld:32984820 Page 56
lay
lay
Ive
lay
==================================================
Page 57
==================================================
2496
gs
|
2
1 protect me or any successor from this type of thing _ I think
1 2 that would be splendid. I have not reviewed the guidelines
1
3
as prepared to the present date by the Department _ It might
4 be that they are well defined in there_ But I welcome any
5 consideration of such directives
6 Senator Hart of Colorado_ Do you think this is a problen"
7
Mr Kelley. sir, not with me _
8
Senator Hart of Colorado Do you think that it has been
9
a problen for the people that preceded you?
10 Mr _ Kelley. I think So
11 Senator Hart of Colorado And that's a problem the
1
12 Congress ought to address?
0
0
13 Mr Kelley. I think SO
14 Senator Hart of Colorado_ The Committee received a
15 letter fron the Department of Justice a couple of days , the
16 Assistant Attorney General asking
our cooperation in carrying
17 out the investigation or their efforts to review the investi-
18 gation conducted by the FBI into the death of Martin Luther
!
19 Jr _
'1
in order to determine whether that investigation
i
20 should be re-opened _ They asked our cooperation, they asked L
21 for our transcripts, the testimony before the Committee, all
3 22 material provided to the Committee by the FBI Which relates
1
23 to Dr and the Southern Christian Leadership Conference .
2
8 24 I guess my question is this: Why is the Justice Depart-
25 ment asking this Comnittee for FBI files?
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 57
NO ,
King,
King
==================================================
Page 58
==================================================
2497
GS
1
3 1 Mr Kelley . I don ' think they re asking for files
1
2
I think they re asking for what testimony was given by
1 3
witnesses whose testimony has not been given up I don 't know
4 Senator Hart of Colorado _ I 11 quote it. "And all
5
material provided to the Committee by the FBI which relates
6
to Dr King and the Southern Christian Leadership Conference_ 01
7
I repeat the question_ is the Justice Department
8 asking this Committee for material provided to us by the
9 FBI?
10 Mr Kelley. Frankly , I don 't knor Do you mind if I
11 just ask
1
12 (Pause)
0
0
13 Mr . Kelley. I am inforned and I knew this one
14 Everything that was sent to you was sent through them Did
15 they have a copy also? Yes, they had a retained copy . I
16 don t know
17 Senator Hart of Colorado So there s nothing you
18 provided us that's not available to the Justice Department?
3
19 Mr _ Kelley . That S right.
9
20 Senator Hart Of Colorado _ And you can t account for L
21 an official of the Justice Department would ask this Committee
5 22 for your records?
1
23 Mr Kelley _ sir_
1
8 24 Senator Iart of Colorado You released a statement on
25 November the 18th of 74 regarding the FBI S. counter-intelligence
NW 88608 Docld:32983820 Page 58
Why
why _
why
NO ,
==================================================
Page 59
==================================================
2498
S
1
4
1 program and you said you made a detailed study of COINTELPRO
1 2 activities and reached the following conclusions , and I quote:
1 3 "The purpose 0f these counter-intelligence programs was
4
to prevent dangerously and potentially deadly acts against
5 individuals , organizations and institutions both public
6 and private across the United States J
7
NOw we had an FBI informant in the other before this
8
Committee and he stated he tola the FBI on a nurber of
occasions he planned violent acts against black people in
10 groups _ And yet, he said few , if any , instances in which the
11 FBI actually prevented violence from taking place_
1
12 ow does his testimony square with your statement that
8
0
13 I have quoted?
14 Mr Relley. It doesn t, and I don 't know if any of
15 his statenents contrary to what we have said is the truth_
16 We don t subscribe to what he said- We have checked into it
17 and we know of no instances where, for example , 15 minutes
18 and that type of thing has been substantiated .
2
19 Senator Iart of Colorado You re saying the tes timony
i
20 he gave us under oath was not accurate? |
21 Mr _ Kelley. Right.
5 22 Senator Hart of Colorado You also said in that statenen
1
23 and I quote: "I want to assure you that Director Hoover did
2
8 24 not conceal from superior authorities the fact that the FBI
25 was engaged in neutralizing and disruptive tactics against
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 59
day
==================================================
Page 60
==================================================
2499
5 T
1 revolutionary and violence-prone groups _
8
2
Now the Committee has received testimony that the New 1
L
3 Left COINTELPRO programs was not in fact tola to higher
4 authorities the Attorney Gereral and Congress _
5 Do you have any information in this regard?
6 I know in that statement you cite onw or two instances ,
7 but in terms of the bulk 0f COINTEL programs
1
the record
8 seems to date at least to be clear that there was not systemati]
9 information flowing upward through the chain of command to
10 Director Hoover S superiors?
11 Mr Kelley: May I ask that I be given the opportunity
{
12 to substantiate that with documentation?
4
0
13 Senator Hart of Colorado_ Sure_
14 Mr Kelley: Or respond to it.
15 Senator Hart of Colorado . Dorector Kelley , just in
16 passing , do you agree with the statement made by President
17 Ford that those responsible for harassing and trying to destroy
18 Dr = should be brought to justice.
19 M . Kelley_ Those wo directly responsible &nd upon whcse orders
20
the activities were taken responsible. I don t know i he intended to say
21 that, but if he did not, I would say that it would be mre proper_ Insofar
22 as myy on
opinion is concerned , that it be centered on those who said
23 to do it and those who are responsible-
24 I: took the responsibility for any such program and I
25 don 't expect that those under me would be not acting in
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 60
King
==================================================
Page 61
==================================================
2500
csh
L
1 accordance with what they think is proper and may even have
8
2 some reservation, but they do it on my orders _ I accept that 1
1 3 responsibility_
4 I think that it should rest, on those who instructed that
5
that be done
6 Senator Hart of Colorado _ But you agree that the people
7 who give the orders should be brought to justice -
8 Mr Kelley . I do _
9 The Chaixman _ Aren 't they all dead?
10 Nr Relley_ No
11 The Chairman Not te?
{
12 Mr Kelley . Not quite_
8
1
13 Senator Hart of Colorado That 's &ll, Mr _ Chairman_
14 The Chairman Thank you , Senator
15
Director Kelley , in the Committee review of the
16 COIITELPRO program and other political involvements of the
17 FBI , it seens to me that we have encountered two or three
18
basic questions_
2
19 Since the investigation is over insofar as the Committee
i
20 is concerned , We re now turning our attention to remedies for
|
21 the future, What I woula think Ioulc be our constructive
1
22
legislative work, it is very important that we focus on what
1
23 we learned in that investigation _
2
24 And one thing that Fe have learned is that Presidents 0f
8
25 the United States have from time to tine ordered tile FBI to
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 61
qui-
's
Page
==================================================
Page 62
==================================================
2501
S
1
7 1 obtain for them certain kinds of information by exercising the
1 2 necessary surveillance to obtain and to have a purely
1
3 political character_
1
that they simply wanted to have for their
4 own personal purposes _
5 I think that you woula agree that that is not a proper
6 function of the FBI , , and you agree _
7 Yet it's a1folly difficult for anyone in the FBI ,
8 including the Director, to turn down a President of the United
9 States 1f he receives a direct order from the President. It
10 is always possible, of course, to say and if you insist,
11 I Will resign_ But that puts a very hard burden on any man
1
12 serving in your position, particularly 1f the President puts
0
0
13 a face on the request and jakes it sound plausible or
14 even invents some excuse It is alrvavs easy for hin to say ,
15 you know , I am considering Senator White for an important
16 position in mY administration , and I need to know more about
17 his activities , particularly of late _ I've had some cause
18 for concern and I want to be certain 'that there is nothing in
1
19 his record that woula later embarrass me and I just want you
i
20 to keep careful track of hin and report to me on what he ' s
L
21 been doing lately.
5 22 It's difficult for you to say back to the President , Mr
1
23 President , that' s a
very questionable activity for the FBI,
2
24 and I frankly don t believe that you ve given me the real 8
25 reason you want this man followed _ I think his opposition
NW 88608 _Docld: 32989820 Page 62
no ,
goocl
why
==================================================
Page 63
==================================================
2502 L
1 ~sk 8 to your current policy is politically embarrassing to you ana
1 2
you want to get something on him _
1
3
I mean , you know the Director can hardly talk back that
4 way , and I'm wondering what we cauld do in the way of protectin
5 your office an the FBI from political exploitation in this
6 basic charter that Ive write _
7
Now_ I vant your suggestions, but let' s begin with one
8
or two of mine _ I would like your response
9 If we were to write into the law that any order. given you
10 either by the President or by the Attorney General should be
11 transmitted in writing and should clearly state the objective
1
12 and purzose 0f the request and that the FBI would maintain
4
0
13 those Written orders and that furthermore they would be
14 available to any oversight comnittee of the Congress _ If the
15 joint conmittee on intelligence is established _ that committee
16 would have access to such a file_
17 So that the committee itself would be satisfied that
18 orders were not being given to the FBI that were improper or
!
19 unlawful_
8
20 What woula you think of writing
a provision of that kind L
21 into a charter for the rBI?
9 22 Hr Kelley- I would say Writing into the law any order
1
23 issued the President that is a request for action by the
2
8 24 Attorney General should be in writing, is certainly, in mY
25 ~opinion , is a very plausible solution. I'm sure that in
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 63
by.
==================================================
Page 64
==================================================
2503
1
1
Y
sk 9 contemplation of this there would be some that will say yes
1 2
or some that will say no , but I think we could define an
1
3
area where you are trying to cure the abuses ana we could
4
do that-
5
Now as to the availability to any oversight committee
6
of Congress , I would say generally that I certainly woula have
no objection to this, but I again, there may be some request
8
for some- thing of high confidentiality that the President might
9
put in writing such as some national or foreign security
10
matter
11
I Iould like to have such a consideration be given a
1
12
8
great deal of thought and that the oversight comittee review
0
13
be conditioned with that possibility_ I don 't think it would
14
present a problem _
15
I have said previously that I feel I can discuss every-
16 thing except the identity of the infornants to the oversight
17
committee I welcome that.
18
The Chairman Well, that has been of course the way we
2
19 proceeded with this Cormittee It has worked pretty well,
i
20
I think _ 6
21
:ow Senator Goldwater brought up a question on the
5 22
Martin Luther King tapes . I would like to pursue that question
1
23
If these tapes do not contain any evidence that needs
2
8 24
to be preserved for ongoing criminal investigations, and since
25
Dr King has long since been violently removed from the scene,
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 64
==================================================
Page 65
==================================================
2504-2505
7
1
10 are they preserved? aren t they simply destroyed? 1
2 1
Is there a problem that we can help through new law to enable
1
3
the FBI to remove from its files sO much 6f this information
that is has collected tlat it is no longer needed or may never
5
have connected the person with any criminal activity? And
6
yet, all of that information just stays there in the files
year after year
8
What can we do? HOw can a law be changed? If that's
9 not the problen then what is? are these tapes still down
10 there at the FBI?
11 Mr Kelley. Mell, of course, we do have the rule that
{
12 they are maintained ten years _ Now the rule i8 'Your
0
1
13 question and right now are maintained? Since we
14 do naintain everything since the inquiry has started and until
15 that'8 lifted, we can t destroy anything _
16 I would say that this is a proper area for guidelines
17 or legislation and again , as I have said, there shoula be
18 some flexibility and I know that' s a broad statement but there
2
19 might be some areas Wherein that the subject of the investigatioh
i
20 hinself may want them retained because it shows his innocence _ |
21 I think you have to deliberate this very carefully, but
y 22 it can be done and Ie are Willing to be guided those
1
23 rules .
2
8 24 The Chairman Let Ine ask you this The FBI is conducting]
25 thousands of investigations every year on possible appointees
NW 88608 Docld:32988820 65
Why why
Nhy
why
they why
by
Page
==================================================
Page 66
==================================================
2506
1
1_
0 1 to Federal positions_ As a matter of fact, the' only time I
2 1
ever see an FBI agent is when he comes around and flashes his
1
3
badge and asks me a question or two about what I know of Mr.
4
SO and S0 , who 's being considered for an executive office
5
And we have a very brief conversation in which I tell hin that
6
as far as I know , he S a loyal and patriotic citizen, and that
is about the extent of it.
8
Then when this file is completed and the person involved
9
is either appointed
or not appointed, what happens to that
10
file? I know it's full of all kinds of gossip because it is
11
in the nature 0f the investigation to go out to his old
{
12
0
neighborhoods and talk to everybody Ivho might have known him
1
13
What happens to the file? Is that just retained forever?
14
Mr Kelley _ We have some capability of destroying sone
15
files and they are rather lengthy insofar as retention _ Wle
16
have some archival rules which govern the retention of mateial
17 and is developed in cases involving certain members of the
18
Executive Branch of the government _
3
19
I see no reason this woula not be a proper area
i
20 for consideration of legislation _ L
21 The Chairman _ Can you give me any idea of ho1v much
3 22
do you have records that would tell us ho much tine and money
1
23 is being spent by the FBI just in conducting these thousands 2
8 24
of routine investigations on possible Presidential appointments
25
to Federal offices?
NW 88608 Docld:32939820 Page 66
why
==================================================
Page 67
==================================================
2507
L
1
2 2 Mr Kelley. I feel confident we can get it. I do not
2 1
have it nOw , but if you would llke to have the annual cost
1 3 .
for the investigation of Federal appointees
The Chairman_ Yes _ Plus , you know
1
plus any other
6
information that mould indicate to uS what proportion of the
6
time and effort of the FBI was absorbed in this kind of
7 activity_
8
Mr Kelley. I can tell you it is relatively small, but
9
I can get you, I think, the exact amount of time and the
10 approximate expense_
11 The Chairman _ I wish you would do that because this is
1
12
a matter we need siore infornation about _ And when you supply
8
1
13 that data to the Committee, would you also supply the number
14 of such 'investigations each year?
15 You know , I don t expect you to go back 20 or 25 years ,
16 but give uS a good idea of the last few years _ For example,
17 enough to give us an idea of how much time and how broad the
18 reach of these investigations may be
1
19 Mx _ Kelley. Through 70?
d
20 The Chairman_ That would be sufficient , I would think _ |
21 The other matter that is connected to this same subject
4
22 that I woulc like your best judgment on is whether these
1
23 investigations could not be linited to offices of sensi tivity_
2
8 24 That is to say where legitimate national security interest mightl
25 be involved so that there is a reason to make a close check on
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 67
==================================================
Page 68
==================================================
2508
1
1
0 13 past associations, attitudes and expressions f belief.
1 2
I have often wondered whether we couldn t eliminate
3
routine Federal offices that are not particularly sensitive
4
in the national security sense from the reach 0f these FBI
5
checks
6
And So when you respond to the series of questions , I
7
wish you would include the offices that are now covered by
8
such checks and give
us an idea of howv far down into the
Federal bureaucracy this extends _
10
Could you do that?
11
Mr Kelley . Yes , sir.
{
12
0
The Chairnan_ Fine _
1
13
Now there is a vote _ The vote always cones just at
14
the wrong tine , but Mr Schwarz wants to ask you some additional
15 questions for the record, and there may be other questions
16
too that would be posed the staff , after which I will ask
17
Mr Schwarz to adjourn the hearings_ It looks like Te 're going
18
to be tied up on the floor with votes:
1
19 But before I leave I want to thank' you for your testimony
i
20
[ir Kelley, and to express my appreciation to. you for the L
21
way you have cooperated with the Conuittee in the course of
4
22
its investigation during the past months
1
23
Mr Kelley _ Thank you _
2
8 24
The Chairman And I hope , as you
1
that as a result
25
of the wvork Of the Committee Tve can write a generic law for
NW 88608 Docld:32980820 Page 68
by
do
==================================================
Page 69
==================================================
2509
1
1
9s-' 2 4 the FBI that will help to remedy many of the problems Ive '11
2 1
encounter in the future
8
3
End %ape 4 Thank you .
4
5
6
8
9
10_
11
1
12
8
0
13
14
15
16
17
18
1
19
i
20 L
21
5 22
1
23
2
8 24
25
NW 836o8 Docld:32982820_Page 69
7
==================================================
Page 70
==================================================
AHW smnl 2510
t f
1 Mr - Schwarz . Mr . Kelley, I'11 try to be very brief.
8
1 2 On page 5 of your statement 7
1 3
Mr_ Kelley- What?
4 Mr _ Schwarz . On page 5 of your statement , the third
5 full paragraph , you said the following , and I would like then
6 to question about what you said. "We must recognize that
situations have occurred in the past and will arise in the
8 future where the Government may well be expected to depart from
its traditional role, in the FBI' s case , as an investigative
10 and intelligence-gathering agency , and take affirmative steps
11 which are needed to meet an imminent threat to human life or
1
12 property- n
0
1
13 NOw , by that you mean to take what kind of steps in whet
14 kind of situation?
15 And can you give some concrete examples under your general
16 principles statement?
17 Mr . Kelley. I think that Mr - Adams addressed himself to
18 that the other where you have an extremist who is an
I
19 employee at the waterworks , ana he makes a statement that he' s
i
20 going to do something which is devastating to the city, and you
6
21 have no way to attack this under the ordinary procedures , ana
1 22 so therefore you must take some steps to meet that imminent
1
23 threat to human life or property.
2
24 Mr_ Schwarz _ So let us take that case as a test of the
8
25 principle_ You are saying the extremist has said he is going
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 70
day ,
Page
==================================================
Page 71
==================================================
2511
2 M
to do something to the waterworks , poison it or something , ana
8
2 he is on the way down there with the poison in his car. 1
1
3 Is that the presumption?
4 Mr . Kelley- We hadn t gone that far, but all right, you
5 can extent it.
6 Mr _ Schwarz _ All right, now , in that case you have the
7 traditional law enforcement tool, which is the power of arrest.
8 Mr - Kelley. Not under probable cause where he has not
gone down there _ The hypothetical we gave was one where he had
10 not taken any overt acts in perpetration of this_
11 Mr . Schwarz . Well, if he hasn t taken any overt acts ,
1
12 are you then in what you woula call in imminent threat of
0
0
13 human life or property?
14 Mr _ Kelley. I think sO _
15 Mr Schwarz _ How so? Unless he has taken an overt act'
16 to the poison or to get in the car with the poison , there
17 is not by definition any threat to life or property.
18 Mr - Kelley. Mr _ Schwarz , I ve been around in this business
1
19 a long time. I've . heara a number of threats which were issued
i
20
and they thereafter materialized into actions I don t .think
L
21
take these threats as being empty ones , because So many times
4 22
they have been acted upon -
1
23 I was criticized one time when there was a threat made to
2
24 kill me ana it was said later on , it' s not rhetoric, it' s
8
25 not rhetoric to me , because when they say they re going to
NW 88608 Docld:32985820 71
buy
Page
==================================================
Page 72
==================================================
smn 3
2512
1 kill me , that just means one
thing.
8
1 2 Mr_ Schwarz. But I'm not disagreeing with you_
1 3
Mr - Kelley. But' you are disagreeing with me You 're saying
4 on the basis of experience that you cannot detect a possible
5 threat. That's the whole area of concern that we have here = where
6 we don 't lose the capability of doing something. We don't
say we should initiate ourselves . We say that we should go to
the Attorney General We do not subscribe to the idea that
we should act independently because maybe we don t have the
10 judicial review the capability of determining, but we do
11 think that we should report it and thereafter see what can
1
12 be done _
0
0
13 Mr - Schwarz . Well , have you changed in the course of
14 our discussion the standard on page 5
15 On page 5 you ' re talking about an iminent threat.
16 Mr . Kelley . Yes _
17 Mx - Schwarz _ And I hear you now as saying a possible
18 threat
2
19 Mr _ Kelley. An imminent possible threat.
8
20 Mr Schwarz _ An imminent possible threat. All right.
L
21 Now would a
fair standara for either action, other than
5 22 arrest, I don t know what you have in mind , but something to
1I
23 prevent the person from carrying out his activities other
2
24 than arrest, for instance, what is an example of what you have
8
25 in mind?
NWV 88608 Docld: 32989820 _Page 72_
==================================================
Page 73
==================================================
4
2513
7
1 Mr. Kelley. Removing him" Erom his position or whatever
8
1 2 is necessary in order to make it impossible or at least as
L
3 impossible as possible to perpetuate this thing.
4 Mr . Schwarz. You mean have him lose his job or
5
Mr _ Kelley. I don t know what it woula be .
6
Mr _ Schwarz . Isolate him in some fashion _
7
Mr . Kelley- In some fashion perhaps _
8
Mr . Schwarz _ NOw , for such activity and for opening
9 an investigation into a domestic group , could you live with
10 a standard which said you would have to have an immediate
11 threat that someone was likely to commit a serious federal
1
12 crime involving violence?
8
0
13 Mr. Kelley. I think that this thing coula be worked out
14 SO that there could be an adequate basis for an evaluation_
15 Mr _ Schwarz So those words _
1
without trying to commit
16 you entirely to them, do not seem to you to depart far from
17 what you think would be an acceptable standard-
18 Mr - Kelley- Well, an imminent , immediate threat might
1
19 be , by virtue of the word It immediate" that he S going to
i
20 do it the next minute _ In that case it may be necessary for L
21 you to, not with the presence or the possibility, not able
4 22 to do anything except put him under arrest or anything .
11
23 Mr _ Schwarz . Of course, of course _
2
8 24 And nobody would at all disagree with that kind of action
25 Mr . Kelley. I don 't think they would either.
NW BB6IB_Docld: 32989820_Page 73
Smn
==================================================
Page 74
==================================================
2514
snn 8
1
1 Mr- Schwarz . But on the question, let's take the opening
8
2 of an investigation into a domestic group _ 1
1
3 Is it basically consistent with practicality to make the
4 test immediate threat of a serious Federal crime involving
5 violence?
6 Mr . Kelley. To open a domestic security case
7
Mr. Schwarz. Yes .
8 Mr - Kelley- It appears to me that this is a terrorist
9 activity, in effect. We certainly have terrorist activities
10 under our
jurisdiction as a threat against the United States _
11 Mr _ Schwarz _ Now , are there other circumstances where
1
12 it is justifiable to open an investigation of the domestic
8
1
13 group where you do not have an immediate threat of serious
14 federal crime involving violence?
15 Mr _ Kelley. Oh , I think there are other criteria, and
16
they have been well defined as to what is the possible
17 opening, the basis for a
possible opening . We haven t been
18
discussing that , we have been discussing particular instances
1
2
19 but there are other criteria that are used , yes .
i
Mr . Schwarz . What would the other criteria be?
20 6
21 Mr . Kelley. Well, the possible statutory violations
4 22
over which we have jurisdiction are, generally speaking , the
1
22 most used of thebasis , and then you have_ of course, some
i
24
intelligence investigations which should, of course, be of
8
25 short duration. If there is no
showing of this into action
NW 88608 Docld:32988820 74 Page
==================================================
Page 75
==================================================
2515
6 r
1_ or a viable intent.
8
2 Mr _ Schwarz _ So that' s what you re looking for in the 1
1
3
intelligence investigation?
4 Mr _ Kelley. By intelligence investigation ,
yes , you
5 are looking to prevent .
6 Mr . Schwarz_ And what you are looking to prevent , and
what you re looking to find is a likelihood of action combined
8 with an intent to take an issue?
9 Mr - Kelley. And the capability.
10 Mr _ Schwarz_ And the capability.
11 All right. I just have two other lines , Mr . Kelley , and
1
12 I appreciate very much your time _
0
1
13 Mr . Kelley. That' s all right.
14 Mr . Schwarz _ Assuming a legitimate investigation has
15 been started into a
domestic intelligence matter , is it legiti-
16 mate for the FBI , in addition to obtaining information that
17
relates to what we 've just been talking about, the likelihood
18 of violent action, is it also legitimate for the FBI to
1
19
collect, A, retain, B, disseminate , C, information concerning
5
20
let's say the sex life of a person on the one hand , ana the
L
21
political views of a person on the other?
4
22 Mx - Kelley. I think, Mr . Schwarz , that this is just what
1
23 many of our problems and perhaps the guidelines
can define
2
24
this type of thing. I think probably you will agree that
8
25
within the determination of the deviations possibly of sex
NW 88608 Docld:32980820 Page 75
==================================================
Page 76
==================================================
smn 7
2516
1
lives, there might be something that is relevant. I would say
8
1 2 ordinarily it's not. And so far a5
political views , yes , I
1
3 think that this could be , if he is espousing sone cause or
4 some view that advocates violence or the overthrow of the
5 government .
6 Mr . Schwarz . Woula those be the two limits on political
7 views?
8 Mr _ Kelley- What?
9 Mr _ Schwarz Woula those be the limits on political
10 views that you think are okay to collect , advocants of violence
11 or advocants of overthrow?
1
12 Mr _ Kelley. Well, I don 't think because he' s a Democrat
0
1
13 or a
Republican it woula be anything that woula be damaging,
14 but it might on the other hand counter the report that he' s
15 a member Of some other organization
16 Mr . Schwarz _ Is the standard you used on collection of
17 sex life information, might be relevant? I suppose anything
18 might be relevant, but don t you think that as a function of
2
19 balance , it has to have a high degree of relevance before it's
i
20
justifiable to collect that kind of information on American
L
21
citizens who are
not suspected of having comitted crimes?
4 22 Mr. Kelley- Insofar as doing it presently, it has been
1
23 included in some reports as a result Of the requirement that
2
24 that is what is required by our rules , that when a person
8
25
reports something to uS , we do a report of the complaint. Insofar
NW 88608 Docld: 32983820 Page 76
only
==================================================
Page 77
==================================================
s mn8 2517
L
as a
determination by guidelines that might be prepared later,
8
2 I think that we can
certainly deliberate on this to see whether !
1
3 or not this is something we should retain, and we woula not
4 object to anything reasonable in that regard_
5 Mr. Schwarz_ I just have one final question _
6 Taking the current manual and trying to understana its
7 applicability laid against the facts in the Martin Luther King
8 case , under Section 87 there is a Et
permission is granted to
9 open investigations of the infiltration of non-subversive
10 groups , and the first sentence reads : "When information is
11
received indicating that a subversive group is seeking to
{
12 systematically infiltrate and control a non-subversive group
0
0 1
13 or organization , an investigation can be opened.
14 NOW , I take it that is the same standard that was used
15
in opening the investigation of the Southern Christian Leadership
Conference in the 1960s , SO that investigation could still be
16
17
open today under the FBI manual_
1
the current FBI manual
Mr _ Kelley. We are interestea in the infiltration of
18
3
19
clearly subversive groups into non-subversive groups inasmuch
i
as this is a ploy that is used many times , and having infil-
20 L
21
trated, they then get control, and they have a self-laundered
3 22
organization which they can use , and not, certainly, to the
1
23
benefit of the country.
2
Mr _ Schwarz _ But is the answer to my question yes , that
8 24
under that standard , the SCLC investigation coula still be
25
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 77 Page
==================================================
Page 78
==================================================
smn9
2518 7
1 opened today?
8
2 Mr . Kelley- I think so !
1 3 Mr - Schwarz _ All right, then _
1
just one final question.
4 Do you agree that special care needs to be taken not only
5 of the standards for initially opening
an investigation of a
6 group , but perhaps extra care needs to be taken when the investi
7 gation goes beyond the initial target group to individuals
8 or people who come into contact with it?
9 Mr _ Kelley. I don t know if I agree with that entirely.
10 you mean that we go into the non-subversive group , that we
11
then investigate peopie in that non-subversive group , not the
1
12 infiltrators , but the non , that we conduct a lengthy investigation
0
1
13 of them without any basis for doing
so other than that they
14 are in an infiltrated group, I would likely have said F but
15 off the top of my head I woula say probably that S not necessary
16 Mr . Schwarz _ Thank you very much ,
17 Mr Smothers Just a couple of very brief lines of
18 inquiry, Mr _ Kelley.
3
19 I think that the questions of the Chief Counsel_ was
i
20
raising is one that goes further into your statement , when you
L
21
talk about the difficulty of setting out the line between
4 22
intelligence gathering and law enforcement kinds of functions .
1
23 Nevertheless , though , I think that have made an effort,
2
24 indeed , the Bureau S organizational scheme reflects # {: 8
25 to distinguish some of this has been made .
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 78
you
Page
==================================================
Page 79
==================================================
smn 10
2519
Putting aside for one moment the counterespionage
1
8
effort, and looking strictly at what we have been calling the
1 2
Domestic Intelligence , is it your view that the retention of 1
3
this function in the Bureau is critical to the Bureau s
4
law enforcement position?
5
6 Mr - Kelley- personal opinion is that the Bureau does
7 a
splendid job in this area, I feel further that the background
of criminal investigatory activities and experiences which
8
all counterintelligence people have is very helpful _ It is help-
9
ful not only in gathering knowledge and experience , it also
10
enters into this field, a person with a
broad understanding
11
0 of the rights and privileges , and you don t have SO much that
12
0
spY type , that cloak and dagger _ that very , very secret type 1
13
of an operation _
14
I subscribe to the present system heartily.
15
Mr _ Smothers _ Woula it be of assistance to your mission
16
if within the Bureau guidelines were established that
17
effectively limited access or controlled dissemination of
18
1 the intelligence product? In other words 1f we had a 19
i
situation where the intelligence product is critical to assist
20 L
the law enforcement effort, I don 't think there s any question
21
that there should be access to it.
i 22
1
Isn t our problem one
of controlling the use of that
23
2 intelligence product and preventing the kind of murky crossing
8 24
of lines there with the information legitimately needed for
25
NW 88608 Docld:32980820 79
My
Page
==================================================
Page 80
==================================================
smn 11
2520
1
1 law enforcement?
8
2 Mr .
Kelley. There is always a problem when there is wide 1
1
3 dissemination because that just numerically increases the
4
possibility of misuse, abuse or slander libel, or anything
5 of that matter, and I think that it would be well worthwhile
6 to review the dissemination rules to make them subject to
7
close guidance in the guidelines that we re speaking Of _
8 Mr _ Smothers _ Let me just raise one final area with you _
9 We talked a little bit about, or a question was raised about
10
the investigation now being conducted by the Justice Department
11
regarding the improper actions on the COINTELPRO , and the
1
12
King case in particular_
8
13 As we look at allegations 6f impropriety by your personnel 12
14 I think it would be helpful for our record here to have some
15
insight into the procedure the Bureau would normally follow
16
What does the Bureau do when you get an allegation that
an agent or administrative official in the Bureau has behaved
17
18
improperly?
3
Is an investigation conducted internally , or is it
19
i
routinely referred to the Justice Department?
20 6
21
Mr _ Kelley. There may be a revision in this type of
3 procedure as a result of the establishment of the Council for
22
1
23 _
Professional Responsibility. At present it woula be in the
2
great majority of the cases turned over to our Investigative
8 24
Division for investigation _ There might, on some unusual
25
NWV 88608 Docld:32989320 Page 80
==================================================
Page 81
==================================================
smn 12
2521
1
1 occasion , be a designation of 'a special task force made up
8
2 perhaps , of division heads _ That is most unlikely, but it is 1
1
3
handled internally at present .
4 Mr _ Smothers _ Woula these internal determinations be
5 reviewed by Justice, or do you think that is a necessary
6 step?
7 I guess what we are
searching for here is, first of all,
8 I think you answered that, well, to what extent does the
9
Bureau police itself, ana then secondly , is the Department of
10 Justice involved in the police determinations?
11 For instance, what if the Attorney General disagreed with
1
12 the assertion that only the higher up officials who ordered
4
1
13 the action against King should be the subject of investigation
14
and maybe prosecution?
15 How does the interplay work there between you and Justice?
16 Mr _ Kelley. We do report to the Attorney General those
17
activities which we construe as improper or possibly illegal.
18 There is a possibility that the Department_ having been advised
1
19 of the situation , might take it on their own to do their own
i
investigating, and this is something that we feel is a 20 L
21
decision to be made only rather rarely, because we feel we
9 22 have within our Own organization sufficient capability to
1
23.
handle that. But we do not protest it. It is handled
2
independently of us .
8 24
25 Mr _ Smothers _ Thank you _
NWV 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 81
==================================================
Page 82
==================================================
snn 13
2522 L
1 That is all I have
8
2 Mr . Schwarz _ Thank you . 1
1 3 (Whereupon , at 12:12 0 'clock P.m. , the Committee recessed
4 subject to the call of the Chair.)
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
1
12
0
0
13
14
15
16
17
18
1
19
i
20 L
21
5 22
1
23
2
8 24
25
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 82 Page
==================================================
Page 83
==================================================
VzCCHQOG4 [
PP MM
%p Ho amal 6528035
ZnR WUUUU
P ?114447 F73 Er
FM DireCTor FBI
TO Fbi MIA `I PPIOPITY
LEGAL ATTACHE MEXICO CiTy PPIO"ITY
BT
'(1n5)
WCLGs
VISIT 05 FE"ATZ SELECT COMMITIEE 0" I@ICLLIGF CE (SSCI) STAFF
TO MIA MI FIZLD QFFic? A"D LEGA T MGXICO CiTy R5GapcIng DplG
EmfofCeMC,I AgenCY (Dsa) .
TyF SSCI Is conductinG 4 STUDY 0F THG DzA In ConMECTIon
WiTK TH? COMMITTS?'S ROLE Iw Ovt?siGhT 0F C7PTAI: POPTIOn? 0F
QEA SUnGSI. PDIMARILY , THZ COMMITTEE Is INIZPESTED Ir
DETTRMINI:G THF POL5 OF THE DZA I" THZ IniCLLiAIwcE ComMunItY _
SSCI CHAI?MA BIrch BAYH Has PZQUZSTED THZ FBI TO ASSIST Wi
THE COMMITISE'S STUPY BY PPOvIDING 37iFFi"GS TO STAFF MZMBERS
PfGa"DI"G FBI /n5a RFLATIO SHIPS. I HAVZ AGREED TO AssISI THE
COMMITTF? I2 IIS STUDY . AS SUCH , YCU TO PTOvIDE BPIzFirGS
TO Th? COMMITI?E SiAF7 ReGa?3i"G OU? PZLATIO"SHIPc WITH DEA .
462246-
SCARCHCD_
TEvexco_
SERIALIZED
Ta L~FILED_
FEB 2 1 1980
FBI- MIALHI
SaL
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 83
3346
0 bb-_
Ap7
Asacb
Feelma'z
Lolllds
==================================================
Page 84
==================================================
4
PAGE Two D HQ J"4 ] U"CLAS
THF COMMITTEE MOUL D ALSO LIY? ITS STAFF MEMBERS TO BZ
CFWERALLY BPIEFFD o1 THE MIAMI FISLD OFFICF FCI PROGrAM.
THEY ARE PPIMAPILY InIT?STC? In THE PRIORITIES A ND FCI
THPFATS I" MIAMI _ THE STAFF IS ALSO InIfDSSTFC I" ACa[ipinG
InfocMA IIO" FZGA"diXC TKC POLE 4"D FU"CTIoNS 0p 0U>
LFCaT I" MEXICC CITy. ACCOrDI"GLY , BF P?E?A"I? To PROVIDE
8DiefI"G 0r THOSZ MAITSCS .
FQo Yo'jD INFORMA TIO" TKE STAFF MZMBERS VHO DILL BZ
T7aVZLINC To YOUD FAC ILITI?C A55 DENNIS P . SHAFO# 4 ND
THQMAS CoXA'OLLY . APPA4GEME TS ALDZADY HAVE 322"' MA DE TO
HAV? Ikt MIAMI FIzL? OFFICE BFISF 4TSSoC . SHACO% AaR
Con OLLY 0" FEETMIAPY 27 , 1929, A T 2830 P.M. TkV COMMITTZE
HAS BSE" ADVISF? TH^ T WILLIAM 7 "ETILZS, 4S0C MIAMI, WILL
ConcTiCT THF PriEFing_
IT IS OuR UYtERsIandiNG IXAT THS STAt? CZPa RTmsnT Hcs
CAELSn THF U. S , 7mbassy I" MZXICO CIty TO APVICr THEM 0F
TH? SIAFV MEMBE?S VISIT TO DCA 'Aw) FBI PERSO""TL . THE
COMMITITZ IndIcATS? Ii 4OULD LIKS TO VISIT WITH 0U? LEGA T
on THV Mocminc 0F FEB?UAPY 23 , OP SOMETIME 0 N 773RUARY 25 , 1989
LFC4T MEXICO CITy SHOULD BS AVAILABLE FOR SRIEFInGS on ONE
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 84
==================================================
Page 85
==================================================
PAGE THPEE DE HQ 4041 UMCLAs
OF THOSE Tu0 70 TfS . IT Is SUGGESTED TKAT LEGAT MCXICO CIty
ConiACI 4RD HEA TH , REG IONAL DIPEC TOF , DzA , MEXICO CITY ,
WHC IS ~ooodiNA TING DEA 'S MEETINGS WIth STAFF' In ORDER To
D2A "G E A DA TE A ND TIME FoR BPIv?inG FBI HEADQ WARTERS WILL
"OTIFY COMMITTSE THAT InfodMPTIO" ~EGA?dInG FBi BRIzFinG
SHOULD BF OBTAI"ED BY TH7M IHPOWGH DEA
FO? YO'J~ AdniTIo"AL I"FOCMA TIOM , STAFF M7YRZRC 5 ILL BE
ACcom?A Izr PY DAVID MLociC, Co "GR5SSIO AL 2.574IBS OFFICE ,
rfs. Mt, MCLOCIC, HO'EVFR, wILL "OI ^ TtF"? F3I ?2IzvIrGs.
BOTH STAFF Pe?s0:S AR? CLTADZD To 7?CTIVz CLAESIFIID
In5o MATIO# !P TO TOP SzC?EI. WHILI YOU SHOULE RzSPo:?
FIJLLV , YQU SKCULn "QT DISC'SS THS DETAILS 0F 0 NGOIEE
IPVCSIIEATIO"S 07 PROVIDE JNFODMATIO" wHIch
1T ILL COMP ZOMISt
IXFooma TS D
SVTTL. DrS"LTc 0F Bpisfi"G TO ?EAcH F3i H343eWA RTEPS LY
COB TK? 24Y ^fTZ? SCKEOUL~> Bpifvi_G_
PUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE 7384721"G THIS MATIEP SKQIJLD' 37
DI ECTen To Sp CHPISTOPyer MAz7fLLA ! LRCAL LIAISOE/
CO"GRESSIO"AL ^Fqairs U"II, FSI HFADQu: PTEPS, IXTE"SIo" 4516 .
31
0s5~ 2643z mM- |
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 85
Trh
30 21
Page
==================================================
Page 86
==================================================
PNK C
ViveE Coey
GuD GApy .
VZC;ZCKe0@4 [
PP Mit
DE HQ 004 1 0527935
Z? yuwWU
P 2112447 FEB 80
Fm DI PEC To? FBI
To FB} MIAMI PFICRITY:
LEGAL 'ATTACHE. MEXICO' CITY PRIQPITY
RT
"xCLAS:
VISIT 0F SEMATE SELECT COMMITIEE 04' IWTELLJGCRCE (CSCI) SIAFF'
To MIAMI FIELD QFFICS QD Leeat MGXICO' CItY REGARDING DRUg
Fi'FQPCEMeFT AceiCY (JEA) ,
TKF SSCI TS CONDUcTIEG a STUQy 0F THE DEA In Co" ECTION
WITH TkE COMMITTEF 'S. FOLE In OVEQZIGHT 07 C7rTA IN PORTIONS QF
REA BIIDGET . PRIMARILY, ThE CQWMITTEE IS INTEPESTED N
DETErMINING THE 'ROLE OF_ TKE 'DEA I4 THE IWTELLIGENCE COMMUN ITY .
SSCI CHPIRMA; BIRCH BAyh Hes' PEQWZSIE) THE FBI Io ASSIST IN
TH COMMITTEF'S STwjy By PPOVIDING BRI;FI%GS TO SIAFG , MEmBERS'
FFGapbING FBI'REA RCLATIONSHIPS. I
KrVe AGPEEZ To ASSIST THE
COMMITTFE In Its STWDY , As Such; YoU ARE To PROVIDE JRIEFINGS
TC ThF COMMITTEE ' StafF RRGARSI'G ovP PFLATIOA'SHIPS WIIH DcA ,
-32+6.-33
Bearcura
NLed_
FEB 2 1 *M
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 86
D 8Erlal*bD
FVL- MIAMI
==================================================
Page 87
==================================================
PAGE TWo DE Hq ` 044[ IncLaf
TKE COMMITTFE WOULC ALsQ LIKE ITS STAFF MEMBERS TQ BE
GENERALLY BPIEFED Ok TNE MTAMI FITLD OFFICE FC I. Procram.
THEY A?5 PPIMARILY INTEPESIED I" ThS PRIOBITIZS aND FCI
THREA TS I4 MIA MI, TkE STAFF IS ALsO INIFFESTCQ Ii ACRWT?ING
Infopma TIQH TEGARDINC IHE fole Ak) FWnctiops 0F QUR
LEGaT Jn MEXICC CITY. ACCORDINGLY , BS PRSP& RED TO PROIDE
A BRIEFING 0h THOSE MATTERS_
Fop Yoir IMFORMATION, TXS SIAFF MEMBEPS WILi PE
TpAVFLING To YouR FACILITIES APE DENNIS P. SkA RON And
IhOMAs ConaoLly: ArpaNGEMEWTS ALPEADY: HAVE BEEN Ma DE IO
Ha VE TkZ MIAMI FIELD OFFICE BBIEF MESSRS , SHAROM Amb
CoNnOLLY 0, FesruaRY 27 , 1980 , AI.2830 'P,M. THS COMMITTEE
HAS BEEX ARVISED ThAT: WILLIAM F. NETILES, ASAC MIAMI, WILL
CONDWc I TKE, BRIEFInG .
It IS QuR UNCERSTAMBING Tha T ThS STA Tc BEPa RTMENT Ka s
CABLED THE V : S , ZMBASSY IQ MEXICO CITY To ADVISE TKEM 0F
ThE STAFT MEMberS VISII Iq DEA Ard FBI PERSO NNEL . Thc
COMMI TTEE INDICA TEQ IT WQUL) LIKI TO VISIT WITH 0ur LEGA T
or THE MQ?NIng OF February 23 , OR SQMETIAE ow Fzbrua?y 25 , 198@ .
LEGA T MEXICO CITY SHOULD BE AVAILABLE FOR BPIEFIwGS On .OnE
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 87
WHO
==================================================
Page 88
==================================================
PaGe THREE DF Ha_o04j VMcLAs
0F THOSE Two DATES , It IS SUGGESTED THAT LEGAT MEXICO city
contacT EdWapd HEAtK, PEG IONAL LIRECTOR, DEA, MEXICO GITY ,
WHO IS GOOPDINA TING DEA '&' MFETINGG . WITH StaFF In 0 RDER TO
arraAGE 4 DA TE ANd TIMG Fop 'BRIEFING FEI" HEADQWAPTERS WILL
NOTIFY 'COMMITTET THAT INFOPMATIOM PEGaFDINc FBI BPIEFIng
SHOWLD RE ObTAINED BY IHEM Through DEA .
FOP YOUR ADDITIOMAL IWFORMA TION , STafF MEMBERS 'ILL 36
AccQMPAWIED bY DAVID ,MELOCIC, CO@GRESSIOMAL Affa IpS DTFICE ,
DEA , Mr _ MTLOCIC _
9
HoweveR, WILL "ot ATTEND FBI BRIETInge.
BQTH STAFF PERSO S ARE CLEA"ED TQ PECEIVE CLASSIFIED
INFOPMATION WIP T TQP SECRET . WKILR, YoU SHoWLD PESPO :)
FliLY
{
YQW SHCULD NoT Discuss THE DETAILS 0f ONCOInG
INVESTIGATIons OR: PRQVIDE IWFOPMATION WHICH NIli COMPROMISE:
ImFosManTS . D
SITeL PESULTS 0F BRIEFING Tq Rrach FBI HEADQUARTERS EY
CC? IKE Day AFTE? SChEDULSI BrISFInG ,
QUFSTIONS Yqu Ma y HAve #EGAPDING THIS Ma TTER SHJUL) %E
DIFECIED To Sa CHRISTOPHER MMZTELLA ! LEGAL LIA ISun/
coig DESSICWAL AFFAIRS -{iWIT, FFI HeAnqvarTERS, Exte"STon 45 1 @ _
BT
0G41
01.943 2 m m - |
"NhB
NW 88608 Docld: 32989820 Page &8
==================================================
Page 89
==================================================
20
FD-36 (Rev. 5-22-64)
4*F
F B |
Date: JANUARY 9 , 1976
Transmit the following in CODE
(Type in plaintexl or code)
Via TELETYPE NITEL
(Priority)
TO: DIRECTOR (62-116395)
~Dcs
FROM: SAC , MIAMI (66-3346)
SENSTUDY 75.
RE MIAMI NITEL 1/8/76.
FORMER AGENT JOHN LESTER QUIGLEY WAS RECONTACTED 1/9/76
REGARDING THE ADVISABILITY OF HIS CALLING LEGAL COUNSEL DIVISION
SHOULD HE BE CONTACTED BY THE SENATE COMMITTEE _ QUIGLEY AGREED
TO CALL ME AND OFFICE OF LEGAL COUNSEL SHOULD HE BE CONTACTED .
END
JLM:mjs
(1)
L6_3346 4
Approved; Sent M Per
ZF
Special Agent in Charge U.S.Government PrInting Offlce: 1972 Sn 455-574
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 89
32
==================================================
Page 90
==================================================
NR @1 4 MM CODE
4:32PM NITEL JANUARY 9, 1976 JWB
TO DIRECTOR (62-116395 )
FROM MIAMI (66-3346)
SENSTUDY 75 ,
RE MIAMI NITEL JANUARY 1976,
FORMER AGENT JoHN LESTER QUIGLEY WAS RECONTACTED JANUARY 1976
REGARDING THE ADVISABILITY 0F HIS CALLING LEGAL COUNSEL DIVISION
SHOULD HE BE CONTACTED BY THE SENATE COMMITTEE. QUIGLEY AGREED
TO CALL ME AND OFFICE 0F LEGAL COUNSEL SHOULD HE BE GONTACTED.
END .
b6-334612
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 90
8, `
9 ,
==================================================
Page 91
==================================================
FD- Rev. 5-22-64)
2
22
F B |
Date: JANUARY 8 , 1976
Transmit the following in CODE
(Type in plaintext or code)
Via TELETYPE NITEL
(Priority)
TO: DIRECTOR , FBI (62-116395)
FROM: SAC , MIAMI (66-3346)
SENSTUDY 75,
RE BUTEL CALL TO DALLAS, 1/6/76 , AND DALLAS TELCALL TO
MIAMI
9
1/7/76, RE FORMER AGENT JOHN LESTER QUIGLEY .
I CONTACTED QUIGLEY TELEPHINICALLY 1/8/76. HE STATED HE
HAS BEEN REQUESTED TO GRANT INTERVIEWS TO TV, AUTHORS,
PUBLISHERS , ETC . , ON A NUMBER OF CCCASIONS AND HAS REFUSED IN
EVERY INSTANCE HE SAID HE WILL COOPERATE WITH THE SENATE
COMMITTEE AT LEAST TO THE INITIAL EXTENT OF DETERMINING WHAT
INFORMATION IS DESIRED OF HIM IN ORDER THAT HE CAN DECIDE
WHETHER HE WILL NEED PRIVATE LEGAL COUNSEL . QUIGLEY SAID HE
IS RELUCTANT TO TAKE ANY INITIATIVE WHATSOEVER IN THIS MATTER
AND SUGGESTED FBI OFFICE OF LEGAL COUNSEL CONTACT HIM As TO
ANY DIRECTION OR ADVICE CONSIDERED NECESSARY _ HIS OVER-ALL
VIEW IS THAT THE SENATE COMMITTEE EFFORTS ARE DESTRUCTIVE As
PERTAIN TO FBI AND HE DOES NOT WANT TO BE A PARTY TO THE
66-3346
{iM;njstA
(1)
66-334676
LB
Approved: Sent M Per
Special Agent in Charge U.S.Government Printing Offlce: 1972 _ 455-574
NWV 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 91
==================================================
Page 92
==================================================
FD-36 5-22-64)
F B |
Date:
Transmit the following in
in plaintext o code)
Via
(Priority)
PAGE TWO
COMMITTEE S APPARENT OBJECTIVES . HE SAID HE WILL RECEIVE ANY
COMMITTEE MEMBER WHO CONTACTS HIM, BUT HE WILL NOT TAKE ANY
INITIATIVE .
THE FOLLOWING IS QUIGLEY S ADDRESS: JOHN LESTER QUIGLEY ,
THE FOUNTAIN , APT . 107 , 4120 TIVOLI COURT, LAKE WORTH, FLORIDA,
PHONE : (305) 967-7610.
ANY CONTACT BY PHONE SHOULD BE MADE BETWEEN 8:30 AND 9:00
ANY MORNING IN THE NEXT SEVERAL DAYS.
END
Approved: Sent M Per
Special Agent in Charge U.S Government PrIntlng Office: 1972 S 455-574
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 92
(Rev.
(Type
==================================================
Page 93
==================================================
NR9B6 MM CODE
3:3@PM NITEL JANUARY 8, 1976 JWB
To DIRECTOR (62-116395)
FROM MIAMI (66-3346) 2P
SENSTUDY 75 _
RE BUTEL CALL To DALLAS , JANUARY 6, 1976 , AND DALLAS TELCALL To
MIAMI , JANUARY 7, 1976, RE FOR MER AGENT JOHN LESTER QUIGLEY.
I CONTA CTED QUIGEL Y TELEPHONICALLY JANUARY 8, 1976. HE STATED HE
HAS BEEN. REQUESTED To GRANT INTER VIEWS To TV, AUTHORS,
PUBL ISHERS, ETC. , oN A NUMBER 0F OCCASIONS AND HAS REFUSED In
EVERY INSTANCE _ KE SAID HE WILL COOPERATE WITH IHE SENATE
COMMITTEE AT LEAST To THE INITIAL EXTENI OF DETERMI NI NG WHAT
INFORMATION IS DESIRED OF HIM In ORDER THAT HE CAn DECIDE
WHETHER HE WILL NEED PRIVAT LEGAL COUNSEL , QUIGLEY SAID KE
IS RELUCTANT To IAKE Any INITIATIVE WHA TSOEVER In THIS MATTER
ND SUGGESTED FBI OFFICE OF LEGAL COUNSEL CONTACT HIM AS To
AnY D IRECI Ion OR ADVICE CONSIDERED NECESSARY_ HIS O VER-ALL
VIEW IS THAT THE SENATE COMMITTEE EFFORTS ARE DESTRUCTIVE As
PERTAIN Io FBI AND HE DOES NOT WANI To BE A PARTY To THE
COMMITTEE'S APPARENT OBJECT I VES , HE SAID HE WILL RECEI VE ANY
COMMITIEE MEMBER WHO CONTACIS HIM, BUT HE WILL NOT TAKE Any
INITIATIVE.
END PAGE ONE
b6-3346-46
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 93 Page
==================================================
Page 94
==================================================
H 1^
PAGE TWQ (MM 66-3346)
THE FOLL OW I NG IS QUIGLEY'S ADDRESS : JOHN LESTER QUIGLEY ,
THE FQUNT AIN, APT . 107 , 4120 TIVOLI COURT , LAKE WORTH , FLOR
PHONE (305) 967-7610.
AnY CONTACT BY PHONE SHOULD BE MADE 'BETWEEN 8:30 AND 9 :@0
Any MOR NI NG In THE NEXT SEVERAL DAYS.
END .
CBL FBIHQ TU
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 94
IDA ,
==================================================
Page 95
==================================================
Routing Slip (Copies t Offices Chccked)
0-7 (Rev.
To: S Ac:
To LEGAT:
Albany Houston Oklahoma City Beirul
Alhuquergue Indianapolis Oiaha [Sera}
Alexandria Jackson Philadelphia Botn Alchorage Jacksonville Phocnix Brasilia
Atlonta Kansas Cily Pitlsburgh Buenos Aircs
Ballimore Knoxville Porll and Carac S
Birmingh am Las Vegas Richmond Kong
Boston Litlle Rock Sacramento London
Buffalo Los Angeles SL Louis Madrid
Butte Louisville Salt Lake City Manila
Charlotte Mcmphis San Antonio Mexico City
Chicago Miami San Oltawa
Cincinnali Milwaukee San Francisco Paris
Cleveland Minneapolis San Juan Roie
Columbia Mobile Savannah Singapore
Dalias Newark Scattle Tel Aviv
Denver New Haven Springfi eld Tokyo
Detroit New Orl eans Tanp a
Ei Paso New York City Washington Field
Honolulu Norfolk Quantico
1 Date
1/5/76
; RE: DIRECTOR S APPEARANCE
1 BEFORE SENA TE SELECT COMMITTEE
1 ON INTELLIGENCE
ICCIVEOUIRTEE ela_334k3
DECEMBER 10 , 1975 INDZV
4
'SERIALIZES 0
72
"224
1
Rctcnlion For apprpriate 19/6
For infomation oplional aclion Surep,
The enclosed is for your inforation- IF used pafuture__dEEy Nempn ceal
sources, paraphrase contenls.
Encloscd are corrected pages from reporl of SA
dated
Remorks: routing slip dated 12/30/75 and
captioned as above , all SACs and Legats were
furnished 3 copy of the transcript of Mr .
Kelley S 12/10/75 appearance before the
Senate Select Committee on Intelligence
Activities. Although the data contained in
the transcript may be made available to news
media representatives , used in answering
questions received from citizens and other-
wise treated as being Of a public-source nature,
the transcript itself should not be reproduced
for , or
given anyone outside the FBI
Ec.
Bufile
Urfile
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 95
12
Hoilg
Diego
JANs
By
to,
==================================================
Page 96
==================================================
NW 88608 Docld: 32989820 Page 96
==================================================
Page 97
==================================================
NR85:) WA PLATi
E3@PM NITTEL 12/10/75 "GHS
To ALL SACS
8o D IRECTOR
DIRECTOR ' S APPEARANCE BEFORE SENATE SELECT COMMITIEZ
ON INTZLLIGENCE ACTIVITIES
9
DECE!@ER 10, 1975
A COpY OF THZ STATEMENT -I DELI VERED 90FO?E THC 'SCNATE
SELECT COMMITTEE on INTELLIIGENCE ACT IVITIES TODAY HAs BZEN
SE NT ALL OFFICES. Fo? YOuR INFOR MAT ION , TKCRE FOLLOWS A
SYNOPSIZED ACCOUnT 0F TKE MAJOR AREAS 0F THE COMMITTEE' S
QUEST IonS' To MZ, TOGETHF? WITH MY - RESPONSES :
(4) RZGARDING FRI iNFORMANTS, QUESTIOnS WERE ASKED
WHETHER CoURT APPROVAL SKOULD' BE REQUIRZD FOR FE I USE .0F
INFORMANTS In INVEST IGATIONS 0F ORCANIZATIONS (MY RESPONSE
WAS THAT IHE CONTROLS WHICH Exist TOdAY 0 VER: USE 0F INFOFMANTS
435 SATISFACTORY) ; KOW CAN F3I KEEP InFO?MAANTS OPERATING
WITHIN PROPE? L IMITS SQ ThEY Do NOT FNVADE RIGHTS 0f OTHER
PERSONS (MY RESPONSE WAS THAT RELIANCE MUST BE PLACED On THE
INDI VIDUAL AGENTS HA NDL InG INFOR MANTS Amd THOSE SUPERVISING
THE AGENT S; 'iORX, That .InFORMANfs WHO VI OLATE THE LAW can BE
3
L:
77
(olo - 3346
Z
INdexen
SeRiALI
DEC 1 0 '1975
10
J`
FBI-MIAMI
%a
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 97
7 L
45Z
9 %s
8fz
Ilt[v5
Page
==================================================
Page 98
==================================================
PAGE TWo
PROSE CUTED
AS CAN Any AGENT WKO COUNSELS' .AN , INFoRMANT To
COMMIT VIOLATIONS);; A ND DID FORME? KLAN INFORMANT GARY ROWE
TEST IFY ACCURATEL Y WHEN HE TOLD THE 'COMMI FTEE 0N . DECEMBE? 2
THAT HE . I NFORMED FBI 0F PLANNED ACTS OF VIOLENCE BUT FBI
DID NOT 'ACT To PRE WNT THEM (MY RESPONSE @AS THAT ROWE' 5
TESTIMonY WAS NOT .ACCUrATE) .
(2) In RESPONSE To QUESTIONS REGARDING IMPROPER
CONDUCt BY FBI FMPLOYEES;, ` I STATED THAT ALL EGED VIOLATIONS 0F
LAW . BY FBI PER SONNEL SKOULD BE INVESTIGATED , BY THE FB I' 03
OT HER APPROPR IATE AGENCY ; ThAT. THE INSPECTION DIVISION HAS
CONDUCTED INQUIRIES REGARDI nG ALLEGATIONS 0F MISCOND[CT ;
THAT An OFFICE OF PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIB ILITY Has JUST
BEEN ESTABL ISHED In THE JUST ICE DEPARTMENT , 4 ND WE WILL; ADVISE
ThAt OFFICZ 0F OUR MAJOR -I VESTIGATIO S 0F DEPARIMENTAL: PERSO NNEL ,
InCL UD I NG FBI EMPLOYEES _ Fo? ALLEGED VIOLATIONS OF /Lal , REGULATIONS ,
OR STA NDARDS 0F CONDUCT ; IKAT I WOULD RESER VE COMMENT
REGARD ING 'POSSIBLE CREATION 0f A NATIONAL INSPECTOR GENERAL
To CONSIDER MATTERS OF
MISCONDUCT BY EMPLOYEES
0F Any FEDERAL
AGENcY _
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 98
==================================================
Page 99
==================================================
PAGE THREE
(3) In RESPONSE To QUESTIONS CONCER NING HARASSMENT 0f..
MARTIN LUTHER KING JR ., 1 STATED THAT THE PERSONS WKO ISSUED
THE ORDERS WHCH RESUL TED In Such HARASSME NT SHOULD' FACE THE
RESPONSIBILITY FOR IT, RATHER THAN THOSE UNDER THEM WHO CARRIED
Oit SUCH ORDERS In GOOD FAITH; ThAT THE FBI STILL HAS RECORDINGS
RESULTInG FROM ELECTRONIC SUR VEILLANCES OF KInG ; THAT WE RETAIN
RVCORDINGS FOR TEN YEARS BUT WE AL SO HAVE AGREED To 4 REQUEST
FROM THE SE NATE NOT 'o DESTROY IMFORMATION In OUP FILES WHILE
CONGRESSIONAL INQUIRIES ARE BEING' CONDUCTED ; TkAT I 'HAVE Not
RZ VIEWED TKE KING IAPES; THAT IF THE COMMAITTEE REQUESTED To
RE VIEW THE KInG TAPES, THE BEQUEST . WOULD 26 REFERRED To THE
ATTORNEY GE NERAL .
0
"(4} In RESPONSE To QUEST IOnS REGARDING WHETHER IT WoULD
9E AD VANTAGEOUS IO SEPARATE. THE FBI CR IMINAL I VESTIGATIVE
RESPONSIB IL ITIES AND . OUR INTELLIGENCE FVNCT IONS , I STATED
THAT WE HAVE FoUND THE TWo AREAS To 30 COMPATIBLE , A ND I
FEEL THE FBI IS DoInc A SPLEND ID JOB In BotH AREAS;
(5) In RESPONSE IO QUEST IONS CO NCERNI NG THE ADEQUACY
OF:,CO NTROLS 0N REQUESTS FROM THE WHITE KOUSE . A ND FROM OTHER
GOVR NME NT AGENCIEs FOr FBI INVESTICATIONS OR' FOR INFORMATION
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 99
==================================================
Page 100
==================================================
PAGE FOUR
TROM OUR FILES, I STATED THAI WHEN' SUCH REQUESTS ARE MADE
ORALLY, TKEY SHOULD BE CONFIRMED In WRITINC ; THAT WE WoUid
WEL COME: ANY LEG ISLATIVE GUIDELINES THE CONGRESS FEELS WOULD
PROTECT THE' FBI
FROM IHE POSSIBILITY 0F PARTISAN MiSUSE _
A FULL , TRANSCR IPT 0F IXE QUEST IONS AND ANSWERS WILL BE
Fur NI SHED To: Each OFFICE AS Soon AS IT IS:.A VAILABLE.
ALL LEGATS AD VI SED SEPARATEL Y .
END
FBI MM SAK AACK Oxk Ack FOR 1 'TEL 'CLR And TU
NW 88608 Docld:37989820 Page 100
"*{
==================================================
Page 101
==================================================
NRw5g WA PLAER ~
830PM NITEL 12/16/75 GHS
To ALL SACS
FRom DIRECTOR
DIRECOR * $ APPEARANCE BEFORE SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE
On INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES , DECE[BER 10, 1975
A COPY 0F THE STATEMENT I DELI VERED BEFORE THE ScNAtE
SELECT COMMITTEE On IMTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES TODAY Has BEEN
SENT ALL OFFIcES; FOR YobR InforMATION , TNERE FOLLons A
SYNOPSIZED ACCOUNT 0F THE MAJOR AREAS Of TKZ COMMITIEE'$
QUESTIOnS To TOGETHER WITN MY RESPONSES :
(I} REGARDING FBI INFORMANTS, QUESTIonS WERE ASKED
WXETHER COURT APPROVAL SHOULD BE REQWIRED FOR FBI USE 0F
InForMANTS In INVEST IGATIOMS QF ORGAMIZATIONS (MyY RESPONSE
Was TMAT THE ContROLS WHICR EXIST TQdAy OVER USE 07 INFORMANTS
ARE SATISFACTORY) ; KOW CAm FBI KEEP INFORMANTS OPERAT ING
WITHIN PROPER LIMITS SQ THEY Do NOT INVADE RIGHTS 0p OTHER
PERSONS (MY RESPONSE WaS TKAT RELIANCE MuST BE PLACED O8 THE
INDIVIDUAL AGENTS HANDLInG IMFORMANTS A ND THOSE SUPERVISING
THE AGENIS' WORX , TkAT InforMAnIS WHQ VIOLATE IXE Law GAN BE
bl-33
JLwial
~Rie
1
1275
FL hl
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 101
ME ,
s 2
==================================================
Page 102
==================================================
PAGE TWo
FROSECUTED 5m AS Cam Amy AGEnt Who COUNSELS AM INFORMANT To
COMMIT VIOLATIONS) ; And DID FORMER XLAn InforMANT GARY ROwE
TESIIfY ACCURATELY WKEN HE TOLD TKE COMMITTEE On DECEMBER 2
THAT HE INFORMED FBI OF PLAMNED ACTS 0F VIOLENCE BUT YBI
DID NOT ACT To PREVENT THEM (MY RESPONSE WAs IHAT ROME"&
TESTIMONY Was NOT ACCURA TE) *
{2) In RESPONSE To QUESTIONS REGARDING IMPROPER
CONDUCT By FBI EMPLOYEES , 1 STATED That ALLEGED VIOLATIONS 0f
LAW BY FB1 PERSONNEL SHOULD BE INVESTIGATED BY THE FBI OR
OT KER APPROPRIATE AGENCY $ IhAT THE IWSPECTIQN DIVISION HAS
GONDUCTED INQUIRIES REGARDING ALLEGATIONS OF MISCONDUCT $
TRAT An OFFI CE OF PROFESSIONAL RESPOMSIBILITY KAS JUST
BEEN ESTABLISHED In IHE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT , ANd WE WILL ADVISE
Ihat OFFICE Qf OUR MAJOR INVESTIGATIONS OF DEPARTMENTAL PERSONNEL ,
INCLWDInG FBI EMPLOYEES , FoR ALLEGED VIOLATIONS 0F LAW , REGULATIONS ,
OR STANDARRS OF ConducT $ TkAT 1 WOULD RESZR VE COMMENT
REGARDING POSSIBLE CREATIOR OF A NATIONAL INSPECTOR GENERAL
T0 CONSIDER MATTERS Of NISCONDUCT By EMPLOYEES Of Any FEDERAL
AGENCY ,
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 102
==================================================
Page 103
==================================================
PAGE THREE
(3) In RESPONSE TO QUESTIDNS CONCER NI NG HARASSMENT 0F
MARIIN LUTHER KING , JR . , I STATED THAI IXE PERSOMS WHQ ISSDED
TKE ORDERS WHICH RESUL TED I0 S0GH HARASSMENZ SHOuLD FACE THE
RESPONSIBILITY For IT, RATRER IkAN THOSE UNDER THEM #Ho CARRIED
QUT SUCH ORDERS In GoQd FAITH; THAT TXE FBI STILL HAS RECORDINGS
RESWLT ING FROM ELECTRONIC SUR VZILLANCES 0F RING $ THAT NE RETAIN
RECOrDINGS FOR TEN YEARS BUT WE ALSO HAVE AGREED TO A REQUEST
Mrom THE SE NATE Not Io DESTROY IMFORMATIOM Im QUR FILES WRILE
CONGRESSIO NAL INQUIRIES ARE BEING CONDUCTED ; TRAT I KAVE MOT
RE VIEWED TXE KING TAPES $ Ikat If THE COMMITTEE REQWESTED To
RE VIEW THE XiNG TAPES, THE REQUEST @OULD BE REFERRED To TNE
ATTORNEY GENERAL ,
(4) In RESPONSE To QUESTIONS REGARDInG WHETHER IT WouLD
BE AD VaNTAGEOUS TO SEPARATE TKE FBI CR IMINAL IMVZSTIGATIVE
RESPONSIBILITIES AND OUR INIELLIGENCE FUNCTIONS , I STATED
ThAT WE HAV FQUND THE TWo AREAS To BE COMPAIIBLE , AND
I
FEEL THE FBI Is DOING 4 SPLENDID JoB In BOTK AREAS.
65} In RESPONSE TO QWEST IoNS ConCER NI NG THE ADEQUACY
0f" ConIROLS Qn REQUESTS From THE WHITE KQUSE AnD FROM OT HER
GOVERNME NT AGENCIES FOR FBI INWESTIGATIONS OR FOR INFORMATION
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 103
==================================================
Page 104
==================================================
PAGe FOMR
Prom OUR FILES , I STATED THAT WHEN SUCh REQUEST S ARE MADE
OrALLy , T KEY SKOULD BE CONFIRMED In WRITING ; ThAT WE MOULD
WEECOME Any LEGISLATIVE GUIDELINES THE CONGRESS FEELS WouLD
PROTECI THE FBI FROM THE POSSIBILITY OF PARTISAN MISUSE
FuLL IRANSCRIPT 0f THE QUESTIOnS A ND ARSWERS WILL BE
FUR NI SKED To EACH OFFICE AS Soom AS IT IS AVAILABLE&
ALL LEGATS AD VISED SEPARATELY .
END
FBI Mm SAK AaCk OxX Ack For 1 TEL CLR AND IU
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 104
==================================================
Page 105
==================================================
Roufing Slip (Copies to es Checked)
0ZHRol12-17-73;
To: S AC:
To LEGAT:
Albany Houslon Oklahoma Cily Keirut
Albuqucrgue Indianapolis Oinaha [3er
Alexandri& Jack son Philaucielphia Bonn
Anchoroge Jacksonville Phoenix Krsilin
Allanla Kansas City Pitlsburgh Buos Aires
Baltimore Knoxville Porll ana Caraccs
Birmingham Las Vegas Richrond Kong
Boslon Litlle Rock Sacramenlo London
Buffalo Los Angcles St. Louis Madrid
Bulle Louisville Salt Lake City Manila
Charlolte Memphis San Anlonio Mcxico
Chicago Miami Sa Diego Qulawa
Cin cinnati Milwaukee San Francisco Paris
Cieveland Minneapolis San Juan Roir;o
Columbia Mobilc Saannah Sngapore
Dallas Newvark Scalulc Tcl Aviv
DJen ver Ncw Haven Springficld Tokyo
Dctroil Ncwv Orl cans Tamp n
El Paso Ncw York City Washington Field
Honolulu Norlolk Quantico
Datc
11/21/75
RE: SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE
ON INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES
Ca/5 66" 33%6
Retention For uppmpriale,
For infomation optional action CJ Srep, by
The enclosed is for your infonnation. If used in 0 {ulure report, con ceal all
sourccs, paraphrasz contents.
Enclosed &re corrected pages from rcport ol SA
dlatcdl
Remark s:
Enclosed for your information is a copy of
cP an article by Mr . William Safire entitled 'Mr
Church' s Gover-Up" that appeared in the
It Novembe 20 1975 , issue 0f The New York
3
%
L6 3446 -
#o
Enc.: 1.UV ; :
Bufil
43+
RZ I
#68d-32989820 Rsa
0
NW 88608 Page 105
Mong
(ity
49 /2"e:;
#
1J/5c
7td
==================================================
Page 106
==================================================
Mr. Churchs Cover
Crn7v The committee is not asking embar-
William Safire rassing questions even when answers
ere readily available: A couple of
WASHINGON, NGv. 19--Or: Oct. 10, weeks ag0, at an1 open shearing, an
1963, the then-Attorney Gcreral of the FB. man inadvertently Slerted to
Unitcd States put his personal Signa- blurt out an~episode about newsmen
ture on a document that launched and who were weritapping in 1962 with
lcgitimatized one 0f the Inost horren- tne apparent knowleage of Attornej
dous abuses of Federal police power in Generai Kennedy. The too-willing wit}
this century. ness was promptly shooshed into Si
In Senator Frank Church's subcon}- lence, and told that such information
mittee hcaring roum this week, the would bc developed only in executive
euthorized wiretapping and subse- session: Nobody raised an eyebrow.
quent unaulhorized bugging and at- That pattern or containment by the
tempted blackmailing of Mariin Luther Church committee is vividly shown by
Jr; is gingeriy examined, the handling of the buggings at the
with the "investigation" conducted in 1964 Republican &d Democratic con-
sivch 2 as not to unduiy em-
barrass officiais of the Kennedy or ESSAY
Johnson Administrations:
With great carc, the committee has
focused on tie FBI Yesterday, when ventions which were ordered by Lyn-
the commitlee counsel itrst set forth don Johnson: Such invasions of
the result of shuffling through press cal headquarters were worse than the
clips, it seemed as if ro Justice De- crime committed at Watergatc, since
Partmcnt had existcd in 1962; todey: involved the use of the 'FBL,
an FBI: wiiness pointed out that it but the Church investigators seem to
was Robert Kennedy who authorized be determined not to probe too deeply-
tlic wirctap of Dr; and that "'the If FBI documents say that reports
President of the United States and the were made to specific Johnson aides,
Atorney Generai specifically discussed why are those men not given the
their concern pf Commiunist infiuence same opportunity to publicly tell their
with Dr: King:' 2} story so avidly given the next Presi-
But Ihe Church committce showed dent's men? If Lyndon Johnson com-
no zest for getting furthcr to the Ken- mitted this impeachable high crime of
nedy rool of &is precedent to Water; the FBL to spy on political
eavesde 'ropping: Ir Senator Church opponents, who can be brought for:
sere willng to let the chips fall whcre ward to tell us all about it?
may, ke wvould call some knowf- But that would cause embarrass-
edgeable witnesses into the glare of ment to Democrats; and Senator
the camera lights and ask them some Church wants to embarrass profes-
questions that have gone unasked for sional employees of investigatory
thirleen ycars: agencies only. A' rew sensc of Con-
For exampic, he could call Nicholas gressional decorum exists, far from
Katze nbach, Atiorey Gereral Ken- the sense of outrage cxpressed in the
redy' : dcputy and successOr, and ask Senate Watergale committee's hear-
what #2 knows of the Kenncdy de- room: When it is revealed that the
cision t0 wiretap Dr; King: Wio at management of NBC News gave press
justice concurred in the reconmenda- credentials t0 LB.J:'s spies at thc 1964
tion? Hcw does {he FBI koiv thc convention, everybody hlushes demure-s
President was consulted Oi' informed? Iy--and nobody demands to knowf
Ater Mr_ Katzenbach assumed of- which network executive made whati
ficc, end the #tretapplng continted, decision "nder what prcssure:
ha was teid by angry newsmen ttat I have bcen haranguing patient
the FB.I. was Jeaking scurrilous in- readers for years about the double
{grmation &boat Dr: Why did ke standard appiied to Democralic and
66-3346-92
wait For four months, aid for & thou- Republican political crimes, and had
sand telephenic interccplions. to dis- hoped the woud come when tte
continue the officiaily approved rap? hardball precedents set bv the Ken-
Of course, ahis sort Gi testimony nedy and Johnson nen wolld br laid 7
would erode Senator Ciurch 's political before thc: public in damning drtail.
T18
tase. Tlat is we do not sec Jor- Obriously, Demccrat Frank Caurch
Iner Assisant F director Cartha is Jicl the mlan to do it, His _ '2975
(Deke) Deloact: , Indor Jotnson's shako; indignatton_ ix a} too salcc;
personal contact wilh Ihe FBI in the tvc; thc trail of higi-level responsi-
wiiness chair: Wiat did Presiclcn;, biiity (or" the crimes ccrimitied against
G24
Johnson Kncv a:Dlil ke character- Dr. King &nd Oithers is evidently going
2 SSassinalion plot and "hen did he to % ailoged te cool.
~Maw i* What cone-rations tox You'd think tie: ?hcr &li shc THE NER YORK TIMES
QI?C? b3twfen Mr: Dejoacn ard Presi- nation has becu thrtktxn :1 tk past
actt Jokn:on on the tapnit? ef ixr . few years, ow" %lilic?] kcada e vnuti THURSDAY NOVEMBER 2Oth,1975
Or atout ihe lisc of ;he F.BL m have learned tkat W O? thing tlzt PAGE C-41
"he: intrusions ito thc livts 0f brings you down is ti: &8 ~ Cevsrt
NNea688 f8cld:32989820 188 #p.
JUp
By
King being
way
politi-
they
King:
using
gate
they
ing
King
day
wiy
jow]-
Pity .
Kin;
3VJ
Page
==================================================
Page 107
==================================================
Rouling Slin (Copies to Offices Checke #
0-7 (Rev. 7-1l-78
TC: SAC:
To LEGAT}
Albany ilouslon Oklahoma City
Albuquersgc Indiaapolis Omaha Beit
Alexandria Jackson Philadelphia Bonn
Anchorage Jacksonville Phocnix Brasilia
Atlanta Kansas City Pittsburgh Buenos Aires
Baltimore Knoxville Portl &nd Caracas
Binninghan Las Vegas Richmond Kong
Boston Little Rock Sacramento London
Buffalo Los Angcle8 St: Louis Madrid
Butte Louisville Salt Lakc City Manila
Charlotte Memphis San Antonio Mexico Cily
Chicago Miami San Diego Oltawa
Cincinnali Milwaukee San Francigco Paris
Cleveland Minneapolis San Juan Roine
Columbie Mobile Savannah Tel Aviv
Dallag Newark Seallre Tokyo
Den ver Newy Haven Springlicld
Delroit New Orl cans 'Tonip &
El Paso New York City Washington Field
Honolulu Norfolk Quantico
Date December_ 5,1975
RE: TESTIMONY OF ASSISTANT To THE DIRECTOR
DEPUTY ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR JAMES B . ADAMS
BEFORE THE SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE ON
12/2/75
Retention For appropriate
For infomation optional action Surep, by
The encloged is for your infou otion If used-in 4 future report, conceal ul}
sourccb, paraphrase contents.
Enclosed are corrected pages {rom report' of SA
dated
Remarks:
Re Bureau R/s of 12/4/75 which provided
excerpts of Mr . Adams testimony.
Attached for your information and
assistance , is the complete transcript of
above-referenced testimony 1c6-334L
UnEdited
Teansce_Pzs
ZCARCHED WDZID_
SERIALIZEJ_ ~MI
Enc. (1)
Bufile Lzj 8 19t5
Urfile
FEL-WAMI
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 107
Hong
==================================================
Page 108
==================================================
Vol I5
Olpe Iuited Stateg Settate
Report of Proceedinge
Hearing held before
Slect: Comitteo to Study Governmental.Operations
With Respect to Intolligence Activitieg
INTELLIGENCE INVESTIGATION
Hesday
1
December 2, 2975
Tashington, D.C
Iolo
3346-3/
KE ECIZD_ Euz
WARD & PAUL SERIALIZZA
410 FIRST STREET, S, E.
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20003
LZ} S 1975
FBI_IYLAIvl
(202) 644-6000
NW-88608 Docld: 32989820_Page_108
==================================================
Page 109
==================================================
11 Senator Tower The next witnesses to appear before the
1
12- Committee are Mr _ James Adams Assistant to the Director-
0
0
13 Deputy Associate Director, Investigation , responsible for all
14
investigative operations ; Mr - R _ Raymond Wannall , Assistant
15
Director, Intelligence Division responsible for internal
16
security and foreign counterintelligence investigations ; Mr _
17 John A_ Mintz , Assistant Director, Legal Counsel Division;
18 Joseph G . Deegan _
0
Section Chief , extremist investigations ;
2
19 Mr . Robert L. Schackelford, Section Chief , subversive
i
20
investigations; Mr - Homex A Newman , Jr., Assistant to Section
L
21
Chief , supervises extremist informants ; Mr . Edward P _ Grigal '^-
3 22
Unit Chief_ supervises subversive informants ; Joseph G . Yelie} ,
1
23 Assistant Section Chief , Civil Rights Section , Gener.. Inv.' 6' 1.
2
gative Division
8 24
25 Gentlemen , will you all rise and be sworn.
NWV 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 109
==================================================
Page 110
==================================================
snn 16
1901
7
Do you' solemnly swear the testimony you are about to give
8
1 2 before this Committee is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
1
3 but the truth, so help you God?
Mr. Adans _ I do . 6
Mr _ Wannall _ I do.
6
Mr _ Mintz. I do .
7
Mr _ Deegan . I do .
8 Mr Schackelford. I do
9 Mr = Newman . I do
10 Mr_ Grigalus _ I do .
11 Mr _ Kelley . I do _
1
12 Senator Tower _ It is intended that Mr . Wannall will be
8
0
13 the principal witness , and we will call on others as guestioning
14 might require, and I woula direct each of you when you do
15 respond _ to identify yourselves , please , for the record,
16 I think that we will spend just a few more minutes to allop
17 the members of the Committee to return from the floor.
18 (A brief recess was taken.)
1
19 Senator Tower The Committee will come to order
8
20 Mr Wannall
1
according to data , informants provide 83
L
21 percent of your intelligence information.
4 22 NOw , Will you provide the Committee with some information
I
23 on the criteria for thc selection 8f informants?
2
8 24
25
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 110
==================================================
Page 111
==================================================
1902
1
TESTIMONY OF W _ RAYMOND WANNALL ASSISTANT DIRECTOR ,
8
2
2 INTELLIGENCE DIVISION FEDERAL BUREAU Op INVESTIGATION
1 3
ACCOMPANIED BY : JAMES B . ADAMS ASSISTANT TO THE
DIRECTOR-DEPUTY ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR (INVESTIGATION) 4
5 JOHIN A MINTZ , ASSISTANT DIRECTOR , LEGAL COUNSEL
6 DIVISION ; JOSEPH G. DEEGAN SECTION CHIEF ; ROBERT L.
SCHACKELFORD , SECTION CHIEF ; HOMER A NEWMAN JR.
*8
ASSISTANT TO SECTION CHIEF ; EDWARD P _ GRIGALUS UNIT
9 CHIEF ; AND JOSEPH G. KELLEY, ASSISTANT SECTION CHIEF
10 CIVIL RIGIITS SECTION GENERAL INVESTIGATIVE DIVISION
11 Mr _ Wannall- Mr _ Chairman, that is not FBI data that you
0
12 have quoted. That was prepared by the General Accounting
4
1
13 Office.
14 Senator Tower. That is GAO _
15 Mr _ Wannall- Based on 2 sampling of about 9 3 cases .
16 Senator Towver _ Would that appear to be a
fairly accurate
17 figure.
18 Mr_ Wannall I have not seen any survey which the FBI
3
19 itself has conducted that would confirm that, but I think that
i
20 we do get the principal portion of our information from live
6
21 sources
4 22 Senator Tower _ It would be a relatively high percerl:
1
23 then?
2
24 Mr Nannall_ I would say yes _ And your ques}
8
25 criteria?
NW-88608-Doeld;32989820-Page-111-
7
==================================================
Page 112
==================================================
smn 18
190.3
Senator Tower. Rhat criteria do you use in the selection
1
8
2 of informants?
1
Mr . Wannall Well, the criteria vary with the needs _ In 1 3
our cases relating to extremist matters , surely in, order to get
4
an informant who can mela into a group which is engaged in a 5
criminal type activity, you re going to have a different set
6
7
of criteria_ If You re talking about our internal security
matters , I think we set rather high standards _ We do require
8
that a preliminary inquiry be conducted which woula consist
9
principally of checks of our headquarters indices , our field
10
office indices , checks with other informants who are operating
11
1 in the same area , and in various established sources such as
12
0
local police departments .
0
13
Following this , if it appears that the person is the type
14
who has credibility, can be depended upon to be reliable , we
15
would interview the individual in order to make a determination
16
as to whether or not he will be willing to assist the FBI
17
in discharging its responsibilities in. that field
18
2 Following that, assuming that the: answer is positive_ we
19
8 woula conduct a rather in depth investigation for the purpose
20 6
of. further attempting to establish credibility and: reliability.
21
Senator. Tower_ HOw. does the- Bureau: distinguish between 9
22
1
the: use of informants for law enforcement a8 opposed to
23
0
intelligence: collection?
8 24
Is the guidance different , or is it the same or what?
25
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 112
==================================================
Page 113
==================================================
E smn 19
1904
1
1 Mr _ Wannall Well , Mr _ Adams can probably best address
8
2 the use of informants on criminal matters since he is over 1
1 3 the operational division on that.
4 Mr _ Adams You do have somewhat of a difference in the fact
5 that a criminal informant in a law enforcement function , you
are trying to develop evidence which will be adissible in
court for prosecution , whereas with intelligence , the informant
8 alone , your purpose could either be prosecution or it could be
9 just for purposes of pure intelligence -
10
The difficulty in both is retaining the confidentiality
11 of the individual and protecting the individual and trying to ,
6
12
through use of the informant, obtain evidence which could be
0
1
13
used independently of the testimony of the informant SO that
14
he can continue operating as a criminal informant.
15 Senator Tower _ Are these informants ever authorized to
16 function as provocateurs?
17 Mr Adams _ No , sir, they re not. We have strict regula-
18
tions against .using informants as provocateurs. This gets
2
19 into that delicate area of entrapment which has been addressed
8
by the courts on many occasions and has been concluded by the
20 6
21
courts that providing an individual has a willingness to engage
4
22 in an activity, the government has the right to provide him the
1
23
opportunity_ This does not mean , of course; that mistakes don
2
occur in this area , but we take whatever steps we can to
8 24
25 avoid this. Even the law has recognized that informants can
NWV 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 113
==================================================
Page 114
==================================================
smn 20
1905
L
1 engage in criminal' activity, and the courts have held that,
8
1 2 especially the Suprene Court in the Newark County Case , that
1
3 the very difficulty of penetrating an ongoing operation , that
4 an informant himself can engage in criminal activity, but
5 because there is lacking this criminal intent to violate a
law we stay away from that_ Our regulations fall short of that
If we have a situation where we felt that an informant
has to become involved in some activity in order to protect
9 or conceal his use as an informant , we go right to the Unitea
10 States Attorney or to the Attorney General to try to make sure
11 we are not stepping out of bounds insofar as the use of our
1
12 informants .
0
1
13 Senator Tower. But you do use these informants and do
14 instruct them to spread dissension among certain groups that
15 they are infolming on, do you not?
16 Mr _ Adams _ We did when we had the COINTELPRO programs _
17 which were discontinued in 1971 , and I think the Klan is probably
18 one of the best' examples 0f a situation where the law was
3
19 in effect at the time. We heard the term States Rights used
i
20 much more then than we hear it today. We saw in the Little
L
21 Rock situation the President of the United States , in sending
i 22 in the troops , pointing out the necessity to use local law
1
23 enforcement. We must have local law enforcement, to use the
2
24 troops only as a last resort.
8
25 And then you have a situation like this where do try
NWN 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 114
You
==================================================
Page 115
==================================================
1906
smn 21
L
1 to preserve the respective roles in law enforcement. You have
8
2 2 historical problems with the Klan coming along. We had
L
3 situations where the FBI and the Federal Government was almost
4 powerless to act. We had local law enforcement officers in
5 some areas participating in Klan violence.
6 The instances mentioned by Mr_ Rowe _
1
every one of those ,
he saw them from the lowest level of the informant_ He didn'+
8 see what action was taken with that information , as he pointed
9 out in his testimony. Our files show that this information was
10 reported to the police departments in every instance _ We
11 also knew that in certain instances the information , upon being
1
12 received , was not being acted upon. We also disseminated
0
1
13 simultaneously through letterhead memoranda to the Department
14 of Justice the problem _ and here, here we were , the FBI , in a
15 position where we had no authority in the absence of instruction
16 from the Department of Justice to make an arrest.
17 Sections 241 and 242 don t cover it because you don t have
18 evidence of a conspiracy , and it ultimately resulted in
3
19 a situation where the Department called in United States
i
20 Marshals who do have authority similar to local law enforcement
L
21
officials_
4 22 So , historically, in those days , we were just as frus-
1
23 trated as anyone else was and when we information: from
2
24 someone like Mr . Rowe good information _ reliable information,
8
25 and it was passed on to those who had the responsibility to
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 115
got
==================================================
Page 116
==================================================
smn 22 1907
L
1 do something about it, it was not always actea upon , as he
8
1 2 indicated_
1 3 Senator Tower None 6f these cases , then, there was
4 adequate evidence of conspiracy to give you jurisdiction to
5 act?
6 Mr: Adams _ The Departmental rules at that time and still
require Departmental approval where you have a conspiracy.
8 Under 241 , it takes two or more persons acting together, You
9 can have a mob scene , and you can have blacks and whites
10
belting each other, but unless you can show that those that
11
initiated the action acted in concert in a conspiracy , you havel
{
12 n0 violation _
0
1
13
Congress recognized this , and it wasn t until 1968
14
that they came along and added Section 245 to the civil rights
15 statute, which added punitive measures against an individual
16 that didn t have to be a conspiracy. But this was a problem
17 that the whole country was grappling with: the President of
18 the United States
1
Attorney General We were in a situation
1
19
where we had rank lawlessness taking place , as You know from
i
20 a memorandum we sent you that we sent to the Attorney General
L
21
The accomplishments we were able to obtain in preventing
4 22 violence, and in neutralizing the Klan G e and that was one
1
23 of the reasons_
2
24
Senator Tower. What was the Bureau 5 purpose in con- 8
25
tinuing or urging the continued surveillance of the Vietnam
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 116
==================================================
Page 117
==================================================
1908
snin 23
L
1 Veterans Against the War?
8
1 2 Was there a
legitimate law enforcement purpose, or was the
1
3 intent to halter political expression?
4 Mr _ Adams _ We had information on the Vietnam Veterans
5 Against the Wax that indicated that there were subversive
6 groups involved _ They were going to North Vietnam and meeting ,
with the Communist forces. They were going to Paris, attending
8 meetings paid for and sponsored by the Communist Party, the
9 International Communist Party. We feel that we- had a very valid
10 basis to direct our attention to the VVAW
11 It started out, of course, with Gus Hall in 1967 , who was
{
12 head of the Communist Party, USA , and the comments he made ,
8
1
13 and what it finally boiled down to was a situation where it
14 split off into the Revolutionary Union , which was a Maost
15 group , and the hard-line Communist group, and at that point
16 factionalism developed in many of the chapters , and: closed
17 those chapters because there was no longer any intent to follow
18 the national organization.
2
19 But we had a valid basis for investigating it, and we
8
20 investigated chapters to determine if there was affiliation
|
21 and subservience to the national office.
4 22 Senator Tower. Mr _ Iart?
1
23 Senator Hart of Michigan. But in the process of chasing
2
24 after the Veterans Against the War , you a lot of information
8
25
that clearly has no rclationship to any Federal "criminal
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 117
they
got
Page
==================================================
Page 118
==================================================
smn 24 '1909
L
statute_
8
1 2 Mr Adams _ I agree , Senator
1 3
Senator Hart of Michigan _ don t you try to shut that
4 stuff off by simply telling 'the agent:, or .your
informant?
5
Mr Adams : Here is the problem that ` you, have With that.
When you re looking" at an organization, do you report the
violent statements made by the group or do you also show that
you may have one or two violent individuals
1
but you have
9 some of these church groups that were mentioned, and others ,
10 that the whole intent of the group is not in violation of the
11 statutes_ You have to report the good , the favorable along
1
12 with the unfavorable, and this is a problem . We wind up with
0
8
13 information in our files_ We are accused of being vacuum
14 cleaners , and you are a vacuum cleaner. If You want to know the
15 real purpose of an organization , do you only report the
16 violent statements made and the fact that it is bY. a small
17 minority, or do you also show the broaa base of the organizatioh
18 and What it really is?
2
19 And within that is where we have to have the guidelines
i
20 we have talked about before - We have to narrow down , because
|
21 we recognize that we do wind up with too much information in
4 22 our files_
1
23 Senator Mart of Michigan_ But in that vacuuming process
Z
24 you are feeding into Departmental files the names of people
8
25 who are, who have been engaged in basic First Amendment
NWN 88608 Docld: 32989820 Page 118
Why:
only
==================================================
Page 119
==================================================
smn 25 1910
7
1 exercises and this is what hangs some of us up _
8
1 2 Mr _ Adams _ It hangs me up . But in the same files I
1
3 imagine every one of you has been interviewed by the FBI , either
4 asking you about the qualifications of some other Senator
5 being considered for a Presidential appointment, being inter-
6 viered concerning some friend who is applying for a job.
Were you embarrassed to have that in the files the
8 FBI?
9 Now someone can say , as reported at our last session , tha-
10 this is an indication the mere fact that we have a name in our
11 files has an onerous impression , a chilling effect. I agree.
1
12 It can have , if someone wants to distort what we have in our
0
1
13 files , but if they recognize that we interviewed you because
14 of considering: a man for the Supreme Court of the United
15 States , and that isn 't distorted or improperly used , I don 't
16 see: where any harm is served by having that in our files_
17 Senator Hart of Michigan _ But if.I am: Reverend; Smith
18
and: the. vacuum cleaner: picked up the fact. that I. was_helping
I
19 the veterans Vietnam Veterans Against. the War , and two years
8
20 later a name check is. asked: on Reverend Smith and. all your
L
21 file shows: is that he was associated: two years ago. with a group
53 22 that was sufficient enough , held sufficient, doubtful. patriotism
1
23 to justify turning loose a lot 0f your energy in pursuit on
2
24 them
8
25 Mr _ Adams This is a problem _
NW 88608 Docld: 32989820 Page 119
of
==================================================
Page 120
==================================================
smn 26 1911
L
1 Senator Hart of Michigan _ This is what should require
8
1 2 us to rethink this whole business .
1
3 Mr _ Adams _ Absolutely.
4 And this is what I hope the guidelines comittees as well
5
as the Congressional input are going to address themselves to
6 Senator Hart of Michigan _ We ve talked about a wide range
7 0f groups which the Bureau can and has had informant penetration
8 and report on. Your manual , the Bureau manual 5 definition
9 of when an extremist or security investigation may be under-
10 taken refers to groups whose activity either involves violation
11 of certain specified laws or which may result in the violation
1
12 of such law, and when such an investigation is opened , then
0
1
13 informants nay be used.
14 Another guideline says that domestic intelligence
15 investigations now must be predicated
on criminal violations
16 The agent need only cite a statute suggesting an investigation
17 relevant to a potential violation. Even now , with an improved_
18
upgraded effort to avoid some of these problems we are back
1
19
again in a world of possible violations or activities which
i
20 may result in illegal acts _
L
21 Now , any ' constitutionally protected exercise of the
4
22 right to demonstrate , to assemble, to protest , to petition ,
1
23
conceivably may recult in violercc cr dicruption of 2 local
2
24 town meeting , when a controversial social issue might result
8
25 in disruption It might be by hecklers rather than those holding
NW 88608 Docld: 32989820 Page 120
==================================================
Page 121
==================================================
smn 27 1912
L
1 the meeting .
8
1 2 Does this mean that the Bureau should investigate all
1
3 groups organizing or participating in such a meeting because
4
they may. result in violence ; disruption?
5 Mr Adams No , sir.
6 Senator Hart of Michigan . Isn 't that how You justify
7 spying on almost every aspect of the peace movement?
8' Mr _ Adams _ No , sir. When we monitor demonstrations we"
9 monitor demonstrations where we have an indication that the
10 demonstration itself is sponsored by a group that we have an
11 investigative interest in , a valid investigative interest in,
1
12 or where members of one of these groups are participating where
0
0
13 there is a 'potential that might change the peaceful
14 nature of the demonstration _
15 But this is our closest question of trying to draw
16
guidelines to avoid getting into an area of' infringing on the
17 First Amendment rights of people, yet at the same time being
18 aware of groups such as we have had in greater numbers in the
1
19 past than we do at the present time , But we have had periods
i
20 where the demonstrations have been rather severe and the
L
21 courts have said that the FBI has 'a right , and indeed 3 duty,
1 22 to keep itself informed with respect to the possible commission
1
23 of crime It is not obliged to wear blinders until it may be
2
24 too late for prevention
8
25 And that' s a good statement if applied in a clearcut
NWV 88608 Docld:32989820 121
they
Page
==================================================
Page 122
==================================================
smn 28 1913
L
case Our problem is where we have a demonstration and we have 8
3 2 to make a judgment call as to Whether it is one that clearly
1
3 fits the criteria of enabling us to monitor the activities , and
end 5 4 that S : Where I think iost of our disagreements :fail
5
6
7 ,
8
9
10
11
1
12
0
1
13
14
15
16
17
18
2
19
8
20 L
21
9
22
0
23
2
8 24
25
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 122_
==================================================
Page 123
==================================================
HARRIS GSII 1914
Sen Sel _ CIA
12/2_
Tape
p5
Scnator Hart of Michigan _ Let's assume that the rule 8
1 2
for opening an investigation on a group is narrowly drawn. The
1
3 Bureau manual states that informants investigating a subversive
4 organization should not 'only report on what that group is
5 doing but should look at and report on activities in which
the group is participating .
There is: 3 Section 87B3 dealing with reporting: on
connections with other groups _ That section says that the
9 field office shall "determine and report on any
significant
10 connection or cooperation with non-subversive groups
11 significant connection or cooperation with non-subversive
1
12 groups
0
1
13 NOw let 5 look at this in practice In the spring of
14 1969 there was a rather heated national debate over the
15 installalion of the anti-ballistic missile system _ Some of us
16 remember that_ An rBI informant and two FBI confidential
17 sources reported on the plan S participants and activities
18 of the Washington Area Citizens Coalition Against the ABM,
1
19 particularly in open public debate in a high school auditorium ,
i
20 which included speakers from the Defense Department for the 6
21 ABM and a scientist and defense analyst against the ABM _
4
22 The informants reported on the planning for the meeting,
1
23 the distribution of materials to churche? and schocls ,
2
8 24 participation by local clergy , plans to seek resolution on {"
25 ABM from ncarby town councils_ There was also informa' Vm
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 123
Any
Page
==================================================
Page 124
==================================================
1915
1
1 plans for a subseqjuent town meeting in Washington with the
1 2 names of local political leaders who would attend _
1
3 Now the information, the informant information came Js
4 part of an investigation of an allegedly subversive group
5 participating in that coalition _ Yet the inforination dealt
6 with all aspects and all participants The' reports on the
plans for the meeting ana on the meeting itself were disseminated
8 to the State Departuent , to military intelligence, and to: the
9 [hite Iouse
10 Flow d0 we get into all of that?
11 Mr Adans Well
1
12 Senator Iart of Michigan Or if You were to rerun it,
6
0
13 'toula you do it again?
14 Mr _ Adars Well, not in 1975 , compared to
what 1969
15 Ias _ The problem we had at the time Ias where we had an
16 informant who had reported that this group , this meeting was
17 going to take place and it was going to be the Daily Worla
18 which Ias the east coast communist newvspaper that made conulents
2
19 about it- formed an organizational meeting _ We took
i
20 a guick look at it. The case apparently was opened in May .28 _
6
21 1969 and closed June 5 saying tlere was no problem with this
9
22 organization _
1
23 Now the problen we into is if Tve take 2 quick look
2
8 24 and get out, fine We ve had cases, though , where we have
25 stayed in too long . When you !re dealing Wvith security J* Ji}
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 124
They
get
==================================================
Page 125
==================================================
3 119 ;6
1
C1
Soviet espionage where they can put one person in this country
1 2 and supported him with total resources_ of the Soviet
1
3. Union , false identification_ all_the money he needs comnuni
4 cations networks , satellite assistance , and everything , and
5 you re working with a paucity of information.
6 The same problem exists to a certain extent in domestic
7 security. You don t have a lot of black and white situations_
8 So someone reports some to you which you feel; you take
9 a quick Jook at and there ' s nothing to it, and I think that' s
10 what they did _
11 Senator Hart of Michigan _ You saia that was '69 Let
1
12 me bring you up to date, closer_ to current , a current place
0
0
13 Onl the calendar
14 This one is the fall of last year, 1975 _ President
15 Ford announced his new program with respect to amnesty, as
16 he described it, for draft resistors Following that there
17 were several national conferences involving all the groups
18 and individuals interested in unconditional amnesty.
{
19 Now parenthetically, while unconditional amnesty is
i
20 not against
5 Ihile unconditional amnesty is not yet the law , 6
21 we agrecd that advocating it is not against the lawy either _
3 22 Mr Adams _ That ' s right.
1
23 Sonator Iart of Michigan _
88
Somne of the sponsors #:r
28
8 24 umbrella organizations involving about 50 diverse eop: ifu
25 the country . FBI informants providcd .advance i)'04vi6 "il
@NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 125
gshi
they
thing
==================================================
Page 126
==================================================
4 1917
7
plans for the mee ting and apparently attended and reported on 8
1 2 the conference The Bureau' s own reports described the
1
3 participants as having represented diverse' perspectives 0n
4 the issue of amnesty , including civil liberties and human
5 rights groups , G.I_ rights spokesmen , parents of men Killed
6 in Vietnain , wives of ex-patriates in Canada
1 experts on draft
counselling , religious groups interested in peace issues
8 delegates from student organizations , and aides of . Iouse and
9 Senate members , drafting legislation 0n amnesty _
10 The informant apparently Ias attending in his role as
11 a member of a growp undler investigation as allegedly subversive
{
12 and it described the topics of the workshop
0
0
13
Ironically, the Bureau office report before them noted
14 that in view of the location of the conference at a theological
15 seminary , the FBI would use restraint and limit its coverage
16 to informant reports_
17 Now this isn' t five or ten years ago _ 'This is last
18 fall_ And this is a conference of people who have the point
3
19 of vie1 that I share , that the soaner we have unconditional
8
20.
amnesty , thc better for the soul 0f the coun L
21 NOw what reason is it for a vacuun cleaner approach on
4 22 a thing like that? Don t these instances illustrate how broad
1
23 informant intclligence really is, that woula cause these groups
2
24 in that setting having contact With other groups , all and 8
25 everybody is drawn into the vacuum and many names So into the
NW 88608 Docld:34989820 126
gsh
try
Page
==================================================
Page 127
==================================================
5 1918
1
Bureau filcs 8
1 Is this what we want?
1
2
Mr Adams I'1l let Mr Wannall address himself to this _
4 He is particular knowledgeable as to this operation .
5
Mr Wannall Senator Iart , that was a case that was
6 opened on Novemnber 14 and closed November 20 , and the informatidn
which caused us to be interested in it were really two particular
8 items _ One was that' a membcr of the steering committee there
9 Tas a three man steering committee , and one of those members
10 of the national conference was in fact 3 national officer
11 of the VVAI in whom we had suggested before we did: have a
1
12 legitimate investigative interest
0
1
13 Senator Iart of Michigan . Nell, I would almost say So whht
14 at that point.
15 Mr Manna11 The second report we had was that the
16 VVAW Tould actively participate in an 'attempt to pack the
17 conference to take it over And the third report Ive had
18 Senator Hart 0f Michigan And incidentally , all of the
3
19 informalion that your Buffalo informant had given you with
i
20 respect to the goals and aimis of the VVAW gave You a list of L
21 goals which were completely within Constitutionally protected
4
22 objectives There wasn 't a single item out of that VVAI that
1
23 jeopardizes the .security of this country at all
2
8 24 Mx Wannall_ Well, of course, ve did not rely entirely
25 on the Buffalo informant , but even there we dia recej-.
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 127
gsh
==================================================
Page 128
==================================================
6 1919
fron that informant information Which I considered to be
8
1 2 significant _
1
3 The Buffalo chapter of the VVAW was the regional office
4 covering New York and northern New Jersey; It was one of the
5 five most active VVAN chapters in the country and at a
6 national conference, or at the regional conference , this
7: informant reported information back to us that an attendee
8 at the conference announced that he had run guns into Cuba
9 prior to the Castro take-over He himself said that he during
10 the Cuban crisis had been under 24 hour suveillance There
11 was also discussion at the conference of subjugating the
1
12 WVAW to the revolulionary union _ There were some individuals
0
1
13 in the chapter or
the regional conference who were not in
14 agreemnent with uS , but Mx Adans has addressed himself to the
15 interest of the revolutionary union
16 So all of the information that we had on the VVAN did
17 not come froin that source but even that particular source did
18 give uS information which We considered to be of some
2
19 significance in our appraisal of the need for continuing the
5
20 investigation of that particular chapter of the VVAW _
L
21 Senator Hart of Michigan _ But does it you the
9
22 right or does it create the need to go to a conference , even
1
23 if it is a conference that might be taken over by the VVAW
Ql
24 when the subject matter is horv and by what means shall we 8
25 seek to achieve unconditional' amnesty? What threat?
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 128
gsh
sive
Page
==================================================
Page 129
==================================================
7 1920
L
1 Mx Wannall_ Our interest , of course , was the VVAN
ch
2 influence on 3 particular meeting , if You ever happened to be 1
1
3 holding a mec ting, or whatever subject it was
4 Senator Iart of Michigan What if it was a meeting to
5 Seek to make more. @ffective the food stanp system in this
6 country?
7 Mr Wanna1l Wel:l
1
of course there had been some
8
organizations _
9 Senator Iart of Michigan . [ould the same logic follow?
Mr Mannall I think that if we found that if the 10
Communist Party USA was going to take. over the mee ting and
11
1
use it as a front for its Own purposes , there woula be 2 logic
12_
4
in doing that _ You have a whole scope here and it' $ a matter 1
13
of where you ; do and: where.you don 't, and, hopefully , as wc 14.
said before we will have sone guidance , not only from this
15
committee but from the suidelincs that are being developed _
16
But within the rationale of what we re doing today, I was
17
explaining to you our interest not in going to this thing and
18
3
not gathering everything there was about it_
19
i
In fact, one individual attended and reported to us
20 6
and that Ias the person Who had , who was not developed for
21
this reason; an inforant Iho had been reporting on other 4 22
1
matters for some period of time
23
2
And as soon as we got the report of the outcwte ( { 6.
8 24
meeting and the fact that in the period of some 3 ( ;:
25
NW 88608 Docld:32889820 Page 129
gsh
've
only
==================================================
Page 130
==================================================
5b,l L 1921
L
discontinued further interest _
8
1 2 Senator Hart 0f Michigan _ Meli, my time has expired
3 but even this brief exchange , I think, indicates that if we
4 really want to control the dangers to our society of using
5 informants to gather domestic political intelligence , we have
6 to restrict sharply domestic intelligence investigations, An
that gets us into what I woula like to raise with you when
8 my turn comes around again_
%
and that's the use of warrants ,
9 obliging the Bureau to obtain a warrant before a full-fledged
10 informant can be directed by the Bureau against a group or
11 individuals .
{
12 I know" you have objections to that and I woula like to
0
1
13 review that- with you_
14 Senator Mondale Pursue that question
15 Senator Hart of Michigan _ I am
talking
now about an
16 obligation %o obtain a warrant before you turn joose a full-
17 fledged informant. I'm not talking about tipsters that run
18 into you or you run into, or who walk in as information sources
32
19 The Bureau has raised some objections in this memorandum to the
8
20 Committee The Bureau argues that such a warrant requirement
L
21 might be unconstitutional because it would violate the First
4 22 Amendment rights of FBI informants to communicate with their
1
23 government _
2
24 Now that's a concern for First Amendment rights that 8
25 ought to hearten all the civil libertarians _
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 130
any
==================================================
Page 131
==================================================
9 , 1922
But why woula that vary, would a warrant requirement
8
! 2 raise a serious: constitutional question?
1 3
Mr Adams
6
Well, for one thing it's the practicability
4 of it or the .impacticability of getting a warrant which:
5 ordinarily involves probable cause to: show that a crime has
6 been or is about to be comamitted _
7 In the intelligence field we are not dealing necessarily
8 with' an imminent criminal action _ We re dealing with activitied
9 such as with the Socialist Workers Party, which we have
10 discussed before, where say publicly we re not_ to engage
11 in any violent activity today, but we guarantee you we still
1
12 subscribe to the tenets of communism and that when the time
0
8
13 is ripe, we re going to rise up and help overthrow the United
8
14 States
15 Well, now , you can t show probable cause if: they re about
16 to do it because they re telling you they re not going to do it
17 and You know they re not going to do it at this particular
18 moment
2
19 It' s just the mixture somewhat of trying to mix in a
i
20 criminal procedure with an intelligence gathering function , and
L
21 we can't find any practical way of doing it_ We have a particula
5 22 organization . We may have an infornant that not only belongs
1
23 to the Communist Party, but belongs to several other organizatioh:
2
24 and as part of his function he may be sent out by the Communist
8
25 Party to try to infiltrate one of these clean organizations _
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 131
gsh
why
they
Page
==================================================
Page 132
==================================================
10
00
We don 'thave . probable_ cause for him to target against
8
1 2 that organization, but' yet we shoula be' able to receive informa-
1 3 tion from him that he as a Communist Party member, even
though in an informant status is going to that organization
5 and don t worry about it. We 're making no
headway
on i+.
6 It's just from our standpoint the' possibility of informants ,
the Supreme Court has held that informants per se do not
8 violate the First, Fourth or Fifth Amendments They have
9 recognized the necessity that the government has to have
10 individuals who will assist them in carrying out their
11 governnlental duties _
{
12 Senator Mart of Michigan. I'm not sure I've Jheard anythirg
6
1
13 yet in response to the constitutional question, the very
14 practical question that you addressed
15 Quickly, you are right that the court has said that the
16 use of the informant per se is not a violation of constitutiona_
17 rights of the subject under investigation _ But Congress
18 can prescribe SOIne safeguards some rules and some standards
1
19 just as we have with respect to your use of electronic
8
20 surveillance , and coula do it with respect to informants _ 6
21 That' s quite different from saying that the warrant
9
22 procedure itself would be unconstitutional
11
23 But with respect to the fact that you couldn't sho
2
8 24 probable cause, and therefore; you couldn 1 t get a warrant,
25 therefore you oppose the proposal to require to get a
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 132
9Sh
you
==================================================
Page 133
==================================================
11 1924
1
8 warrant_ It seems to beg the question
8 2
Assuming that you that since we use informants and
3
investigate groups which may ,only engage in lawful activities
4
but which might engage in activities that can result in
5
violence or illegal acts, and you can 't use the warrant, but
6
Congress could say that the use of informants is subject to
such abuse and poses such a threat to legitimate activity,
8
including the willingness of people to assemble ana discuss
9
the anti-ballistic missile system, and we don t want you to
10
use
them unless
you have indication of criminal activity
or
11
unless you present your request to a magistrate. in the same_
1
12
8
fashion as you are required to do with respect to, in most
0
13
cases , to wiretap_
End Tape
6 14
This is an option available to Congress
Begin
Tape 1f
Senator Tower Senator Schweiker
16
Senator Schweiker _ Thank you very much
17
Mr Wannall, what S the difference between a potential
18 security informant and a security informant?
3
19
Mr Wannall I mentioned earlier , Senator Schweiker ,
8
20
that in developing an informant we do a preliminary check on
L
21
him before talking with him and then we do a further in-depth
5 22 background check
1
23
A potential security informant is someone who is under 2
8 24
consideration before he is approved by headquarters for use as
25
an informant _ He is someone who is under current consideration
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 133
gsh
say
Page
==================================================
Page 134
==================================================
12 1925
L
1 On some occasions that person Will have been developed to a 8
1 2 point where he is in fact furnishing information and we are
L
3" engaged in checking upon_ his reliability
4 In some instances he may be paid for information furnished
5 but it has not gotten to the point yet where we have satisfied
6 ourselves that he meets all of our criteria When he does _
the field must submit its recommendations to headquarters , and
headquarters will pass upon whether that individual is an
9 approved FBI informant
10 Senator Schweiker So it's really the first step of
11 being an informant, I guess
{
12 Mr _ Wannall _ It is a preliminary step, one of the
8
0
13 preliminary steps _
14 Senator Schweiker In the Rowe case, in :the Rowe
15 testimony that we just heard what was the rationale again
16 for not intervening when: violence was known?
17 I know we asked you several times but I'm still having
18 trouble understanding what the rationale , Mr _ Wannall, was
1
19 in not intervening in the Rowe situation when violence was
8
20 known L
21 Mx Wannall_ Senator Sckweiker Mr Adams did address
4 22 himself to that. If you have no objection, I'11 ask him to
1
23 answer that
2
8 24 Senator Schweiker All, right.
25 Mr Adams The problem we had at the time , and it's the
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 134
gsh
==================================================
Page 135
==================================================
13. 1926
1
problem today_ we; are an investigative agency _ We do not
8
2
have police powers like the United States marshalls do _ 1
1
3
About 1795 , I guess
1 or sqme period like that, marshalls have
had_ the .authority: that almost: borders on what a' sheriff,has
5 We are the investigative agency of the Department of Justice
and during these times the Department of Justice had us maintain
the role of an investigative agency . We were to report on
activities to furnish the information to the local police,
8
9
who had an obligation to; act. We furnished it to the Departlen
of Justice
10
In those areas where the local police dia not act, it
11
{
12
resulted finally in the Attorney General sending 500 Unitea
6
States marshalls down to guarantee the safety of people who 1
13
were trying to march in protest of their civil rights_
14
This was an extraordinary measure because it came at a 15
time of civil righs versus federal rights , and yet there was 16
a breakdown in law enforcement in certain areas of the country
17
This doesn t mean to indict all law enforcement agencies
18
{ in itself at the time either because many of them did act
19
i
upon the information that was furnished to them _ But we
20 L
have no authority to make an arrest on the spot because we
21
would not have had evidence that there was a -conspiracy 3 22
1
available_ We can do absolutely nothing in that regard_
23
2
In Little Rock , the 'decision was made for instance, that
8 24
if any arrests need to be made , the Army should make them and
25
NW_88608 Docld: 32989820_Page_135
gsh
==================================================
Page 136
==================================================
14 1927
next to; the Army; the' United States marshalls should: make them,
8
1 2 not the FBI , even though we developed the violations _
1
3 And Gver the Years- as you know , at the time there were many
'4 questions raised _ doesn t the FBI stop this? Tby don "t
5
you do something about it?
6 Well, we took the other route ana effectively destroyed
the Klan as far as committing acts of violence , and of course
we exceeded statutory guidelines in that area _
Senator Schweiker What would be wrong, just following
10 up your point there Mr' Adams , with setting up a program
11 since it' s obvious to me that a lot of informers are going to:
0
12 have pre-knowledge of violence of using U.S . marshalls on some
0
1
13 kind 0f a long-range basis to prevent violence?
14 Mr Adams We do We have them in Boston in connection
15 with the busing incident . We are
investigating the violations
16 under the 'Civil Rights Act . But the marshalls are in Boston,
17 are in Louisville_ I believe at the same time, and this
18 is the approach that the Federal government finally recognized
2
19 was the solution to the problem where yYou had to have added
8
20 Federal import _ L
21 Senator Schweiker But instead of Waiting until it
22 gets to a Boston state, which is obviously a pretty advanced
11
23 confrontation, shouldn t we have somr 'iere a coordinated prograr
2
8 24 that when you go up the ladder of cc"'and in the FBI , that
25 on an immediate and fairly contemporzry basis , that kind of
NW 88608 Docld:32980820 Page 136
gsh
Why
they
4
==================================================
Page 137
==================================================
15 1928
7
help can be sought instantly as opposed to waiting until it
8
1 2 to a Boston state?
1
3 I realize it's a departture from the past. I'm not
4 Saying it isn' € But.it seems. to me_ we need &.better remedy,
5 than we have
6 Mr _ Adams _ Well, fortunatelyr_we 're at a time where
conditions have subsided in the country, even from the '60s
8 and the '70s and periods
Itc or 50s and '60s We report to the
9 Department of Justice on potential troublespots arouna the'
10 country as we learn of them So that the Department will be
11 aware of them The planning for Boston; for instance, took
1
12 place a year in advance with state 'officials , city officials ,
8
1
13 the Department of Justice and the FBI sitting down together
14 saying , how are we going to protect the situation in Boston?
15 I think we ve learned a lot from the days back in the
16 early '60s _ But the government had no mechanics which protected
17 people at that time
18 Senator Schweiker I'd like to go , if I may , to the
3
19 Robert: Iardy case_ I know he is not a witness but he
i
20 was a witness before the Iouse But since this affects my L
21 state, I'd like to ask 'Mr_ Wannall Mr Hardy , of course, was
3 22 the FBI informer who ultimately led and planned and organized
1
23 a raid on the Camden draft board _ An! according to Mr Hardy's
2 #
8 24 testimony before our Comittee , he s32. that in advance of the
25 raid someone in the Department had even acknowledged the fact
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 137
gsh
gets
Page
==================================================
Page 138
==================================================
16 1929
8 that had all the information needed to clamp down
2 1
on the conspiracy and could arrest people at that point in time
L 3
and yet no arrests were made
4
Mr_ Wannall, was this true?
5
Mr = Wannall _ Well, I can answer that based on the
6
material that I have reviewed , Senator Schweiker_ It was not
7
a case handled in mY division but I think I can answer your
8
question .
9
There was , in fact, 3 representative of the Department
10
of Justice on the spot counselling and advising continuously
11
as that case progressed as to what 'point the arrest should be
1
12
8 made and we Were
being guided by those to our mentors , the
1
13
ones who are responsible for Making decisions of that sort
14
So I think that Mr Iardy' s statement to the' effect that
15
there was someone in the Department there is perfectly true
16
Senator Schweiker That responsibility rests with wlio
17
under your procedures?
18
Mr Wannall We investigate decisions on making arrests ,
{
19
when they should be made _
1
and decisions With regard' to i
20
prosecutions are made either by the United States attorneys L
21
or by Federals in the Department _
5 22
Mr Adans At this time that particular
case did have 1
23
departmental attorney on the scene :0 :ause there are questions' 2
8 24
f conspiracy Conspiracy is a tough iolation to prove and
25
bometimes a question of do you have the added value of catching
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 138
gsh
they they
Why ,
only
==================================================
Page 139
==================================================
17 1930
7
8 ~smeone in the commission of the crime as further proof
1 2
rather than relying on. one informant and some circumstantial
1
3
evidence to prove the violation
4
Senator Schweiker Well,- in this case _ though ,
5
even had a dry run
They could have arrested them on the
6
dry run _
7
That 's getting pretty close to conspiracy , it seems to
8
me
They had
a run and they could have arrested them on
the run
10
I'd like to know they didn t arrest them on the
11
run _ Who was this Departient of Justice official who made
1
12
that decision?
0
0
13
Mr Adans Guy Goodwin was the Department official
14 Senator Schweiker Next I'd like to ask back in 1965 ,
15 during the height of the effort to destroy the Klan , as you
16 put it a few moments ago , I believe the FBI has releasea
17 figures that we had some thing like 2 ,000 informers of some
18 kind or another infiltrating the` Klan out of roughly 10 ,000
1
19
estimated membership _
i
20
I believe these are either FBI figures or estimates_ L
21 That would mean that one out of every five members of the Klan
4 22
at that point wwas an informant paia the government _
1
23 And I believe the figure goes 02 S0 indicate that 70
2
8 24 percent of the new members of the Kla:. that year were FBI
25 informants _
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 139
gsh
they
dry
dry
why dry
by
==================================================
Page 140
==================================================
18
7
Isn't this an
awfuliy overwhelming quantity of people
8
1 2 to put in an effort such as that? I'm not criticizing that
1
3 you shouldn t have informants in the Klan ana know what' s
going on for violence , but it seems to me that this is the
5 tail wagging the
6 For example, today we supposedly have only 159.4.total;
informants for both domestic: fnformants and. potential informants
8. and that here we
had 2,000` just in the Klan alone
9 Mr _ Adans Well, this number 2 ,000 did include all
10 racial matters, informants at that particular time and I
11 think the figures we tried to reconstruct as to the actual
{
12 number of Klan informants in relation to Klan members was around
8
0
13 6 percent , I think , after we had read some of the; testimony_
14 NOw the problem we had on the Klan is the Klan had a
15 group called the Action Group This was the group that you
16 remember from Mr Rowe ' s testimony , that he was left af-
17 ter the meeting. He attended the open meetings and heard
18 all of the hurrahs and this type of thing from information,
3
19 but he never knew what was going on because each one had an
5
20 action group that went out and considered themselves in the V
21 missionary field .
9 22 Theirs was the violence
1
23 In order to penetrate those, it takes
1 you have to direct
1
8 24 as many informants as you possibly can against it. Bear in
25 mind that I think thc newspapers , the President and Congress and
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 140
gst
dog _
Page
==================================================
Page 141
==================================================
19 1932
L
1
8 everyone is concerned about the murder of the civil rights
2 1
workers _ the Linio Kent zase, the Viola Liuzzo case, the
1
3
bombings of the church in Birmingham _ We were 'faced with one
4 tremendous problem at that time
5
Senator Schweiker I acknowledge that_
6
Mr Adams Our only approach was through informants
7
and through the use of informants we solved these cases , the
8
ones that were solved Some of the bombing cases we have
9
never solved They are extremely difficult_
10
These informants , as we told the Attorney General and
11
as we told the President, that we had moved informants like
{
12
4 Mr Rowe up to the top leadership _ He was the bodyguard to the
1
13
head man _ He was in a position where he coula 'forewarn us
14
of violence, could help uS on cases that had transpired , and
15
yet we knew and conceived that this could continue forever
16
unless we can create enough disruption 'that these members will
17
realize that if I go out and murder three civil rights workers _
18
even though the sheriff and other law enforcenent officers are
2
19
in on it, if that were the case and with some of them it was 8
20 the case, that I would be caught_ And that' s what we did and L
21 that' s violence stopped , Was becausc the Klan was insecure
1
22 and just like you say, 20 percent , they thought 50 percent of
1
23 their ierabers ultimately were Klan members and they didn t 2
8 24 dare engage in these acts of violence because they knew they
25
couldn t control the conspiracy any longer _
NW 88608_Docld: 32988820 141
gsh
why
Page
==================================================
Page 142
==================================================
20 1933
8
1
1 Senator Schweiker My time is expired _ I just have
8
1 2 one
quick question _
1 3 Is it correct that in 1971 we re using around 6500
4 informers for black ghetto situations?
5 Mr Adams I'm not sure if that's the year _ We did
have one year where we had a number like that which probably
had been around 6000 , and that Ias the time when the cities
8 were being: burned_
1
Detroit, Washington , areas like this _ We
[ere given a mandate to know what the situation is , where is
10 violence going to break out, what next?
11 They weren t informants like an individual penetrating
{
12 an organization _ They were listening posts in the community
0
1
13 that would help tell us that we have a group here that's getting
14 ready to start another fire-fight
or some thing _
15 Senator Tower At this .point , there are three more
16 Senators remaining for questioning _ If we can try to get
17 everything in in the first round we will not have a second
18 round and I think we can finish around 1:00 _ and we can_ go
2
19 on and terminate the proceedings
i
20 Iowever
1
If anyone feels that have another question L
21 that they want to return to, we can come back here by 2:00 _
5
22 Senator Mondale?
1
23 Senator Mondale Mr Adams , it seems to me that the
2
8 24 record is now fairly clear that when the FBI operates in the
NW 88608
86ckEi68d28fagei,e investigating; it
may be the: best professional
gsh
they
==================================================
Page 143
==================================================
21
1934
1
1
organization of its kind in the world And when the FBI acts
8
2 in the field of political ideas , it has bungled its job , it 1
1
3. has interfered with the civil liberties , and finally, in the
4 last month or two , through its public disclosures , heaped
5 shame upon itself and really led toward an
undermining of
the crucial public confidence in an essential: law enforcement
agency Of this country .
8 In a real sense , history has repeated itself because it
9 was precisely that problem that led to the creation of the FBI
10 in 1924 _
11 In Worla War I, the Bureau of Investigation strayed from
{
12 its law enforcement functions and became an arbiter and
0
0
13 protector of political ideas _ And through the interference
14
of civil liberties and Palmer Raids and the rest, the public
15 becane s0 offended that later through Mr Justice Stone and
16 Mr _ Hoover , the FBI was created And the first statement
17 by Mr_ Stone was that never again will this Justice Department
18 get involved in political ideas
I
19
And yet here we are again looking at a record where with
8
Martin Luther with anti-war resistors , with L t we even 20 L
21
had testimony this morning of meetings with the Council of
y 22 Churches Secretly we are investigating this vague , ill-defined
1
23
impossible to define idea of investigating dangerous ideas
2
It seems to be the basis of the strategy that people
8 24
25 can t protect themselves that you SOInehow need to use the
NW 88608 Docld: 32988820 Page 143
gsh
King,
==================================================
Page 144
==================================================
22 1935
7
1 tools of law enforcement to protect people from subversive
8
1 2
or dangerous: ideas , which I find strange and te profoundly
1 3 at odds with the philosophy of American government _
4 I started in politics years ago and the first thing
we
5 had to do was to get the communists out of our parts and out
6 of the union _ We did a very fine job. As far as I know and
7 I'm beginning to wonder _ but as far as I know we had no
8 from the FBI or the CIA We just ramned them out of the meetings
9 on the grounds that they weren t Democrats and they weren 't
10 good union leaders when we didn't Fant anything to do with them
11 And. yet , We see time and time again that we re going to
{
12' protect the blacks from Martin Luther King because he ' s
8
1
13 dangerous , that we going to protect veterans from whatever
14 it is, and we re going to protect the Council of Churches
15 from the veterans , and SO on , and it just gets S0 gummy and
16 confused and ill-defined and dangerous , that don t you agree
17 with me that we have to control this , to restrain it, sO that
18 precisely What is expected of the FBI is known by you , by the
I
19 public, and that You can justify your actions when we ask
8
20 you? L
21 Mr Adams I agree with that, Senator and I would like
y 22 to point out that when the Attorney General made his statement
1
23 Mr Hoover subscribes to we follcred that policy for about
2
8 24 ten years until the President of thc Ated States said that
25 we should investigate the Nazi Party
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 144
gsh
qui-
help
've
it ,
==================================================
Page 145
==================================================
23 1936
1 I for one feel that we should investigate the Nazi Party.
8
1 2 I feel that our investigation of the Nazi Party resulted in
L
3 the fact that in World War II as contrasted with Worla War I,
4 tliere 'Iasn't one single incident of' foreign directed sabotage
5 which took place in .the United States
6 Senator Mondale _ And under the criminal lawv you could
7 have investigated these issues of sabotage
8
Isn't sabotage a crime?
9 Mr Adams Sabotage is a crime
10 Senator Mondale Could you have investigated that?
11 Nr Adams After it happened
{
12
Senator Mondale_ You see , every time we get involved
8
1
13 in political ideas _ you defend yourself on the basis 0f"
14 crimes that could have been comunitted . It's very interesting
15 In my opinion , you have to stand here if You re going to
16 continue what you re now doing and as: I understand it, you
17 still insist that you did the right thing with the Vietnam
18 Veterans Against the War and investigating the Council of
2
19 Churches , and this can still go on . This can still go on under
i
20 your interpretation of Your present powers what you try to
L
21
justify on the grounds of your law enforcement activitics
5 22 in terms of criminal matters
1
23 Mx Adams _ The law does :not say we have to wait until
2
24 we have been murdered before we can 8
25
Senator Mondale Absolutely , but that's thc field of
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 145
gsh
Page
==================================================
Page 146
==================================================
24 1937
1
8 law again_ You 're.trying to defend apples with oranges _ That:'
2 1
the law. You can do that
3
Mr Adans That s rightr but how do YOu find out which
4
of the 20',,000 Buna members might have been a saboteur You
5
don t have probable cause to investigate anyone , but you can
direct an intelligence operation against the German-American
Bund the same thing Fve did after Congress said
Senator Mondale couldn 't you, get a warrant for that?
Wvhy did you object to going to court for authority for that?
10
Mr _ Adams Because we don t have probable cause to
11
go against an individual and the law doesn 1 t provide for
1
12
0
probable cause to investigate
an organization_
0
13
There were activities which did take place , like one time
14 they outlined the Comunist Party
15 Senator Mondale What I don t understand is why it
16
wouldn t be better for the FBI for us to define authority
17
that you coula use in the kind of Bonn situation where under
18
court authority you can investigate where there is probable
3
19
cause or reasonable cause to suspect sabotage and the rest _ 8
20 Wouldn t that make a lot more sense than just Iaking thesel L
21 decisions on your Own?
4
22
'Mr . Adams We have expressed ccmplete concurrence in
1
23
that. We feel that wC re going to gc #ineat to death in the 2
8 24
next 100 years , you re damned if You and 'damned if you
25
don ' t if wa don 't have a delineation of our responsibility
NW 88608 Docld:32939820 146
gsh
i0'
Page
==================================================
Page 147
==================================================
25 1938
in this area But I won t agree with YoU , Senator , that we 8
1 2 have bungled the intelligence operations in the United States _
3
I agree with you that we have made some mistakes Mr Kelley:
has set a pattern of being as
forthright
as any Director of the
5 FBI in acknowledging mistakes that. had been made , but I think
that 8s you said , ana I' believe Senator Tower said, and
Senator Church , that we have to watch these hearings because
Of the necessity that Te must concentrate on these areas of
9 abuse _ We must not lose sight of the
10 overall law enforcement and intelligence community, ana I
11 still feel that this is the freest councry in the world _
1
12 I've travelled much , as I'm sure you have, and I know we have
0
0
13 made some mistakes , but I feel that the people in the United
14 States are less chilled the mistakes we have made than they
15 are' by the fact that there are 20 000 murders a year in the
16 United States and they can t walk out of their houses at night
17 and feel safe _
18 Senator Mondale That' s correct, and isn 't that an
2
19 argument then , Mr Adams , for strengthening our powers to go
i
20 after those who commit crimes rather than strengthening or |
21
continuing
a policy which we now see undermines the public
4
22 confidence you need to do your job
11
23 Mr Adams _ Absolutely. The mistakes we have made are
28
24 what have brought on this embarrassment to us 8
25 I'm not blaming the Committee _ I m saying we made some
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 147
gsh
by
==================================================
Page 148
==================================================
26 1939
[
mistakes and in doing SO this is what has hurt the FBI _ But
8
1 2 at the same time I don 't feel that a balanced picture comes
3 out, as you have said yourselves_ because of the necessity
0f zercing in on abuses
5 I think that we have done one tremendous job 1 think
the accomplishments in the Klan was the finest hour of the
FBI and yet, I m sure in dealing with the Klan that we made
End Tape 7 8 some mistakes _ But I just don t agree with bungling _
9
10
11
{
12
08
1
13
14
15
16
i7
18
3
19
i
20 L
21
9 22
1
23
E
8 24
25
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 148
gsh
4
Page
==================================================
Page 149
==================================================
SHARRIS / smnl 1940
t. 8
1 Senator Mondale_ I don't want to argue over terms but
8
2 I think I sense an agreement that the FBI has gotten into trouble 1
1
3 over it in the political idea trouble, and that that's where we
4
neea to have new legal standards _
5 Mr. Adams Yes
1
I agree with that.
6 Senator Tower _ Senator Huddleston
7 Senator Huddleston _ Thank You , Mr . Chairman _
8 Mr Adams these two instances we have studied at: some
length seems to have been an inclination on the part of
10 the, Bureau to establish_ a notion about an individual or a group
11
which seems to be very hard to ever change or dislodge. In
{
12 the case of Dr _ King , where the supposition was that he was
0
1
13
being influenced by Communist individuals , extensive investi-
14
gation was made, surveillance, reports came
back indicating tha
this in fact was untrue , and directions continued to go out
15
to intensify the investigation. There never seemea to be a 16
willingness on the part of the Bureau to accept its own facts.
17
Ms Cook testified this morning that some thing similar
18
2
to that happened with the Vietnam Veterans Against the War, that
19
i every piece of information that she supplied to the Bureau
20 L
seemed to indicate that the Bureau was; not correct in its
21
5 22
assumption that this organization planned to commit violence ,
1
23 or that it was
being manipulated, ana you seemed to insist
2
that this investigation go on , and +k-5 information was used
8 24
25
against the individuals _
NW 88608 Docld:72989820 Page 149
et
==================================================
Page 150
==================================================
smn 2
1941
L
NOw , are there instances where the Bureau has admitted that
8
1 2 its first assumptions were wrong and they have changed their
1
3 course?
4 Mr _ Adams We have admitted that. We have also shown
5 from one of the cases that Senator Hart brought up , that after
five days we closed the case We were told something by an
individual that there was a concern of an adverse influence
8 in and we looked into it. On the Martin Luther King
9 situation there was no testimony to the effect that we just
10 dragged on and on , or admitted that we dragged on and on and
11 on , aa infinitum. The wiretaps on Martin Luther King were
1
12 all approved by the Attorney General Microphones on Martin
0
1
13 Luther King were approved by another Attorney General _ This
14 wasn t the FBI , ana the reason they were approved was that
15 there was a basis to continue the investigation up to a point .
16 What I testified to was that we were improper in' discreditir
17 Dr . but it's just like
18 Senator Huddleston. The Committee has before it memorandal
2
19 written by high officials of the Bureau indicating that the
'8
20 information they were receiving from the field , from these
L
21 surveillance methods , did not confirm what their supposition
5 22 was .
11
23 Mr . Adams _ That memorandum was rot on Dr . King . That
2
24 was on another individual that I thi somehow got mixed up
'25 in the discussion, one where the is3w was can we make people
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 150
it,
King ,
8
==================================================
Page 151
==================================================
1Jil
smn 3
1
prove they aren't a Communist before we will agree not to
8
1 2 investigate them _
1 3 But the young lady. appearing this morning Making the
4 comment that she never knew of anything she tola us that
5 she considers herself 3 true member of the VVAW-WSO inasmuch
as she feels in general agreement of the principles of it, and
agreed to cooperate with the FBI in providing information regard
8 ing the organization to aid in preventing violent individuals
9 from associating thenselves with the VVAW-WSO . She is most
10 concerned about efforts ,by the Revolutionary Union to take over
11 the VVAW-WSO , and she is working actively to prevent this_
{
12 I think that we have a basis for investigating the VVAW-
0
0
13 WSO in certain areas today. In other areas we have stopped
14 the investigation_ They don 't agree with these principles
15 laid down the
16 Senator Huddleston. That report was the basis of your
17
continuing to pay informants and continuing to utilize that
18
information against members who certainly had not been involved
1
19 in violence , and apparently to get them fired from their job
i
20 or whatever?
L
21 Mr . Adams _ It all gets back to the fact that even in the
9 22 criminal law field, you have to detect crime, and you have to
11
23 prevent crime, and you can t wait unt:? some thing happens _ The
2
24 Attorney General has clearly spoken that area , and even our
8
25
statutory jurisdiction provides tha : we don 't
NW 88608 Docld: 32989820 Page 151
by
==================================================
Page 152
==================================================
1943
smn 4
1
1 Senator Huddleston. Well, of course we ve had considerabl
8
1 2 evidence this morning where no attempt was made to prevent
3 crime, when you had information that it was going to occur.
4 But I'm_ sure there are instances- where you have
5 Mr. Adams _ We disseminated every single item which he
6 reported to us
7 Senator Huddleston_ To a police department which you
8 knew was an accomplice to the crime
9 Mr Adams _ Not necessarily_
10 Senator Huddleston Your informant had told you that ,
11 hadn 't he?
1
12 Mr _ Adams _ Well , the informant is on one level . We have
&
1
13 other informants and we have other information _
14 Senator Huddleston _ Yes , but you were aware that he
15 had worked with certain members of the Birmingham police in
16 order to
17 Mr Adams . Yes_ He furnished many other instances also .
18 Senator Huddleston . So you weren t really doing a whole
2
19 lot to prevent that incident telling the people who were
i
20 already part of it. L
21 Mr . Adams _ We were doing everything we could lawfully
4
22 do at the time , and finally the situation was corrected , SO tha
1
23 when the Department , agreeing that we had no further. juris-
2
8 24 diction , could sent the United States Marshal down to perform
25 certain law enforcement functions _
NW 88608 Docld: 32989820 Page 152
L
by
==================================================
Page 153
==================================================
smn 5
1944
7
1 Senator Huddleston. Now the Committee has received
8
2 documents which indicated that in one situation the. FBI assisted 2
1 3 an informant who had been established in a white hate group
4
to establish a rival white hate group , and that the Bureau paid
5
his expenses in setting
uF this rival organization_
6 Now does_ this not put: the Bureau in a position of being
responsible for what actions the rival white hate group might
have undertaken?
Mr_ Adams _ I'& like to see if one of the other gentlemen
knows that specific case , because I don't think we set up a 10
11
specific group.
{
This is Joe Deegan _
12
0
Mr _ Deegan _ Senatcr , it' s my understanding that the 1
13
informant we re talking about decided to break off from the
14
group he was with. He was with the Macon Klan group of 15
the United Klans of America, and he decidea to break off. This
16
was in compliance with our regulations _ His breaking off,
17
we did not pay him to set up the organization_ He did it
18
3 on his own . We paid him for the information he furnished
19
8
us concerning the operation. We did not sponsor the organiza -
20 L
21
tion _
Senator Huddleston. Concerning the new organization that 4 22
1 he set up , he continued to advise 0f the activities of that
23
1
organization?
8 24
Mr. Deegan _ He continued to advj : , us of that organization
25
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 153
You
==================================================
Page 154
==================================================
1945
smn 6
L
1. and: other organizations _ He would advise uS of planned
8
2 activities
1
3 Senator Huddleston: The: new organization _ that he formed ,
4 did it operate in a very similar manner to the previous one?
'5 Mr _ Deegan . No , it did not , and it did not last that
6 long .
7 Senator Huddleston _ There ' s also evidence of an FBI
informant in the Black Panther. Barty who had a position of
responsibility within the Party with the knowledge of his
10 FBI contact of supplying members with weapons and instructing
11 them in how to use those weapons _ Presumably this was in the
{
12 knowledge of the Bureau, and he later became came in contact
0
1
13 with the group that was contracting for murder and he partici-
14 pated in this group with the knowledge of the FBI agent , and
15 this group did in fact stalk a victim who was later killed with
16 the weapon supplied by this individual, presumably- all in the
17
knowledge of the FBI _
18 How does this square with your enforcement and crime
2
19 prevention responsibilities .
i
20 Mr . Deegan . Senator, I'm not familiar with that particulal
L
21 case_ It does not square with our policy in all respects , and
5 22 I would have to look at that particular case you re talking
1
23 about to give you an answer.
2
24 Senator Huddleston I don 't have the documentation on that
25 particular case , but it brings
up
the point as to what kind of
NW88608 Docld: 32939820 Page 154
8
==================================================
Page 155
==================================================
smn 7 1946
1 control you exercised over this kind of informant in this kind
8
2 of an: organization and to. what extent an effort is made to 2
L
3 prevent these informants; from engaging in the kind of thing
4 that you are supposedly trying to prevent.
5 Mr _ Adams _ A example of this was Mr - Rowe , who became
6 active in an action group, and we told him to getout or
we would no longer use him as an informant , in spite of the
8 information he had furnished in the past .
9 We have had cases , Senator, where we have had
10 Senator Huddleston But you also told him to participate
11
in violent activities _
1
12 Mr Adams _ We did not tell him to participate in violent
0
1
13 activifies.
14 Senator Huddleston. That what he said_
15 Mr . Adams _ I know that' s what he; said._ But_ that's what
lawsuits are_ all about , is that there. are_ two sides to the
16
17 issue, and our agents. handling. this have. advised: uS , and I
18 believe have advised. your. staff, that at no time did they
1
19
advise him to engage_ in violence-
8
Senator. Huddleston: Just to_ do what was necessary to
20 L
21 the information , I believe maybe might have been his
y 22 instructions _
1
Mr Adams _ I don 't think they made any such statement
23
2
to him 'along that line , and we have informants we have
8 24
informants who have gotten involved in the violation of the law
25
NWV,88608 Docld: 32989820 Page 155
good
'5
get
==================================================
Page 156
==================================================
1947
smn 8
and we have imediately converted their status from an informant
8
2 to the subject, and have prosecuted I would" say, offhand , I 1
1
3 can think of around 20 informants that we have prosecuted for
4
violating the laws , once it came to our attention, and even
5 to show you our policy Of disseminating information on violence
6 in this case during the review of the matter, the agents told
me that they found one case where their agent had been working
8 24 hours a and he was a little late in disseminating the
information to the police department. No violence-occurred ,.
10 but it showed up in a file review and he was censured for
11
his delay in properly notifying local authorities
1
12 So we not have a policy , I feel that we d0 follow
0
1
13 reasonable safeguards in order to carry it out, including periodic
14
review of all informant. files
Senator Huddleston. Well, Mr _ Rowe 5 statement is
15
16 substantiated to some extent with the acknowledgement by the
17 agent in charge that if you re going to be a Klansman and you
18
happen to be with someone and they decide to do something , that
3
19 he couldn t be an These were the words of the agent , .
i
and be a good informant. He wouldn t take the lead; but the
20 L
21
implication is that he woula have to go along- and woula have
5 22 to be involved if he was going to maintain his credibility.
1
Mr Adams There S no question but that an informant at
23
2
24
times. will have to be: present. during demonstrations riots ,
9
25
fistfights that take place, but I believe his statement was
NW 88608 Docld:37989820 156
day,
only
angel _
Page
==================================================
Page 157
==================================================
1948
[
to the effect that
e and I was
sitting in the back of the
1
8
room and I don't recall it exactly, but some of then were
2 1
beat with chains, and I didn't hear whether he saia he beat 1 5
someone with a chain or not, but I rather doubt that he did
4
because it' s one thing being present , and it's another thing
5
taking an active part in criminal actions _
6
Senator Iuddleston He was close enough to his
7
throat cut.
8
How does the gathering of information
9
Senator Tower_ Senator Mathias is here , and I think that
10
we probably should recess a few minutes _
11
{ Coula we have Senator Mathias questions and then shoula
12
0
we convene this afternoon? 1
13
Senator Huddleston. I'm finished. I just had one more
14
question_
15
Senator Tower . Go ahead _
16
Senator Huddleston. I wantea to ask how the selection of
17
information about an individual S personal life, social, sex
18
1 life and becoming involved in that sex life or social life
19
i is a requirement for law enforcement or crime prevention _
20 L
Mr _ Adams _ Our agent handlers have advised uS on Mr _
21
Rowe , that they gave him no such instruction , they had no 4
22
1 such knowledge 'concerning itw and I can' t see where it woula
23
1
be of any value whatsoever.
8 24
Senator Huddleston _ You aren't atore of any case where
25
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 157
get
==================================================
Page 158
==================================================
smn 10 1949
1 these instructions_ were given to an agent or an informant?
8
Mr _ Adams To involved in sexual activity? No , sir. 1 2
1 Senator Huddleston. Thank you , Mr Chairman.
'4
Senator Tower Senator Mathias_
5
Senator Mathias_ Thank you , Mr_ Chairman.
6 I would like to come back very briefly to the Fourth
Amendment considerations in connection with the use of informants
8 and in posing these questions we re not thinking of the one
9 time volunteer who walks in to an FBI office and says I have
10 a story I want to tell you ana that' s the only time that you
11 may see him. I'm thinking of the kind of situations in which
1
12 there is a more extended relationship which could be of varying
0
1
13 degrees _ It might be in one case that the same individual
14 will have some usefulness in a nuber of situations _ But when
15 the FBI orders a regular agent to engage in a search , the first
16 test is a judicial warrant, and what I would like to explore
17
with you is the difference between a one time search which
18
requires a warrant , and which you get when you make that
2
19
search , and a continuous search which uses an informant, or
i
the case of a continuous search which uses a regular undercover
20 |
21
agent , someone who is totally under your control and is in a
4
22_
slightly different category than an informant_
1
23 Mr Adams _ Well we get there into the fact that the
2
Supreme Court has still held that the use of informants does
8 24
25 not invade any of these constitutionally protected areas , ,and_
NW 88608 Docld:3989820 158
get
Page
==================================================
Page 159
==================================================
smn 1l 1950
1 if a person wants to tell an informant something that isn't
8
2 protected by the Supreme Court. 2
1
3 An actual search for legal evidence , that is a protected
4 item, but information and the use of informants have been
5 consistently hela as not posing any constitutional problems _
6 Senator Mathias I would agree 1
if you re talking about
the fellow who walks in off the street, as I said earlier
1
but is it true that under existing procedures informants are
given background checks?
10 Mr _ Adams Yes , sir.
11 Senator Mathias. And are subject to a
testing period
{
12 Mx Adams _ That' s right, to verify and make sure they
8
1
13 are providing to uS reliable information_
14 Senator Mathias _ And during the period that the relation-
15
ship continues they are rather closely controlled by the
16
handling agents _
17 Mr = Adams _ That S true
18' Senator Mathias_ So in effect they can come in a very
1
19
practical way agents themselves to the FBI .`
i
20 Mr. Adans They
can do nothing
L
21 Senator Mathias. Certainly agents in the common law use
4
22 of the word
1
23 Mr - Adams _ That' s right, can do nothing, and we
2
24 instruct our agents that an informant can do nothing that the
8
25 agent himself cannot do , and if the agent can work himself into
NW 88608 Docld:82989820 Page 159
they
they
==================================================
Page 160
==================================================
1951
sm 12
L
1 an organization in an undercover capacity, he can sit there and 8
1 2 glean all the inforation that he wants , ana that is not in the
1
3 Constitution as a protected area. But we do have this problem_
4 Senator Mathias_ But if a' regular agent who is a Iember
5 of the FBI attempted to enter these premises , he would require
6
a warrant?
7
Mr _ Adams No sir, if a regular it depends on the
8 purpose for which he is entering. If a regular agent by
concealing his identity, by L t was admitted as .a member of the
10 Communist Party, he can attend Communist Party meetings and he
11 can enter the premises he can enter the building, and there ' s
1
12 no constitutionally invaded area there _
8
0
13 Senator Mathias _ And so you feel that anyone who has
14 a less formal relationship with the Bureau than .a regular
15 agent , who can undertake a continuous surveillance operation
16 as an undercover .agent _ or as an informant_ L
17 Mr _ Adams _ As long as he commits no illegal acts .
18 Senator Mathias _ Let me ask you . why you, feel that it is
1
19 impractical to require_ a warrant since , as I understand it,
8
20 headquarters must approve the use 0f an informant. Is that
end
{
21 degree of formal action required?
4 22.
1
23
8 24
25
NW 88608 Docld}82989820 Page 160
{
==================================================
Page 161
==================================================
MARRIS : GSHI 1952
Sen . Sel = CIA
4
9 1 Mr Adans The main difficulty is the particularity
1
8 which has to be shown in obtaining
a search warrant_ You
2 1
have_ to go after particular evidence You have to specify
1
3
what you re going after , and an informant operates in an
4
area that you just cannot specify. He doesn t know what' s
5
going to be discussed at that meeting_ It may be a plot to
blow up the Capitol again or it may be a plot to blow up the
State Department building _
8
Senator Mathias _ If it were a criminal' investigation,
9
you would have little ' difficulty with probable cause, wouldn 't
10
you?
11
Mr Adams We would have difficulty in 2 warrant to {
12
0 use someone as .an informant in that area because the same
1
13
difficulty of particularity exists We can t specify.
14
Senator Ma thias I understand the problem because it's
15
very similar to one that we discussed earlier in connection
16
say wiretaps on a national security problem _
17
Mr Adams That's it, and there we face the problen of
18
where the Soviet , an individual identified as a Soviet spy 1
19
in a friendly country and they tell uS he ' s been a Soviet spY
20
there and now he coming to the United States _
1
and if we can 't
6
21
show under a probable cause warrant, if we couldn t show that
4
22
he was actually engaging in espionage in the United States , 1
23
2 we couldn t get a wiretap under the probable cause requirements
8 24
which have been discussed , If the good fairy didn t drop the
25
NW 88608 Docld432989820 Page 161
8
1s
==================================================
Page 162
==================================================
2 1953
1 evidence in our hands that this individual is here conducting
8
1 2 espionage , we again" would fall short of this , and that' s
1
3 we re still groping with it.
4 Senator Mathias _ When you say fall short, you really,
you would be: falling short of the requirements '0f the Fourth
6 Amendment _
7 Mr _ Adams _ That' s right, except for the fact that the
8 President , under this Constitutional powvers , to protect this
nation ana make sure that it survives first, first 0f all
10 national survival, and these are the areas that not only the
11 President but the Attorney General are concerned in and we re
{
12 all hoping that somehow we can reach a legislative middle
8
1
13 ground in here _
14 Senator Mathias _ Which we discussed in the other nationa
15 security area as to curtailling a warrant to that particular
16 need .
17 Mr _ Adams And if you could get away from probable
18 cause and get some degree of reasonable cause and get some
3
19 method of sealing indefinitely your interest, say , in an
i
20 ongoing espionage case and can work out those difficulties ,
L
21 we may get their yet.
5 22 Senator Mathias _ And you don 't despair of finding that
1
23 middle ground?
2
8 24 Mr Adlams I don t because I think that today there ' s
25 more of an open mind between Congress andl the Executive Branch
NW. 88608 Docld32989820 Page 162
gsh
why
==================================================
Page 163
==================================================
3 1954
L
and the FBI and everyone concerning the need to get these 8
1 2 areas resolved .
1
3 Senator Mathias . And you: believe that the Department,
4 if We coula come together woula support, woula agree to that
5 kind of a warrant requirement if We could agree on the language=
6 Mr Adams If we can [ork out problems and the Attorney
General is personally interested in that also _
8 Senator Mathias Do You think that this agreement Iight
extend to some of those other areas that we talked about?
10 Mr Adams _ I think that that would be a Iquch greater
11 difficulty in an area of domestic intelligence informant Who
1
12 reports on many different operations and different types of
8
1
13 activities that might conle up rather than say in a Soviet
14 espionage or; a
foreign espionage
case where you do have a little
15 more degree of specificity to deal with
16 Senator Mathias I suggest that we arrange to get
17 together and try out some drafts with each other but in the
18 meantime , of course there' s another alternative and that
1
19 would be tthe use of wiretap procedure by which the Attorney
i
20 General must approve a wiretap before it is placed, and the L
21 same general process could be used for informants , since
4
22 you come to headquarters any way .
1
23 Mr Adams That could be an alte Live _ I think it
1
8 24 would be a very burdensome alternative " I think at SOmne
25 point after we attack the major abuses Or what are considered
NW 88608 Docld;82989820 Page 163
gsh
==================================================
Page 164
==================================================
4 1955
L
major abuses of Congress and get over this hurdle , I think
8
1 2 Te re still going to have to recognize that heads of agencies
1
3 have to accept the responsibility for managing that agency
4 and we can t just keep pushing every operational problem up
5 to the top because there just aren t enough hours in the"
6 Senator Mathias _ But the reason that parallel suggests
7 itself is of course the fact that the wiretap deals generally
8 with one level of information in one sense of gathering
9 information You hear what you hear from the tap.
10 Mr Adams But you re dealing in a much smaller nurber
11 also .
1
12 Senator Mathias Snaller nunber , but that' s all the
8
1
13 more reason When an informant goes in, he has all 0f his
14 senses He S gathering all of the information a human being
15 can acquire from a situation and has access to more information
16 than the average, Wiretap.
17 And it would seem to me that for that reason a .parallel
18 process might be useful and in order
2
19 Mx Adams Mr _ Mintz pointed out one other main
i
20' distinction to me which I had overlooked fromn our prior L
21 discussions which is the fact that with an informant he is
9 22 more in thc position of being a concentral monitor in that one
1
23 of the two parties to the conversation agrees such as like
1
8 24 concentral monitoring of telephones and microphones and
25 anything else versus the wiretap itself where the individual
NW 88608 Docld{32989820 164
gsh
day _
Page
==================================================
Page 165
==================================================
5 1956
1 whose telephone is being tapped is not aware and there is,
8
1 2 and neither of the two parties talking had agreed that their
1 3 conversation could be monitored .
4 Senator Mathias I find that one difficult to accept .
5 If I'm the third party overhearing
a conversation that is taking
place in a room where I am , and my true character isn t perceived
by the two people who are talking, in effect they haven 't
8 consented to Iy overhearing my conversation. Then they consent
9 if they believe that I am their friend or their a partisan
10 of theirs_
11 But if they knew in fact that I was an informant for
1
12 someone else , they wouldn 1 t be consenting
0
1
13 Adams _ Well, that's like I believe Senator Ilart
'14 raised earlier that the courts thus far have made this
15 distinction with no difficultyc but that doesn t mean that
16 there may not be some legislative compromise which might be
17 addressed .
18 Senator Mathias _ Well, I particularly appreciate your
1
19 attitude in being Willing to work on these problems because
8
20 I think that' s the most important thing that can evolve from
|
21 these hearings ,
SO that we can actually look at the Fourth
4 22 Amendment as the standard that we have t achieve _ But the
1
23 way we, get there is obviously going to ; lot easier if we
1
8 24 can work toward them together
25 I just have onc final question, X5 Chairman , and that
NW 88608 DociH: 32989820 Page 165
gsh
Mr
# 1
==================================================
Page 166
==================================================
6 1957
8 deals with whether Tve shouldn t impose a standard Of probable
2 1
cause that a crime has been comitted as a means of controlling
3
the use of informants and the kind of information that
4
collect.
5
Do you feel that this would be too restrictive?
6
Mr Adams Yes , sir, I do
7
When I look at informants and I see that each year
8
informants provide uS , locate 5000 dangerous fugitives ,
9
provide subjects in 2000 more cases , recover 586 million
10
in stolen property and contraband _ and that's irrespective
11
of what we give the local law enforcement and other Federal {
12
8 agencies , which is almost a comparable figure , we have almost
1
13
reached a point in the criminal law where we don t have much
14
left. And in the intelligence field we still, I think when
15
we carve all of the problems away , we still have to make sure
16
that we have the means to gather information which will permit
17
us to be aware of the identity of individuals and organizations
18
that are acting to overthrow the government of the United 2
19
i States And I think we still have some areas to look hard
20
at as we have discussed_
1
but I think informants are here to
|
21
stay . They are absolutely essential to law enforcelent _
5 22
Everyone uses informants The press has informants Congress 1
23
1 has informants You have individuals in your comunity that
8 24
rely on , not for ulterior purposes but to let you know
25
what S the fecl of the people, am I serving them properly,
NW 88608 Docldlb2989820 Page 166
gsh
they
they
they
You
==================================================
Page 167
==================================================
gsh 7 1958
1 am I carrying out this?
8
1 2 It's here to say . It' s been here throughout history
3 and there will always be informants Ana the thing we want to
4 avoid is abuses. like provacateurs , criminal activities , and
5 to ensure that wre have safeguards that wiil prevent that_
But we do need informants
Senator Tower Senator Hart, do you have any further
8 questions?
9 Senator Iart of Michigan _ Yes I ask unanimous request
10 perhaps ith a view to giving balance to the record , the
11 groups that we have discussed this morning into which the
1
12 Bureau has put informants , in popular language , our liberal
0
0
13 groups 547 I would ask unanimous consent that be printed in
14 the record
1
the summary of the opening Of the headquarters
15 file by the Bureau of Dr Carl McIntyre when he announced
16 that he was organizing a group to counter the American Civil
17 Liberties Union and other 11 liberal ana communist groups , 1
18 is not a left only pre-occupation _
2
19 Senator Tolver [ithout objection , SO ordered
i
20 (The material referred to follows:) L
21
4
22
1
23
8 24
25
NW 88608 Docld"32989820 Page 167
1
==================================================
Page 168
==================================================
8
1959
1
1
Senator Tower. Any more questions? 8
2 3
Then the Committee will have an Executive Session this
1 3
afternoon in Room 3110 in the Dirksen Building at 3 : 00 , and
4
I hope everyone will be in attendance
5
Tomorrow morning we will hear from Courtney Evans
6
Cartha DeLoach _ Tomorrow afternoon former Attorneys General
7
Ramsey Clark and Edward Katzenbach_
8
The Committee, the hearings are recessed until 10 :00
9
a.m tomorrow morning _
10
(Whereupon , at 1.10 0 'clock P.m., the hearing in the
11 above mentioned matter was concluded , to reconvene on
Wednesday
1
12
0
December 3rd , 1975 , at 10 :00 0 'clock 2 .In . )
1
13
14
15
16
17
18
1
19
i
20 6
21
3 22
1
23
1
8 24
25
N 88608 Docld: 32989820 Page 168
gsh
==================================================
Page 169
==================================================
Routing Slip (Copies {icas Chcckad)
0-7 (Rev, 7-11-75)
TO: SAC:
To LEGAT;
Alhany Houston Oklahoma Cily
'Aluuquergue [udianapolis Omaha Berr;
Alexandria Jackson Philadelphia Ronfi
Anchorage Jacksonville Phocnix Brasilia
Atlanla Kansas City Pillsburgh Buenos Aire8
Baltimore Knoxville Porlland Caracas
Bimingham Las Vegas Richmond Hong Kong
Boston Lillle Rock Sacramento London
Buffalo Los Angeleg Sl. Louis Madrid
Bulle Louisville Salt Lake City Manila
Charlotle Memphis Sau) Antonio Mexico City
Chicago Miami San Diego Oltawa
Cincinnati Milwaukee San Fraicisco Paris
Cleveland Minneapoli8 San Juau Rome
Columbia Mobile Savannah Tel Aviv
Dallas Newark Scatlle Tokyo
Denver Ncw Havcn Springficld
Detroit New Orleang Tamp &
El Paso New York City Washinglon Field
Honolulu Norfolk Quantico
RE:
Date December 4 1915
HEARINGS BEFORE THE SENATE
SELECT COMMITTEE
Retention For appropriatc_
For infomation oplional action Surep, by
The encloged i8 for your infoimation. If ubed in a fulure report, con eeel @ll
sources, paraphrase contents:
Euclosed are corrected pages fiom rcport of SA
daled
Remark s:
For your assistance in responding to
local press inquiries , attached is a copy of
unedited excerpted remarks by Assistant to the
Director--Deputy Associate Director James B
Adams while testifying before the Senate Select
Committee on 12/2/75 concerning anti-FBI
allegations made by Rowe former FBI
informant
L =34636
Ec (1) 2975
Bufile
(Jrfile IiS fI
NWV 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 169
Gary
==================================================
Page 170
==================================================
EXCERPTS OF REMARKS MADE BY
ASSISTANT TO THE DIRECTOR
DEPUTY ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR JAMES B ADAMS
TESTIFYING BEFORE THE
SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE
PERTAINING TO THE KU KLUX KLAN
GARY ROWE FORMER FBI INFORMANT AND
PREVIOUS ATTEMPTS OF THE FBI
TO PREVENT VIOLENCE
DECEMBER 2 , 1975
Oo_3346-19
8 1975
[IMAMI
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 170
==================================================
Page 171
==================================================
QUESTION : You do use informants and do instruct them to
spread dissention among certain groups that are
informing on , do you not?
MR _ ADAMS : We did when we had the COINTEL programs which were
discontinued in 1971, and I think the Klan is probably one
of the best examples of a situation where the law was
ineffective at the time _ We heard the term , State'8 Rights
used much more than we hear today . We saw with the
Little Rock situation the President of the United states
sending in the troops pointing out the necessity to use
local law enforcement. We must have local law enforcement
use the troops as a ' last resort. When you have a
situation like this where you do try to preserve the
respective roles in law enforcement , you have historical
problems
With the Klan coming along , we had situations where
the FBI and the Federal Government was almost powerless
to act. We had local law enforcement officers in some
areas participating in Klan violence The incidents
mentioned by Mr Rowe--everyone of those he saw them from the
lowest level--the informant _ He didn 1 t see what action
was taken with that information as he pointed out during
his testimony. Our files show that this information was
reported to the police departments in every instance
We also know that in certain instances the infor-
mation upon being received was not being acted upon We
also disseminated simultaneously through letterhead
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 171
they
only
==================================================
Page 172
==================================================
memorandum to the Department of Justice the problem
And here we were--the FBI--in a position where we had no
authority in the absence Of an instruction from the
Department of Justice to make an arrest Section 241
and 242 don 0 t cover it because you don t have evidence
Of a conspiracy. It ultimately resulted in a situation
where the Department called in U . S _ Marshals who do have
authority similar to local law enforcement Officials_
So historically, in those
1 we were just as
frustrated as anyone else was , that when we information
Erom someone like Mr Rowe--good information
1
reliable
information--and it was passed on to those who had the
responsibility to do something about it, it was not always
acted upon as he indicated
QUESTION : In none Of these cases , then , there was adequate
evidence Of conspiracy to give you jurisdiction to act_
MR . ADAMS The Departmental rules at that time , and still
require Departmental approval where you have a conspiracy.
Under 241 , it takes two or more
persons acting together
You can have a mob scene ana you can have blacks and whites
belting each other , but unless you can show that those that
initiated the action acted in concert, in a conspiracy , you
have no violation
Congress recognized this and it wasn t until 1968
that they came along and added Section 245 to the Civil
Rights Statute which added punitive measures against an
2
NW 88608 Docld: 32989820 Page 172
days
got
do ,
==================================================
Page 173
==================================================
individual_ There didn t have' to be 2 conspiracy. This
was a problem that the whole country was grappling with--
the President of the United States , Attorneys General--we
were in a situation where we had rank lawlessness taking
place _ As you know from the memorandum we sent you that
we sent to the Attorney General the accomplishments we were
able to obtain in preventing violence and in neutralizing
the Klan and that was one Of the reasons
QUESTION: A local town meeting on a controversial social
issue might result in disruption It might be hecklers
rather than by those holding the meeting_ Does this
mean that the Bureau should investigate all groups
organizing or participating in such meetings because
may result in violent government disruption?
MR ADAMS : No sir, and we don't.
QUESTION : Isn 't that how you justify spying on almost every
aspect of the peace movement?
MR _ ADAMS : No sir_ When we monitor demonstrations
1 we monitor
demonstrations where we have an indication that the
demonstration itself is sponsored by a group that we have
an investigative interest in , a valid investigative
interest in , or where members of one of these groups are
participating where there is a
potential that they might
change the peaceful nature of the demonstration .
This is our closest question of trying to draw
guidelines to avoid getting into an area 0f infringing
on the lst Amendment right , at the same time , being
3 -
NWV 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 173
by
they
yet
==================================================
Page 174
==================================================
aware of groups such as we have' had in greater numbers
in the past than we do at the present time _ We have had
periods where the demonstrations have been rather severe
ana the courts have said that the FBI has the right,
ana indeed the duty , to keep itself informed with respect
to the possible commission of crime It is not obliged
to wear blinders until it may be too late for prevention
Now that's a good statement if applied in a clear-cut
case
Our problem is where we have a demonstration and
we have to make a judgment call as to whether it is one
that clearly fits the criteria of enabling
uS to monitor
the activities That' s where I think most of our disagree-
ments fall-
QUESTION
8 In the Rowe Case , in the Rowe testimony that we just
heard what was the rationale again for not intervening when
violence was known about I know we have asked this several
times--I m still having trouble understanding what the
rationale Mr Wannall , was in not intervening in the Rowe
situation when violence was known _
MR. WANNALL : Senator Schweiker
1
Mr Adams did address himself to
that and if you have no objections
1
I'l1 ask that he be
the one to answer the question _
MR. ADAMS : The problem we had at the time, and it is the problem
today , we are an investigative agency ; we do not have
police powers even like the U . S . Marshals do _ The Marshals
4
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 174
==================================================
Page 175
==================================================
since about 1795 I guess
1 or some period like that, had
authorities that almost border on what a sheriff has _ We
are the investigative agency of the Department of Justice,
and during these times the Department Of Justice had us
maintain the role of an investigative agency _
We were to report on activities. We furnished the
information to the local police who had an obligation to
act_ We furnished it to the Department of Justice in those
areas where the local police did not act. It resulted
finally in the Attorney General sending 500 U. S _ Marshals
down to guarantee the safety of people who were trying to
march in protest of their civil rights _
This was an extraordinary measure because it came at
a time of Civil Rights versus Federal Rights and there
was a breakdown in law enforcement in certain areas of the
country. This doesn 't mean to indict all law enforcement
agencies in the South at the time either, because many of
them did act upon the information that was furnished to
them . But we have no authority to make an arrest on the
spot because we woula not have had evidence that was 2
conspiracy available _ We could do absolutely nothing in
that regara_ In Little Rock the decision was made for
instance , that if any arrests need to be made , the Army
should make them . And next to the Army , the U_ S _ Marshals
should make them-~not the FBI , even though we developea
the violations _ We have over the years as you know at the
Mt 5 -
NW 88608 Docld.32989820 175
yet
Page
==================================================
Page 176
==================================================
Time there were many questions raised_ Why doesn t the
FBI stop this? Why don t you do something about it? Well,
we took the other route and effectively destroyed the Klan
as far as committing acts of violence and , Of course, we
exceeded statutory guidelines in that area _
QUESTION : What would be wrong , just following
up on your point
there
1
Mr _ Adams , with setting
up a program since it is
obvious to me that a lot of our informers are going to
have preknowledge Of violence of using U. S . Marshals on
some kind of long-range basis to prevent violence?
MR _ ADAMS We do _ We have them in Boston in connection with
the busing incident_ We are investigating the violations
under the Civil Rights Act , but the Marshals are in
Boston . are in Louisville , I believe, at the same
time and this is the approach that the Federal Government
finally recognized .
QUESTION 8 On an immediate and fairly contemporary basis that
kind Of can be sought instantly as opposea to waiting
till it gets to a Boston state_ I realize a departure from
the past and not saying it isn 't, but it seems to me we need
a better remedy than we have _
MR ADAMS : Well, fortunately
we are at a time where conditions have
subsided in the country even from the 60 ' s and the 70 ' 8 , or
50 's and 60 's . We report to the Department of Justice on
potential trouble spots around the country as we learn of them
SO that the Department will be aware of them The planning
-6-
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 176
They
help
==================================================
Page 177
==================================================
for Boston
1
for instance , took place a year in advance , with
state officials , city officials , the Department Of Justice
It and the FBI sitting down together saying How are we going to
protect the situation in Boston"? I think we have learned a
lot from the days back in the early 60 's . But , the Government
had no mechanics which protected people at that time_
QUESTION
8 Next I woula like to ask, back in 1965 , I guess during
the height Of the effort to destroy the Klans as you put it
2_ few moments ago , I believe the FBI has released figures that
we had something like 2 ,000 informers 0f some kind or another
infiltrating the Klan out 0f roughly 10 ,000 estimated member-
MR . ADAMS : That's right.
QUESTION: I believe these are FBI figures or estimates_ That would
mean that 1 out of every 5 members Of the Klan at that point
was an informant paid by the Government and I believe the
figure goes on to indicate that 70 percent Of the new members
in the Klan that year were FBI informants _ Isn't that an
awful overwhelming quantity Of people to put in an effort such
as that? I'm not criticizing that we shouldn t have informants
in the Klan ana know what is going on to revert violence but it
just seems to me that the tail is sort of wagging the For
example today we supposealy have only 1594 total informants ,
both domestic informants and potential informants Yet, here
we have 2 ,000 in just the Klan alone
MR. ADAMS : Well , this number of 2 ,000 did include all racial matters
and informants at that particular time and I think the figures
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 177
ship.
dog .
==================================================
Page 178
==================================================
we tried to reconstruct as to the actual number 0f Klan
informants in relaton to Klan members was around 6 percent , I
think after we had read some of the testimony on it. Isn't that
right , Bill? Now the problem we had on the Klan is the Klan
had a group called the Action Group This was the group if you
remember from Mr Rowe ' s testimony that he was left out Of in
the beginning _ He attended the open meetings and heard all the
hoorahs and this type of information but he never knew what was
going on because each one had an Action Group that went out and
considered thenselves in the missionary field_ Theirs was the
violence In order to penetrate those you have to direct as
many informants as you possibly can against it. Bear in mind
that I think the newspapers , the President , Congress , everyone
was concerned about the murder of the three civil rights
workers the Lemul Penn case , the Violet Liuzzo case, the
bombings of the church in Birmingham . We were faced with one
tremendous problem at that time _
QUESTION
8 I acknowledge that _
MR . ADAMS : Our only approach was through informants Through the
use of informants we solved these cases The ones that were
solved _ There were some Of the bombing cases we never solved _
They re extremely difficult, but , these informants as we told
the Attorney General and as we told the President , we moved
informants like Mr Rowe up to the top leadership_ He was the
bodyguard to the head man He was in a position where he
coula see that this could continue forever unless we coula
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 178 -8-
==================================================
Page 179
==================================================
create enough disruption that these members will realize that
if I go out and murder three civil rights, even though the
Sheriff and other law enforcement officers are in on it, if
that were the case , and in some Of that was the case, that I
will be caught , and that's what we did , and that 1 S why violence
stopped because the Klan was insecure and just like you say
20 percent , thought 50 percent of their members ultimately
were Klan members and didn t dare engage in these acts Of
violence because knew couldn t control the conspiracy
any longer -
QUESTION: I just have one quick question_ Is it correct that in
1971 we were using around 6500 informers for a black ghetto
situation?
MR ADAMS : I'm not sure if that the year We did have a year
where we had 2 number like that Of around 6000 and that was
the time when the cities were being burned _ Detroit, Washington_
areas like this , we were given a mandate to know what the
situation is
1
where is violence going to break out next_ They
weren t informants like an individual that is penetrating an
organization_ were listening posts in the community that
would tell us that we have another group here that is
getting ready to start another fire fight or
something -
QUESTION : Without going into that subject further Of course we
have had considerable evidence this morning where no attempt
was made to prevent crime when you had information that it
was going to occur_ I am sure there were instances where
you have _
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 179 ~9-
they
they
they they
's
They
help
==================================================
Page 180
==================================================
MR _ ADAMS : We disseminated every single item which he reported to uS
QUESTION: To a
police department which you knew was an accomplice to
the crime_
MR . ADAMS : Not necessarily knew _
QUESTION: Your informant told you that , hadn t he?
MR _ ADAMS : The informant is on one level. We have other informants
and we have other information
QUESTION: You were aware that he had worked with certain members of
the Birmingham Police in order
MR _ ADAMS : That' s right. He furnished many other instances also .
QUESTION : So you really weren 't doing a whole lot to prevent that
incident by telling the people who were already a part Of it_
MR _ ADAMS : We were doing everything we could lawfully do at the
time and finally the situation was corrected when the Department
agreeing that we had no further jurisdiction , sent the U.S _
Marshals down to perform certain law enforcement functions
QUESTION: This brings up the point as to what kind Of control
you can exercise over this kind of informant and to this
kind Of organization and to what extent an effort is made to
prevent these informants from engaging in the kind of thing
that you were supposedly trying to prevent_
MR - ADAMS : A good example of this was Mr _ Rowe who became active in
an Action Group and we tola him to out or we were no longer
using him as an informant in spite of the information he had
furnished in the past . We have cases , Senator where we have had
QUESTION: But you also told him to participate in violent activities
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 180 ~10-
get
Page
==================================================
Page 181
==================================================
MR . ADAMS : We did not tell him to participate in violent activities_
QUESTION: That' s what he said.
MR _ ADAMS : I know that 1 S what he says , but that's what lawsuits
are all about is that there are two sides to issues ana our
Agent handlers have advised us , and I believe have advised your
staff members , that at no time did they advise him to engage
in violence
QUESTION : Just to do what was necessary to get the information
MR . ADAMS : I do not think they made any such statement to him
along that line either and we have informants who have gotten
involved in the violation Of a law and we have immediately
converted their status from an informant: to the subject and
have prosecuted I would say off hand , I can think Of around
20 informants that we have prosecuted for violating the laws
once it came to our attention and even to show you our policy
of disseminating information on violence in this case during
the review Of the matter the Agents have told me that they
founa one case where an Agent had been working 24 hours a
and he was a little late in disseminating the information
to the police department. No violence occurred but it showed
up in a file review and he was censured for his delay in
properly notifying local authorities _ So we not
have a policy, I feel that we do follow reasonable safeguards
in order to carry it out, including periodic review of all
informant files.
QUESTION: Mr _ Rowe 1 S statement is substantiated to some extent with
an acknowledgment the Agent in Charge that if he were going
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 181 -ll-
day
only
by
==================================================
Page 182
==================================================
to be a_ Klansman and he happened to be with someone and
decided to do something , he couldn t be _ an angel _ These are
words Of the Agent . And be a good informant. He wouldn t
take the lead but the implication is that he would have
to go along or would have to be involved if he was going
to maintain his liability as a Led
MR . ADAMS : There is no question that an informant at times will
have to be present during demonstrations , riots
1
fistfights
that take place but I believe his statement was to the
effect that , and I was sitting in the back Of the room and I do
not recall it exactly, but that some of them were beat with
chains and I dia not hear whether he said he beat someone with
a chain or not but I rather doubt that he did _
1
because it is
one thing being present , it is another thing taking an
active part in a criminal action
QUESTION: It's true . He was close enought to get his throat cut
apparently.
QUESTION 8 How does the collection Of information about an
individual 1 s personal life, social, sex life and becoming
involved in that sex life or social life is a requirement for
law enforcement or crime prevention_
MR ADAMS : Our Agent handlers have advised uS on Mr _ Rowe that
gave him no such instruction
1
they had no
such knowledge
concerning it and I can t see where it would be 0f any
value whatsoever
-12-
NWV 88608 Docld:32989820 182
they
they
Page
==================================================
Page 183
==================================================
QUESTION
: You don t know Of any such case where these instructions
were given to an Agent or an informant?
MR . ADAMS : To involved in sexual activity? No Sir.
-13-
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 183
get
Page
==================================================
Page 184
==================================================
FD-36 (Rev4s-22-64)
43
F B |
Date: SEPTEMBER 12 , 1975
IX
Transmit the following in CODE
(Type in plaintext or code)
Via TELETYPE NITEL
(Priority)
TO: DIRECTOR (62-116395) me1
FROM : MIAMI (66-3346)
SENSTUDY 75
REMYTEL SEPTEMBER 1975.
THOMAS McANDREWS ADVISED THE MIAMI OFFICE HE IS DEPARTING
THIS DATE FOR WASHINGTON D. As HE HAS BEEN CALLED TO
TESTIFY _ FURNISHED FOR INFO .
END
JLM:mjs
(1)
#o0766 $
iicseel
Filed
66-3346-/7
Approved: Sent M Per
1_
Special Agent in Charge U.s.Government Printing Offlce: 1972 _ 455-574
NW 88608 pocld: 32989820 Page 184
SAC ,
10,
Ca,
==================================================
Page 185
==================================================
NR (13 MM CODE
9:02 PM NITEL SEPTEMBER 12, 1975 MRW
To DIRECTOR (62-116395)
FROk MIAMI (66-3346) ONE PAGE
SE NSTUDY 75
REMYTEL SEPTEMBER 10 , 1975 .
THOMAS MCA NDREWS ADVISED THE MIAMI OFFICE HE IS DEPAR TING
THIS DATE FOR WASHING D.C., AS HE HAS BEEN CALLED TO
TESTIFY . FUR NISHED FOR INFO .
END
TMA ACk FOR ONE A ND FB HQ CLR
TH
66-3345-/7
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page-185
Ton ,
==================================================
Page 186
==================================================
ev. 5-22-64)
F B /
Date: SEPTEMBER 10, 1975
Transmit the following in CODE
(Type in plaintext or code)
Via TELETYPE NITEL
(Priority)
TO: DIRECTOR (62-116395)
FROM: SAC , MIAMI (66-3346)
SENSTUDY 75
REBUTEL SEPTEMBER 5 , 1975.
THOMAS MC ANDREWS AND FREDERICK F, FOX WERE CONTACTED BY
SAC SEPTEMBER 9 , 1975. ADDRESSES SET FORTH IN RETEL FOR EACH
ARE CORRECT _
MC ANDREWS STATED HIS KNOWLEDGE IS INDIRECT AND DIMMED
BY APPROXIMATELY FIFTEEN YEARS . THE AGENT HANDLING z COVERAGE
AT WFO WHILE MC ANDREWS WAS SAC IS NOW DEAD . MC ANDREWS
PROTESTED THAT BUREAU FILES SHOULD BE BY FAR MORE ACCURATE
AND COMPLETE THAN HIS KNOWLEDGE AND MEMORY
FOX STATED HE WOULD NOTIFY FBI, MIAMI
9
SHOULD HE BE
CONTACTED .
END
JLM:mjs
(1)
0 * 000
tnoexs:: _
Flled- ~
7]
6.334L-16
Approved: Sent
lLp
M Per
Special Agent in Charge U.S.Government Printing Offlce: 1972 I 455-574
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 186
Ls6
34 p*v A %87 .
==================================================
Page 187
==================================================
NR CI4 MM CODE
6:01 PM NITEL SEPTEMBER 10, 1975 MRW
TO DIRECTOR (62-1{6395)
FROM MIAMI (66-3346)
SENSTUDY 75
REB UTEL SEPTEMBER 5, 1975 _
THOMAS MC ANDREWS AND FREDERICK F. Fox WERE CONTACTED BY
SaC SEPTEMBER 9 , 1975 , ADDRESSES SET FORTH In RETEL FOR EACH
ARE CORRECT.
MC ANDREWS STATED HIS KNO WLEDGE IS INDIRECT AnD DIMMED
BY APPROXIMATELY FIFTEEN YEARS. THE AGENT HANDLING Z COVERAGE
AT WFO WHILE MC ANDREWS WAS SAC IS NOW DEADa MC ANDREWS
PROTESTED THAT BUREAU FILES SHOULD BE BY FAR MO RE ACCURATE
AND COMPLETE THAN HIS KNOWLEDGE AND MEMO RY .
FoX STATED HE WOULD NOIIFY FBI, MIAMI, SHOULD HE BE
CONTACTED .
END
PLS ACk FOR 4
LSG FBIHQ ACK FOR FOUR AND HOLD FOR TWo
Indexa:' _
Flledr
66-3346-16
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 187 Page
==================================================
Page 188
==================================================
(
NR 030 WA CODE
5:53PM NITEL 9/5/75 PMJ
To ALEXA NDR IA BAL TIMORE BIRMI NGHAM
BOSTON CHICAGO CINCINNATI
DALLAS EL PASO IND IANAPOLIS
JAcKSON JACKSONVILLE LOUISVILLE
LOS A NGELES MEMPHIS MIAMI
NEW YORK OKLAHOMA CITY OMAHA
PHILADELPHIA PHOENIX ST_ LOUIS
SA N DIEGO SAN FRANCISCO SA VANNAH
SEA TTLE
FROM DIRECT OR (62-116395)
PERSbNAL ATTENTIon
SE NSTUD Y 75
REBUTELS MAY 2, 1975 , AND SEPTEMER 4, 1975 .
SE NATE SELECT COMMITTEE (SSC) HAS REQUESTED WHEREABOUTS
OF A NUMBER 0F FORMER FBI EMPLOYEES INDICATING THEY MAY BE
INTER VIEWED BY THE SSC STAFF LISTED BEL OW , BY FIELD OFFICE
TERRITORY, ARE THESE FORMER EMPLOYEES AND THEIR LAST Known
ADDRESSES AS CONTAINED In BUREAU FILES , be-334b- /5
SEARCHED_ JINDEXED
'SERIALIZED SLFILED
SEP 5 1975
FBI-MIAYA
ASAC
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 188
==================================================
Page 189
==================================================
PAGE Two
INFORMATION FROM SSC INDICATES NAMES OF FORMER SA 'S
LITRENTO AND STEWART DEVELOPED AS HA VI NG BEEN RESPONSIBLE FOR
SUPER VISING COMMUNICATIONS BETWEEN THE FBI AND CIA CONCERNING
MA IL OPENING ACTIVITIES. ALL OTHERS In LIST BELOW WERE EITHER
SAC, ASAC, OR BOTH, DUR ING PERIOD 1959 1966 In ONE OR MORE
OF THE FOLLOW ING OFFICES: BOSTON, DETROIT , LOS ANGELES , MIAMI
9
NEW YORK, SAn FRANCISCO, SEATTLE , AND WASHINGTon FIELD . THEY
PRESUMABL Y ARE ALSO KNOWLEDGEABLE CONCER NI NG MA IL OPENInGS .
EACH 0F TKESE FOR MER EMPLOYEES IS To BE IMMEDIATEL Y
ConIA CTED ANd ALERTED THAT KE MIGHT BE APPROACHED BY THE SSC
STAFF FOR INTER VIEW THE FOR MER EMPLOYEE MAY , AFTER BEING
CONTACTED BY SSC STAFF , CONTACT BUREAU' S LEGAL COUNSEL DIVISION
BY COLLECT CALL FOR FULL INFORMATION TO ASSIST HIM INCLUDING
OBLIGATIoNS AS To CONFIDENTIALITY 0F INFORMATION ACQUIRED AS
FBI EMPLOYEE _ IT IS EMPHASIZED THAT BUREAU' S OFFER 0F
ASSISTANCE IS NOT INTENDED To IMPEDE SSC WORK, BUT IS DO NE
AS COOPERAT IVE GESTURE AND To SAFEGUARD SENSITIVE BUREAU
INFORMAT ION .
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 189
==================================================
Page 190
==================================================
PAGE THREE
COnTACTS WITH THESE FOR MER EMPLOYEES To BE HANDLED
PERSONALL Y BY SAC OR ASAC. In EVENT THIS IS Not FEASIBLE
FOR JUST CAUSE , To BE HANDLED BY A SENIOR SUPERVISOR.
IMMEDIATEL Y AFTER CONTACT , RESULTS SHOULD BE FURNISHED
BUREAU BY NITEL In ABOVE CAPTION, BRIEFL Y INCLUDING REACTION
OF FOR MER EMPLOYEES CONTACTED . IF A FOR MER EMPLOYEE NO
LONGER In YOUR TERR ITORY OR TEMPORAR ILY AWAY , SET OUT LEAD To
OT HER OFFICE IMMEDIATEL Y WITH COpY To FBI HQ
ALEXANDRIA :
W , DONALD STEWART , CR YSTAL HOUSE I, APARTMENT ARLINGTON,
VIRGINIA.
JAMES H, GALE, 3307 Rocky MOUNT RoAD, FAIRFAX, VIRGINIA
THOMAS E BISHOP , 8820 STARK ROAD, ANNANDALE, VIRGINIA
BALTIMORE:
ANTHONY P, LITRENTO, 2810 STONYBROOK DRIVE, BOWIE, MARYLAND
PAUL 0' CONNELL , JR . , 2417 STRATTON DRIVE , POTOMAC, MARYLA ND
DONALD E, RONEY , 131 CAMBR IDGE DRI WINDSOR HILLS,
WILMINGTON, DELAWARE
VICT OR TURYN, 2645 TURF VALLEY ROAD, ELLICOTT
MAR YLA ND
DONALD W. MORLEY, BOX 222, NEW MARKET, MARYLAND
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 190
2.82 ,
VE ,
CITY,
Page
==================================================
Page 191
==================================================
PAGE FOUR
BIRMINGHAM:
John DAVID POPE, JR., 22 1 REMING TON ROAD, BIRMINGHAM, ALABA MA
BOSTON:
LEO L, LAUGHL IN , 9 EVERETT A VENUE , WINCHESTER , MASSACHUSETTS
EDWARD J POWERS , [@ COLONIAL DR IVE, BEDFORD , NEW HAMPSHIRE
J,F, DESMO ND , 185 FRANKL In STREET, BoSToN, MASSACHUSETTS
CHICAGO :
MARL In W . JohNSON , CANTEEN CORPORATION, THE MERCHANDISE
MART , CHICAGO , ILLINOIS
HAR VEY G FOSTER , 1012 SOUTH HAMLIN, PARK RIDGE, ILLINOIS
CINCINNATI:
PAUL FIELDS , 2677 CYCL ORAMA DRIVE , CINCINNATI, OHIO
HARR Y J MORGAN, 5314 ELMCREST LAnE, CINCINNATI, OHIO
DALLAS:
PAUL H. STODDARD , 3014 CHATTERTON DRI VE , SAN ANG EL 0 , TEXAS
KENNETH E, COMMONS, 2458 DOUGLAS DRIVE , SAN AnG TEXAS
EL PASO :
KARL W, DISSLY , POST OFFICE Box 9762 , EL PaSO , TEXAS
IND IANAPOLIS:
DILLARD W , HOWELL , 6413 CARD INAL LANE, INDIANAPOLIS,
INDIANA
ALLAn GILLIES 8228 HOOVER LANE , I NDIANAPOLIS , INDIANA
Ja CKSON:
WILLIAMS W , BURKE , ~JR . , 1847 AZTEC DRIVE , JACKSON,
MISSISSIPPI
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 191
ELO ,
==================================================
Page 192
==================================================
PAGE FIVE
JACKSONVILLE:
DoNALD K, BROW N, 826 BROOKMONT A
VENUE, EAST JACKSONVILLE,
FL ORIDA
WILL IAM M, ALEXANDER , 4857 WATER Oak LANE, JACKSONVILLE,
RL OR IDA
LOUISVILLE:
BER NARD C. BROWN, 2301 NEWMARKET DRIVE, N.E,, LOUISVILLE,
KE NT UCKY
LOS ANGELES:
WILLIAM G . SIMON , 2975 LOMBARDY ROAD , SAN MARINO,
CAL IFOR NIA
WESLEY G , GRAPP , 4240 BoN HOMME ROAD , WOODLAND HILLS,
CALIFOR NIA
AR NOLD C. LARSON, 4232 ABBInGTon COURT, WESTLAKE VILLAGE,
CAL IFOR NIA
JOSEPH K. PONDER , 3719 CARRIAGE HOUSE COURT
9
ALEXANDRIA ,
VIRGINIA. BUSINESS ADDRESS : 3030 SOUTH RED HILL A VENUE ,
SA NT A A CALIFORNIA
MEMPHIS :
E, HUGO WINTERROWD , 1550 NORTH PARKWAY, MEMPHIS , TENNESSEE
MIAMI: (g19) 241<99L
THOMAS MC A
NDREWS , 324 NEAPOL ITAN WAy, NAPLES, FLORIDA
FREDERICK F, FOx, 11450 W , BISCAYNE CANAL ROAD , MIAMI ,
FLOR IDA K93 - 7743
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 192
NA ,
Page
==================================================
Page 193
==================================================
PAGE SIX
NEW YORK :
JOSEPH L, SCHMIT , 65 6 HUnT LANE, MANHASSET , NEW YORK
KENR Y A, FITZGIBBON, 76 EASTON ROAD, BRONXVILLE, NEW YORK
OKLAHOmA CITY;
JAMES T, MORELA 108 FERN DRI VE, POTEAU , OKLAHOMA
LEE 0, TEAGUE , 2501 N.W. 12ST STREET , OKLAHOMA CITY ,
OKLA HOMA
OMAHA
JoHN F, CALLAGHAN , IoWa LAW ENFORCEMENT ACADEMY ,
CAMP DODGE , POSI OFFICE Box 130, JohNSTON , IQwA
PHILADELPHIA:
RICHARD J BAKER , 219 JEFFREY LANE , NEWTON SQUARE,
PE NNSYL VA NIA
JOHN F. MAL O NE , 25 GARFIELD A VENUE, CARBONDALE , PENNSYL VANIA
PHOENIX:
PALMER M, BAKEN, JR.> 3832 EAST YUCCA STREET , PHOENIX,
ARIZONA
ST ,- LOUIS :
THOMAS J , GEARTY , 6630 CLAYTON ROAD NR 105 , RICHMOND HEIGHTS,
MISSOURI
WESLEY I. WHALEY, 286 GREEN TRAILS DRI VE , CHESTERFIELD ,
MISSOURI
NWV 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 193
ND ,
==================================================
Page 194
==================================================
PAGE SEVEN
SAN DIEGO :
FRA NK L, PRICE , 2705 TokaLON STREET , SaN DIEGO , CALIFORNIA
SAN FRA NCISCO :
CURTIS 0. LYNUM, 644 EAST HILLSDALE BOULEVARD SAN MATEO ,
CAL IFOR NIA
HAROLD E. WELBORN, 13067 LA VISTA COURT , SARATOGA,
CAL IFORNIA
SA VANNAH:
TROY COLEMAN, 36 CROMWELL ROAD , WILMINGTON, PARK, SA VANNAH ,
GEORGIA
JOSEPH D . PUR VIS , 721 DanCY AVENUE , SA Vannah, GEORGIA
SEATTLE:
LELA ND V BOARDMAN, ROUTE BoX 268, SEQUIM, WASHING TON
RICHARD D , AUERBA P.0 , Box 1768, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON
JAMES E. MILNES, 4317
6 5@TH A VENUE , N.E. SEATTLE,
WASHINGTON
PAUL R. BIBLER , 15134
6
38TH A
VENUE, N.E., SEATTLE,
WASHINGTON
END
NW 88608 Docld: 32989820 Page 194
3,
CH ,
==================================================
Page 195
==================================================
13 039 0A CODE
5e53Pm] NITEL 9/5/75 PMJ
To ALEXA MDRIA BAL TIMORE BIRMINGHAM
Boston CXICAGO CINCINNATI
daLLAS EL PASO INDIANAPOLIS
JaCKSON JACKSONVILLE LOUISVILLE
LOS ARGELES RZMHIS MAMI
NEW YorK OKLAROMA CITY OMAHA
PHILADELPHIA PHOENIX ST . LOUIS
SAN DIEGO SAM FRANCISCO SA VAnmak
SEA TTLE
Prom DIRECT OR (62-[/6395)
FZRSONaL ATTENIION
SE NSTUDY 75
REBUTEL S MAy 2, 1975 , AND SEPTEIBER 4, 1975 ,
SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE (SSC) Has REQUESTED WHEREABOUTS
OF A NUMBER OF FORNER FBI EMPLOYEES INDICATING TKEY MAY BE
IMTERVIEWED BX TKE SSCSTAFF $ LISTED BELOW , BX FIELD OFFICE
TERRITORY , ARE TXESE FORMER EMPLOYEES ANd THEIR Last Kiown
ADDRESSES AS CONTAINED IN BUREAU FILES. b6_
SEP 5 1975
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 195
3346-/5
INd_XED
{4JALIziSS2ffFIEo GD
FBI-MVAMI
==================================================
Page 196
==================================================
PAGE Two
INFORMATION From SSc INDIGATES MAMZS 0f] FORMER SA"$
LITRENTO Amd STEWART]DEVZL OPED As HA VI NG BECN RESPONSIBLE FOR
SUPER VISING COMMUNICATIONS BETWEEN THE FBI And CIA CONCERNING
MA IL OPENING ACTIVITIES , ALL OTHERS In LIST BELOpI WERE EITHER
ASAC, Or Both, DURING PERIOD 1959 e 1966 IN ONE QR MORE
OF THE TOLLOWING OFFICES : BoSTOn, DETROIT , Los ANGELES , MIAMI ,
NEV YoRK, SAW FRANCISCO , SeAtTLe, And waSHI#GTON FIELD THEY
FRESUMABL Y ARE ALSQ KNOWLEDGEABLE ConCer NI NG MAZL OPENINGS +
Each O THESE FORMER EMPLOYEES IS To BE IMMEDIATELY
CONTACICD And ALCRTED ThAT HE MIGHT BE APPROACHED BY TKE SSC
STAFF FOR INTER VIEW
0
TKE ForMER CMPLOYEE MAY , AFTER BEING
CONIAGTED BY SSC STAFF , ContAcIBurEAu'S LEGAL _COUNSEL DIVISION
BY COLLECT CALL For FuLL INFORMATION TQ ASSIST HIM INCLUDING
OBLIGATIONS AS To CQNFIDENTIALITY. Of_ IMFORMATION ACQUIRED As
TBIEMFLOXEE IT IS EIPHASIZED THAT BurCAU"$ OFFER 0F
ASSISTANCZ IS NoT INTENDED To IMPEDE SSC Iork, BUT IS DONE
AS CooPeraTIV GESTWRE AN) To SaTEGUARd SENSITIVE BURCAI
INFORMat IOn ,
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 196
8ACp
==================================================
Page 197
==================================================
PAGE THREE
CONTACTS WITH THESE ForMER EMPLOYEES TO BE HANDLED
PERSONALLY By SAC OR Asac. Iv EVENT THIS 15 Not FEASIBLE
FoR JUST CAUSE, to BE HANDED By 0 SENIOR SUPER VISOR
INIZDIATEL Y AFTER CONTACT , RESULTS Shovld BE FURNISHED
BUREAU By NITEL IN ABOvE_CAPTION; BRIEPLY }NCLWDING REACTION
Of For[ER EMFLOYCES CONTACTED , If 4 FORMER EMPLOYEE No
LONGER IN Your TerrITORY]Or TeNPORArILY AWAY , SET Out LEAD TO
OT HER OFFICE IMMZDIATEL Y WITH COPY To FBIHQ
t
ALEXA HDRIA :
W: DonaLD STEWART , CRYSTAL HOUSE I, APARTMENT ARLINGTON ,
VIRGINIA .
JAMES H, Gale, 3307 Rocky (ount Road, FAIRFAX, VIRGINIA
TKOMAS E BISHOP , 8820 Stark ROAD , AnNaNdale, VIRGIMIA
BALTIMOrE?
Anhony Pa LITRENTO, 2810 StONybrooi; DRI BOWIE, MaRYLAND
Paul 0*CONNELL , 2417 STrattON DRI VE , PoTomAC , Maryland
DONALD E. RONEY , 134 CAIBRIDGE DRI VE , WINDSOR HILLS,
WILMINGTON, DELAWARE
VICIOR TURYW, 2645 Turf VaLLEY RoAd, ELLICOTT CITY,
MARYLAED
DOHALD W. [ORLEY , BOX 222, NEN MARKET , MARYLAND
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 197
202 ,
VZ ,
JR + $
Page
==================================================
Page 198
==================================================
PAGE Four
BIRNINGHAM:
Jokn DAVID POPE , 221 REMINGTOI) RoAd , BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA
BOSTON:
LEO &, LaUGhLIN, 9 EVERETT AVENUE, NINCHESTER , MASSACHUSETTS
EDWARD J. PONERS, 10 COLONIAL DRIVz , BEdFord , NEV HAI?SHIRE
J,F, DEStOND , 185 MRANKL IN STREET , BoStoN,` MASSACHUSETTS
CHICAGO:
MARLIN W; JOHNSON , CANTEEN CQRPORATION, THE MERCHANDISE
MART , CHICAGO , ILLINOIS
HAR VEY G+ FOSTER , 1012 SOUtH HAMLIN, Park RIDGE, ILLINOIS
CI NCIMNATI &
PAUL FIELDS, 2677 CyCLOrAma DRIVE , CINCINNATI, OHIO
HARRY J . MorGan, 5314 ELMCREST Lane , CINCINNATI, OHIQ
DaLLAS:
Paul A. StoddarD , 3014 CHATTERTON DRI Saw ANz TEXAS
KENNETN E+ Commoms, 2458 DougLas DRIVE , San ANGElO, Texas
EL PASO:
Karl DISSLY , POST OFFICE Box 9762, EL PaSO, TEXAS
ZND IANAPOLIS:
DILLARD W, KONELL , 6413 CARDINAL LAne, INDIANAPOLIS,
IndIANA
Allan GILLIES 8228 HOOVER LaNe , INDIANAPOLIS , INdIANA
JACKSOH:
WILLIAMS N . BURkE , 1847 AZTEC DRIVE , Jackson,
MISSISSIPPI
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 198
JR.,
ELQ, VE ,
We
JR+,
==================================================
Page 199
==================================================
PACE FI VE
JACKSONVILLE :
DONALD I+ BROWN, 826 BRodicmont 4 VENUE , East JACKSONVILLE ,
PLORIDA
WILLIAM M. ALEXANDER , 4857 WATER OAk LANE, JACKSONVILLE,
ELOR IDA
LOHISVILLE:
BERNARD C. BROWN; 2305 NEWMARKET DRIVE, W.E,, LOWISVILLE,
IE NI UCKY
LOS ANGELES:
WILLIAM G, SI 2075 LO(iBARDY Road $ SAN MARINO ,
CAL IFORNIA
WESLEY G, GRAPP $ 4245 BoN HOMME ROAD , Woodland HILLS ,
CALIFOR NIA
AR NOLD Ca LARSon, 4232 ABBINGTON Court , WESTLAKC VILLAGE,
CAL IFOR MIA
JOSEPH Ka PONDER , 3719 CARRIAGE HOUSE COURT , ALEXANDRIA ,
VIRGINZA+ BUSI NESS ADDRESS: 3030 SoutH RE) XILL AVENUE ,
SANTA aNA > CAL IFORNIA
MZMPHIS#
E, huGo WINTERROND , Iss0 NORTH PArKwAY , MEMPNIS , TENESSEE
MIAMI ;
THOMAS MC ANDRENS , 324 NEAPOLITAU NAPLES, FLORIDA
MREDERICk F, Fox, I[4s0 W, BISCAYNE Canal Road , MIAMI ,
PLOR IDA
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 199
Mon,
Nay ,
Page
==================================================
Page 200
==================================================
PAGE SIX
NEW YORK #
JOSEPH Lt SCHMIT , Gs6 HUNT Lane, Ranhasset , NEV YORK
HEMY Ac FITZGIBBON, 76 Easton Rqad , BRONXVILLE, NEW YoRK
OKLAKOMA CITY:
JAMES T +MoreL 108 FERN DRIVE , PoteAU , OKLAHOMA
LEE 0, TCAGUE , 2501 N.N. 12IST STRECT , Oklahoma CITY ,
OKLAHOMA
ONAHA
jOkN F; CALLAGHAn, IOwA LaW EMFoRCE MENT ACADEMY
CAM? DODGE , POST OFTICE Box 130, JohnScOn, Iona
PKILADCLPHIA *
RICHARD J, BAKEr , 219 JEFFREY Lane, NEWTON: SQUARE,
PENNSYL VA NIA
Johm 5+ MALONE , 25 GARFIELD A
VZNUE , CarbONdaLE , PENNSYL VANIA
PHOE NIX:
PALMER M: BAKEH, 3832 EAST YucCA STREET , PHOENIX,
ARIZONIA
ST + LOUIS :
TROMAS J + GEArTY , 6630 Clayton Road Nr *. 185 + RICHUOND HEIGHTS ,
MISSOURI
WESLCY T, NHALEY, 286 GRECN TRAILS DRIVE , CHESTCRFIELD ,
MISSOURI
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 200
AND ,
JR+,
==================================================
Page 201
==================================================
PAGE SEVEH
San DIEGO?
PRANK L; PRICE , 2705 TokaLoN STREET , SAn DIBGO , CALIFORNIA
SAn JRA NCISCO;
CWRTIS L YNUM, 644 EAST HILLSDALE BOULEVARD , SAN MATEQ ,
CALIFOR NIA
HAROLD E, WELBORN, [3067 La VISTA COURT , SARATOGA ,
CAL IFoR NIIA
SA VAWmaH :
Troy COLEMAN; 36 CROMNELL RoAd _ WIL MINGTON PARk, SAVANNAH,
CEORGIA
JOSEPK D + PUR VIS , 721 Dancy AvENUE , Sa VANNAH, GEORGIA
SEATTLE:
LEAND V, Boardmah, RQUTE 3, BoX SEQUIM, WASHINGTOM
RICKARD D . AucrbaCh, P.o+ Box 1768, SCATTLE, WASHINGTOW
JAMES E& MIL 4317 4 s0th A
VENUE , N.E+} SEATTLE,
NASHINGTON
Paul Rv BIBLER , 15434 38TH AVENUE, N E.} SEATTLE,
WASHINGTON
END
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 201
04
268 ,
AES,
Page
==================================================
Page 202
==================================================
FD-36 (Rev. 5-22-64)
F B /
Date: 9/8/75
Transmit the following in CODED
28
(Type in plaintext or code)
TELETYPE URGENT
Via
(Priority)
TO: DIRECTOR, FBI (62-116395)
ATTENTION: INTD , W.0. CREGAR
FROM: MIAMI (66-3346) (RUC)
2p
SENSTUDY 75 , BUDED SEPTEMBER 8 , 1975
RE BUREAU TELETYPE SEPTEMBER 5 , 1975.
ON SEPTEMBER 8, 1975 , SUPERVISOR JOSEPH C . BALL AND SA
RAYMOND L. 0' KELLY MT WITH WALTER J. LAUCHEED , ASSISTANT
DIRECTOR, AND ROBERT WENNERHOLM , LEGAL COUNSEL , DADE COUNTY
FLORIDA PUBLIC SAFETY DEPARTMNT (DCPSD) , AT THE DCPSD .
THESE TTO OFFICIALS WERE ADVISED OF TH REQUEST TO THE
FBI BY THE SENATE SELECT COMITTEE (SSC)
9
FQR ACCESS TO
ALL MEMORANDA AND OTHER MATERIALS WHICH RELATE TO ELECTRONIC
SURVEILLANCE OF DR . MARTIN LUTHER KING BY STATE AND LOCAL
AGENCIES _
INFORMATION IN MIAMI AIRTEL MAY 23, 1966, CAPTIONED
"MARTIN LUTHER KINC , SECURITY MATTER
4
C" WAs ORALLY
066-3346
nws (1) bo
66_3346-/4
Approved: Sent
3392
LM Per
Special Agent in Charge
#U. $. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1969 0 346-090 (11)
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 202
~VLN
JR. ,
RDRLo/kr
Page
==================================================
Page 203
==================================================
FD-36 (Rev. 5-22-64)
F B /
Date:
Transmit the following in
(Type in plaintext or code)
(Priority)
PAGE TIO
FURNISHED AND THEY WERE ASKED WHETHER THE DCPSD HAS ANY
OBJECTION TO THE FBI RELEASING To SSC THE MATERIAL EMANATING
FROM DCPSD AND CONTAINED IN THIS AIRTEL WHICH WOULD DISCLOSE
TE BCPSD USED ELECTRONIC SURVEILLANCES IN THEIR COVERAGE
OF KING _
LAUGHEED ADVISED THE DCPSD HAS NO OBJECTIONS TO THE FBI
RELEASING THIS INFORMATION T0 THE SSC HE SAID THEY WOULD
HAVE TO SEARCH THEIR RECORDS To DETERMINE WHAT INFORMATION
THEY HAVE ON KING AND THAT ANY REQUEST FOR THIS INFORMATION
BY SSC WOULD HAVE To BE IN THE FORM OF A SUBPOENA_
E, WILSON PURDY
9
DIRECTOR , DCPSD , WHO IS ON VACATION,
WAS INITIAILY CONTACTED IN THIS MATTER BY SAC JULIUS Lo
MATTSON AND MADE AWARE OF THE REQUEST BY SSC .
Approved: Sent M Per
Special Agent in Charge
*U. s GOVERNMENT PRNTING OFFICE 1969 0 346-090 (11)
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 203
Via
Page
==================================================
Page 204
==================================================
NRG!4 MM CODE
3:39PM URGENT SEPTEMBER 8 , 1975 JGS
To DIRECTOR (62-1 16395 )
FROM MIAMI (66-3346) (RUC)
AtTN: INTD , W.0 , CREGAR
SE NST UDY 75 , BUDED SEPTEMBER 1975
RE BUREAU TELETYPE SEPTEMBER 5 , 1975.
on SEPTEMBER 8, 1975 , SUPER VISOR JOSEPH C. BALL ANd SA
BAYMOO' KELLY MET WITk WAL TER J . LAUGHEED , ASSISTANI
DIRECTOR , A ND ROBERT WENNER HOL M, LEGAL COUNSEL , DAdE COUnTY ,
FL ORIDA PUBLIc SAFETY DEPARTMENT (DCPSD) , AT THE DCPSD .
THESE TWo OFFICIALS WERE AD VISED 0F THE REQUEST To TKE
FBI BY THE SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE (SSC) , FOR ACCESS TO
ALL MEMORA NDA A ND OT HER MA TERIALS WHICH ' RELATE To ELECTRONIC
SUR VEILLANCE 0F DR , MARTIN LUTHER KING BY STATE AND LOCAL AGENCIES .
INFOR MATION In MIAMI AIRTEL MAY 23, 1966 , CAPTIONED
"MARTIN LUTHER KING , JR., SECURITY MATTER-C" WAS ORALLY
FUR NISTED AND THEY WERE ASKED WTETHER TTE DCPSD HAS Any
OBJECTIon To THE FBI RELEASING Io SSC THE MATERIAL EMANATING
FRoO DCPSD A ND CONTAINED In THIS AIRTEL WHICH WOULD DISCLOSE
THE D CPSD USED FLECTRONIC SUR VEILLANCES In THEIR COVERAGE
OF KING
END PaGE 0 NE
Guve;}
7iio" _
t
6673346-/4
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 204
8,
1
==================================================
Page 205
==================================================
PAGE: TWo MM , 66-3346
LAUGHEED ADVISED THE DCPSD HAS NO OB JECTIONS Io TKE FBI
RELEASING THIS INFORMATION Io IHE SSC. HE SAID THEY WOULD
XAVE To SEARCH THEIR RECORDS To DETERMINE WHAT INFORMATION
THEY HAVE on KING AnD THAT AnY REQUEST FOR THIS INFORMA TION
BY SSC WOULD HAVE To BE In THE FORM 0F A SUBPOENA .
E. WILso PURDY, DIRECTOR, DCPSD, WHO IS on VACATION,
WAS INITIALLY ConTACTED In THIS MATTER BY SAC JULIUS La
MATTSON AnD MADE AWARE 0F THE REQUEST BY SSC.
END
FBl WA VLN
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 205
==================================================
Page 206
==================================================
NR @12 WA CODE
258PM URGENT 9-5-75 VLN
To MIAMI
NEW YORK
RROM UIRE UERECE9e-S63-!48395)
SENSTUDY 75 , BUDED SEPTEMBER 8, 1975.
REMMA IRTEL MAY 1966, NYAIRTELS MAY 18, 1965 , MAY 28,
1965 , A ND NYLET JUL Y 1965 , ALL CAPTIONED MARTIN LUTHER
KING , SECURITY MATTER C," MAI AMI FILE [@0-15079 ,
NEW YORK FILE [@G-136585 .
THE SENATE SELECT COMAMITTEE (SSC) HAS REQUESTED ACCESS To
ALL MEMORANDA A ND OTHER MA TERIALS WHICH RELATE TO ELECTRONIC
SUR VE ILLANCE 0F DR MARTIN LUT HER KING BY STATE AND LOCAL
AGENCIES OR GO VERNMENTS.
REFERENCED COMMUNICATIONS INDICATE THAT IHE DADE CountY
SHER IFF' S OFFICE , MIAMI , FL OR AND THE THE NEW YORK CITY POLICE
DEPARTMENT USED ELECTRONIC SUR VE ILLANCE EQUIPMENT In THEIR
COVERAGE 0F DR. KING
In ORDER FOR FBIHQ Io BE ABLE To RESPOND To THE SSC REQUEST
II WILL BE NE CE SSARY FOR MIAMI AND NEW YORK To CONTACT APPRO -
66-43
INDEXED
SERHALIZEDZZ FILED
SEP 5 1975
FBI-MAM
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 206
23 ,
29,
JR .
IDa,
46 -k2
IsEARCHEDZ E
Yarn~
46
X46
==================================================
Page 207
==================================================
4
44
PAGE TWo
PR IATE OFFICIALS OF THE DADE CounTY SHERIFF' S OFFICE AND THE
NEW YORK CITY POL ICE DEPARTMENT AND AD VI SE THEM 0F THE SSC
REQUEST _ SE CURE THEIR COMMENTS RELATIVE To: WETHER
THEY HA VE Any OBJECTIOn To OUR RELEASING To SSC TKE MA TERIAL
FROM THEM CONT AINED In REFERENCED COMMUNICATIONS , WHICH WOULD
DISCL OSE THAT THEY USED ELECTRONIC SUR VEILLANCES In THEIR
CO VERAGE 0F KING THEY SHOULD BE APPRISED 0F THE FACT
EVEN IF FBI HQ DOES NOT VOLUNTARILY SUPPL Y REQUESTED
INFORMATION, SSC MAY SUBPOENA FBI RECORDS .
EXPED ITE AND SUBMIT BY TELETYPE In TKE ABO VE CAPTION ,
ATTENTIOn INTD, W , 0. CREGAR , BY CL OSE 0F BUSINESS SEPTEMBER 8,
1975 .
END
fBi M M Ct r m rc
NW 88608 Docld: 32989820 Page 207
==================================================
Page 208
==================================================
MROIz wa CODE
258PM URGENT 9-5-75 VLH
TO MIAMI
WzI YORK
PROM DIRECTOR (62- [ [ 6395)
SENST UDy 75 , BUDED SEPTEMBER 1975 ,
REMMA IRTEL MAY 23+ 1966, MYAIRTELS MAY 182 1965 , May
1965 , ANd NYLET JuLY [965 , AlL CAPTIONED # MARIIR LUTHER
KING, JR+, SECURITX MATTER
0
C," MIAMI FILE 100-15079 ,
AEW YorK FILE [BC- [36585 _
THE SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE (SsC) #As REQUESTED ACCESS TO
ALL NEICORANDA AND OTNER MATERIALS WHICK RELATE To ELECTRONIC
SuR VEILLA NCC 0f DR MARTIM LUT HER KiNG By StATE ANd_ LocaL
AGENGIES Or GOVERNMENTS.
REFERENCED COMMUNIGATIONS INDICATE ThaT THE dade COunTY
SHERIFf' $ OFFICE , MIAMI, FLOR IDA, AND THE THE NEW YORI CITY POLICE
DEPARTMENI UScD ELECTRONIC SUR VEILLANCE EQUIPMENT IN TKEIR
COVERAGE 0F DRz KING
Tn ORDER FOr FBIHQ To BE ABLE To RESPOND TQ THE SSC REQUEST
IT WILL BE NeceSSARY For MIAMI A ID NEW York To CoNTACT APPRO-
66-3346-/3
IaECR!
SERIALIZLD
SEP 5 1975
FBL_MAN
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 208
80
28,
29,
SZ2Firom
==================================================
Page 209
==================================================
~0
T~4f
PAGE Two
FRIATE OFFICIALS OF TkE dade CountY SHERIFF' 8 OFFICE AND THE
NzI YORK GITY POLICC DEPARTMENT And ADVISE ThEM Of THE SSC
RECUEST SECURE THEIR COMEWTS RELATI VE To: WHETHER
TkzY Ka vz Any OBJECTIOn TO OUR RELEASING To SSc THE MATERIAL
PROM THEM CONI AINED In REFERENCED COMMUNICATIONS , WHICH WOULD
DISC OSE TkAT TKEY USED ELECTRONIC Sur VEILLANCES In THEIR
COVZRAGE OF KING . THEY ShoULD BE APPRISED OF THE FACI
EVZN IF FBIKO DoES NOT VOLUNTARILY SUPPLY REQUESTED
INFORMATION, SSc MAY SWBPoEnA FBI RECORDS ,
EXPEDITE AnD SUBMIT BY TELETYPE IN THE ABO VE CAPT Ion
ATTENTIon INTD , W. 0, CREGAR, By CLOSE 0F BUSINESS SEPTEMBER 8,
1975 .
END
fB | m m
Cl r m r
NW 88608 Docld: 32989820 Page 209
==================================================
Page 210
==================================================
NR 033 WA CODE
4:47PM 9/4/75 NITEL AJN
Io ALL' SACS
RROM D IRECTOR (62 1 16395)
PERSONAL ATIE
SE NSTUDY / 5
REBUTEL MAY 2, 1975 .
PURPOSES OF INSTANT TELETYPE ARE To (4) REITERATE THAT
FBI HAS PLEDGED FULL COOPERATION 'WITH THE SENATE SELECT
COMMITTEE (SSC) AND WISKES To ASSIST AND FACILITATE Any
INVEST IGATIONS UNDERTAKEN BY IHE SSC WITH RESPECT To THE FBI ;
A ND (2) SET FORTH NEW PROCEDURE RELATING To SSC STAFF
INTER VIEWS OF CURRENI A ND FORMER FBI EMPLOYEES .
FOR INFORMATION OF THOSE OFFICES WHICH HA VE Not PREVIOUSL Y
HAD CURRENT OR FOR MER EMPLOYEES In IIS TERRITOY INTER VIEWED
BY THE SSC , THE BUREAU FREQUENTL Y LEARNS" FROMg THE SSC OR
OT HERW ISE ThAT FORMER EMPL OYEES ARE BEING CO NSIDERED FOR
INTER VIEW BY TKE SSC STAFF . INSTRUCTIonS ARE ISSUED FOR THE
FIELD OFFICE To CONTACI THE FORMER EMPLOYEE TO ALERT HIM As To
POSSIBLE INTER VIEW , REMIND HIM 0F KIS CONFIDENTIALITY AGREEMENT
WITh IHE BUREAU A ND SUGGEST THAT IF HE CoNIACTED FOR
66-3346-/2
BEAccHTED '7300
4
42
SEZALIEd_
7322,
19750)
FBI_MIAW
5
12
AA
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 210
9
t
==================================================
Page 211
==================================================
PAGE TWo
INTER VIEW , HE MA Y CONTACT THE LEGAL COUNSEL DI VISION BY
COLLECT CALL FOR FURTKER INFORMATION. In THE USUAL CASE,
AS CIR CUMSTANCES UNFOLD , THE FOR MER EMPL OYEE IS TOLD( I)
THAT HE HAS A RIGHT To LEGAL COUNSEL
9
BUT THAT THE BUREAU
CA Nnot PROVIDE SAME ; (2) THAT TkE BUREAU HAS WAI VED THE
CONFIDENT IAL ITY AGREEMENT FOR THE INTER VIEW WITHIN SPECIFIED
PARAMETERS ; ANd (3) THAT IHERE ARE FOUR PRI VILEGED AREAS In
WKICH HE IS NOT REQUIRED To ANSWER QUESTION_ TIHESE AREAS
ARE RELATING To INFORMA TION WHICH MAY (a) IDENTIFY BUREAU
SOURCES ; (B) REVEAL SENSITIVE METHODS/TECHNIQUES ; (C) REVEAL
IDENT IT IES 0F THIRD AGENCIES, INCLUD I NG FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE
AGENCIES, OR INFORMATION FR OM SUCH AGENCIES ; AND (D ) ADVERSEL Y
AFFECI ONGOING BUREAU INVEST IGATIONS
HERETOFORE , BUREAU HAS OFFERED INTER VI EWEES CONSULTATION
PR IVILEGES WHEREBY A BUREAU SUPER VISOR . WOULD BE A VAILABLE
NEARBY , ALTHOUGH NOT ACTUALLY At' INTER VIEW , SO INTER VIEWEE
MIGHT CONSULT WITH HIM SHOULD QUEST IONS ARISE AS TO PARAMETERS
OF INTER VIEW OR PRI VILEGED AREAS. THE CONSuL IANT DID Not ACT
As A LEGAL ADVISOR
EFFECT I VE IMMEDIATELY , BUREAU WILL NO LONGER PRO VIDE
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 211
==================================================
Page 212
==================================================
&
PAGE THREE
On-T HE- SCE NE PERSO NNEL FOR CoNSULTATION PURPOSES To ASSIST
EITHER CURRENT 0F FOR MER EMPLOYEES . PROSPECTI VE INTER VIEWEES
SKOULD BE TOLD THAT, IF THEY DESIRE ASSISTANCE 0F THIS NATURE
DUR I NG An INTERVIEW , THEY MAY ConIACT EITHER PERSONALL Y (IF
INTER VIEW IS In WASHINGTON, D . C.) OR BY COLLECT CALL , THE
ASSISTANI DIRECTOR 0F THE INTELLIGENCE DIVISION, MR. W, Ra
WANNALL , OR , In HIS ABSENCE , SECTION CHIEF W . 0 , CREGAR .
THIS CHA NGE Im PROCEDURE SHOULD NOt BE CO NSTRUED AS
LESSENING TKE ASSISTANCE WE ARE FURNISHING To CURRENT ANd
FORMER EMPLOYEES
FOR YOUR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, I AM WORKING WITH THE
DEPARTMENT In EXPLORING A VENUES To ARRANGE LEG AL REPRESENTATION,
WHEN NECESSARY , FoR CURRENT AND FORMER EMPLOYEES WITHOUT
EXPENSE To THEM: YOU WILL BE KEPT AD VI SED OF DEVEL OPMENTS
In THIS REGARD .
END
FBI MM CLR MRW
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 212 Page
==================================================
Page 213
==================================================
NR033 WA CODE
4:47PM 9/4/75 NITEL AJm
To ALL SA CS
From D IRECTOR (62-1[6395)
PERSO NAL ATTENTION
SE NSTUDY 75
REB UTEL MAY 2, 1975 ,
PURPOSES 0F INSTANT TELETYPE ARE TO (4) REITERATE ThAT
FBI HAS PLEDGED FULL COOPERATION WITH THE SENATE SELECT
COMMITTEE (SSC) AND WISHES To ASSIST ANd FACILITATE Any
INVEST IGATIoNS WNDERTAKEN BY IHE SSC WITH RESPECT TO THE FBI ;
A nD (2) SET FORTH NEW PROCEDURE RELATING To SSC STAFF
INTER VIEWS OF CURRENT AND FORMER FBI EMPLOYEES .
FOR INFORMATION OF TKOSE OFFICES WHICH HA VE Not PREVIOUSL Y
HAD CURRENT OR FORMER EMPLOYEES In ITS TERRITOY INTER VIENED
BY THE SSC , THE BUREAU MREQUENTL Y LEARNS FrOM TKE SSC OR
OT HERW ISE THAT FORMER EMPLOYEES ARE BEING CONSIDERED FOR
INTER VIEW BY THE SSC STAFF . INSTRUCTIQNS ARE ISSUED FOR TKE
FIELD OFFICE To CONTACT THE FORMER EMPLOYEE TO ALERT HIM AS To
POSSIBLE INTER VIEW , REMIND KIM OF KIS CONFIDENT IALITY AGREEMENT
WIT} TKE BUREAU ND SUGGEST THAT IF HE IS CONTACTED FOR
66-3346-/2
KSEARCHED IndIXed
SERIALIZED
ZFFIEd_7n
SEP 4 7975
FBl_MXM_
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 213
==================================================
Page 214
==================================================
PAGE Tbo
INTER VIEW , HE MAY ContACT THE LEGAL COUNSEL DI VISION BY
COLLECT CALL FOR FURTHER INFORMATIOM. In THE USUAL CASE,
AS CIR CUMSTANCES UNFOLD , TKE FOR MER EMPLOYEE IS TOLD( 1)
TkAT KE KAS A RIGHT To LEGAL COUNSEL , BUT THAT THE BUREAU
CA NNOI PROVIDE SAME ; (2) THAT TKE BUREAU HAS WAI VED THE
CONFIDENT IALITY AGREEMENT FOR THE INTER VI EW WITHIN SPECIFIED
PARAMETERS ; AND (3) ThAT THERE ARE FOUR PRI VILEGED AREAS' In
WHICH HE IS NOT REQUIRED TO ANSWER QUEST Ion. THESE AREAS
ARE RELATING TO INForMATION WHICH MAY (a) IDENTIFY BUREAU
SOURCES ; (B) REVEAL SENSITI VE METHODS/TECHNIQUES }, (C) REVEAL
IDENT ITIES OF THIRD AGENCIES, InCLUDInG FOREIG N INTELLIGENCE
AGENCIES, OR INFORMATION FROM SUcH AGENCIES ; ANd CD) ADVERSEL Y
AFFECT ONGOING BUREAU INVEST IGATIONS
HERETOFORE , BUREAU HAS OFFERED INTER VI EWEES CONSULTATION
PRIVILEGES WHEREBY A BUREAU SUPER VI SOR WOULD BE A VAILABLE
NEARBY , ALTKOUGH NOT ACTUALLY AT INTER VIEW , So INTER VIEWEE
MIGHT CONSULT WITH kIM SHOULD QUEST IONS ARISE As To PaRAMETERS
0F INTER VIEW OR PRI VILEGED AREAS, THE CONSULTAnT DID Not AcT
AS A LEGAL ADVISOR
EFFECT I VE IMMEDIATELY , BUREAU WILL No LONG ER PROVIDE
NW 88608 DocId:32989820 Page 214
==================================================
Page 215
==================================================
x
PAGE THRCE
On-T HE- SCE NE PERSO NNEL FOR CONSULTATION PURPOSES TO ASSIST
EITHER CURRENT OF FORMER EMPLOYEES . PROSPECTI VE INTERVIEWEES
SHOULD BE TOLD THAT, IF THEY DESIRE ASSISTANCE OF THIS NATURE
DURInG An INTERVIEW , THEY MAY CONTACT EITHER PERSONALL Y (IF
INTER VIEW IS In WASHINGTON, D. C,) OR BY COLLECT CALL , THE
ASSISTA NT DIRECTOR OF THE INTELLIGENCE DIVISION, MR . W, Ra
WANnALL , In HIS ABSENCE , SECTION CHIEF 0, 0 . CREGAR ,
THIS CHA NGE IN PROCEDURE SHOULD NOT BE CONSTRUED As
LESSENING THE ASSISTANCE WE ARE FURNISHING To CURRENT AND
FORMER EMPLOYEES .
FOR YOUR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, I AM WORKING WITH THE
DEPARTMENT In EXPL ORING A VENUES TO ARRANGE LEGAL REPRESENTATION,
WHEN NECESSARY , FOR CURRENT AND FORMER EMPLOYEES WITHOUT
EXPENSE To THEM: YOU WILL BE KEPT AD VISED 0F DEVELOPMENTS
In THIS REGARD ,
END
FBI MM CLR MRW
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 215
4| '
OR ,
==================================================
Page 216
==================================================
FD-36 (Rex. 5-22-64)
F B |
Date: AUGUST 1975
Transmit the following in CODE
(Type in plaintext or code)
Via TELETYPE IMMEDIATE
(Priority)
TO: DIRECTOR (62-116395)
FROM: MIAMI
SENSTUDY 75
REBUTEL 8-26-75.
FORMER MIAMI ASAC FREDERICK F , FOX CONTACTED 8-27-75
PER INSTRUCTION _
FOX'S RESIDENCE ADDRESS SHOULD BE CORRECTED IN BUREAU
RECORDS TO 11450 WEST BISCAYNE CANAL ROAD, MIAMI 33161 _
END
{iXtmjsml
(1)
440
Fiied_
66-3346- |1
Approved: Sent
40
Em
Per
Special Agent in Charge U.S.Government PrInting Offlce: 1972 S 455-574
NW 88608 pocld:32989820 Page 216
[0
28 ,
SAC ,
==================================================
Page 217
==================================================
NR %01 MM .CODE
16 : [ SPM I MMEDIATE AUGUST 23, 1975 JyB
To D IRECTOR (62-116395 )
FROM MIAMI
SE NST UDY 75
REBUTEL AUG UST 26 , '1975 _
FORMER MIAMI ASAC FREDERICK F. Fox CONTACTZD AUGUST 27, '1975
PER INSTRUCTION:
FoX' S RESIDENCE ADDRESS SHOULD BE CORRECTED In BUREAU
RE CORDS To 1[450 WEST BISCAYNE CanaL R04d, MIAMI 3316].
EN _
VN FBIHQ CL?
Fiice _
66-334-|1
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 217
==================================================
Page 218
==================================================
W 539 4A CODE
3:3IPM NITEL 8-26-.75 LXS
To ALEANY
EALI [YORE
MiAHI
PHILADELPXIA
TAMPA
PRom DIRzCT (62-|] 5395)
BRSONAL ATTZNITIO
SE' NIST BY
kky 3346 %
3/7s
REBUTEL MA Y 1975
INcUIRIES MADE 0f BUREAU 3y, STN4T? SELECT COMITTEZ (SSC)
CONCER ING BELOW-LISTED FORMz 731 EMPLOYEZS SUGGEST S TKEY MAY
EZ _ INTER VIEWED BY .SSC"STAF?
8'
WKILE SUBJZCT OF INTERVIEWS KAS:
NOT .ZzzN D ISCUSSED BY INIE VIEPS WILL LIXELX PERTAIN,,IO
THESE 03* ER EMPLOYEES' DUTIES WHILZ In TXE INTER VAL SZCURITY
AAD /OR SUB VERSI V. CoiTROL SECT IOnS AND MAY ALso 'RZLAIZ To TkE
FOR IIZR ` BUREAWJ' S IWVSIIGATIONS -0F MARTIN' LUTKZR KING ,
COMMURIST INFLUZNCES In RACIAL MATTERS AND RELATED
MA TTZRS
SZT OUT BZL OW ARE LLASI KNOWN .ADDRESSZS 05 IKZSZ FORME3 BUREAU
6683346-/0
ISEARCHEDS 49w) ntn,
AUG 26 1975
RBI-MWA
NW 88608 Docld:32989820' Page 218
2,
SSC ,
JR ; ,
==================================================
Page 219
==================================================
PAcE Tio:
EMPL'OYSES .
EACK :'0F THESE FO3WER EMPLOYEES IS TO' B% I MAEDI4TELY
CONTA CT ED Aid ALE?TED TXAT: KE MIGHT B5 APPROACHED FY ' TXE SSC
STAFF THEY . SHOULD BE TOLD HAt In' TkZ ZVeNT THEY 43E
INTER VISWED ANd DUR InG COURSZ 02 SAME, QUZSTIONS ARE' ASXED'
WHICH RELATE TO_ 'SENSITI VE BUREAU . OPERATIONS (SOUR METHODS'
AiND TECHIQUZS, ` ONGOING' INVEST.IGATIONS , AND TKIRD Agzncy RULE,
(iCLUD I NG "IDENT ITIFS 0F FOREIG N INTELLiGENCZ AGENCIESY IHEY
9
MAy REQUEST, 41 FBI AGENT 3E PRESENI . BUREAY "ILL PROVIDE'
AGENT on RZQUEST 0f 'INTZ?VIZYEI _ 4S A PR ELUD& To INTER VIEW ,
THE FORRE? E piOYZE 4FTER 33InG CoNTACTED BY SSC, STAFF ,
COMIA CT EUREAU' S LEGAL COU:SEL DIVISION 'BY' COLLECT CALL For
FWLL INFOMATION TO ASSIST HIM, IWCLUD IiG OELIGATIOWS: AS
To
CONFIDENT IALITY OF INFORMATIOW 'ACQUIRED
AS FBI EMPLOYZE . II
IS Z"PKASIZED IXAT BURZAU' S 0fFzz 0F ASSISTANCE IS NOT
INTENDED To IMPZDE SSC WORK BUT IS DO NZ AS: COOPEZATIVE GEST URE'
ND To SAFZGUARD SENSITIVE BUREAU INMORMATION COTACTS WITH
TKZSE FORME ? EMPLOYEES To BE HANDLZD PERSONALL Y BY SAC OR
ASAC . In EVENT" THIS NOT FEASIBLE FOR JUST ' CAUSE , ~ To- BE
KANDL ED , BY 4 SENIOR SUPER VISOR
NW 88608 Docld:32989820. Page 219
CES}
AY,
==================================================
Page 220
==================================================
PAGE THREE
IMMEDIATEL Y AFTER ConTACT RESUL TS SHOULD BE FurNISHED
BUREAU BY TELETYPE In ABO VE CAPTION . IF A FoR MER EMPLOYEE NO
LONGER In YOUR TERRITORY OR TEMPORARILY AwAK, SET OUT LEAD To
OT HER . OFFICZ IMMED IATELY WITH COPY TO FBI KEADQUARTzRS _
ALPANY : JohN , KLEINKAUF , [53 CULLZi A VENUZ
9
SCHENECTADY
JZW YoRk: 12309 $ EMPLOYED AS DIRECTO3 07 SECURITY AND SAFETY
UNIoN COLL EGE SCHENECTADY
9
~WzQ Yoz K 12343:
BALT IMO?E: JAMES { , BLAilD , 4310' ROSZDALE ' AVENUE , BETXESDA `
XAR YL AnD ~ 29814,
MIAMI: FRZDERICK Fx. Fox, 1450 WEST" BISCAYNZ cANAL' ROAD ,
SIAXI; FLOR IDA 33161 .
PHILADFLPHIA: ~1RS KATXLEZW LoGAN, SPOUSE 0F 54 Ricxard E.
LoGaNv, ASSIG ED PHILADELPHIA 0FricE .
TAMPA : PAvL L 'cox, U.S. .A.T,0.9 P..0 zox 1412,
SARASOTA , EOR IDA 33578,
BEST 'INFORMATIOM BUREAW #AS COnCERNING Cox' S 4 HEREABOUTS
IS TXAT KE IS CURRENTLY ow A: L? THLY Tf? "Itk 4 MotoR TRAILZR
TmROIGH CANADA AnD TKE MID-WEST INDECATED ADDRESS BTL IEVED Td
3z A TRAILZR Court CONIACT POInT FOR MAILING PUZPOSZS . BUREAU
DOES NOI DESIRE :EXTENSI VE INVEST ICATION TO LOCATE Cox 'aivd
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 220
==================================================
Page 221
==================================================
"PAcz; Foi?
SUGGEST S FEASIEILITY OF, LZAVING 'SOMz {ISSAGE IHRROUGH TKE
IND ICATED . ADDRESS OR SOIS MEANS 0F FO?'ARDING 4 COiMUNICATIOiv
To COx So HE MIGHT Co_TACT YoU? OFFICE 0#' RzTURN TO AREA 03
SOO NER IamPA ' S REPL Y To 3u3zav SHOULD SZT ` OUT HAT ARRANGEMENTS
For POSSIELZ CoNTACT: NAV 9zm PZFCCIZD _
EnD
F3I MM JWB CLR
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 221 Page
==================================================
Page 222
==================================================
M #C9 WA CODE
3:3OPM NITEL 8-26-75 LXS
To ALBANY
BAL T IMORE
MIAMI
PHILADELPHIA
TAMPA
PROM DIRECT OR (62-] [6395)
PERSONAL ATTENT ION
SENSTUY 75
REBUTEL MAY 2, 1975 ,
INQUIRIES MADE 0f BUREAU BY SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE (SSC)
CoNCER NI NG BELOW-LISTED FORMER FBI EMPLOYEES SUGGEST S THEY MAY
BE INTER VIEWED BY SSC STAFF WXILE SUBJECT OF INTER VIEWS HAS
NOT BEEN D ISCUSSED BY SSC , INTER VIENS WILL LIKEL Y PERTAIN TO
TKESE ORMER EMPLOYEES' DUTIES WHILE In THE INIERMAL SECURITY
AND /OR SUB WERSI VE CONTROL SECT IONS ANd Max ALso RELATE To TKE
FORMER BUREAU' S INVESTIGATIONS OF MARTIN LUTHER KING , JR+>
COMMUNIST INFLUCNCES In RACIAL MATTERS AND RELATED MATTERS ,
SET OT BEL Ow ARE LaST KOWN ADDRESSES 0F THESE For MER BUREAU
bb-3346-/0
'3=
'42ilZ
AUG 2 6 1973
FEL-MWM
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 222
==================================================
Page 223
==================================================
PAGE Two
ETPPLOYEES,
EACH OF THESE FORMER EMPLOYEES IS To BE IMMEDIATELY
ContACIED And ALERTED THAT XE MIGHT BE APPROACKED BY THE SSC
StAFF , They ShouLd BE TOLD THAT In TKE EVEMT THEY ARE
INTER VIENED And DUrInG COUrSE 0F SAME , QUESTIONS ARE ASKED
WMICH RELATE To SENSITIVE BUREAU OPERATIONS (SOURCES, METHODS
AND TECHNIQUES, ONGoING IWVST IGATIONS , ANd THIRD AGENCY RULE,
INCLUDIng: IDENT ITIES QF FOREIGN INTELiIGENCE AGENCIES) , TIHEY
MAY REQUEST Aw FBI AGENT BE PRESENT
0
BUREAW WILL PROVIDE
AGENT on REQUEST OF INTER VIEWEE . AS A PRELUDE TO INTER VIEW ,
THE FORMER EMPLOYCE MAY, AFTER BEING CONTACTED BY SSc STAFF ,
CoNtACI BUREAU' $ LEGAL COUNSEL DI VISION By COLLECT CALL FOR
Full INFORMATION To ASSIST HIM, INCLUD InG OBL IGAT IONS As To
CONFIDENT IALITY OF INFORMATIO ACQUIRED As FBI EMPLOYEE , IT
IS EMPHASIZED That BUREAU" S OFFER 0F ASSISTANCE IS Not
INTE NDED To IMPEDE SSC WORK BUT IS DO NE As COOPERATIVE GESTURE
ANd To SAFEGUARD SENSITIV BUREAU INFOR MATION . ContACIS WITH
THESE FORMER EMPLOYEES To BE HANDLED PERSONALLY BY SaC OR
Asac. In EVENT THIS NOT FEASIBLE FOR JUST CAUSE, To BE
HA NDLED BY A SENIOR SUPER VISOR
NK 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 223
==================================================
Page 224
==================================================
PAGE THREE
IMMEDIATELY AFTER ContACT , RESULTS SHOULD BE FURNISHED
BUREAU BY TELETYPE In ABOVE CAPTION . IF A FOR MER EMPLOYEE NO
LOMGER In Your TERRITORY OR TEMPORARILY AWAy, SET OUT LEAD To
OT HER OFFICE IMMEDIATELY WITH COPY TO FBI HEADQUAR TERS +
ALBANY : JOHN H, KLEINKAUF, 1153 CULLEN AVENUE , SCHENECTADY ,
NEW YORK 12309 ; EMPLOYED As DIRECTOR Or SECURITY ANd SAFETY ,
WMION COLL SCHENECTADY , NEW YORK 12308,
BaLt IMORE: JAMES F, BLAND, 4310 ROSEDALE A VENUE , BETHESDA ,
MARYLAND 20044 ,
MIAMI : FREDERICK FOX, 1450 WEST BISCAYNE Canal Road,
MIAMI,' FLORIDA 3316[.
PHILADEL PHIA : MRS< KATHEEN LoGan, SPOUSE OF SA RICHARD E,
LoGan, ASSIGNED PHILADELPHIA OFFICE
6
IAMPA : PAUL La COX, U S.NaAaT.Oo, Pa 0. BOX 1418,
SARASOTA, FLORIDA 33578,
BEST INFORMATION BUREAU HaS COnCERNING Cox' S WHEREABOUTS
IS THAT KE IS CURRENTL Y On 4 LENGTHLY TRIP WITH A MOTOR TRAILER
THROUGH CANADA AND THE MID-WEST
9
INDICATED ADDRESS BELIEVED To
BE 4 TRAILER COURT CONTACT POINT FOR MAILING PURPOSES. BUREAU
DOES NOT DESIRE EXTENSI VE INVEST IGATION To LOCATE cox And
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 224
EGE ,
F,
==================================================
Page 225
==================================================
PAGE FOUR
SUGGESTS PEASIBILITY OF LEA VING SOMZ MESSAGE THROUGH THE
INDICATED ADDRESS OR SOME MEANS 0F FORWARDING A COMMUNICATION
TO Cox So HE MIGHT CONTACI YOUR OFFICE on RETURN To AREA OR
SOONER
0
TaMpPa'S REPLY To BUREAU Should SET OUT WHAT ARRANGEMENTS
FOR POSSIBLE ContACT HA VE BEEN PERFECTED .
END
FBI MM JWB CLR
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 225
==================================================
Page 226
==================================================
FD-36 (Rev. 5-22-64) 24S
p
F B |
Date:
6/24/75
Transmit the following in CODED
(Type in plaintext or code)
TELETYPE URGENT
Via
(Priority)
TO: D IRECTOR , FBI (62-116395)
ATTENTION : SA W.0. CREGA R
DOWNGRADED TO
FROM: SAC , MIAMI (66-3346) (RUA SECRET
T, P S E C R € T Per
7e22
Date
SENSTUDY 1975; BUD ED JUNE 24, 1975
RE BUREA U TELETYPE JUNE 18, 1975 , As ABOVE.
THE FILES OF THE MIA MI OFFICE CONTA IN THE FOLLOWING
INFORMA TION ON "MA IL SURVEILLANCE" BY OR ON BEHA LF OF THE
FBI FROM JA NUA RY 1, 1960 TO THE PRESENT TIME.
"(1) MA IL OPENING OR MA IL INTERC EPT _
ON JANUA RY 2, 1963 , MIAMI BEGAN SCREENING A IRMA IL TO
CUBA EMA NA TING FROM PUERTO RICO IN CONNECTION WITH THE
CASE CAPTIONED , "PENETRA ESPIONAGE
44 CUBA
9
IT BUF ILE 65-
67842 , OFFICE OF ORIGIN SAN JUAN 65-398, MIAMI 65-2940 /
1
6+66-3346
RLo/kr
Ulc
(/75
Approved: Sent
94 Y
Pe
Special Agent in Charge
#U. s. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFPCE 1969 0 346-090 (11)
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 226 66
L
3346_9
TE ,
Sr -_
ILmul
Ld:,
Zartetsn; L
@Bz0
(1) B
==================================================
Page 227
==================================================
FD-36 (Rev. 5-22-64)
F B /
Date:
mit the follow_ in
(Type in plaintext or code)
Via
(Priority)
PAGE TwO
S ECRET
ON FEBRUA RY 11, 1963 , MIAMI BEGA N SCREENING SUCH MA IL
EMA NA TING FROM MIAMI IN CONNECTION WITH THE CASE CAPTIONED ,
"FOXTROT , ESPIONAGE
B
CUBA It BUFILE 65-67951, OFFICE OF
ORIGIN MIAMI 65-2945 .
IN ORD ER To FACILITA TE DISSEMINA TION OF INFORMA TION
ON THE SCREENING OF THIS MA IL, MIAMI OBENED A SEPA RA TE FILE
CA PTIONED , "JOE SURVEY , ESPIONA GE
Gr
CUBA
9
"1 MIAMI 65-2959 , AND
THIS SOURC E WAS ASSIGNED SYMBOL NUMBER CSMM 921-S _
THE PURPOS E OF THE JOE SURVEY WAS TO LOCA TE CLANDESTINE
COMMUNICA TIONS THROUGH THE USE OF CERTA IN INDICA TORS AN
DROP ADDRESS ES ON MA IL TO CUBA
1
AND TO IDENTIFY THE
COMMUNICA TION As BEING ONE DIRECTED BY AN ILLEGAL AGENT
THROUGH ITS CONTENTS AND WRITING CHRA CTERISTICS _
THIS MA IL WAS INTERC EPTED IN A ROOM FORMERLY OCCUPIED
BY THE POSTAL INSPECTORS AT THE BISCA YNE ANNEX POST OFFICE,
MIAMI _ POSTAL EMPLOYEES FOULD BRING THE APPROPRIA TE MA IL
BAGS TO THIS ROOM, WHERE MIAMI AGENTS WOULD REVIEW IT,
LOOKING FOR SOME 50 DROP ADDRESS ES IN CUBA , REBIN THE MA IL
IN BUNDLES , AND PLACE IT BACK IN THE MA IL BAGS _
Approved: Sent M Per
Special Agent in Charge
#U; & GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1969 0 346-090 (11)
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 227
Transe ing
==================================================
Page 228
==================================================
FD-36 (Rev. 5-22-64)
F B |
Date:
Transmit the following in
(Type in plaintext or code)
(Priority)
PAGE THREE
S ECRET
THIS MA IL CONS ISTED PRIMA RILY OF LETTERS CONTA INING
PERSONAL CORRESPONDENCE WITH SOME 12, 000 TO 000 LETTERS
BEING REVIEWED DA ILY_
THE JOE SURVEY END ED ON JULY 21, 1966_ THE NUMBER
OF AGENTS UTILIZED RANGED FROM FOUR TO TW ENTY DEPEND ING ON
THE AMOUNT OF MA IL AND YHETHER A SPECIAL SFA RCH WAS NEED ED
BA S ED ON INFORMA TION FROM BUREAU SOURCE SIX. AGENT TIME
SPENT TA $ APPROXIMA TELY 60 MAN HOURS A WEEK _
AGENTS REVIEWING THIS MA IL WERE FROM THE S ECURITY
SQUAD AN THE FOLLOWING SPECIAL AGENTS INTERC EPT ED MA IL
AT BISCA YNE ANNEX AT VA RIOUS TIMES DURING THE PERIOD OF
THE SURVEY :
JOHN BA RRON ; EDWA RD J. DAHL; GEORGE E. DA VIS ,
WILLIAM E. DOWLING; JA MES H, DOWNING; WILLIAM MA YO DREW ,
JR. ; A RNOLD C. DUQUETTE; ROBERT JAMES DWYER; CHA RLES W
@DMISTON; THOMA S ERRION; MAURICE F_ FARABEE; LA HRENCE
FELDHAUS ; CLA RENCE P. GRA ERNEST FA RRISON; JA MES D_
Approved: Sent M Per
Special Agent in Charge
#U S. GOVERNMENT PRITING OFFICE 1969 0 346-090 (11)
NWV 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 228
Via
20 ,
JR. , ;
HAM;
==================================================
Page 229
==================================================
FD-36 (Rev. 5-22-64)
F B |
Date:
mit the following in
(Type in plaintext or code)
Via
(Priority)
PAGE FOUR
SECRET
HA JAMES C HOLMES ; MELVIN C JENS EN ; SAMUEL W JONES ;
JOS EPH P. MC CANN; JOHN E. MC HUGH; JOHN J, MA TTIMORE;
JOHN C. MENTON; PETER J. NERO; JAMES J_ 0 'CONNOR; RA YMOND L.
0 KELLY; EUGENE L. PA YNE; LEON PRIOR; LEMA N Lo STAFFORD ,
WILLIAM W , STEVENS ; ROBERT G, STRONG ; EDWIN L. SWEET _
WHEN A DROP ADDRESS WAS NOTED ON AN ENVELOPE, THIS
PIECE OF MA IL WA S HAND CA RRIED AND LATER SENT BY MA
PURSUANT TO BUREA U INSTRUCTIONS TO THE FBI LABORA TORY FOR
EXAMINA TION FOR SECRET WRITING AND MICRODOTS _ IN FACH CA SE,
AFTER THE LETTER WAS EXAMINED IT WAS THEN PLACED BACK IN
2
THE NORMAL FLOW OF MA IL AT BISCA YNE ANNEXDESTINED FOR
CUBA
AUTHORITY TO HAND DELIVER LETT ERS TO THE LABORA TORY
CAME FROM BUREAU SUPERVISORS WILLIAM A BRANNIGAN , OTHO EZELL ,
AND INSPECTOR DON MOORE.
DURING THE PERIOD THE JOE SURVEY WAS IN EFFECT ,
APPROXIMA TELY 4,00 LETTERS WERE OPENED EITHER BY THE
FBI LABORA TORY OR THE MIAMI OFFICE, RELA TING TO CUBAN
Approved: Sent M Per
Special Agent in Charge
# U. S. GOVERNMENT PRMNTING OFFICE 1969 0 346-090 (11)
NWV 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 229
Transc
YES ;
JR. ;
IL;
==================================================
Page 230
==================================================
FD-36 (Rev. 5-22-64)
F B |
Date:
Transmit the following in
(Type in plaintext or code)
Via
(Priority)
PAGE FIVE
SECRET
INTELLIGENCE MA TTERS _ OF THIS AMOUNT , THERE WERE 50 LETTERS
IN 1963 AND 10 LETTERS IN 1964, WHICH WERE DETERMINED TO
CONTA IN SECRET INK MESSAGES , EITHER ON THE LETTER OR ON THE
ENVELOPE.
THE MA IL INTERC EPTED AT BISCA YNE ANNEX WHICH WAS
OPENED AT THE MIAMI OFFICE WAS OPENED IN A SPEC IAL CHA MF ERING
ROOM BY THE FOLLOWING SPECIAL AGENTS :
JAMES D. HA WILLIAM E. DOWLING, WILLIAM W . STEVENS ,
GBORGE E. DA VIS , WILLIAM G. FRIED EMA NN _
THOS E BETTERS OPENED AT THE MIAMI OFFICE WHICH WERE IN
THE SPANISH LANGUA GE WERE TRA NSLATED BY MRS _ SOPHIA Y.
SALIBA AND MISS ELFANORE M_ SCHOENBERGER .
(2) MA IL COVERS PHYS ICALLY CONDUCTED BY FBI EMPLOYEES _
THERE WERE NO KNOWN INSTANC ES WHERE MIAMI FBI EMPLOYEES
PHYS ICA LLY CONDUCTED A MA IL COVER ALONE OR IN COOPERA TION
WITH POSTAL SERVICE EMPLOYEES OTHER THAN As INC ID ENTA L TO
HE REVI EW OF MA IL IN THE JOE SURVEY _
Approved: Sent M Per
Special Agent in Charge
*U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1969 0 346-090 (11)
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 230
YES ,
JR. ,
==================================================
Page 231
==================================================
FD-36 (Rev. 5-22-64)
F B /
Date:
Transmit the following in
(Type in plaintext or code)
Via
(Priority)
PAGE SIX
TO SECRE
(3) DOCUMENTS AND MEMORA NDA ON MA IL OPEN [INGS , INTERC EPTS
AND COVERS IDENTIF IED ABOVE .
PENETRA TE, ESPIONAGE
U
CUBA: 2 PENETRA TE WAS THE BUREA U
CODE NAME FOR A CUBAN INTELLIGENCE AGENT IN PUERTO RICO.
ALL `OF THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENTS WERE DISS EMINA TED UND ER
THE ABOVE CAPTION:
BUREAU A IRTEL To SAN JUAN, OCTOBER 29, 1962 , REQUESTING
SAN JUAN CONSIDER FFASIBILITY OF CHECKING MA IL COMING
FROM PUERTO RICO TO CUBA
BUREA U .A IRTEL TO SAN JUAN, NOVEMBER 3, 1962 , CONCERNING
BUREAU DEC ISION TO HOLD IN ABEYANCE CHECKING OF THIS
MA IL.
SAN JUAN TELETYPE TO BUREAU, NOVEMBER 2 , 1962 , CONCERNING
A WA TCH LIST OF SUSPECTE MA IL GOING TO CUBA
BUREAU RADIOGRAM TO SAN NOVEMBER 7 , REQUESTING
M IAMI To CONTACT POST OFFICE ON FEASIBILITY OF CHECKING MA IL
61f2
FROM PUERTO TO CUBA VIA MIAMI.
Approved: Sent M Per
Special Agent in Charge
#U. &. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1969 0 346-090 (11)
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 231
1962 , JUA N,
==================================================
Page 232
==================================================
FD-36 (Rev. 5-22-64)
F B /
Date:
Transmit the follow in
(Type in plaintext or code)
Via
(Priority)
PAGE SEVEN
T S ECRET
SAN JUAN TELETYPE TO BUREAU , NOVEMBER 10 , 1962,
REQUESTING MIAMI TO DETERMINE FROM POST OFFICE THE NUMBER
OF MA IL DISPA TCHES FROM MIAMI TO CUBA
BUREAU A IRTEL TO MIAMI NOVEMBER 8 , ON DES IRABILITY
OF AGENTS RA THER THAN POSTAL EMPLOYEES CHECKING THIS MA IL.
MIAMI A IRTEL TO BUREAU, NOVEMBER 13 , 1962 , REQUESTING
BUREA U TO: CONTACT CHIEF POSTAL INSPECTOR, WA SHINGTON ,
D.C., ON - CHECKING MA IL AT MIAMI
BUREAU A IRTEL TO SAN JUAN, NOVEMBER 21, 1962 , ADVIS ING
FBI LABORATORY SHOULD PROCESS ANY LETTERS SENT BY PENETRA TE
FROM PUERTO RICO TO CUBA
SAN JUAN TELETYPE TO BUREAU, NOVEMBER 23 , ON
TRANSPORTING SUSPECTE MA IL VIA THE A IRLINES
BUA IRTEL TO SAN JUAN DEC EMBER 4, ON BUREAU CONTACT
WITH CHIEF POSTA L INS PECTOR H.B. MONTA GUE .
BUREA U TELETYPE TO MIAMI DECEMBER 10 , 1962 , ON
MIAMI AGENTS PERSONA LLY HANDLING SCREENING OF MA IL.
Approved: Sent M Per
Special Agent in Charge
#U. &. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1969 0 - 346-090 (11)
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 232
ing
1962 ,
1962 ,
1962 ,
==================================================
Page 233
==================================================
FD-36 (Rev. 5-22-64)
F B [
Date:
Transmit the following in
(Type in plaintext or code)
Via
(Priority)
PAGE EIGHT
SECRET
MIAMI A IRTEL TO BUREA U, DEC EMBER 13, 1962 , ON CONTACT
WITH POSTAL INSPECTOR E.M. CAMPBELL ON METHOD OF SCREENING
THIS MA IL.
NEW YORK A IRTEL TO BUREAU DEC EMBER 1962 , ON SIGNIF ICANT
CLANDESTINE INDICA TORS WHEN REVIEWING THIS MA IL.
SAN JUAN A IRTEL TO MIAMI DECEMBER 13 , 1962 , ON METHOD
PENETRA TE USED TO SIGNIFY INVISIBLE WRITING IN A LETTER.
BUREAU A IRTEL TO MIAMI DECEMBER 21, AUTHORIZING
MIAMI TO' SCREEN MA IL FROM PUERTO RICO TO CUBA ALSO AUTHORIZ-
ING SPECIAL AGENTS GEORGE E, DAVIS , AND WILLIAM G. FRIEDE
NANN TO HANDLE INITIAL INSPECTION OF COMUNICA TIONS BEFORE
SENT TO FBI LABORA TORY AND SETS OUT METHOD OF TRANSMITTA L
TO LABORA TORY _
MIAMI A IRTEL TO BUREA U DECEMBER 28, 1962 , ON MIAMI
ARRANGEMENTS WITH LOCAL POSTAL AUTHORITIES TO IMPLEMENT
SCREENING SURVEY _
Approved: Sent M Per
Special Agent in Charge
# U. &: GOVERNMENT PRWNTING OFFICE 1969 0 346-090 (11)
NW 88608 Docld: 32989820 Page 233
12 ,
1962,
JR. ,
==================================================
Page 234
==================================================
FD-36 (Rev. 5-22-64)
F B |
Date:
Transmit the following in
Type in plaintext or code)
Via
(Priority)
PAGE NINE
S ECRET
BUREA U AIRTEL TO MTAMI, JANUA RY 3, 1963, REQUESTING
NAMES OF MIAMI AGENTS YHO HA VE RECEIVED SPECIALIZED TRA INING
IN PROC ESS ING MA IL .
MIAMI A IRTEL TO BUREA U JA NUA RY 7 , ON MIAMI
AGENTS WHO HA VE REC EIVED CHAMF ERING TRA INING _
SAN JUAN TELETYPE TO BUREAU JANUA RY 10, 1963 , WITH NEW
DROP ADDRESSES IN CUBA FOR MIAMI MA IL PROCESSING .
BUREA U RADIOGRAM TO SAN JUAN JANUARY 24, ON FBI
LABORA TORY PROC ESS ING SUSPECTED LETTER RECEIVED FROM
MIAMI MA IL SURVEY _
SAN JUAN RADIOGRAM TO MIAMI JANUA RY 25, 1963, ON NEW LETTER
DROP OF PENETRA TE IN CUBA
BUREAU RADIOGRAM TO SAN JUAN JANUARY 30, 1963,
AUTHORIZING 30 DAY MA IL COVER ON RIOS MORA LES , HIMENEZ VEGA ,
AND MUJICA
NEW YORK A IRTEL TO BUREAU JANUA RY 1963 , SETTING
OUT INDICA TORS ON ENVELOPES TO ASSIST MIAMI IN ID ENTIFYING
MA IL FROM ILLEGAL AGENTS .
Approved: Sent M Per
Special Agent in Charge
# U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1969 0 346-090 (11)
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 234
1963 ,
1963 ,
30 ,
==================================================
Page 235
==================================================
FD-36 (Rev. 5-22-64)
F B |
Date:
mit the following in
in plaintext or code)
Via
(Priority)
PAGE TEN
S ECRET
BUREA U RAD IOGRAM TO SAN JUAN FEBRUARY 14, 1963,
CONTA INING NEW CUBAN DROP ADDRESS ES OF PENETRATE.
BUREAU AIRTEL TO SAN JUAN, FEBRUARY 28, 1963 , ON
FEASIBILITY OF OBTA INING ACCESS TO CUBAN COURIERS BAGGAGE
OR DIPLOMATIC POUCHES TO- DETERMINE CUBAN MA IL DROP IN NEW
YORK CIFY .
BUREAU AIRTEL TO MIAMI MA RCH 28, 1963 , ADV ISING NO
S ECRET WRITING OR MICRODOTS ON SUSPECTED LETTER SENT TO
LABORA TORY _
MIAMI A IRTEL TO BUREA U MAY 17, 1963, ADVISING THAT MIAMI
IS NOT SCREENING ANY MA IL COMING FROM CUBA
SAN JUAN LETTER TO BUREA U FEBRUARY 23 , 1965 , REQUESTING
MIAMI TO EXTEND JOE SURVEY TO COVER INCOMING MA IL FROM CUBA
TO PUERTO RICO AN OUTGOING MA IL PUERTO RICO TO CUBA
MIEMI A IRTEL TO BUREAU APRIL 2, 1965, ADVIS ING THAT
MIAMI POSTAL INSPECTOR E.M. CAMPBELL BELIEVES THAT SCREENING
INCOMING MA IL FROM CUBA FOR PUERTO RICO WOULD PRES ENT
S ECURITY PROBLEM AN ADD APPROXIMA TELY 000 PIEC ES OF
MA IL To THE SOREENING DA ILY
Approved: Sent M Per
Special Agent in Charge
#U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1969 0 346-090 (11)
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 235
Transe
(Type
17,
==================================================
Page 236
==================================================
FD-36 (Rev. 5-22-64)
F B |
Date:
Transmit the following in
(Type in plaintext or code)
Via
(Priority)
PAGE ELEVEN
TO SECRET
BUREAU LETTER TO SAN JUAN APRIL 19, 1965, CONCURRBING
WITH MIAMI RECOMMENDA TION THAT JOE SURVEY COVERAGE CANNOT
BE SECURELY EXPAND E AT THIS TIME AN INSTRUCTING SAN JUAN
TO SUPPLY MIAMI WITH LIST OF' DROP ADDRESS ES IN CUBA
SAN JUAN LETTER TO MIAMI MA Y 17, 1965, ADVIS ING WA TCH
LIST OF DROP NAMES AN ADDRESSES IN CUBA : NOT BEING FURNISHED
DUE TO LARGE NUMBER OF WA TCH LIST.
FOXTROT , ESPIONAGE CUBA :
FOXTROT WA S THE BUREAU CODE NAME FOR A CUBA N INTELLIGENCE
A GENT IN MIAMI_ INVESTIGA TION WAS INITIATE ON THE BASIS
OF INFORMA TION FROM BUREA U SOURCE 6 . ALL OF THE FOLLOWING
DOCUMENTS WERE DISSEMINA TED UND ER THE ABOVE CAPTION:
BURFAU AIRTEs TO NEW YORK DECBMBER 12, 1962 , ON NEW
NAMES AND ADDRESSES IN CUBA IN THE EVENT MIAMI INSTRUCTED
TO INSTITUTE COVERAGE OF MA IL FROM PUERTO RICO TO CUBA
Approved: Sent M Per
Special Agent in Charge
#U. s. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1969 0 346-090 (11)
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 236
==================================================
Page 237
==================================================
FD-36 (Rev. 5-22-64)
F B |
Date:
Transmit the following in
(Type in plaintext or code)
(Priority)
PAGE TWELVE
S ECRET
MIAMI A IRTEL TO BUREAU JANUARY 15, ADVIS ING INFORMA
Ga
TION IN BUREAU LET DECEMBER 12 , 1962 , INCLUDED IN MIAMI MA IL
COVERAGE IN PENETRA TE CASE.
MIAMI TELETYPES TO BUREAU JANUA RY 25 AND JANUA RY
1963, REQUESTING AUTHORITY TO SCREEN MIAMI TO CUBA MA
AND ADVIS ING THA T MIAMI POSTAL INSPECTOR CAMPBELL ADVISED
ADDITIONAL COVERA GE WOULD CAUSE NO BURD EN OR INTERRUPT POST
OFFICE OPERA TIONS .
BUREAU TELETYPE TO MIAMI FEBRUA RY 4, 1963 , ADVIS ING
CHIEF POSTAL INSPECTOR H.B. MONTAGUE, WA SHINGTON , D.C.,
VE APPROVAL TO COVERAGE OF MA IL GOING FROM MIAMI TO CUBA
MIAMI AIRTEL TO BUREAU FEBRUARY 11 , 1963 , ADVIS ING
JOE SURVEY COVERAGE BEGAN FEBRUA RY 11 , 1963_
MIAMI A IRTEL TO BUREA U FEBRUA RY 12 , 1963, ESTIMA TING
12 ,000 PIECES OF MA IL BEING REVIEWED DA ILY IN FOXTROT AND
PENETRA TE CASES _
Approved: Sent M Per
Special Agent in Charge
* U: S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1969 0 346-090 (11)
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 237
Via
1963 ,
31 ,
IL,
==================================================
Page 238
==================================================
FD-36 (Rev, 5-22-64)
F B /
Date:
mit the following in
in plaintext or code)
Via
(Priority)
PAGE THIRTEEN
T S ECRET
BUREAU RADIOGRAM TO MIAMI MA RCH 1963 , ON FEASIBILITY
OF JOE SURVEY SCREENING MA IL ARRIVING IN MIAMI FROM NEW
YORK CITY FOR A LIMITED PERIOD IN EFFORT TO OBTA IN LETTER
CONTANING PHOTOGRA PH AND MONEY TO BE SENT FOXTROT FROM CUBA ,
IN ORDER TO ID ENTIFY FOXTROT _
MIAMI TELETYPE TO BURFA U MA RCH 13, 1963, ADVIS ING LOCAL
POSTAL INSPECTOR: APPROVED AND REQUESTING CHIEF POSTAL
INSPECTOR MONTA GUE BE CONTACTE FOR OFFICIAL APPROVA L IN
SCREENING NEW YORK MA IL .
BUREAU TELETYPE TO MIAMI MARCH 14, 1963 , ADVISING
CLEA RANCE OBTA INED FROM MONTA GUE FOR A TEMPORA RY PERIOD TO
SCREEN THE NEW YORK MA IL .
BUREAU A IRTEL To NEW YORK, MA RCH 13, 1963, ON FFASIBILITY
OF SCREENING MA IL FROM CUBAN MISSION TO THE UNITED NATIONS
IN ORD ER TO IDENTIFY FOKTROT _
MIAMI TELETYPE TO BUREAU MA RCH 17 , 1963 , ADVISING THAT
SLIGHTLY OVER ONE MILLION PIECES OF MA IL FROM NEW YORK
ARFA BEING REVIEWED DA ILY _
Approved: Sent M Per
Special Agent in Charge
*U. s GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1969 0 346-090 (11)
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 238
Transe
(Type
12 ,
==================================================
Page 239
==================================================
FD-36 (Rev. 5-22-64)
F B /
Date:
Transmit the following in
(Type in plaintext or code)
Via
(Priority)
PAGE FOURTEEN
SECRET
MIAMI TELETYPE TO BUREA U MARCH 15, 1963 , ADVIS ING MA IL
COVER TO BE PLACED ON FOXTROT , UACB; POSTA L INSPECTORS WILL
PROVIDE THE RETURN ADDRESS ES ON THIS MA IL .
BUREA U A IRTEL TO _MIAMI MA RCH 28 , 1963 , ADVISING SECRET
WRITING FOUND ON A LETTER SUBMITTED FROM JOE SURVEY .
MIAMI A IRTEL TO BUREAU MARCH 25, 1963 , IN ICA TING MA IL
COVER PLACED ON SON OF_ FOXTROT , POSTAL INSPECTORS WILL
FURNISH RETURN ADDRESSES _
BUREAU TELETYPE TO MIAMI MA RCH 1963, IND ICA TING
THA T A LETTER CONTA INING SECRET WRITING FROM FOXTROT MA Y
HA VE BEEN PROCESS ED PRIOR TO ITS RECEIPT BY LABORA TORY _
MIAMI A IRTEL TO BUREAU APRIL 1, 1963 , INDICA TING
MA IL COVERS ON FOXTROT AN SON OF FOXTROT WERE UNPRODUCTIVE.
MIAMI TELETYPE TO BUREAU APRIL 3, 1963, ADVISING
LETTERS OF FOXTROT WERE NOT MADE AVA ILABLE TO ANY OTHER
PERSON OR AGENCY ACCORDING TO POSTAL INSPECTORS
Approved: Sent M Per
Special Agent in Charge
#U. s: GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1969 0 346-090 (11)
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 239
29 ,
==================================================
Page 240
==================================================
FD-36 (Rev. 5-22-64)
F B /
Date:
Transmit the following in
(Type in plaintext or code)
Via
(Priority)
PAGE FIFTEEN
P S ECRET
BUREA U TELETYPES APRIL 12 AND APRIL 23 , 1963 , ADVIS ING
S ECRET WRITING CONTA INED IN A LETTER AND TWO RELIGIOUS
PAMPHLETS SENT BY FOXTROT _
MIAMI AIRTEL TO BUREAU APRIL 29, 1963, CONTA INING THE
FIRST OF A SERIES OF WEEKLY SUMMA RIES ON THE FOXTROT
INVESTIGA TION _
BUREAU A IRTEL TO MIAMI, MAY 2, 1963 , ASKING FEASIBILITY
OF US ING MA ILS RA THER THAN AGENT PERSONNEL IN SUBMITTING
LETTERS OF FOXTROT TO LABORA TORY _
MIAMI A IRTEL TO BUREAU MAY 6 , 1963, ON ARRANGEMENTS
MADE WITH POST OFFICE IN SCREENING MA IL AND RECOMMEND ING
AGENT PERSONNEL BE -US ED IN TRANSMITTING THURSDA Y INTERCEPT IONS _
BUREAU A IRTEL TO MIAMI MAY 16, 1963 , ADVIS ING MIAMI TO
USE THE MA IL IN FORWA RD ING LETRERS OF FOXTROT To FBI LABORA TORY
EXCEPT FOR THURSDAY INTERCEPTIONS _
BURFA U A IRTEL TO MIAMI JUNE 24, 1963 , AUTHORIZING 30
DAY MA IL COVER ON FRANCISCO GUA SCH, A SUSPECTED MA IL DROP
OF FOXTROT_
Approved: Sent M Per
Special Agent in Charge
#U. S. GOVERNMENT PRITING OFFICE 1969 0 346-090 (11)
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 240
==================================================
Page 241
==================================================
FD-36 (Rev. 5-22-64)
F B /
Date:
Transmit the following in
'Type in plaintext or code)
Via
(Priority)
PAGE SIXTEEN
SECRET
BUREA U A IRTEL TO MIAMI JUNE 27 , 1963, ADVISING THA T
S ECRET WRITING WAs FOUND ON THE ENVELOPE CONTA INING A LETTER
OF FOXTROT _
MIAMI A IRTEL TO BUREAU JULY 1, 1963, ADVISING MA IL
COVER PLACED ON SUSPECTED MA IL DROP OF FOXTROT IN MIAMI.
BUREA U LETTER TO MIAMI JULY 1963, ADVISING IT WA S
NOT NECESSARY FOR MIAMI TO INFORM BUREAU WH EN INTERC EPTE
LETTERS HA VE BEEN RETURNED TO NORMAL MA IL FLOW AT MIAMI.
12
BUREAU AIRTEL To MIAMI AUGUST 15, 1963, SETTING OUT
GUID ELINES IN DUSCUSS ING FOXTROT CASE WITH MIAMI CENTRA L
INTELLIGENCE AGENCY .
MIAMI LETTER TO BUREA U S EPTEMBER 9, 1963, REPORTING
RESULTS - OF MA IL COVER ON FRANCISCO GUA SCH, WHICH WA S PROVID ED
BY POSTAL INSPECTOR CAMPBELL .
BUREAU AIRTEL TO MIAMI SEPTEMBER 19, 1963 , ON FEASIBILITY
OF CHECKING POST OFFICE BCES FOR MA IL DROP OF FOXTROT IN
MIAMI.
Approved: Sent M Per
Special Agent in Charge
# U. &. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1969 0 346-090 (11)
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 241
12,
==================================================
Page 242
==================================================
FD-36 (Rev. 5-22-64)
F B /
Date:
mit the follow= in
(Type in plaintext 0T code)
Via
(Priority)
PAGE SEVENTEEN
SECRET
BUREA U A IRTEL TO MIAMI SEPTEMBER 26 , 1963, GIVING
AUTHORITY FOR SIX MONTHS MA IL COVER ON FRANCISCO GUA SCH .
BUREAU A IRTEL; TO MIAMI OCTOBER 3 , 1963, POINTED OUT
THAT SECRET WRITING WAS FOUND ON TWO SHEETS OF PA PER SUBMITTED
WITH A BLANK LETTER OF FOXTROT_
MIAMI AIRTEL TO BUREAU OCTOBER 10 , 1963 , ADVISING THA T
THROUGH ARRANGEMENTS WITH POSTAL INSPECTOR R,G, WOLF , A
LETTER FROM FOXTROT IN A POST OFFICE BOX USED AS A DROP , WAS
OBTA INED AN FORWA RD ED TO LA BORA TORY .
MIAMI AIRTEL To BUREAU OCTOBER 14, 1963 , ADVISING
POSTAL INSPECTOR MADE AVA ILABLE ANOTHER LETTER OF FOXTROT
FROM A MA IL' DROP IN MIAMI_
MIAMI LETTER TO BUREAU OCTOBER 21, 1963, WITH RESULTS
OF MA IL COVER ON A SUSPECTED INTELLIGENCE AGENT WHICH WERE
PROVID ED BY POSTAL INSPECTOR SAL DRAGO .
BUREAU AERTEL TO MIAMI NOVEMBER 13, 1963, ON ADMINISTRA TIVH
HANDLING OF INTERC EPTED MA IL SENT To FBI LABORA TORY
Approved: Sent M Per
Special Agent in Charge
*U. s. GOVERNMENT PRNTING OFFICE 1969 0 - 346-090 (11)
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 242
Transe ing
==================================================
Page 243
==================================================
FD-36 (Rev. 5-22-64)
F B |
Date:
Transmit the follow- 1n (Type in plaintext or code)
Via
(Priority)
PAGE EIGHTEEN
SECRET
MIAMI A IRTEL TO BUREAU , D ECEMBER 5, 1963, RECOMMEND ING
SCREENING OF MA IL FROM MIAMI TO MEXICO , APPROXIMA TELY
5,000 LETTERS A DAY WOULD BE INVOLVED _
MIAMI AIRTEL TO BUREAU - NOVEMBER 21 , 1963, ADVIS ING A
MA NILA ENVELOPE MA ILED FROM NEW YORK CITY INTERCEPTE AND
BELIEVED TO CONTA IN A BOOK AND MONEY FOR FOXTROT .
NEW YORK A IRTEL TO BUREAU NOVEMBER 26 , 1963 , IND ICA TING
THA T A PORTION OF THE MONEY FURNISHED TO FOXTROT FOUND IN
AFOREMENTIONED BOOK ORIGINATED FROM SOVIET FUNDS USED IN
THEIR CLAND ESTINE OPERA TION ,
MEMORA NDUM OF SA WILL;IAM E. DOWL ING DATED DECEMBER 2 ,
1963 , CONTA INING COMPILA TION OF AGENT TIME SPENT ON FOXTROT
CASE.
BUREAU LETTER TO MIAMI DEC EMBER 5, 1963, RBQUESTING
APPROPRIATE COVERAGE BY MIAMI OF A POST OFFICE BOX USED As
A MA IL DROP BY FOXTROT _
Approved: Sent M Per
Special Agent in Charge
#U. s. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1969 0 346-090 (11)
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 243
ing
==================================================
Page 244
==================================================
FD-36 (Rev. 5-22-64)
F B /
Date:
Transmit the following in
(Type in plaintext or code)
Via
(Priority)
PAGE NINETEEN
SECRE
MIAMI A IRTEL TO BUREAU DEC EMBER 14, 1963, ADVIS ING OF A
LETTER WHICH FOXTROT MA ILED AT A MA IL BOX AN WHICH WAs
FURNISHED BY POSTAL INSPECTOR E.M. CAMPBELL .
MIAMI AIRTEL TO BUREAU DECEMBER 18, 1963, ADVIS ING
THREE LETTERS WHICH FOXTROT MA ILED AT MA IN POST OFF ICE
FURNISHED BY . POSTAL INSPECTOR CAMPBELL .
MIAMI AIRTEL TO BUREAU JANUA RY 27 , RECOMMEND ING
THAT CIA AT MEXICO CITY , MEXICO CONTINUE SCREENING MA IL FOR
MEXICO As SOME OF THIS MA IL MAY BYPASS JOE SURVEY
MIAMI A IRTEL TO BUREAU FEBRUA RY 3 , 1964, ADVIS ING OF
ARRA NG EMENTS - MADE WITH POSTAL INSPECTOR CA MPBELL TO REVIEW
MA IL GOING TO A SUSPECTED DROP ADDRESS OF FOXTROT IN
MIAMI AREA
MIAMI MEMORANDUM DATED JUNE 2, 1964, SUMMA RIZING
BACKGROUND AND ACTIVITIES OF FOXTROT THROUGH 1963, INCLUD ING
S ECRET INK MESSAGES LOCATE IN HIS LETTERS _
MIAMI AIRTEL TO BUREA U JUNE 10, 1964, REINSTITUTING
TEMPORA RY SCREENING OF ALL MA IL FROM NEW YORK, NEW YORK AREA
TO CUBA
Approved: Sent M Per
Special Agent in Charge
# U. S GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1969 0 346-090 (11)
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 244
1964,
==================================================
Page 245
==================================================
FD-36 (Rev. 5-22-64)
F B /
Date:
Transmit the following in
in plaintext or code)
Via
(Priority)
PAGE TWINTY
TQP SECRET
MIAMI MEMORANDUM DATED SEPTEMBER 15, 1964, SUMMA RIZING
BACKGROUND AN ACTIVITIES OF FOXTROT IN 1964 .
MIAMI A IRTEL TO BURFAU JANUARY 13, 1965, FORWA RD ING
A LETTER OF FOXTROT MA ILED AT A MA IL BOX AN PROVID ED BY
POSTAL INSPECTOR CAMPBELL .
BUREAU A IRTE To MIAMI SEPTEMBER 1965, REQUESTING
INTERVIEW = OF FOXTROT BE CONS ID ERED IN VIEW OF LACK OF
INFORMA TION INDICA TING HE IS ACTIVELY ENGAGED IN INTELLIGENC E
ACTIVITY AN HOW INFORMA TION FROM JOE SURVEY CAN BE USED
DURING INTERVIEW _
MIAMI MEMORA NDUM DA TED SEPTEMBER 15 , SUMMA RIZING
BACKGROUND AND ACTIVITIES OF FOXTROT IN 1965 .
MIAMI A IRTEL TO BUREAU OCTOBER 14, 1966, REFLECTING
JOE SURVEY WAs DISCONTINUED ON JULY 21, 1966 AT THE DIRECTION
OF THE BUREAU .
(4) BUREAU ASKED IF MM 890-S RESULTD FROM INTERCEPTION
OF MA IL.
Approved: Sent M Per
Special Agent in Charge
#U S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1969 0 346-090 (11)
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 245
(Type
3,
1965,
==================================================
Page 246
==================================================
FD-36 (Rev. 5-22-64)
F B /
Date:
Transmit the following in
(Type in plaintext or code)
Via
(Priority)
PAGE TWENTY-ONE
SECRET
MM 890-S WAS NOT INVOLVED IN THE INTERC EPT OF MA IL.
THE BUREA U MAY HA VE REF ERENCE TO CSMM
AsIIAMSk
MIAMI ILE
134-769 , A BUREAU AUTHORIZED ACTIVITY WHICH BEGAN ON MA RCH 15 ,
1962 , AND END ED AUGUST 1, 1966 . THIS OPERA TION PHOTOGRA PHED
MA TERIAL FROM DIPLOMA TIC POUCHES
9
HA VA NA , CUBA TO NEW YORK,
AN HA VANA To THE CUBAN EMBA SSY , OTTA WA
9
CANADA
9
WHICH PASSED
THROUGH MIAMI VIA PAN AMERICAN A IRWAYS _
Asterisk
INFORMATION FROM CSMM 809_St WAS DISSEMINA TED UND ER
THE CAPTION, "FOREIGN POLITICAL MA TTERS
Ga
CUBA I BUF ILE
9
109-12-210, MIAMI FILE 105-1747 .
Asterwsk
ADDITIONAL INFORMA TION ON CSMM 809-Sf IS NOT BEING
SUBMITTED As IT DOES NOT INVOLVE MA IL EMANA TING IN THE
U.S . OR PUERTO RICO .
TOP SECRET , CLASSIFIED BY 7129 , XGDS 2 AN 3, INDEFINITE.
Approved: Sent M Per
Special Agent in Charge
#U. s. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1969 0 346-090 (11)
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 246
809-SA
==================================================
Page 247
==================================================
Xr048 WA CODE
DOWNGRADEDTO
4.38PM IMMED IATE 6/18/75 GHS SECRET
To NEL YoRK MIAMI Ret
(7l7222
Date
BoSToN SAN FRANCISCO
DETROIT SEATTLE
Los ANGELES WFO
ROM DIRECTOR
T S E C R E' T
SENSTUD Y 1975; BUDED: JUNE 24, 1975 _
THE, FOLLOW ING REQUEST FOR INFORMATION HAS BzzN ADDRESSED
To THE ATTORNEY GENERAL ANvD FRom THE' ATTORNEY GENERAL TO FS IHQ
FROM THE SE NATE SELECT CO;AMITTEE To STUDY GOVERNMENTAL
OPERATIoMS WITH RESPECT TO INTELL IGENCE ACTIVITIES:
THE FOLLOWING REQUESTS ' PERTAINING TO THE TECHNIQUE REFERRED To
As MAIL SUR VEILLANCE; INCLUD ING MAIL COVERS ANd OPENING MAIL'
AND THE UT ILIZATION 0F THIS TECHNIQUE, In INTERNAL SECURITY,
INI ELLIGENCE , COLLECIIon,
A
ND/ Or' COUNTERINTELL IGENCE MATTERS,
OPERATIONS, OR ACT IVITIES: ' (1) . FOR ALL INCIDENTS '0F MAIL
OPENING OR = MAIL INTERCEPT BY 03 . On BBZHALF OF THE FEDERAL BUREAU:
OF INVEST IGATIOn FROM January L,
1960, UNTIL THE . PRESENT, PLEASE
;Eez flkAk:
Bl-3346 _ 8
2
EEp:' Hiat
JUN 1 8 1975
Bv
dhitez1
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 247
bnExJAVe74ZrMe
MLE+
e&' #9
==================================================
Page 248
==================================================
PAGE Tlvo T
5 E `c R E'I
STATE THE PHYSICAL LOCATION WHERE, THE OPENING 0R INTERCEPT . WAS
CONDUCTED,. THE NAMES OF THE INDIVIDUALS #HO PARTICIPATED In THE
OPE NING0r
INTERCEPI ,
THE TYPE 0F MAIL OPENED OR INTERCEPTED,
AND THE PURPOSZ OF THE OPENING OR INTERCEPT. (2) FOR ALL
INCIDENT S: 0F MAIL CO VERS THAT WERE PHYSICALLY CONDUCTED BY FBI
EMPL OYEES, W HETHER 'ALONE OR In COOPERATION WITH POSTAL SERVICE
EMPL OYEES;' FROM JANUARY ,T, 1960, UNTIL THE PRESENT, PLEASE STATE
THE PKYSICAL LOCATION WHERE IkE CoVER WAS CONDUCTED, TKE NAMES
OF THE INd I VIDUALS WHO PARTICIPATED In THE CO VER, IHE TYPE 0F
MAIL COVERED, And 'THE' PURPOSE 0F THZ COVER: (3) 'PLEASZ PROVIDE
ALL; DOCUMENT S F AND MEMIORANDA WHICH DISCUSS, REFER, OR RELATE To
THE OR IGINS, AUT HOR IZATIONS, CONdUcT ANd TERMINATION 0f, AND
POL ICIES AND PROCEDURES THE MAA IL OPENINGS, INTERCEPTS, AND
CQ VERS IDENT IFIED ABO VE. "
EaCk OFFICE "SHOULD iMMZDIATELY REVIEH . ITs FILES FOR ALL
InFoR MAT Ion REQUESTED BY THE SENATE COMMITTEE. NEW BoSToN,
DETROfI, Los
A NGEL ES, SEATTLE, AnD WFQ SHOULD FurNISH INFOR-
MATIon CoNCER NING SAM SUR VE Y. NEW YQRK, 'DETROIT, AND SAN
FRANCISCO 'SHOULD FURNISH InFOR MATION CONCERNING
GUS SUR VEY:
NEW YORK AND WFO SHOULD FURNISH INFORMATION CONCERNI NG Z CO VERAGE:
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 248
FOR;'
yoRk,
==================================================
Page 249
==================================================
PAGE THREE T S E C R E 1
SAN FRANCISCO `SHOULD FURNISH ` INFOR MATION ConCERNING CHIPROP
A ND CKICLETa MIAMI SHOULD IF THE INFORMATION' RECEI VED
FR OM MM 890- $ RESULTED FROM INTERCEPT 0F MAIL AND IF SO
APPROPR IATE INFORMATION SHOULD BE FUR NISHED. RESULTS SHOULD BE
'SUBMITTED BY TELETYPE, ATTENTION OF Sa W. .03 'CREGAR, AND SHOULD
REACH: THE BUREAU BY JUNE 24, 1975 ;
CLASSIFIED By 3676, XGDS 2 AND 3, INDEFINITE
END
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 249
ADVISE
==================================================
Page 250
==================================================
5s6 :4 C0)z
5835?. #ITL 5-20-75 PA"
To ALL 3Acs
703 9I?zCTO? 03z 115395)
?z?5J9RL ATT
SZ STUJY 75 ,
ZEZUTZL X4Y ?, 1975 .
In COE ECTIon #Ith "o3k 07 TXz S_TC 4 J XouSz SELZCT
CO I ITTzES, ITS 737ZSEMTATIVEZ 0Y Co TACT YOU: 077ICE 70 3
If0? ATIO".
In ,03 RZCZET InzIA@C , 4 REPRZSZNTATIVC 07 TXr SENATI
SLZCTI CO;;ITTZZ TZLEPHO ICALL Y InQUISZ) AS To IdCTITY 07 SAC
I} 4 PA?TIC'LA7 077ICC OuInZ 1973.
Iy KANDL IwG SUC INQUI?IzS InSURZ ZJTAZLISHIN3 5ovA 7ines
0, ~ZP ZSE TATIVI By SxO : 07 CRZJENTIALS 0w PISSONAL CO#TACT 03,
I7 IZLIPKOMIC CO:TACT, ZY IZLIPAJMI:3 1ACK To CO ITTZZ.
'JLzaS In7O3 UTIJ; IS 07 PUELIC "ATUZ, 4S I: IKZ IcSIawCz
CIT_) AOVZ, 0zTAI3 >IK CLZ4.A/C2 P3IOR To SU?PL YING A:Y
IZu: :ATION ZcIX? WUST 63 ZXIDITIOUSL Y AJVISZ) 07 ALL
Inzor f4TIO%' 7'3 ISXZD.
Z5
JLZ FZI
A% CL ? TXS
3346-7
~0 INDEXED '7t"r6
HAY 2 1 1975
Fa MIAMI
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 250
AsAe
@6 -
02z
==================================================
Page 251
==================================================
FD-350 (Rev. 7-16-63)
(Mount Clipping in Space Below)
Senate Committee Rejects Requesy]
By CIA, FBI to Monitor Inquiry
'J # SAUL FRIEDMaN Towed7em to: possibly intimidate (Indlcate page_ name of
'Herald Washinglon Bureau- employes who may wish tExgive-ii newspaper, Clty and state.)
WASHINGTON The Select tormation about their superiors .
Senate Committee' on- Inteliigencef CFURCH SAiD she' committee;
IActivities: tejected . Friday -a rather had' unanimously rejected' the 'CIA:
unusual request by the CIA and FBI} FBI 'proposal; ""beiieving there ~l-A
tto monitor the 'committees investi should Ibe no' inhibition" arong_
lgation into the spying operations of] those questioned by;; senators Or
those ~agencies 'staff personnel:
At the Same time; committee? 'In another" important procedural, MIAML HERALD
chairman Frank Church (D, Idaho) action, the committee gave Church
announced that rthe tempo ,of our] the to issue subpenas if the
investigation will: now pe stepped
adenROstesttoni
or: the 'agencies are
pp"* and that staff investigators will _ slow in volunteering documents and MIAMI
9
TLA.
begin questioning; Witnesses . within witnesses.
a Tew `days aboiit_ the- CTAs "tco- The first .phase of the investiga-
vert"' operations here-and abroad; tion Church said, would go-into the_
The committee was created' by CIAs: "covert intelligence `opera:
the: Senate in January . following tions" . including reported plans and:
charges and reports_that govern- attempts: , to; assassinate foreigg
ment, inteilgence . units and othet ieaders:
agencies were ilegally: spying on: The 'committee' investigators;
American citizens But the _commit: at- least-one Senator present
tee has been -siow in getting off the Iili' question' witnesses ' informally
Irouna oE . in swOrn depositions.in execu
FRIDAY, AT a: "closed litive session; Church said:
Qmmittee nembers 'cleared a1a
"some obstacles to an investigation,
Churck reported ,and 'it-was decid ;
'ed" the serious investigative" work 5/10/75
Should go-forwafd: Date:
Among the problems were re- Editlon:
quests relayed to the-committee by
Author; the White ` House. and the Justice}
Department; that the' GA 'and the} Editor:
FBI be permitted to haye monitors TItle:
SENATE COMITTEE
present When one of their agents 0 REJECTS REQUEST BY
emplopes is questioned:'
Churcl said the agencies suggest-| FBI , CIA
ed that %the monitors be called'ob- Character:
2} servers:
or The committee; has already
agreed with CIA-FBI requests to Classlflcation:
take such unusual secrecy measures Submltting Offlce: MIAMI
9
FLA_
that committee and staff members
wili be required to withhold infor;} Belng Investlgated
mation' from each other as' weli as| 6
from-the public
23316
The committee balked at the lat-!
ISEARCHED JINDEXED_
est request; however, because it SERIALIZELNA _FILEd_
would have opened the probe to; the]
3gencies_under investigaticn and ak-|
MAY 1 3 1975
FBI-MIAMI
NW 88608_Docld: 32989820Page 251_
With
meeting
==================================================
Page 252
==================================================
FD-350 (Rev. 7-16-6 3)
(Mount Clipping in Space Below)
Senate unit:
(Indicate page, name of belrg CIA; FB}
newspaper, clty and state.)
Rrom ptobe:
2-A
Associated Piess;"
WASHINGTON"' 'Senate
intelligence Committee has rejected MIAMI NEWS
as: Cunacceptable"" a Ford admiqis
tration proposal that CIA ;and FBf
monitors; be aliowed to- observe thev
questioning of witnesses MIAMI
9
FLA
Chairman Frank Church: (D:
idaho; Said' the committee ' voted:
unanimously to-enter _ the active
phase of-the proberand to authorize
him to isSue' Subpoenas if they:
prove necessary;
"We 'decided: that the serious in:
Vestigative work' should; 'now g0}
forward;' 'Church said; "The tempo
of" the_ investigation will now be:
stepped-up.
He. told 4
news: conference the"
committee will begin-a wide-ranging:
feview Of past and present covert
intelligence activities, Including "iss
'sues raised 'a5 to assassinationsse'
Church said: the request for moni; Date:
5-10-75
tors tg: 'sit, in on executive interro: EdItlon:
gation sessions; was made - the
White 'House; but he thought"
Eye hae]
Author:
been initiated by the CIA: Edltor:
"The committee voted: 'unank-. TItle:
SENATE UNITEBARS
'mously to reject ' the proposal ber CIA,FBI FROM PROBE
'cause we thought' there ;hould; be
no inhibition %H possiblevinhibition";
'OEwitnesses;;Chtirch said Character:
The initial ghase of the investiga
Or interviews, the_taking o8|
sworn depositions and 'formal hear; Classtficatlon:
'ings' will be' cloged to .the public; Submitting Offlce: MIAMI FLA
~Church: sajd:
"The 'committee will decide Tater Belng Investlqated
What_phases ; 9f' its ' investigation
Z36 5_
Willgo- #ublic;"' he added:
ARC(iED inDEXEd
FILED
MAY 1 3 1975
FBI-MIAMI
NW-88608-Docld: 32989820 Page 252
the"
tion
SERIALIZEDEIA
==================================================
Page 253
==================================================
~ 44 4
NRD 74 MA CODE
930 PM NITEL 5-2-75 MSE
TO ALL SACS
FR OM D IRECTOR_(62-1 16395)
PERSONAL AKENAIoN
SENST UDY 75
CAPT IONED MATTER PERTAINS To BUREAU' S HANDLING 0F REQ UESTS
FR OM SENATE AND HOUSE SELECT CO MMITTEES To STUDY GOVERNMENTAL
OPERATIONS WITH RESPECT To INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES. In CONNEC-
TIon WITH WORK OF IKESE COMMITTEES, STAFF MEMBERS MAY SEEK
TO INTER VIEW CURRENT AND FORMER FBI EMPLOYEES.
RECENTL Y, T HE SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE SSC) STAFF HAS
INTER VIEWED SEVERAL FORMER EMPLOYEES AND II IS ANTICIPATED
THAT "MANY RORE SUCH PERSONNEL WILL BE CoNTACTED:
THE F3i HAS PL EDGED FULL COOPERATION WITh THE COMMITTEE
AND WE WISH Io ASSIST AND FACIL ITATE Any INVEST IGATIOnS UNDER
TAKEN BY THE CO MMITTEE WITH RESPECT TO THE FBI. HOWEVER, WE
Do HAVE An OBLIGATION To INSURE THAT SENSITIVE SOUR CES AND
METHOD S AND ONGOIng SENSITIVE INVEST IGATIONS ARE FULLY
66-3348 4
7
SEARCHED_ INDEXED
SERIALIZELAL FILED
3
@
8
MAY 7
2 1975
L
7
Z1SZE8-ZaM
NW 88608 Docid:32989820 Page 253
W
Sy
5lx/75
{e
NH
==================================================
Page 254
==================================================
4
PAGE Two
PR OTECTED. SHOULD Any FORMER EMPLOYEE CONTACI YOUR OFFICE AND
HA VE AnY QUEST Ion REGARDING HIS OBLIGATION NOT To DIVULGE INFOR-
MATIoN OBTAINED BY VIRTUE 0F HIS PAST FBI EMPLOYMENT, HE SHOULD
BE INSTRUCTED To CONTACT LEGAL COUNSEL, FBI BY COLLECT CALL.
YOUR CONVERSATIONS WITH FOR MER EMPLOYEES MUST BE In KEEPING WIth
OUR PLEDGE: IT IS BEL IEVED SUCH A PROCEDURE WOULD INSURE PROPER
PROTECT Ion A ND ALSO FACILITATE THE WORK OF THE SSC:
THE ABOVE PROCEDURE ALSO APPL IES To CURRENT EMPLOYEES
OF YOUR OFFICE. HOWEVER, CoNTACT WItH THE LEGAL COUNSEL SHOULD
BE HA NDLED THROUGH THE SAC:
END
KOLD
FBi MM SGS
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 254
HQ,
==================================================
Page 255
==================================================
FD-36 (Rev. 5-22-64)
F B /
P
27
Date: MARCH 1975
Transmit the follow= in CODE
(Type in plaintext o code)
Via
TELETYPE DELLAEEUZ
(Priority)
To DIRECTOR
FROM MIAMI (LL- ~
Adm)
ATTENTION : BUDGET AND ACCOUNTING SECTION
SENATE SELECT COMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES
RE BUREAU TELETYPE TO ALL SACS , MARCH 24 , 1975 .
FOLLOWING ARE MIAMI OFFICE STATISTICS SHOW ING PERCENTAGES
OF TIME ASSIGNED TO COUNTERINTELLIGENCE (CI) MATTERS AND INTERNAL
SECURITY (IS) MATTERS BY SPECIAL AGENT PERSONNEL :
SACS Ut
0; ASACS
M 0
SUPERVISORS CI MATTERS : ONE ASS IGNED 90 PERCENT; ONE
ASS IGNED 5 PERCENT . SI MATTERS : ONE ASS IGNED 50 PERCENT; ONE
ASSIGNED 5 PERCENT
9
SPECIAL AGENTS CI MATTERS : 15 ASS IGNED FULL TIME; TWO
ASS IGNED 50 PERCENT; ONE ASS IGNED 40 PERCENT; ONE ASSIGNED 5
PERCENT . IS MATTERS : TwO ASS IGNED FULL TIME; THREE ASS IGNED
75 PERCENT; ONE ASS IGNED 60 PERCENT; ONE ASS IGNED 50 PERCENT;
ONE ASS IGNED 30 PERCENT; FIVE ASS IGNED 10 PERCENT _
JCB/al
(1) iSearcbtd
9r5+
1;
_iali"ci
Approved: Sent
BA
M Per
Special Agent in Charge
#U. &. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1969 0 (11)
NW 88608 (Qocld: 32989820 Page 255
373+8-3
2,
ing
==================================================
Page 256
==================================================
OPTIONAL ForM NO. 10
July 1973 EDITION
GSA FPMR (41 CFR) 101-11.6
UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT
Memorandum
TO SAC , MIAMI DATE:
3/26/75
FROM SUPERVISOR JOSEPH C. BALL
SUBJECT: SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE ON
INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES
Re Miami teletype to Bureau, 3/26/75 .
For your information, Supervisor CLYDE GROOVER ,
Budget and Accounting Section, Administrative Division,
FBIHQ, advised that for purposes of response to Bureau
teletype Of 3/24/75, the following categories Should be
included under Internal Security:
3 , 14, 61, 98, 100 , 117, 170 , 174, 176
The following categories should included under
Counterintelligence:
64 65, 105 , 110, 111,
134, 185
In arriving at the statistics set forth in referenced
teletype, the following Agents were included :
Supervisors
La
CI Matters : SA BALL
K
Assigned 909
SA WILSON Assigned 59
IS Matters: SA EDDY Assigned 50%
SA BALL Assigned 59
Special Agents
La
CI Ma tters : Assigned full time
Ea
SA BURGINS
CERVANTES
COCHRANE
DATSON
DWYER
FARABEE
JCB/al GIBBONS
(1) JONES Lb-33/6
KISZYNSKI
E3673 /60
MARSZALEK
MILLS
1975 ROSS
EBK_MIAMI STEVENS
STICKNEY
WARGER
U.S, Savings Bonds Regularly on tbe Payroll Savings Plan
NW 88683 'Bocld:32989820 256
157 , 163 ,
97 , 102, 108 , 109 , 3i26
113 ,
Q2
Bwy
Page
==================================================
Page 257
==================================================
SAs CI Matters (cont.) Assigned 509 FORRESTER and WALZER
Assigned 40% 0' KELLY
Assigned 59 4 e SITHER
TS Matters Assigned full time HOMER MILLER
PETERSON
Assigned 759 WINDLAND
MENTON
HEANEY
Assigned 609 0' KELLY
Assigned 50% CANNON
Assigned 309 DOWL ING
Assigned 109 DOOHER
VAN RHEIN
GUTIERREZ
DREW
KELLOGG
2
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 257
==================================================
Page 258
==================================================
NRO4 6 VA CODE
8:30 PM NITEL 3-24-75 DEB
To ALL SACS
OM DIRECT OR
SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE on INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES
SE NATOR FRANK CHUR CH, CHAIRMAN OF THE SENATE SELECT
COMMITTEE To ST UDY GOVERNMENTAL OPERATIONS WITH RESPECT To
INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES HAS MADE An INITIAL REQUEST FOR INFORMATION
FROM THE FBI: AMonG THE ITEMS REQUESTED IS A BREAKDOW N 0F
FIELD AGENT PERSONNEL ASSIGNED To INTERNAL SECURITY ANd
COUNTER INTELLIGENCE MATTERS.
ACCORD INGL Y, WITHIN FOUR EIGHT HOURS EACH SAC SHOULD SUTEL
Io FBIHQ, ATTENTIoN: BUDGET AND ACCOUNTInG SECTION, SETTInG FORTH
SEPARATEL Y THE NUMBER OF SACS, ASACS, SUPER VISORS AND AGENTS ASSIGNED
To INTER NAL SECURITY AND COUNTERINTELL IGENCE MATTERS. PERCENTAGES
OF An AGENT' S TIME, WKEN NOT ASSIGNED FULL- TIME To THESE ACT IVITIES,
SHOULD BE USED IF APPROPRIATE, PARTICULARL Y In THE SUPERVISORY
CATEGOR IES: THIS INFORMATION SHOULD BE BROKEN DOwN SEPARATEL Y
BETWEEN INTERNAL SECURITY AND COUNTERINTELL IGENCE. YOUR RESPONSE SHOULD
BE LIMITED To AGENT PERSONNEL ONL,Y.
END
FB I MM JRS CLR AND TKU
ACk FOR (I)
THANKS
El
Iv, 'NED _ INDEXED_
'SZRIALIZED FILED
YR MAR 24 1975
7k
FBI~MAMI
[b2zz
NW 88608 Docld:32989820 Page 258
23Y
334
7
3_
44