Francesco/who-killed-jfk huggingface dataset:
[124-10271-10033_multirif_redacted.pdf — page 199]
CONFIDENTIALU. S. Senate Select Committee toStudy Governmental Operations WithRespect to Intelligence Activities (SSC)Re: Testimony of Retired FBISpecial Agent (SA) Robert R.Nichols Before SSC Executive Sessionwhich might compromise a source; information which mightdivulge a sensitive investigative technique or method;information which might divulge what had been furnished theFBI by other Government agencies and/or foreign intelligencesources; and information which might adversely affect anongoing investigation. It was pointed out to Nichols thatif he so desired, he could obtain private counsel. He wasinvited to obtain additional personal briefing on the earlymorning of May 30, 1975, before his appearance before theSSC, from the Legal Counsel Division and the IntelligenceDivision of the FBI.Early on the morning of May 30, 1975, Nichols wasbriefed by the FBI, including advice to him that hisemployment agreement with the FBI was being waived for thepurposes of the interview by the SSC to the extent that itpertained to King, Levison and the Southern ChristianLeadership Conference (SCLC), the organization which had beenheaded up by King. Nichols was reminded of the areas ofprivilege and, at his request, was accompanied to the SSCoffices by SA Seymor F. Phillips of the FBI.At the SSC offices, Nichols and Phillips metMr. John Bayly of the office of the Minority Counsel of theCommittee who indicated that the interview would be underoath. Staff Member Seidel then appeared and inquiry wasmade of him by Phillips as to whether the interview wouldbe under oath, it being noted that it was only then, afterappearing at the SSC offices, that Nichols and Phillipsbecame aware of the oath aspects of the interview. WhenSeidel said that Nichols would be interviewed in an ExecutiveSession, Phillips asked that he be permitted to confer withFBI Headquarters as it would require clearance from the- 2 -CONFIDENTIALNW 88326 Docld:32989611 Page 200
[124-10271-10033_multirif_redacted.pdf — page 200]
# U. S. Senate Select Committee toStudy Governmental Operations WithRespect to Intelligence Activities (SSC)Re: Testimony of Retired FBISpecial Agent (SA) Robert R.Nichols Before SSC Executive SessionAttorney General (AG) before Nichols would be able to testify.Such AG clearance vas inmediately obtained telephonicallythrough FBI Headquarters and Phillips advised Nichols,Seidel and Mr. John Smith, of the office of Senator Walter D.Huddleston of the Committee that clearance for the interviewhad been obtained from the AG provided the interview waswithin the scope of the aforementioned areas. Phillipsfurther indicated that if Nichols believed the interviewwas outside the scope, he could invoke 16.22, Code of FederalRegulations. Arrangements were made for the ExecutiveSession to take place in the nearby old Carroll Arms Hotelwhile Phillips remained at the BBC offices in the event he wasneeded for consultation purposes.The Executive Session took place in Room 607 ofthe old Carroll Arms Hotel and lasted approximately for theperiod from 10:40 a.a., to 1:15 p.m. Present in addition toSeidel, Bayly and Smith, were a male reporter andSenator Huddleston who administered the oath to Nichols,remained about twenty minutes and who asked only a fewquestions. At the outset of this session, Seidel furnishedNichols the Rules of Procedure of the BSC, including SenateResolution 21. Nichols was permitted to look at the Rulesof Procedure and after a brief review, he told Seidel he wassatisfied as to the 88C authority and that they could proceedwith the questioning. Nichols was advised of his rights,including that to counsel.# TESTIMONY OF ROBERT R. NICHOLSThe following reports the questions and answers asfurnished by Nichols, but not necessarily in chronologicalorder.
[124-10271-10033_multirif_redacted.pdf — page 201]
U. S. Senate Select Committee toStudy Governmental Operations WithRespect to Intelligence Activities (SSC)Re: Testimony of Retired FBISpecial Agent (SA) Robert R.Nichols Before SSC Executive SessionNichols was questioned about the communist backgroundof Levison. He replied that he could not discuss this matterbecause it would jeopardize an FBI source. Nichols indicatedthat he did not know the identity of the source. Seidel,who did most of the questioning throughout the session, thenasked Nichols a series of questions attempting to determinewhether the source was a technical one, a foreign one, a"Soviet" one, also naming several other types. Nichols'answer in each case was that he did not know. At one point,Seidel claimed that Nichols had said it was a foreign source.Nichols then stated he did not recall having so stated andthat if he had so stated, it was wrong as he did not knowthe source. Seidel then asked how Nichols knew that theinformation he had would disclose the source if he wasunaware of the source's identity. Nichols responded thatinasmuch as he knew in advance the interview would includethe subject of Levison, he had asked Phillips of the FBIwhat he could discuss about Levison. Nichols then relatedthat Phillips had asked Nichols what he knew or recalled aboutLevison's background and that when he gave Phillips certaininformation, Phillips told him that that information wouldpossibly identify the source and, therefore, would beprivileged. (The Nichols-Phillips exchange referred to heretook place during the early morning of that same day, May 30,1975).Court Seal [JFK Law 10 (a)1]
[124-10271-10033_multirif_redacted.pdf — page 202]
U. S. Senate Select Committee toStudy Governmental Operations WithRespect to Intelligence Activities (SSC)Re: Testimony of Retired FBISpecial Agent (SA) Robert R.Nichols Before SSC Executive SessionCourt Seal [JFK Law 10 (a)1]Seidel questioned Nichols concerning alleged harassment of King by the FBI and mentioned such specific allegations as the following: Sending of a tape recording to Mrs. King; anonymous telephone calls to attempt to cancel press meetings by King; false fire alarms; and furnishing of information about King to the clergy and the news media, including an Atlanta editor, Ralph McGill. In each instance during this phase of the questioning, which Nichols described as rather extensive by Seidel, Nichols answered that he did not participate in any such actions and was unaware that any such things were being done. He also told Seidel that he knew of no COINTELPRO (counterintel- ligence) activity on the part of the FBI against King.Nichols was asked if he had contacts at Atlanta, Georgia, Police Department (PD) in the King investigation which Nichols acknowledged he had been assigned to in 1964. Nichols answered that he had confided in one detective in the security detail of the PD and on the urging of Seidel, Nichols furnished the detective's identity as Sergeant Bobby Moore.- 5 -
[124-10271-10033_multirif_redacted.pdf — page 203]
U. S. Senate Select Committee toStudy Governmental Operations WithRespect to Intelligence Activities (88C)Re: Testimony of Retired FBISpecial Agent (SA) Robert R.Nichols Before SSC Executive SessionCONFIDENTIALNichols was questioned as to what type ofinvestigation concerning King was conducted besides theuse of a technical surveillance. Nichols replied that hehad attempted to initiate action to infiltrate the SCLCwith live informants but that every one of his suggestionsalong this line was turned down by FBI Headquarters. Nicholsfurnished the reason for these rejections as being that theFBI did not want to interfere with civil rights organisationsbut indicated that the Bureau had never told him this inthe rejections and that it was his own rationale. Nicholsindicated that from time to time spot physical surveillanceswould take place in Atlanta to verify contacts between Kingand individuals known or suspected of being communists.During this phase of the interview, Seidel mentioned the nameof Harry Wachtel and Nichols acknowledged he was one ofKing's contacts. In response to a question as to whether ornot trash or mail covers were used against King, Nicholsresponded that they were not.Inquiry was made as to why so much reliance wasplaced by the FBI on technical coverage of King and so littlewas done in the way of physical surveillances. Seidelpointed out that a technical surveillance of an individualwas a greater infringement of his privacy than was a physicalsurveillance. Nichols responded that the Bureau did what itfelt was necessary to get the information it needed. Seidelthen asked Nichols how he would personally feel about atechnical surveillance on him, Nichols. Nichols' responsewas that he would rather have his phone tapped than to alwaysbe followed around.Nichols was questioned concerning the authority forthe technical surveillance of King and how Nichols wouldlearn of such authority. Nichols explained that he would be- 6 -NW 88326 Docld:32989611 Page 204
[124-10271-10033_multirif_redacted.pdf — page 204]
U. S. Senate Select Committee toStudy Governmental Operations WithRespect to Intelligence Activities (BSC)Re: Testimony of Retired FBISpecial Agent (SA) Robert R.Nichols Before SSC Executive Sessioncalled into the office of the Special Agent in Charge andtold that advice from the Bureau had been received that thetechnical surveillance vas authorized. When inquiry wasmade concerning the mechanics of installing the surveillance,Nichols answered that he had nothing to do with this phase.On questioning, Nichols discussed the monitoring planthe had set up with a cover company and Nichols gave the generallocation of the plant. Nichols indicated that he did not knowwho actually made the installation and was asked if anAl Miller was the sound man in the office. Nicholsacknowledged that he was and when asked if Nichols hadmonitored the surveillance, Nichols indicated he had on aspot basis.Nichols was questioned and furnished informationof a biographical and personal nature. It included suchthings as the period of time he was assigned in Atlanta, theperiod of time assigned security work, the King case andcriminal work, as well as when and why he had been transferredfrom Atlanta to Oklahoma City. Seidel brought up the matterof Nichols' testimony in Houston, Texas, in connection withan FBI case concerning the heavyweight boxer Cassius Clay.On questioning, Nichols acknowledged he had been transferredto Oklahoma City because of what the Bureau considered hisdeficiencies in his testimony in that case. Seidel inquiredas to what actually Nichols had done wrong and Nicholsreplied that he had received a letter of censure but had thrownit away and cannot now recall the specific deficiencies forwhich he was censured. He only recalled that his testimonywas considered not up to Bureau standards. Seidel then asked,"What are the Bureau standards? Didn't you tell the truth?"Nichols responded that there was no question as to thetruthfulness of his testimony, that he had told the truth.- 7 -
[124-10271-10033_multirif_redacted.pdf — page 205]
# U. S. Senate Select Committee toStudy Governmental Operations WithRespect to Intelligence Activities (SSC)Re: Testimony of Retired FBISpecial Agent (SA) Robert R.Nichols Before SSC Executive SessionNichols was questioned about his contacts withanother retired FBI Agent, Alan Sentinella, to whom the Kingcase was assigned after it had been handled by Nichols.Nichols was asked if he had discussed his forthcomingtestimony with Sentinella who resides in Atlanta. Nicholsacknowledged that he had had a discussion with Sentinellabut that they had both purposely avoided any discussion of thesubstance of Nichols' testimony-to-be and the testimony whichSentinella had already given the SSC. They discussed onlyprocedural aspects as Nichols wanted to have some idea inadvance as to what might be expected in any trip to Washingtonto testify. It was Nichols' impression that Seidel thoughtthat Nichols was holding out some information on this matter.On at least three occasions Seidel inquired ofNichols as to whether he had discussed his forthcomingtestimony with Charles Harding of Atlanta, a retired FBIAgent who had also been acquainted with the King case in 1964.On each ocasion, Nichols denied that he had had any discussionwith Harding on this matter.Nichols was questioned as to whether the technicalsurveillance on King was justified and his response was thatit was justified. When asked why, Nichols stated that therewas considerable evidence of communist influences on Kinginasmuch as King was receiving much advice in his work fromLevison and other communists. Seidel asked if they includedJack O'Dell and Harry Wachtel and Nichols acknowledged thatit did. When Nichols was asked as to whether or not he haddeveloped any information as to the communist background ofLevison, O'Dell or Wachtel, Nichols responded that he hadnot and that the information was developed by others.- 8 -
[124-10271-10033_multirif_redacted.pdf — page 206]
U. 8. Senate Select Committee toStudy Governmental Operations WithRespect to Intelligence Activities (SBC)Re: Testimony of Retired FBISpecial Agent (SA) Robert R.Nichols Before SSC Executive SessionAt one point, when Seidel asked about allegedharassment by the FBI, Nichols told him of FBI investigationsof church burnings in South Georgia and that the Bureaurecognized outstanding work by its Agents in this fieldand that some of the Agents, including Nichols, had receivedmeritorious awards. Nichols indicated that he had beencommended for his work generally in civil rights investigations.When asked about what the FBI was doing in the Kingcase besides use of wiretaps, Nichols advised that he hadattended a conference at FBI Headquarters to explore avenuesof investigation that might be pursued in the King case.The objective was to discuss ways of better determining theextent of the communist influences on King. Nichols furnishedthe names of the following FBI personnel as attending theconference: Agents Henry Rouse and Nichols from Atlanta;and from FBI Headquarters, Assistant Director William C.Sullivan, and Agents Larry Gurley and Fred Baumgardner.(Nichols advised that also attending the conference wasa Bureau official, Joseph Sizoo, but that he did not furnishthis name during his testimony as he did not then recall hispresence at the conference). Nichols told the SSC that hecould not remember what decisions were made at the conference.Nichols vas questioned concerning a dispute betweenKing and former FBI Director Hoover which had been aired bythe news media. Nichols was asked if the dispute was thereason for technical coverage of King and Nichols answeredthat he was convinced that that was not the reason for thetechnical coverage; that such coverage was otherwise fullyjustified. Nichols pointed out that the investigation ofKing was initiated before the dispute although it was hisrecollection that the technical coverage started after thedispute.
[124-10271-10033_multirif_redacted.pdf — page 207]
U. S. Senate Select Committee toStudy Governmental Operations WithRespect to Intelligence Activities (SSC)Re: Testimony of Retired FBISpecial Agent (SA) Robert R.Nichols Before SSC Executive SessionAttempt was made by Seidel to question Nichols concerning FBI investigation of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee but Nichols refused to discuss the matter on the basis it was outside the parameters of the testimony.Nichols was questioned concerning an alleged visit of William C. Sullivan to Atlanta to see the newspaper editor, Ralph McGill. This discussion was initiated in the context of the allegation that the FBI furnished information about King to the news media. Nichols responded that he did not remember Sullivan ever coming to Atlanta.Nichols was asked if he knew about the writing of a monograph about King by an FBI Agent named Charles Brennan. Nichols responded that he did not know of this.Nichols advised that he was offered the opportunity to make a statement at the beginning of his testimony but declined to do so. He was given the same offer at the close of his testimony and he made a statement to the following effect. Nichols believed that the Bureau had always conducted the King investigation with the objective of determining the extent of communist influences on King and on the SCLC and that the only way to make a determination as to the full extent required technical coverage. Nichols pointed out that the Bureau never interfered in the legitimate civil rights activities of individuals or organizations or harassed such people and that it was Nichols' belief that FBI personnel were doing what they were being paid for when they conducted legitimate investigations revolving around communisa and communist influences in civil rights activities.- 10 -
[124-10271-10033_multirif_redacted.pdf — page 208]
U. S. Senate Select Committee toStudy Governmental Operations WithRespect to Intelligence Activities (SSC)Re: Testimony of Retired FBISpecial Agent (SA) Robert R.Nichols Before SSC Executive SessionAlso at the conclusion of the testimony, Nicholswas told that a draft of the testimony would be made available forhim to review for editing purposes. The SSC would telephoneNichols who was returning to Atlanta to advise him the draft wouldbe available and Nichols would have five days to review same.Nichols was told that the draft could not be mailed to him butthat someone might bring it to Atlanta; otherwise, Nichols wouldhave to return to Washington, D. C., if he wanted to review it.Expenses for such a second trip were not mentioned.On June 2, 1975, Nichols telephoned FBI Headquartersfrom Birmingham, Alabama, where he was temporarily residingand advised he recalled the following additional details ofwhat was covered in his testimony.Seidel asked Nichols if information received throughtechnical coverage included information relating to> Court Seal [JFK Law 10(a)1]Senator Huddleston asked Nichols how it would bepossible to follow the Bureau instruction precisely and Nicholsresponded that it would be very difficult to comply and in someinstances, it would not be possible. Seidel then commented,"Why - because of the nature of the beast?" (wiretap).- 11 -
[124-10271-10033_multirif_redacted.pdf — page 209]
U. S. Senate Select Committee toStudy Governmental Operations WithRespect to Intelligence Activities (SSC)Re: Testimony of Retired FBISpecial Agent (SA) Robert R.Nichols Before SSC Executive Session> CONFIDENTIALJohn Smith of Senator Huddleston's office asked thedifference between a bug and a wiretap and Nichols respondedthat a bug was a microphone implanted on the premises whereasa wiretap was an interception of a telephone line. Smith thenasked if there was a bug on King or the SCLC in Atlanta andNichols responded "not to my knowledge." Seidel asked aboutany other places in Atlanta where there may have been bugs onKing and Nichols advised he had no knowledge of any. Seidelasked if Nichols was familiar with a Willard Hotel (Washington,D. C.) incident involving King and Nichols responded that hewas not.NOTE:Original and one copy to the Attorney General copyfor forwarding to the White House. Debriefing of Nichols,including telephonic contact from him 6/2/75, by S. F. Phillips.- 12 -> CONFIDENTIAL> ![confidential]
[124-10271-10299.pdf — page 0]
# ATTENDEESUSIB AD HOC COORDINATING GROUPON CONGRESSIONAL REVIEWWednesday, 4 June 1975, at 1000 hoursDCI Conference Room (7D64)Dr. John M. ClarkeAD/DCI/ICLt. Col. Harold CoyleRep. for Deputy UnderSecretary of the Air ForceMr. J. J. HitchcockStateMr. Walter Elder STATCIAMr. David Lowman STATNSAMrs. Harriett D. MowittExec Sec to the Ad Hoc GroupICSMr. J. Foster CollinsTreasuryMr. Donald E. MooreChairman, USIB SecurityCommitteeMr. Leon F. SchwartzFBIMr. Robert UpchurchERDAMr. Merrill T. KellyArmyRADM Donald P. Harvey, USNMr. John Brock STATCaptain William QuisenberryDIAColonel Jerry D. Alderson, Jr,Air ForceCaptain L. C. MartinezNavy
[124-10271-10299.pdf — page 1]
CONFIDENTIAL4. In addition to the "category II" items, there are a number of additional subjects largely geographic in nature for which the DCI feels CIA should assume responsibility for preparing comprehensive papers. In view of the apparent adversary relationship between the Senate Select Committee Staff and the agencies under investigation, it may be that preparation of papers dealing comprehensively with specific subjects will deflect some of this cross-agency probing and result in a positive solution to problems before they arise.5. The Chairman reminded the group of the responsibility which exists to keep Mr. Cotter of the Post Office Department informed on matters resulting from the Congressional investiga- tions which will clearly impact on his agency's affairs. At present, the cross-agency character of the interviews now under way indicate a possible communication gap in adequately coordinating on postal matters.6. The Chairman explained the DCI's action taken in late May to separate the responsibility for CIA's response to the Congressional Select Committees from those responsibilities of the IC Staff. [Both Dr. Clarke and Mr: Elder emphasized the very close relationship which exists in the two efforts. Mr. Elder will represent CIA at all USIB Ad Hoc sessions henceforth.]7. The Chairman questioned Mr. Elder, the CIA repre- sentative whether or not the Senate Select Committee had yet furnished the Agency with a list of subjects with which they plan to deal in depth. Mr. Elder reported they have not yet done so, but it is apparent that three items are of priority interest at the moment: assassinations, the Phoenix program, and covert action; that it appears clear the Committee is currently pursuing the question of authorities, approvals, and support from other agencies.8. The 27 May request addressed to the DCI covering materials under the jurisdiction of a number of Community agencies was provided to the members of the Ad Hoc Group. [Dr. Clarke indicated he was seeking policy guidance on selected items in the request which dealt with Community product such as NIE etc.] He noted the 27 May request indicated identical: letters were being forwarded to the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Defense. Copies have been sent to all USIB Ad Hoc members, the NSC and the White House.2CONFIDENTIAL
[124-10271-10299.pdf — page 2]
# CONFIDENTIAL9. Copies of a memorandum which set forth the action items resulting from the Policy Steering Group session of last week were provided to the Ad Hoc members for their information.10. Mr. Elder reported that the House Committee has indicated to CIA its intent to concentrate on specific issues, but as of now are not adequately organized to be specific in their requests. The one extant request forwarded to the CIA was posing some problems because of the lack of cleared personnel, approved storage facilities, and determinations on the ultimate disposition of records. The Chairman noted that concurrent with this meeting, a meeting of Community legal representatives was taking place with the purpose of commenting on the House Select Committee's proposed security regulations which have not yet been adopted.11. [CIA reported its success with the provision of a reading room for SSC Staff at CIA headquarters.] State reported there were no comparable facilities anticipated there. Defense has provided badges to Staff members and reading facilities are available. The same accessability of materials is true at NSA and FBI.12. The last subject on the agenda was the implementation of the Community Central Index. In the material provided to the group was a letter reaffirming the purposes of the Central Index and a list of 40 key words to be used in identifying material furnished the Index. A printout of the Index content was provided to the group as a review document only. The final format of such periodic reports has not yet been refined. Group members are encouraged to comment if they detect any problems with items in the printout. Forms for inputting information to the Central Index were also provided to the Group. This is a service of common concern which will assure the uniformity of information received and should serve to lighten the workload of the individual agencies. The telephone number of Mrs. Young of the Central Index was provided for agencies' convenience in accessing the Index information.![signature of Harriett D. Mowitt]Harriett D. MowittExecutive SecretaryAttachment: as stated