16) thu 2,2, 28,4 Hw SA. B-Huu ISK, 17 tu yo ¥U9F co tun T, oft 79, Bl 82
& “HRG46 WA CODE 7:20PM WITEL 3-24-75 DEB TO ALL Sacs STUDY GOVERNMENTAL: oPEAN ACTIVITIES Nas MADE ane I FROM. THE FSI. FIELD AGENT PERSONNEL nSSIGHED To i COUNTERTNTELL GENCE MATTERS, AC TO FBIHQ,. aTTENT IOW: BUDGET, AND accoul leararear’ THE NUMBER OF SACS, ASACS, | TO INTERNAL SECURITY “AND COUNTERINTEL ‘OF AN AGE TS TIME, Wen hor. ASSIGNED, NTERNAL SECURITY qND > ORDINGLY, WITHIN FOUR EIGHT HOURS ‘EACH ‘SHOULD BE YSED_ IF APPROPRIATE, PARTICULARLY IN VF THE SENAT 'E SELECT 1! : i0Ns WITH RESPECT T0 4 NITTAL REQUE “ST FOR INFOR MAT IOW AMONG THE ITEMS REQUESTED IS § BREAKDOWN OF , Sac SHOULD SyTEL NT iti SECTION, SETTING FORTH, | SUPERVISORS AND AGENTS ,SSIGNED LIGENCE NATTERS. PERCENTAGES FULL-TIME 10. THESE sCTIVITIES, THE SUPERVISORY ATEGO RIES. THIS INFORMATION SHOULD BE. BROKEN DOWN SEPARATELY BETWEEN LATERM aAL SEC URITY AND > COURTERHAELL IeEice YOUR RESPONS Ez SHO yLD BE LIMITED ‘TO AGENT PERSONNE L ONLY. |  ¢£ 2 ACOF~ / EaD | fo . ee ) , . . | SSC PBI By CLR AWD.THS | 2 | et e remit \ 7 Stes \ | NAR 2 24191 \ ; / NW 54965 DocId:32989503 Page 2
Bulky Exhibit - Inventory of Propet Acquired as Evidence ; FD-192 (Rev. 19-6-65) Date __ Qe 2/31/75 a oh cy rt tater S eEEEnanamennneaed Title and Character of Case SENSTUDY Daie Property Acquired | Source From Which Property Acquized | 12/31/75 . | Bureau Location of Property or Bulky Exhibit | Reason for Retention of Property and Efforts Made to Dispose of Same — Bulky Exhibit Room | Description of Property or Exhibit and Identity of Agent Submitting Same One copy of transcript of questions which were asked Director _ KELLEY during his appearance before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence Activities, 12/10/75. - apok a abst eh Submitted by SAC RICHARD D, ROGGE/db1 SEMIANNUAL INVENTORY CERTIFICATION TG JUSTIFY RETENTION CF PROPERTY (Initial and Date) B22? eX LB Ok Yo SELIG GL Fiald Files 62-2665 /B/ SEARCHED. sssssssscssseel NDEXED) srsssseassnsnnn SERIALIZED searsercens PILED, srvereeded eeteaneene DEC31 1975 Fei Bure NW 34965 Doocld: 32959503 Page 3 =
NR@74 WA CODE 1:12PM NITEL 52-75 PSE TO ALL SACS FROM DIRECTOR (62-116395) Pi ons ATTENTION Shewy {F) \Qaprioueo MATTER PERTAINS TO BUREAU'S HANDLING OF REQUESTS FRUi SENATE AND HOUSE SELECT COMMITTEES TO STUDY GOVERNMENTAL OPERATIONS WITH RESPECT TO INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES. IN CONNEC~ TION WITH WORK OF THESE COMMITTEES, STAFF MEMBERS MAY SEEK TO INTERVIEW CURRENT AND FORHMER FBI EMPLOYEES. ; \ RECENTLY, THE SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE (SSC) STAFF HAS INTERVIEWED SEVERAL FORMER EMPLOYEES AND IT 1s ANTICIPATED THAT MANY MORE SUCH PERSONNEL WILL BE CONTACTED. THE FBI H&S PLEDGED FULL COOPERATION WITH THE COWMITTEE AND WE WISH TO ASSIST AND FACILITATE ANY INVESTIGATIONS UNDER- TAKEN BY THE COMMITTEE WITH RESPECT TO THE FBI. HOWEVER, WE DO HAVE AN OBLIGATION TO INSURE THAT SENSITIVE SOURCES AND METHODS AND ONGOING SENSITIVE INVESTIGATIONS ARE FULLY 2 a . a be 266) as een eed _ 7 RH gS me tears ss be nse nen raat te ties NW 54965 Docld:32989503 Page 4 . Ge SHAD
PAGE Two PROTECTED. SHOULD ANY FORMER EMPLOYEE CONTACT YOUR OFFICE AND HAVE ANY QUESTION REGARDING HIS OBLIGATION NOT TO DIVULGE INFOR- MATION OBTAINED BY VIRTUE OF HIS PAST FBI EMPLOYMENT, HE SHOULD BE INSTRUCTED TO CONTACT LEGAL COUNSEL, FBIHQ@, BY COLLECT CALL. YOUR CONVERSATIONS WITH FORMER EMPLOYEES MUST BE IN KEEPING WITH OUR PLEDGE. IT IS BELIEVED SUCH A PROCEDURE WOULD INSURE PROPER’ PROTECTION AND ALSO FACILITATE THE WORK OF THE ssc. THE ABOVE PROCEDURE ALSO APPLIES TO CURRENT EMPLOYEES OF YOUR OFFICE. HOWEVER, CONTACT WITH THE LEGAL COUNSEL SHOULD BE HANDLED THROUGH THE SAC. END | DMB FBI BUFFALO ACK FOR TWO AND CLR Nw 34965 DocId: 32989503 Page 5
FD-36 (Rev. 5-22-64) @ FB1 Transmit the following in CODED (Type in plaintext or code) Via TELETYPE URGENT (Priority) | moe ee Lee TO: DIRECTOR, FBI FROM: SAC, BUFFALO ACCOOn TW6- ATIN: BUDGET AND agGSENT SECTION SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES REBUTEL DATED MARCH 24, 1975. BUFFALO DIVISION HAS TWO SUPERVISORS AND 23 SPECIAL AGENTS ASSIGNED TO INTERNAL SECURITY AND COUNTERINTELLIGENCE MATTERS BUT NOT NECESSARILY ON A FULL TIME BASIS. FOLLOWING IS A BREAKDOWN OF FIELD AGENT PERSONNEL ASSIGNED TO THESE AREAS ON FULL TIME BASIS: INTERNAL SECURITY COUNTER INTELLIGENCE SAC 0 0 ASAC 0 0 SUPERVISORS 0 0 SPECIAL AGENTS 6 G? 0 (1)? imw te amet oe tn ae ve Th evesevooveeses chia Denes netrreageoee ened... severance tcesceere Approved: tp Sent ya NS ale Special Agent in Charge GPO : 1970 © - 402-735 NW 54965 DoclTd: 325989503 Page 6
FD-36 (Rev. 5-22-64)  ] @ | | J I I wma. | FBI ! Date: { I Transmit the following in (Type in plaintext or code) (Priority) I BU PAGE TWO IN ADDITION TO ABOVE, COMPUTATION OF ESTIMATED PERCENTAGE OF TIME SPENT BY OTHER AGENT PERSONNEL ASSIGNED THESE MATTERS WOULD REPRESENT EQUIVALENT OF FOLLOWING NUMBER OF FULL TIME PERSONNEL: INTERNAL SECURITY COUNTERINTELLIGENCE SUPERVISORS 1 SPECIAL AGENTS 7 GRAND TOTALS : SUPERVISORS SPECIAL AGENTS Approved: _.. Sent LM Per Special Agent in Charge GPO : 1970 © ~ 402-735 NW 54965 Doold: 325989503 Page 7
1 “ OPTIONAL FORM NO. to 4 MAY 1962 EDITION GSA FPMR (4t CFR) 101-11.6 UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT Memorandum TO : SAC (66- ) DATE: 3/26/75 FROM : SUPV. FRANCIS B. JENKINS SUBJECT: SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES ReBUtel to Director, 3/26/75. Information in retel was arrived at on the following basis: As of 3/26/75, there are 1 Supervisor and 12 SAs assigned to Squad #3, and 1 Supervisor and 10 SAs assigned to Squad #4, which squads handle Internal Security and Counter- intelligence matters. In addition, 5 Resident Agents and 1 Road Trip Agent also devote a portion of their time to both of these matters. Set forth below is the percentage of time spent on Internal Security and Counterintelligence by Agents of the #3 and #4 Squads, as well as Resident Agents: INTERNAL SECURITY - AGENTS Name Bercent Total AHART 100% BAGDY 100% KASH 100% LASH 100% MC GUIGAN 100% THILL 100% = 6 SAs KING 75% COMFORT 5% ANGLE 2% . BUCHER 2%, “ “- 4A RISDON 2% PUCKETT 5% = 1\SA (minus 9%) FBJ:afe , we (1) SEARCHED Senn 672/501) eee SERIALIZED FILE a? ¢ ee h FC Vy" FBI—BUFFALO — Buy U.S. Savings Bonds Qin on NW 54965 Docld: 32989503 Page &
| BU 66- INTERNAL SECURITY - AGENTS (Cont. ) | Name Percent Total CAIN 50% CORCORAN 50% = 1 SA THOMAS 50% PEARSON 50% = 1 SA SHAW 70% WAGNER 50%, = 1 SA (plus 20%) CRAWFORD 95% = 1 SA (minus 5% JENSON 95% 7 1 SA (minus 5%) SIWULA 90% = 1 SA (minus 10%) SUNDERLAND 50% = 4 SA TOTAL 13% SAs COUNTERINTELLIGENGE -~ AGENTS HORAN 20% SHAW 30% WAGNER 50% = 1 SA SMITH 95% = 1 SA (minus 5%) SMALLDON 85% THOMAS 5%, ANGLE 2%, RUDY 5%, RISDON 2%, PUCKETT 27, = 1 SA (plus 1%) CAIN 50% CORCORAN 1 SA PEARSON SUNDERLAND \ MW 54965 Doold: 32939503 Page 9
BU 66- INTERNAL SECURITY - SUPERVISORS Name Percent Total JENKINS 80% UTZ 20% = 1 Supervisor COUNTERINTELLIGENCE - SUPERVISORS JENEINS 15% UTZ 20% = 1; Supervisor (minus 15%) Based on the above computations, the Bureau was advised in retel that there are | Supervisor and 13%; SAs assigned full-time to Internal Security, and -s Supervisor and 5 SdAs assigned to Counterintelligence. The format utilized in preparation of retel was based on information received in a telephone conversation by ASAC JOHN F. SHANLEY with Section Chief L. CLYDE GROVER, Budget and Accounting Section, Administrative Division, FBIHQ, on 3/25/75. The above is for information. f NW 34965 Docld: 32909503 Page i0 |
NRO36 yA CODE 4:10PM NITEL 5-20-75 Pay TO ALL Sacs FROM DIRECTOR (62-116395) PERSONAL ATTENTION SENSTUDY - 75. REBUTEL MAY 2, 1975. IN CONNECTION yITH wORK OF THE SENATE aNd HOUSE SELECT COMMITTEES, ITS REPRESENTATIVES iaY CONTACT YOUR OFFICE FOR INFORMATION. IN ONE HECENT INSTANCE, A REPRESENTATIVE OF THE SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE TELEPHOWICALLY INQUIRED AS TO IDENTITY OF Sac IN A PARTICULAR OFFICE DURING 1979. | | IN HANDLING SUCH INQUIRIES INSURE ESTABLISHING BONA FIDES OF REPRESENTATIVE BY SHOW OF CREDENTIALS ON PERSONAL CONTACT OR, IF TELEPHONIC CONTACT, BY TELEPHONING BACK TO COMMITTEE. UNLESS INFORMATION IS OF ~ PUBLIC NATURE, AS IN THE INSTANCE CITED ABOVE, OBTAIN FBIHQ CLEARANCE PRIOR TO SUPPLYING ANY INFORMATION. FBIHQ MUST BE EXPEDITIOUSLY ADVISED OF aLL ad INFORMATION FURNISHED. ~ Z D- DLES - ., ® : ee one — ; " END 1. SAC (2. SEARCHED > OEXED SERIALIZED > FILED | AY 20 1975 nay eS 4, Desk 4 " | ] “1. sur G. Bask 6 = GEA WwW S4965 Doold: 325389503 Page ii
NRGSS wa CODE S3G9PM 9/4/75 NITEL AJN TO ALL Sacs FROM DIRECTOR (62-116595) PERSONAL ATTENTION SENSTUDY 75 REBUTEL MAY 2, 1975. : PURPOSES OF INSTANT TELETYPE ARE TO (1) REITERATE THAT FBI HAS PLEDGED FULL COOPERATION wITH THE SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE (SSC) aNiD wISHES To ASSIST AND’ FACILITATE ANY INVESTIGATIONS yNDERTAKEN BY THE SSC WITH: RESPECT TO THE FBI3 AND (2) SET FORTH NEW PROCEDURE RELATING TO SSC STAFF INTERVIEyS OF CURRENT AND FORMER FBI EMPLOYEES, FOR INFORMATION OF THOSE OFFICES yHICH HAVE NOT PREVIOUSLY HAD CURRENT OR FORMER EMPLOYEES IN ITS TERRITOY INTERVIEWED ' BY THE SSC, THE BUREAU FREQUENTLY LEARNS FROM THE SSC OR OTHERWISE THAT FORMER EMPLOYEES ARE BEING CONSIDERED FOR INTERVIEW BY THE SSC STaFF. INSTRUCTIONS ARE ISSUED FOR THE FIELD OFFICE TO CONTACT THE FORMER EMPLOYEE TO ALERT HIM AS TO POSSIBLE INTERVIEy, REMIND HIM OF HIS CONFIDENTIALITY AGREE Me NT WITH THE BUREAU SUGGEST THAT m HE Is ee FOR 1. stc_ Ly" C “a prited 0 , 2. ASAC of Ns 3. Sec; Supvr. sh 4. Desk 4 4 ,) 5. Desk peers (Po. SHC 6, Desk 6 GI Gb? ? #
NW 54965 Docld: 32989503 Page i3 ipermreer ° PAGE Tyo INTERVIEy, HE WAY CONTACT THE LEGAL COUNSEL DIVISION BY COLLECT CALL FOR FURTHER INFORMATION. IN THE USUAL CaSE, AS CIRCUMSTANCES UNFOLD, THE FORMER EMPLOYEE IS TOLD(1) THAT HE HAS q RIGHT TO LEGAL COUNSEL, BUT THAT THE BUREAU CANNOT PROVIDE SAME3 (2) THAT THE BUREAU HAS WAIVED THE CONFIDENTIALITY AGREEMENT FOR THE INTERVIEw wITHIN SPECIFIED PARAMETERS$ AND (3) THAT THERE ARE FOUR PRIVILEGED AREAS IN wHICH HE IS NOT REQUIRED TO ANSWER QUESTION. THESE AREAS ARE RELATING TO INFORMATION WHICH MAY CA) IDENTIFY BUREAU SOURCES; (B) REVEAL SENSITIVE METHODS/TECHNIQUES3 (C) REVEAL IDENTITIES OF THIRD AGENCIES, INCLUDING FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES, OR INFORMATION FROM SUCH AGENCIES; AND (D) ADVERSELY AFFECT ONGOING BUREAU INVESTIGATIONS. HERETOFORE, BUREAU HAS OFFERED INTERVIEWEES CONSYLTATION PRIVILEGES wHEREBY A BUREAU SUPERVISOR yOULD.BE aVaILABLE NEARBY, ALTHOUGH NOT ACTUALLY AT INTERVIEy, SO INTERVIEWEE MIGHT CONSULT wITH HIM SHOULD QUESTIONS ARISE aS TO PaRAMETERS OF INTERVIEy OR PRIVILEGED AREAS. THE CONSULTANT DID NOT act AS A LEGAL ADVISOR. EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY, BUREAU WILL NO LONGER PROVIDE
ye é | | >: PaGE THREE ON=THE-SCENE PERSONNEL FOR CONSULTATION PURPOSES TO ASSIST EITHER CURRENT OF FORMER EMPLOYEES. PROSPECTIVE INTERVIEWEES — SHOULD BE TOLD THAT, IF THEY DESIRE ASSISTANCE OF THIS NATURE "DURING AN INTERVIEW, THEY MAY CONTACT EITHER PERSONALLY CIF INTERVIEW IS IN waSHINGTON, D. C.) OR BY COLLECT CALL, THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF THE INTELLIGENCE DIVISION, MR. Ww. R. WANNALL, OR, LN HIS ~BSENCE, SECTION CHIEF W. 0. CREGAR. THIS CHANGE 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 EXPLORING aVENUES TO ARRANGE LEGAL REPRESENTATION, ‘WHEN NECESSARY, FOR CURRENT AND FORMER EMPLOYEES wITHOUT EXPENSE TO. THEM. YOU yILL BE KEPT ADVISED OF DEVELOPMENTS IN THIS REGARD. END . RFP F6i BU 65 _Docld: 32989503 Page 14 * rT a
NW 34965 Doold: 32989503 FD"350 (Rev, 7-16-63}, e —~ Prevent Megal “Surveillance ‘Continuing disclosures by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence drama- | tize to the American people how exces- sive and illegal certain CIA and FBI sur- veillance practices became during the fading Cold War years. Apparently the systematic opening of foreign mail to and from Americans by the CIA, as well as the FBI’s burglary break-ins or “black bag jobs,” had been stopped quite a while ago — as they certainly should have been. But with Americans now well alerted to this threat to their own liberties, there can be no excuse for avoiding effective new restraints to correct past mistakes and prevent a recurrence, of these abuses... .. 7... Earlier this yea, the Rockefeller CIA panel disclosed the 20-year program of mail openings, which it branded as ‘unlawful’ and raising ‘constitutional questions under the Fourth Amendment” barring unreasonable search and sei- zure, But a Senate committee has now added such details as Sen. Church’s dis- covery in his own CIA files of a copy of a letter he had sent from Russia to his mother-inslaw in Idaho in 1971. More ‘disturbing is the disclosure that the FBI between 1942 and 1968 con- ducted 238 break-in burglaries against 14 unnamed ‘domestic security targets,” not to mention uncounted others against 2. ASAC 3. Sec. Supvr, 4. Desk 4 9. Desk 5 6. Desk 6 Page (Mount Clipping in Space Below) enqrotinuttaserataS) various other individuals and groups. What this means is that the FBI, with- out benefit of any court warrant as re- quired under the Fourth Amendment, broke into homes and offices and _ presumably rummaged through private files, letters and other belongings. To put it bluntly, the FBI in such cases, wheth- . er with or without the support of higher autority brazenly ignored the Bill of Rights. We realize, of course, that attitudes and conditions have changed..The break- ins began in wartime, That they persist- ed long afterwards, however, documents * the inadequacies of legal restraints, and the dangers of the irresponsible attitude of “go do it, but don’t tell me about it.” More important than assessing blame ‘or hooting at ironies is the imperative of preventing similar perils in the future. The country needs better laws, more effective accountability of these agencies to elected officials and a much greater alertness on their part to the dangers posed by surveillance excesses to Ameri- can liberties. The U. S. must have first-rate intelli- gence capability at home and abroad. It needs a strong and effective FBI and CIA in the national interest. But it must de- _vise strict guidelines that confine this capability within lawful and constitution al boundaries. Casa i rd SM SHES YI Ux 26 , “UE (-206 3 3 ey G— 62- Reis + O-L A {Indicate page, name of newspaper, city and state.) 14 BUPFALO EVENING NEWS Buffalo, New York ce Turcay “L = 80-1876 L = 80-2122 9/29/75 City Date: Edition: Author: - Edite: Millard C. Browne Title: SENATE SELECT COMMITTE ON INTELLIGENCE °F “ 66- 2183 — Classificatiog: ae Buffalo Character: Submitting Office: CJ Being Investigated iE ~ [SED ED mer ; S70 1975 , FiO emAnnie > teens ty S rn
SAC (67-369-I) LL/12/75 SAG RICHARD D. ROGGE WARY JO COOK This is to record that at 4:30 PH on 11/10/75 SAC was telephonically contacted by Supervisor EDVARD P, GRIGALUS of the Intelligence Division indicatins that there is a possibility SA GARRY G. LASH may be called to testify before the Select Committee to Study Government Operntions with respect to intellirence activities and that he was cnlling to verify that SA LASH was the primary case Agent who handled 'IARY JO COOK. Mr. GRIGALUS stated that any further information that is developed, he will notify Buffalo. (l= 62-2665 (Senstudy, 75) 1 -~ SAC 1 ~ ASAC 1 ~ SA LASH RDR:faf (5) NW 34965 Docld: 329699503 Page 16 ne Tamme? SEAROHED. scccssuss con DETIE KER sssenrsenone SERUMLIZED sacsosere CYLED.  ccestnene 74cm FBI—BUFFALO /%, -
é / ~ SAC (G7-3G9-K) 11/13/75 DDVARD P. GRIGALUS FBIHQ, EXTENSION 4592 MARY JO COOK Rememo of SAC RICHARD D. ROGGE, 11/12/75. Oa 11/13/75 EDVARD P. GRIGALUS, FBIHG, Ext. 4591, telephonically advised as follows: The U. S. Senate Select Comnittce to study governmental operations with respect to intelligence activities made the following request: "The following documents and materials relating to MARY JO COOK, in custody of the Buffalo, N. Y., Field Office or elsewhere: a2. all documents and materials reflecting | contacts and reports of contacts (and the substance therco?} between MARY JO COOK and FBI SAs from 7/73 to 12/74, b. all documents and materials reflecting | . information supplicd by MARY JO COOX to FBI SAs (and Bureau Pield or Headquarters summarics thereof), including i. 211 written reports prepared by MARY JO COOK from 7/73 | \ ce. all documents and materials relating to any guidance, directions, instructions or suggestions j given to MARY JO COOK by FBI SAs from 7/73 to 12/74. dad. all documents and materials relating to Bureau and Field Office supervision of the handling of MARY JO COOK by FBI SAs from 7/73 to 12/74. Send above materials by cover airtel captioned "SENSTUDY 75, ATTN: INTD tr. W. O. CREGAR." ; —_ 5 ~ / Me Lyd @O- 62-2665 (SENSTUDY, 75) OF ‘iT - sac SERRA og TED wmf | 1 ~ ASAC Va CERAEEL Le AED le ls 7 *® / peor mpG/iat a FEI—BUFFALO ~~ (5) ee £2 i t e ‘need’ . tet _ ack Unf ie aad
“ Fauting Slip 0-7 (Rev. 12-17-73) TQ: SAC: J Albany [—) AJbuquerque £_] Alexandria {_! Anchorage (Cj Atlanta {__} Ballimore {_] Birmingham (_} Boston {—] Buffalo C]} Butte {_} Charlotte {_} Chicago f_j Cincinnati (J Cleveland (_} Columbia ) Dallas Denver C_] Detroit C_] E! Paso {_} Honolulu RE: SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE (2 Houston (_] Indianapolis C_] Jackson (_j Jacksonville (_] Kansas City f_] Knoxville (_j Las Vegas (_].Little Rock [_] Los Angeles {_] Louisville (_] Memphis (_) Miami [_] Milwaukee C] Minneapolis (_j Mobile (_.] Newark {_] New Haven New Orleans [] New York City (__] Norfolk . “ 2 . (Copies to "e Checked) C_J Oklahoma City Omaha [7] Philadelphia (_] Pheenix (__] Pittsburgh [_} Portland (_] Richmond {_] Sacramento St. Louis (_} Salt Lake City {| San Antonio ON INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES {_] For information ‘) optional Retention (_] action - TO LEGAT: (_) Beirut (} Bern “Cj Bonn (_} Brasilia {.] Buenos Aires [”] Caracas [_} Hong Kong C_} London CJ) Madrid ‘£1 Manila C} Mexico City (] San Diego [_} Ottawa Cl} mn Brancisco “(-) Paris C_] San Juan [_j Rome , el Aviv cl Springfield {_] Tokyo amp a {_] Washington Field [_} Quantico pate 21/21/75 For appropriate 7] The enclosed is for your information. {f used in’ a future report, [7] conceal all sources, [_] paraphrase contents. 7 ([j Enclosed are corrected pages from report of SA dated Remarks: H Enclosed for your information is a copy of an article by Mr. William Safire entitled "Mr. Church's Cover-Up" that appeared in the November 20, Bufile Urfile 1975, MW 54965 Doocld: 32999503 Page i6 ro? Ben issue of "The New York Times.' CS! * wrt
By William Safire WASHINGON, Nov. 19—-On Oct. 10, 1963, the then-Attorney General of the United States put his personal signa- ture on a document that launched and legitimatized one of the most horren- dous abuses of Federal police power in this century. In Senator Frank Church’s subcom- mittee hearing room this week, the authorized wiretapping and subse- quent unauthorized bugging and at-_ tempted blackmailing of Martin Luther King Jr. is being gingerly examined, with the “investigation” conducted in such a Way as not to unduly em- - barrass officials of the Kennedy or Johnson Administrations. With great care, the committee has focused on the F.B.I, Yesterday, when? the committee counsel first set forth . the result of shuffling through press clips, it seerned as if no Justice De-4 partment had existed in 1962; today, an F.B.I. witness pointed out that it was Robert Kennedy who authorized the wiretap of Dr. King, and that “the President of the United States and the Attorney General specifically discussed their concern of Communist influence with Dr. King.” But the Church committee showed no zest for getting further te the Ken- nedy root of this precedent to Water- gate eavesdropping. If Senator Church were willing to let the chips fall where they may, he would call some knowl- . edgeable witnesses into the glare of the camera lights and ask them some questions that have gone unmasked for - thirteen years. For example, he could call Nicholas _ Katzenbach, Attorney General Ken- nedy’s deputy and successor, and ask what he knows of the Kennedy de- cision to wiretap Dr, King. Who at Justice concurred in the recommenda- tion? How does the F.B.J. know the ; President was consulted or informed? After Mr. Katzenbach assumed of-’ fice, and the wiretapping continued, | he was told by angry newsmen that the F.B.. was leaking scurrilous in- formation about Dr. King. Why did he wait for four montis, and for a thou- sand telephonic interceptions, to dis« continue the officially approved tap? Of course, this sort of testimony would erode Senator Church’s political base, That is why se do not see for- mer Assistance F.8.1 director Cartha (Dctke) Deloach, Lyndon Johnsen’s personal contact with the F.B.I. in the witness chair. What did President Johnson know about the character- assassination plot and when did he know it? What conversations tock place between Mr. Deloach and Pres:- dent Johnson on the tapping ef Dr. King, or about the use of tne FBI in eayother intrusions into the lives of yeo'Hiea) Ggures? NW 54965 Docld: 32989503 Page 19 | os gC “Mg, Church’ . ver-Up ON manners “re commiltee is not asking embar- rassing questions even when answers are readily available. A couple of weeks ago, at an open hearing, an F.B.I. man inadvertently started to blurt out an episode about newsmen who were weritapping in 1962 wit . the apparent knowledge of Attorney" General Kennedy. The too-willing witi - ness was promptly shooshed into si: lence, and told that such information would be developed only in executive session. Nobody raised an eyebrow. That pattern of containment by the Church committee is vividly shown by the handling of the buggings at the 1964 Republican and Democratic con- a a Ea Ye ESSAY ventions which were ordered by Lyn- don Johnson, Such invasions of politi- . cal headquarters were worse than the crime committed at Watergate, sirce they involved the use of the F-B.I, but the Church investigators seem to be determinetl not to probe too deeply. If F.B.I. documents say that reports were made to specific Johnson aides, why are those men not given the same opportunity to publicly tell their story so avidly given the next Presi- dent’s men? If Lyndon Johnson com- mitted this impeachable high crime of using the F.B.I. to spy on political 4 opponents, who can be brought for- ward to tell us all about it? But that. would cause embarrass- ment to Democrats, and Senator Church wants to embarrass profes- Sional employees of investigatory agencies only. A new sense of Con-° gressional decorum exists, far from the sense of outrage expressed in the Senate Watergate committee’s hear- ing room. When it is revealed that the management of NBC News gave press credentials to L.B.J.’s spies at the 1964 convention, everybody blushes demure-, ly—and nobody demands to know which network executive made what. decision under what pressure. I have been haranguing patient’ readers for years about the double standard applied to Democratic and Republican political crimes, ard had hoped the day would come when the hardball precedents set by the Ken- nedy and Johnson men would be fad before the public in damning detail. Obviously, Democrat Frank Church is not the man to do it. His_jowl- shaking indignation is ail tco selec- tive; the trail of high-level responsi- bility for the crimes committed against Dr. King and others is evidentiy going to be allowed to coai. Pity, You'd think thac afier ali the nation Pas been unreugh 11 the past few years, our political leaders would have learned that the one thitp that brings vou down is the art ef cover- ing up. cena . so ZZ LASAC Sec. Supyr._& Desk 4_ ¢ . Desk 5 Desk 6 AASH. oO on = Ww h et THE NEW YORK TIMPS THURSDAY, NCVEMBER 20th,1975 PAGE C--41 ;
Luffako, New York Noyerbanr 26, 1975 VLTED SEANCES OSVIATS SLLeeet QO ITsen ON DVSELLIGIUCK ACTIVITIES €55¢} Rls TWVSENVITA! OF ERY OSPECcrAL > ASSENT CARRY G. LAS PY SSC STAR NOSPETSS ADDRET POSTAL £2) JERR RAYDI Oy NOVEACEN 20, 1975 . interview of Speeial Avent LAST by Soc Stat? Committea mexbers was condinetod in SoC office spacs. whe interview lasted from approvirately 14:15 AN until Peier ta the interview SA LAS was advised of the fdentity of the intervievers and that he was free to cxeroine his pichts at any tine as miorantced by the United States Conetitution. SA LAS was advised thet ho had the richt te have an etterncy present and the ristrt to have a United States Senator present, SA LAST enived both of thess nichts. Fe uni also advised thet the scors ef the inquiry would cencern the handling of Merny do cfot, a forcexe ITE infercant, exelusively. A ecurt gogorter was pracent wha dietated into a eaasette recerdines mechine dueinn tho inatemvwied. SA LASK was not svorn. Ac follows are the quostions dineeted to SA LACT and the ansvers that ko provided according to the bast recollection of SA LAST: i pte ree on ASAC Git cr Hon UL: L = 62-665 co as eG GGLidam.. Fm it Te (10) - OM teed NW 54965 Docld: 32989503 Page 20
. a » ~ UNITED STATES SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES ANDREW POSTAL SA LASH POSTAL LASH POSTAL LASH POSTAL LASH POSTAL LASH POSTAL LASH POSTAL, LASH POSTAL LASH POSTAL LASH ’ NW 54965 Doold:32989503 Page 21 SA LASH, what is your present employment? Special Agent of the FBI Where are you assigned? Buffalo, New York Were you assigned there during the Summer of 1973? Yes Did you specialize in any type of investigations? Yes, Internal Security investigations Did you have occasion to reoruit Mary Jo Cook as an informant in an organization known as Vietnam Veterans Against the War (VVAW) (Characterization of which is contained in appendix hereto)? Yes Would you state why the Buffalo Chapter of the VVAW was being investigated by the FBI? I do not feel that I can answer this question within the scope of the current interview. Who was your supervisor at the time you handled Mary Jo Cook? Francis Jenkins Who was your SAC at the time? Richard Ash Would you deseribe for us the methods of recruiting Mary Jo Cook. Upon discovering that Mary Jo Cook had attended some meetings of the Buffalo Chapter of the VVAW, I interviewed her concerning her attendance and indicated to her that I wished her to become an informant for the FBI. ~ >?
UNITED STATES SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES POSTAL What was the nature of these documents? LASH Any number of documents and handouts were provided to the attendees at conventions. Some of these were pamphlets describing VVAW activities, copies of VVAW newspapers , flyers concerning demonstrations and activities in other VVAW chapters, etc. POSTAL What was the method of payment for Miss Cook's services? LASH Miss Cook was paid on a COD basis for information provided. POSTAL Was she paid a salary? LASH No POSTAL What determined the amount that she was paid monthly? LASH She was paid on a monthly basis COD for information provided. Inasmuch as she provided a good deal of information every month, she was usually paid the maximum amount permitted by FBI Headquarters, therefore monthly payments often totaled similar amounts. POSTAL Was she instructed to pay income tax? LASH She was advised to treat all money she received from the Bureau as income and to pay appropriate taxes. POSTAL Was she given any instructions on how to report her income from the FBI? LASH I cannot recall giving her any specific instructions, however, if I had I would have instructed her to report it as miscellaneous income or income from self-employment, something of that nature. POSTAL Were these instructions to conceal the faet that she was receiving money from confidential FBI funds? ~12- NW 54965 Docid: 32989503 Page 31 ene