“STUDY APR 29 1976 Edition: LATE CITY Author: Editor: Title: Character: or Classification: Submitting Office: Being Investigated 62-15065-38 SEARCHED SERIALIZED INDEXED FILED Sac PR 29 1976 ✓ FBI NEW YORK PIC : C on, the report said, "yet neith- er ascertained the full details" of”
“ing Investigated 62-15065-38 SEARCHED SERIALIZED INDEXED FILED Sac PR 29 1976 ✓ FBI NEW YORK PIC : C on, the report said, "yet neith- er ascertained the full details" of the campaign to discredit Dr. King. Mr. Kennedy, for example, in 1963 authorized wiretaps on Dr. King's home a”
“pe cifically discussed their concer n of Communist in fluenc e with Dr. King." But the Churc h co mm ittee showed no zest for getting further to the Ken- nedy root of this precedent to Water- gate eavesdropping. If Senator Church were willing to let the chips fall where they ma y”
“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 ques tion s that have gone un as ked for thir”
“t for getting further to the Ken- nedy root of this precedent to W ater- gate eavesdropping. If Sena tor Church were willing to let the ch ips fall where they may, he would call some knowl- edgeable witnesses into the gla re of the c amera lights and ask them some questions that ”
“s, it seem ed as if no Justice De- pariment had exist ed in 1962; today, an F.B.I. witness pointed o ut that it was Robert Kennedy who authorized the wiretap of Dr. King, and that " the President of the United States and the Attorney Gener al specifically di scussed their concer ”
“ess pointed out that it was Robert Kennedy who authorized th e wiretap of Dr. King, and that "the Pr esident of the United S ta tes and the Attorney General specifically discussed their concern of Communist influence with Dr. King." But the Church committee showe d n o z est fo r”
“ment to Democrats, and Senator Church wants to embarrass profes- sional employe es 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 t”
“ome knowl- edgeable witne sses into the glare of the camera lights and ask them some quest ions that have gone unasked for thirteen years. For example, he could call Nicholas Katzenbach, Attorney General Ken- nedy's de puty and successor, and ask what he knows of the Ken ned y d ”
“he Senate Watergate committee's hear- ing room. When it is revealed that the management of NBC Ne ws gave press credentials to L.B.J.'s spies at the 1964 conve nt ion , e very bod y blushes dermure- For example, he could call Nicholas Katzenbach, Attorney General Ken- nedy's depu”
“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 star ted to blurt out an episode about newsmen wh o were wer itapping in 1962 wit h the apparent knowieage of Attorney General Kenn”
“l of the United States put his personal signa- ture on a document that launched and legi tim ati zed one of the most horren- dous abuses of Federal police power in this century. The committee is not asking embar- rassing questions even when answers are readily available. A couple”
“nedy root of this precedent to Water- gate eavesdropping. If Sen ato r C hur ch wer e w ill ing to l et 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 unasked for thirteen ”
“ployees of investigatory agencies only . A n ew sense of Con- gressional decorum exists, far fro m t he sense of outrage expressed in the Senate Watergate com mi tte e's hear- in g room. When it is revealed that the management of NBC News gave press credentials to L.B.J.'s spies ”
“r concern of Communist influence wit h Dr. King." But the Church committee showed no zest for gettin g further to 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 c al l some knowl- ed”
“n be brought f or ward to tell us all about it? But that would cause em barrass- ment to Demo crats, and Senator Church wants to emb ar ra ss p ro fes- sional em ployees of investigato ry agencies only. A new sense of Con- gressional decorum exists, far from the sense of outrage ”
“the United States put his personal signa- ture on a document that launched and legitimatiz ed one of the most horren- dous abuses of Federal police power in this century. The committee is not asking embar- rassing questions even when answers are readily available. A couple of wee”
“975, issue of "The New Y ork Ti mes. " C Coxx molepy Olencki lepy Olencki 66-2921-4 cach bulletin bo ard 4/ each SRA Dort Enc. Bufile U rfile 疏 NW 65994 Docld:32989835 Page 10 SACCHED INDEXED 1 SER IALIZED FILE S N OV 2 4 1975 FOI-R.C Mr. Church's Cover- Up By William Safire WASH”
“hurch wants to embarrass profes- sional employees o f investigatory agencies o nly. A new se ns e 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 gav”
“counsel f ir st set forth the result of shuffling throu gh pr ess clips, it seemed as if no Justice De- pariment had existed in 1962; today, an F.B.I. wi tne ss p oin ted out that it was Robert Kennedy who authorized the wiretap of Dr. King, and that "the President of the United ”
“SEARCHED SERIALIZED INDEXED. FILED NOV 24 1975 FBI-ALBANY 62-2368-118 Page 41 Mr. Church's Cover-Up 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”
“resident of the United State s a nd the Attorney General specifically discussed their concern of Com munist influence with Dr. King." But the Church committee sho wed no zest for getting further to t he Ken- nedy r oot of this precedent to W ater- gate eavesdropping. If Senator C”
“W illia m Safire WASHINGON, Nov. 1 9- On O ct . 10 , 19 63 , t he then-Attorne y General of the Uni ted 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. The committee is ”
“hear- ing room. When it is revealed that the managem ent of NBC News gave press credentials to L.B.J .'s spies at the 1964 convention, everybody blushes dermure- For example, he could call Nicholas Katzenbach, Attorney General Ken- nedy's deputy and successor, and ask what he kno”
“WASHINGON, Nov. 19-On Oct. 10, 1963, the then-Attorney General of the United States put his personal sig na- ture on a document that launched and legitimatized one of the most horren- dous abuses of Federal police power in this century. The committee is not asking embar- rassing ”
“rt out an episode about newsmen who were weri tapping in 1962 with the apparent knowieage of Attorne y General Kennedy. The too-willing wit ness was promptly shooshed into sit lence, and told that such information would be developed only in executive In Senator Frank Church's'sub”
“s tha t have gone unasked f or thirteen years. For example, he could call Nicholas Ka tz en ba ch , 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 t”
“opponents, wh o can be brought for ward to tell us all about it? Bu t that woul d cause embarras s- 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 ”
“fluence with Dr. King." But the Church committee showed no zest for getting further to 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 gla”
“h Dr. King." But the Church committee showed no zest for getting further to the Ken - n edy ro ot 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 th”
“ommittee counsel first set forth the result of shuffling through pr ess clips, it seemed as if no Ju stice De- pariment had existed in 1962; today, an F.B.I. witn ess pointed out that it was Robert Kennedy who authorized the wi ret ap of Dr. King, and that "the President of the U”
“and legitimatized one of the most horren- dous abuses of Fe der al police power in this ce nt ur y. In Senator Frank Church's subcom- mittee hearing room this week, the authorized wiretapping and subse- quent unauthorized bu gging and a t- t em pted blackmailing of Martin Luther ”
“s- sional employ ees of investigatory agencies only. A new sense of Con- gressiona l d ecoru m e xis ts, far from the sense of outrage expressed in the Senate Watergate committee's hear- ing room. When it is revealed that th e m anagement of NBC News gave press credentials to L.B”
“o the Ken- nedy root of this pr ecedent t o Water- gat e eaves dropping. If Senator Churc h wer e wi lling to let the chips fall where they may, he would call some knowl- edgeable witnesses into the glare of the camera li gh ts and ask them some questions that have gone unasked f”
“hat have gone unasked for thirteen years. For example, he could call Nicholas Katzenba ch, Attorne y 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.I”
“vention, everybody blushes dermure - F or example, he could call Nicholas Katzenbach, Att orn ey Gen eral 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.I. k”
“e counsel first set forth the result of shuffling thr ough press clips, it seemed as if no Justice D e- 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 St”
“bout the use of the F.R.L. in any other intresions into the lives of petitscal figures? NW 54 955 Do cId:32989494 NW 65994 Docld:32176535 Page 7 which network executive made what decision unde r w ha t pressure. I have been haranguing patient readers for ye ars about the double s”
“mation is a copy of an article by Mr. William Safire entitled "M r. Chu rch 's Cov er- Up" th at app ear ed in the November 20, 1975, issue of "The New York Times." CCoxxmolepy Olencki lepy Olencki 66-2921-4 cach bulletin board 4/ each SRA Dort Enc. Bufile Urfile 疏 NW 65994 Docld”
“OI-R.C Mr. Church's Cover-Up By William Safire WASHINGON, Nov. 19-On Oct. 10, 1963, the then -At tor ney General of the United States put his personal signa- ture on a document that launched and legitimatize d one of the most horren- dous abuses of Federa l p oli ce power in this”
“sel first set fo rth t he result of shuffling through press clips, it see med as if no Ju sti ce De- 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 State”
“deputy and successor, and ask what he knows of the Kennedy de- cision to wiretap Dr. King. Who at J ustice concurred in the recommenda- tion? How does the F.B.I. know the President was consulted or informed?ly-and nobody deniands to know After Mr. Katzenbach assumed of- fice, an ”
“isted in 1 962; to day, an F.B.I. witness pointed out that it was Robert Kennedy who a ut ho ri ze d 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 th”
“nt of NBC News gave press credentials to L.B.J.'s spies at the 1964 convention, everybody blushe s d ermure- For example, he could call Nicholas Katzenb ach , A ttorney General Ken- nedy's deputy and successor, and ask what he knows of the Kennedy de- cision to wiretap Dr. King. ”
“.B.I. witness pointed out th at it was Robert Kennedy who authorized the wiretap o f D r. Kin g, 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 ”
“gate committee's hear- ing room. When it is revealed that the management of NBC News gave pre ss cre dentials 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 pr ess ure. I have”
“ea rs about the double standard applied to Democratic and Republic an political crimes, and had hope d the day would come when the har dball precedents set by th e Ken- ned y and Johnson inen would be 'aid before the public in damning d et ail. Obviously, Democcat Frank Church no”
“ANY 62-2368-11B NW 54955 DocId:32989494 Page 41 NW 65994 Docld:32176535 Page 6 Mr. Church's Cover-Up 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 on”
“. A new sense of Con- gressiona l d ecorum exists, far from the sense of outrage expressed in th e S enate Watergate committee's hear- ing room. When it is reve aled that the management of NBC News gave press credentials to L.B.J.'s spies at the 1964 conve ntion, everybody blushe”
“arrass profes- sional employees of investigato ry agencies only. A new se nse of Con- gressional dec orum 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”