[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
. You are therefore authorized and directed in such cases as you may approve, after investigation of the need ineach case, to authorize the necessary investigative agencies that they are at liberty to secure information bylistening devices.of persons suspected of subversive activities against the government of the United States,including suspected spies.You are requested furthermore to limit these investigations so conducted to a minimumand to limit them insofar as possible to aliens.(Roosevelt 1940)Jackson, who wanted no part in wiretapping, made a fateful decision in response to the presidentialdirective: he instructed Hoover to maintain the records of all wiretaps, listing times, places, and cases(Theoharis and Cox 1988, p.171).In so doing, Jackson effectively permitted the FBI to usewiretapping, free of Department of Justice oversight.In 1941, Francis Biddle, the succeeding Attorney General, wrested back control of wiretaps fromHoover and turned down applications he felt were unjustified (Biddle 1941; USS 94d, p.37).In1952, Attorney General J.Howard McGrath, in a letter to Hoover supporting the use of wiretaps"under the present highly restrictive basis," made explicit the requirement that all FBI wiretapsrequired the attorney general's prior approval (McGrath 1952).However, McGrath did not undo thecustom that surveillance orders operated without time limits.Only in 1965, when Attorney GeneralNicholas Katzenbach recommended that authorizations be limited to 6 months (Hoover 1965), didthe FBI change its practice.In 1940 and 1941, several bills that attempted to establish a legal basis for electronic surveillancewere introduced in Congress.One of these was endorsed by Roosevelt and Jackson (USS 94e, p.280), but Hoover opposed any legislation requiring warrants for wiretapping (Hoover 1941) and nolegislation passed.When the war ended, Hoover sought and received continued wiretapping authority from PresidentHarry Truman.Indeed, the power was broadened.In his reauthorization request to Attorney GeneralThomas Clark, Hoover omitted the final sentence of Roosevelt's original memo, which had requiredthat electronic surveillance be kept to a minimum and limited "insofar as possible to aliens" (Gentry1991, p.324).Clark forwarded the amended memo and urged Truman to approve wiretapping incases "vitally affecting domestic security, or where human life is in jeopardy," and Truman apparentlysigned it without being aware of the shift from earlier policies (Clark 1946).In time Truman's aides discovered the change.A 1950 memo to Truman from George Elsey, assistantcounsel to the president, reported that "not only did Clark fail to inform the President that Mr.Roosevelt had directed the FBI to hold its wiretapping to a minimum.he requested the President toapprove very broad language [that was] a very far cry from the 1940 directive" (Elsey 1950).Truman,however, took no action to rescind the expanded authority.The new authorization meant that nationalsecurity was no longer the sole justification for wiretaps (Clark 1946).By adding "domestic security" to the list of reasons for which wiretapping could be employed, Clark's memo substantially broadened Roosevelt's directive.Developing intelligence is quitedifferent from collecting evidence.In particular, intelligence investigations have less narrowlydefined goals than criminal investigations.Developing intelligence is neither attempting to findevidence of a specific crime nor developing a case against a specific suspect.Rather, it is attemptingto discern a pattern of behavior: What is the structure of an organization? What are its goals? Whatare its methods?Those who work in intelligence emphasize the degree to which they operate under legal restraintsintended to protect the rights of Americans.Yet the very character of intelligence work makes itunlikely that these restraints weigh as heavily on them as on criminal investigators.Intelligenceofficers don't go into court to face opposing attorneys.Criminal investigations are unsuccessfulwithout convictions.Intelligence investigations even in counterintelligence, where prosecution issometimes appropriate can be deemed successful even if no prosecutions occur.The changes Clarkmade were thus quite significant.They moved wiretap investigations into a shadowy area where, byand large, they were protected from public scrutiny
[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]