◆ SpookStack

TO area 7 a I | this type device. (General authority in organized crime cases. be, No specific authority in this case.) e CLO? At 4:15 p.m., Bureau representatives met with the Le Attorney General; Harold Reis, Executive Assistant to the Attorney § General} Rogovin and Spritzer of the Solicitor General's Office, - f. in the office of the Attorney General. I informed the Attorney £ General that footnote 4, page 4 of the revised memorandum was -— i : MR. DoLOACH:. . . rom + J. x cast Lf, fe SUMJECT: FRED B. BLACK, JR. . | SV foo Baty . ANTIRACKETEERING ain . UNITED STATES Gf MENT Memorandum ii s § 3 McAndrews — FlyoRaTe: May 23, 1966 tt et et et eunee nm pe a x At 3:30 p.m. today, Assistant Attorney General Rogovin, - Tax Division, was interviewed at his office by Section Chief .- .. McAndrews and me. Rogovin furnished the attached memorandum, 1 Vv) which the Department proposes to file in the Supreme Cow t today, na) and asked that it be reviewed by Bureau representatives. This ia the third version of this proposed memorandum. - | Basically, this memorandum is the same as the second S version concerning which our views were furnished to the Depart- (\ ment by letter dated May 23. There is a significant difference. On Page 4, footnote 4 states, "Incidents similar to that described in this memorandum will not recur." It then goes on to state that longstanding policies of the Department of Justice required Attorney General authorization for wiretapping but until recently - such authorization was not required concerning other types of listening devices. It further states that since early 1965, use of listening devices has been strictly confined to collection of intelligence affecting national security and then only with») 73 a A —-(,/ Attorney General written authorization. . , al This footnote gives a definite impression that the Bureau was operating independently when we employed listening - devices. Rogovin was told definitely that we object vehemently to this footnote. He was emphatically to that we had Attorney General authorization from Rober ennedy for use of ———— a, oa) " ORIGINAL FILED IN objectionable to the Bureau in that it created an impression that” the Bureau wag acting entirely without Departmental authority < in the use of listening devices. twas suggested that this | <—wemms * ai, (6) -- ¢ (NOT RECORDED \. Enclosure = = 191. gun 13 1966 3 JUN-10-K ee _—s ne ht