TESTIMONY OF PAUL MACCABEE BEFORE SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP91B00389R000500190006-1
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 13
• Document Creation Date: December 23, 2016
• Document Release Date: January 3, 2013
• Sequence Number: 6
• Publication Date: August 2, 1988
• Content Type: MISC

Declassified and Approved For Release 2013/01/03: CIA-RDP91 B00389R000500190006-1
TESTIMONY OF PAUL MACCABEE
BEFORE SUBCOMMITTEE ON TECHNOLOGY AND THE LAW
COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
AUGUST 2, 1988
Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee on Technology and the
Law; my name is Paul Maccabee. I'm a journalist from St. Paul, Minnesota. I
want to thank you for the opportunity to testify on my experiences seeking
information on organized crime through the Freedom of Information Act
(FOI A).
I'd like to summarize the Justice Department's response to my filing
dozens of FOIA requests and appeals during the last seven years. The
request for these files under the FOIA was undertaken to provide the
public with-the first comprehensive history of organized crime in
Minnesota.
My first FOIA requests for documents on organized crime figures were
filed in 1981. The Justice Department has responded to those requests
with deletions of material that should be releasable under the FOIA, very
narrow interpretations of fee waiver provisions, and lengthy delays in
processing files and administering appeals. In one case, the Justice
Department delayed responding to a fee waiver appeal for 1,350 days.
As a result of the Justice Department's actions, I have been unable to
obtain most of the documents that would enable me to write a book on
syndicate crime that seems to be of tremendous public interest. Most
importantly, my readers have been denied the opportunity to learn about
the influence that organized crime has had in Minnesota.
Allow me to share my background with you. When I began my research, I
was a reporter for the weekly Twin Cities Reader newspaper in
Minneapolis - where I received the state's highest award for journalistic
excellence, the Society of Professional Journalists-Minnesota Chapter
"Page One" Award. I am a member of both the Society of Professional
Journalists and Investigative Reporters and Editors. I have published more
than 120 articles and columns in local and national daily newspapers,
weekly magazines, and monthly publications.
Declassified and Approved For Release 2013/01/03: CIA-RDP91 B00389R000500190006-1
 Declassified and Approved For Release 2013/01/03: CIA-RDP91 B00389R000500190006-1
I have been called by the Wall Street Journal "an aggressive young reporter
always alert to offbeat angles in his stories." The American Society of
Journalists and Authors refers to me as "a reliable, conscientious and
experienced journalist who has written extensively on" organized crime
topics.
ARBITRARY DENIAL OF FEE WAIVER REQUESTS:
in January 1983, I asked the Federal Bureau of Investigation to issue a
complete waiver of what ultimately would become more than $1,800 in
fees f or approx i mate ly 59 FO I A requests for FBI files on gangsters i n
Minnesota. Four months later, the FBI denied my fee waiver request,
claiming that release of these historic documents "will not... result in
primary benefit to the general public."
In response, on March 2, 1984 I filed a fee waiver appeal with the Justice
Department's Office of Legal Policy to overturn the FBI's fee waiver denial.
Four years would pass until the Justice Department responded to my
appeal - more than 1,300 days after the fee waiver appeal was filed.
In an effort to speed up the Justice Department's decision on my appeal, I
supplied the Office of Legal Policy with letters from the nation's leading
history, journalism and law enforcement experts urging a complete waiver
of fees.
Among the authorities who vouched for the strong public interest in these
crime files and urged the Justice Department to grant a 100 percent fee
waiver: The Society of Professional Journalists, The Reporters Committee
for Freedom of the Press, Chicago Crime Commission, American Society of
Journalists and Authors, Minneapolis History Collection, Center for
Investigative Reporters, Ramsey County Historical Society, Minnesota
Attorney General Hubert H. Humphrey III, Senior Research Fellow Lucile
Kane of the Minnesota Historical Society, Community Crime Prevention,
Minnesota Public Interest Research Group, Minneapolis Police Chief
Anthony Bouza, Minneapolis Mayor Donald Fraser, U.S. Congressmen Bruce
Vento and Martin Sabo, Bloomington Citizens Crime Prevention
Association, and U.S. Senator David Durenberger.
Minneapolis Police Chief Anthony Bouza wrote the Justice Department: "I
Declassified and Approved For Release 2013/01/03: CIA-RDP91 B00389R000500190006-1
 Declassified and Approved For Release 2013/01/03: CIA-RDP91 B00389R000500190006-1
am writing to recommend cooperation with this effort undertaken by Paul
Maccabee and, because of its value to the public, to urge a waiver of the
fees normally associated with such requests. Fundamentally, the proposal
to do a book on organized crime fills a real public need."
Minnesota Attorney General Hubert H. Humphrey III confirmed the public
interest in the release of these Justice Department files, arguing that this
"research project could be an invaluable tool for other researchers and
historians, as well as the citizens of Minnesota who are interested in the
topic."
The Executive Director of the Ramsey County Historical Society confirmed:
"The book for which (Maccabee) is conducting this research will make a
contribution of national importance in understanding a period that left a
lasting mark on the American consciousness." Concluded the Center for
.Investigative Reporting: "Denying Maccabee a fee waiver in the release of
these documents would seriously harm the public interest."
The subjects of this book are of intense public interest - including
bankrobber John Dillinger, kidnapper Alvin "Creepy" Karpis,
then-Minneapolis Mayor Hubert H. Humphrey, Kate "Ma" Barker, "Pretty Boy"
Floyd, J. Edgar Hoover, and many others. The events covered in the book are
also of tremendous public interest - the war by Mayor Hubert H. Humphrey
against organized crime, the infamous kidnapping of Edward Hamm by
Alvin "Creepy" Karpis and Ma Barker, the Teamsters Union racketeering
directed by the Minnesota associates of union boss Jimmy Hoff a, and much
more.
The Justice Department responded to my fee waiver appeal by requesting
that I provide documentation proving the relevance of these files to the
book. In 1985, I prepared 17 pages of single-spaced memoranda showing
why these records were crucial to the accuracy of my history book.
I took care to ensure that this series of FOIA requests, although extensive,
would not burden the Justice Department. Many of the FOIA requests
pertained to a mere handful of documents. For instance, my request for
files on Minneapolis gambling king Louis Hecht encompassed 20 pages and
my request for files on Irish mobster Jack Keavy involved only five pages.
In January 1983, I significantly narrowed the size of my FOIA requests by
thousands of pages so as to make the requests more manageable for the
Declassified and Approved For Release 2013/01/03: CIA-RDP91 B00389R000500190006-1
 Declassified and Approved For Release 2013/01/03: CIA-RDP91 B00389R000500190006-1
Justice Department. For instance, I narrowed my request for files on
organized crime associate Morris Roisner from 7,494 pages down to a
total of 194 pages.
Between January and May 1983, I reduced the number of files I'd requested
under the FOIA so dramatically that the fees requested by the Justice
Department dropped by almost 50 percent from $3770.60 to $1,828.70.
I informed the Justice Department that the FBI and other agencies could
further narrow my requests by deleting pages of files that consisted
primarily of newspaper clippings.
Throughout 1984, the Justice Department declined to respond to my fee
waiver appeal. In July 1985, the Office of Legal Policy sent me a letter
which promised that any delays in processing the appeal would take only
several weeks."
Throughout 1985, the Justice Department declined to respond to my fee
waiver appeal.
In an effort to prod the Justice Department into responding, I mailed
letters to the Office of Legal Policy's Richard Huff requesting information
on the delays. The Justice Department received letters from me dated
March 17, May 27, July 23, August 4 and September 2, 1984; May 9, June
21, July 13, September 12, September 24, October 3, and November 17,
1985; March 25 and Apri 1 14, 1986, and January 9, 1987.
My letters went unanswered, except for receipt of a form letter which
failed to address the substance of any appeal. Again, throughout 1987 the
Justice Department did not respond to my fee waiver appeal.
In a March 25, 1986 letter to the Justice Department, I pleaded "again and
again, l urge your office to immediately-obey federal law and issue a fee
waiver decision. If your office has no intention of obeying FOIA law, then
please notify me of this fact so that my attorneys may proceed with
action against you and your office." I did not receive a response from the
Justice Department.
In my January 9, 1987 letter to the Office of Legal Policy, I again asked:
"As your office's unconscionable delay stretches into its third
record-breaking year, I again ask you to comply with federal law and make
Declassified and Approved For Release 2013/01/03: CIA-RDP91 B00389R000500190006-1
 Declassified and Approved For Release 2013/01/03: CIA-RDP91 B00389R000500190006-1
an immediate determination in this case...surely, after almost three years
of stone-walling, it is time to end these delaying tactics and obey the
law."
Again, I did not receive a response from the Justice Department.
On May 3, 1987, I spoke by telephone with Richard Huff of the Office of
Legal Policy - requesting information on how long the delays would
continue. Mr. Huff promised that his staff would "immediately" call me
back.
However, no one from his staff made that return call.
I turned to members of the U.S. Congress and the U.S. Senate for
assistance. In July 1987, Congressman Bruce Vento wrote the Justice
Department asking them to explain the delays. The Justice Department
responded in writing on August 18, 1987, promising the Congressman that
the fee waiver appeals would "be adjudicated by the middle of October."
Yet the Justice Department did not honor that promise to Congressman
Vento - throughout October and November and December, the Justice
Department did not respond to my appeals.
On December 7, 1987, U.S. Senator David Durenberger wrote the Office of
Legal Policy protesting the Justice Department's continuing delays. His
staff then telephoned the Office directly, demanding an explanation for the
delays. A week later, Congressman Vento again wrote the Office of Legal
Policy asking that the delays cease and a decision on the appeal be
rendered at last.
Still, the Justice Department did not respond to the appeals.
Finally on March 10, 1988, Senator Durenberger wrote Stephan Markman
about the 45 months of delay, threatening to investigate the option of
having the Office of the Special Counsel of the Merit Systems Protection
Board pursue disciplinary action against Markman's office. In addition,
Senator Durenberger threatened to require Markman to appear before the
government operations and information committees of the Senate to
explain his reasons for refusing to comply with FOIA law. Once again,
Senator Durenberger reiterated his suggestion that the Justice Department
issue a 100 percent fee waiver in this case.
Declassified and Approved For Release 2013/01/03: CIA-RDP91 B00389R000500190006-1
 Declassified and Approved For Release 2013/01/03: CIA-RDP91 B00389R000500190006-1
On February 29, 1988, the Justice Department acted - denying a full fee
waiver and authorizing only a 50 percent waiver of fees. Even while
denying a full fee waiver, the Office of Legal Policy admitted that "it is
evident that these records pertaining to organized crime figures and
organizations in Minnesota reflect the operations or activities of the
government and that you have demonstrated an intent and ability to
disseminate the requested information to the general public."
As of this morning's hearing, I've agreed to pay for FBI processing of
approximately 22 of the smaller FOIA requests (about 625 pages) so as to
be able to begin writing my book. I do intend to file suit in U.S. District
Court against the Justice Department to overturn the denial of a full fee
waiver.
Unfortunately, the Justice Department's long delays and ultimate denial of
this fee waiver appeal is not an isolated case.
For instance, it took more than 455 days for the Office of Legal Policy to
make a determination on a fee waiver appeal with the Executive Office for
U.S. Attorneys pertaining to 1,000 pages of files on deceased gangster
Isadore Blumenfeld - the "Godfather of Minnesota."
The original fee waiver denial by the Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys
was itself delayed for almost two years before a decision was reached
(the fee waiver request was filed in July 1984 and substantially denied in
February 1986, authorizing merely a 20 percent reduction in fees).
I had filed an FOIA fee waiver appeal in October 1986 with the Office of
Legal Policy, asking that they overturn the Executive Office for U.S.
Attorneys' denial of a fee waiver. Months passed, with no response. In June
1987, the Office of Legal Policy promised a response "in several weeks."
First weeks, then months passed, without a response from the Justice
Department.
In January 1988, after a delay of more than 14 months, the Office of Legal
Policy authorized a 50 percent fee reduction - even though the Office
admitted that Blumenfeld's files "reflect the operations or activities of
the government and that you have demonstrated an intent and ability to
disseminate the requested information to the general public."
Declassified and Approved For Release 2013/01/03: CIA-RDP91 B00389R000500190006-1
 Declassified and Approved For Release 2013/01/03: CIA-RDP91 B00389R000500190006-1
An indication of how capricious these fee waiver denials are is reflected
in the fact that that the original justification by the Executive Office for
US Attorneys for the denial was different from the justification for the
subsequent denial of a fee waiver appeal by the Office of Legal Policy. The
Executive Office claimed that "due to the sensational nature of organized
crime and its participants, you stand to gain personal benefit by the
publishing of your book."
The Office of Legal Policy, on the other hand, justified a fee waiver denial
under the claim that only "half of the releasable information would
contribute significantly to public understanding" government operations
and activities. I will be suing the Department of Justice in U.S. District
Court to overturn its denial of a complete fee waiver.
Similarly, it took the Justice Department 880 days of delay to respond to
an appeal of the FBI's denial of a fee waiver for 3,041 pages of files on
deceased Minneapolis hitman Jack Apple. After the FBI denied my request
for a complete waiver of fees for Apple's files (authorizing a mere 20
percent reduction), I filed an appeal with the Office of Legal Policy on
June 19, 1984.
For months, the Office of Legal Policy did not render a decision on the
appeal. The Office even refused to respond to letters requesting
notification as to why the delays were dragging on. In July 1985, more
than a year after the filing of the Jack Apple appeal, the Office warned
that additional delays of "at least several weeks" could be expected.
After 29 months of delay, on November 19, 1986 the Office upheld the
FBI's denial of a complete waiver of fees. The Office claimed that "much of
the releasable information is only partially useful and informative." I will
be suing the Office of Legal Policy in U.S. District Court to overturn this
denial.
It is worth noting that these denials of fee waivers are inconsistent with
the actions of several other federal agencies. The Department of the
Treasury, for instance, has waived all search and copy fees "in the public
interest" for hundreds of files on Minneapolis gangster Rocky Lupino. I n the
blunt words of the Department of the Treasury: "You qualify for a fee
waiver. A fee can be waived when it is in the public interest."
My experiences have convinced me that the Justice Department's decisions
Declassified and Approved For Release 2013/01/03: CIA-RDP91 B00389R000500190006-1
 Declassified and Approved For Release 2013/01/03: CIA-RDP91 B00389R000500190006-1
on fee waiver appeals are being made in an arbitrary manner.
DELAYS I N PROCESSING FILES:
When I've offered to pay the Justice Department fees for its files, the
Department has delayed processing of FOIA requests for months, even for
years, beyond the deadlines established under the Freedom of Information
Act.
For instance, in August 1981, I initiated an FOIA request for all FBI files
pertaining to the late organized crime "Godfather of Minnesota," Isadore
Blumenfeld. Eleven months passed, until on July 1982, I received a
telephone call from the FBI claiming that processing of the files was
nearly complete.
In November 1982, the FBI apologized for its delays and promised that
processing of Blumenfeld's files was nearing completion with "release of
the material to you... anticipated in the near future." Again, months passed.
In April 1983, I wrote to the FBI asking for an estimated completion date
for this processing.
Finally, in October and December 1984 - almost three full years after I'd
filed the initial FOIA request - the FBI released more than 1,400
heavily-censored pages of files on Blumenfeld.
Similarly, it took the FBI 18 months to process 83 pages of files on slain
Minneapolis journalist Arthur Kasherman - a year and a half between the
day I notified the FBI of my willingness to pay fees for Kasherman's files
and the day they actually mailed this handful of documents.
It's been my experience that processing of files by the FBI is very slow
even when the number of pages to be processed is relatively small. For
example, I agreed in July 1986 to pay fees so that the FBI would process
63 pages of files on the Irish syndicate figure Tommy Banks. Almost two
years later, in May 1988, the FBI released the files on Banks to me -
rendered virtually unreadable by wholesale deletions. The Bureau had taken
682 days to process 63 pages of FBI files - an average of more than 10
days of delay for every single page released.
The FBI is not the only Justice Department agency which responds slowly
in processing FOIA files. In July 1982, I filed an FOIA request for Criminal
Declassified and Approved For Release 2013/01/03: CIA-RDP91 B00389R000500190006-1
 Declassified and Approved For Release 2013/01/03: CIA-RDP91 B00389R000500190006-1
Division files on gangster Isadore Blumenfeld. By February 1983, the
Criminal Division had identified 14 files under Blumenfeld's name but said
that "a heavy work load would delay processing" of my request. The
Division promised that the Blumenfeld files would be processed "as rapidly
as possible."
More than two years of delay followed until in January 1985, the Criminal
Division finally released its pages on Blumenfeld.
These delays of two to four years in processing files under the Freedom of
Information Act handcuff journalists who need to use the FOIA for
newspaper stories that cannot wait 48 months for completion. As a result
of these delays, publication of my book has been delayed by several years -
and the public has been prevented from reading about a subject of great
interest to them.
I believe that such processing delays by the Justice Department are not
necessary. For example, on April 14, 1986, I requested a fee waiver and
release of 300 pages of Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms files on
bankrobber Salvatore Lupino. Just one week later, on April 23, 1986, the
Treasury Department released the files on Lupino at no charge and with
virtually no deletions.
ARBITRARY AND CAPRICIOUS DELETIONS:
I n February 1987, I. received 1,651 pages of FBI files on the Bureau's "Top
Hoodlum Program" of surveillance of major organized crime figures.
The FBI withheld 1,300 pages of Minneapolis Top Hoodlum Files in their
entirety - historic files pertaining to long-dead gangsters. The majority of
the 1,651 pages of Top Hoodlum files released to me were
heavily-censored. Most often, only the file numbers and administrative
markings remained - with 80 to 90 percent of the material on gangsters
deleted.
Much of the deleted Top Hoodlum material appears to discuss links
between law enforcement officers or public officials and organized crime
figures - a subject of overwhelming public interest. For instance, the FBI
deleted every word of a 1962 memo in the Top Hoodlum files outlining
"Political Tie-Ups With Organized Crime."
Declassified and Approved For Release 2013/01/03: CIA-RDP91 B00389R000500190006-1
 Declassified and Approved For Release 2013/01/03: CIA-RDP91 B00389R000500190006-1
Similarly, in May 1988 the FBI released 50 pages of Bureau files on
deceased bootlegger Leon Gleckman after delays totalling 22 months. Most
of the Gleckman files were rendered unreadable due to wholesale
deletions.
Again, the FBI invoked the FOIA's privacy exemption to withhold
information in Gleckman's file linking corrupt law enforcement officials
with gangsters. For example, when processing the Gleckman files, the FBI
deleted the names of police officers who acted on behalf of organized
crime as "moles" within the St. Paul Police force. The Bureau also deleted
the names of public officials tied to the Barker/Karpis gang, the names of
politicians known "to be on the take" with the mob, the names of police
who "tipped off" gangsters to impending raids, information on the purchase
through bribery of "two City Councilmen" and the identity of a U.S.
Attorney with close links to mob figures. The result, of course, is that the
readers of my book will be denied access to this important information on
the relationship between public officials and organized crime.
Finally, when the FBI released in 1984 about 62 pages of files on deceased
Irish syndicate leader Edward Morgan, it rendered the file almost
unreadable by wholesale deletions. Again, the deletions appeared to
revolve around the activities of public officials with links to organized
crime.
In my 1986 appeal of the FBI's Ed Morgan file deletions, I noted that the
FBI had deleted from the files details of corrupt activities by Minneapolis
police controlled by Morgan. In addition, the FBI had deleted most of a
1934 memo discussing contacts between gangsters and police
departments, details of payoffs to police officers made by Morgan's
syndicate, the names of 16 public officials who actually received payoffs
from organized crime, the names of public officials who "furnished
protection to Ed Morgan," and the details of corrupt deals between Morgan
and the Minneapolis County Attorney.
The FBI claimed the "privacy" exemption to justify withholding
information on public officials from the citizens whom they served. When
the FBI reprocessed its files on Morgan, it was revealed that originally the
FBI had deleted such confidential information as the names of the Mayors
of Minneapolis and St. Paul.
In May 1987, the Office of Legal Policy denied my FOIA appeal of the FBI's
Declassified and Approved For Release 2013/01/03: CIA-RDP91 B00389R000500190006-1
 Declassified and Approved For Release 2013/01/03: CIA-RDP91 B00389R000500190006-1
deletions of this material. I intend to sue the Justice Department in U.S.
District Court to compel release of this material to the public.
Again, when the FBI processed files on Minneapolis journalist Arthur
Kasherman, it deleted 90 percent of the material from a 1944 memo
headlined "Political Tie-Ups With Organized Crime" and virtually every
single word of the section headed "Police Tie-Ups with Organized Crime."
From my experience, it appears that the Justice Department has used FOIA
exemptions to justify withholding evidence of corruption from the public. I
appealed the FBI's deletions from Morgan's file in May 1988. My appeal
mentioned the fact that the public's interest in understanding the ties
between elected officials and gangsters vastly outweighed the deceased
public official's alleged privacy interests in hiding his corruption from the
public.
Minnesota's most notorious gangster was the late Isadore Blumenfeld, a
man referred to as "The Godfather of Minnesota." Under the FOI A, the FBI
released to me in 1984 some 1,477 pages of files on Blumenfeld - most
rendered worthless for historic scholarship due to massive deletions.
Another 640 pages of material was withheld in its entirety.
Given the tremendous public interest in Blumenfeld and the fact that
virtually all of his criminal associates are long-dead, the extent of the
Justice Department's withholding surprised me. Moreover, the FBI's
deletions of Blumenfeld's files was inconsistent with the full disclosure
of Blumenfeld's files by other federal agencies. For example, the
Immigration and Naturalization Service quickly released 250 pages of
investigative files on Blumenfeld - with almost no deletions whatever.
Similarly, the U.S. Department of Labor quickly released its file on
Blumenfeld - again, with almost no deletions. And the U.S. Bureau of
Prisons released its entire prison and medical file on Blumenfeld with
barely a single deletion.
In contrast to that cooperation with reporters, the FBI deleted material
from their file on Blumenfeld pertaining to corrupt behavior committed by
federal law enforcement personnel - material that referred to
"irregularities on the part of Internal Revenue Service personnel." In
August 1987, the Office of Legal Policy denied my appeal of these
deletions and upheld the FBI's withholding. I intend to sue the Justice
Declassified and Approved For Release 2013/01/03: CIA-RDP91 B00389R000500190006-1
 Declassified and Approved For Release 2013/01/03: CIA-RDP91 B00389R000500190006-1
Department in U.S. District Court to overturn its denial of my appeal.
Finally, the Justice Department also inflicted significant deletions to the
FBI files it processed for me on the late Arthur Stillman of Minneapolis - a
public official who was allegedly a suspect in the most famous kidnapping
in Midwest history, the Virginia Piper kidnapping case.
In September 1982, I initiated an FOIA request for FBI files on Stillman.
Two months later, the FBI announced that it would withhold 128 pages of
Stillman's files in their entirety - pages with material of tremendous
historic importance and public interest. The 64 remaining pages from
Stillman's file that were released were severely edited. (I appealed the
FBI's deletions and, in July 1983, the Office of Legal Policy denied my
appeal.)
Among the material deleted by the FBI was an allegation that Stillman may
have been deeply involved in criminal activity. For example, the FBI
appears to have deleted information that suggests that Stillman, a member
of the Minnesota Parole Board, may have used his position as an official to
violate the public trust by obtaining early release for selected murderers.
The FBI also deleted material that suggests that Stillman may have
actually received ransom money from the Piper Kidnapping which was
"used by Stillman to purchase narcotics." Furthermore, the FBI deleted
information that suggested that this former Minnesota Parole Board
official may have intended to have an associate murdered before he could
tell the police about Stillman's involvement in the Piper kidnapping.
This is precisely the kind of historic information on public figures that
gives citizens a better understanding of how organized crime affects their
local government. I believe that in resisting the release of these files to
the public, the Justice Department is denying citizens the right to become
informed about the history and workings of their government.
CONCLUSION:
After seven years as a requestor under the Freedom of Information Act, my
experience has suggested that the Justice Department is not complying
adequately with the law. Its compliance with fee waiver provisions has
been slow and inconsistent. Its processing of files requested under the
FOIA has been subject to delays of up to two or three years and has been
subject to excessive deletions. Its responsiveness not only to my
Declassified and Approved For Release 2013/01/03: CIA-RDP91 B00389R000500190006-1
 Declassified and Approved For Release 2013/01/03: CIA-RDP91 B00389R000500190006-1
requests, but to legislators requesting information on the status of my
requests or appeals, has been spotty at best.
The Justice Department has used the Freedom of Information Act as a
shield to hide public corruption rather than as the tool for public
disclosure for which it was enacted.
The end result is that my readers - the ultimate beneficiaries of this book
on organized crime - have been denied the opportunity to learn about this
portion of their own history in a timely manner.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for this opportunity to testify. I will, of course,
respond to questions.
Declassified and Approved For Release 2013/01/03: CIA-RDP91 B00389R000500190006-1