7/22/85 Gibson Ie A Bit Partis4n In Hie . - Hood College

6- „clounication Journaler of Congress in 1940, whenteen terms. Then he failed inwing a brief tour in the Navy,. His servicei/r Congress thent in 1972. Indeed, Boggs was.aigns, mainly because in his19% of the vote . ivil rights bills in 1956, 1957,its position and twice votedts causes. Furthermore, BoggsDematic leaders by:Ifare legislation.” Accordinghe "always supported liberalrich different factions of theits career. In 1954 he became'sirion ostensibly created for;am Rayburn. Then in 1962if Majority Whip, a post heto Udall of Arizona for theBoggs chaired the platform;ational Convention, and heions."agressional successor, Boggs'pericnce had a great deal of'decd. he had been a highlyci his triumphs in colleget freshman recipient of thetined annually to the bestd foremost a debater, whog prepared texts," recalled.iggs, 13 June 1979, and Barone.p. 2774.Hale Boggs on J. Edgar Hoover57Lindy Boggs, who added that he was blessed with "natural talent,beautiful tonal qualities and a lovely speaking voice.""THE MESSAGE.The message conveyed through Boggs' brief speech was arelatively simple and straightforward one. He argued that throughcampus surveillance and wiretaps on the telephones of congress.men the FBI was endangering the freedoms guaranteed in theBill of Rights. Three times in the speech he mentioned the Billof Rights, and twice he discussed campus surveillance and congressional wiretapping.Boggs' allegations about FBI infiltration of student. groupswere not disputed, in part due to a break-in a month earlier at anFBI field office in Media, Pennsylvania. Stolen documents releasedby the perpetrators "proved beyond a doubt that the FBI wasinvestigating students as if they were criminals."" Indeed, aSenate committee later observed that during the late '60's andearly '70's "student groups were subjected to intense scrutiny,including every member of the. Students for a Democratic Societyand every Black Student Unioh and similar group.""Although Boggs' allegation of campus surveillance arousedlittle controversy, his plea for Hoover's resignation and his claimabout FBI wiretapping of congressmen prompted considerablecriticism, as will be demonstrated later in this analysis. Substantial e,didence can be cited, however, to corroborate Boggs'Specific claims about electronic surveillance and thus to stakeunderstandable his fears about the status of the Bill of Rights.But at that time, the Louisiana congressman was pointedlycriticized for not offering proof of his charges. Dan Rather, thenWhite House correspondent for CBS news, noted that it was"Boggs' case where proof is lacking.""taPersonal interview with Hon. Lindy Boggs, IS June 1979.tovilliarn Sullivan, The Bureau: My Thirty Years in Hoover's FBI (NewYork: W. W. Norton and Company. 1979), p. 151.laU.S. Cong., Senate, Select Committee To Study Government OperationsWith Respect To Intelligeace Activities. "Intelligence Activities and theRights of Americans," Final Report, 94th Cong., 2nd Session, 26 April 1973,p. 8.ieCong. Rec., p. 11565.rMIL YIN.POBANYVIOMM.1“1. ,.1.0.1 n1.1—*.*

58 101.The Southern Speech Communication JournalBoggs amplified his April 5 remarks at a press conferencethe following day, and also expanded them during a longerspeech given seventeen days later. In, this second address,.Boggsoffered several examples of senators and congressmen who believed they were under electronic surveillance. In addition, Boggscharged that in 1970 a wiretap had been found on his hometelephone by an investigator for the Cheseapeake and PotomacTelephone Company, but he also noted that the company laterdenied any tap had been located?' .Senator Joseph Montoya of New Mexico was one of the wiretap victims named by Boggs. Somewhat earlier Montoya hadhimself delivered a speech alleging FBI surveillance of membersof Congress. Boggs also named Congressman John Dowdy andSenators Ralph 'Yarborough, William Benton, Birch Bayh,Charles Percy, and Wayne Morse. The Louisiana congressmanclaimed that each of these legislators suspected some sort ofelectronic surveillance was being used against them."Two days after the April 5 speech, four other members ofCongress reported suspicions about FBI surveillance, wiretaps inparticular. Representative Nick Galibanakis "said a tap hadbeen reported to him, but he could not certify it as a fact," andRepresentative Benjamin S. Rosen asserted that a policeman hadreported Rosen's phone as being tapped, but the telephonecompany denied it. Senators George McGovern and Harold:B.Hughes suspected taps on their telephones, but neither had anyproof." The evidence needed by Boggs and others in 1971 surfaced in 1975, after former top FBI officials Cartha DeLoach andLouis B. Nichols first disclosed the magnitude of FBI surveillanceof members of Congress.On January 19, 1975, DeLoach and Nichols revealed theexistence of "files containing information on the personal livesof Senators and Congressmen." Specifically, Senators Mike Mansfield. Ted Kennedy, Lowell Weicker, Abraham Ribicoff, GeorgeMcGovern and Adlai Stevenson III, and Congressmen HaleCong. Rer., p. 11563.loCang. Rer., p. 11653.11"Congress Wiretaps Denied," Washington Past, 7 April UM, Sec. A,p. 10.Hale Boggs oBoggs. Wilbur Mills and Carlwhich "contained data on theof members of Congress as wellby DeLoach as 'junk.' "" TIsweeping denials issued fourZeigler, and the rest of thepublic uproar coaxed the ponetub into motion.The results of separatedistressingly similar. First, a Sutional Rights of the House Juin FBI files that "informationcumbent members of Coneressfile on each incoming Congre'"Intelligence Activities and de.same conclusions, noting dialhad been subjected to electroninquiries publicly documentedcirculated in the nation's caphseveral cases, purely politicalof Congress to an Administrpurely personal information. Isocial activities of a high-leelectronic'survefflance and dinthe Federal government.""In retrospect, it appears Icorrect in his allegations abouerred only in specifying wirerssurveillance technology such 2devices. 20Ronald Kessler, "FBI Had tilesPost, 19 January 1975, Set. A. p. I. US. Cong., House. Subtomnaiit,Committee on the Judiciary. fBI Of.February 1975, part one, p. 42."U.S. Cong. Senate, Select CommWith Respect To Intelligence Actilit241.I.S, Cong., Senate, Stitt' CommaWith Respect To Intelligente Ac isit- - -.now st,r .- yet.,.-2-15 -2.S.",,. .1,9-",ECIM

Cod,nnurtication Journalmarks at a press conferencended them during a longerIn this second address, Boggsrs and congressmen who berveillance. In addition, Boggsad been found on his hometo Cheseapeake and Potomacnoted that the company laterMexico was one of the wireaewhat earlier Montoya hadF111 surveillance of membersmgressman John Dowdy andBina Benton, Birch Bayh,The Louisiana congressmanttors suspected some sort ofsed against them."4:cell, four other members ofFBI surveillance, wiretaps in;alifianakis "said a tap hadnot certify it as a fact.," andasserted that a policeman had; tapped, but the telephonege McGovern and Harold E.ephones, but neither had anyBoggs and others in 1971 sari officials Cartha DeLoach andmagnitude of FBI surveillanceAt and Nichols revealed thermation on the personal lives.cifically, Senators Mike Manscr, Abraham Ribicoff, GeorgeIII, and Congressmen Haleington Post, 7 April 1971. Sec. A,4(42.1a,w rctl. unieio 64111Hale Boggs on J. Edgar Hoover59Boggs, Wilbur Mills and Carl Albert were the subject of dossierswhich "contained data on the girlfriends and drinking problemsof members of Congress as well as other information characterizedby DeLoach as 'junk.' "" These revelations made suspect thesweeping denials issued four years earlier by Hoover, Mitchell,Zeigler, and the rest of the "Nixon team," and the resultingpublic uproar coaxed the ponderous federal investigative apparatus into motion.The results of separate Senate and House probes weredistressingly similar. First, a Subcommittee on Civil and Constitutional Rights of the House Judiciary Committee found evidencein FBI files that "information" was to be gathered "on non-incumbent members of Congress" so that Hoover had "a completefile on each incoming Congressman."" Then, the Senate report"Intelligence Activities and the Rights of Americans" reached thesame conclusions, noting that both senators and congressmenhad been subjected to electronic surveillance.22 These legislativeinquiries publicly documented rumors that for years had quietlycirculated in the nation's capital. The Senate report noted: "Inseveral cases, purely political information, such as the reactionof Congress to an Administration's legislative proposals, andpurely personal information, such as coverage of extra-maritalsocial activities of a high-level official, was obtained fromelectronic surveillance and disseminated to the highest levels ofthe Federal government."'"In retrospect, it appears that Boggs was at least partiallycorrect in his allegations about FBI surveillance. He may haveerred only in specifying wiretaps, as opposed to other electronicsurveillance technology such as hidden transmitters and otherdevices."Ronald Krscler, "FBI Had Files on Congress, Ex-aides Say," WashingtonPox:, 19 January 1955. Sec. A, p. 1.21U.S. Cong., House, Subcommittee on Civil and Constitutional Rights.Committee on the Judiciary, FBI Oversight, 99th Congress, First Session, 27February 1975, part one, p. 42."U.S. Cong., Senate, Select Committee To .Study Government OperationsWith Respect To Intelligence Activities, pp. 12, 229.29 U.S. Cong., Senate, Select Committee to Study Government OperationsWith Respect To Intelligence Activities, p. 13.SIV!,11117111M

moo -Ad6o.W.;60a .SoThe Southern Speech Communication JournalHale BoggsRegardless of whether the danger stemmed from wiretaps,"bugs." or other means of surveillance, the threat to the Billof Rights was real. Evidence unavailable to Boggs in 1971 demonstrates that Hoover was a virtual dictator over the FBI, capableof extreme acts of revenge against critics." However, as early as1964 there were warnings, as Fred Cook observed, that "the reputation of the Bureau" was causing pressures which resulted in"scant regard for human or individual rights."" Tom Wickeragreed with Cook's analysis: "As time brings from Freedom ofInformation Act suits, more grand jury deliberations, more investigative reporting, the truth becomes clearer—the assault onMartin Luther King was only part of a long and dismal recordof FBI attempts at Hoover's command to suppress dissent andsocial change. hound and harass supposed enemies, smear individuals and organizations, blackmail those on whom it . 'hadsomething,' and manipulate public attitudes to suit the prejudices of the Director. And all these activities were based onsurveillances and infiltrations conducted with little or no regardfor the law.""The very fact that Boggs and others believed they were beingkept under surveillance documents the chilling effect of such"police-state" behavior. Indeed, Boggs noted in an April 6 pressconference that "more important than charges and countercharges is the fundamental fact that a substantial number of themembers of Congress are firmly convinced that their phones aretapped by the FBI." He contended that fear of wiretaps was asharmful as their actual use, adding that such fear would "chillthe kind of free discourse s4as a free society.","The inescapable messacthe whole system of freedomstone of an open society," siEmerson at a 1971 Princetovestigating the FBI."" .Eincrsyears later by the Church riused by the FBI in COINTiviolations of both state and fwire fraud, incitement to viextortion. More fundament.citizens engaged in lawfulserious injury to the First Arspeech and the right of theto petition the government flTherefore, the accuracyappears to be a matter of hichoice remain: why, for elanoration against Hoover, thenfollow-up speech? This aml osingled out wiretapping—leadTutBoggs' untimely death a,personality combine to frumotives. Nevertheleit it is r.offered explanations and dinsstrategy.Although Boggs told the Ibeen tapped, he cla1med thatattacks on Hoover. lie citca"Further information about Hoover's character can be located in twotypes of source, books by ex - agents and declassified FBI memorandum.Books include those by Sullivan; William Turner, Hoover's FBI (New York:Dell Books, 1970): and Norman 011estad, Inside the FBI (New York: LyleStuart and Company, 1967). FBI memorandum can be located in the citedCongressional hearings, and in the Freedom of Information Act ReadingRoom, J. Edgar Hoover FBI Building, Washington, D.C."Fred Cook, "The FBI Nobody Knows," quoted in Theodore Becker,Government Lawlessness in America (New York: Oxford University Press,'1971), F. 71."Tom Wicker, "Hoover Deceit Being Condoned," New York Times, 2June 1978, Sec. t, p. 16.21"CongressWiretaps DeniedI). 1 .Pat Wavers and Stephen OMBallantine Books, 1975), p. 571."U.S. Cong., Senate, Select Corn,With Res?ect To Intelligence."1 .41 '

-V wirnunication JournalHale Boggs on J. Edgar Hooverriger stemmed from wiretaps,illance, the threat to the Billiilable to Boggs in 1971 demondictator over the FBI, capablet critics." fictever, as early asCook observed, that "the repuig pressures which resulted inividual rights."" Torn Wickertime brings from Freedom ofid jury deliberations, more ingrcornes clearer—the assault onft of a long and dismal recordinland to suppress dissent andsupposed enemies, smear inkmail those on whom it 'hadlic attitudes to suit the prejuhese activities were based onducted with little or no regard61the kind of free discourse we must have if we are to continueas a free society."""The inescapable message . . . is that the FBI jeopardizesthe whole system of freedom of expression which is the cornerstone of an open society," stated Yale law professor Thomas I.Emerson at a 1971 Princeton University seminar entitled "Investigating the FBI."28 Emerson's argument was documented fiveyears later by the Church committee: "The abusive techniquesused by the FBI in COINTELPRO Erom 1956 to 1971 includedviolations of both state and federal laws prohibiting mail fraud,wire fraud, incitement to violence, sending obscene mail, andextortion. More fundamentally, the harassment of innocentcitizens engaged in lawful forms of political expression didserious injury to the First Amendment guarantee of freedom ofspeech and the right of the people to assemble peaceably andto petition the government [or a redress of grievances.""Therefore, the accuracy of Boggs' denunciation of Hooverappears to be a matter of history. Still, questions of rhetoricalchoice remain: why, for example, did Boggs give his one-minuteoration against Hoover, then wait two weeks to offer proof in afollow-up speech? This and other questions—such as why Boggssingled out wiretapping—lead ui to a consideration of motives.)thers believed they were beingits the chilling effect of suchoggs noted in an April 6 pressIt than charges and counterat a substantial number of therivinced that their phones are:d that fear of wiretaps was asig that such fear would "chillTHE MOTIVESBoggs' untimely death and the complexity of his publicpersonality combine to frustrate attempts to pinpoint hismotives. Nevertheless, it is possible to probe beyond publiclyoffered explanations and thus better understand Boggs' rhetoricalstrategy.Although Boggs told the House that his home telephone hadbeen tapped. he claimed that this wasn't the motive behind hisattacks on Hoover. He cited "a far more personal experience"'a character can be located in twoand declassified FBI memorandum.a Turner, Hoover's FBI (New York:I. Inside the FBI (New York: Lyleandurn can be located in the cited'mom of Information Act ReadingV4shington, D.C.lows," quoted in Theodore Becker.York: Oxford University Pro.yr"Congres Wiretaps Denied," Washington Post, 7 April 1971, Sec. A,P. 1.Spat 'Walters and Stephen Gillen, Investigating the FBI(New York:Ballantinc Books, 1975). p. 371.a9U.S. Cong. Senate. Select Committee To Study Government OperationsWith Respect To Intelligence Activities, p. 139.g Condoned," New York Times, 2, ,.- "- Tf.T7IL,T70,.'7MilrPtS. !.K,TroS0712rMIN

62(The Southern Speech Communication JournalHale Boggras the motive behind his initial criticism of Hoover, adding thattwo unnamed friends, Justice Department career officials, hadprivately expressed fears at Hoover's retention as FBI Director."This public explanation of Boggs' motives was maintained until,/ January 21, 1975.But the congressman's son alleged that his father had otherreasons for criticizing Hoover. These "other reasons" centeredaround Hoover's use of perscnal information against critics of thePresident's Commission on the Assassination of PresidentKennedy. According to the younger Boggs, the Director "leakedphotographs of sexual activity and reports on alleged Communist affiliations of some authors of books and articles on theassassination." The Washington Post also argued that this "playeda large role" in Boggs' "decision to confront Hoover."'Given Hoover's collection of dossiers on private lives, it ispossible to imagine that Boggs was reacting to some action takenby Hoover or his agents against him—blackmail or a threat ofsome kind. When this writer asked about that possibility, Boggs'widow replied, "I don't think there was anything like that. Itwas not because of anything directed against him, except thathe didn't feel comfortable talking on his own telephone."'"Why did Boggs risk a punishing confrontation with Hoover?He claimed initially that it was at the behest of friends at theJustice Department, yet his son revealed that Hoover's use ofpolitical intelligence affected Boggs' decision considerably. Whileboth of these factors probably played a role, it would seem unwiseto limit our analysis to these motives, since two additional causalfactors can be identified.A complete understanding of Boggs' attitudes toward Hoovernecessitates an examination of their relationship during the probeinto John Kennedy's assassination. Boggs was openly critical ofFBI performance, which he claimed resulted in inadequate information being made available to the Warren Commission."Despite the constraintsindepZndent and analyticflthan one occasion he shookand he generally refused tche felt any doubt about an iAccording to a former airthing—Hoover lied his eyes uthe gun, on Oswald, on RolTherefore, it may be assutHoover took seed during theCommission.Boggs' philosophy on dcalso have influenced his acrias chairman of the New OrLstrongly that government rotfact, his first major politicacorrupt district attorney itappalled that we had not iliberties," claimed Lindy B rspoke from "the stirringssense of responsibility," ant'and other ineffective contortI see what until now I hadBoggs placed the blatn,Congress," observing that "occured without our consentDuring his service on MOdeveloped contacts with iris.greater insight into abusesLion about FBI misconductimbued with an acute persotbecame very incensed at hitrys.3.113ernard Fenrerwald, Caortmiton Press, 1977), p. 96.Cong. Rec., 22 April 1911, p 122 April 1971, p. 11565.stlionald Kessler, "Hill Data Confirmed by FBI," Washington Post, 21January 1975, Sec. A, p. 1."Personal interview with Hon. Lindy Boggs, 13 June 1979."Edward Epstein, Inquest (New York: Viking Press, 1966), p. 48.soCong. Rec.,!.psorrmtT. 77reRSwpersonal interview with22 April 19 7!.37 Cong.Rec.,soCong.Rec., 22 April 1971.p, 1a9Personal interview wtth Hon.- "--totwITwternsr,r-Ar7P.-TertlrIN.

ra.sw3iiarsdillistvasausa.asise.s.s.

the Louisianan by House Speaker Sam Rayburn. Then in 1962 Boggs stepped up to the position of Majority Whip, a post he held for nine years until beating Mo Udall of Arizona for the Majority Leadership. Itt addition, Boggs chaired the platform committee at the 1968 Democratic National Convention, and he served on two presidential commissions."