FOIA requests and the CIA money trail

Hi all - I'm aware that there are plenty of successful and unsuccessful FOIA requests every year, around the JFK assassination and related bits of history - and I'm also aware the Jeff Morley's lawsuit about the Joannides information -

My question is about MONEY, though. Does anyone know how this actually works, and maybe could point me in a direction, for research?

I'm interested in the CIA's money trail during the JFK period. Briefly why - by example - the original allocation for anti-Castro activities was 17 million dollars. However there were 800 employees operating out of JM/WAVE at one point, and if you add in the contractor money and all the money for foreign bribes and stuff like that, you start looking at about 80 million per year, which of course is "way more than what's in the official budget".

So, I guess, a) has anyone tried to look at the "books" of someone like an E Howard Hunt (who was allegedly one of the CIA's "money men"), and b) are there any records of the CIA's use of money in the early Vietnam period, "just after" the JFK assassination?

'Cause y'know... the CIA has been funding its black ops with drug money since day one. There's plenty of documentation on that. Which is, in my opinion, why we see a bunch of dark clandestine types hanging around mob figures like Jack Ruby, and also why we see CIA types and near-CIA types (like Loran Hall and William Seymour) getting involved with drugs. Rose Cheramie tells the story of driving back from Miami with some Cuban types, supposedly with drugs for Jack Ruby - so now, what if that's true?

Maybe "that's" what they don't want to tell us - maybe the CIA was actually "funding" Jack Ruby to run all those drugs. So they could use the money for... other things.

How much of a window do we have into the "MONEY" angle on this thing? How about.... the Teamsters? Has anyone unraveled that whole (financial) mess, or is that still a big unknown? Teamsters owned Cabana Motel along with Doris Day, yes? And, my best understanding of all that is that Teamsters were loaning money to the Mob as part of a "laundering" operation - real money went out and fake money came in, which they'd then launder through "borderline" banks (of which there are many examples, including Phillip A Twombly in Fullerton CA).

So specifically, I don't suppose we can look through the Mafia books at this point, but what about the CIA books? Shouldn't all that be available to us through FOIA or something?

Mr. Steven Aftergood

Re: Aftergood v. CIA, No. 01-2524 (D.D.C.) (RMU)

Dear Mr. Aftergood:

On April 4, 2005, in the above-entitled civil action, the Court issued an Order specifying that "defendant shall disclose the CIA budget figure for 1963 by May 6, 2005." Order of Apr. 4, 2005, at 1. As you know, "the CIA budget figure for 1963" was $550 million, information that already was in your possession. This information also was officially confirmed in the record of this case. Thus, as the Court stated in its earlier opinion, this "simply means that the CIA must disclose to the plaintiff what he already knows." Aftergood v. CIA, No. 01-2524, 2005 WL 299983, at *5 (D.D.C. Feb. 9, 2005).

In accordance with the Court's Order, I can reiterate this $550 million figure to you, and I can of course also attach a copy of the Cost Reduction Program report, which you yourself submitted to my client and which contains this figure.

This ought to conclude this litigation.

Sincerely,

JANICE GALLI McLEOD
Counsel for Defendant

The Department of State just launched its new FOIA website, and it’s impressive. The site is sleek, informative, user-friendly, and the best feature, in my opinion, is the new virtual reading room search. The new search proudly boasts a total of 80,211 searchable documents—for now, that is,
http://nsarchive.wordpress.com/2013/07/11/7112013-frinformsum-state-rolls-out-sleek-user-friendly-comprehensive-foia-site/

gerrrycam wrote:The Department of State just launched its new FOIA website, and it’s impressive. The site is sleek, informative, user-friendly, and the best feature, in my opinion, is the new virtual reading room search. The new search proudly boasts a total of 80,211 searchable documents—for now, that is,
http://nsarchive.wordpress.com/2013/07/11/7112013-frinformsum-state-rolls-out-sleek-user-friendly-comprehensive-foia-site/

Hm, that's interesting. 80,000... and... how many years has this been going on now? Or are these "just" the State Department docs, and we expect all the rest of the government departments to follow suit sometime in our lifetimes?

Earth to Uncle Sam: FOIA is about new information. Not stuff you already released. Duh. (Slaps forehead, walks away in disgust)...  

[url=http://www.foia.cia.gov/sites/default/files/document_conversions/1705143/BOLSCHWING, OTTO (VON) VOL. 2_0136.pdf]http://www.foia.cia.gov/sites/default/files/document_conversions/1705143/BOLSCHWING,%20OTTO%20(VON)%20%20%20VOL.%202_0136.pdf[/url]
YOU WOULD BE SURPRISED WHAT YOU CAN FIND IN FOIA LIKE PASH RETURNING TO ARMY AT 71 YEARS OLD

Well... one interesting thing I've noticed from all this evidence that's passing before my eyes right now, is the date on Jack Ruby's IRS Levy: that date is 11-26-63. Here it is: http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh23/html/WH_Vol23_0183b.htm

Now, I know a little bit about IRS "levies". A "levy" is the LAST step in the collection process. First, for a couple years before that, they're a lot nicer than a "levy" - first they send you all these really nice letters saying "you owe money", and then they send you a few more not-so-nice letter saying, "no, you REALLY owe the money", and then eventually they send you this thing that says "you have 60 days to appeal or we're going to shut you down". AFTER all that, is when they use a levy.

A levy is an "attachment", it means they're going to take every penny you have, from anywhere they can find it, until you've paid the debt. So on this case, 44 thousand bucks - and if Ruby is operating at a few hundred a day, that's a year's worth of money! Which means, Jack Ruby and his places of business are effectively shut down, for an entire year - and that's IF he comes up with the money (if he doesn't it goes on for a lot longer, until he eventually does, or until they throw him in jail, one or the other).

So, it would seem to me, that Jack Ruby was in a rather desperate condition at this point - after all, if he loses his place of business then he loses his "tool kit", he can't do a darn thing without that place of business. Without the Carousel he has no place to gamble, no place to stash the drugs, and no way to introduce the girls to the clients - which means his status in the mob and wherever else he's employed goes to hell "overnight", which means he goes from a big wheel to a nobody overnight. And my read of Jack is that such a thing wouldn't sit too well with him - which probably explains why he was crying most of the afternoon on the 22nd.

Not sure if this is relevant or not but in Victor Marchetti's book about the CIA he mentions companies and 'fronts' the CIA used back in the day to make money for stuff they weren't budgeted for. The one I specifically remember was an air travel company. They owed the whole thing and I think it was a massive airline. He tracked some of their extra cash for sneaky things and it ran into the millions. I will have a look through the book tonight and see what else he had to say.

Frankie Vegas wrote:Not sure if this is relevant or not but in Victor Marchetti's book about the CIA he mentions companies and 'fronts' the CIA used back in the day to make money for stuff they weren't budgeted for. The one I specifically remember was an air travel company. They owed the whole thing and I think it was a massive airline. He tracked some of their extra cash for sneaky things and it ran into the millions. I will have a look through the book tonight and see what else he had to say.

Hi Frankie, I think you're on the right track. This is something else the Mob and the CIA have in common, yes? They both use "front corporations".

Seems to me, it is vitally important to understand, in this 1963 context, that the Mafia were the experts in all these areas - everything ranging from assassinating Castro to laundering a little money. The CIA were the n00bs on the block. The Mafia had been doing this kind of thing since the early 30's when they started making way more money than they knew what to do with - and so, for example, one of the tricks Carlos Marcello used was he would "hire" people to buy property in their own names - they were "front people", just masks for the real owners. In exchange for their ownership and perhaps for taking care of the property, they'd be paid a handsome monthly stipend and all they'd have to do is make the property available whenever it was needed as a safe house or for a meeting or whatever. And then they'd cook the books a little and show the caretaker how to handle the cash, and how much to bring to the bank and how much not to. And on the back end of all this, the money still had to be laundered, because it came on the scene as "unaccountable cash" and it somehow had to be made "accountable" so it could be used for legitimate purposes.

So it seems to me, the CIA would have learned most of this trade from the Mob, or at the very least if they somehow arrived at the solution independently then they ended up using the very same methods. Front corporations are a must-have, and shady banks are a must-have on the back end.

This is exactly the kind of work E Howard Hunt did, isn't it? Wasn't he the money guy, the "bag man"? Somewhere, somehow, there must have existed a "real" set of books for each operation, in addition to the "official" set maintained by the accountants. Y'know? It must have been a little more than just, "here Fat Freddy, take this bag of cash and go buy us some rifles".

All right, let's get specific. What about the Double-Check Corporation? That's a known CIA front in 1963, and apparently it was writing David Ferrie some paychecks at one point. What do we know about the books of Double-Check? Anything? Do we have a complete list of the people they paid and when the payments were made? Shouldn't such a thing be obtainable through FOIA requests?

nonsqtr/Brian wrote:Hi Frankie, I think you're on the right track. This is something else the Mob and the CIA have in common, yes? They both use "front corporations".

Seems to me, it is vitally important to understand, in this 1963 context, that the Mafia were the experts in all these areas - everything ranging from assassinating Castro to laundering a little money. The CIA were the n00bs on the block.....

So it seems to me, the CIA would have learned most of this trade from the Mob, or at the very least if they somehow arrived at the solution independently then they ended up using the very same methods. Front corporations are a must-have, and shady banks are a must-have on the back end.

This is exactly the kind of work E Howard Hunt did, isn't it? Wasn't he the money guy, the "bag man"? Somewhere, somehow, there must have existed a "real" set of books for each operation, in addition to the "official" set maintained by the accountants. Y'know? It must have been a little more than just, "here Fat Freddy, take this bag of cash and go buy us some rifles".

All right, let's get specific. What about the Double-Check Corporation? That's a known CIA front in 1963, and apparently it was writing David Ferrie some paychecks at one point. What do we know about the books of Double-Check? Anything? Do we have a complete list of the people they paid and when the payments were made? Shouldn't such a thing be obtainable through FOIA requests?

On the very last item, I think Ernie Lazar believes all such things are obtainable through FOIA requests.

dwdunn(akaDan) wrote:

nonsqtr/Brian wrote:Hi Frankie, I think you're on the right track. This is something else the Mob and the CIA have in common, yes? They both use "front corporations".

Seems to me, it is vitally important to understand, in this 1963 context, that the Mafia were the experts in all these areas - everything ranging from assassinating Castro to laundering a little money. The CIA were the n00bs on the block.....

So it seems to me, the CIA would have learned most of this trade from the Mob, or at the very least if they somehow arrived at the solution independently then they ended up using the very same methods. Front corporations are a must-have, and shady banks are a must-have on the back end.

This is exactly the kind of work E Howard Hunt did, isn't it? Wasn't he the money guy, the "bag man"? Somewhere, somehow, there must have existed a "real" set of books for each operation, in addition to the "official" set maintained by the accountants. Y'know? It must have been a little more than just, "here Fat Freddy, take this bag of cash and go buy us some rifles".

All right, let's get specific. What about the Double-Check Corporation? That's a known CIA front in 1963, and apparently it was writing David Ferrie some paychecks at one point. What do we know about the books of Double-Check? Anything? Do we have a complete list of the people they paid and when the payments were made? Shouldn't such a thing be obtainable through FOIA requests?

On the very last item, I think Ernie Lazar believes all such things are obtainable through FOIA requests.

I checked Ernie, didn't find much on "money". There's a whole lot on the surveillance bit, y'know... "who's who", but not a whole lot on the actual operational side.

I'm asking from a position of extreme naivete, I'm just wondering whether anyone's ever tried anything like this. Never having done an FOIA request, I don't know what's involved. All you do is send the government a few bucks and tell them what you want? And then they either tell you "yes" or "no"?

In Ernie's case, it seems he was mostly interested in FBI files, and the FBI is at least somewhat more removed from the ability to use "national security" as a catch-all excuse for withholding information.

But um.... how can I say this.... I'd bet my left nut the CIA is still using some such mechanism to fund their dark side, and going after the information in any kind of dedicated or persistent (or "aggressive") manner could be dangerous. Seriously!

However aboveboard and through the legal system in full public view.... with lawyers and publicists in tow.... if there were ever a significant inquiry or challenge into the CIA's ability to fund operations this way, I would guess it would be met with the "utmost" in the way of cover-up and all that, and therefore if anyone were serious about pursuing this it would also have to be done with the "utmost" diligence and caution.

As individuals we have very little clout probably, but if a bunch of us were to get together and "flood" the government with requests of this type, it is possible that something might come of it. (I mean, besides more mysterious unexplainable "suicides", yuk).  

nonsqtr wrote:I checked Ernie, didn't find much on "money". There's a whole lot on the surveillance bit, y'know... "who's who", but not a whole lot on the actual operational side.

I'm asking from a position of extreme naivete, I'm just wondering whether anyone's ever tried anything like this. Never having done an FOIA request, I don't know what's involved. All you do is send the government a few bucks and tell them what you want? And then they either tell you "yes" or "no"?

I don't know what's involved either; never been in any position to be able to file such requests. That's why I mentioned what Ernie seems to believe, about that one final question in your reply to Frankie.

In Ernie's case, it seems he was mostly interested in FBI files, and the FBI is at least somewhat more removed from the ability to use "national security" as a catch-all excuse for withholding information.

I don't know why that would be.

But um.... how can I say this.... I'd bet my left nut the CIA is still using some such mechanism to fund their dark side, and going after the information in any kind of dedicated or persistent (or "aggressive") manner could be dangerous. Seriously!

We all have to take our chances. I expect I'll be killed by deranged racists soon enough.

However aboveboard and through the legal system in full public view.... with lawyers and publicists in tow.... if there were ever a significant inquiry or challenge into the CIA's ability to fund operations this way, I would guess it would be met with the "utmost" in the way of cover-up and all that, and therefore if anyone were serious about pursuing this it would also have to be done with the "utmost" diligence and caution.

As individuals we have very little clout probably, but if a bunch of us were to get together and "flood" the government with requests of this type, it is possible that something might come of it. (I mean, besides more mysterious unexplainable "suicides", yuk).

I agree, but fuck a bunch of caution at this point.

dwdunn(akaDan) wrote:

I agree, but fuck a bunch of caution at this point.

Life is cheap. And, I value mine, I'd like to live to fight another day.

Y'know... um... the World Anti-Communist League and all that - they didn't mind bringing in the drugs 'cause they were only being sold to the despicable radical leftie hippies anyway.... y'know like, who cares "how" they die, right? Whether by drug overdose or by police bludgeoning in Oakland or actual bullets at Kent State.

For people who are so operationally capable, some of 'em sure are philosophically stupid. Well, the chickens are coming home to roost, aren't they... so, I wouldn't exactly say "fuck" caution, but I would say there's a need for people to become more involved, and "becoming more involved" always carries risk with it - and in that sense I can see what you're saying and I'd probably be on board, 'cause a certain element of risk would seem to be required for anything resembling an acceptable level of resolution.... at least that seems to be an increasingly prevalent (and realistic) view at this point.

another kinda relevant point. I've never done and FOIA request (but will be in the next month) but I have asked a private law firm for some papers relating to Admiral George Gregory Burkley and even a little old housewife like me in NZ received a 'threat' of some sort.
I was sitting in the couch drinking coffee beside my husband one morning and we were both checking out emails on our laptops. A little box popped up on mine that said I had an email from him. I gave him a funny look and opened it and it was this: http://thewebfairy.com/masonic/Ciaa.jpg
The document from the CIA on how to counter researchers on this case. My husband of course had his email hacked. Bizarre.
When I finally managed to get hold of the law firm they explained that the files had been destroyed over 20 years ago.
They whole thing was very strange and kind of heart breaking. Those documents could have explained what Dr Burkley meant when he told his lawyer to tell the HSCA that he had evidence  that 'More than Oswald must have been shooting that day" and he wanted to hand it over to them.

I'm sorry to hear about that Frankie. Reminds me of a theory I once thought up, about Australia and New Zealand being de facto colonies of the CIA & US Air Force. Ya never know y'know

[url=http://www.foia.cia.gov/sites/default/files/document_conversions/1705143/BOLSCHWING, OTTO (VON) VOL. 2_0136.pdf[/url]]http://www.foia.cia.gov/sites/default/files/document_conversions/1705143/BOLSCHWING,%20OTTO%20(VON)%20%20%20VOL.%202_0136.pdf[/url][/url]
I see CIA took this page down  i didn't know they followed this blog or is it there blog?

----- SECRET

NOT EELEAME TO fp:125 rITIONALS

EIRS-028-78

-at3o7

MEMORANDUM FM

• PCS/PG1.• .•

ATTENT/ON:

FROM:

•Chief,..Operations Group

SUBJECT: Nano Trace•and Records Search--

Colonel Boris T. Pash;

.Otto brecht Allred Von Bolshving;

• Artur Adolf lonradi; and

Dr. : Heinrich Graf Von Horan (Herne)

. .

REFERENCES: A. OGC 78-5719 dated 29'August 1978 (C)

: B.. • United States Depaitainit of Justice

.y (INS) Memorandun 'dated 18 July 1976

..:.:..s'.sr.., ..1)! .

I. (S) ILA iistensivf • search •of. 'the files of

this Directorate.revealed the following information

on the individuals listed in the above. references.

.; • • ; • • :

A. Cole-net Boris T Paisha.

Thor* ii **;indication that • •

ever :had • contlicthilth •• Bishop '•-•• • ••-:

Valerian (Tr/Ia.:and no lisd eat 1011

in :Trifa's tiisc Ithat' -

PASH:was a-contact of. or• mven f'••:" -;

• SURVTWE OF THIS DOCURNT RESPONDED TC10/0 112.. to ?rife: PASH :was . interested

rr.v.1 no-ormatiou an the Russian Orthodox Church (ROC)

:,

▪

ena TO HAW DEED RELRISEllin!.san,Francis-•_ Californieri;and in

1111ER 1.,11 PART DL la ITS ERTIRETY TO THA nay 1971- hi a1 jiteไ. this Agency k

EQUESTEH. after his:To:twa t to active s-Army duty,

of his concernl ihat•thorROO lwas •

passiblys•perietrated-by.:Soiriat'-'.

intellig enc. a You may Wish. to

contact the ?If or further •

informat ion Sub., act PASH was

a nilitaryfdetailee of • thii Agency.

front :1951 ..to ,1953 :and returned to

active 'duty 'after that tine I. You COPY FOR

7 --------

SUOtiCb

• .• tV06 tr.)

r*: :1

gpf .th:§.§1f AND RELEASED BY

• kYltNAI iNIELL 15 ENCE AGENCY

Mitt" HODS EXEMPT I ON3B2B

NA/ i WAR CRIMES DI SCLOSURE ACT

OM 1003 1008

I!!

1

1

11

V;

II •

 http://www.foia.cia.gov/sites/default/files/document_conversions/1705143/BOLSCHWING,%20OTTO%20(VON)%20%20%20VOL.%202_0136.pdf


Colonel Boris T. Pash;. Otto brecht Alfred Von Bolshwing;. Artur Adolf Konradi; and. Dr. Heinrich Graf Von Meran (4erna). REFERENCES: A. OGC 78-5719 dated ...