Latest in FOIA
Our latest FOIA litigation targets two sets of survey results that should shed light on whether the Trump administration has put pressure on intelligence analysts.
Our latest FOIA lawsuit.
One of the great political mysteries of the last few weeks involves what has happened to the possible criminal indictment of former Acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe, who is accused of having made false statements regarding his role in certain leaks to the media relating to the Hillary Clinton e-mail scandal.
Friday was supposed to be a very big day for those following the investigation being led by Special Counsel Robert Mueller. Not only was Acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker scheduled to testify before the House Committee on the Judiciary, but Michael Cohen—President Trump’s former attorney, now turned cooperating witness for Mueller’s investigation—was supposed to do the same before the House’s oversight and intelligence committees.
Yesterday evening, we received a response to one of our FOIA requests asking whether anyone has sought or received internal ethics guidance on Whitaker’s involvement in the Mueller investigation.
We’re using FOIA to find out whether the acting attorney general has consulted with career ethics experts on his involvement with the Mueller investigation. If not, that could be a major red flag.
Late on Friday, we received the first set of responsive documents to our “meta-FOIA request” regarding the release of congressional candidate—and former postal inspector and CIA officer—Abigail Spanberger’s unredacted SF-86 form.
In response to a Freedom of Information Act request from New York Times reporter Charlie Savage, the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board (PCLOB) has declassified its implementation report on Presidential Policy Directive 28: Signals Intelligence Activities (PPD-28). PPD-28 was signed by President Obama in January of 2014 and provides principles guiding “why, whether, when, and how the United States conducts signals intelligence activities.” The report was sent to Congress in early 2017.
On Tuesday, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled to deny the nonprofit group Protect Democracy access to certain documents related to the Trump administration’s legal justification for airstrikes in Syria in April 2017.
It isn’t every day that the Department of Justice acknowledges formally that the president of the United States lied in a speech to Congress. But that’s how I read a letter I received a few days ago from the department.