|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Title: |
Memorandum for heads of departments litigating components handling criminal matters, Requirement for Office Discovery Policies in Criminal Matters |
|
Author: |
David Ogden |
|
Title: |
Deputy Attorney General |
|
Authoring or Creator Agency: |
Department of Justice |
|
Audience: |
United States Attorneys |
|
|
Title: |
Issuance of Guidance and Summary Action Taken in Response to the Report of the Department of Justice Criminal Discovery and Case Management Working Group |
|
Author: |
David Ogden |
|
Title: |
Deputy Attorney General |
|
Authoring or Creator Agency: |
Department of Justice |
|
Audience: |
Department of Justice Prosecutors |
|
|
Title: |
Guidance for Prosecutors Regarding Criminal Discovery |
|
Author: |
David Ogden |
|
Title: |
Deputy Attorney General |
|
Authoring or Creator Agency: |
Department of Justice |
|
Audience: |
Department of Justice Prosecutors |
|
|
|
Archive Link |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The FY 2011 Budget requests a $300.6 million increase, including 440 new positions (126 agents and 15 attorneys), to strengthen national security and counter the threat of terrorism. This represents a five percent increase in counterterrorism funding and a nine percent increase in intelligence resources over the FY 2010 levels. Overall, the FY 2011 budget request dedicates 15 percent of the department's total discretionary budget authority to national security efforts. These funds are needed to allow the department to identify, track and defeat terrorists operating in the United States and overseas, and to fortify our intelligence analysis capabilities.
[...]
Continued advances in high speed telecommunications, computers and other technologies are creating new opportunities for terrorists and criminals. New vulnerabilities and challenges in law enforcement, including the need to ensure cyber security, require substantial investment in technology and human capital. This request will enable the department to address emerging threats and maintain the security of the nation. |
| |
Agency(ies): |
Department of Justice |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Title: |
Department of Justice FY 2012 Budget Request |
|
Authoring or Creator Agency: |
Office of Public Affairs, Department of Justice |
|
|
|
Archive Link |
|
Title: |
U.S. Department of Justice FY 2012 Budget Request, STRENGTHEN NATIONAL SECURITY, +$128.6 million in Program Increases |
|
Authoring or Creator Agency: |
Department of Justice |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Author: |
Lanny Breuer |
|
Title: |
Assistant Attorney General |
|
Authoring or Creator Agency: |
Criminal Division, Department of Justice |
|
Audience: |
Richard Tallman Chair Advisory Committee on the Criminal Rules United States Court of Appeals |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Title: |
Department of Justice Press Conference |
|
Author: |
Eric Holder |
|
Title: |
Attorney General |
|
Authoring or Creator Agency: |
Department of Justice |
|
Notes: |
Banking Blockade |
|
|
Title: |
Justice Department Sues American Express, Mastercard and Visa to Eliminate Rules Restricting Price Competition; Reaches Settlement with Visa and Mastercard |
|
Authoring or Creator Agency: |
Office of Public Affairs, Department of Justice |
|
Concerning: |
"Banking Blockade |
|
|
|
Archive Link |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Attorney General publicly confirmed the existence of an investigation into disclosures of classified information by WikiLeaks on November 29, 2010. |
| |
Name(s:) |
Neil MacBride |
| |
Title: |
United States Attorney |
| |
Agency(ies): |
Office of the United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, Criminal Division, Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section, CEOS, Department of Justice, EDVA |
|
Concerning: |
Grand Jury |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
|
WASHINGTON (AP) The Justice Department will prosecute anyone found to have violated U.S. law in the leaks of classified government documents by online whistleblower WikiLeaks, Attorney General Eric Holder said Monday.
'This is not saber-rattling,' said the attorney general, who declared that the Obama administration condemns the leaks.
Holder said the latest disclosure, involving classified State Department documents, puts at risk the security of the nation, its diplomats, intelligence assets and U.S. relationships with foreign governments.
'To the extent that we can find anybody who was involved in the breaking of American law, who put at risk the assets and the people I have described, they will be held responsible; they will be held accountable,' Holder said at a news conference on another topic. He called the WikiLeaks probe 'an active, ongoing criminal investigation. |
| |
Name(s:) |
Pete Yost |
| |
Title: |
Reporter |
| |
Agency(ies): |
Associated Press, AP |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
Archive: |
Archive Link
http://archive.is/S6iOz |
|
|
Holder emphasized that his office, along with the Department of Defense, is conducting an 'active ongoing criminal investigation.'
[...]
'To the extent that we can find anybody who was involved in the breaking of American law, and who has put at risk the assets and the people that I have described, they will be held responsible,' Holder said at a press conference this morning. 'They will be held accountable.'
[...]
'To the extent there are gaps in our laws, we will move to close those gaps,' he said. 'Which is not to saywhich is not to saythat anybody at this point because of their citizenship or their residence is not a target or a subject of an investigation that is ongoing.' |
| |
Name(s:) |
Eric Holder |
| |
Title: |
Attorney General |
| |
Agency(ies): |
Department of Justice |
|
Concerning: |
Grand Jury |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
Archive: |
Archive Link
http://archive.is/caV5p |
|
Title: |
Government's Response in Opposition To The Real Parties' In Interest Motion For Immediate Unsealing of Motions and Upcoming Hearing |
|
Author: |
Neil MacBride |
|
Title: |
United States Attorney |
|
Authoring or Creator Agency: |
Office of the United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, Department of Justice, EDVA |
|
Concerning: |
"Grand Jury |
|
|
Title: |
Holder: Wikileaks, Oregon Investigations Ongoing |
|
Author: |
Eric Holder |
|
Title: |
Attorney General |
|
Authoring or Creator Agency: |
Department of Justice |
|
Concerning: |
"Grand Jury |
|
|
|
2010-12-31 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Prosecution: How long did you chat with bradass87?
Lamo: Over a period, May 20 through May 26. |
| |
Name(s:) |
Julian Assange |
| |
Title: |
Editor in Chief |
| |
Agency(ies): |
WikiLeaks |
|
Concerning: |
Grand Jury |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
Archive: |
Archive Link
http://archive.is/TPvVn |
|
|
Secret Grand Jury investigating alleged associations between Assange and Manning is convened in Alexandria, VA |
| |
Name(s:) |
David House |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
|
The Attorney General publicly confirmed the existence of an investigation into disclosures of classified information by WikiLeaks on November 29, 2010. |
| |
Name(s:) |
Neil MacBride |
| |
Title: |
United States Attorney |
| |
Agency(ies): |
Office of the United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, Department of Justice, EDVA |
|
Concerning: |
Grand Jury |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
|
WASHINGTON (AP) The Justice Department will prosecute anyone found to have violated U.S. law in the leaks of classified government documents by online whistleblower WikiLeaks, Attorney General Eric Holder said Monday.
'This is not saber-rattling,' said the attorney general, who declared that the Obama administration condemns the leaks.
Holder said the latest disclosure, involving classified State Department documents, puts at risk the security of the nation, its diplomats, intelligence assets and U.S. relationships with foreign governments.
'To the extent that we can find anybody who was involved in the breaking of American law, who put at risk the assets and the people I have described, they will be held responsible; they will be held accountable,' Holder said at a news conference on another topic. He called the WikiLeaks probe 'an active, ongoing criminal investigation. |
| |
Name(s:) |
Pete Yost |
| |
Title: |
Reporter |
| |
Agency(ies): |
Associated Press, AP |
|
Concerning: |
Grand Jury |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
Title: |
Government's Response in Opposition To The Real Parties' In Interest Motion For Immediate Unsealing of Motions and Upcoming Hearing |
|
Author: |
Neil MacBride |
|
Title: |
United States Attorney |
|
Authoring or Creator Agency: |
Office of the United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, Department of Justice, EDVA |
|
Concerning: |
"Grand Jury |
|
|
Title: |
Holder: Wikileaks, Oregon Investigations Ongoing |
|
Author: |
Eric Holder |
|
Title: |
Attorney General |
|
Authoring or Creator Agency: |
Department of Justice |
|
Concerning: |
"Grand Jury |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Questioner
The daily question, WikiLeaks apparently today released what is described as a treasure trove of infrastructure targets around the world, which of course could be damaging not only to those countries but to US interests. Why hasn't the Government just gone ahead and shut down the site? Or shut down the dissemination of his information? Why can't you do that?
Eric Holder, US Attorney General, Department of Justice
Well, let me condemn in the strongest terms the leaks of information that have come as a result of the actions that you have just reference. National security of the United States has been put at risk, the lives of people who work for the American people has been put at risk. The American people themselves have been put at risk by these actions which are, I believe, arrogant, misguided, and ultimately, not helpful in any way. We are doing everything that we can. We have a very serious, active ongoing investigation that is criminal in nature. I authorized just last week a number of things to be done so that we can hopefully get to the bottom of this and hold people accountable, as they should be.
Questioner
What are the things that can be done? And has the Government explored the ability to be able to seize the sites. Last week you were before us saying look at all the Web sites we seized and shit down. But, you can't do that in this case. What are the parameters that are limiting that? And, what are some of the actions that you did authorize to go forward?
Eric Holder, US Attorney General, Department of Justice
It is an ongoing investigation. I don't want to get into exactly what I authorized, but I can say that I personally authorized a number of things last week and I think that is an indication of the seriousness with which we take this matter and the highest level involvement in the United States Department of Justice. With regard to all the tactics that we can do or can use to ameliorate the consequences of these actions I don't want to get into those as well, but we will do everything that we can both to hold people accountable, and to minimize the harm that will befall American people.
[...]
Questioner
Mr. Attorney General, going back to WikiLeaks for a minute. Can you help us understand, going back to Jason's question for a minute, why you can't shut these sites down? Is there something within the law? Is there something missing within the law that prevents you from doing that?
Eric Holder, US Attorney general, Department of Justice
Well as I said, I don't want to get into what our capabilities are. At this point I will simply say what I have just said. We have a very serious criminal investigation that is underway, and we are looking at all the things that we can do to try to stem the flow of this information.
Questioner
Several members of Congress from both political parties have offered to produce legislation to close gaps and vague issues in the Espionage Act and elsewhere. Are you working with the Hill to do that at this point, or is that not necessary?
Eric Holder, US Attorney general, Department of Justice
Well it is certainly something that we need to look at to see exactly the Espionage Act as everyone knows is something that is pretty old. There have been subsequent Court decisions that cast some doubt on on at least some provisions in the Act, but I think people should also understand that is not the only tool that we have to use in the investigation of this matter. Now I don't what to get into specifics here but people would be have a misimpression if the only statute you think we are looking at is the Espionage Act. That is certainly something that might play a role, but there are other statutes, other tools that we have our disposal.
Questioner
In terms of the things that you authorized last week, are you talking about search warrants, FISA applications? Can you be a little more specific?
Eric Holder, US Attorney general, Department of Justice
All I would say is that there were significant things that I personally authorized. |
| |
Name(s:) |
Eric Holder |
| |
Title: |
Attorney General |
| |
Agency(ies): |
Department of Justice |
|
Concerning: |
Grand Jury, Banking Blockade |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Questioner
You mentioned that cyber security was discussed. On the subject of WikiLeaks what discussions did you have, and specifically the Attorney General, what type of pressure have you applied on companies such as Mastercard and Paypal in terms of trying to suspend accounts?
Eric Holder, US Attorney General, Department of Justice
I am not going to talk about the ongoing investigation that I have described I guess over the course of the last week or so, other than to say again that we have an active ongoing serious investigation of that matter. We had, I think, informal conversations about the WikiLeaks matter. The concern that it has raised in the minds of all of us. And, the hope here in the United States is that the investigation that we are conducting will allow us to hold accountable the people responsible for that unwarranted disclosure of information that has put at risk the safety of the American people and people who work on behalf of the United States.
Questioner
[MISSED] any of these companies? Paypal was saying yesterday that it had received letters from the administration?
Eric Holder, US Attorney General, Department of Justice
I am not going to comment on any of the investigative steps that we have taken.
Questioner
Related to that, as part of this Operation Payback that some are calling a cyberwar with computer intrusions into Paypal, attacks against Amazon.com and other sites, have you directed the FBI to look at these incidents and is there any investigation into...?
Eric Holder, US Attorney General, Department of Justice
We are aware of the incidents that you have described and we are simply say that we are looking into it.
Questioner
Do you believe that you have identified all the people who are responsible for giving WikiLeaks the latest stash of documents?
Eric Holder, US Attorney General, Department of Justice
The investigation is ongoing.
[...]
Questioner
Mr. Attorney General did you and your colleagues in your meetings today reach any agreement about uniform approach on WikiLeaks?
Eric Holder, US Attorney General, Department of Justice
I was going to say that we didn't talk about WikiLeaks in any formal way.
[...]
Questioner
Do you have...have certain countries been the focal point of the WikiLeaks research or investigation...like Iceland...with connections that Iceland has to WikiLeaks?
Eric Holder, US Attorney General, Department of Justice
As I indicated before I really don't want to go into any specifics of the ongoing investigation.
[...]
Questioner
Reports are suggesting that the next release of documents from WikiLeaks could be confidential threat assessments of detainees at Guantanamo. Are you concerned that sources and methods information may come out as a result of that and also are you concerned there could be some additional questions from the Hill and elsewhere regarding whether some detainees who have been release have gone back into the battlefield and become recidivists?
Eric Holder, US Attorney General, Department of Justice
I am concerned about, I think we are all concerned about certainly the United States Government concerned about the nature of the release, as I have indicated...I think that the release of this information has put at risk American National Security, and whatever is to come I think we will not in any way...will be consistent with the concerns that I have expressed. |
| |
Name(s:) |
Eric Holder |
| |
Title: |
Attorney General |
| |
Agency(ies): |
Department of Justice |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
|
Questioner
Address maybe the...someone had suggested maybe the response by those who support WikiLeaks to attack Amazon and other companies...is basically a cyberwar...between the two sides...that is proliferating across boundaries and what you all are doing at DHS, since cyber issues are in your purview, to address that or mitigate that?
Janet Napolitano, Secretary Department of Homeland Security
I think the Attorney General has always said that he doesn't want to comment on any ongoing investigations or activities with respect to WikiLeaks. All I will say is with respect to the protection of the private sector we are working or do work very closely with him on variety of matters, involving cyber, cyberattacks, cyber intrusions and the like. I think your question raises the importance of cyber. That is why, our discussions with the EU today were to follow up the the agreement made by our leaders in Lisbon two weeks ago: to formulate a US EU Cyber Working Group and to really focus on issues about intrusions into critical infrastructure, into financial markets and into other areas that are cyber dependent. So, that Working Group has already begun, and I think we will see some important measure that will come out of that that will be between the United States and the EU. |
| |
Name(s:) |
Janet Napolitano |
| |
Title: |
Secretary of Homeland Security |
| |
Agency(ies): |
Department of Homeland Security |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
|
Questioner
...aware that US authorities are trying to get their hands on Julian Assange and your Government is trying to get its Government on Julian Assange?
Cecilia Malmstrom EU Commissioner
Ah, the Swedish Judicial Apparatus is totally independent and doesn't take any order from my...Swedish politicians or Americans authorities. And the crimes he is accused of, if he is being sent to Sweden will be processed accordingly. So, I have absolutely no comments to that. I am not part of the Swedish Government, I am commissioner of the European Union based in Belgium. |
| |
Name(s:) |
Cecilia Malmstrom |
| |
Title: |
Commissioner |
| |
Agency(ies): |
European Union |
|
Concerning: |
Sweden versus Assange, EU-US |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
|
She also highlighted the United States and the European Union ongoing, coordinated efforts to protect vital cyber networks from attacks through the U.S.-EU Cyber Working Groupformalized by President Obama in the Nov. 20 U.S.-EU Summit Declarationwhich facilitates the continued sharing of cybersecurity best practices and security standards and enhances collaboration on public-private partnerships; cyber incident management; public awareness; and combating cyber crime. |
| |
Name(s:) |
Janet Napolitano |
| |
Title: |
Secretary of Homeland Security |
| |
Agency(ies): |
Department of Homeland Security |
|
Concerning: |
EU-US |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
Archive: |
Archive Link
http://archive.is/efUyW |
|
Title: |
U.S.-EU Cooperation Against Terrorism (May 21, 2012) |
|
Author: |
Kristin Archick |
|
Title: |
Specialist in European Affairs |
|
Authoring or Creator Agency: |
Congressional Research Service, CRS |
|
Concerning: |
"EU-US |
|
|
Title: |
EU-US ministerial meeting on Justice and Home Affairs |
|
Authoring or Creator Agency: |
Atlantic Organization for Security |
|
Concerning: |
"EU-US |
|
|
|
Archive Link |
|
Title: |
The U.S. Congress and the European
Parliament: Evolving Transatlantic Legislative
Cooperation (January 2, 2013) |
|
Author: |
Kristin Archick, Vincent Morelli |
|
Title: |
Specialist in European Affairs, Section Research Manager |
|
Authoring or Creator Agency: |
Congressional Research Service |
|
Concerning: |
"EU-US |
|
|
|
2011-01-31 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It is nearly certain that allegations regarding WikiLeaks and Julian Assange from the grand jury that has been meeting every month since September 2010 attempting to mount an espionage case will be disclosed in these proceedings. |
| |
Name(s:) |
Julian Assange |
| |
Title: |
Editor in Chief |
| |
Agency(ies): |
WikiLeaks |
|
Concerning: |
Grand Jury |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
Archive: |
Archive Link
http://archive.is/TPvVn |
|
|
Secret Grand Jury investigating alleged associations between Assange and Manning is convened in Alexandria, VA |
| |
Name(s:) |
David House |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
|
The Attorney General publicly confirmed the existence of an investigation into disclosures of classified information by WikiLeaks on November 29, 2010. |
| |
Name(s:) |
Neil MacBride |
| |
Title: |
United States Attorney |
| |
Agency(ies): |
Office of the United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, Department of Justice, EDVA |
|
Concerning: |
Grand Jury |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
|
WASHINGTON (AP) The Justice Department will prosecute anyone found to have violated U.S. law in the leaks of classified government documents by online whistleblower WikiLeaks, Attorney General Eric Holder said Monday.
'This is not saber-rattling,' said the attorney general, who declared that the Obama administration condemns the leaks.
Holder said the latest disclosure, involving classified State Department documents, puts at risk the security of the nation, its diplomats, intelligence assets and U.S. relationships with foreign governments.
'To the extent that we can find anybody who was involved in the breaking of American law, who put at risk the assets and the people I have described, they will be held responsible; they will be held accountable,' Holder said at a news conference on another topic. He called the WikiLeaks probe 'an active, ongoing criminal investigation. |
| |
Name(s:) |
Pete Yost |
| |
Title: |
Reporter |
| |
Agency(ies): |
Associated Press, AP |
|
Concerning: |
Grand Jury |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
Title: |
Government's Response in Opposition To The Real Parties' In Interest Motion For Immediate Unsealing of Motions and Upcoming Hearing |
|
Author: |
Neil MacBride |
|
Title: |
United States Attorney |
|
Authoring or Creator Agency: |
Office of the United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, Department of Justice, EDVA |
|
Concerning: |
"Grand Jury |
|
|
Title: |
Holder: Wikileaks, Oregon Investigations Ongoing |
|
Author: |
Eric Holder |
|
Title: |
Attorney General |
|
Authoring or Creator Agency: |
Department of Justice |
|
Concerning: |
"Grand Jury |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Specifically, Movants request the unsealing of: (1) all orders and document filed in this matter before the Court's issuance of the December 14, 2010 Order requiring Twitter to provide information concerning Movants (the 'Twitter Order'; )2_ all orders and documents filed in this matter after issuance of the Twitter Order; (3) all similar judicial orders requiring entities other than Twitter to provide information concerning Movants' electronic communications and publications; and (4) all documents filed in connection with such other orders or requests for such orders (collectively, the 'sealed documents')
[...]
Because the motions pertain to an unsealed Court Order brought under U.S.C 2703(d) are not grand jury documents, and contain nay non-confidential, public information, previously known to Parties, Parties did not seek to place the January 26 motions under seal. Nevertheless, the Court Clerk placed the motions under seal, apparently due to the fact that the December 14 Order has a grand jury docket number associated with it.
[...]
Having used a form of request for information about Parties that is outside of grand jury processes, the government cannot now require the secrecy reserved to those processes. [Footnote 3] Although Parties asked the government to consent to the relief sought here, the government refused to do so. |
| |
Title: |
Lawyer for Jacob Appelbaum, Lawyer Rop Gonggrijp, Lawyer Birgitta Jonsdottir |
|
Concerning: |
Twitter 2703(d), 2703(d) Orders, Grand Jury |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
|
Footnote 1: The Subscribers challenged the Order with respect to the three Twitter accounts with which they are identified. But with respect to the fourth Twitter account, WikiLeaks, no party raised objections as to Twitter's production of records related to it. No person appeared on behalf of Wikileaks in the proceedings before the magistrate judge, who dismissed as moot Twitter's motion for clarification related to production of records from the WikiLeaks account. Twitter did not object to the dismissal. Thus, both the owner of the Wikileaks Twitter account and Twitter itself have waived any right to appeal the Order's directive to produce records relating to the account. See Wells v. Shriners Hospital, 109 F.3d 198, 199 (4 th Cir. 1997) ('the consequence of failing to file objections is waiver of the right to appeal'). |
| |
Name(s:) |
Andrew Peterson |
| |
Title: |
Assistant United States Attorney |
| |
Agency(ies): |
Department of Justice, National Security Division, NSD |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
Title: |
MOTION for Unsealing of Sealed Court Records by Jacob Appelbaum, Rop Gonggrijp, Birgitta Jonsdottir. (jlan) (jcor, ). (Entered: 01/28/2011) |
|
Title: |
Lawyer for Jacob Appelbaum |
|
Concerning: |
"Twitter 2703(d), 2703(d) Orders, Grand Jury |
|
|
Title: |
U.S. District Court Eastern District of Virginia (Alexandria) CRIMINAL DOCKET FOR CASE #- 1-11dm00003TCBLO All Defendants.pdf |
|
Concerning: |
"Twitter 2703(d), 2703(d) Orders, Grand Jury |
|
|
|
2011-04-30 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It is nearly certain that allegations regarding WikiLeaks and Julian Assange from the grand jury that has been meeting every month since September 2010 attempting to mount an espionage case will be disclosed in these proceedings. |
| |
Name(s:) |
Julian Assange |
| |
Title: |
Editor in Chief |
| |
Agency(ies): |
WikiLeaks |
|
Concerning: |
Grand Jury |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
Archive: |
Archive Link
http://archive.is/TPvVn |
|
|
Secret Grand Jury investigating alleged associations between Assange and Manning is convened in Alexandria, VA |
| |
Name(s:) |
David House |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
|
The Attorney General publicly confirmed the existence of an investigation into disclosures of classified information by WikiLeaks on November 29, 2010. |
| |
Name(s:) |
Neil MacBride |
| |
Title: |
United States Attorney |
| |
Agency(ies): |
Office of the United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, Department of Justice, EDVA |
|
Concerning: |
Grand Jury |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
|
WASHINGTON (AP) The Justice Department will prosecute anyone found to have violated U.S. law in the leaks of classified government documents by online whistleblower WikiLeaks, Attorney General Eric Holder said Monday.
'This is not saber-rattling,' said the attorney general, who declared that the Obama administration condemns the leaks.
Holder said the latest disclosure, involving classified State Department documents, puts at risk the security of the nation, its diplomats, intelligence assets and U.S. relationships with foreign governments.
'To the extent that we can find anybody who was involved in the breaking of American law, who put at risk the assets and the people I have described, they will be held responsible; they will be held accountable,' Holder said at a news conference on another topic. He called the WikiLeaks probe 'an active, ongoing criminal investigation. |
| |
Name(s:) |
Pete Yost |
| |
Title: |
Reporter |
| |
Agency(ies): |
Associated Press, AP |
|
Concerning: |
Grand Jury |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
Title: |
Government's Response in Opposition To The Real Parties' In Interest Motion For Immediate Unsealing of Motions and Upcoming Hearing |
|
Author: |
Neil MacBride |
|
Title: |
United States Attorney |
|
Authoring or Creator Agency: |
Office of the United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, Department of Justice, EDVA |
|
Concerning: |
"Grand Jury |
|
|
Title: |
Holder: Wikileaks, Oregon Investigations Ongoing |
|
Author: |
Eric Holder |
|
Title: |
Attorney General |
|
Authoring or Creator Agency: |
Department of Justice |
|
Concerning: |
"Grand Jury |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3) Clarifying the standard for issuing 2703(d) orders A third potentially appropriate topic for legislation is to clarify the standard for issuance of a court order under 2703(d) of ECPA. ECPA provides that the government can use a court order under 2703(d) to compel the production of non-content data, such as email addresses, IP addresses, or historical location information stored by providers. These orders can also compel production of some stored content of communications, although compelling content generally requires notice to the subscriber. According to the statute, '[a] court order for disclosure... may be issued by any court that is a court of competent jurisdiction and shall issue only if the governmental entity offers specific and articulable facts showing that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the contents of a wire or electronic communication, or the records or other information sought, are relevant and material to an ongoing criminal investigation.' 18 U.S.C. 2703(d).
Until recently, no court had questioned that the United States was entitled to a 2703(d) order when it made the 'specific and articulable facts' showing specified by 2703(d). However, the Third Circuit recently held that because the statute says that a 2703(d) order 'may' be issued if the government makes the necessary showing, judges may choose not to sign an application even if it provides the statutory showing. See In re Application of the United States, 620 F.3d 304 (3d Cir. 2010). The Third Circuit's approach thus makes the issuance of 2703(d) orders unpredictable and potentially inconsistent; some judges may impose additional requirements, while others may not. For example, some judges will issue these orders based on the statutory 'reasonable grounds' standard, while others will devise higher burdens.
In considering the standard for issuing 2703(d) orders, it is important to consider the role they play in early stages of criminal and national security investigations. In the Wikileaks investigation, for example, this point was recently emphasized by Magistrate Judge Buchanan in the Eastern District of Virginia. In denying a motion to vacate a 2703(d) order directed to Twitter, Judge Buchanan explained that 'at an early stage, the requirement of a higher probable cause standard for non-content information voluntarily released to a third party would needlessly hamper an investigation.' In re 2703(d), 2011 WL 900120, at *4 (E.D. Va. March 11, 2011).
Other statutes and rules governing the issuance of legal process, such as search warrants and pen/trap orders, require a magistrate to issue legal process when it finds that the United States has made the required showing. The Third Circuit's interpretation of 2703(d), under which a court is free to reject the government's application even when it meets the statutory standard, is at odds with this approach. Legislation could address this issue. |
| |
Name(s:) |
James Baker |
| |
Title: |
Deputy Attorney General |
| |
Agency(ies): |
Department of Justice |
|
Concerning: |
Grand Jury, Twitter 2703(d) Order, 2703(d) Order |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
Title: |
The Electronic Communications Privacy Act: Government Perspectives on Protecting Privacy in the Digital Age' |
|
Authoring or Creator Agency: |
Senate Committee on the Judiciary, United States Senate |
|
Concerning: |
"Grand Jury, Twitter 2703(d) Order, 2703(d) Order |
|
|
|
Archive Link |
|
Title: |
Statement of James A. Baker Associate Deputy Attorney General before the Committee on the Judiciary United States Senate Entitled 'The Electronic Communications Privacy Act: Government perspectives on Protecting provacy in the Digital Age' Presented April 6, 2011 |
|
Author: |
James Baker |
|
Title: |
Associate Deputy Attorney General |
|
Authoring or Creator Agency: |
Department of Justice |
|
Concerning: |
"Twitter 2703(d), 2703(d) Orders, Grand Jury |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The 'Not for Profit' Cyber Criminal
Hacktivist groups such as Anonymous undertake protests and commit computer crimes as a collective unit. Anonymous does not have a leader or a controlling party, but instead relies on the collective power of individual participants. Its members utilize the Internet to communicate, advertise, and coordinate their actions. Anonymous has initiated multiple criminal Distributed Denial of Service attacks against the Recording Industry Association of America, the Motion Picture Association of America, the Church of Scientology, and various businesses in support of WikiLeaks.
Just last month, Anonymous hacked into the website of a U.S. security firm with US government contracts and stole approximately 72,000 e-mails from the company and posted them online. This attack was in response to the claim that a researcher at the company had identified key members of Anonymous. |
| |
Name(s:) |
Gordon Snow |
| |
Title: |
Assistant Director |
| |
Agency(ies): |
Cyber Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation |
|
Concerning: |
Anonymous |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
Archive: |
Archive Link
http://archive.is/cEz6q |
|
|
The Secret Service's commitment to sharing information and best practices with our partners, the private sector, and academia is perhaps best reflected through the work of our 31 Electronic Crime Task Forces, including two located overseas in Rome, Italy, and London, England. |
| |
Name(s:) |
Pablo Martinez |
| |
Title: |
Deputy Special Agent In Charge |
| |
Agency(ies): |
Criminal Investigation Division, Cyber Crime Operations, Secret Service |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
Title: |
Gordon M. Snow, Assistant Director, Cyber Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Statement Before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Subcommittee on Crime and Terrorism, Washington, D.C., April 12, 2011 |
|
Author: |
Gordon Snow |
|
Title: |
Assistant Director |
|
Authoring or Creator Agency: |
Cyber Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation |
|
Concerning: |
"Anonymous |
|
|
|
Archive Link |
|
Title: |
Cyber Security: Responding to the Threat of Cyber Crime and Terrorism |
|
Authoring or Creator Agency: |
Senate Judiciary Committee Subcommittee on Crime Terrorism |
|
|
|
Archive Link |
|
Title: |
Statement of Jason Weinstein Deputy Assistant Attorney General Criminal Division Before the Committee on Judiciary United States Senate Crime and Terrorism Subcommittee Entitled 'Cybersecurity: Responding to the Threat of Cyber Crime and Terrorism' Presented April 12, 2011 |
|
Author: |
Jason Weinstein |
|
Title: |
Deputy Assistant Attorney General |
|
Authoring or Creator Agency: |
Criminal Division, Department of Justice |
|
|
Title: |
Statement of Mr. Pablo A. Martinez Deputy Special Agent in Charge Criminal Investigative Division US Secret Service Before the Senate Committee on the Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime and Terrorism US Senate April 12, 2011 |
|
Author: |
Pablo Martinez |
|
Title: |
Deputy Special Agent in Charge |
|
Authoring or Creator Agency: |
Criminal Investigative Division, Secret Service |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Title: |
Attorney General Eric Holder Speaks About the Department of Justice's Priorities and Mission |
|
Authoring or Creator Agency: |
Department of Justice |
|
|
|
Archive Link |
|
Title: |
Attorney General holder Address to Employees |
|
Authoring or Creator Agency: |
C-SPAN |
|
|
|
2011-05-31 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In February 2011, national security experts warned that cyber attacks are the greatest future threat to the United States' security. Because any Internet connection will suffice for criminal purposes, more defendants will reside and operate from outside the United States. As people increasingly rely on the Internet as a place to work, shop, and store valuable information, more emphasis will be placed on protecting computer systems from hackers, protecting on-line personal information, and defining electronic privacy. Law enforcement will depend on international collaboration to investigate and collect evidence overseas. Courts, legislators, and regulators in the United States, the European Union, and elsewhere are already grappling with questions concerning government investigators' access to individuals' digital communications and data to investigate law violations. The Wikileaks investigation is a recent example. Cross-border discovery of ESI is a hot issue before the European Commission's Data Protection Working Party. |
| |
Name(s:) |
John Haried |
| |
Title: |
Assistant National Criminal Discovery Coordinator |
| |
Agency(ies): |
Department of Justice |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Letter Re: 11-3/ 10GJ3793
Date of Letter May 25, 2011
[...]
We advise you that the Grand Jury is conducting an investigation of possible violations of federal criminal law involving, but not necessarily limited to conspiracy to communicate or transmit national defense information in violation of 18 U.S.C. 793(g) and conspiracy to violate the laws of the United States, in violation of 18 U.S.C. 371 to wit; knowingly accessing a computer without authorization or exceeding authorized access and having obtained information protected from disclosure for reasons of national defense or foreign relations in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1030(a) and knowingly stealing or converting any record of thing of value of the United States or any department or agency thereof in violation of 18 U.S.C. 641.
[...]
Signed by:
Tracy Doherty-McCormick, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Criminal Division's Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section (CEOS) (X)
Niel MacBride, U.S. Attorney, Eastern District of Virginia |
| |
Name(s:) |
Neil MacBride, Tracy Doherty McCormick |
| |
Title: |
United States Attorney, Assistant United States Attorney |
| |
Agency(ies): |
Office of the United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, Criminal Division, Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section, CEOS, Department of Justice, EDVA |
|
Concerning: |
Grand Jury |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
Archive: |
Archive Link
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/676543-letter-11-3-10gj3793-11-1685-letter-re-11-3.html |
|
|
Date of Subpoena May 25, 2011
Grand Jury Appearance June 15, 2011
Requested by:
Tracy McCormick, Assistant Assistant US Attorney, Criminal Division's Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section (CEOS)
Signed by:
Julia Schlidt, U.S. District Court Clerk |
| |
Name(s:) |
Tracy Doherty-McCormick |
| |
Title: |
Assistant United States Attorney |
| |
Agency(ies): |
Criminal Division's Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section, Department of Justice, CEOS |
|
Concerning: |
Grand Jury |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
Archive: |
Archive Link
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/676542-subpoena-11-3-10gj3793-11-1685-letter-re-11-3.html |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Letter Re: 11-3/ 10GJ3793
Date of Letter May 25, 2011
[...]
We advise you that the Grand Jury is conducting an investigation of possible violations of federal criminal law involving, but not necessarily limited to conspiracy to communicate or transmit national defense information in violation of 18 U.S.C. 793(g) and conspiracy to violate the laws of the United States, in violation of 18 U.S.C. 371 to wit; knowingly accessing a computer without authorization or exceeding authorized access and having obtained information protected from disclosure for reasons of national defense or foreign relations in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1030(a) and knowingly stealing or converting any record of thing of value of the United States or any department or agency thereof in violation of 18 U.S.C. 641.
[...]
Signed by:
Tracy Doherty-McCormick, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Criminal Division's Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section (CEOS) (X)
Niel MacBride, U.S. Attorney, Eastern District of Virginia |
| |
Name(s:) |
Neil MacBride, Tracy Doherty McCormick |
| |
Title: |
United States Attorney, Assistant United States Attorney |
| |
Agency(ies): |
Office of the United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, Criminal Division, Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section, CEOS, Department of Justice, EDVA |
|
Concerning: |
Grand Jury |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
Archive: |
Archive Link
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/676543-letter-11-3-10gj3793-11-1685-letter-re-11-3.html |
|
|
Date of Subpoena May 25, 2011
Grand Jury Appearance June 15, 2011
Requested by:
Tracy McCormick, Assistant Assistant US Attorney, Criminal Division's Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section (CEOS)
Signed by:
Julia Schlidt, U.S. District Court Clerk |
| |
Name(s:) |
Tracy Doherty-McCormick |
| |
Title: |
Assistant United States Attorney |
| |
Agency(ies): |
Criminal Division's Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section, Department of Justice, CEOS |
|
Concerning: |
Grand Jury |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
Archive: |
Archive Link
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/676542-subpoena-11-3-10gj3793-11-1685-letter-re-11-3.html |
|
|
House said he wasn't told whether he is a target of the investigation. He said he was questioned about Manning's time in Boston in 2010 and about the activities of Jacob Appelbaum, a WikiLeaks volunteer in Seattle. |
| |
Name(s:) |
Michael Riley |
| |
Title: |
Reporter |
| |
Agency(ies): |
Bloomberg News |
|
Concerning: |
Grand Jury |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
Archive: |
Archive Link
http://archive.is/Lr5o6 |
|
Title: |
David House's statement on the WikiLeaks Grand Jury |
|
Authoring or Creator Agency: |
Bradley Manning Support Network |
|
Concerning: |
"Grand Jury |
|
|
|
Archive Link |
|
Title: |
Exclusive: David House on Bradley Manning, Secret WikiLeaks Grand Jury, and U.S. Surveillance |
|
Authoring or Creator Agency: |
Democracy Now |
|
Concerning: |
"Grand Jury |
|
|
Title: |
Ratigan: guest David House jerked around in Wikileaks/Grand Jury proceeding |
|
Author: |
hidnusr10 |
|
Concerning: |
"Grand Jury |
|
|
Title: |
WikiLeaks grand jury witness David House refuses to testify, invokes Fifth Amendment |
|
Authoring or Creator Agency: |
AFP |
|
Concerning: |
"Grand Jury |
|
|
|
Archive Link |
|
Title: |
WikiLeaks Grand Jury investigation widens |
|
Author: |
Glenn Greenwald |
|
Title: |
Journalist |
|
Authoring or Creator Agency: |
Salon |
|
Concerning: |
"Grand Jury |
|
|
Title: |
WikiLeaks Grand Jury | Witness Profile, David House, June 15, 2011 |
|
Author: |
Alexa O'Brien |
|
Title: |
Journalist |
|
Concerning: |
"Grand Jury |
|
|
|
Archive Link |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Title: |
COMPLAINT against FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, CRIMINAL DIVISION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, NATIONAL SECURITY DIVISION ( Filing fee $ 350, receipt number 4616045510) filed by ELECTRONIC PRIVACY INFORMATION CENTER. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet)(jf, ) (Entered: 01/26/2012) |
|
Concerning: |
"Epic FOIA, Criminal Division, National Security Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation, FBI, Department of Justice |
|
|
|
2011-01-31 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It is nearly certain that allegations regarding WikiLeaks and Julian Assange from the grand jury that has been meeting every month since September 2010 attempting to mount an espionage case will be disclosed in these proceedings. |
| |
Name(s:) |
Julian Assange |
| |
Title: |
Editor in Chief |
| |
Agency(ies): |
WikiLeaks |
|
Concerning: |
Grand Jury |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
Archive: |
Archive Link
http://archive.is/TPvVn |
|
|
Secret Grand Jury investigating alleged associations between Assange and Manning is convened in Alexandria, VA |
| |
Name(s:) |
David House |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
|
The Attorney General publicly confirmed the existence of an investigation into disclosures of classified information by WikiLeaks on November 29, 2010. |
| |
Name(s:) |
Neil MacBride |
| |
Title: |
United States Attorney |
| |
Agency(ies): |
Office of the United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, Department of Justice, EDVA |
|
Concerning: |
Grand Jury |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
|
WASHINGTON (AP) ' The Justice Department will prosecute anyone found to have violated U.S. law in the leaks of classified government documents by online whistleblower WikiLeaks, Attorney General Eric Holder said Monday.
'This is not saber-rattling,' said the attorney general, who declared that the Obama administration condemns the leaks.
Holder said the latest disclosure, involving classified State Department documents, puts at risk the security of the nation, its diplomats, intelligence assets and U.S. relationships with foreign governments.
'To the extent that we can find anybody who was involved in the breaking of American law, who put at risk the assets and the people I have described, they will be held responsible; they will be held accountable,' Holder said at a news conference on another topic. He called the WikiLeaks probe 'an active, ongoing criminal investigation. |
| |
Name(s:) |
Pete Yost |
| |
Title: |
Reporter |
| |
Agency(ies): |
Associated Press, AP |
|
Concerning: |
Grand Jury |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
Title: |
Government's Response in Opposition To The Real Parties' In Interest Motion For Immediate Unsealing of Motions and Upcoming Hearing |
|
Author: |
Neil MacBride |
|
Title: |
United States Attorney |
|
Authoring or Creator Agency: |
Office of the United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, Department of Justice, EDVA |
|
Concerning: |
"Grand Jury |
|
|
Title: |
Holder: Wikileaks, Oregon Investigations Ongoing |
|
Author: |
Eric Holder |
|
Title: |
Attorney General |
|
Authoring or Creator Agency: |
Department of Justice |
|
Concerning: |
"Grand Jury |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Title: |
COMPLAINT against FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, CRIMINAL DIVISION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, NATIONAL SECURITY DIVISION ( Filing fee $ 350, receipt number 4616045510) filed by ELECTRONIC PRIVACY INFORMATION CENTER. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet)(jf, ) (Entered: 01/26/2012) |
|
Concerning: |
"Epic FOIA, Criminal Division, National Security Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation, FBI, Department of Justice |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Title: |
COMPLAINT against FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, CRIMINAL DIVISION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, NATIONAL SECURITY DIVISION ( Filing fee $ 350, receipt number 4616045510) filed by ELECTRONIC PRIVACY INFORMATION CENTER. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet)(jf, ) (Entered: 01/26/2012) |
|
Concerning: |
"Epic FOIA, Criminal Division, National Security Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation, FBI, Department of Justice |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On July 18, 2011, the DOJ Criminal Division wrote to Epic acknowledding receipt of EPIC's FOIA Request, stating that the EPIC request was 'broad in scope and d[id] not clearly identify the records' that EPIC was seeking.
The DOJ Criminal Division requested clarification regarding the names of the individuals to who EPIC referred, 'including the specific time frames covered by [EPIC's] requests, as well as further description of the specific subject matter related to WikiLeaks' that EPIC sought. |
| |
Agency(ies): |
Electronic Privacy Information Center, EPIC |
|
Concerning: |
Epic FOIA, Criminal Division, National Security Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Department of Justice, FBI, NSD |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
|
2011-01-31 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It is nearly certain that allegations regarding WikiLeaks and Julian Assange from the grand jury that has been meeting every month since September 2010 attempting to mount an espionage case will be disclosed in these proceedings. |
| |
Name(s:) |
Julian Assange |
| |
Title: |
Editor in Chief |
| |
Agency(ies): |
WikiLeaks |
|
Concerning: |
Grand Jury |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
Archive: |
Archive Link
http://archive.is/TPvVn |
|
|
Secret Grand Jury investigating alleged associations between Assange and Manning is convened in Alexandria, VA |
| |
Name(s:) |
David House |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
|
The Attorney General publicly confirmed the existence of an investigation into disclosures of classified information by WikiLeaks on November 29, 2010. |
| |
Name(s:) |
Neil MacBride |
| |
Title: |
United States Attorney |
| |
Agency(ies): |
Office of the United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, Department of Justice, EDVA |
|
Concerning: |
Grand Jury |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
|
WASHINGTON (AP) ' The Justice Department will prosecute anyone found to have violated U.S. law in the leaks of classified government documents by online whistleblower WikiLeaks, Attorney General Eric Holder said Monday.
'This is not saber-rattling,' said the attorney general, who declared that the Obama administration condemns the leaks.
Holder said the latest disclosure, involving classified State Department documents, puts at risk the security of the nation, its diplomats, intelligence assets and U.S. relationships with foreign governments.
'To the extent that we can find anybody who was involved in the breaking of American law, who put at risk the assets and the people I have described, they will be held responsible; they will be held accountable,' Holder said at a news conference on another topic. He called the WikiLeaks probe 'an active, ongoing criminal investigation. |
| |
Name(s:) |
Pete Yost |
| |
Title: |
Reporter |
| |
Agency(ies): |
Associated Press, AP |
|
Concerning: |
Grand Jury |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
Title: |
Government's Response in Opposition To The Real Parties' In Interest Motion For Immediate Unsealing of Motions and Upcoming Hearing |
|
Author: |
Neil MacBride |
|
Title: |
United States Attorney |
|
Authoring or Creator Agency: |
Office of the United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, Department of Justice, EDVA |
|
Concerning: |
"Grand Jury |
|
|
Title: |
Holder: Wikileaks, Oregon Investigations Ongoing |
|
Author: |
Eric Holder |
|
Title: |
Attorney General |
|
Authoring or Creator Agency: |
Department of Justice |
|
Concerning: |
"Grand Jury |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Title: |
COMPLAINT against FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, CRIMINAL DIVISION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, NATIONAL SECURITY DIVISION ( Filing fee $ 350, receipt number 4616045510) filed by ELECTRONIC PRIVACY INFORMATION CENTER. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet)(jf, ) (Entered: 01/26/2012) |
|
Concerning: |
"Epic FOIA, Criminal Division, National Security Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation, FBI, Department of Justice |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Title: |
COMPLAINT against FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, CRIMINAL DIVISION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, NATIONAL SECURITY DIVISION ( Filing fee $ 350, receipt number 4616045510) filed by ELECTRONIC PRIVACY INFORMATION CENTER. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet)(jf, ) (Entered: 01/26/2012) |
|
Concerning: |
"Epic FOIA, Criminal Division, National Security Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation, FBI, Department of Justice |
|
|
|
2011-01-31 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It is nearly certain that allegations regarding WikiLeaks and Julian Assange from the grand jury that has been meeting every month since September 2010 attempting to mount an espionage case will be disclosed in these proceedings. |
| |
Name(s:) |
Julian Assange |
| |
Title: |
Editor in Chief |
| |
Agency(ies): |
WikiLeaks |
|
Concerning: |
Grand Jury |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
Archive: |
Archive Link
http://archive.is/TPvVn |
|
|
Secret Grand Jury investigating alleged associations between Assange and Manning is convened in Alexandria, VA |
| |
Name(s:) |
David House |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
|
The Attorney General publicly confirmed the existence of an investigation into disclosures of classified information by WikiLeaks on November 29, 2010. |
| |
Name(s:) |
Neil MacBride |
| |
Title: |
United States Attorney |
| |
Agency(ies): |
Office of the United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, Department of Justice, EDVA |
|
Concerning: |
Grand Jury |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
|
WASHINGTON (AP) ' The Justice Department will prosecute anyone found to have violated U.S. law in the leaks of classified government documents by online whistleblower WikiLeaks, Attorney General Eric Holder said Monday.
'This is not saber-rattling,' said the attorney general, who declared that the Obama administration condemns the leaks.
Holder said the latest disclosure, involving classified State Department documents, puts at risk the security of the nation, its diplomats, intelligence assets and U.S. relationships with foreign governments.
'To the extent that we can find anybody who was involved in the breaking of American law, who put at risk the assets and the people I have described, they will be held responsible; they will be held accountable,' Holder said at a news conference on another topic. He called the WikiLeaks probe 'an active, ongoing criminal investigation. |
| |
Name(s:) |
Pete Yost |
| |
Title: |
Reporter |
| |
Agency(ies): |
Associated Press, AP |
|
Concerning: |
Grand Jury |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
Title: |
Government's Response in Opposition To The Real Parties' In Interest Motion For Immediate Unsealing of Motions and Upcoming Hearing |
|
Author: |
Neil MacBride |
|
Title: |
United States Attorney |
|
Authoring or Creator Agency: |
Office of the United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, Department of Justice, EDVA |
|
Concerning: |
"Grand Jury |
|
|
Title: |
Holder: Wikileaks, Oregon Investigations Ongoing |
|
Author: |
Eric Holder |
|
Title: |
Attorney General |
|
Authoring or Creator Agency: |
Department of Justice |
|
Concerning: |
"Grand Jury |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Title: |
COMPLAINT against FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, CRIMINAL DIVISION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, NATIONAL SECURITY DIVISION ( Filing fee $ 350, receipt number 4616045510) filed by ELECTRONIC PRIVACY INFORMATION CENTER. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet)(jf, ) (Entered: 01/26/2012) |
|
Concerning: |
"Epic FOIA, Criminal Division, National Security Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation, FBI, Department of Justice |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Title: |
COMPLAINT against FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, CRIMINAL DIVISION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, NATIONAL SECURITY DIVISION ( Filing fee $ 350, receipt number 4616045510) filed by ELECTRONIC PRIVACY INFORMATION CENTER. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet)(jf, ) (Entered: 01/26/2012) |
|
Concerning: |
"Epic FOIA, Criminal Division, National Security Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation, FBI, Department of Justice |
|
|
|
2011-10-31 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It is nearly certain that allegations regarding WikiLeaks and Julian Assange from the grand jury that has been meeting every month since September 2010 attempting to mount an espionage case will be disclosed in these proceedings. |
| |
Name(s:) |
Julian Assange |
| |
Title: |
Editor in Chief |
| |
Agency(ies): |
WikiLeaks |
|
Concerning: |
Grand Jury |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
Archive: |
Archive Link
http://archive.is/TPvVn |
|
|
Secret Grand Jury investigating alleged associations between Assange and Manning is convened in Alexandria, VA |
| |
Name(s:) |
David House |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
|
The Attorney General publicly confirmed the existence of an investigation into disclosures of classified information by WikiLeaks on November 29, 2010. |
| |
Name(s:) |
Neil MacBride |
| |
Title: |
United States Attorney |
| |
Agency(ies): |
Office of the United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, Department of Justice, EDVA |
|
Concerning: |
Grand Jury |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
|
WASHINGTON (AP) ' The Justice Department will prosecute anyone found to have violated U.S. law in the leaks of classified government documents by online whistleblower WikiLeaks, Attorney General Eric Holder said Monday.
'This is not saber-rattling,' said the attorney general, who declared that the Obama administration condemns the leaks.
Holder said the latest disclosure, involving classified State Department documents, puts at risk the security of the nation, its diplomats, intelligence assets and U.S. relationships with foreign governments.
'To the extent that we can find anybody who was involved in the breaking of American law, who put at risk the assets and the people I have described, they will be held responsible; they will be held accountable,' Holder said at a news conference on another topic. He called the WikiLeaks probe 'an active, ongoing criminal investigation. |
| |
Name(s:) |
Pete Yost |
| |
Title: |
Reporter |
| |
Agency(ies): |
Associated Press, AP |
|
Concerning: |
Grand Jury |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
Title: |
Government's Response in Opposition To The Real Parties' In Interest Motion For Immediate Unsealing of Motions and Upcoming Hearing |
|
Author: |
Neil MacBride |
|
Title: |
United States Attorney |
|
Authoring or Creator Agency: |
Office of the United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, Department of Justice, EDVA |
|
Concerning: |
"Grand Jury |
|
|
Title: |
Holder: Wikileaks, Oregon Investigations Ongoing |
|
Author: |
Eric Holder |
|
Title: |
Attorney General |
|
Authoring or Creator Agency: |
Department of Justice |
|
Concerning: |
"Grand Jury |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Title: |
COMPLAINT against FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, CRIMINAL DIVISION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, NATIONAL SECURITY DIVISION ( Filing fee $ 350, receipt number 4616045510) filed by ELECTRONIC PRIVACY INFORMATION CENTER. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet)(jf, ) (Entered: 01/26/2012) |
|
Concerning: |
"Epic FOIA, Criminal Division, National Security Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation, FBI, Department of Justice |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Title: |
October 18, 2011 Letter from Attorney General Eric Holder to The Honorable Reena Raggi, Chair of the Advisory Committee on the Criminal Rules |
|
Author: |
Eric Holder |
|
Title: |
Attorney General |
|
Authoring or Creator Agency: |
Department of Justice |
|
|
|
2011-11-30 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It is nearly certain that allegations regarding WikiLeaks and Julian Assange from the grand jury that has been meeting every month since September 2010 attempting to mount an espionage case will be disclosed in these proceedings. |
| |
Name(s:) |
Julian Assange |
| |
Title: |
Editor in Chief |
| |
Agency(ies): |
WikiLeaks |
|
Concerning: |
Grand Jury |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
Archive: |
Archive Link
http://archive.is/TPvVn |
|
|
Secret Grand Jury investigating alleged associations between Assange and Manning is convened in Alexandria, VA |
| |
Name(s:) |
David House |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
|
The Attorney General publicly confirmed the existence of an investigation into disclosures of classified information by WikiLeaks on November 29, 2010. |
| |
Name(s:) |
Neil MacBride |
| |
Title: |
United States Attorney |
| |
Agency(ies): |
Office of the United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, Department of Justice, EDVA |
|
Concerning: |
Grand Jury |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
|
WASHINGTON (AP) ' The Justice Department will prosecute anyone found to have violated U.S. law in the leaks of classified government documents by online whistleblower WikiLeaks, Attorney General Eric Holder said Monday.
'This is not saber-rattling,' said the attorney general, who declared that the Obama administration condemns the leaks.
Holder said the latest disclosure, involving classified State Department documents, puts at risk the security of the nation, its diplomats, intelligence assets and U.S. relationships with foreign governments.
'To the extent that we can find anybody who was involved in the breaking of American law, who put at risk the assets and the people I have described, they will be held responsible; they will be held accountable,' Holder said at a news conference on another topic. He called the WikiLeaks probe 'an active, ongoing criminal investigation. |
| |
Name(s:) |
Pete Yost |
| |
Title: |
Reporter |
| |
Agency(ies): |
Associated Press, AP |
|
Concerning: |
Grand Jury |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
Title: |
Government's Response in Opposition To The Real Parties' In Interest Motion For Immediate Unsealing of Motions and Upcoming Hearing |
|
Author: |
Neil MacBride |
|
Title: |
United States Attorney |
|
Authoring or Creator Agency: |
Office of the United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, Department of Justice, EDVA |
|
Concerning: |
"Grand Jury |
|
|
Title: |
Holder: Wikileaks, Oregon Investigations Ongoing |
|
Author: |
Eric Holder |
|
Title: |
Attorney General |
|
Authoring or Creator Agency: |
Department of Justice |
|
Concerning: |
"Grand Jury |
|
|
|
2011-11-30 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It is nearly certain that allegations regarding WikiLeaks and Julian Assange from the grand jury that has been meeting every month since September 2010 attempting to mount an espionage case will be disclosed in these proceedings. |
| |
Name(s:) |
Julian Assange |
| |
Title: |
Editor in Chief |
| |
Agency(ies): |
WikiLeaks |
|
Concerning: |
Grand Jury |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
Archive: |
Archive Link
http://archive.is/TPvVn |
|
|
Secret Grand Jury investigating alleged associations between Assange and Manning is convened in Alexandria, VA |
| |
Name(s:) |
David House |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
|
The Attorney General publicly confirmed the existence of an investigation into disclosures of classified information by WikiLeaks on November 29, 2010. |
| |
Name(s:) |
Neil MacBride |
| |
Title: |
United States Attorney |
| |
Agency(ies): |
Office of the United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, Department of Justice, EDVA |
|
Concerning: |
Grand Jury |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
|
WASHINGTON (AP) ' The Justice Department will prosecute anyone found to have violated U.S. law in the leaks of classified government documents by online whistleblower WikiLeaks, Attorney General Eric Holder said Monday.
'This is not saber-rattling,' said the attorney general, who declared that the Obama administration condemns the leaks.
Holder said the latest disclosure, involving classified State Department documents, puts at risk the security of the nation, its diplomats, intelligence assets and U.S. relationships with foreign governments.
'To the extent that we can find anybody who was involved in the breaking of American law, who put at risk the assets and the people I have described, they will be held responsible; they will be held accountable,' Holder said at a news conference on another topic. He called the WikiLeaks probe 'an active, ongoing criminal investigation. |
| |
Name(s:) |
Pete Yost |
| |
Title: |
Reporter |
| |
Agency(ies): |
Associated Press, AP |
|
Concerning: |
Grand Jury |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
Title: |
Government's Response in Opposition To The Real Parties' In Interest Motion For Immediate Unsealing of Motions and Upcoming Hearing |
|
Author: |
Neil MacBride |
|
Title: |
United States Attorney |
|
Authoring or Creator Agency: |
Office of the United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, Department of Justice, EDVA |
|
Concerning: |
"Grand Jury |
|
|
Title: |
Holder: Wikileaks, Oregon Investigations Ongoing |
|
Author: |
Eric Holder |
|
Title: |
Attorney General |
|
Authoring or Creator Agency: |
Department of Justice |
|
Concerning: |
"Grand Jury |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Title: |
FY 2013 Department of Justice Forecast of Contracting Opportunities (PDF) |
|
Authoring or Creator Agency: |
Department of Justice |
|
Notes: |
On cursory glance, neither WikiLeaks nor Mantech listed in 2011 procurement. |
|
|
Title: |
FY 2013 Department of Justice Forecast of Contracting Opportunities (XLS) |
|
Authoring or Creator Agency: |
Department of Justice |
|
|
|
Archive Link |
|
Title: |
FY 2013 Department of Justice Forecast of Contracting Opportunities (XLS) |
|
Authoring or Creator Agency: |
Department of Justice |
|
Notes: |
This link is currently unauthorized but was previously accessible. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[...] given the dependency of what is going on on the military side it would be inappropriate to comment on that at this time[...] |
| |
Name(s:) |
Eric Holder |
| |
Title: |
Attorney General |
| |
Agency(ies): |
Department of Justice |
|
Concerning: |
Grand Jury |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Title: |
FOIA Requests Closed by OIP in January 2012 |
|
Authoring or Creator Agency: |
Department of Justice |
|
Concerning: |
"FOIA, Grand Jury |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The lawsuit hallenges the failure of the DOJ Criminal Division, the DOJ National Security Division, and the FBI to disclose documents in response to EPIC's June 23, 2011 FOIA Requests seeking agency records concerning the government's identification and surveillance of individuals who have demonstrated support or interest in WikiLeaks. |
| |
Agency(ies): |
Electronic Privacy Information Center, EPIC |
|
Concerning: |
Epic FOIA, Criminal Division, National Security Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Department of Justice, FBI, NSD |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
Title: |
COMPLAINT against FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, CRIMINAL DIVISION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, NATIONAL SECURITY DIVISION ( Filing fee $ 350, receipt number 4616045510) filed by ELECTRONIC PRIVACY INFORMATION CENTER. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet)(jf, ) (Entered: 01/26/2012) |
|
Author: |
Ginger McCall, John Verdi, Marc Rotenbergy, David Jacobs |
|
Authoring or Creator Agency: |
Electronic Privacy Information Center, EPIC |
|
Concerning: |
"Epic FOIA, Criminal Division, National Security Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation, FBI, Department of Justice |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Title: |
LCvR 7.1 CERTIFICATE OF DISCLOSURE of Corporate Affiliations and Financial Interests NONE by ELECTRONIC PRIVACY INFORMATION CENTER (jf, ) (Entered: 01/26/2012) |
|
Author: |
Ginger McCall, John Verdi, Marc Rotenbergy, David Jacobs |
|
Authoring or Creator Agency: |
Electronic Privacy Information Center, EPIC |
|
Concerning: |
"Epic FOIA, Criminal Division, National Security Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation, FBI, Department of Justice |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Title: |
Docket for ELECTRONIC PRIVACY INFORMATION CENTER v. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, CRIMINAL DIVISION et al, U.S. District Court District of Columbia (Washington, DC) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 1:12-cv-00127-RWR |
|
Concerning: |
"Epic FOIA, Criminal Division, National Security Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation, FBI, Department of Justice |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
National Security
Defending national security from both internal and external threats remains the Department of Justice's highest priority. The FY 2013 Budget request provides a total of $4 billion to maintain critical counterterrorism and counterintelligence programs and sustain recent increases for intelligence gathering and surveillance capabilities.
The administration supports critical national security programs within the department, including those led by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the National Security Division (NSD). In FY 2011, the FBI dedicated approximately 4,200 agents to investigate more than 33,000 national security cases. NSD has continued to carry out its primary functions to prevent acts of terrorism and espionage in the United States and to facilitate the collection of information regarding the activities of foreign agents and powers.
Investigating cybercrime and protecting our nation's critical network infrastructure is a top priority of the department. The President's FY 2013 Budget request maintains recent increases for the FBI's cyber terrorism investigations, the National Cyber Investigative Joint Task Force (NCIJTF) and the forensic examination of digital evidence. In addition, other department components have made critical investments to protect U.S. citizens and secure our homeland, and these components will continue their efforts in FY 2013. |
| |
Agency(ies): |
Office of Public Affairs, Department of Justice |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
Archive: |
Archive Link
http://archive.is/wjYqg |
|
|
a. Insider Threat
The 2010 WikiLeaks incident and other recent data leakage occurrences highlight the fact that insider threats pose one of the greatest risks to government information systems. Employees are trusted with sensitive and/or classified information and there is often little oversight or security governing that access. Implementing strong, flexible, and scalable measures to prevent insider attacks from succeeding is vital. The recent agency-wide Information Security Assessment revealed significant security weaknesses throughout the government and within the Department. Of primary concern are the control and monitoring of removable media, insider threat behavior monitoring and detection, and prevention of data leaks on all sensitive and classified information systems.
To counter insider threats, the increase will be used to design a defense plan and acquire and implement hardware infrastructure and software tools to monitor, detect, and respond to insider threats. |
| |
Agency(ies): |
Department of Justice |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
Title: |
U.S. Department of Justice FY 2013 Budget Request NATIONAL SECURITY $4.0 billion DOJ National Security Programs FY 2013 Overview |
|
Authoring or Creator Agency: |
Department of Justice |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Defendants [Department of Justice Criminal Division, National Security Division, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation] deny this paragraph, except to admit that, on November 29, 2010, Attorney General Eric Holder stated that there was an active criminal investigation into the potential unauthorized release of classified information. |
| |
Name(s:) |
Stuart Delery, Elizabeth Shapiro, Scott Risner |
| |
Title: |
Acting Assistant Attorney General, Deputy Branch Director Federal Programs Branch, Trial Attorney |
| |
Agency(ies): |
Civil Division, Federal Programs Branch, Department of Justice |
|
Concerning: |
Epic FOIA, Criminal Division, National Security Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Department of Justice, FBI, NSD |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
Title: |
ANSWER to 1 Complaint, by FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, CRIMINAL DIVISION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, NATIONAL SECURITY DIVISION.(Risner, Scott) (Entered: 03/23/2012) |
|
Author: |
Scott Risner |
|
Authoring or Creator Agency: |
Civil Division, Federal Programs Branch, Department of Justice |
|
Concerning: |
"Epic FOIA, Criminal Division, National Security Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation, FBI, Department of Justice |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Title: |
NOTICE of Appearance by Scott Risner on behalf of FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, CRIMINAL DIVISION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, NATIONAL SECURITY DIVISION (Risner, Scott) (Entered: 03/23/2012) |
|
Author: |
Scott Risner |
|
Authoring or Creator Agency: |
Civil Division, Federal Programs Branch, Department of Justice |
|
Concerning: |
"Epic FOIA, Criminal Division, National Security Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation, FBI, Department of Justice |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Title: |
ORDER setting initial scheduling conference for June 1, 2012 at 11:15 a.m. Counsel shall confer and submit a joint written report no latter than five days in advance of the hearing. Signed by Judge Richard W. Roberts on 5/15/12. (lcrwr2) (Entered: 05/15/2012) |
|
Concerning: |
"Epic FOIA, Criminal Division, National Security Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation, FBI, Department of Justice |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Title: |
Docket for ELECTRONIC PRIVACY INFORMATION CENTER v. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, CRIMINAL DIVISION et al, U.S. District Court District of Columbia (Washington, DC) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 1:12-cv-00127-RWR |
|
Concerning: |
"Epic FOIA, Criminal Division, National Security Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation, FBI, Department of Justice |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Title: |
MEET AND CONFER STATEMENT. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order Defendants' Proposed Order, # 2 Text of Proposed Order Plaintiff's Proposed Order)(McCall, Ginger) (Entered: 05/24/2012) |
|
Concerning: |
"Epic FOIA, Criminal Division, National Security Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation, FBI, Department of Justice |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CIA's Public Information Programs Division tasked the search to the two directorates that were most likely to possess records responsive to plaintiffs' requests: the Directorate of Support and the National Clandestine Service. Meeks Decl. [Paragraph] 16. The Directorate of Support maintains records on current and former CIA employees and other individuals for whom security processing or evaluation was required for any number of reasons. Id. 17. The National Clandestine Service maintains records containing information on persons 'who are of foreign intelligence or foreign counterintelligence interest to CIA.' Id. 19 (quoting 70 Fed. Reg. 42418, 42449 (July 25, 2005)).
[...]
Third, Ms. Meeks has determined, and articulates with reasonable specificity in her declaration, that the information protected from disclosure falls squarely within section 1.4(c) of E.O. 13,526, which covers 'intelligence sources and methods.' Id. [Paragraph] 32'40. If CIA confirmed or denied that it possessed records revealing a classified relationship to plaintiffs, it would correspondingly confirm or deny that plaintiffs were either intelligence sources or intelligence targets. Id. [Paragraph] 40. Confirming or denying that fact would reveal secret information about the sources CIA employs or does not employ in its intelligence-gathering function, id. [Paragraph] 32'35, or about the 'basic business practices and methodological 'tools' used by the CIA to accomplish its mission,' id. [Paragraph] 36'39.
[...]
State initially determined that five offices were most likely to possess records responsive to plaintiffs' request: its Central Foreign Policy Records database, the Bureau of Diplomatic Security, the Office of Passport Services, the Office of Overseas Citizens Services, and the American Embassy in Sana'a, Yemen. Id. [Paragraph] 19. Based on information obtained from other responsive documents in the course of
processing Mobley's request, State determined that its Office of Legal Advisor should also be tasked with a search.
[...]
The Bureau of Diplomatic Security, which is charged with maintaining security surrounding the conduct of U.S. foreign policy, Walter Decl. [Paragraph] 21, conducted searches of
numerous of its offices for responsive records. Specifically, the Bureau searched its Office of Criminal Investigations, its Office of Protective Intelligence Investigations, its Office of Intelligence and Threat Analysis, and its Office of International Programs. Id. [Paragraph] 22. Those offices conducted electronic searches of the Bureau's Investigative Management System and other offices' shared libraries using plaintiffs' names (including Mobley's son Charles) as keywords.
[...]
The consular section of the Embassy searched its online database; individual Embassy employees searched their own email; and the Information Resource Management Section conducted a search using the Scan Mail application using the name 'Mobley.'
[...]
Within that office, Legal Adviser's Records Manager conducted a broad-based search, and the Office of Law Enforcement and Intelligence conducted a search, coordinated by the Assistant Legal Adviser and conducted by several attorney-advisers in that office. Id. [Paragraph] 26. Those searches encompassed both paper and electronic files, both classified and unclassified, on both document management systems and content servers. Id. Individual attorney-advisers searched their current and email archive systems, and all electronic searches were conducted using variations of Mobley's name. |
| |
Name(s:) |
Stuart Delery, Ronald Machen, Elizabeth Shapiro, Judson Littleton |
| |
Title: |
Acting Assistant Attorney General, United States Attorney, Deputy Branch Director, Trial Attorney |
| |
Agency(ies): |
Department of Justice, Civil Division, Federal Programs Branch |
|
Concerning: |
Mobley versus CIA FOIA, Global Intelligence Files, Stratfor, GI Files |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Title: |
NOTICE of Appearance by Marc Rotenberg on behalf of ELECTRONIC PRIVACY INFORMATION CENTER (Rotenberg, Marc) (Entered: 06/01/2012) |
|
Concerning: |
"Epic FOIA, Criminal Division, National Security Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation, FBI, Department of Justice |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Title: |
Docket for ELECTRONIC PRIVACY INFORMATION CENTER v. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, CRIMINAL DIVISION et al, U.S. District Court District of Columbia (Washington, DC) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 1:12-cv-00127-RWR |
|
Concerning: |
"Epic FOIA, Criminal Division, National Security Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation, FBI, Department of Justice |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Title: |
Docket for ELECTRONIC PRIVACY INFORMATION CENTER v. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, CRIMINAL DIVISION et al, U.S. District Court District of Columbia (Washington, DC) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 1:12-cv-00127-RWR |
|
Concerning: |
"Epic FOIA, Criminal Division, National Security Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation, FBI, Department of Justice |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Title: |
SCHEDULING ORDER setting deadlines for dispositive briefing. See Order for further information. Signed by Judge Richard W. Roberts on 6/6/12. (lcrwr2) (Entered: 06/06/2012) |
|
Concerning: |
"Epic FOIA, Criminal Division, National Security Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation, FBI, Department of Justice |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Plaintiffs state that they intend to submit an email exchange between employees of a private firm as evidence in support of their brief opposing summary judgment in favor of defendants. Plaintiffs' counsel indicates that he obtained this email from the Wikileaks website. Because the email was allegedly sent between 'two defense contractors with access to classified information,' Mot. at 1, counsel believes the information in the email may be classified. Further, according to plaintiffs' counsel, if he were to submit this email as evidence and 'someone in the government does believe it is classified, it would have severe repercussions on [plaintiffs' counsel's] ability to obtain and hold a security clearance in the future.'
[...]
The Government does not conduct a classification review of whatever information private individuals without non-disclosure agreements happen to obtain from somewhere in the public domain, solely because those individuals express their belief that such information may be classified. [Footnote] 3 There are additional reasons that defendants cannot confirm the classification of the particular email at issue. As the undersigned advised plaintiffs' counsel, the U.S. Government as a policy matter does not confirm or deny the authenticity (or, by extension, the classification) of documents posted on Wikileaks. That is particularly the case where, as counsel recognizes here, the email is not a government document.
[...]
[Footnote 3] Otherwise, private litigants could presumably require the Government to conduct a classification review of a New York Times article or a blog post that they intended to offer in litigation, simply because such document purported to reveal classified information obtained from individuals with access to that information. Such a requirement would impose an enormous burden on the Government and, more importantly, intrude on the Executive's exclusive authority to determine how best to manage and protect classified information.
[...]
Finally, under the circumstances presented here--where the Government cannot confirm or deny the authenticity or classification of a document obtained from Wikileaks... |
| |
Name(s:) |
Stuart Delery, Ronald Machen, Elizabeth Shapiro, Judson Littleton |
| |
Title: |
Acting Assistant Attorney General, United States Attorney, Deputy Branch Director, Trial Attorney |
| |
Agency(ies): |
Department of Justice, Civil Division, Federal Programs Branch |
|
Concerning: |
Mobley versus CIA FOIA, Global Intelligence Files, Stratfor, GI Files |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
Title: |
Re: Insight- Sharif Mobley |
|
Author: |
Scott Stewart, Aaron Colvin, Fred Burton |
|
Authoring or Creator Agency: |
Stratfor |
|
Concerning: |
"Mobley versus CIA FOIA, Global Intelligence Files, GI Files, Stratfor |
|
|
|
Archive Link |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
...the Government respectfully submits that it is neither appropriate nor necessary in these circumstances [Footnote] 1 to treat the document as 'presumptively classified' and to facilitate its submission through Court Security Officers. Instead, for the reasons explained below, while the Government does not confirm or deny the authenticity or classification of this or any other particular document posted to Wikileaks, the Government has no objection to the submission of the email on the public record under these circumstances; moreover, clarifying that the Government has no objection to the filing of this email on the public record in these circumstances represents the most expeditious way of moving this case forward. [Footnote] 2
[...]
Due to the combination of several factors, it is neither appropriate nor necessary to treat the Wikileaks document plaintiffs wish to submit as evidence in this case as presumptively classified. The email purports to be an exchange between non-government employees of a private company, not a purported government document, and the email's author merely relays information he obtained from another unnamed source. Further, because the email was posted to Wikileaks, it is already available in the public domain [Footnote] 1 for anyone (such as plaintiffs' counsel, for example) to search for, access, and download. Neither plaintiffs nor plaintiffs' counsel have authorized access to classified information, so their republication of this already public email does not risk being interpreted as confirmation or denial of the document's contents by an individual in a position of knowledge. Nor has plaintiffs' counsel signed a non disclosure agreement that legally obligates him to comply with certain procedures to ensure the safeguarding of potentially classified information.
Indeed, in all material respects, the email (in which the author, a non-government employee, merely relays information purportedly obtained from an anonymous source) is analogous to a story published on the New York Times website or a blog that purports to rely on an unnamed source providing potentially classified information. The Government does not officially confirm or deny the accuracy of such publicly available articles or conduct a 'classification review' of them, and yet there is no basis to treat them as presumptively classified or employ specialized procedures to facilitate their submission by non-cleared counsel for the Court's in camera review. Indeed, similar documents are often submitted in Freedom of Information Act cases in an effort to defeat the Government's invocation of an exemption or a Glomar response, and courts routinely recognize a critical distinction between information publicly described by nongovernment or anonymous sources and official Government disclosures. See, e.g., ACLU v. U.S. Dep't of Defense, 628 F.3d 612, 621 22 (D.C. Cir. 2011)
[...]
[Footnote] 3 A contrast with the Government's position regarding the handling of certain Wikileaks documents by cleared counsel in the Guantanamo detainee habeas cases may be illuminating. The Government has acknowledged that purported detainee assessments were leaked to Wikileaks, but it has neither confirmed nor denied whether any particular report on Wikileaks is an authentic and official Government document. See Resps.' Response to Pet'r's Emergency Application for Immediate Access to All Publicly Available Wikileaks Documents Relevant to Pet'r's Case at 3-5, Dkt. #376, Paracha v. Obama, Civ. Action No. 04-2022 (June 15, 2011). Moreover, petitioners' counsel in those cases are authorized to have access to certain classified information concerning their clients and have signed non-disclosure agreements obligating them to take specific steps to protect potentially classified information. Under those circumstances, all purported detainee assessments appearing on Wikileaks must be treated by petitioners' counsel as 'potentially' classified documents, in light of counsel's non-disclosure obligations, the Government's acknowledgement that purported detainee assessments were leaked to Wikileaks, and the fact that cleared counsel's use or dissemination of such assessments could be viewed as confirmation of their authenticity or classification. Id. at 4-8. Here, in contrast, the email does not purport to be a Government document, the Government has not acknowledged that any classifiedinformation has been leaked in the private company's emails posted to Wikileaks, and plaintiffs' counsel has not been authorized to have access to classified information or signed a nondisclosure agreement. |
| |
Name(s:) |
Stuart Delery, Ronald Machen, Elizabeth Shapiro, Judson Littleton |
| |
Title: |
Acting Assistant Attorney General, United States Attorney, Deputy Branch Director, Trial Attorney |
| |
Agency(ies): |
Department of Justice, Civil Division, Federal Programs Branch |
|
Concerning: |
Mobley versus CIA FOIA, Global Intelligence Files, Stratfor, GI Files |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
Title: |
Re: Insight- Sharif Mobley |
|
Author: |
Scott Stewart, Aaron Colvin, Fred Burton |
|
Authoring or Creator Agency: |
Stratfor |
|
Concerning: |
"Mobley versus CIA FOIA, Global Intelligence Files, GI Files, Stratfor |
|
|
|
Archive Link |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Title: |
NOTICE of Stipulation to Amend Briefing Schedule by FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, CRIMINAL DIVISION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, NATIONAL SECURITY DIVISION (Risner, Scott) (Entered: 12/12/2012) |
|
Concerning: |
"Epic FOIA, Criminal Division, National Security Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation, FBI, Department of Justice |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On November 28, 2010, the organization WikiLeaks published numerous documents that it contended were Department of State embassy cables. The following day, Attorney General Eric H. Holder, Jr. stated that the Department of Justice had initiated a criminal investigation into the potential unauthorized release of classified information. Compl. [Paragraph][Paragraph] 15-16. That investigation continues to this day.
[...]
The requests set forth EPICs suspicions about the scope of the Governments investigation, and seek four categories of records that would reveal whether, and to what extent, the Government has employed particular investigative techniques in its attempts to identify suspects and obtain evidence.
[...]
In response to EPICs requests, the FBI, NSD, and the Criminal Division have determined that all responsive documents are protected from disclosure by Exemption 7(A), and accordingly each component has properly refused to produce responsive records.
[...]
Here, Defendants have determined that certain information concerning the requested documents and the bases for their withholding cannot be provided publicly. The Government should not be required to divulge sensitive information concerning an investigation, including non-public information concerning the scope or size of the investigation...
[...]
EPIC seeks records concerning a government investigation into the unauthorized disclosure of classified information.
[...]
Specifically, the FBI indicates that it conducted a search of its Central Records System ('CRS') using the search term 'WikiLeaks,' and identified a file containing cross-references to certain agency files. See Hardy Decl. (Ex. 1) [Paragraph][Paragraph] 17-19. Through consultations with the case agents assigned to the file, the FBI identified investigative files likely to contain responsive information. Id. [Paragraph] 19.
[...]
Upon receiving the request, NSD FOIA personnel determined that the Counterespionage Section ('CES') was the only location within NSD that was reasonably likely to possess responsive records.
[...]
Upon receiving the request, NSD FOIA personnel determined that the Counterespionage Section ('CES') was the only location within NSD that was reasonably likely to possess responsive records. Bradley Decl. (Ex. 3) [Paragraph] 9. NSD searched all of the electronic files pertaining to the investigation of the lead CES attorney assigned to the matter, after determining that such a search would locate any potentially responsive records because any other files would be duplicative of those records. Id. That search was sufficiently comprehensive. Additional detail regarding how NSD conducted its search is included in NSDs ex parte declaration, since its disclosure would provide non-public information regarding the scope of NSDs involvement in the investigation that would itself compromise the investigation. See Bradley Ex Parte Decl. (Ex. 4) [Paragraph] 4.
[...]
Finally, the Criminal Division determined that the only entities likely to have responsive documents were the Computer Crimes and Intellectual Property Section ('CCIPS') and the Office of International Affairs ('OIA'). Cunningham Decl. (Ex. 5) [Paragraph] 10. Those entities conducted searches, employing a variety of search terms designed to locate potentially responsive materials. Id. The Criminal Divisions FOIA personnel determined that those searches were likely to locate any responsive documents. Id.
[...]
In response to EPICs requests, Defendants determined that all records responsive to the requests are subject to one or more of FOIAs nine statutory exemptions to disclosure. All of the records are being withheld pursuant to Exemption 7(A), which applies to 'records or information compiled for law enforcement purposes' to the extent that the production of such records 'could reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement proceedings.'
[...]
Here, each components declaration makes clear that the information withheld under this exemption was 'compiled for law enforcement purposes' because it is part of a broader investigation being conducted by the Department of Justice into the unauthorized disclosure of classified information. See Hardy Decl. (Ex. 1) [Paragraph] 23; Bradley Decl. (Ex. 3) [Paragraph] 13; Cunningham Decl. (Ex. 5) [Paragraph] 12. The investigation of criminal conduct, particularly when it entails serious threats to the national security, is plainly a high-priority law enforcement duty of the Department. See Ctr. for Natl Sec. Studies, 331 F.3d at 926 (recognizing that the Exemption 7(A) threshold is satisfied by an investigation concerning 'a heinous violation of federal law as well as a breach of this nations security'). Insofar as individuals are being investigated for their role in the unauthorized disclosure of classified information, there is a clear nexus between the subjects 'and a possible security risk or violation of federal law.' Id. Because the records at issue were compiled as part of a Department of Justice investigation into possible violations of federal law, they were 'compiled for law enforcement purposes,' and the threshold inquiry under Exemption 7(A) is satisfied.
[...]
Defendants have also determined that the disclosure of the responsive records could reasonably be expected to interfere with ongoing enforcement proceedings.
[...]
In justifying its reliance on Exemption 7(A), the Government need not discuss the exemption on a document-by document basis. To do so could itself impede the investigation, as providing details such as the volume of the responsive material or the nature of particular documents could itself reveal sensitive information that could impede the investigation.
[...]
The declarations explain that the requested documents relate to an ongoing national security investigation. In November 2010, the Attorney General announced that the Department of Justice was conducting a criminal investigation into the possible disclosure of classified information that was published on the WikiLeaks website. Bradley Decl. (Ex. 3) [Paragraph] 13. That investigation concerns potential violations of federal criminal laws, in the form of serious threats to the national security, and the investigation continues today. Id.; Hardy Decl. (Ex. 1) [Paragraph] 23; Cunningham Decl. (Ex. 5) [Paragraph] 12. From the terms of their request, it is clear that EPIC seeks to obtain documents concerning that investigation.
[...]
Defendants declarations also describe the types of records at issue. The declarations explain that the records responsive to EPICs request consist of evidentiary, investigative, and administrative materials related to the investigation. See Hardy Decl. (Ex. 1) [Paragraph][Paragraph] 26, 29-38; Bradley Decl. (Ex. 3), [Paragraph][Paragraph] 14-16; Cunningham Decl. (Ex. 5) [Paragraph][Paragraph] 14-19. The records are further described by type such as confidential source statements, communications between government investigators and attorneys, and summaries of evidence obtained during the investigation in ways that indicate the information contained in the materials.
[...]
For example, Defendants have withheld information that, if disclosed, would identify potential witnesses and other individuals who have cooperated with the investigation. Specifically, the FBI has explained that the documents include statements made to the FBI by sources who were given expressed or implied assurances that their identities would remain confidential. Hardy Decl. (Ex. 1) [Paragraph] 30. These statements contain information provided by individuals with knowledge of potential criminal activities. Id. As the FBI explains, disclosure of the information would mean that 'the sources that have chosen to cooperate with law enforcement could be subjected to retaliation, intimidation, or physical or mental harm.' Id. Aside from the harms that disclosure would cause to the sources themselves, it is the judgment of the FBI that '[t]his would have a chilling effect on these investigations and any future prosecutions resulting from these cases.' Id. NSD and the Criminal Division have made similar determinations |
| |
Name(s:) |
Scott Risner |
| |
Title: |
Trial Attorney |
| |
Agency(ies): |
Civil Division, Department of Justice |
|
Concerning: |
Epic FOIA, Criminal Division, National Security Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Department of Justice, FBI File, Counterespionage Section, CES, Computer Crimes and Intellectual Property Section, CCIPS, Office of International Affairs, OIA |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
|
The FBI subsequently conducted a second search of the CRS to locate any reference entries that might be responsive to plaintiffs request, using the term 'WikiLeaks.' [Footnote] 2 ['Reference entries, or cross-references, are mere mentions of a subject, individual, or organization in files that are indexed to other subjects, individuals, organization, events, or activities.']
The second search ofthe CRS identified a file containing reference entries pertaining to WikiLeaks. The case agents assigned to this file were contacted about whether it might contain information responsive to plaintiffs request for 'all records regarding any individual targeted for surveillance for support for or interest in WikiLeaks,' for 'lists of names of individuals who have supported or shown interest in WikiLeaks,' and for communications with internet, social media, and financial services companies regarding 'lists of individuals who have demonstrated ... support for or interest in WikiLeaks.' As a result of these consultations, the FBI identified investigative files that likely contain information responsive to plaintiffs FOIA request. [Footnote] 3 ['Plaintiffs request seeks '[a]ll records regarding any individuals targeted for surveillance for support for or interest in WikiLeaks,' as well as certain information regarding 'lists of individuals who have demonstrated support for or interest in WikiLeaks.' The FBI is not investigating individuals who simply support or have an interest in WikiLeaks. However, reading Plaintiffs request broadly, the FBI concluded that records concerning its investigation of the disclosure of classified information that was published on the WikiLeaks website would be responsive to Plaintiffs request. The FBI does not, however, maintain lists of individuals who have demonstrated support for or interest in WikiLeaks, and thus has no records responsive to this portion of Plaintiffs request.']
The files containing information potentially responsive to plaintiffs request are part of active, ongoing criminal investigations. The FBI has determined that all potentially responsive records in these files are exempt from disclosure pursuant to FOIA Exemption 7(A) 5 U.S.C. [Section] 552(b)(7)(A).
[...]
Here, responsive records are contained in files pertaining to the FBI's investigation of the disclosure of classified information that was published on the WikiLeaks website. The FBI's Washington Field Office opened these files in 2010 and maintains them per applicable Attorney General Guidelines. The investigations are ongoing and clearly are within the law enforcement duties of the FBI to detect and undertake investigations into possible violations of Federal criminal laws. See 28 U.S.C. [Section] 533. Thus, all ofthe records responsive to plaintiffs FOIA request were compiled for law enforcement purposes and readily meet the threshold for applying FOIA Exemption 7. [Footnote] 4 [The FBI's files contain potentially responsive records originating from other government agencies ('OGAs'). Because the FBI is withholding all records pursuant to Exemption 7(A), it has not referred these records to their originating OGAs for review and application of other exemptions. The FBI believes that these records are also subject to one or more of the other exemptions described in this declaration. If the FBI's Exemption 7(A) with holdings are not upheld, it will refer the records to the originating OGAs for review and a direct response to plaintiff.
[...]
The FBI has withheld all responsive records pursuant to Exemption 7(A). As established above, these records are law enforcement records related to pending FBI investigations. The FBI has determined that disclosure of any responsive records in the midst of these active, on going investigations is reasonably expected to interfere with those investigations as well as any resulting prosecutions. Moreover, disclosure of records from the FBI's pending investigative files is reasonably expected to interfere with the U.S. Department of the Army's pending prosecution of Private Bradley Manning in relation to the disclosure of classified information that was published on the WikiLeaks website. As such, the release of these records would interfere with pending and prospective enforcement proceedings, including investigations and prosecutions.
[...]
Types of Documents Protected By Exemption 7(A)
(26) Providing a document-by-document description or listing of the records potentially responsive to plaintiffs request would undermine the very interests that the FBI seeks to protect under Exemption 7(A), in addition to the other exemptions identified below. In order to protect these interests, the FBI instead has described the types of potentially responsive records in the pending investigative files that are being withheld in full pursuant to Exemption 7(A). 5 The pending investigative files contain the following types of documents:
(a) Electronic Communication ('EC'): The purpose of an EC is to communicate within the FBI in a consistent format that can be uploaded by the originating Division or office, transmitted, and downloaded by recipient Divisions or offices within the FBI's internal computer network.
(b) FBI Letter: This is a letter or formal correspondence in a format used by the FBI to communicate with the Department of Justice ('DOJ'), U.S. Attorneys' Offices, other government agencies ('OGAs'), other law enforcement agencies (including federal, state, local, and tribal), commercial businesses, and private citizens. Its format is identical to the business letters utilized by commercial agencies except that it contains the FBI Seal at the top of the first page, as well as specific identifying information regarding the originating office within the FBI that sent the letter (e.g.Omaha Division or FBIHQ).
(c) FD-302 (Interview Form) [Footnote] 6 [All forms with the designation 'FD-' are forms created and utilized internally by the FBI.] This is an internal FBI form on which the results of FBI interviews of persons are recorded. Such interview information may later be used as evidence at criminal trials. These interview forms are often incorporated into FBI Investigative Reports. The contents of these forms may also be incorporated into ECs for purposes of setting/covering leads.
(d) FD-542 (Investigative Accomplishment Form): This is an internal FBI form on which employees claim accomplishments and investigative methods used in investigations.
(e) FD- 794 (Payment Request): This is an internal FBI form used by employees to request payment for reimbursement of expenses incurred during an investigation.
(f) Memorandum: This is ordinarily a communication from the FBI to the Attorney General and/or other DOJ component officials; from one employee/official to another at FBIHQ; or from one employee/official to another within an FBI field division. It serves to assist in the overall supervision of a case by summarizing pertinent details of an investigation.
(g) Emails: These documents include electronic messages exchanged between and among FBI Special Agents, other FBI employees, and personnel from OGAs, concerning these investigations.
(h) Letterhead Memorandum ('LHM'): This memorandum is an interim summary that reports information, usually derived from FD-302s, concerning the subject of an investigation. It is designed to alert other field offices and/or FBIHQ about pertinent developments in an investigation. Usually, an LHM is attached to a cover sheet, which is typically an FBI letter. The LHM can also be detached from the cover sheet and disseminated to other Government agencies, as a 'Law Enforcement Sensitive/For Official Use Only' document.
(i) FBI Records Checks: These are computerized print-outs of the results of checks of databases concerning FBI records, local law enforcement records and/or business records. The information from these records checks is often incorporated into Investigative Reports and ECs for lead purposes.
(j) FBI Investigative Reports: These are summaries of investigations as of the date of the report. The purpose of these documents is to advise FBIHQ and FBI field offices of the investigative infor |
| |
Name(s:) |
David Hardy |
| |
Title: |
Section Chief |
| |
Agency(ies): |
Records/Information Dissemination Section Records Management Division, FBI, Federal Bureau of Investigation |
|
Concerning: |
FBI File, Grand Jury, Epic FOIA, Federal Bureau of Investigation, FBI |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
|
In addition to this declaration, which is being filed on the public record, I am also submitting a second declaration ex parte and in camera for the Court's review. That declaration includes information that cannot be disclosed publicly concerning active law enforcement proceedings and NSD's assertion of certain exemptions.
[...]
In response to plaintiff's FOIA request, NSD FOIA personnel determined whoch component(s) within NSD would be likely to possess records. Specifically, NSD FOIA personnel contacted CES [Counterespionage Section]. the component whoch they deemed was likely to possess responsive records. CES stated that there was a pending criminal investigation concerning WikiLeaks and the unauthorized disclosure of classified information. CES's subject matter expert-- the lead CES attorney assigned to the investigation-- indictaed that any potentially responsive documents would be contained in his/her electronic files, and that any other responsive records in NSD's possession would, to the best of his/her knowledge and belief, be duplicative of those files. NSD FOIA was given access to all of the lead attorney's electronic files pertaining to the WikiLeaks investigation and located documents responsive to plaintiff's request, including documents that originated with other Department of Justice components or government agencies. No other locations within NSD are reasonably likley to have responsive records that are not duplicated in the electronic files of the lead attorney.
10. After completing its search, NSD determined that all of the responsive records are part of a pending criminal investigation and are therefore exempt from disclosure pursuant to FOIA exemption (b)(7)(A). In addition, certain responsive records or portions thereof are exempt from disclosure pursuant to FOIA Exemptions (b)(1), (b)(3), (b)(5), (b)(6), (b)(7)(C), and (b)(7)(D).
[...]
11. Exemption (b)(7) of the FOIA protects from mandatory disclosures records of information compiled for law enforcement purposes whose disclosure could reasonably be expected to cause one of the harms enumerated in the subpart of the exemption. See 5 U.S.C. [Section] 522(b)(7). In this case, the harm could reasonably be expected to result from disclosure concerns the potential interference with ongoing law enforcement proceedings.
[...]
12. All of NSD's responsive records are protected from disclosure pursuant to FOIA Exemption (b)(7)(A) because they are part of an on-going criminal investigation, and there release would interfere with that investigation.[Footnote] 1 [Footnote 1: NSD's files contain potentially responsive records originating from other government agencies ('OGAs')...]
[...]
13. On or about November 29, 2010, the Attorney General announced that the Department of Justice was conducting a criminal investigation into disclosures of classified information that was published on the WikiLeaks website. The investigation concerns possible violations of federal criminal laws, and is within the law enforcement duties of NSD and the broader Department of Justice. All of NSD's responsive records reside in the files of that open investigation, which continues to this day.
14. Any release of information from the responsive records within NSD's criminal investigative files is reasonably likely to harm the pending law enforcement proceedings.
[...]
15. Each of the responsive documents consist of investigative or evidentiary materials created as part of the investigation, including communications between attorneys at NSD and other Department of Justice components. The following paragraphs describe the types of investigative materials in the responsive records, along with the potential harm that could result from their disclosure:
a. Documents concerning potential targets: These documents include communications discussing potential targets of the investigation. Once documents are released and are in the public domain, information concerning this ongoing investigation could reach the target of the investigation and allow these targets to critically analyze materials concerning the investigation.
[...]
b. Documents concerning investigative strategies: NSD has identified certain documents that include discussions of potential investigative strategies and techniques. The disclosure of such infomation would reveal the methods by which the Government is (or is not) conducting the investigation, thus enabling targets to evade detection.
c. Documents concerning witnesses: This category includes information that the Government has obtained from witnesses (whether testimony or documentary evidence). If this information is released, individuals and potential witnesses who possess information relevant to the investigation will be identified...
[...]
d. Documents concerning other exchanges of information between NSD and other entities: Disclosure of such information would reveal investigative information and evidence developed by the government agencies and other entities that have cooperated as part of the investigation.
[...]
19. In the course of its search, NSD identified records which are classified. The information contained in these documents is owned by and under the control of the U.S. Government. The withheld information is classified SECRET
[...]
20. In this case, the information in the responsive, classified materials relates to intelligence activities, sources, and methods. Disclosure of this information would reveal the scope of sensitive U.S. intelligence gathering operations. The documents discuss ongoing intelligence operations, including gathering methods. Disclosure of this information would provide out adversaries and foreign intelligence targets with insight into the United States Government's foreign intelligence collection capabilities, which in turn could be used to develop the means to degrade or evade those collection capabilities.
[...]
23. NSD has also determined that certain responsive records are exempt from disclosure pursuant to FOIA Exemption (b)(5). FOIA Exemption (b)(5) protects 'inter-agency or intra-agency memorandums or letters which would not be available by law or to a party other than an agency in litigation with th agency'...Among the provledges incorporated into Exemption 5 is the Attorney Work Product privldge, which protects documents prepared by an attorney as part of, or in reasonable anticipation of, [sic] litigation. The purpose of the privledge is to protect the adversarial process by insulating the attorney's preparation.
24. In this case, NSD's responsive records consist of materials that were prepard by an attorney, or under the direction of an attorney, in reasonable anticipation of litigation. These materials include email messages and memorandums between attorneys at NSD and the FBI and/or other DOJ components. Thse materials were all prepared in anticipation of possible criminal prosecutions arising out of the pending investigation into the disclosure of classified information that was published on the WikiLeaks website. For example, one of NSD's records consists of an email from an NSD lawyer which provides the lawyer's impression about the investigation...
[...]
25. ...The deliberative process privledge applies to documents in the pending investigative files that rflect decision-making by NSD, alone or in conjunctions with other DOJ compenents, regarding the scope and focus of the investigations, as well as pending and prospective prosecutions. For example one of the deliberative materials consist of an email discussing what investigative techniques should be used.
[...]
30. [...] All of this information was compiled for the criminal investigation described above.
[...]
32. With respect to Federal Government personnel and other law enforcement agencts, NSD has withheld names and/or identifying information of individuals who have participated in teh investigation as part of their official duties.
[...]
33. [...] NSD has also applied these exemptions (in conjunction with Exemption (b)(7)(D), discussed below) to withhold the names and/or identifying information of individuals who have provided in |
| |
Name(s:) |
Mark A. Bradley |
| |
Title: |
Director |
| |
Agency(ies): |
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and Declassification Unit, Office of Law and Policy, National Security Division, Department of Justice |
|
Concerning: |
Grand Jury, Counterintelligence Section (CES), CES, Epic FOIA, National Security Division, NSD, Department of Justice |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
|
10. In response to the plaintiff's June 23, 2011 FOIA request for records relating to WikiLeaks, the Criminal Division determined that the only entities that were reasonably likely to have records responsive to the request were the Computer Crimes and Intellectual Property Section (CCIPS) and the Office of International Affairs (OIA). Both CCIPS and OIA subsequently conducted searches of their electronic files for responsive records after determining that their electronic files would contain all responsive records in their possession. [_] The searches conducted by CCIPS and OIA were reasonably calculated to locate all responsive files, and included the following search terms: 'WikiLeaks'; 'surveillance'; 'social media'; 'Facebook'; 'Google'; 'Twitter'; 'Private Bradley Manning'; 'Julian Assange'; 'Jacob Appelbaum'; 'David House'; 'Rop Gonggrijp'; and 'Birgitta Jonsdottir.' Both components also searched utilizing the following Boolean connectors: 'communications' AND ('financial services company/(ies)' OR 'Visa' OR 'Mastercard' OR 'Paypal'). ANd CCIPS also conducted additional searches utilizing the following Boolean connectors: 'WikiLeaks' AND ('Facebook' OR 'Google' OR 'Twitter') AND ('Manning' OR 'Assange' OR 'Appelbaum' OR 'House' OR 'Gonggrijp' Or [sic] 'Jonsdottir.') [_] As a result of these searches, the Criminal Division identified electronic and paper files reviewed the responsive records, and have determined that they must be withheld in their entirety for the reasons described below.
[_]
In this case, the Criminal Division has determined that all of the potentially responsive records are protected by Exemption (b)(7)(A) because their release could reasonably be expected to interfere with an ongoing law enforcement investigation.
[_]
12. [_] Here, the responsive records in the possession of the Criminal Division are all part of the Department of Justice's investigation into the unauthorized disclosure of classified information that resulted in the publication of materials on the WikiLeaks website. This matter is an active ongoing criminal law enforcement investigation, and is clearly within the law enforcement duties of the Criminal Division, which include the investigation and prosecutions of violations of federal criminal laws.
[_]
The Criminal Division has exempted from disclosure all responsive records within the pending investigative file pursuant to FOIA exemption 7(A) because the Criminal Division has determined that the disclosure of these laws enforcement records could reasonably be expected to interfere with the Department's national security investigation into the unauthorized disclosure of classified information.
[_]
14. The Criminal Division cannot provide a public description of each individual document withheld under Exemption (b)(7)(A). To do so would itself reveal protected information concerning the Government's ongoing investigation, including the size and scope of the investigation (or at least the Criminal Division's role in it) and the particular Division offices involved in the investigation (and, by implication, the offices that are not involved).
[_]
15. The responsive records withheld from the pending investigative files pursuant to Exemption (b)(7)(A) include the following types of documents:
a. Emails: These documents include electronic messages exchanged between and among Criminal Division attorneys, employees, and Assistant United States Attorneys concerning an ongoing investigation.
b. Legal Pleadings: This category includes legal documents that have been filed under seal with the United States courts in connection with either pending or prospective litigation.
c. Memoranda: The documents in this category summarize both the deliberative and legal aspects of an investigation or matter, and contain predecisional [sic], deliberative, proposed or recommended courses of action.
d. Transmittal Memoranda: A transmittal memorandum provides an addressee with a brief or synopsis or a separate underlying document. A transmittal document can be detached from the underlying document, and may further be identified as having such language as: 'Law Enforcement Sensitive - Limited Official Use.'
e. Case Tracking Summary: These documents list ongoing investigations or matters, including open, ongoing, and closed investigations and cases.
f. Miscellaneous Administrative Documents: The Criminal Division uses various types of documentary forms throughout criminal investigation, which includes facsimile cover sheets, routing slips, tracking system cover documents, notes, memoranda, letters, and other attachments of an administrative nature that would identify the ongoing law enforcement investigation or matter.
[_]
16. The Criminal Division has determined that any release of the records described above to the plaintiff would be premature and likely cause harm to pending law enforcement proceedings.
[_]
[_] responsive records generally fall within two categories: evidentiary and investigative materials, and administrative materials.
[_]
17. Evidentiary and investigative materials: This category includes copies of emails among Department attorneys as well as memoranda and pleadings filed under seal that are not publically [sic] available. The information contained in these records includes discussion of litigation and prosecutions strategies, summaries of evidence, attempts to obtain evidence form third parties, and the identification of persons of interest to the investigation. The disclosure of such information would halrm the ongoing investigation in numerous ways.
[_]
18. Administrative materials: The Criminal Division has also determined that the release of administrative materials within the investigative file would likely interfere with the ongoing investigation. These materials include the transmittal memoranda, cover sheets, and other administrative guidance in the file. These materials are often attached to or directly related to the evidentiary and investigative materials discussed able, and the release of these documents creates the potential for the same harms discussed in the previous paragraph. These documents could also reveal the particular offices or employees within the Criminal Division that are involved in the investigation, as well as the other Department components or Government agencies participating in the investigation, and the disclosure of this information could reasonably be expected to harm the investigation by revealing non-public information regarding the scope and status of a complex national security investigation. Administrative materials also record information such as the identities of sources or persons of interest to the investigation, and the dates and locations of events of interest to investigators. Releasing such materials would also reveal what facts have been obtained as part of the investigation, which could provide meaningful insight to potential targets such that they could change their behavior in ways that would frustrate the investigation.
[_]
Attorney Work Product [_] 25. The Criminal Division relies on Exemption 5 to protect materials create by Criminal Division and other Department attorneys in anticipation of potential prosecutions arising out of the pending investigation. The documents being withheld are tangible items that reflect the sorting and assembling of factual information, as well as the underlying legal analyses reflect the sorting and assembling of factual information, as well as the underlying legal analyses and recommendations of DOJ attorneys about how best to prosecute an ongoing matter.
[_]
29. The Criminal Division has withheld documents that reflect the decision-making process as it has played out during the investigation. The materials as issue include discussion and suggestions regarding potential investigative steps. The material also include drafts of affidavits, pleadings, and memorandum, that were subject to revisions. Accordingly, the Criminal Division has properly asserted FOIA Exemption (b)(5) to withhold certain documents from disclosure.
[_]
31. The Criminal Division relies on Exemption 6 (general privacy p |
| |
Name(s:) |
John E. Cunningham III |
| |
Title: |
Trial Attorney |
| |
Agency(ies): |
Office of Enforcement Operations, Freedom of Information Act/Privacy Act (FOIA/PA) Unit, Criminal Division, Department of Justice |
|
Concerning: |
Grand Jury, Computer Crimes and Intellectual Property Section (CCIPS), CCIPS, Office of International Affairs (OIA), OIA, Epic FOIA, Criminal Division, Department of Justice, FBI File, FBI, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Counterespionage Section (CES),C |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
|
1. In November 2010, the Attorney General announced that the Department of Justice was conducting a ciminal investigation into the possible disclosure of classified information hat was published on the website of the organization WikiLeaks. Bradley Decl. (Ex. 3) [Paragraph] 13
[...]
5. The FBI conducted its search using the Central Records System (CRS), which is a comprehensive system that includes administrative, applicant, criminal, personnel, and other files compiled for law enforcement purposes. Id. [Paragraph] 11, 17-19. The FBI determined that its search of the CRS ws likely to locate any responsive documents. Id.
6. The FBI determined that all of the responsive records within its possession or control are protected from disclosure under Exemption 7(A). Id [Section] 20. The FBI furtehr determined that certain information is also protected by Exemptions 1, 3, 5, 6, 7(C), 7(D), 7(E), and 7(F). Id [Paragraph] 39.
[...]
7. After receiving the request, NSD determined that the Counterespionage Section ('CES') was the only location within NSD that was reasonably likely to possess responsive records. Bradley Decl. (Ex. 3) [Section] 9. NSD further determined that any potentially responsive records would exist within the electronic files of the lead CES attorney assigned to the matter, and NSD reviewed those documents in order to identify responsive records. Id.
8. NSD determined that all of the responsive records wthinn its possession or control are protected from disclosure under Exemption 7(A). Id. [Paragraph] 10. NSD further determined that certain information is also protected by Exemption 1, 3, 5, 7(C), and 7(D). Id.
[...]
9. After receiving the request, the Criminal Division determined that its entities were likely to have responsive documents were the Computer Crimes and Intellectual Property Section ('CCIPS') and the Office of International Affairs ('OIA'). Cunningham Decl. (Ex. 5) [Paragraph] 10.
[...]
10. The Criminal Division determined that all of the responsive records within its possession or control are protected from disclosure under Exemption 7(A). Id. [Paragraph] 11. The Criminal Division further determined that certain information is also protected by Exemption 3, 5, 6, 7(C), and 7(D).
[...]
12. Each component determined that all of the responsive records were compiled for law enforcement purposes because the documents are part of the investigative file pertaining to the Department of Justice's ongoing investigation ino the unauthorized disclosure of classified information. Hardy Decl. (Ex. 1) [Paragraph] 23; Bradley Decl. (Ex. 3) [Section] 13; Cunningham Decl. (Ex. 5) [Paragraph] 12. Such an investigation concerns criminal conduct and threats to national security. Id.
[...]
13. Each component determined that the disclosure of responsive records could reasonably be expected to interfere with the ongoing investigation. Hardy Decl. (Ex. 1) [Paragraph] 27-38; Bradley Decl. (Ex. 3) [Paragraph] 11-16; Cunningham Decl. (Ex. 5) [Paragraph] 11-19. The components have provided declarations that describe the responsive records in functiona; categories that connect the nature of the documents to the interference that disclosures could cause to the investigation. Id.
14. Each component has determined that the disclosure of certain responsive records would identify potential witnesses and other individuals who have cooperated with the investigation...
[...]
15. Each component has determined that the disclosure of certain responsive records would reveal documentary evidence or other information gathered in the course of the investigation, which would undermine pending or prospective prosecutions by revealing the scope and focus of the investigation, thereby revealing to targets the scope of the Government's evidence against them and the invetigative techniques that have been employed. Hardy Decl. (Ex. 1) [Paragraph] 32; Bradley Decl. (Ex. 3) [Section] 8(b); Cunningham Decl. (ex. 5) [Paragraph] 17.
16. Each component has determined that the disclosure of certain responsive records would identify the subjects of, and person of investigative interest to, the investigation. Hardy Decl. (Ex. 1) [Paragraph] 32; Bradley Decl. (Ex. 3) [Paragraph] 8(a); Cunningham Decl. (ex. 5) [Paragraph] 17.
[...]
17. FBI and NSD personnel who are authorized to classify national security information have determined that certain responsive information must be withheld because it is properly classified pursuant to the requirements of Executive Order 13526. Hardy Decl. (Ex. 1) [Paragraph] 2, 44; Bradley Decl. (Ex. 3) [Paragraph] 2, 19.
[...]
19. The FBI has determined that certain information is subject to sections 1.4(b) of Executive Order 13526 because it concerns foreign government information. Hardy Decl. (Ex. 1) [Paragraph] 45-51. The FBI has determined that the release of information would identify foreign governments and reveal information provided by those governments in confidence, which would harm the relationshiop and cooperative endeavors between the foreign governments and the FBI. Id. [Paragraph] 50(A).
20. The FBI and NSD have determined that certain information is subject to section 1.4(c) of Executive Order 13526 because it concerns intelligence activities, sources, or methods. Hardy Decl. (Ex. 1) [Section] 52; Bradley Decl. (Ex. 3) [Paragraph] 20. The FBI and NSD have determined that the release of information would reveal actual intelligence activities and methods used by the Government, which could reveal specific targets of the investigation and allow hostile entities to develop countermeasures that would disrupt the use of those activities and methods. Id.
21. The FBI has determined that certain information is subject to sections 1.4(d) of Executive Order 13526 because its release would impair U.S. government relations with foreign governments by disclosing sensitive intelligence information gathered by the United States either about or from a foreign country. Hardy Decl. (Ex. 1) [Paragraph] 74-75
24. Each component has withheld materials that constitute atorney work product. Hardy Decl. (Ex. 1) [Section] 82; Bradley Decl. (Ex. 3) [Section] 24; Cuningham Decl. (Ex. 5) [Paragraph] 25. The FBI's declaration explains that it witheld materials and communications created by Government attorneys 'in relation to the pending prosecution of PFC Bradley Manning' and 'in anticipation of potential other prosecutions arising out of the pending investigations into the disclosures of classified information that was subsequently published on the WikiLeaks website.' Hardy Decl. (Ex. 1) [Paragraph] 82. The Criminal Division's declaration explains that the component witheld 'materials created by Criminal Division and other Department attorneys...that reflect the sortng and assembling of factual information, as well as the underlying legal analysis and recommendations of DOJ attorneys about how to prosecute an ongoing matter.' Cunningham Decl. (Ex. 5) [Paragraph] 25. NSD's declaration explains that it withheld e-mail messages and memoranda between attorneys at NSD and other DOJ components concerning potential prosecutions, such as an email from an NSD lawyer providing the lawyer's impressions about the investigation. Bradley Decl. (Ex. 3) [Paragraph] 24.
25. The FBI witheld materials protected by the attorney-client privledge, including 'communications between and among FBI counsel and their FBI clients and employees that reflect the seeking and/or providing of legal advice with respect to aspects of the ongoing investigations and related pending prospective prosecutions.' Hardy Decl. (Ex. 1) [Paragraph] 84.
26. Each component witheld materials protected by the deliberative process privledge. These materials include draft affidavots, pleadings, and memoranda that were created as part of the investigation. Cunningham Decl. (Ex. 5) [Section] 29. They also include materials that reflect the decision-making process among agency officials regarding the scope and focus of the pending investigation. Hardy Decl. (Ex. 1) [Paragraph] 87; Bradley Decl. (Ex. 3) [Paragraph] 26; Cunningham Decl. (ex. 5) [Paragraph] 29.
[...] |
| |
Name(s:) |
Stuart Delery, Elizabeth Shapiro, Scott Risner |
| |
Title: |
Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Deputy Branch Director, Trial Attorney |
| |
Agency(ies): |
Civil Division, Federal Programs Branch, Department of Justice |
|
Concerning: |
Epic FOIA, Criminal Division, National Security Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation, FBI, Department of Justice, Computer Crimes and Intellectual Property Section (CCIPS), CCIPS, Office of International Affairs (OIA), OIA, FBI File, Counterespionage |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
Title: |
MOTION for Summary Judgment by FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, CRIMINAL DIVISION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, NATIONAL SECURITY DIVISION (Attachments: # 1 Index of Exhibits, # 2 Exhibit 1, # 3 Exhibit 3, # 4 Exhibit 5, # 5 Statement of Facts, # 6 Text of Proposed Order)(Risner, Scott) (Entered: 01/31/2013) |
|
Concerning: |
"Epic FOIA, Criminal Division, National Security Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation, FBI, Department of Justice |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Specifically, Defendants seek to file the following materials: Ex Parte and In Camera Declaration of David M. Hardy (FBI) (Exhibit 2 to Defendants' motion); Ex Parte and In Camera Declaration of Mark A. Bradley (NSD) (Exhibit 4 to Defendants motion); and Ex Parte and In Camera Declaration of John E. Cunningham III (Criminal Division) (Exhibit 6 to Defendants motion).
The FBI, NSD, and the Criminal Division are also filing public declarations, which provide all information that can be disclosed on the public record.
[...]
The ex parte and in camera declarations provide additional details concerning Defendants withholdings of materials contained in the Governments files concerning an ongoing criminal law enforcement investigation. Specifically, Mr. Hardys ex parte declaration provides information concerning the FBIs withholdings under Exemptions 3 and 7(D); Mr. Bradleys declaration discusses NSDs withholdings under Exemptions 3, 6, 7(A), and 7(C); and Mr. Cunninghams declaration discusses the Criminal Divisions withholdings under Exemption 3. In the estimation of the declarants, the disclosure of this information would undermine the interests protected by those exemptions. This information cannot be disclosed publicly without causing serious harm to the ongoing law enforcement investigation. |
| |
Name(s:) |
Stuart Delery, Elizabeth Shapiro, Scott Risner |
| |
Title: |
Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General; Deputy Branch Director; Trial Attorney |
| |
Agency(ies): |
Civil Division, Federal Programs Branch, Department of Justice |
|
Concerning: |
Epic FOIA, Criminal Division, National Security Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Department of Justice, FBI, NSD |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
Title: |
MOTION for Leave to File Ex Parte and In Camera Exhibits by FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, CRIMINAL DIVISION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, NATIONAL SECURITY DIVISION (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Risner, Scott) (Entered: 01/31/2013) |
|
Concerning: |
"Epic FOIA, Criminal Division, National Security Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation, FBI, Department of Justice |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Title: |
NOTICE of Filing Ex Parte and In Camrea Exhibits by FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, CRIMINAL DIVISION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, NATIONAL SECURITY DIVISION re 10 MOTION for Leave to File Ex Parte and In Camera Exhibits (Risner, Scott) (Entered: 01/31/2013) |
|
Concerning: |
"Epic FOIA, Criminal Division, National Security Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation, FBI, Department of Justice |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Although the government cites a litany of exemptions for its withholdings, it places special emphasis on Exemption 7(A), which authorizes the witholding of records 'compiled for law enforcement purposes,' if disclosed 'could reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement proceedings.' But the records EPIC seeks concern the targeting of individuals engaged in lawful First Amendment activities for which no legitimate law enforcement purpose exists. To be precise, EPIC is not generally seeking records about individuals who may be the target of criminal investigations, it is seeking records about individuals who are exercising their Constitutional rights. Furthermore, the government has not explained the harm that would result from disclosure of such records, as required under Exemption 7(A).
[...]
The core EPIC's FOIA requst seeks information about the surveillance of individuals who have demonstrated interest in, or expressed support for, WikiLeaks. Many individuals have viewed documents published by WikiLeaks, donated money to the organization, spoken out in support of WikiLeaks or its sources, or otherwise associated themselves with the organization. These activities are all protected under the First Amendment. Speech in support of WikiLeaks or individuals associated with it involves matters of public concern, and therefore 'occupies the the highest rung of the hierarchy of First Amendment values, and is entitled to special protection.' Connick v. Myers, 461 U.S. 138, 145 (1983) (internal quotation marks omitted). The fact that such expressions might take the form of monetary donations to WikiLeaks does not diminish th
First Amendment issues at stake. See Citizens United v. Fed. Election Comm'n, 558 U.S. 310, 130 S. Ct. 876, 898 (2010) (applying strict scrutiny to a law prohibiting corporate independent expenditures). Supporters of WikiLeaks are protected by the First Amendment even if some members of the organization may be engaged in unlawful activity. See NAACP. v. Claiborne Hardware Co., 458 U.S. 886, 908 (1982) ('The right to associate does not lose all constitutional protection merely because some members of the group may have participated in conduct or advocated doctrine that itself is not protected'). Finally, individuals who attempt to access documents released by WikiLeaks are exercizing their 'right to receive information and ideas.' Kleindienst v. Mandel, 408 U.S. 753, 762 (1972).
EPIC accepts that a portion of the responsive records relate to legitimate law enforcement investigations. However, a fair reading of EPIC's FOIA request makes clear that many documents fall outside the exemptions claimed and relate to the surveillance of individuals who are engaging in First Amendment activities. [Footnote] 14 [Footnote 14 'The FBI claims that it is not 'investigating' individuals who merely support WikiLeaks. Hardy Decl., Dkt. 12, Ex. 2, at 8 n.3. But the key question is whether records exist, not what the government's investigatory intent is. The FBI's statement provides no information aout whether such records might nevertheless find their way into the FBI's databases (through inter-agency transfers, for example), or whether an otherwise legitimate investigation might have been exceeded its bounds. And it says nothing about the activities or records maintained by CRM or NSD.'
[Footnote 15] The government also relies on Sections 1.4(b) and 1.4(d), claiming that they require nondisclosure of the identities of particular foreign governments and related information in order to protect cooperative endeavors and preserve 'the fragile relationships that exist between the United States and certain forign governments.' defs.' Mot. Summ. J. Dk. 12, at 19, 20. However, the identities of some foreign governments, and information about their role (or the lack thereof) in this case have been made public. See Raphael Satter, Minister: Iceland refused to help FBI on WikiLeaks, Associated Press (Feb. 1, 2013), http://news.msn.com/world/minister-iceland-refused-to-help-fbi-on-wikileaks. This publicly-disclosed information should thus be released to EPIC. |
| |
Name(s:) |
Marc Rotenberg, Ginger McCall, David Jacobs |
| |
Agency(ies): |
Electronic Privacy Information Center, EPIC |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
Title: |
Cross MOTION for Summary Judgment by ELECTRONIC PRIVACY INFORMATION CENTER (Attachments: # 1 Statement of Facts, # 2 Text of Proposed Order)(McCall, Ginger) (Entered: 03/04/2013) |
|
Concerning: |
"Epic FOIA, Criminal Division, National Security Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation, FBI, Department of Justice |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The government simply states that NSD personnel 'determined which component(s) within NSD would be likely to possess responsive recrods,' and that any documents not in the lead attorney's electroni files would be 'duplicative.' Bradley Decl., Ex. 3, at [Paragraph] 9. The declaration does not explain how NSD determined which component to search, why it believes that other documents would b duplicative, or the terms used, if any, to search the elctronic files. |
| |
Name(s:) |
Marc Rotenberg, Ginger McCall, David Jacobs |
| |
Agency(ies): |
Electronic Privacy Information Center, EPIC |
|
Url: |
Url Link
|
|
Title: |
Memorandum in opposition to re 12 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by ELECTRONIC PRIVACY INFORMATION CENTER. (Attachments: # 1 Statement of Facts, # 2 Text of Proposed Order)(McCall, Ginger) (Entered: 03/04/2013) |
|
Concerning: |
"Epic FOIA, Criminal Division, National Security Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation, FBI, Department of Justice |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Title: |
MOTION for In Camera Review of Withheld Records by ELECTRONIC PRIVACY INFORMATION CENTER (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(McCall, Ginger) (Entered: 03/04/2013) |
|
Concerning: |
"Epic FOIA, Criminal Division, National Security Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation, FBI, Department of Justice |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Title: |
Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 17 MOTION for In Camera Review of Withheld Records by FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, CRIMINAL DIVISION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, NATIONAL SECURITY DIVISION (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Risner, Scott) (Entered: 03/05/2013) |
|
Concerning: |
"Epic FOIA, Criminal Division, National Security Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation, FBI, Department of Justice |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Title: |
Docket for ELECTRONIC PRIVACY INFORMATION CENTER v. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, CRIMINAL DIVISION et al, U.S. District Court District of Columbia (Washington, DC) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 1:12-cv-00127-RWR |
|
Concerning: |
"Epic FOIA, Criminal Division, National Security Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation, FBI, Department of Justice |
|
|
