FREEDOM OF INFORMATION FILING REVEALS CORRUPTION HORRORS
This was found in federal records reports today:
FOIA REQUEST # DOE-7JUL18-A July 27, 2018 TO: United States Department of Energy FOIA Officer Department of Energy Environmental Management Consolidated Business Center ATTN: FOIA/PA Requester Service Center 250 E. 5th Street, Suite 500 Cincinnati, OH 45202 Fax: (513) 246-0524 Email: foiaoffice@emcbc.doe.gov BCC: GAO, IG, Congress FROM: The Technology Alliance Email Response: DOE@congressionalreview.net RE: Request Under Freedom of Information Act (Expedited Processing & Fee Waiver Requested) Dear FOIA officer: Pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. § 552 et seq. and the implementing regulations of the United States Department of Energy (DOE), 43 C.F.R. Part 2, we make the following request for FOIA data. Requested Records: Our Office requests that United States Department of Energy produce the following within twenty business days and further seeks expedited review of this request for the reasons identified below: 1. All records discussing, referring, or relating to all meetings or communications between DOE staff and the law firm of Perkins Coie and their representatives including minutes of those meetings, or any memorandum written about these meetings by the DOE employees and contractors who were present. Our Office seeks all responsive records regardless of format, medium, or physical characteristics. In conducting your search, please understand the terms “records,” “communications,” and “documents” in their broadest sense, to include any written, typed, recorded, graphic, printed, or audio material of any kind. We seek records of any kind, including electronic records, audiotapes, videotapes, and photographs, as well as letters, emails, facsimiles, telephone messages, voice mail messages and transcripts, notes, or minutes of any meetings, telephone conversations or discussions. Our request includes any attachments to these records. No category of material should be omitted from search, collection, and production. You may not exclude searches of files or emails in the personal custody of your officials, such as personal email accounts. Records of official business conducted using unofficial systems or stored outside of official files is subject to the Federal Records Act and FOIA. It is not adequate to rely on policies and procedures that require officials to move such information to official systems within a certain period of time; Our Office has a right to records contained in those files even if material has not yet been moved to official systems or if officials have, through negligence or willfulness, failed to meet their obligations. Custodian searches are still required; agencies may not have direct access to files stored in .PST files, outside of network drives, in paper format, or in personal email accounts. In addition, please note that in conducting a “reasonable search” as required by law, you must employ the most up-to-date technologies and tools available, in addition to searches by individual custodians likely to have responsive information. Recent technology may have rendered the DOE’s prior FOIA practices unreasonable. In light of the government-wide requirements to manage information electronically by the end of 2016, it is no longer reasonable to rely exclusively on custodian-driven searches. Furthermore, agencies that have adopted the NARA Capstone program, or similar policies, now maintain emails in a form that is reasonably likely to be more complete than individual custodians’ files. For example, a custodian may have deleted a responsive email from his or her email program, but the DOE’s archiving tools would capture that email under Capstone. Accordingly, Our Office insists that the DOE use the most up-to-date technologies to search for responsive information and take steps to ensure that the most complete repositories of information are searched. If any potentially responsive records have been destroyed and/or transferred to other agencies or offices, such as the National Archives and Records Agency (NARA), then I request copies of the destruction or transfer slips as well as any other documentation relating to, mentioning or describing said transfer or destruction, to include but not be limited to confirmation that the DOE has no other copies of said records. Under the FOIA Improvement Act of 2016, agencies must adopt a presumption of disclosure, withholding information “only if . . . disclosure would harm an interest protected by an exemption” or “disclosure is prohibited by law.” If it is your position that any portion of the requested records is exempt from disclosure, Our Office requests that you provide an index of those documents as required under Vaughn v. Rosen, 484 F.2d 820 (D.C. Cir. 1973), cert. denied, 415 U.S. 977 (1974). As you are aware, a Vaughn index must describe each document claimed as exempt with sufficient specificity “to permit a reasoned judgment as to whether the material is actually exempt under FOIA.” Moreover, the Vaughn index “must describe each document or portion thereof withheld, and for each withholding it must discuss the consequences of disclosing the sought-after information.” Further, “the withholding agency must supply ‘a relatively detailed justification, specifically identifying the reasons why a particular exemption is relevant and correlating those claims with the particular part of a withheld document to which they apply.’” See - Competitive Enter. Inst. v. Office of Sci. & Tech. Policy , 827 F.3d 145, 149–50 (D.C. Cir. 2016); cf. Judicial Watch, Inc. v. Kerry , 844 F.3d 952, 955–56 (D.C. Cir. 2016) Id. at 8 (“The Government argues that because the agency had a policy requiring [the official] to forward all of his emails from his [personal] account to his business email, the [personal] account only contains duplicate agency records at best. Therefore, the Government claims that any hypothetical deletion of the [personal account] emails would still leave a copy of those records intact in [the official’s] work email. However, policies are rarely followed to perfection by anyone. At this stage of the case, the Court cannot assume that each and every work-related email in the [personal] account was duplicated in [the official’s] work email account.” (citations omitted)) See- Presidential Memorandum—Managing Government Records, 76 Fed. Reg. 75,423 (Nov. 28, 2011), http://bit.ly/2qOnSLU; Office of Mgmt. & Budget, Exec. Office of the President, Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments & Independent Agencies, “Managing Government Records Directive,” M-12-18 (Aug. 24, 2012), http://bit.ly/2raBimr See - FOIA Improvement Act of 2016 § 2 (Pub. L. No. 114–185) See- Founding Church of Scientology v. Bell , 603 F.2d 945, 949 (D.C. Cir. 1979) See - King v. U.S. Dep’t of Justice , 830 F.2d 210, 223–24 (D.C. Cir. 1987) (emphasis in original) See - Id. at 224 (citing Mead Data Central, Inc. v. U.S. Dep’t of the Air Force , 566 F.2d 242, 251 (D.C. Cir. 1977) In the event some portions of the requested records are properly exempt from disclosure, please disclose any reasonably segregable nonexempt portions of the requested records. If it is your position that a document contains non-exempt segments, but that those non-exempt segments are so dispersed throughout the document as to make segregation impossible, please state what portion of the document is non-exempt, and how the material is dispersed throughout the document. Claims of non-segregability must be made with the same degree of detail as required for claims of exemptions in a Vaughn index. If a request is denied in whole, please state specifically that it is not reasonable to segregate portions of the record for release. In addition to the records requested above, Our Office also requests records describing the processing of this request, including records sufficient to identify search terms used and locations and custodians searched and any tracking sheets used to track the processing of this request. If the DOE uses FOIA questionnaires or certifications completed by individual custodians or components to determine whether they possess responsive materials or to describe how they conducted searches, we also request any such records prepared in connection with the processing of this request. You should institute a preservation hold on information responsive to this request. Our Office intends to pursue all legal avenues to enforce its right of access under FOIA, including litigation if necessary. Accordingly, the DOE is on notice that litigation is reasonably foreseeable. Where possible, please provide responsive material in electronic format by email ( DOE@congressionalreview.net ) in PDF format. Our charity non-commercial public interest Congressional investigation and distribution group requests rolling production of these records as they are located and reviewed. Please be aware that under 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(6)(A), a FOIA request is considered constructively denied after twenty business days and is subject to an appeal on that basis. Fee Waiver In accordance with 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(A)(iii), Our Office requests a waiver of fees associated with processing this request for records. The subject of this request concerns the operations of the federal government, and the disclosures will likely contribute to a better understanding of relevant government procedures by the general public in a significant way. Moreover, Our Office provides research to major online news organizations viewed by millions of voters and therefore we are entitled to a fee waiver on the grounds that disclosure of the information sought is in the public interest because it is likely to contribute significantly to public understanding of the operations or activities of the government and is not primarily in the commercial interest of the requester. Regardless, we are willing to pay fees for this request up to $50 without prior approval. If you estimate that the fees will exceed this limit, please notify me first. Expedited Processing Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(6)(E)(1) and 43 C.F.R. § 2.20(a)(2), Our Office requests that the DOE expedite the processing of this request. Requests shall receive expedited processing when a requester demonstrates “an urgency to inform the public about an actual or alleged Federal Government activity, if made by a person who is primarily engaged in disseminating information.” First, Our Office is an organization “primarily engaged in disseminating information.” (finding that Our Office is a “representative of the news media” because it “gathers information of potential interest to a segment of the public, uses its editorial skills to turn the raw material into distinct work, and distributes that work to an audience.”) See - Mead Data Central, 566 F.2d at 261 See - Am. Civil Liberties Union v. Department of Justice, 321 F. Supp. 2d 24, 29 n.5 (D.D. Cir. 200)) Second, these records are urgently needed to inform the public about actual or alleged government activity. Specifically, Our Office contends there exists an urgency to inform the public about what matters of state that were discussed and that those disclosures are helpful to the current White House Administration and the American public in their efforts to end political corruption. The courts have found that the issue of news coverage to be especially critical in determining whether a “compelling need” exists for expedited FOIA processing. The Court have asserted that the “ultimate conclusion” with regards to expedited processing relies on important underlying facts, such as “the credibility of a claimant’s allegations regarding government activity, the existence of a threat to physical safety, or whether an issue is the subject of news coverage.” Certification The above information is true and correct to the best of our knowledge. Further Correspondence To ensure that this request is properly construed, that searches are conducted in an adequate but efficient manner, and that extraneous costs are not incurred, Our Office welcomes an opportunity to discuss its request with you before you undertake your search or incur search or duplication costs. By working together at the outset, Our Office and the DOE can decrease the likelihood of costly and time-consuming litigation in the future. This matter affects every voting citizen because, if we can't get justice in America, then no voter will believe they can either. A handful of corrupt tech billionaires, and their corrupt Senators, are manipulating public emotional triggers in order to steer, and money-launder, a trillion U.S. taxpayer dollars into their private bank accounts. Over 300 million American voters have said that the #1 issue with U.S. public policy is “CORRUPTION”. This issue is about that corruption. Their “climate”, “immigrants”, “medical coverage” issues are fake controversies that they use to scam U.S. Treasury funds that have nothing to do with those ‘cover issues’. They use Google, Facebook, Twitter and the Main Stream Media, that they own, in order to pump up these fake controversies via fake news. They use "Dark Money" fake charities, "Invisible Bridge" money laundering, crony stock market insider trading and pump-and-dump schemes, revolving door payola, prostitution bribes and other illicit corruption tricks. We are fighting back and we have already taken out part of the “bad guys”, and their schemes, using 100% legal tactics and methodologies. Any member of the public can now accomplish these anti-corruption efforts using espionage journalism, private investigation methods, citizen sleuth websites, class-action lawsuits and personal mass public media distribution. We encourage the public to continue in their efforts to bankrupt every single corrupt party that abuses our Democracy. In our matter, the U.S. Government, via the Obama White House and the U.S. Department of Energy intentionally defrauded us out of years of work and our life savings! Now they owe us some offsets! We are here to collect. We could not understand how ‘public servants’ could do these kinds of crimes to, and with, our government while stealing our, and millions of other taxpayers, money out of our pockets. We set out to hunt down every single person, group and process that allowed these crimes to happen, document their crimes on permanent public record and then make it nearly impossible for them to ever do this to the public again. We were tricked by false government promises into spending years of our lives and millions of dollars of our life savings. We, and our peers, were used as the “facade” of a “cover story” to operate a criminally illicit “Dark Money” operation against the American public. We swear, warrant and certify that we can prove every assertion in a public federal jury trial, Grand Jury hearing and/or televised Congressional hearing, given equitable credible legal resources and security protection. Senior government officials had full knowledge of, and participated in, this criminal enterprise. They knew, from the start, that the state and federal funding was covertly hard-wired, in advance, exclusively to their friends. They then attacked us with “Fusion GPS” , “Lois Lerner Targeting”, a tabloid character assassination program and worse things. They attacked us because we properly reported the crime to the FBI and Congress. They attacked us because we did "the right thing". The cover-ups of this crime continue to this day. The failure of the U.S. Government to provide any 1.) apology, 2.) damages offset, 3.) justice, 4.) whistle-blower and informant fees; in this matter continues to this day. We are not anti-government. We are anti-corruption. In fact, top government officials are helping us in our quest. For our first project, almost every taxpaying member of the public supported our past efforts and, in fact, provided us with a historically large number of purchasing letters of support which we hand-delivered to Congress. Nobody else was able to do that. The non-crony major international news outlets, every major industrial publication, most of the non-crony members of the U.S. Congress, and every other non-crony public official confirmed that "Part Two" of our project was a “go”. After winning Congressional awards and fully delivering on our previous government contracts, federal officials asked us to invest our time and money in the federal government and do even more to create domestic jobs and new domestic technology opportunities. BUT… ...it turned out that all of the government “deciders” worked for and owned stock in our arch competitor. The government officials took the money they had promised to us and gave it to their friends, who are our competitors. They gave it to the least qualified party; who also happened to be their buddy and their campaign financiers. They also gave part of the taxpayer cash to some of their friends who immediately filed bankruptcy in order to make huge profits off of tax loss filings and stock market valuation “pumps” without ever having to create any jobs or ongoing product deliveries. We were asked to pay bribes and we refused to pay bribes. We refused to be part of the Silicon Valley “Dark Money” crimes. We knew these people. We were invited to their parties and to their most intimate meetings. When we saw that they were running afoul of Democracy using corrupt schemes, illegal insider trading, sextortion, money laundering, tax evasion, bribes, prostitutes, Dark Money conduits, election rigging, internet manipulation and other crimes against the public; we said NO! Will the U.S. Government provide us with the justice we seek and the Constitution demands? We have worked with exceptional FBI, GAO, SEC, CFTC, IG and Congressional staff in this matter and we wish to acknowledge their support. Many have seen the recent news head-lines about top-level law enforcement firings of corrupt law enforcement executives. Those were the right moves and we wish to confirm the fact that certain public officials continue to stall our justice. Treasury and GAO say that over 180 million taxpayer dollars have been spent on cover-ups, attacks and DOJ stalls against our request in order to avoid political embarrassment for the Obama Administration. They are no longer around and they SHOULD be embarrassed by their corruption! You can resolve our matter for dramatically less money than you are spending trying to cover it up! We will not give up and we will fight to the end. Our Task Force of crime victims, journalists, bloggers, mass data scientists, intelligence specialists and voters is now using 100% legal means to terminate every single crook in this case until we get justice. We demand a resolution where our damages are paid for and the whistle-blower and informant fees we are owed are delivered. The news articles and Congressional reports prove that this Silicon Valley Cartel regularly engages in crimes, sex abuse, illicit acts, a sociopath culture and law-breaking. Fact-based forensic data has now been published representing the work of tens of thousands of renown, award-winning journalists and researchers. They prove that what we are saying really did happen and it really is a criminal abuse of Democracy! The ICIJ, Snowden, Assange and Binney leaks prove the depth of the crimes. Hundreds of thousands of documents have now been placed on public record in the federal courts and P2P archives and those documents prove who engaged in these crimes and how they did it. The 60 Minutes episodes, The feature films: Dark Money; Too Big To Fail; Inside Job and the tens of thousands of broadcast news segments about this corruption all prove our assertions. The evidence is indisputable! It is time for the public to take a stand against this kind of organized crime that is operated by the very people that are meant to serve the public! It is time for The U.S. Government and The U.S. Department of Energy to deliver the 1.) apology, 2.) damages offset, 3.) justice, 4.) whistle-blower and informant fees that are required. We look forward to your response and to a personal reply from Rick Perry, The Secretary of Energy. Sincerely, The Technology Alliance DOE@congressionalreview.net For additional confirmation of precedents confirming our rights to this data, please review the following: See - Al-Fayed v. Central Intelligence Agency, 254 F.3d 300, 306 (D.C. Cir. 2001) (Al-Fayed) Id. at 308. (emphasis added) See - : Wadelton v. Department of State, 13-0412 ESH, 2013 WL 1760853 (D.D. Cir. 2013) (Wadelton See - Id. Document 10, Filed 04/25/13, Page 6 of 8 (citing ACLU-NC v. DOD , 2006 WL 1469418, at *1-2; Amer. Civil Liberties Union of N. Cal. v. Dep’t of Justice , No. C 04-4447, 2005 WL 588354, at *5-7 (N.D. Cal Mar. 11, 2005)) See - Edmonds v. FBI , CIV.A. 02-1294 (ESH), 2002 WL 32539613 (D.D.C. Dec. 3, 2002) See - U.S.C. § 552(a)(6)(E)(v)(II
by HarryVonZell to news (+26|-0)