walkafyre Profile picture
Nov 11, 2022 21 tweets 13 min read Read on X
So I’m a couple of days behind, but it’s ok because it’s now #FOIAFriday! Earlier this week, a new Midyear Exam drop was released on the FBI’s Vault. Let’s go through the 60+ pages of Part 48 of MYE. vault.fbi.gov/hillary-r.-cli…
First up, we have some notes from an interview of an unknown Secret Service agent on May 25, 2016. If you recall, the attachments to a 302 serial are called the “1A” file. As you can see from the first page, this would be MYE-302-093-1A76. ImageImage
I’m not going to go deep into the notes themselves here, but @15poundstogo has some highlights in the attached tweet, and the comments below it look at some of the rest of the notes. You should go there and look through the discussion, then come back.
What I find interesting is how much the substance of the notes differs from the final 302, which was actually released ALL the way back in Part 4. themyefiles.org/#individual-se… Image
As we’ll see, most of this drop seems to consist of records related to USSS. Before releasing docs under FOIA, the FBI has to send docs out to any other agency that may have “equities” in the record. So it appears USSS just returned these docs that they’ve reviewed under FOIA.
Next we have a response from USSS to FBI regarding a preservation request that FBI sent. The FBI sent these out at the beginning of MYE to any agencies that might have had equities in Hillary’s emails, to determine if any classified info was leaked. Not much detail unredacted… ImageImage
Then again, most of the preservation responses are mostly redacted. There’s actually an entire subfile (PRESPRO) for all the requests and responses. This one from USSS is MYE-PRESPRO-019. ImageImage
We then have several pages as part of a production from the State Department to FBI in response to a preservation request. We’ve seen other parts of this same response in other releases (MYE-PRESPRO-029-1A21). ImageImageImage
This is an interesting certification from someone at DOS, probably someone lower-level who was on an email chain or something. Maybe I can figure it out with some more analysis later. ImageImage
Next we have another attachment to a PRESPRO Serial. Another response package from USSS. This is MYE-PRESPRO-097-1A63. The 3rd screenshot is the actual serial itself, which was released in Part 15. ImageImageImage
Next up is a memo from USSS in regards to a classification review by FBI. This is serial 54 in the OCA (“Original Classification Authority”) subfile. So MYE-OCA-054. It attaches the memo from the FBI as well. ImageImageImage
Next is a similar response to a separate request from the FBI. This one is MYE-OCA-069. ImageImageImageImage
Next we get a copy of a classification review request to the CIA. This is MYE-OCA-072-1A46. There were 2 pages withheld in full, so we don’t have much detail on the actual file sent for review. The last screenshot is the actual serial (MYE-OCA-072), that was released in Part 20. ImageImageImageImage
Here we have some more pages of a CIA response to a classification review request. MYE-OCA-068-1A43. Apparently the included emails are “UNCLASSIFIED” according to the response letter. So I wonder why someone handwrote “CLASSIFIED” at the top of this one? ImageImageImageImage
This is interesting just because of all the handwringing over the documents at Mar-A-Lago. As you can see, just because there is a cover page with TOP SECRET blazed across the front doesn’t mean that what is inside is necessarily classified. Image
And we finally get the 302 for Huma Abedin’s January 6, 2017 interview. MYE-302-102. We’ve actually known about this interview since Part 24. In Part 30, this was withheld from release for a “Referral/Consult” with another agency, but I have no idea why or what agency… ImageImageImage
Technically, the notes of her interview are actually MYE-302-103-1A85 (rather than under 302-102), but that’s just based on how they were filed in the system. ImageImageImageImage
This is what was released in Part 24, for those curious. ImageImageImage
Finally, we get some NDAs signed by Huma’s attorneys as well as some of the documents that were shown to her. These are still part of the 302-103-1A85 file. ImageImageImageImage
That’s it for this drop! There are of course several pages I did not screenshot, nor did I dive much into the content of some of the notes/serials, but I wanted to thread the actual serials released. Thoughts on the documents themselves may be added under those tweets above.
I will try to get the documents separated out and uploaded to themyefiles.org soon. But definitely go through the Part 48 link at the top of the thread and see what you find! /end

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with walkafyre

walkafyre Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @walkafyre

May 25
“POLICY STATEMENT USE OF DEADLY FORCE”

A rundown…

1/x Image
In 1995, the Attorney General issued a resolution standardizing the DOJ’s policy on the use of deadly force. Note the similarities to the current policy included in the Mar-A-Lago Operation Order.

2/x


Image
Image
Image
Image
Here is what the policy looked like in 2004.

3/x
Image
Image
Read 8 tweets
May 10
I’ll add a bit more supplemental information to the embedded thread below from @JasonLeopold and the latest release of Mueller documents via his ongoing FOIA lawsuit. Follow along…
1/
First of all, if you aren’t a subscriber to @JasonLeopold’s weekly “FOIA Files” newsletter, you should sign up now. He’s a FOIA master and always manages to pry loose interesting documents from agencies across the federal government.
2/bloomberg.com/account/newsle…
@JasonLeopold As he mentions, Jason has been receiving monthly releases of FBI 302 forms and the supporting materials that were created as part of Mueller’s investigation. This release is actually the 47th release. The FBI first processed the 302s, now it is releasing the support materials.
3/
Read 12 tweets
Nov 26, 2022
As a passive follower of the “lab-leak-or-natural-origin” debate, I believe this thread pinpoints the type of focus that should be highlighted regarding the POINT of the debate 1/?
I’ve always thought it was obvious from the beginning that it was a lab leak. And I think that the truth should come out and be exposed. But as more information dribbles out, it seems (from the outside) that mostly the motive behind “proving it” has been for “accountability.”
Unfortunately, in todays world, that makes it a “political” fight. One side wants to take down the other side. “These jerks need to go to jail! (Or at the very least, no longer funded!)” While I agree, from a larger perspective it appears like a battle with no larger goal.
Read 6 tweets
Aug 25, 2022
This whole game of “election misinformation” is tiring. That’s what EVERY campaign consists of. By responding with “the Hunter laptop story was true!” we are accepting their premise that elections can ever be “misinformation-free.”
They had been subtle for years, slowly creeping the term “fake news” into our discourse. Trump saw what was happening, and attacked their overall premise. That was his appeal, he didn’t play their game, he showed how petty and underhanded they are.
But we’ve let “misinformation,” “disinformation,” “election interference,” and other bullshit terms define the acceptable scope of our national debates. They can’t win in battles of ideas, so they attack and distort language itself.
Read 4 tweets
Jul 18, 2022
THREAD: First of all, @DanCrenshawTX, being a prick throughout your thread is not really a good way to convince people of the “truth” you claim to espouse. Secondly, your bait-and-switch in the language you use is rather apparent… 1/5
You first insinuate the bill doesn’t “kick unvaccinated service members out of the military,” but later you claim it extends the prohibition against “dishonorable” discharges. Not quite the same thing (as you well know). 2/5
The bill explicitly ALLOWS service members to CONTINUE to be discharged on the sole basis of refusing the COVID vaccine, by ensuring that any such discharge shall only be an “honorable discharge” or “general discharge under honorable conditions.” 3/5
Read 6 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(