Just Human Profile picture
Feb 3, 2023 15 tweets 7 min read Read on X
🧵

New batch of FOIAs have dropped thanks to @15poundstogo and @JudicialWatch

Full batch is here: drive.google.com/file/d/1xZ6D3P…
One document that immediately drew attention was this FBI 302.

Not because it is new, but because it has been RECLASSIFIED and redacted as of last Spring.
Here is the version that @jsolomonReports obtained and published on January 20th, 2021.

Link: justthenews.com/sites/default/…
To reclassify a document is no simple matter.

Source: justice.gov/oip/page/file/…

h/t: @mgEyesOpen
One explanation for this reclassification that I have seen offered in a few places is that DOJ set Trump up by reclassifying it, knowing that he had a copy.

This is at least partially based on the timing of Trump's back and forth with NARA and DOJ over docs stored at MAL.
I get why pple would jump to that take, but I don't think it holds up.

Here is the timeline of the Trump-NARA-DOJ.

DOJ was already involved before this doc got reclassified.

Source: cnn.com/2022/08/09/pol…
And nowhere, that I have seen, has it been argued by DOJ or NARA that Trump had docs that were reclassified. I think they would have mentioned that in the court filings somewhere by now.
Besides, the President can and DID declassify this document. It was published.

So I do not think this would be the "Gotcha, Orange Man!" trick that a few folks seem to think it would be.
So then, why has this document been reclassified?

Clues and indicators as to why are on and in the document itself.
NSICG = National Security Information
Classification Guide

archive.org/stream/FBIClas…

REASON: 1.4 (C) = intelligence activities (including covert action), intelligence sources or methods, or cryptology

federalregister.gov/documents/2010…
The redactions are for these reasons:

b6 = privacy (names)
b7 = for law enforcement purposes

justice.gov/oip/page/file/…
So, knowing and understanding all of this, lets read the redacted and unredacted versions again.
The doc is referencing Steele and Burrows of Orbis meeting with FBI and apologizing for running to the media with the Dossier.

Steele and Burrows say they did so because they were "riding two horses," one was the FBI and one was their client.
That client, was Hillary Clinton and they chose her.

So, to RECLASSIFY this document, something MUST be going on with either Steele, Burrows, Orbis, HRC, the FBI agents at this meeting, or a combo thereof.

END

• • •

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

Keep Current with Just Human

Just Human 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 @realjusthuman

Aug 19
United States v. White
(D.C. City Councilmember Bribery Case)

#DrainTheSwamp Image
Relevant Persons and Entities

Confidential Human Source 1 (CHS 1): A DC business owner who contracted with the District recently pleaded guilty to bank fraud conspiracy and other offenses after being busted for obtaining fraudulent PPP loans! He took a plea deal and began "disclosing other prior criminal conduct in which he had participated. In the course of his cooperation, CHS 1 reported a corrupt relationship with White.Image
Read 51 tweets
Aug 18
"FBI agents have raided and searched the Virginia home of Dimitri Simes, an author and policy analyst, who advised Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential election campaign and who currently hosts a current affairs program on Russia’s state-run Channel One.

The raid began on 13 August, the FBI told the local Rappahannock News, which first reported the story.

Simes, whose name was included more than 100 times in the 2019 Mueller report into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election, told the paper he was out of the country and had not been notified about the search ahead of time. He was not aware he was the focus of any current law enforcement investigation, he said.

“I’m puzzled and concerned,” he said. “I have not seen a warrant. I was not contacted by any law enforcement or anyone else whatsoever.”"
Simes is mentioned 134 times in the Mueller Report, beginning on page 111, but many, possibly more than half, of those mentions are citations of transcripts or emails.

justice.gov/d9/report.pdf
Image
Read 18 tweets
Aug 15
Huddleston v. FBI
(Seth Rich FOIA Case)

Judge Mezzant has issued two Memorandum Opinions and Orders this morning.

Plaintiff’s Corrected Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. #112). DENIED


Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment Regarding FOIA Exemption 7(A) (Dkt. #148) DENIED
storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…
storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…
First, let's look at the one concerning Plaintiff’s Corrected Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. #112)Image
"This motion requests for the Court to allow Huddleston to conduct discovery and order the FBI to conduct additional searches for records from additional sources and additional categories of records." Image
Read 20 tweets
Aug 10
Huddleston v. FBI
(Seth Rich FOIA Case)

Judge Mezzant ORDERS the FBI to provide:

-Supplemental Brief on "standard for unsealing documents" at issue here
-Supplemental Brief on the present motion
-And an answer as to whether or not Seidel, in Paragraph 9 in Exhibit 1 of Docket Entry No. 148 was referring to Docket Entry Nos. 74 & 75.

ORDER
storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…Image
"The Court requires supplemental briefing on two issues.

First, the Court requires supplemental briefing regarding whether the Court should employ the Fifth Circuit’s standard (described above) for unsealing documents to the present motion or a different standard given the unique nature of FOIA litigation.

Second, the Court requires supplemental briefing on what result the Court should reach regarding the present motion and why. Regardless of what standard (and corresponding reasoning to support a particular outcome) the Government recommends, the Government should also [sic] discuss how the Court would analyze the present motion under the Fifth Circuit’s standard to unseal documents.

The Court hereby ORDERS the Government to submit supplemental briefing on the issues discussed above by August 21, 2024.

The Government shall further indicate whether Paragraph 9 in Exhibit 1 of Docket Entry No. 148 refers to Docket Entry Nos. 74 & 75."Image
Read 14 tweets
Aug 10
United States v. Trump
(DC Case)

"On August 3, 2024, the Court issued an order scheduling a status conference for August 16, and directed the parties to confer and file by August 9 a joint status report that proposes a schedule for pretrial proceedings moving forward. The parties have conferred."

And...

Special Counsel Smith has asked Judge Chutkan for an extension of time to allow the Office to "[finalize] its position on the most appropriate schedule for the parties to brief issues related to the [SCOTUS Presidential Immunity] decision."


Defense does not oppose this motion and Judge Chutkan has GRANTED it.

The status conference that was set for August 16 is moved to September 5, 2024.storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…Image
Image
Why?

Smith says it's because,

"The Government continues to assess the new precedent set forth last month in the Supreme Court’s decision in Trump v. United States, 144 S. Ct. 2312 (2024), including through consultation with other Department of Justice components."

He then cites part of the Special Counsel statute,

See 28 C.F.R. § 600.7(a) (“A Special Counsel shall comply with the rules, regulations, procedures, practices and policies of the Department of Justice,” including “consult[ing] with appropriate offices within the Department for guidance with respect to established practices, policies and procedures of the Department . . . .”).Image
Image
Read 7 tweets
Aug 8
United States v. Biden
(Hunter Tax Case in CA)

It's been a busy few days on this docket.

Judge Scarsi set a status conference and a hearing on all pending motions in limine for 8/21/2024 starting at 10am and apparently running all day (mentions AM and PM sessions), so parties are getting those motions in.Image
From Special Counsel Weiss Image
Motion in Limine to preclude defense expert Joshua Lee. Deficient and untimely.


Weiss says Hunter's counsel should only get "two bites of this "apple." storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…
Image
Read 17 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!

:(