First, let's look at the one concerning Plaintiff’s Corrected Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. #112)
"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."
The Court considers:
1) "...whether Huddleston’s frequent usage of news articles as summary judgment evidence is appropriate."
2) "...whether Huddleston may challenge the adequacy of the FBI’s search by engaging in mere speculation that not yet uncovered documents may exist."
3) "...whether Huddleston may challenge the adequacy of the FBI’s search on the grounds that other documents possibly responsive to his request may exist."
4) "...whether discovery is appropriate in this case."
"the Court will not address Huddleston’s argument that the Court should compel the FBI to search its digital evidence files, specifically Seth Rich’s laptop(s). Both the FBI and Huddleston agree that this issue has already been fully briefed in different motions"
"The Court does not address the FBI’s argument that Huddleston has attempted to amend his FOIA request via emails... The Court resolves Huddleston’s arguments on different grounds."
1) "Huddleston’s usage of news articles as summary judgment evidence is not appropriate because the articles constitute inadmissible hearsay."
2) "Huddleston makes six arguments challenging the FBI’s search as inadequate by engaging in mere speculation that as of yet uncovered records may exist...
Such speculation is insufficient to challenge the FBI’s search as inadequate."
3) "Huddleston’s request questions whether other documents possibly responsive to the FOIA request might exist without creating substantial doubt as to the sufficiency of the FBI’s search."
4) "The Court finds that discovery is not warranted in this case because Huddleston has not shown that the FBI acted in bad faith."
"Assuming that the findings in the Durham Report have a direct bearing on this case, the Durham Report never found that the FBI acted in bad faith (Dkt. #133-1). Rather, the Durham Report found that confirmation bias played a significant role in the FBI’s less [than] ideally executed investigation into matters related to intelligence activities and investigations arising out of the 2016 presidential campaigns..."
"Huddleston has not sufficiently persuaded the Court that there is tangible evidence of bad faith sufficient to justify discovery."
Plaintiff’s Corrected Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. #112) is DENIED.
"The Government does not satisfy the second element, which requires a document-by-document review in order to assign documents to the proper category."
"Under categorical withholding, an agency may provide descriptions of categories of documents, rather than a description of every specific document being withheld.
However, the agency still “must conduct a document-by-document review in order to assign documents to the proper category.”
"The Government has not put forward any evidence suggesting that it has conducted a document-by-document review of the documents within the Work Laptop and the Personal Laptop in order to assign the documents to the proper category."
"Even if a document-by-document review may require arduous efforts by the Government, it remains a requirement of categorical withholding."
"The Government has not satisfied this second requirement. Therefore, the Government is not entitled to judgment as a matter of law."
"...the Government must first conduct a document-by-document review of the documents within the Work Laptop and the Personal Laptop..
"the Government must either produce the Vaughn indexes or file a motion for summary judgment regarding the documents within the Work Laptop and the Personal Laptop by February 7, 2025."
"ORDERED the Government shall conduct and complete by February 7, 2025 a document-by-document review of the information it possesses on the compact disk containing images of Seth Rich’s personal laptop, Seth Rich’s work laptop, the DVD, and the tape drive that is responsive to Plaintiff’s FOIA requests."
"ORDERED the Government shall either (1) produce Vaughn indexes addressing the information it possesses on the compact disk containing images of Seth Rich’s personal laptop, Seth Rich’s work laptop, the DVD, and the tape drive that is responsive to Plaintiff’s FOIA requests by February 7, 2025; or (2) file a motion for summary judgment regarding the information it possesses on the compact disk containing images of Seth Rich’s personal laptop, Seth Rich’s work laptop, the DVD, and the tape drive that is responsive to Plaintiff’s FOIA requests by February 7, 2025."
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
As I said in the first thread, this isn't intended to present or boost one theory over another. This is simply a repository of things I've come across in the files and find remarkable.
Y'all are free to point out in the replies how a document supports or undermines a particular theory, of course. And if you see something interesting in a document that I missed, point it out, please!
Okay, on to the docs...
First up is an example of the CIA tracking media reporting on JFK assassination. In this memo are a couple contact persons, a history of security clearances, and the disclosure of two CIA projects: AEACTIVE and FJALIVE.
FJALIVE had something to do with Dhahran, Saudi Arabia, and State Dept fought hard until now to hide that.
Just a thread of interesting, notable, or in some way remarkable finds from the 2025 record releases.
This thread isn't intended to present or boost one theory over another or to uncover some hidden truth-though attention will be given to places where redactions have been recently lifted.
This is simply a repository of things I've come across in the files and find remarkable.
There are 2,100+ documents here. Documents of all sorts. No index is available; you can't search the contents of the files or even their dates or titles. They are only numbered.
It's like opening a storage shed crammed with hundreds of unlabeled boxes containing thousands of unlabeled folders with tens of thousands of documents from 50+ years ago.
And then going through the files in the boxes one by one.
All 62,000+ pages.
Who on this planet is insane enough to do such a thing?
Imagine defending the Steele Dossier in the year 2024... 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
"...our project was run in real-time. So, it was real-time reporting produced almost like a live commentary on what was happening.
That is not the way we work if we have a project over the course of several months and then produce a report at the end of that period. The Trump-Russia project wasn't that kind of project..."
I've had two near-death experiences. The first was my own fault; the second was something out of my control.
In attempting to meaningfully process those events beyond the immediately obvious reward of still breathing and draw on them as a resource that helps drive me forward into the rest of my life, I did a lot of things.
I prayed, journaled, talked to many friends and family about the experiences, read Scripture, considered how differently things could have so easily gone, and of course replayed the memories of those events in my head countless times.
"Although the defendant was the incumbent President during the charged conspiracies, his scheme was fundamentally a private one. Working with a team of private co-conspirators, the defendant acted as a candidate when he pursued multiple criminal means to disrupt, through fraud and deceit, the government function by which votes are collected and counted—a function in which the defendant, as President, had no official role...
This motion provides a comprehensive account of the defendant’s private criminal conduct; sets forth the legal framework created by [SCOTUS Presidential Immunity Opinion] for resolving immunity claims; applies that framework to establish that none of the defendant’s charged conduct is immunized because it either was unofficial or any presumptive immunity is rebutted; and requests the relief the Government seeks, which is, at bottom, this: that the Court determine that the defendant must stand trial for his private crimes as would any other citizen."
4 parts to this thing.
Section I-Preview of the case Gov't intends to prove at trial.
Section II-Overview of legal principles governing claims of presidential immunity.
Section III-Applies above legal principles to the conduct of President Trump and "establishes that nothing the Government intends to present to the jury is protected by presidential immunity."
Section IV-Relief sought by Gov't i.e. Trump is not immune from prosecution and case proceeds to trial.