Skip to content

Get Judicial Watch Updates!

DONATE

Judicial Watch • JW v ODNI Opposition 00508

JW v ODNI Opposition 00508

JW v ODNI Opposition 00508

Page 1: JW v ODNI Opposition 00508

Category:

Number of Pages:116

Date Created:July 28, 2017

Date Uploaded to the Library:August 03, 2017

Tags:00508, ODNI, Secretarys, jacob, classified, Opposition, Intelligence, cheryl, Sullivan, defendants, message, original, Mills, unclassified, Pentagon, National, filed, Obama, State Department, White House, plaintiff, FBI, document, Supreme Court, department, FOIA, EPA, IRS, CIA


File Scanned for Malware

Donate now to keep these documents public!


See Generated Text   ∨

Autogenerated text from PDF

Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document Filed 07/28/17 Page THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT COLUMBIA
JUDICIAL WATCH, INC.,
Plaintiff,
OFFICE THE DIRECTOR
NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE, al.,
Defendants.
Civil Action No. 17-cv-00508 (CKK)
PLAINTIFF MEMORANDUM POINTS AND AUTHORITIES OPPOSITION DEFENDANTS MOTION DISMISS
Michael Bekesha
D.C. Bar No. 995749
JUDICIAL WATCH, INC.
425 Third Street S.W., Suite 800
Washington, 20024
(202) 646-5172
Counsel for Plaintiff
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document Filed 07/28/17 Page
TABLE CONTENTS
TABLE CONTENTS .................................................................................................................
TABLE AUTHORITIES ..........................................................................................................
MEMORANDUM POINTS AND AUTHORITIES .................................................................1
Introduction ..........................................................................................................................1
II.
Legal and Factual Background ...........................................................................................2
Secretary Clinton email practices .........................................................................5
III.
Intelligence Community Directive 732 ....................................................................2
Defendants refusal conduct damage assessment .............................................7
Argument .............................................................................................................................8
Plaintiff plainly has standing ...................................................................................8
Plaintiff well within the zone interests...........................................................13
Plaintiff Complaint more than sufficient .........................................................14
IV.
Information transmitted and stored the
unofficial, undisclosed email system
classified national intelligence ...................................................................14 actual suspected unauthorized disclosure compromise occurred ............................................................................17
Defendants must conduct damage assessment ....................................................17
Conclusion .........................................................................................................................20
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document Filed 07/28/17 Page
TABLE AUTHORITIES
Cases
Abbott Laboratories Gardner, 387 U.S. 136 (1967)............................................................18,
Abraha Colonial Parking, Inc.,
2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 39384, (D.D.C. Mar. 20, 2017) ..............................................16,
American Society for Prevention Cruelty Animals
Feld Entertainment, Inc., 659 F.3d (D.C. Cir. 2011) ......................................................9
Bowen Michigan Academy Family Physicians,
476 U.S. 667 (1986) .....................................................................................................18,
Caminetti United States, 242 U.S. 470 (1917) ...........................................................................18
Cannon District Columbia, 717 F.3d 200 (D.C. Cir. 2013) ..................................................16
Carik U.S. Health and Human Services, Supp. (D.D.C. 2013) .......................................................................................16
Clarke Securities Industry Association, 479 U.S. 388 (1987) ...................................................14
Cody Cox, 509 F.3d 606 (D.C. Cir. 2007) ...........................................................................18,
Covey Run, LLC Washington Capital, LLC,
2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 44925 (D.D.C. Mar. 28, 2017).....................................................17
Federal Election Commission Akins, 524 U.S. (1998) .....................................................9,
Friends Animals Jewell, 828 F.3d 989 (D.C. Cir. 2016) .................................................11,
Lujan Defenders Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555 (1992) ......................................................................8
Murray Energy Corporation Administrator Environmental Protection Agency,
2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 11612 (4th Cir. June 29, 2017) ....................................................10
Murray Energy Corporation v., McCarthy,
2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14304 (N.D. Va. Oct. 17, 2016) .............................................10
Rusk Cort, 369 U.S. 367 (1962) .................................................................................................19
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document Filed 07/28/17 Page
Settles U.S. Parole Commission, 429 F.3d 1098 (D.C. Cir. 2005) ............................................17
Ward District Columbia Department
Youth Rehabilitation Services, 768 Supp. 117 (D.D.C. 2011) .................................16
Waterkeeper Alliance Environmental Protection Agency,
853 F.3d 527 (D.C. Cir. 2017) ...................................................................................8,
Statutes and Regulations U.S.C. 552 ..................................................................................................................................9 U.S.C. 701(a) ...........................................................................................................................18 U.S.C. 702 ................................................................................................................................18 U.S.C. 706(1) ...........................................................................................................................20 U.S.C. 3101 ............................................................................................................................13 U.S.C. 3002 ..............................................................................................................................2 U.S.C. 3003(4) .........................................................................................................................2 U.S.C. 3003(5) .......................................................................................................................15 U.S.C. 3023(b)(1) ....................................................................................................................2 U.S.C. 3024(f)(1)(A)............................................................................................................2, U.S.C. 3024(g)(1)(G) ...............................................................................................................3 U.S.C. 3024(i)(1) .....................................................................................................................2 U.S.C. 3024(i)(2)(C) ..........................................................................................................3,
Exec. Order 13526, Fed. Reg. 707 (Dec. 29, 2009) .......................................................... passim
Intelligence Community Directive 703 ....................................................................................14,
Intelligence Community Directive 732 .................................................................................. passim
iii
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document Filed 07/28/17 Page
Miscellaneous Authorities
Bill Gertz, DNI declined required damage assessment Clinton
leaked email secrets, Washington Free Beacon (Sept. 14, 2016) ......................................7
Compromise. Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary
(available merriam-webster.com) ..................................................................................17
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document Filed 07/28/17 Page
Plaintiff Judicial Watch, Inc., counsel, respectfully submits this memorandum
points and authorities opposition the motion dismiss filed Defendants Office
Director National Intelligence; Daniel Coats, his official capacity Director National
Intelligence; William Evanina, his official capacity National Counterintelligence Executive;
the U.S. Department State; and Rex Tillerson, his official capacity Secretary the
U.S. Department State. addition, pursuant LCvR 7(f), Plaintiff requests oral hearing Defendants motion. grounds therefor, Plaintiff states follows:
MEMORANDUM POINTS AND AUTHORITIES
Introduction.
After year-long investigation, the Federal Bureau Investigation, one the
member organizations composing the Intelligence Community, determined that least eight
records containing Top Secret information were transmitted and stored unofficial, unsecure
email system. Information classified Top Secret only when the unauthorized disclosure
the information reasonably could expected cause exceptionally grave damage the
national security. addition, least records contained Secret information, and least eight
records contained Confidential information. The State Department, also part the Intelligence
Community, determined that least records transmitted and stored the unofficial,
unsecure email system are classified either Top Secret, Secret Confidential and contain
information pertaining intelligence activities intelligence sources methods. circumstances where there actual suspected unauthorized disclosure
compromise classified national intelligence, including classified information pertaining
intelligence activities intelligence sources methods, damage assessment must
conducted. Yet, despite the indisputable fact that such information was transmitted and stored
-1-
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document Filed 07/28/17 Page unofficial, unsecure system and the plain requirements the law, Defendants have not
conducted assessment evaluate the damage national security.
When damage assessment conducted, results formal, written report. Such
reports are available the public under the Freedom Information Act. Because damage
assessment has been conducted here, report its findings does not exist, and Defendants
cannot produce under the Freedom Information Act. result, Plaintiff and the public
are being deprived information about the damage national security caused the use
unofficial, unsecure email system transmit and store classified national intelligence.
II.
Legal and Factual Background.
Intelligence Community Directive 732.
The National Security Act 1947, amended, provides, part, for the establishment integrated policies and procedures for the departments, agencies, and functions the
Government relating the national security. U.S.C. 3002. Those departments and
agencies relating national security make the Intelligence Community, which consists the
Office the Director National Intelligence and separate, federal agencies and/or agency
components, including the FBI and the State Department. Id. 3003(4).
The Director National Intelligence serves head the Intelligence Community. charged statute with protect[ing] intelligence sources and methods from unauthorized
disclosure, among other duties and responsibilities. Id. 3023(b)(1) and 3024(i)(1).
addition, the Director responsible for the dissemination information, including national
intelligence. Id. 3024(f)(1)(A) (The Director shall establish objectives, priorities, and
guidance for the intelligence community ensure timely and effective collection processing,
-2-
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document Filed 07/28/17 Page
analysis, and dissemination national intelligence. id. 3024(g)(1)(G); id.
3024(i)(2)(C) The Director National Intelligence shall establish and implement guidelines
for the intelligence community for the [p]reparation intelligence products such way
that source information removed allow for dissemination the lowest level classification
possible unclassified form the extent practicable. conjunction with the National Security Act, then-President Barack Obama issued
Executive Order 13526 [p]rescribe[] uniform system for classifying, safeguarding, and
declassifying national security information, including information relating defense against
transnational terrorism. Fed. Reg. 707 (Dec. 29, 2009). The preamble the executive
order states:
Our democratic principles require that the American people informed the
activities their Government. Also, our Nation progress depends the free
flow information both within the Government and the American people.
Nevertheless, throughout our history, the national defense has required that
certain information maintained confidence order protect our citizens,
our democratic institutions, our homeland security, and our interactions with
foreign nations. Protecting information critical our Nation security and
demonstrating our commitment open Government through accurate and
accountable application classification standards and routine, secure, and
effective declassification are equally important priorities.
Id.
According 13526, information may classified one three levels: Top
Secret, Secret, and Confidential. Id. 1.2. Top Secret applies information, the
unauthorized disclosure which reasonably could expected cause exceptionally grave
damage the national security. Id. 1.2(a)(1). Secret applies information, the
unauthorized disclosure which reasonably could expected cause serious damage the
national security. Id. 1.2(a)(2). Confidential applies information, the unauthorized
-3-
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document Filed 07/28/17 Page
disclosure which reasonably could expected cause damage the national security. Id. 1.2(a)(3). addition, information cannot considered classified unless pertains one more the following:
(a) military plans, weapons systems, operations;
(b) foreign government information;
(c) intelligence activities (including covert action), intelligence sources methods,
cryptology;
(d) foreign relations foreign activities the United States, including confidential
sources;
(e) scientific, technological, economic matters relating the national security;
(f) United States Government programs for safeguarding nuclear materials facilities;
(g) vulnerabilities capabilities systems, installations, infrastructures, projects, plans, protection services relating the national security;
(h) the development, production, use weapons mass destruction.
Id. 1.4.
Pursuant the National Security Act and 13526, well other authorities, thenDirector National Intelligence James Clapper issued Intelligence Community Directive 732 June 27, 2014. See generally ICD 732. The directive requires damage assessment
conducted whenever there actual suspected unauthorized disclosure compromise
classified national intelligence that may cause damage U.S. national security. ICD
732(D)(2). disclosure compromise involves classified national intelligence originating
from affecting only one Intelligence Community member, the head that member
-4-
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document Filed 07/28/17 Page
organization required conduct damage assessment coordination with the National
Counterintelligence Executive. ICD 732(D)(4). disclosure compromise involves
classified national intelligence that originates from otherwise affects more than one
Intelligence Community member, Community damage assessment must conducted the
affected member organizations and other representatives directed the DNI. ICD
732(D)(5).
ICD 732 also plainly contemplates that the damage assessment result formal, written
report. Complaint 16. sets forth detailed requirements concerning the preparation,
contents, and use the report, including the distribution copies it. See ICD 732(D)(7) and
(E). ICD 732 also specifies the roles and responsibilities various officials, including the
National Counterintelligence Executive and the heads the Intelligence Community members, preparing and using the assessment report. ICD 732(E). addition, ICD 732 does not
mandate the report classified prohibit from disclosure. See generally ICD 732.
Secretary Clinton email practices.
During her tenure Secretary State, Hillary Rodham Clinton used unofficial,
unsecure email system transmit and store emails conducting official, State Department
business. Complaint and 19. After year-long investigation into Secretary Clinton
email practices, the FBI concluded that emails sent received the Secretary her
unofficial, unsecure email system contained Top Secret, Secret, and Confidential
information. Complaint 21. July 2016 statement, FBI Director James Comey
described the FBI findings follows:
From the group 30,000 e-mails returned the State Department, 110 emails e-mail chains have been determined the owning agency contain classified
-5-
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document Filed 07/28/17 Page
information the time they were sent received. Eight those chains
contained information that was Top Secret the time they were sent; chains
contained Secret information the time; and eight contained Confidential
information, which the lowest level classification. Separate from those,
about 2,000 additional e-mails were up-classified make them Confidential;
the information those had not been classified the time the e-mails were sent.
***
With respect the thousands e-mails that were not among those produced
State, agencies have concluded that three those were classified the time they
were sent received, one the Secret level and two the confidential level.
Id. 22. The FBI also found that Secretary Clinton and her colleagues were extremely
careless their handling very sensitive, highly classified information and that possible
that hostile actors gained access Secretary Clinton personal e-mail account. Id.
The State Department has also reviewed the approximately 30,000 emails returned
Secretary Clinton. has posted its website least record containing information classified Top Secret and records containing information classified either Secret Confidential,
all pertaining intelligence activities intelligence sources methods. See
foia.state.gov/Search/Results.aspx?collection=Clinton_Email.1 Approximately records
contain information classified Secret and 2073 records contain information classified
Confidential, all pertaining other types information, also are posted. Id.2
The emails are available the State Department website and are submitted here for
ease reference Exhibit the information that has been deemed classified and does not pertain intelligence
activities intelligence sources methods, that information mostly pertains foreign
government information information about foreign relations (EO 13526, 1.4(b)) foreign
activities the United States (EO 13526, 1.4(d)).
-6-
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document Filed 07/28/17 Page
Defendants refusal conduct damage assessment.
Even though member organization the Intelligence Community (the FBI) determined
that highly classified information was found unofficial, unsecure email system, ODNI
decided not conduct required damage assessment. Complaint 33; Bill Gertz, DNI
declined required damage assessment Clinton leaked email secrets, Washington Free
Beacon (Sept. 14, 2016, available http://freebeacon.com/national-security/dni-declinesrequired-damage-assessment-clintons-leaked-email-secrets/) ODNI not leading
[intelligence community]-wide damage assessment and not aware any individual element
conducting such formal assessments, Joel Melstad, spokesman for the Office the
Director National Intelligence, said. January 10, 2017, Plaintiff sent letter thenDirector Clapper, National Counterintelligence Executive Evanina, and then-Secretary John
Kerry formally requesting that the damage assessment required ICD 732 commenced
without further delay. Id. 35. Plaintiff still has not received response its January
letter, and neither assessment nor the resulting report required ICD 732 has been conducted prepared. Id. 36.3 damage assessment report prepared pursuant ICD 732 quintessential record that
Plaintiff would request and obtain under FOIA, then analyze and make available the public
part its educational mission. Id. 37. the Intelligence Community had conducted
damage assessment and prepared the resulting report required ICD 732, Plaintiff
undoubtedly would have submitted FOIA request for the report part its ongoing
Defendants Motion Dismiss also confirms that damage assessment has been
conducted.
-7-
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document Filed 07/28/17 Page
investigation. Id. 38. The only reason Plaintiff has not requested the report because
Defendants announced that they had decided not conduct the required assessment and prepare report. Id.
Prior damage assessments reports prepared the Intelligence Community, least
portions such reports, have been made public through FOIA. Id. 39. For example,
May 2014, FOIA lawsuit compelled the disclosure the damage assessment report prepared
after Edward Snowden compromise classified national intelligence. See Leopold U.S.
Department Defense, Case No. 14-cv-0197 (TSC) (D.D.C.). Id.
III.
Argument.
Plaintiff plainly has standing. have standing under Article III the Constitution, plaintiff must demonstrate three
familiar requirements: (1) injury-in-fact; (2) causal connection between the asserted injury-infact and the challenged action the defendant; and (3) that the injury will redressed
favorable decision. See Lujan Defenders Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555, 560-561 (1992).
Defendants not challenge whether Plaintiff has satisfied prongs two three. Nor could they. the Court were order Defendants undertake assessment and prepare report
required ICD 732, Plaintiff, through FOIA, would able obtain the report, analyze it, and
make available the public. Defendants only argue that Plaintiff has not suffered injuryin-fact. recent informational injury case, the U.S. Court Appeals for the District
Columbia Circuit held, plaintiff suffers injury fact when agency action cuts him off
from information which must publicly disclosed pursuant statute. Waterkeeper
-8-
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document Filed 07/28/17 Page
Alliance Environmental Protection Agency, 853 F.3d 527, 533 (D.C. Cir. 2017) (quoting
Federal Election Commission Akins, 524 U.S. 11, (1998)). [T]he upshot Akins that
the plaintiff must assert view the law under which the defendant obligated disclose
certain information that the plaintiff has right obtain. (Waterkeeper Alliance, 853 F.3d
533 (quoting American Society for Prevention Cruelty Animals Feld Entertainment, Inc.,
659 F.3d 12, 22-23 (D.C. Cir. 2011)).
ICD 732 requires Defendants conduct damage assessment and issue formal, written
report.4 FOIA requires that the report disclosed. See generally U.S.C. 552.
Defendants refusal conduct the required damage assessment and prepare report its
findings prevents Plaintiff off from obtaining information that must disclosed statute.
Plaintiff theory that simple.
Defendants argue that plaintiff informational injury case can only satisfy the
standing requirement the plaintiff seeks enforce single statute that imposes both
obligation act and obligation disclose. effect, Defendants argue there can
standing when plaintiff theory based the interaction two statutes. That argument
not supported the case law the facts alleged the Complaint. Waterkeeper Alliance, plaintiff sought compel the Environmental Protection
Agency reverse rule exempting all farms from reporting air releases from animal waste.
853 F.3d 532. The plaintiffs argued that they had suffered informational injury because
the EPA decision exempt the farms from the reporting requirement prevented the plaintiffs
Defendants not argue that they conduct damage assessment that they are not
required prepare report.
-9-
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document Filed 07/28/17 Page
from gaining access the information. Id. 532-533. response, the EPA argued that the
plaintiffs lacked standing challenge part the final rule because relied upon statute that
had reporting requirement but disclosure requirement. Id. 533. The Court disagreed.
Id. The Court concluded that the plaintiffs could look another statute albeit related statute
that requires disclosure. Id. short, the D.C. Circuit recently concluded that obligation act and obligation disclose imposed two different statutes confers standing.
Similarly, Murray Energy Corporation McCarthy, the plaintiffs sought require
the Environmental Protection Agency conduct continuing evaluations potential loss
shifts employment caused the enforcement the Clean Air Act. 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS
143404, **2-3 (N.D. W.Va. Oct. 17, 2016), overruled other grounds Murray Energy
Corporation Administrator Environmental Protection Agency, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS
11612 (4th Cir. June 29, 2017). The plaintiffs asserted that because the EPA was failing
conduct such evaluations, they suffered injury-in-fact because resulting information could not obtained through FOIA. The court agreed. concluded:
This Court finds that the plaintiffs have also established standing under the
informational doctrine. The statute requires the EPA gather certain
information and conduct evaluations, which plaintiffs contend has refused do.
The plaintiffs may entitled the information which has not been collected
analyzed and have requested the same. This sufficient support standing.
This Court unpersuaded the EPA argument that had the EPA conducted
the employment evaluations, the plaintiffs would not entitled the
information. The EPA fails point out any theory which this information
could secreted from the plaintiffs any other person. not live
secret society, and the plaintiffs would have the ability receive the information
through the Freedom Information Act, not through other means.
Id. **46-47.
Plaintiff injury different than the injuries suffered the plaintiffs Waterkeeper
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document Filed 07/28/17 Page
Alliance and Murray Energy. fact, Plaintiff injury more direct than that Waterkeeper
Alliance. The plaintiffs Waterkeeper Alliance sought for the EPA enforce statute that
required third-party submit information the agency. Once that information was
submitted, the EPA was required disclose it. Here, Plaintiff seeks for Defendants conduct damage assessment. Once the assessment complete, FOIA requires the report its findings disclosed. There reliance whatsoever third-party.5 addition, the facts here could not any clearer. member the Intelligence
Community has already determined that Top Secret information was transmitted and stored unofficial, unsecure email system. The FBI also concluded that because unofficial,
unsecure email system was used entirely possible that hostile actors could have gained
access this very sensitive, highly classified information. Defendants have mandatory
obligation conduct damage assessment and prepare report its findings. They have not
done and not plan so. Had the assessment been conducted and the report prepared,
Plaintiff would have sought and received minimum, redacted form the damage
assessment.
Contrary Defendants assertion, Friends Animals Jewell has bearing here.
that case, the plaintiffs relied upon statutory deadline provision, not record-creation
The same can said for Akins. that case, plaintiffs challenged the Federal Election
Commission determination that the American Israel Public Affairs Committee was not
political committee. Akins, 525 U.S. 13. Because that determination, AIPAC was not
mandated make disclosures regarding its membership, contributions, and expenditures that the
law otherwise requires. Id. Plaintiffs therefore could not obtain such information. Id. 21.
For plaintiffs gain access the information sought, the government agency had take
enforcement action and the third-party had submit its information. Id.
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document Filed 07/28/17 Page
disclosure statute. 828 F.3d 989, 994 (D.C. Cir. 2016) Friends Animals seeks enforce
section 4(b)(3)(B) deadline requirement, not its disclosure requirements. law required
record created disclosed within that timeframe. Id. Friends Animals seeks
enforce deadline requirement that does not obligate the Secretary disclose information.
Here, Plaintiff relies upon ICD 732 which mandates the creation record and FOIA
which requires disclosure the record. Friends Animals does not apply.6
Finally, concluding that Plaintiff has suffered injury-in-fact will not obliterate the
concept standing entirely Defendants complain. Defs Mot. 11. issue here law
(ICD 732) that requires agency agencies conduct damage assessment and prepare
report. Plaintiff does not request that agency create record not obligated create.
Future plaintiffs will required point specific law mandating the creation record.
Because ICD 732 requires Defendant conduct damage assessment and prepare report,
Plaintiff plainly satisfies the injury-in-fact requirement.
Although the Court Friends Animals held that the plaintiffs injury was too
attenuated confer standing, concluded stating:
Obviously our holding narrow. cannot read broadly mean that
plaintiff suing enforce the requirements section never has informational
standing. For example, suppose the [Fish and Wildlife Service] were
determine that the listing petitions issue are warranted but precluded and yet
declined publish the Federal Register description and evaluation the
data which the finding based, required statute. U.S.C.
1533(b)(3)(B)(iii). that point, Friends Animals may well have
informational standing sue compel the publication the relevant data
that is, compel compliance with section 4(b)(3)(B)s disclosure requirement.
Friends Animals, 828 F.3d 995. Had the government agency taken the required action
within the statutory deadline, the plaintiffs would have had standing sue the resulting
information was not disclosed.
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document Filed 07/28/17 Page
Plaintiff well within the zone interests.
Plaintiff well within the zone interests. Defendants entire argument can
summarized ICD 732 lists three purposes and [n]one these purposes seeks disclose
damage assessment reports. Defs Mot. 14. Such view too narrow and does not
comport with the facts.
ICD 732 was issued pursuant the National Security Act and 13526, well other
authorities. The National Security Act not only addresses the protection classified national
intelligence but also the dissemination information, including intelligence information and
information about the Intelligence Community. The Director National Intelligence shall
establish and implement guidelines for the intelligence community for the [p]reparation
intelligence products such way that source information removed allow for
dissemination the lowest level classification possible unclassified form the extent
practicable. 3024(i)(2)(C). Similarly, 13526 discusses the importance information.
Our democratic principles require that the American people informed the activities their
Government. Also, our Nation progress depends the free flow information both within
the Government and the American people. 13526. The authorities that underlie ICD
732 anticipate that information will made available the public.
ICD 732 also cannot analyzed vacuum. government agencies, Defendants are
subject FOIA and the Federal Records Act. When ICD 732 was issued, then-Director
Clapper knew that any damage assessment reports prepared could requested subject FOIA
or, minimum, the Federal Records Act. See U.S.C. 3101. fact, weeks prior
ICD 732, reporter, Jason Leopold, sued the U.S. Department Defense for access
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document Filed 07/28/17 Page
Defense Intelligence Agency report the damage caused leaks former National
Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden. Complaint 10, Leopold U.S. Department Defense, Case No. 14-cv-00197 (TSC) (D.D.C. Feb. 11, 2014). The damage assessment
report required ICD 732 the type record that would obviously the public interest
and mostly likely disclosed, least redacted form. not-for-profit, educational
foundation that undertakes investigations the federal government and federal officials
making extensive use FOIA, Plaintiff clearly falls within the zone interests. has satisfied
the not especially demanding prudential standing test. Clarke Securities Industry
Association, 479 U.S. 388, 399 (1987).
Plaintiff Complaint more than sufficient.
Defendants argue, [T]he complaint does not allege that actual suspected
unauthorized disclosure compromise occurred. Nor does allege facts that, taken together
the light most favorable Plaintiff, create reasonable inference that there was suspected
unauthorized disclosure compromise. Defs Mot. 17. Defendants complain that Plaintiff
did not plead that classified national intelligence which alleges distinct from classified
information was transmitted and stored the unofficial, unsecure email system. Defendants
also complain that Plaintiff did not plead that the transmission and storage the highly
classified information unofficial, unsecure email system resulted actual suspected
unauthorized disclosure compromise. Both complaints lack merit.
Information transmitted and stored the unofficial, undisclosed
email system classified national intelligence.
According ICD 703, attached Defendants Motion Dismiss, Classified National
Intelligence National Intelligence defined U.S.C. 401a(5), classified pursuant
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document Filed 07/28/17 Page 13526. ICD 703(D)(1). Information must satisfy the definition the statute and
properly classified according the executive order confidential national intelligence.
There dispute whatsoever that information transmitted and stored the unofficial,
unsecure email system was classified pursuant 13526. The FBI concluded, 110 emails e-mail chains have been determined the owning agency contain classified information the time they were sent received. Complaint 22.
National intelligence refers all intelligence, regardless the source from which
derived and including information gathered within outside the United States, that (A)
pertains, determined consistent with any guidance issued the President, more than one
United States Government agency; and (B) that involves (i) threats the United States, its
people, property interests; (ii) the development, proliferation, use weapons mass
destruction; (iii) any other matter bearing United States national homeland security. U.S.C. 3003(5). 13526 sets forth, Information shall not considered for
classification unless its unauthorized disclosure could reasonably expected cause
identifiable describable damage the national security. 13526, 1.4. Information
that, minimum, could reasonably expected cause damage the national security would
obviously also information that involves matters bearing national security. Defendants
not demonstrate why such plain reading mistaken.
Even not all classified information classified national intelligence and Plaintiff
does not concede that that correct ICD 703 also describes classified national intelligence
information classified pursuant 13526, Section 1.4(c). ICD 703(C)(2). According
the State Department own website, least records transmitted and stored the unofficial,
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document Filed 07/28/17 Page
unsecure email system contained information classified pursuant 13526, Section 1.4(c).
See Exhibit 1.7 Thus, classified national intelligence subset information classified
under Section 1.4(c), the facts support Plaintiff Complaint. The emails found the
unofficial, unsecure email system are classified national intelligence. the extent Defendants argue Plaintiff Complaint does not plead classified national
intelligence was transmitted and stored the unofficial, unsecure email system, Defendants are
incorrect. its January 10, 2017 letter, Plaintiff asserted, Then-Secretary Clinton use and
maintenance least one unsecure, unofficial email account and one more unsecure,
unofficial email servers and devices send, receive, and store Top Secret, and Confidential
information plainly constitutes, minimum, suspected, unauthorized disclosure
compromise classified national intelligence that may cause damage [U.S.] national
security. Exhibit Complaint (emphasis added). That letter was not only incorporated reference (Complaint 35), but also attached exhibit the Complaint. Abraha
Colonial Parking, Inc., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 39384, *6-7 (D.D.C. Mar. 20, 2017) [A] court
may consider the facts alleged the complaint, documents attached exhibits incorporated reference the complaint. quoting Ward District Columbia Department Youth
Rehabilitation Services, 768 Supp. 117, 119 (D.D.C. 2011)). Similarly, the Court may
rely upon the records posted the State Department website. Abraha, 2017 U.S. Dist.
LEXIS **6-7 The court may also consider documents the public record which the court
The Court may take judicial notice facts available government website, such
the State Department FOIA page. See Cannon District Columbia, 717 F.3d 200, 205
(D.C. Cir. 2013); see also Carik U.S. Health and Human Services, Supp. 41, 48,
(D.D.C. 2013).
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document Filed 07/28/17 Page
may take judicial notice. Considering the facts the Complaint well Plaintiff January
10, 2017 letter and the records available the State Department website, Plaintiff Complaint more than sufficient. Covey Run, LLC Washington Capital, LLC, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS
44925, (D.D.C. Mar. 28, 2017) (In deciding whether dismiss claim pursuant Federal
Rule Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), counseled complaints are construed with sufficient
liberality afford all possible inferences favorable the pleader allegations fact.
(quoting Settles U.S. Parole Commission, 429 F.3d 1098, 1106 (D.C. Cir. 2005)). actual suspected unauthorized disclosure
compromise occurred.
Defendants argument that Plaintiff did not plead actual suspected unauthorized
disclosure compromise strains credulity. Again, the FBI concluded that highly classified
information was transmitted and stored unofficial, unsecure email system, and, result, possible that hostile actors gained access that information. Complaint 22. The
FBI conclusion alone demonstrates that, minimum, suspected compromise occurred.
Compromise expose make vulnerable danger, suspicion, scandal, etc.;
jeopardize. Compromise. Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary (available merriamwebster.com). Compromise does not require hostile actors gain access information.
simply allows for the possibility that such access could gained. The facts, taken together
the light most favorable Plaintiff, sufficiently allege the existence circumstances for which damage assessment required.
Defendants must conduct damage assessment.
Defendants ignore the mandatory language ICD 732 and argue that the decision
conduct damage assessment committed their discretion. The directive unequivocally
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document Filed 07/28/17 Page
states, Damage assessments shall conducted when there actual suspected
unauthorized disclosure compromise classified national intelligence that may cause damage U.S. national security. ICD 732(D)(2) (emphasis added). Nothing left Defendants
discretion. The directive should enforced according its terms. Caminetti United States,
242 U.S. 470, 485 (1917). elementary that the meaning [any law] must sought
the language which the act framed, and that plain, and the law within the
constitutional authority the law-making body which passed it, the sole function the courts enforce according its terms. Had the Director sought provide discretion ODNI
and the Intelligence Community could have. See ICD 732(D)(3) Damage assessments may
also conducted (emphasis added)).
Instead, required ODNI and the Intelligence
Community conduct damage assessment when suspected unauthorized disclosure
compromise classified national intelligence occurred.
The case law cited Defendants also not support their position. Cody Cox, the
D.C. Circuit concluded that the Armed Forces Retirement Home was required provide highquality health care pursuant U.S.C. 413(b). 509 F.3d 606, 607 (D.C. Cir. 2007).
deciding that Section 413(b) was not committed agency discretion, the Court explained that
the statute did not fall into one the narrow categories that usually satisfies the exceptions
the presumption that agency action judicially reviewable. Id. 610.8 The exceptions are:
Congress expressly granted private right action enforce federal rights against
federal agencies under the APA. See U.S.C. 702. agency actions may not subject judicial review exempted statute and committed agency discretion. See
U.S.C. 701(a); see also Abbott Laboratories Gardner, 387 U.S. 136 (1967) (Section
701(a)(1) applies when statute explicit and unambiguous). The mere fact that statute
silent the issue review not controlling. the contrary, begin with the strong
presumption that Congress intends judicial review administrative action. Bowen
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document Filed 07/28/17 Page
(1) agency decision involving complicated foreign policy matters, (2) agency refusal
undertake enforcement action, (3) and agency determination about how spend lumpsum appropriation. Id. The Court also concluded that the language the statute The
Retirement Home shall provide for the overall health care needs residents high quality and
cost-effective manner, including site primary care, medical care, and continuum longterm care services. was clear and defined. Id. The Court explained:
[W]e found judicial review was available for abuse discretion when the statute
stated that board may excuse failure file request correct error
military record within three years after discovery finds the interest justice. language that board may take action finds the
interest justice provides meaningful standard against which judge the
agency exercise discretion, surely wording mandating that the [agency]
shall provide high quality and cost-effective health care does well.
Cody, 509 F.3d 610-611.
The requirement conduct damage assessment does not concern complicated foreign
policy matters. Nor does concern refusal take enforcement action how spend
lump-sum appropriation. solely concerns law that requires damage assessment
conducted when there actual suspected unauthorized disclosure compromise
classified national intelligence. Nothing committed agency discretion.
Defendants also not claim that the review the decision conduct damage
assessment exempted. Neither the National Security Act nor ICD 732 even suggests that
Michigan Academy Family Physicians, 476 U.S. 667, 670 (1986). addition, there
well-settled presumption favoring interpretations statutes that allow judicial review
administrative action. Abbott Laboratories, 387 U.S. 141 (quoting Rusk Cort, 369 U.S.
367, 379-380, (1962)). short, judicial review final agency action aggrieved
person will not cut off unless there persuasive reason believe that such was the purpose Congress. Abbott Laboratories, 387 U.S. 140.
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document Filed 07/28/17 Page
judicial review decision not conduct damage assessment precluded.
Finally, contrary Defendants assertion (Defs Mot. 22), final agency action was
taken. Defendants decided that Intelligence Community-wide damage assessment into
Secretary Clinton email practices would conducted and that individual Intelligence
Community member would conduct such assessment. See Complaint 33. that
precise decision that Plaintiff challenges here. The decision not conduct damage
assessment may challenged under the APA.9
IV.
Conclusion.
For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff respectfully requests that Defendants Motion
Dismiss denied.10
Dated: July 28, 2017
Respectfully submitted,
/s/ Michael Bekesha
Michael Bekesha
D.C. Bar No. 995749
JUDICIAL WATCH, INC.
425 Third Street S.W., Suite 800
Washington, 20024
Phone: (202) 646-5172
Counsel for Plaintiff the extent that final agency action was taken which the facts refute Plaintiff
also challenges Defendants failure conduct damage assessment action unlawfully
withheld unreasonably delayed. Complaint (quoting U.S.C. 706(1)).
Defendants have made argument whatsoever that Plaintiff claim cannot brought under
this provision the APA.
Pursuant the Court Standing Order, Plaintiff will deliver one appropriately bound and
tabbed courtesy copy this opposition the loading dock located Third and Streets
before the first business day after the filing this motion.
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document 10-1 Filed 07/28/17 Page
Exhibit
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document 10-1 Filed 07/28/17 Page
UNCLASSIFIED U.S Department State Case F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780721 Date: 02/29/2016
Classified DAS, A/GIS, DoS 02/19/2016 Class: SECRET/NOFORN Reason: 1.4(8), 1.4(C), 1.4(D)- Declassify on: 05/17/2036
RELEASE PART
81, 1.4(8), 1.4(C), 1.4(0}
Memo Secretary Hillary Clinton
From John.Kerry
May 18, 2011
KIY ANI-PASHA DINNER
ARMY HOUSE
5/15/11. 10:15 2:15
Overview
During long dinner with Generals Kiyani and Pasha discuss
the major issues between our two countries and the _!egion,
specifically sought their views
1.4(C)
1.4(0)
UNCLASSIFIED U.S Department State Case F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780721 Date: 02/29/2016
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document 10-1 Filed 07/28/17 Page
UNCLASSIFIED
U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780721 Date: 02/29/2016
1.4(8)
1.4(C)
1.4(0)
Executive Summary met with General ani and General Pasha Army_llouse
May 15-16.
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780721 Date: 02/29/2016
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document 10-1 Filed 07/28/17 Page
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780721 Date: 02/29/2016
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780721 Date: 02/29/2016
1.4(8)-
1.4(C)
1.4(0)
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document 10-1 Filed 07/28/17 Page
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780721 Date: 02/29/2016
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780721 Date: 02/29/2016
1.4(8)
1.4(C)
1.4(0)
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document 10-1 Filed 07/28/17 Page
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780721 Date: 02/29/2016
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780721 Date: 02/29/2016
1.4(8)
1.4(C)
1.4(0)
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document 10-1 Filed 07/28/17 Page
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780721 Date: 02/29/2016
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780721 Date: 02/29/2016
1.4(8)
1.4(C)
1.4(0)
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document 10-1 Filed 07/28/17 Page
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780721 Date: 02/29/2016
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780721 Date: 02/29/2016
1.4(8)
1.4(C)
1.4(0)
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document 10-1 Filed 07/28/17 Page
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780721 Date: 02/29/2016
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780721 Date: 02/29/2016
1.4(8)
1.4(C)
1.4(0)
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document 10-1 Filed 07/28/17 Page
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780721 Date: 02/29/2016
UNCLASSIFIED U.S Department State Case F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780721 Date: 02/29/2016
1.4(8)
1.4(C)
1.4(0)
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document 10-1 Filed 07/28/17 Page
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780721 Date: 02/29/2016
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780721 Date: 02/29/2016
1.4(8)
1.4(C)
1.4(0)
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document 10-1 Filed 07/28/17 Page
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-~~~~~~~~- -~~~~~~-
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780721 Date: 02/29/2016
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780721 Date: 02/29/2016
1.4(8)
1.4(C)
1.4(0)
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document 10-1 Filed 07/28/17 Page
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780721 Date: 02/29/2016
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780721 Date: 02/29/2016
1.4(8)
1.4(C)
1.4(0)
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document 10-1 Filed 07/28/17 Page
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780721 Date: 02/29/2016
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780721 Date: 02/29/2016
1.4(8)
1.4(C)
1.4(0)
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document 10-1 Filed 07/28/17 Page
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780721 Date: 02/29/2016
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780721 Date: 02/29/2016
1.4(8)1.4(C)
1.4(0)
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document 10-1 Filed 07/28/17 Page
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780721 Date: 02/29/2016
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780721 Date: 02/29/2016
1.4(8)
1.4(C)
1.4(0)
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document 10-1 Filed 07/28/17 Page
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780721 Date: 02/29/2016
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780721 Date: 02/29/2016
1.4(8)
1.4(C)
1.4(0)
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document 10-1 Filed 07/28/17 Page
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780721 Date 02/29/2016
1.4(8)
1.4(C)
1.4(0)
KIYANI issued statement
acknowledging the session and promised meet the following
day. Ambassador Munter attended the follow meeting with
President Zardari, General Kiyani and others and has reported
separately.
---------
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780721 Date: 02/29/2016
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document 10-1 Filed 07/28/17 Page
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780721 Date 02/29/2016
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780721 Date 02/29/2016
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document 10-1 Filed 07/28/17 Page
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780719 Date: 02/29/2016
Classified DAS, A/GIS, DoS 02/19/2016 Class: SECRET/NOFORN Reason: 1.4(B} _!.:.~1~J. 1.4(D) Declassify on: 05/17/2036
RELEAS PART
[81 I1.4(8 )_,1_
.4(C), 1.4(_~)j
Memo Secretary Hillary Clinton
From John Kerry
May 18, 2011
KIY ANI-PASHA DINNER
ARMY HOUSE
5/15/11. 10:15 2:15
Overview
During long dinner with Generals Kiyani and Pasha discuss
the major issues between our two countries and the regt()f1,) ecifically sought their views
1.4(0)
1.4(C)
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780719 Date 02/29/2016
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document 10-1 Filed 07/28/17 Page
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780719 Date: 02/29/2016
1.4(8)
1.4(C)
1.4(D)
Executive Summary met with General ani and General Pasha Army House
May 15-16
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780719 Date: 02/29/2016
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document 10-1 Filed 07/28/17 Page
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780719 Date: 02/29/2016
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780719 Date: 02/29/2016
1.4(8)
1.4(0)
1.4(C)
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document 10-1 Filed 07/28/17 Page
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780719 Date: 02/29/2016
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780719 Date: 02/29/2016
1.4(8)
1.4(C)
1.4(0)
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document 10-1 Filed 07/28/17 Page
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780719 Date: 02/29/2016
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780719 Date 02/29/2016
1.4(8)
1.4(C)
1.4(0)
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document 10-1 Filed 07/28/17 Page
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780719 Date: 02/29/2016
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780719 Date: 02/29/2016
1.4(B)
1.4(0)
1.4(C)
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document 10-1 Filed 07/28/17 Page
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780719 Date 02/29/2016
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780719 Date: 02/29/2016
1.4(8)
1.4(C)
1.4(0)
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document 10-1 Filed 07/28/17 Page
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc C05780719 Date 02/29/2016
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780719 Date: 02/29/2016
1.4(8)
1.4(C)
1.4(0)
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document 10-1 Filed 07/28/17 Page
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780719 Date: 02/29/2016
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780719 Date: 02/29/2016
1.4(8)
1.4(C)
1.4(0)
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document 10-1 Filed 07/28/17 Page
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780719 Date: 02/29/2016
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780719 Date 02/29/2016
1.4(8)
1.4(C)
1.4(0)
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document 10-1 Filed 07/28/17 Page
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780719 Date: 02/29/2016
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780719 Date: 02/29/2016
1.4(B)
1.4(C)
1.4(0)
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document 10-1 Filed 07/28/17 Page
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780719 Date: 02/29/2016
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc C05780719 Date 02/29/2016
1.4(8)
1.4(C)
1.4(0)
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document 10-1 Filed 07/28/17 Page
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780719 Date: 02/29/2016
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780719 Date: 02/29/2016
1.4(
1.4(C)
1.4(0)
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document 10-1 Filed 07/28/17 Page
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780719 Date: 02/29/2016
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780719 Date: 02/29/2016
1.4(8)
1.4(C)
1.4(0)
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document 10-1 Filed 07/28/17 Page
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780719 Date: 02/29/2016
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780719 Date: 02/29/2016
1.4(8)
1.4(C)
1.4(0)
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document 10-1 Filed 07/28/17 Page
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780719 Date: 02/29/2016
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780719 Date: 02/29/2016
1.4(8)
1.4(C)
1.4(0)
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document 10-1 Filed 07/28/17 Page
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780719 Date: 02/29/2016
~--~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
KIY ANI issued statement
acknowledg
~__t~ s--~-e- and promised meet the following
day. Ambassador Munter attended the follow meeting with
President Zardari, General Kiyani and others and has reported
separately.
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780719 Date: 02/29/2016
1.4(8)
1.4(C)
1.4(0)
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document 10-1 Filed 07/28/17 Page
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780719 Date: 02/29/2016
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780719 Date 02/29/2016
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document 10-1 Filed 07/28/17 Page
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05793060 Date: 12/31/2015
RELEASE FULL
Pra~
February 15, 2006
Subj: Feb
U~ClASSIFltO McCain Amendment and U.S Obligations under Article the Convention Age.inst Torture
Article the Convention Against Torture requires partie~ pr.event
a,ny tetritory under its jurisdiCtion other e.Cts cru~{; .inhuman, degrading
treaonent puniehm.ent which cfo not Bmount torture ... The State
Department agreed with the Justice D.epa.rtn;lent May 2005 conclusion that
this Article did not apply CIA mtertogations foreign countries.
That situation has now changed. matt~r policy, tlie U..S. government
publioJy extended the prohibitiQD aga.i:osr cruel, .inhumaa., d~gracling treatment ,all conduct worldwid~. And the.n, ma-tter law, the
McCain Amendment extended the application Article the
Convention Against Torture conduct .by U.S. officials anywhere the
world.
The prohibitions Article the CAT now apply the enhanced
interrogation techniques authorized for employment CIA. this case,
given the relationship domestic law the queistion treaty
interpretation, the responsibility advising interpretation shared
both the Departmpnt State and the Dspartment Justice.
J1ie Senates reservation stated that the CATs bElI! cniel, inhuman,
degrading treatment punishment. Yould bin~ the U.S. only insofar
meant the cruel, unusual and in.humane treatment punishment prohibited the Fifth, Eighth, .and/or Fourteenth Amendments. So, define the
CATs ban; are look principally Americas cruel and unusua!7
standard. Though that standard found the Ejghth Amendment, the
Senate:s invocation the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments ma.de sense
because, matter substantive due process_the Due Process Clause .of
the Fourteenth Ameridmen.t [which uses the same language the Fifth
.Amendment] incoiporates tlie Eighth Aniendtnents guarantee against cruel
SIN l2104MY
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05793060 Date: 12/31/2015
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document 10-1 Filed 07/28/17 Page
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05793060 Date: 12/31/2015
Praft Feb
and unusual punishment. Goodmrut Georgia; 126 S.Ct. 877, 879 (Jan.
10, 2006); citing Louisiana rel Francis Reaweber1 329 U.S. 459, 463
(1947).
The cruel and unusual standard ajso the Jeast restrictive stands.rd
available anywhere American jurisprudence. .After all, the Eighth
Amendment sets the floor oll what can done the most dangerous
offenders that exist American law, people who can legal1y punished,
even legally put qeath. All other standards trea1ment Am!rican l~w
are more i:estrictive, since they apply people who ~ve not b~en, convicted crimes (as wfth pretrial detention, civil commitment; etc.) and.where the
due process !t!mdard judges whether they can deprived oftheit liberty
all. This why the cruel and wiusual test considered one ~ect
substantive due process, where kind floor .in larger structure
protections. E.g., Iones Johnson, 781 F.2d 769 (9th Cir. 1986)(8th
Amendment minimum standard case involving pretrial detention).
Further, the term degrading. is.a vagiler arid potentially more restrictive
term than cruel.or uinhumart. This another reason why fortunate
that the Senate pointed the cruel and unusual line cases the place define the ban.
There are great many cases the meaning cruel and unusual. the
Supreme Court has repeatedly said, writing about conditions confmement,
the words should interpreted ~fleCible and dynamic manner.
static test can exist which courts may detennine whether conditions
1OLC did not cite Eighth Ani.cndment preccdmta jts 2005 opinion bceBUBc: the Bl3bth Amen.dme.nc
would not apply people wlio had not been judged guilty ofa dime. (I) Thi argument coafu~s two
kiodB rdCicnces. The Senacc commsnded that the cruel and 1111uBUal standard used for Btibsta11tive
defmftlon conduct prevcmred the iraary, not for definltioo lite ca~gori~ o(peopl~ who could
claim the ~t)s protecllons. (2) The distinction al10 substantively iJnmateriAI. conslib.ltionul
protections formally apply these prlsoneni. The protection9, including the ~ifth Amendment ones that
OLC-acknowlculgc1, an: all being artificially linported them the operation the CAT and the Senate
rcaervarioo. The Blghth Amendment aarries CJVCr just well, bolb directly lllld thr9ugb Its inclusion
aepei:t oftbe rubmruic due procesa protected under the Fifth qnd Pouneenth, (3) The-Eighth
Amendment giinirxmm 1tendard. lfwe reject this standard because the people have not been convlc~d crime, die govcmmcut must find e1!1Jd11rd treatment Cfen higher, and more rcsltictiYe, that would
apply eituallom Ilk!! pretrial detcntiOll civil commitment.
5/N l211MMY
UNCLASSIFIED U.S Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05793060 Date: 12/31/2015
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document 10-1 Filed 07/28/17 Page
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05793060 Date: 12/31/2015
Draft Feb
confinement arecruel and unusual, for the Eighth Amendment mus.t draw
its meaning from the evo)ving s.tand~ds decency that ~ar.c th.e progress
of~.rnaturing society.,,, Rhodes Cha,Pmm.-452 .U~S. 337, 346 (1981),
citing Trop Duties. 356:tJ.S., 86, 101 (1958). The treatment punishm~nt
need not b(lfbarous. The Court has u@~d teIIns like serious deprivation,s
ofhuman neecls0 conditions which deprive inmates the minimal
civilized measme ofHfes .ne..ce~sities. treatment punishme11t,
otherw1se justified, can certe.ioly restrictive and even har~h. Rhodes-;
452 U.S. ~47.
Though the Supreme Courtlw frequently been. divided on.applying the.
evolving standards decency test, clearly agreed that, .In
discerning those evolving standards, have looked objective evidence how our society views particular punishment .today,., looking for
relie.ble objective evidence contemporary values, such the practices
legislatures. Pen.ry Lynaugh. 492 U.S. 302, (l989)(unanimous
portion ofopinion). addition the oruel and unusual rtandard, which especially applies
conditions confinement~ the sub~tantiv due process requirements also
prohibit methods interrogation that would slwck the conscience. Both
standards must discussed. The enhanced inte.rrogation techniques
combine manipulations the conditions confinement with the use
specific coercive methods during the questioning itself.
The shocks the conscience ~est has been applied interrogations.
several occasions, but wch cas are now relatively.rare. The Court ruled i.Ii
2003, for example, that man who had been questioned for ten minutes
while pa1n after being justifiably wounded police officm could sue
with 11. claim tha.t his right substantive due process had been vioiated
conduct that shocked ilie conscience. Chayez Martinez. 538 U.S. 760
(2003). Such interrogation cases have seldom risen Supreme Court
review the post-Miranda era since the 1960s. Among the la.st such cases,.
the Court found vio ia.tions due process where the prisoner ha.d been held
inconmtunicado and questioned for prolonged period, E.g., Darwin
~fil
UNCLASSIFIED U.S Department State Case F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05793060 Date: 12/31/2015
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document 10-1 Filed 07/28/17 Page
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc C05793060 Date 12/31/2015
Draft Feb
Co!lhectlcut, 391 U.S. 346 .(1968); Cl~:tfis Texas; 386 U.S. 701 (1967), another case where police officer questipned wou.pded priso~er,
threat~ned kill him, and fired gun neat his ear, th.e Court also found
gross coercion,Beecher Alabama, 389U!S. 35, 3.8 (19?7). applying both tesu, courts look cumulative effect judges the ~ts
both alone combination. Rhodes. 452 US. 347 (sometimes also
reiferred the 1totality crrcumetances).
The cases reveal spectrum views .Some rechniques that are.merely
intrusive harsh may pass.ei*1l.er test there worthy state interest
using them. Almost all the techniq~es question here would deemed
wanton and unneceuary and would frnmediately fail pass muster unless
there was strong sta.~ -interest using.them. presume for this
opinion that they .all justified valid state intere~it the need obtain
iriformation protect the country.
.But that only part the t~st. Under. American law, there precedent
for excusing treannent that intrinsicalJy cruel even the state asserts
compelling need uae it.
The OLC agrees that some conduct prohibited matter how compelling
ilie state intenist J.y be. attempting define such intrlnsically
prohibited conduct, OLC looked whether the enhanced interrogation
techniques question caused seVere pain suffering infltcted significant lasting hann. other words, OLC concluded that the tec:h.hlques not
amount torture. OLC opinion May (p. arid note mthe May draft).
But the CATs Article states explicitly that the prohibited cruel, inhuman, degnu:Ung treatment or-:punishment are acts which not amount
torture. Mo~over, OLC own opinion the legal defutition torture
emphasizes t.he dlffe~nee. OLC quoted the Senates explanation that:
Torture thus distinguished from lesser forms cruel, inhurnBD,,
degrading treatment punishment; whkh are deplored and prevented,
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05793060 Date: 12/31/2015
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document 10-1 Filed 07/28/17 Page
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc C05793060 Date: 12/31/2015
Draft Feb
but are not 110 universally and categorically condemn,ed warrant the
sev.ere legal consequences that the Conv~ntion provides in. the caee
torture, OLC apinion Dec. 3.0,.2004, see also :note 14. the .technique, 1,akcn together, are inttinsically cruel, inhuman,
degrading- i.e., under American constitutional law they would.be either considered .cruel end unusual 2.t shock the conscience, then they are
prohlbited. They can bamd, per se, even thc:y not amoun~ totorture.
And tjiey can }>e bmed even there oompellh~g. state interest ass~rted
justify them. loo.king objective standards infonn judgment aboufevolving
standards ofdecency interrogation techniques that shock the conscience,
three sources stand out: American government practice, any agency, holding
questioning enemy combatants- including enemy combatants who
.not have Geneva protection who were regarded the time
suspected terrorists, guerrillas; spies, saboteurs. are unaware
any prece dent iJi World War II, the Korean War, the Vietnam War,
any subsequent conflict for authorized, systemati~ interrogation
practises similar those question here, even where the prisoners
were presumed unlawful cornbatants.
Recent practice police and prison authorities confining
questioning their most dangerous suspects. Thia practice especially
helpful since these authorities are governed subs~tively similar
standards those th.at would apply ilnder the CAT, given the Senate
reservation. have not conducted review America.n domestic
OLC nomd that eom~ ihe questi11m:d practices are op~ly reg~ed torture lhe Anny.Field
Manual. sald that the Manual applied combatimta receiving Oenevs pr:oteetio:os, and these noL
OLC did not diaCIW
mllllaly practice confining and questioning enemy combatmil6 who did no! qualify
fot Geneva protection, Aleo, the question whether combatant$ an: prolec:tcd no.H.s pol necoeearlly
relevant noting whe!hcr !he militazy reaards the practicer Ulrturoiu cruel, for the purpoae
establishing evolving standards de~CJ>cy.
~~~~OFORN I/St
certainly would not.3 Recent practice other advanc.ed governments that f!J,Ce pot~qtiallr
catastrophic terrorist CI?. ~-11
gpve~epts have abandpneci several
ere. therefore appears that s~veral these teclu qties .singly
comoination, .should considered oru.el, inhuman,.or degrading treatment punishmcntt Within the meaning Article 1:6.
],he techniques least likely be: eustained are the techniques described
~oercive: especially. viewed cumulatively, suen th.e waterboardJ
walling,
dousing; stress positions, and cramped confmement.
Those most likely be.sustained are the basic detention condition and,
context, the cop-ectiye techniq1J.es, such slaps.
The control conditions such. nudity .sleep deprivation, and liquid diet,
may also susta~able, depending the circwnstances and details how
these techniques are used.
OLC did not review dcmc.atic prootice of.police snd prison nuthorilie. OC..C did argue lhat netional
secw:lty inlcmts could justify m.ore lnvatrlve p111ctlccaJh8JI mlghi porhsp1 jusllfiable only law
aiforceme.n1 inrcroalll. ThiJmey valid argummt whc:ro the ticbniquc mig)H clo1c the line,
domeetionlly. 13ut !.he tcchnlqic, techniques, would violate damesric eonstitutional @taudard.s,
nonctfi~JeiiB forbiddco. The Seo11te poin domeetic cotlslftuilonol Jew the eo11Toe for defining thio
ted
international lteaty obllgat!oa.
6/M lll 041iV
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05793060 Date: 12/31/2015
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document 10-1 Filed 07/28/17 Page
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05789094 Date: 01/29/2016
RELEASE PART
81, 1.4(C), 1.4(D),83
CIA PERS/ORG,85
Mills, Cheryl MillsCD@state.gov>
Wednesda March 14, 2012 7:31
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc: CIA PERS/ORG
Laszczych, Joanne
Re: URGENT From Dave Petraeuss Chief Staff...
Subject: CIA PERS/ORG
Thanks for this update. want discuss this situation will reoccur and have protocols that follew that welcome covering with
you. travelling today but loook forward connecting tomorrow discuss.
Classified DAS, A/GIS, Dos 01/29/2016 Class: SECRET Reason: 1.4(C), 1.4(0) Declassify
on: 03/13/2037
Best
Cdm
-----Original Message ----From:.____ __.
Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2012 06:02
To: Mills, Cheryl
Subject: Re: URGENT From Dave Petraeuss Chief Staff ... CIA PERS/ORG
Cheryl,
1.4(C)I
1.4(0) CIA PERS/ORG
Again, many thanks and all best. CIA PERS/ORG
Cheers,l_J
-----Original Message----From:J
Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2012 04:44
To: millscd@state.gov 
Subject: URGENT From Dave Petraeuss Chief Staff..
Dear Cheryl, CIA PERS/ORG
1.4(C)
1.4(0) CIA PERS/ORG
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc C05789094 Date 01/29/2016
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document 10-1 Filed 07/28/17 Page
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05789094 Date 01/29/2016
1.4(C)
1.4(0) CIA PERS/ORG
Ooes all that sound you? so, lease ask get word around immediately
only those circumstances where deems that appropriate and t83 CIA PERS/ORG
Thanks much and cheers, CIA PERS/ORG
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05789094 Date 01/29/2016
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document 10-1 Filed 07/28/17 Page
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05789124 Date: 01/29/2016
RELEASE PART
81, 1.4(C), 1.4(D),83 CIA PERS/ORG,85
Mills, Cheryl 
Wednesday, March 14, 2012 2:40
Fw: URGENT From Dave Petraeuss Chief Staff...
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Classified DAS, A/GIS, Dos 01/29/2016 Class SECRET- Reason: 1.4(C), 1.4(D) Declassify
on: 03/13/2037
----Original Message----From:
Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 201!2 11:03
To: Mills, Cheryl
Cc: Laszczych,Joanne
Subject: Re: URGENT From Dave Petraeuss Chief Staff.. CIA PERS/ORG
Cheryl,
Thank you and excellent. look forward discussing the protocols with you, including learning there have been any
changes. the meantime, safe and productive travels, and please consider coming out Langley for lunch with when you
next have bit time can catch-up person
Cheers
-----Original Message----From: Mills, Cheryl [mailto:MillsCD@state.gov]
Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2012 07:31
To[_
Cc: Laszczych, Joanne 
Subject: Re: URGENT From Dave Petraeuss Chief Staff...
Thanks for this update. want discuss this situation will reoccur and have protocols that follow that welcome covering with
you. travelling today but loook forward connecting tomorrow discuss.
Best
Cdm
-----Original Message----From
--1 CIA PERS/ORG
Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2012 06:02
To: Mills, Cheryl
Subject: Re: URGENT From Dave Petraeuss Chief Staff ...
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case F-2014-20439 Doc C05789124 Date: 01/29/2016
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document 10-1 Filed 07/28/17 Page
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05789124 Date: 01/29/2016
Cheryl,
1.4(C)
1.4(0) CIA PERS/ORG
Again, many thanks and all best.
Cheers[] CIA PERS/ORG
----Original Message----I
From!
Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2012 04:44
To: rhillscd@state.gov 
Subject: URGENl From Dave Petraeuss Ci:hief Staff.. CIA PERS/ORG
Dear Cheryl,
1.4(C)
1.4(0) CIA PERS/ORG
Does all that sound you? so, may please ask you get word around immediately-~-----------------~
only those circumstances where deems that appropriate and the best way forward?
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05789124 Date 01/29/2016
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document 10-1 Filed 07/28/17 Page
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No.
~-2014-20439
Doc No. C05789124 Date: 01/29/2016
Thanks much and cheers, CIA PERS/ORG
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05789124 Date: 01/29/2016
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document 10-1 Filed 07/28/17 Page
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05795231 Date: 01/29/2016
RELEASE PART
81, 1.4(C), 1.4(D),83 CIA PERS/ORG,85 
Wednesday, March 14, 2012 6:49
millscd@state.gov
sullivanjj@state.gov
Re: URGENT From Dave Petraeuss Chief Staff...
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
-----Original Message---From: Mills, Cheryl [mailto:MillsCD@state.gov]
Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2012 05:38
To:H
Cc: Sullivan, Jacob 
Subject: Fw: URGENT From Dave Petraeuss Chief Staff...
classified DAS, A/GIS, Dos 01/29/2016 Class: SECRET Reason: 1.4(C), 1.4(D) Declassify
[on: 03/13/2037
HRC
See b/I
Calling you this around 71Sam.
Cdm
--- Original Message
From -,---,--___,-~~Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2012 04:44
To: Mills, Cheryl
Subject: URGENT From Dave Petraeuss Chief Staff.
Dear Cheryl,
1.4(0) CIA PERS/ORG
1.4(C)
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05795231 Date: 01/29/2016 CIA
PERS/ORG
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document 10-1 Filed 07/28/17 Page
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05795231 Date: 01/29/2016
85~
1.4(0) CIA
PERS/ORG
1.4(C)
Does all that sound you? so, may please ask you get word around immediately only those circumstances where deems that appropriate and the best way forward?
----~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Thanks much and cheers,
83CIA
PERS/ORG
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05795231 Date 01/29/2016
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document 10-1 Filed 07/28/17 Page
UNCLASSIFIED U.S Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05789088 Date: 01/29/2016
RELEASE PAR~
81I1.4(C), 1.4(0),83 CIA
PERS/ORG,85
Mills, Cheryl MillsCD@state.gov>
Wednesday, March 14, 2012 5:39
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
HRC
Sullivan, Jacob
Fw: URGENT From Dave Petraeuss Chief Staff...
jClassified DAS, A/GIS, Dos 01/29/2016 Class: SECRET- Reason: 1.4(C), 1.4(0) Declassify
lon: 03/13/2037
See b/I
Calling you this around 715am.
Cdm
-----Original Message----From:
Sent: Wednesd March 14, 2012 04:44
To: Mills, Cheryl
Subject: URGENT From Dave Petraeuss Chiefof Staff...
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dear Cheryl, CIA PERS/ORG
1.4(C)
1.4(0) CIA PERS/ORG
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05789088 Date: 01/29/2016
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document 10-1 Filed 07/28/17 Page
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05789088 Date: 01/29/2016
Does all that sound you? ---------------- so, may please ask you get word around immediately
only those circumstances where deems that appropriate and the best way forward?
------------
1.4(C)
Thanks much and cheers,
1.4(0) CIA PERS/ORG
L_j CIA PERS/ORG
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05789088 Date 01/29/2016
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document 10-1 Filed 07/28/17 Page
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05770349 Date: /30/2015
RELEASE PART
811.4(8), 1.4(D),85,B6
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject
Sullivan, Jacob SullivanJJ@state.gov>
Saturday, August 2010 7:23
Re: Message from
1.4(8)
1.4(0)
----- Original Message ---From: 
To: Sullivan, Jacob
Sent: Sat Aug 19:19:18 2010
Subject: Re: Message from
Classified DAS, A/GIS, DoS 11/30/2015 Class: CONFIDENTIAL
Reason: 1.4(B), 1.4(D) Declassify on: 08/07/2030
-~-------------
1.4(8)
1.4(0)
-----Original Message --From: Sullivan, Jacob 
To:H
Sent: Sat Aug 19:18:04 2010
Subject: Re: Message from
----- Original Message ---From: 
To: Sullivan, Jacob
Sent: Sat Aug 19:13:39 2010
Subject: Re: Message from
---
--~
-----Original Message --From: Sullivan, Jacob 
To:H
Sent: Sat Aug 19:11:01 2010
Subject: Re: Message from
-----Original Message ---From: 
To: Sullivan, Jacob
Sent: Sat Aug 19:02:28 2010
Subject: Re: Message from
UNCLASSIFIED U.S Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05770349 Date 11/30/2015
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document 10-1 Filed 07/28/17 Page
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05770349 Date: 11/30/2015
1.4(0)
----- Original Message ----From: Sullivan, Jacob 
To:H
Sent: Sat Aug 18:28:06 2010
Subject: Fw: Message from
Dennis reaction:
1.4(8)
1.4(0)
-----Original Message ---From: Sullivan, Jacob
To: 
Sent: Sat Aug 0715:54:47 2010
Subject: FW: Message from
-----Original Message---From: Walles, Jacob
Sent: Saturday, August 07, 2010 3:49
To: georg~ ,Hale, David Rudman, Mara; Feltman, Jeffrey Sullivan, JacobJ;
Daniel_B._Shapiro Prem_G._Kuma~
!Rubinstein, Daniel
Subject: Message from
1.4(8)
1.4(0)
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05770349 Date: 11/30/2015
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document 10-1 Filed 07/28/17 Page
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05776002 Date: 09/30/2015
Classified DAS, A/GIS, DoS 08/27/2015 Clas~
CONFIDENTIAL Reason: 1.4(8), 1.4(D) Declassify on:
12/07/2025
IFrom: 
Tuesday, December 2010 2:22
millscd@state.gov
Re: Draft Embassy Statement
Sent:
To:
Subject
Did
RELEASE PART
1.4(8),81,85,1.4(D ,86
each you about this?
----- Original Message --From: Mills, Cheryl 
To: Laszczych, Joanne 
Cc:
Sent: Tue Dec 13:28:01 2010
Subject: Fw: Draft Embassy Statement
Print this traffic for HRC
From: Mills, Cheryl
To: Adams, Thomas Merten, Kenneth Lindwall, David
Cc: Mcdonald, Kara Laszczych, Joanne; Reynoso, Julissa; Mills, Cheryl
Sent: Tue Dec 13:24:21 2010
Subject: Re: Draft Embassy Statement
c=---~---
Can call 4pm
From: Adams, Thomas
To: Merten, Kenneth Mills, Cheryl Lindwall, David
Cc: Mcdonald, Kara
Sent: Tue Dec 13:20:13 2010
Subject: FW: Draft Embassy Statement
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc C05776002 Date 09/30/2015
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document 10-1 Filed 07/28/17 Page
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05776002 Date 09/30/2015
Dan should back from the oval office credentialing ceremony around and would good conference
call then all this.
1.4(8)
1.4(0)
that the observation the tabulation center did not show
1.4(8)
1.4(0) hat possible. tabulation processJ
1.4(8)
1.4(0)
1.4(8)
1.4(0) are reaching out Luis Vassy the French Embassy here, who their man Haiti matters, get his help
connecting with senior officials Paris. They have not answered any our direct messages.
Thats for now.
Tom
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05776002 Date 09/30/2015
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document 10-1 Filed 07/28/17 Page
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05776002 Date: 09/30/2015
SBU
This email UNCLASSIFIED.
From: Adams, Thomas
Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2010 12:39 Dan Restrepo
Cc:
~----
86.
Subject: Draft Embassy Statement
SBU
This email UNCLASSIFIED.
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05776002 Date: 09/30/2015
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document 10-1 Filed 07/28/17 Page
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780514 Date: 02/26/2016
Classified DAS, A/GIS, Dos 02/26/2016 Clas
CONFIDENTIAL- Reason: 1.4(8), 1.4(D) Declassify
on: 04/07/2026
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
RELEASE PART
1.4(8),811.4(D),86
Sullivan, Jacob 
Friday, April 2011 12:58
Fw: Quartet Call
Fyi
r==~=~-;__ __,,__=------=-~! Sulllvan, Jacob Abedln, Huma; Walles, Jacob; Shapiro, Daniel
Ross, Oennls
Pascal, Alexander 5achar, Alon
IPA); Rudman, Mara; tman, Jeffrey Sutphin, Paul
~hw __-_n a-:~- -;...,-u ..,,.. __a rtz n-:B --- P-__,G. Helf, Frederlt Wells, Alice
Subject: Quartet call
~-----------.---- just finished minute envoys call. Theywere obviously disappointed, the end that there would meeting Berlin but,
worried that were losing time prior the September
~~____i I___, ,,__e
assured that recognized the need move forward before
September and indicated were not opposed inprinciple putting forth
principles, but would only consider doing knew would move forward, which was not the case today.
hu_~_s. iane_
1.4(8)
1.4(0)
1.4(8)
1.4(0) countere_ hat and said would continue
proceed, but that also felt shouldat this
stage all have bilateral meetings with the parties and plan together envoys early May. agreed could continue look
paper, but that could discuss only face-to-face, not electronically, 1.4(8)1
giv~n the sensitivities.
They agreed.
1.4(0) i~~~t~h _s__,we a_...,--:-a
~----- also agreed the need for guidance for public line that could each
use needed. Julia will circulate precise text for clearance but
essentially proposed the following: are committed working
advance Middle East, and the need more urgent than ever; the envoys
met with the parties April with this objective mind; the will
continue these discussions the envoy level; more time needed for
those consultations the way forward before scheduling the next
Principals level meeting.
David
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05780514 Date: 02/26/2016
Case 1:17-cv-00508-CKK Document 10-1 Filed 07/28/17 Page
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05951358 Date: 02/29/2016
RELEASE PART
B1,1.4(B),1.4(C),1.4(0 ,,85,86
Huma 
~rom:
Abedin,
Sent:
Saturday, July 04, 2009 7:42
To;
Subje,,.1:
Fw: Follow Up; Summary 1.0SS EDT ~PRK Confet rice Cerger, Laura
~nt.: sat Jut 02:03:32 ioo9
S~bje