CNN Sues FBI For Comey Memo's Citing FOIA

originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: burntheships

Is CNN acting on behalf of Lynch, or Comey, or Clinton?

That right there is the proverbial $64,000 question. I'm leaning towards Lynch.

Right, and this would lean toward's Clinton too it seems?
Since Lynch was working on Clinton's behalf...

originally posted by: bluesjr
Vlad: "Hello Mr. Comey, have you met Mr. Snowden?"

Well, Putin did reportedly publicly offer Comey political asylum...should he need it.

originally posted by: burntheships

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

I wonder why the FBI hasn't responded to their FOIA request though. I am sure they could come up with a reason or two -- legitimate or not. It would at least cause CNN to have to come up with a legal argument. NOT ANSWERING the request, at all, doesn't.

Interesting in all its perspective.

It could be that just with an answer they will be revealing whether
or not Comey's memos exist, if they exist if they are FBI property?

No, they can answer that the request is not denied or granted because they cannot confirm or deny the existence of the memos.

Glomar Response to FOIA

That's why I think this non-response is so weird. It makes it easy for CNN to appeal and probably win (or at least confirm or deny the memos exist).

A Glomar response or a denial would make things so much more difficult and time-consuming for CNN and the appeals process.

a reply to: burntheships

This is not a good thing, and CNN have not authority to request those memos if they are classified

The only reason they want the memos is to parade them on national TV to show that Trump obstructed justice and keep feeding the violent anti Trump resistance, they probably will interpret them the way that will bring more ratings.

They are full of crap, they want news to keep feeding the hungry liberal masses.

a reply to: MotherMayEye

Interesting!

I guess we will have to wait and see.

As I recall Comey never turned over the memo's
to the FBI. He gave them to a friend, and then
a portion to Mueller?

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

originally posted by: usernameconspiracy
I question the accuracy of this. As someone who has to deal with FOIA from time to time, there has not been enough time for CNN to have filed a FOIA request, had said request denied, filed an appeal, had that denied, and filed suit. IF CC has filed a FOIA request, I would question whether it had even been addressed yet.

My first thoughts, too. But this is based on the fact that FBI hasn't even responded!

Not responding, at all, though? It's eyebrow raising. I feel something is being set-up.

Could you further expound on this?Thank you.

originally posted by: buckwhizzle

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

originally posted by: usernameconspiracy
I question the accuracy of this. As someone who has to deal with FOIA from time to time, there has not been enough time for CNN to have filed a FOIA request, had said request denied, filed an appeal, had that denied, and filed suit. IF CC has filed a FOIA request, I would question whether it had even been addressed yet.

My first thoughts, too. But this is based on the fact that FBI hasn't even responded!

Not responding, at all, though? It's eyebrow raising. I feel something is being set-up.

Could you further expound on this?Thank you.

It was in the Variety link from the OP:

In a lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court in Washington on Thursday, CNN claims that despite the filing of a Freedom of Information Act request, the FBI has yet to make them available or give reason for not doing so.

The FBI should have responded within 20 days to CNN's FOIA request. By not responding, either way, they left themselves open to an immediate appeal.

Had they given them any legal exemption to withhold the records, then CNN would have had to exhaust some administrative appeals processes, first, before filing suit. And their attorneys would have to argue against that exemption.

By not responding, either way, they truncated the FOIA process and CNN is able to take it directly to a court. Or so that is my understanding of the FOIA and the facts, at issue here.

So, I find that odd. This has the appearance of *bureaucratic red tape,* but it's not considering CNN can get right to a Court appeal.

a reply to: MotherMayEye

Right, not only can CNN file an immediate appeal, they can get the government to reimburse the costs of doing so.

The court may award reasonable attorney fees and other litigation costs against the government when the complainant substantially prevails. See 5 U.S.C. Sec. 552(a)(4)(E).

Action Against Individual Employees: Sanctions may be taken against individual agency employees who are found to have acted arbitrarily or capriciously in improperly withholding records. Additionally, the court must award attorney fees and other litigation costs against the government.

When the statutory requirements are found by the Court to have been met, the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) must promptly initiate a proceeding to determine whether disciplinary action is warranted against the office or employee who is primarily responsible for the withholding. The MSPB, after investigating and considering the evidence, submits its findings and recommendations to the agency concerned which then is required to take the corrective action recommended by the Board. See 5 U.S.C. Sec. 552(a)(4)(F). Additionally, there now exists independent jurisdiction for such MSPB investigations under 5 U.S.C. Sec. 1206(e)(1) (1982).

Failure to comply with a court order to produce the records in question may also result in punishment for contempt for the responsible employee. See 5 U.S.C. Sec. 552(a)(4)(G).

137. Sanctions for Violating FOIA

The FBI's handling of something so simple really raises some interesting questions.

a reply to: marg6043

Agreed.

No doubt the purpose behind this is against
Trump. It will be very interesting to see what
happens. My personal opinion is if the Comey
memo's did exist they were FBI property.

a reply to: burntheships

Right, and this would lean toward's Clinton too it seems?

Only to the extent that protecting Clinton also protects Obama.

Since Lynch was working on Clinton's behalf...

No, not really, if at all. Lynch was working on Obama's behalf. Clinton had left the State Department long before Lynch replaced Holder at the DOJ. Lynch answered to Obama -- no one else. So whatever she did was for Obama's benefit, and her own I suppose. So whatever she seemingly did for Clinton, it was only because it also benefited Obama. As did Clinton, for that matter. All of this stems from Clinton's time working for Obama. Clinton did nothing on her own.

For example, remember Obama first claiming he didn't know about Hillary using a private server, then it came out that he not only knew, but that he had used that private email addy for official correspondence... much of which has been withheld from public scrutiny:

State Dept. Withholding 18 Emails Between Hillary, Obama

The State Department is withholding 18 emails between former Sec. of State Hillary Clinton and President Obama, agency spokesman John Kirby said Friday.

The news comes at the same time that the State Department announced that 22 of Clinton’s emails contain “top secret” information. That’s a far higher number than had previously been disclosed. The agency’s Freedom of Information Act department is withholding seven email chains in full in order to protect the highly classified information.

There's far more to this than "Hillary! Hillary! Hillary!"

originally posted by: jadedANDcynical

The FBI's handling of something so simple really raises some interesting questions.

If I made a FOIA request and got no response..I'd practically be helpless because I cannot cover litigation costs. CNN can and the FBI knows it. A non-answer just speeds up the process of a Court appeal.

When CNN sent their FOIA request, the FBI could have:

1.) Granted their request and released the memos;
2.) Denied their request and cited one or more legal exemptions under the FOIA. CNN would have to build a legal argument against their denial and exhausted an administrative appeals process before going to Court;
3.) Given a Glomar response: "We don't deny or grant the request because we cannot confirm or deny the existence of the records." Again, CNN would have to build a legal argument against that response and that would take time. Also, they would have had to exhaust an administrative appeals process before going to Court;
4.) NOT RESPONDED AT ALL. And that would be in violation of the FOIA and open the FBI up for an immediate Court appeals process.(Why did the FBI go this route?);

AND, LASTLY

5.) The FBI could have responded that they DO NOT MAINTAIN THE RECORDS (MEMOS) REQUESTED. If Comey took them with him when he left and didn't leave any copies with the FBI, they could respond this way. OR, if they never existed, at all, they could respond this way. Why? Because Comey already said the memos exist. If they don't, the FBI can legally admit they do not exist because the public has the right to confirm whether they exist or not.

Information, which has already been made public, is no longer protected by privacy laws. You cannot unring a bell. And that is also why I don't think a Glomar response would hold up in Court -- but it would at least force CNN to have to put up some legal argument.

The FBI knows ALL OF THE ABOVE. They have paved the way for CNN to run to the courts for an appeal.

I think it's suspicious and certainly worth paying attention to.

***

So kudos, OP, for bringing it to ATS.

a reply to: burntheships

the left is pissed at comey for not playing along earlier in the game, this is their revenge for that

Wait how can you do a FOIA request for personal property ? Didn't CNN it self try and spin that narrative ? Was Toobin not consulted ? LOL This could be very bad for Comey and a win for Trump.

originally posted by: WhereAreTheGoodguys
Wait how can you do a FOIA request for personal property ? Didn't CNN it self try and spin that narrative ? Was Tubbin not consulted ? LOL This could be very bad for Comey and a win for Trump.

If Comey wrote the alleged memos on-duty as FBI director, then they are FBI property.

a reply to: Boadicea

Good points on Obama. While we can hardly
dismiss Clinton and the pay for play,
seems more and more Obama knew
about her private server.

originally posted by: pryingopen3rdeye
a reply to: burntheships

the left is pissed at comey for not playing along earlier in the game, this is their revenge for that

Could be, interesting angle!

originally posted by: WhereAreTheGoodguys
Wait how can you do a FOIA request for personal property ? Didn't CNN it self try and spin that narrative ?

Question of the week!

Yep! They did spin it that way!

a reply to: MotherMayEye

News reports are popping up that Comey's friend
gave the so called "memo" back to the FBI.

This is starting to feel ultra strange.

a reply to: burntheships

ooooo...I do get a whiff of strangeness on all of this memo stuff...

DP

(Double post....

...not double penetration)