|Submitted||Feb. 15, 2017|
MuckRock users can file, duplicate, track, and share public records requests like this one. Learn more.
To Whom It May Concern:
This is a request under the Freedom of Information Act. I hereby request the following records:
Dear Sir or Madam,
I am a journalist working for the Center for Investigative Reporting (henceforth “CIR”), a nonprofit news organization. I am requesting records under the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act. 5 U.S.C.§ 552.
I am seeking all records concerning communications between this agency and the Government Accountability Institute (henceforth “GAI”) (www.g-a-i.org).
My request encompasses email messages and other forms of correspondence, in addition to records reflecting any contact this agency has had with GAI since its founding in 2012. Emails from GAI may come from, but are not limited to, email addresses on the @g-a-i.org domain. I would also like all communications containing the keyword “Government Accountability Institute.”
Please remove duplicate records and Google alerts from the results of this request.
GAI is a 501(c)(3) organization founded in 2012 by American novelist Peter Schwiezer and Stephen K. Bannon. Schwiezer, a former consult to the Office of Presidential Speechwriting at the White House, is the author of the book "Clinton Cash: The Untold Story of How Foreign Governments and Businesses made Bill and Hillary Rich". Bannon, the former chief executive of Breitbart News, is the current Chief Strategist to the President Donald Trump. He also holds a principal position on the president’s National Security Council (hereafter “NSC”).
Accordingly, I seek to understand the past and current relationship between the Government Accountability Institute and this agency.
CIR (revealnews.org) is both a nonprofit news organization, an online news organization, and the producer of a popular public radio show/podcast called Reveal. Under 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(A)(iii), I am entitled to a fee waiver on the grounds that disclosure of the information sought is in the public interest because it is likely to contribute significantly to public understanding of the operations or activities of the government and is not primarily in the commercial interest of the requester.
Regardless, CIR is willing to pay fees for this request up to $10 without prior approval. If you estimate that the fees will exceed this limit, please notify me first.
The subject of this request is of widespread and exceptional media interest and the information sought involves possible questions about the government's integrity, which affects public confidence. 28 C.F.R. § 16.5(d)(1)(iv). The release of these records will significantly contribute to the public understanding of how Mr. Bannon is advising the president on exigent matters of national security.
Due to ongoing concerns over Mr. Bannon’s role on the NSC, as well has his input on all policy coming out of the executive branch, any responsive records are of timely value. The requested documents are integral to a breaking news story and, therefore, any delay in the documents release would compromise a significant recognized interest.
CIR is an organization “primarily engaged in disseminating information.” Am. Civil Liberties Union v. Department of Justice, 321 F. Supp. 2d 24, 29 n.5 (D.D.C. 2004) (finding that CIR is a “representative of the news media” because it “gathers information of potential interest to a segment of the public, uses its editorial skills to turn the raw material into distinct work, and distributes that work to an audience.”)
The D.C. Circuit Court has stated that in determining whether there is an urgency to inform the public about government activity, and thus a compelling need to exigent disclosure, three factors are relevant: “(1) whether the request concerns a matter of current exigency to the American public; (2) whether the consequences of delaying a response would compromise a significant recognized interest; and (3) whether the request concerns federal government activity.” Al-Fayed v. CIA, 254 F.3d 306 (D.C. Cir. 2001) (“Al-Fayed”)
In Wadelton v. Department of State, 13-0412 ESH, 2013 WL 1760853 (D.D.C. Apr. 25, 2013), the District Court in the D.C. Circuit noted that “courts have found a ‘compelling need’ to exist when the subject matter of the request was central to a pressing issue of the day.”
Additionally, “compelling need” is defined by the first tier of 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(6)(E)(v) as information the delayed release of which “could reasonably be expected to pose an imminent threat to the life or physical safety of an individual.”
As it is the responsibility of NSC members to advise the president on the inclusion of U.S. citizens on so-called “kill or capture lists,” Mr. Bannon is a unique position to advise and persuade the president of the United States to authorize lethal force against Americans overseas. — See: Hosenball, Mark. (2011, Oct 5). Reuters. Secret panel can put Americans on ‘kill list’. Retrieved from: http://reut.rs/2jLLavO.
Due to the reasons I have described, I believe this matter is at the very heart of the “urgency to inform the public concerning actual or alleged Federal Government activity" standard. U.S.C. § 552(a)(6)(E)(v)(II); See also: Al-Fayed at 306.
Other supporting news articles:
U.S. Congresswoman Stephanie Murphy (D-Florida) has introduced legislation (H.R. 804) which would bar the president of the United States from appointing aides who primarily serve a political role as a principal member of the National Security Council. — Rep. Sires, Albio. (2017, Feb. 8). New Jersey Online. Bannon's appointment to National Security Council is reckless. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/2lzkRKE.
“President Trump was reportedly not fully briefed on the executive order he signed that allowed his chief strategist Steve Bannon a seat at the meetings of the country’s top national security efforts.” — Associated Press contributed. (2017, Feb. 6). Fox News. Report: Trump not fully briefed on exec order that gave Bannon seat at NSC meetings. Retrieved from http://fxn.ws/2leKI9B.
“Putting aside for a moment Mr. Bannon’s troubling public positions, which are worrisome enough, institutionalizing his attendance threatens to politicize national security decision making.” — Mullen, Michael G. (2017, Feb. 6) The New York Times. I Was on the National Security Council. Bannon Doesn't Belong There. Retrieved from http://nyti.ms/2lsHL9B.
I expect a response to my request for expedited processing within 10 calendar days, as the statute requires.
The above information is true and correct to the best of my knowledge.
Please furnish all responsive records in electronic format.
All correspondence regarding this request can be directed to me at email@example.com.
Please be aware that under 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(6)(A), a FOIA request is considered constructively denied after twenty business days and is subject to an appeal on that basis. If my request is denied in whole or part, I ask that you justify all deletions by reference to specific exemptions of the act. As the law requires, I will also expect you to release all segregable portions of otherwise exempt exempt material.
I reserve the right to appeal your decision to withhold any information or to deny a waiver of fees.
If you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact me at (415) 786-0793.
Thank you for your prompt attention to this request.
The requested documents will be made available to the general public, and this request is not being made for commercial purposes.
In the event that there are fees, I would be grateful if you would inform me of the total charges in advance of fulfilling my request. I would prefer the request filled electronically, by e-mail attachment if available or CD-ROM if not.
Thank you in advance for your anticipated cooperation in this matter. I look forward to receiving your response to this request within 20 business days, as the statute requires.
To Whom It May Concern:
I wanted to follow up on the following Freedom of Information request, copied below, and originally submitted on Feb. 15, 2017. Please let me know when I can expect to receive a response, or if further clarification is needed.
Thanks for your help, and let me know if further clarification is needed.
Hello Mr. Sankin
In our clarification letter to you dated February 21, 2017, we requested the information below:
In accordance with our Regulation 14 CFR § 1206.300 (a), a requester submitting a request
for records must include his/her name and mailing address, a description of the record(s)
sought and must address fees or provide justification for a fee waiver as written in sections
14 CFR §1206.302 and 14 CFR §1206.507 of NASA’s FOIA Regulation. It is also helpful to
provide a telephone number and email address in case the FOIA office needs to contact you
regarding your request; however, this information is optional when submitting a written
request. If a requester chooses to submit a request online via the NASA FOIA Web site, the
required information must be completed.
In accordance with our Agency filing systems, NASA does not file documents or emails
based on the broad description you have provided. Please be advised, NASA need not
comply with a blanket or categorical request (such as “i.e. GAI.”) where it is not reasonably
feasible to determine what specific record you are seeking. In order to process your request,
we will need you to identify which individuals you believe may have the responsive records
or emails. Please be advised that we are unable to make a determination regarding your
request for expedited processing and the new media category until you provide the additional
clarification requested. You may locate the NASA FOIA regulations at
Please be advised, you must provide the specific subject of the records you are requesting and your personal mailing address as requested. If we do not receive your response on Monday March 20, your request will be closed.
Please feel free to contact Ms. Miriam Brown-Lam at firstname.lastname@example.org<mailto:email@example.com> or 202-358-0718.
There are no files associated with this request.