1

Charles Robert

441 B. West Broadway

Long Beach, New York 11561

516-889-2251

Overnight Mail February 7, 2014

FBI Chief FOIA Officer David M. Hardy

Record/Information Dissemination Section

170 Marcel Drive

Winchester, VA 22602-4843

Re: FOIA request No. 1151829-000

1) FBI Abshire documents-third request

2) FBI copy of joint FBI-DOJ-HHS “IMC Final Investigative Report”

3) FBI copy of February 25, 1987 “Perot” documents

4) FBI copy of Robert v National Archives “FBI Agent Allison” documents

5) FBI unredacted copy of Robert v DOJ “62-0 file” documents

6) FBI Robert III v DOJ “Recarey extradition” documents

7) FBI Robert VII v DOJ “FISC Robert” documents

8) FBI Charles Robert documents including NSLs sent to banks and ISP

Dear FBI Chief FOIA Officer Hardy:

The July 27, 2010 and September 13, 2011 FBI FOIA requester hereby files a de novo

FBI FOIA request for the same eight sets of FBI documents that had been docketed as FOIA

request No. 1151829-000. Please include as background information in this de novo FBI FOIA

request Record, the enclosed 44 page February 22, 2012 “White Paper (WP) in support NARA

Office of Government Information Services (OGIS) Director Miriam Nesbit take jurisdiction of

the request for facilitation services re the September 13, 2013 FOIA requested FBI documents.”

The 2-22-12 OGIS FBI WP is posted at http://snowflake5391.net/2_22_12_OGIS_FBI_WP.pdf

Please provide a 2014 FBI FOIA request docket number or an acknowledgment of receipt

Notification within 20 days by e-mail (charrobert@aol.com). If the de novo February 6, 2014

FBI FOIA requester does not receive a docket number or an acknowledgement letter by February

28, 2014, then this FBI FOIA request will be ripe for the Robert VIII v DOJ, HHS, and SSA,

439 Fed. Appx 32 (2d Cir. 2011), cert. den. 132 S. Ct. 1549 (2012), plaintiff to file Motion with

Judge Garaufis for a pre-clearance Order to file a putative FOIA complaint seeking the release of

these FBI documents. See 2-22-12 OGIS FBI WP §§ A, B, M-T and §§ F-H below.

Out of courtesy and respect for FBI General Counsel James Baker and FBI Director

James Comey, please also include the Record enclosed February 7, 2014 complaint filed with

DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz and supporting 2-7-14 “White Paper Re: Complaint

against OIP Director Melanie Pustay for “defrauding” President Obama by failing to docket and

process a December 3, 2014 expedited FOIA request for two classified OLC Memos that affect

the President’s 2014 NSA TSP reforms.” The December 3, 2014 FOIA requested May 24, 1984

“OLC Olson FISA Memo” and March 18, 2011 reclassified May 6, 2004 “OLC Goldsmith FISA

Memos” are connect-the-dots documents to February 7, 2014 FOIA requested FBI documents.

2

As explained in §§ M-T of the 2-22-12 OGIS FBI WP, the eight sets of July 27, 2010

FBI FOIA requested documents are also connect-the-dots documents with the four one page CIA

classified 1985 “North Notebook” documents that remain the subject of the Robert II v CIA and

DOJ plaintiff’s renewed quiet settlement offer. Therefore, FBI Chief FOIA Officer Hardy

should be consulting with FBI General Counsel Baker as to whether the eight sets of FOIA

requested FBI documents are connect-the-dots documents with the Robert II v CIA and DOJ

“North Notebook” documents. FBI General Counsel Baker can also advise whether the May 24,

1984 “OLC Olson FISA Memo” and the March 18, 2011 reclassified May 6, 2004 “OLC

Goldsmith FISA Memo” are connect-the-dots documents with the de novo FOIA requested FBI

documents. See 2-22-12 OGIS FBI WP §§ U-Y and 12-3-13 OLC FOIA WP §§ L, W which is

posted at http://snowflake5391.net/12_3_13_FISA_MEMOS.pdf

FBI General Counsel Baker knows whether these are connect-the-dots documents

because in Robert VII v DOJ, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 39616, 193 Fed. Appx. 8 (2d Cir. 2006),

cert. den. 127 S.Ct. 1133 (2007), his October 1, 2004 Robert VII v DOJ “corrected” Declaration

informed Judge Garaufis why on March 1, 2004 he had ratified CIA Director Tenet’s CIA FOIA

Officer’s decision to use FOIA exemption 1 and the “Glomar Response” defense to withhold the

1980s “FISC Robert” documents. http://www.snowflake5391.net/baker.pdf. FBI General

Counsel Baker knows whether on March 10, 2004 at the infamous confrontation with then-WH

Counsel Gonzales, then-DAG Comey (2003-2005) knew of the May 24, 1984 Top Secret OLC

Memo Constitutionality of Certain National Security Agency Electronic Surveillance Activities

Not Covered Under the Foreign Surveillance Act of 1979, and the existence of the 1982-2004

E.O 12333 Top Secret “FISA exempt” NSA TSP “haystacks” data banks. See § H below.

If FBI General Counsel Baker advises FBI Chief FOIA Officer Hardy that the de novo

February 6, 2014 FOIA requested FBI documents are connect-the-dots documents with the 1985

Robert II v CIA and DOJ “North Notebook” documents, and the December 3, 2013 OLC FOIA

requested May 24, 1984 “OLC Olson FISA Memo” and March 18, 2011 reclassified May 6, 2004

“OLC Goldsmith FISA Memo” documents, then he may recommend that FBI Director Comey

prepare a “heads up” memo for Robert II v CIA and DOJ co-defendants CIA Director Brennan

and AG Holder to consider the Robert II v CIA and DOJ quiet settlement offer. See § G below.

FBI Director Comey’s 2003-2005 knowledge of the existence of the 1982-2005 E.O.

12333 Top Secret “FISA exempt” NSA TSP “haystacks” data banks, has been made more timely

by President Obama’s January 17, 2014 instruction to AG Holder to “work with” the intelligence

community” and provide the President with a recommendation re the metadata storage of the

NSA ”haystacks” data banks prior to March 28, 2014 when the NSA TSP is to subject to a

reauthorization FISC Order. “They will report back to me with options for alternative approaches

before the program comes up for reauthorization on March 28, 2014.” Id. p. 7. Emphasis added.

http://www.politico.com/story/2014/01/barack-obama-nsa-speech-transcript-102315.html

FBI Director Comey has a 2014 duty to make a recommendation to AG Holder as to the

storage of the 1982-2014 E.O. 12333 Top Secret “FISA exempt” NSA TSP “haystacks” NSA

TSP data banks that have never been subject to any Article III FISC Order. Hence, the FOIA

request for an expedited decision by FBI Chief FOIA Officer Hardy. There should be no question

of fact of AG Holder “defrauding” President Obama re the existence of the pre-9/11 E.O. 12333

Top Secret “FISA exempt” NSA TSP “haystacks” data banks. See § C below.

3

A. Request for an expedited FBI FOIA decision

The Robert v Holz-Robert VII v DOJ-Robert VIII v DOJ, HHS, and SSA-Robert II CIA

and DOJ de novo FBI FOIA requester requests an expedited FOIA decision in order to eliminate

any possibility that FBI Director Comey does not know of the existence of the 1982-2004 E.O.

12333 Top Secret “FISA exempt” NSA TSP “haystacks” NSA TSP data banks that have never

been subject to any Article III FISC Order. The de novo FBI FOIA requested # “7) FBI Robert

VII v DOJ “FISC Robert” documents contain “smoking gun” evidence that FBI Director Judge

Webster knew that the 1985 Robert v Holz plaintiff was the target of the E.O. 12333 Top Secret

“FISA exempt” NSA TSP “haystacks” NSA TSP during the 1984-1987 joint CIA-DIA-FBI-

DOJ-HHS “Fraud Against the Government” investigation of Robert. FBI Director Comey

should know these 1980s facts, when he makes his March, 2014 recommendation to AG Holder

re the storage of the 1982-2004 E.O. 12333 “FISA exempt” “haystacks” NSA TSP data banks

that are now under the command and control of DOD Cyber Commander-NSA Director General

Alexander (2005) and not subject to any FISC Order. See 10-3-13 Comments §§ A-C.

On January 17, 2014, President Obama recognized the potential for abuse when the NSA

conducts surveillance of U.S. citizens and controls the data from that surveillance. The President

highlighted the fact that trust in the good faith of government employees is not enough. It is the

law that is necessary to “constrain those in power:”

But all of us understand that the standards for government surveillance

must be higher. Given the unique power of the state, it is not enough for

leaders to say: trust us, we won’t abuse the data we collect. For history has

too many examples when that trust has been breached. Our system of

government is built on the premise that our liberty cannot depend on the

good intentions of those in power; it depends upon the law to constrain

those in power. Id. 5. Emphasis added.

On January 17, 2014, President Obama reaffirmed his belief that the NSA has never been

“cavalier about the civil liberties” of U.S. citizens. This statement reveals that President Obama

does not know about the 1982-2014 E.O. 12333 Top Secret “FISA exempt” NSA TSP:

What I did not do is stop these programs wholesale – not only because I

felt that they made us more secure; but also because nothing in that initial

review, and nothing that I have learned since, indicated that our

intelligence community has sought to violate the law or is cavalier about

the civil liberties of their fellow citizens.” Id 3. Emphasis added.

. On December 20, 2013, at his end of the year Press Conference, President Obama

commented on the Review Group Recommendations to reform the NSA TSP. President Obama

stated his understanding that the NSA never acted “inappropriately” re the use of a U.S. citizen’s

NSA TSP “haystacks” data. “And I think it's important to note that in all the reviews of this

program that have been done, in fact, there have not been actual instances where it's been alleged

that the NSA in some ways acted inappropriately in the use of this data.” Emphasis added.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/running-transcript-president-obamas-december-20-

news-conference/2013/12/20/1e4b82e2-69a6-11e3-8b5b-a77187b716a3_story.html

4

The de novo FBI FOIA requests asserts that an expedited decision is needed in order that

FBI Director Comey can read the # “7 “FBI Robert VII v DOJ “FISC Robert” and # 8 “FBI

Charles Robert documents including NSLs sent to banks and ISP” to determine for himself

whether these are concrete facts that prove that the intelligence community had in fact been

“cavalier about the civil liberties” of a U.S. citizen. If FBI Director Judge Comey reads the

2010-2013 FBI FOIA No. 1151829-000 FBI case file notes and e-mails for Robert’s July 10,

2010 and September 13, 2011 FBI FOIA requests, then he will learn whether the FBI, as an

intelligence community member, has been “cavalier about the civil liberties” of a U.S. citizen.

See 2-22-12 NARA WP §§ L,S,T, 10-3-13 Review Comments §§ A,R,S, and §§ G, H below.

The de novo FBI FOIA requests asserts that an expedited decision is needed so that after

FBI Director Comey reads the # 7 and # 8 de novo FOIA requested FBI documents, he has time in

March, 2014 to review the 1985-2014 Robert v Holz, Robert v National Archives, 1 Fed. Appx.

85 (2d Cir. 2001), Robert v DOJ, 2001 WL 34077473 (EDNY), 26 Fed. Appx. 87 (2d Cir.

2002), Robert VII v DOJ, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 39616, 193 Fed. Appx. 8 (2d Cir. 2006), cert.

den. 127 S.Ct. 1133 (2007), Robert VIII v DOJ, HHS, and SSA, 439 Fed. Appx 32 (2d Cir.

2011), cert. den. 132 S. Ct. 1549 (2012), and Robert II v CIA and DOJ case file notes and e-

mails. These DOJ documents reveal whether DOJ attorneys had concluded that the 1985 Robert v

Holz FOIA plaintiff’s almost incredible allegation is true: the post-1982 NSA Directors have

conducted the E.O. 12333 Top Secret “FISA exempt” NSA TSP without the knowledge of the

Article I Intelligence Committees or the Article II Presidents Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush, and

Obama, or the Article III FISC and the Supreme Court. See 11-30-11 Robert VIII Petition

Statement of the Case §§ A-C, E, H. http://snowflake5391.net/Robert8vDOJpetition1.pdf

An expedited FBI FOIA decision will also provide FBI Director Comey with the time

prior to the March 28, 2014 FISC deadline, to perform a due diligence review of the March 18,

2011 reclassified May 6, 2004 “OLC Goldsmith FISA Memo” and learn facts re warrantless

domestic content data mining of the E.O. 12333 “FISA exempt” NSA TSP “haystacks” data

banks not known when DAG Comey resigned in August, 2005. He will learn what 2013 FBI

Director Comey’s Chief of Staff and Senior Counselor Chuck Rosenberg knew and when he

knew it as 2002-2003 Counsel to FBI Director Mueller, as 2003-2004 Counselor to AG

Ashcroft, and as 2004-2005 Chief of staff to DAG Comey. See 12-3-13 OLC WP §§ M-Y.

The de novo FBI FOIA requester asserts that the FBI FOIA requested # 7 “FBI Robert

VII v DOJ “FISC Robert” and the # 8 “FBI Charles Robert documents including NSLs sent to

banks and ISP” documents, along with the connect-the-dots 2010-2014 FBI FOIA case file notes

and e-mails, contain “smoking gun” evidence as to whether FBI Director Judge Webster knew

in 1985 and FBI Director Mueller knew in 2004 of the warrantless domestic content data

mining of the 1982-2004 E.O. 12333 Top Secret “FISA exempt” NSA TSP “haystacks” data

banks without any FISC Court Orders. If so, then President Obama should know these time line

FBI Director mens rea facts, when the decision is made as to the storage of the 1982-2004 E.O.

12333 Top Secret “FISA exempt” NSA TSP “haystacks” data banks which, upon information

and belief, have already been transferred into the NSA Utah Data Center. See 2-22-12 OGIS FBI

WP §§ S, T, 12-3-13 OLC FOIA WP §§ K, L, M and 2-7-14 IG Horowitz WP §§ I-L.

Therefore, please advise in the docket or acknowledgment letter whether an expedited

decision will be considered. If there is no Robert II v CIA and DOJ quiet settlement, then your

response will be provided to Judge Seybert in the first week of March, 2014. See § G below.

5

B. A request for the waiver of FOIA fees in the public interest

The de novo FBI FOIA requester requests a waiver of fees. There is a 1982-2014 “Past is

Prologue” public interest in the public knowing the 1980s FBI facts known by FBI Director

Judge Webster (1978-1987) and his FBI Director successors as to the existence of a 1982-2004

E.O. 12333 Top Secret “FISA exempt” NSA TSP “haystacks” data banks. This is a timely issue

because President Obama has instructed AG Holder to consult with the intelligence community,

that includes FBI Director Comey, and make recommendations by March 28, 2014 re the storage

of NSA TSP data banks. This includes the storage of 1982-2004 NSA TSP “haystacks” data

banks that have never been subject to a FISC Order. See 2-7-14 IG Horowitz WP § N.

On April 2, 1987, AAG of the Office of Legal Policy (OLC) Stephen Markman explained

the DOJ FOIA fee waiver policy:

The FOIA's new fee waiver standard, found at 5 U.S.C. §

552(a)(4)(A)(iii), more specifically defines the term "public interest" and

provides:

Documents shall be furnished without any charge or at a charge reduced

below the fees established under clause (ii) if disclosure of the information

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.

This new statutory fee waiver standard thus sets forth two basic

requirements, both of which must be satisfied before fees properly

assessable can be waived or reduced. First, it must be established that

"disclosure of the [requested] information is in the public interest because

it is likely to contribute significantly to public understanding of the

operations or activities of the government." Second, it must be established

that "disclosure of the information . . . is not primarily in the commercial

interest of the requester."

Where these two statutory requirements are satisfied, based upon

information supplied by a requester or otherwise made known to an

agency, the waiver or reduction of a FOIA fee is compelled by the statute

and should be granted freely and promptly by the agency. Where one or

both of these requirements is not satisfied, a fee waiver is not warranted

under the statute. Emphasis added. 1987 FOIA Update, Vol. IIII, No. 1.

http://www.justice.gov/oip/foia_updates/Vol_VIII_1/viii1page2.htm

The requester asserts that the “commercial interest” standard does not apply. He

acknowledges that one of the reasons he seeks these FBI documents is to refer to the documents

in his putative Bivens action alleging that USG officials, including FBI Directors, have acted in

concert to violate his First Amendment right of access to the Courts as per the elements

explained in Christopher v. Harbury, 121 S. Ct. 2171 (2001). However, he asserts that there is a

public interest in the public, the Article I 535 Members of Congress, Article II President Obama,

and Article III FISC and Supreme Court, all knowing the FBI facts that reveal whether FBI

Directors knew of the data mining of the 1982-2004 E.O. “FISA exempt” NSA TSP banks.

6

C. The Article I reason for public interest waiver of fees

The FOIA requester asserts an Article I reason to release the documents because

“disclosure of the information is in the public interest because it is likely to contribute

significantly to public understanding of the operations or activities of the government.” He

asserts that the Congress should know whether the 1982-2014 FBI Directors have known of the

E.O. 12333 Top Secret “FISA exempt” NSA TSP and E.O.12333 Top Secret DIA-CIA domestic

“special activities” that were conducted at the NSA and IMC and took no action to investigate

these facts and advise their Presidents whether a § 413 (b) of the National Security Act

“corrective action” plan should be filed with the Congress. See 12-3-13 OLC WP §§ D-F.

The eight sets of documents and FBI FOIA case file notes and e-mails reveal whether the

1982-2014 FBI Directors knew of allegations of the serial violations of the following laws:

1. The Boland Amendment because FBI Director Judge Webster knew that unaudited HHS funds

were used to pay for medical supplies and treatment for the Contras.

2. § 413 (a) of the National Security Act of 1947 because none of the 1982-2013 AGs informed

the “Gang of Eight” of the E.O. 12333 “FISA exempt” NSA TSP.

3. The “exclusivity provision” of the FISA of 1978 because the E.O. 12333 “FISA Exempt” NSA

TSP has been conducted without the knowledge of the FISC.

4. The Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 because it has statutory limitations on domestic military law

enforcement by the military NSA Directors and DIA Directors.

5. The Social Security Act SSI program of 1972 which has the statutory requirement of a uniform

Federal standard equally applied to SSI recipients in all 50 states.

The de novo FOIA requested # 1 “FBI Abshire”, # 2 “FBI copy of joint FBI-DOJ-HHS

“IMC Final Investigative Report”, # 3 “FBI copy of February 25, 1987 “Perot”, # 4 “FBI copy

of Robert v National Archives “FBI Agent Allison”, # 5 “FBI unredacted copy of Robert v DOJ

“62-0 file”, and # 6 “FBI Robert III v DOJ “Recarey extradition” documents reveal violations of

the federal laws for reasons explained in the 2-22-12 OGIS FBI WP §§ M-R. The ## 1-6 are

connect the dots documents with the ## 7 and 8 documents because FBI Directors participated in

the E.O. 12333 Top Secret DIA-CIA domestic “special activities” both at IMC and the NSA.

The requester asserts that it is in the public interest for all 535 Members of Congress to

know that the 1982-2013 FBI Directors have not enforced federal laws whenever, without

Congressional Notification, the AG decides that a federal law is “unconstitutional” because it

encroaches upon the President’s Article II Commander in Chief “inherent authority” to take

whatever action is necessary to protect the nation from terrorists. He asserts that the eight sets of

de novo FOIA requested FBI documents, along with the 2010-2014 FBI FOIA case file notes and

e-mails, reveal that FBI Directors knew of the allegations of the violations of these five federal

laws and took no action to investigate these allegations. They adopted their AGs’ theory that

the President had Article II Commander in Chief “inherent authority” not to enforce laws that

the AG determined “encroached” on President’s duty to protect the nation from terrorists.

7

D. The Article II reason for public interest waiver of fees

The FOIA requester asserts an Article II reason to release the documents because

“disclosure of the information is in the public interest because it is likely to contribute

significantly to public understanding of the operations or activities of the government.” He

asserts that as to FBI FOIA documents ## 1-6, the public should know whether FBI Director

Judge Webster had “defrauded” President Reagan by withholding the fact that he had

approved the E.O. 12333 Top Secret DIA-CIA domestic “special activity” at IMC that was

conducted without the knowledge of President Reagan. See 2-2-12 OGIS FBI WP § C.

The FOIA requester asserts as to the Article II FBI FOIA documents ## 7, 8, the public

should know whether FBI Director Judge William Webster, (Acting) John Otto (1987), Judge

William Sessions (1987-1993), (Acting) Floyd Clarke (1993), Judge Louis Freeh (1993-2001),

(Acting) Thomas Pickard (2001), Robert Mueller (2001-2013), all approved NSA Directors

conducting warrantless domestic content data mining of the 1982-2004 E.O. 12333 Top Secret

“FISA exempt” NSA TSP “haystacks” data mines without FISC Orders and without the

knowledge of Presidents Reagan, Bush, Clinton, and Bush. This becomes a timely issue because

AG Holder will be recommending to President Obama where the 1982-2004 E.O. 12333 “FISA

exempt” NSA TSP “haystacks” data banks without FISC Orders, should be stored.

Another Article II public reason is the fact that 1982-2014 FBI Directors know the NSA

Directors applied the 1982-2014 “minimization” standards with redactions, when making

queries of the 1982-2014 NSA TSP “FISA exempt” NSA TSP data banks without FISC Orders.

Those Article II “minimization” standards include the following E.O. 12333 access guidelines:

1. President Reagan’s December 3, 1982 DOD Secretary Weinberger Mastercopy DOD 5240 1

R Procedures Governing the Activities of DOD Intelligence Components That Affect United

States Persons. See 10-3-13 Review Group Comments C.

2. President Clinton’s July 27, 1993 National Security Agency Central Security Service: United

States Signals Directive 18 Legal Compliance and Minimization Procedures Letter of

Promulgation Guidelines issued by NSA Director Vice Admiral McConnell who would become

Presidents Bush’s and Obama’s 2007-2009 DNI Mc Connell. See Review Comments § M.

3. President Bush’s December 16, 2008 FBI Domestic Investigations and Operations Guide

(DIOG) issued by AG Mukasey’s that is subject to Top Secret redacted changes. See § F below.

4. President Obama’s May 22, 2012 Guidelines of DNI Director Clapper, the 1991-1995 DIA

Director and the 2007-2010 DOD Under Secretary for Intelligence, and NCTC Director Olsen,

the 2010-2011 NSA General Counsel. See 12-3-13 OLC WP § X (6).

There is a public interest in applying the ever changing Article II 1982-2014

“minimization” standards to the ## 7 and 8 concrete FBI facts. The FBI Directors knew that

there was actual NSA data mining that was not a theoretical allegation as with the Clapper v

Amnesty plaintiffs. The public will understand how exponentially more powerful algorithms can

be used to “go back in time” and data mine E.O. 12333 NSA TSP “FISA exempt” data banks

that have never been subject to FISC Orders. See 2-22-12 NARA FBI WP §§ I-L.

8

E. The Article III reason for public interest waiver of fees

The FOIA requester asserts an Article III reason to release the documents because

“disclosure of the information is in the public interest because it is likely to contribute

significantly to public understanding of the operations or activities of the government.” He

asserts that the public should know that the Article III FISC Judges and the Supreme Court

Justices do not know the “FISA secret law” upon which the E.O. 12333 Top Secret “FISA

exempt” NSA TSP has been conducted from 1982-2014. This is a timely issue because AG

Holder’s March 28, 2014 FISC review certification should inform the FISC of President

Obama’s storage decision as to the 1982-2004 E.O. 12333 Top Secret “FISA exempt” NSA TSP

data banks never subject to FISC Orders. See 10-3-13 Review Group Comments § B.

On February 26, 2013, Justice Samuel Alito in Clapper v Amnesty, 568 U.S. ___ (2013),

noted in dicta that AG Holder contended the government could legally conduct “FISA exempt”

warrantless surveillance of U.S. citizens from an NSA TSP that was not subject to the FISC:

And, although we do not reach the question, the Government contends that

it can conduct FISA-exempt human and technical surveillance programs

that are governed by Executive Order 12333. See Exec. Order No. 12333,

§§1.4, 2.1–2.5, 3 CFR 202, 210–212 (1981), reprinted as amended, note

following 50 U. S. C. § 401, pp. 543, 547–548. Id. 14. Emphasis added.

Because of the June, 2013 Snowden leaks, the public now knows of the FISC Orders

beginning with the first July 15, 2004 metadata Order of FISC Chief Judge Colleen Kollare-

Kotelly. Upon information and belief,that decision was made without AG Ashcroft and FBI

Director Mueller informing the FISC Chief Judge of the Article II “FISA secret law” explained in

the May 24, 1984 Top Secret “OLC Olson FISA Memo” or the May 6, 2004 “OLC Goldsmith

FISA Memo.” See 12-3-13 OLC FOIA WP §§ A, B and 2-7-14 IG Horowitz WP § H (6).

If AG Ashcroft and FBI Director Mueller did not inform FISC Chief Judge Kollare-

Kotelly of the 1982-2004 “FISA secret law,” then this raises the Article III Marbury v Madison,

5 U.S. 137 (1803), issue that the Judiciary, not the Executive, determines what the law “is.”

It is emphatically the province and duty of the Judicial Department [the

judicial branch] to say what the law is. Those who apply the rule to

particular cases must, of necessity, expound and interpret that rule. If two

laws conflict with each other, the Courts must decide on the operation of

each.” Id. 177. Emphasis added.

It is in the public interest to know whether the 1982-2014 AGs and FBI Directors have

made Marbury v Madison “nonacquiescence” policy decisions whereby the Executive, not the

Judiciary, determined what the FISA law “is” as to the warrantless domestic content

surveillance of U.S. citizens. The # 7 “FBI Robert VII v DOJ “FISC Robert” documents along

with the connect-the-dots May 24, 1984 Top Secret “OLC Olson FISA Memo” and March 18,

2011 reclassified May 6, 2004 “OLC Goldsmith FISA Memo” reveal details of the Marbury v

Madison “nonacquiescence” policy that continues to conducted in 2014 without the knowledge

of the FISC. See 10-3-13 Review Comments § B and 12-3-13 OLC FOIA WP § O.

9

F. The public interest in FBI General Counsel Baker explaining the 2014 “FBI Vault”

Disclaimer that is applied to AG Mukasey’s October 1, 2008 FBI DIOG redacted changes

which provides an FBI digital trail back to the E.O. 12333 “FISA exempt” “minimization”

standards revealed in the 1980s #7 “FBI Robert VII v DOJ “FISC Robert” documents

The FOIA requester asserts a 1982-2014 FBI data bank storage reason to release the

documents because “disclosure of the information is in the public interest because it is likely to

contribute significantly to public understanding of the operations or activities of the

government.” He asserts that there is a public interest in FBI General Counsel Baker, the 1996-

2006 OIPR Counsel, explaining the 2014 FBI Vault Disclaimer that is applied to AG Mukasey’s

December 16, 2008 FBI DIOG redacted changes. This FBI website provides an FBI digital trail

back to the E.O. 12333 Top Secret “FISA exempt” FBI “minimization” standards revealed in the

1980s #7 “FBI Robert VII v DOJ “FISC Robert” documents. The public should know what

storage recommendations AG Holder will make re the FBI accessed “FISA exempt” data banks

given that the 1995-2001 “wall” between the FBI and the NSA E.O. 12333 Top Secret “FISA

exempt” NSA TSP data banks was eliminated in October, 2001. See 2-7-14 IG Horowitz § N.

The FBI had posted on its “The Vault” reading room FBI website its December 16, 2008

FBI Domestic Investigations and Operations Guide (DIOG), as it has been revised and updated.

As per a February 6, 2014 search, the last posting revision was made on November 7, 2011 of

FBI Director Mueller’s October 15, 2011 DIOG changes:

The FBI’s Domestic Investigations and Operations Guide (DIOG) was

revised and updated based on comments and feedback received since the

original DIOG was issued on December 16, 2008. This new version was

approved by Director Mueller on October 15, 2011. The changes primarily

clarify and enhance the definitions of terms and procedures used in the

original DIOG. Each change has been carefully looked at and considered

against the backdrop of the tools our employees need to accomplish their

mission, the possible risks associated with the use of those tools, and the

controls that are in place. The DIOG was first issued to help implement the

new Attorney General’s Guidelines for Domestic FBI Operations that were

issued earlier that year. Those guidelines had reconciled a number of

previously separate guidelines, the first of which had been issued in 1976.

A redacted version of this manual was released and posted to the FBI’s

FOIA website in early 2011 along with some training materials used in

briefing FBI personnel on Section 4 of that manual. The second edition of

the DIOG was released on October 15, 2011. A redacted version of this

revised edition was released on 11/07/2011 and posted to the FBI’s

electronic reading room, The Vault on 11/07/2011. Emphasis added.

http://vault.fbi.gov/FBI%20Domestic%20Investigations%20and%20Opera

tions%20Guide%20%28DIOG%29

An electronic Disclaimer attaches to FBI Director Mueller’s October 15, 2011 FBI

DIOG revisions of the AG Mukasey’s December 16, 2008 FBI DIOG. Upon information and

belief, the Disclaimer may be the result of the March 18, 2011 reclassified Top Secret May 6,

2004 “OLC Goldsmith FISA Memo” re the E.O.12333 Top Secret “FISA exempt” NSA TSP:

10

The FBI’s Reading Room contains many files of public interest and

historical value. In compliance with the National Archives and Records

Administration (NARA) requirements, some of these records are no longer

in the physical possession of the FBI, eliminating the FBI’s capability to

re-review and/or reprocess the material. Please note that the information

found in these files may no longer reflect the current beliefs, positions,

opinions, or policies, currently held by the FBI. Emphasis added.

There is a public interest in knowing whether there are FBI DIOG Guidelines that are not

in the custody of FBI Director Comey because they relate to the access to the 1982 E.O. 12333

Top Secret “FISA exempt” NSA TSP data banks that have never been subject to FISC Orders.

The #7 “FBI Robert VII v DOJ “FISC Robert” documents provide concrete FBI facts to apply

the FBI Guidelines that would be applied to 2014 retroactive content searches of those 1980s

FBI “haystacks” stored data banks. Because of the NSA TSP data banks storage issue, FBI

General Counsel Baker, who on March 1, 2004 reviewed the #7 “FBI Robert VII v DOJ “FISC

Robert” documents, can explain not only the FBI Guidelines that were applied in the search for

Robert data in the 1982-1987 E.O. 12333 Top Secret “FISA exempt” NSA TSP data banks, but

the whereabouts of those NSA data banks that were never subject to FISC Orders, but may be the

subject of March, 2014 storage decisions of AG Holder and the Intelligence Community.

FBI General Counsel Baker knows that on May 1, 2003, FBI Director Mueller established

the FBI Office of Intelligence and made 1999-2005 NSA Director General Hayden’s former

Chief of Signals Intelligence Maureen Baginski its first FBI Director. FBI General Counsel Baker

knows whether Director Baginski adopted as the FBI “minimization” standards to access 1982-

2003 E.O. 12333 Top Secret “FISA exempt” NSA TSP “haystacks” data banks, the July 27,

1993 National Security Agency Central Security Service: United States Signals Directive 18

Legal Compliance and Minimization Procedures Letter of Promulgation Guidelines. See 2-22-12

OGIS FBI WP §§ D, E, K, L, 10-3-13 Comments §§ M, Q, and 12-3-13 OLC WP §§ T-Y.

FBI General Counsel Baker knows that on September 17, 2007, FBI Director Mueller

took custody of the DOD TALON data banks that were transferred by 2007-2011 DOD Under

Secretary of Intelligence Lt. General Clapper, the 1991-1995 DIA Director. FBI General Counsel

Baker knows whether FBI Director Mueller adopted as the FBI “minimization” standards, the

December 3, 1982 DOD Secretary Weinberger DOD 5240 1 R Procedures Governing the

Activities of DOD Intelligence Components That Affect United States Persons. FBI General

Counsel Baker knows the whether the DIA TALON data banks included the 1982-2007 E.O.

12333 “FISA exempt” NSA TSP “haystacks” data banks. See 10-3-13 Comments §§ C, L.

FBI General Counsel Baker knows that on November 20, 2007, FBI Director Mueller

knew that AAG of the National Security Division Kenneth Wainstein (2006-2008), FBI Director

Mueller’s 2002 FBI General Counsel and FBI Director Mueller’s 2003-2006 Chief of Staff,

knew of the May 24, 1984 Top Secret “OLC Olson FISA Memo” which was the legal basis for

the data mining of the 1982-2007 E.O. 12333 Top Secret “FISA Exempt” NSA TSP data banks.

FBI General Counsel Baker knows whether the NSA TSP “storage” banks that are subject to AG

Holder’s March, 2014 recommendation include the “constitutionally seized” 1980s Robert VII v

DOJ “FISC Robert” NSA TSP data used in the “Fraud Against the Government” Robert

investigation without being a Fourth Amendment problem. See 10-3-13 Comments § D.

11

G. FBI General Counsel Baker’s knowledge that the de novo FBI FOIA requested

documents are connect-the-dots documents with Robert II v CIA and DOJ the four one-

page CIA classified 1985 “North Notebook” documents because of the E.O. 12333 Top

Secret CIA-DIA domestic “special activities at IMC and NSA.

The FOIA requester places FBI Chief FOIA Officer Hardy on Notice that this FBI FOIA

request has been copied to EDNY U.S. Attorney Loretta Lynch (1999-2001 and 2010-) because

she is the lead attorney in Robert II v CIA and DOJ, cv 02-6788 (Seybert, J.). Therefore, FBI

Chief FOIA Officer Harding should be consulting with FBI General Counsel Baker because he

knows whether the four one-page CIA classified 1985 Robert II v CIA and DOJ “North

Notebook” documents reveal the existence of illegal E.O. 12333 Top Secret CIA-DIA domestic

“special activities at IMC and NSA. As a result, he may decide to recommend to FBI Director

Comey that Robert II v CIA and DOJ co-defendants CIA Director Brennan and AG Holder

should accept the plaintiff’s quiet settlement offer because this would moot this FOIA request.

FBI General Counsel Baker, AG Holder’s 2009-2011 Associate DAG, knows that the

Robert II v CIA and DOJ “North Notebook” CIA 1985 classified documents are subject to

President Obama’s December 29, 2009 E.O. 13526, Classified National Security Information, §

3.3 Automatic Declassification 25 year rule (1985+25=2010). He knows that the plaintiff’s quiet

settlement offer is based in part on the contents of the July 27, 2010 FBI FOIA requested No.

1151829-000 documents being connect-the-dots documents to the 1985 “North Notebook” CIA

documents See 12-14-11 Robert II v CIA and DOJ Affidavit, http://snowflake5391.net/12-14-

11_RIIvCIAandDOJStatusAffidavit%20.pdf, and 8-15-12 Robert II v CIA and DOJ Affidavit

http://snowflake5391.net/8-15-12_RobertIIvCIA_Status_Affidavit.pdf.

FBI General Counsel Baker knows that co-defendant CIA Director Brennan was the

2002-2004 CIA Deputy Executive Director when OIPR Counsel Baker made his March 1, 2004

decision to ratify the CIA FOIA Officer’s decision to use FOIA Exemption 1 and the “Glomar

Response” defense to withhold the “FISC Robert” documents. He knows that CIA Director

Brennan had been the 2004-2005 interim director of the new ODNI National Counterterrorism

Center when AGs Ashcroft and Gonzales were complying with FISC Chief Judge Kollar-

KOtelly’s July 15, 2004 metadata order that did not apply to the 1982-2004 E.O. 12333 Top

Secret “FISA exempt” NSA TSP “haystacks” data banks. See 2-6-14 IG Horowitz WP § H.

FBI General Counsel Baker knows that co-defendant CIA Director Brennan was

President Obama’s 2009-2013 Deputy National Security Advisor for Homeland Security and

Counterterrorism. As a result, they both knew whether President Obama knew why on March 18,

2011 AG Holder’s AAG of the National Security Division David Kris (2009-2011) and Principal

Deputy AAG of the OLC Caroline Krass (2011) had approved the declassification and

reclassification of the May 6, 2004 Top Secret “OLC Goldsmith FISA Memo” that discussed the

May 24, 1984 Top Secret “OLC Olson FISA Memo.” FBI General Counsel Baker knows that FBI

Director Comey should know these facts when AG Holder consults with CIA Director Brenan and

FBI Director Comey re the storage of the 1982-2004 E.O. 12333 Top Secret “FISA exempt” NSA

TSP “haystacks” data banks not subject to FISC Orders. See 12-3-13 OLC FISA WP §§ U, X (8).

The FOIA requester will inform Judge Seybert of the docketing of this FBI FOIA request.

This is a key 2014 time line fact for his Robert II v CIA and DOJ Summary Judgment Motion.

12

H. FBI General Counsel Baker’s knowledge that the de novo FBI FOIA requested

documents are connect-the-dots documents with the Robert VII v DOJ “FISC Robert”

documents because of his March 1, 2004 decision to ratify the CIA’s use of FOIA

exemption 1 and the “Glomar Response” defense to withhold these documents

The FOIA requester places FBI Chief FOIA Officer Hardy on Notice that FBI General

Counsel Bakers knows whether the de novo FBI FOIA requested #7 “FBI Robert VII v DOJ

“FISC Robert” and # 8 “FBI Charles Robert documents including NSLs sent to banks and ISP”

are connect-the-dots documents with the Robert VII v DOJ “FISC Robert” documents. He knows

whether the Robert VII v DOJ, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 39616, 193 Fed. Appx. 8 (2d Cir. 2006),

cert. den. 127 S.Ct. 1133 (2007), case file notes and e-mails reveal that he knew that Robert had

been the illegal target of the of the E.O. 12333 Top Secret “FISA exempt” NSA TSP that was

conducted by AGs Smith and Meese in serial impeachable violation of the “exclusionary

provision of the FISA of 1978 and the PCA of 1878 limitations on military domestic law

enforcement. See 2-22-12 OGIS FBI §§ S, T, 11-30-11 Robert VIII Petition Statement of the

Case §§ A-L, 10-3-13 Review Group Comments §§ A, S, 12-3-13 OLC FOIA WP § W.

FBI Director Comey’s Chief FOIA Officer Hardy is placed on Notice that Robert VIII v

DOJ, HHS, and SSA appellant has informed EDNY U.S. Attorney Lynch that if there is no

Robert II v CIA and DOJ quiet settlement, then the plaintiff will be filing a Robert VIII v DOJ,

HHS, and SSA Motion seeking Judge Garaufis’ pre-clearance Order to file a putative 2014 FOIA

complaint seeking the July 27, 2010 FBI FOIA requested documents along with the two Top

Secret 1984 and 2004 OLC FISA Memos. He will be requesting that Judge Garaufis read in

camera the July 27, 2010 FOIA requested # 7 and # 8 FBI documents because the Second

Circuit rendered its April 11, 2006 Robert VII v DOJ decision based on its deference to OIPR

Counsel Baker’s October 1, 2004 “corrected” Declaration. For the reasons given by the district

court, we agree that Exemption 1 permits OIPR to refuse to disclose whether it has any

documents pertaining to Robert, and to refuse to turn over any such documents that it may, in

fact, possess.” Id. 9. Emphasis added. See 2-7-14 Horowitz WP §§ A-D, G, H, I, N, O.

With 20/20 hindsight and the Snowden leaks, FBI General Counsel Baker knows that

Justice Scalia’s Pavelic & Le Fore v Marvel Entertainment Group, 110 S. Ct. 456 (1991),

Justice Scalia “this-is-not-a-team effort” FRCP 11 standard, applied to his Robert VII v DOJ

2004 original “uncorrected” Declaration as well as his October 1, 2004 “corrected” Declaration

because of the content of the May 6, 2004 Top Secret “OLC Goldsmith FISA Memo:”

The message there by conveyed to the attorney, that this is not a “team

effort” but in the last analysis yours alone, precisely to the point of Rule 11.

Moreover, psychological effect aside, there will be greater economic

deterrence upon the singing attorney, who will know for certain that the

district court will impose its sanction entirely upon him, and not divert part

of it to a partnership of which he may not (if he is only an associate) be a

member, of which (if he is a member) might not choose to seek recompense

from him. To be sure, the partnership’s knowledge that it was subject to

sanction might induce it increase “internal monitoring”, but one can

reasonably believe that more will be achieved by directly increasing the

incentive for the individual signer to take care.” Id. at 459. Emphasis added.

13

The Robert VII v DOJ-Robert VIII v DOJ, HHS, and SSA appellant has informed EDNY

U.S. Attorney Lynch that the plaintiff will be arguing in his Robert VIII v DOJ, HHS, and SSA

Motion seeking a pre-clearance Order to file the putative FOIA complaint seeking Top OLC

FISA Memos and the eight sets of FBI documents, that she will have an affirmative duty to

inform Judge Garaufis whether there had been misrepresentations of fact to the Second Circuit

in EDNY AUSA Mahoney’s April 3, 2006 Robert VII v DOJ letter Brief informing the Court

that Robert was not a FISA “aggrieved person” by application of 50 U.S.C. § 1806 (f). FBI

General Counsel Baker knows whether EDNY AUSA Mahoney’s April 3, 2006 Robert VII v

DOJ letter-Brief was accurate given his October 1, 2004 “corrected” Robert VII v DOJ

Declaration. See 12-3-13 OLC FOIA WP §§ U pp 34-38, and 2-7-14 IG Horowitz WP § H.

As of April 1, 2009, in a NYS licensed attorney has an affirmative duty to comply with

the new NYS Professional Responsibility Guidelines. Pursuant to Rule 3.3(a)(3), EDNY U.S.

Attorney Lynch has a “shall” duty to correct misrepresentations made to Article III Judges:

If a lawyer, the lawyer’s client, or a witness called by the lawyer has

offered material evidence and the lawyer comes to know of the falsity, the

lawyer shall take responsible remedial measures, including if necessary

disclosure to the tribunal. Emphasis added.

NYS Unified Court System Part 1200 Rules of Professional Conduct

http://www.nysba.org/Content/NavigationMenu/ForAttorneys/Professional

StandardsforAttorneys/NYRulesofProfessionalConduct4109.pdf.

EDNY U.S. Attorney Lynch (1999-2001, 2010-) was a 2009 Member of the New York

State Commission on Public Integrity. She knows whether the Robert v Holz, Robert v National

Archives, 1 Fed. Appx. 85 (2d Cir. 2001), Robert v DOJ, 2001 WL 34077473 (EDNY), 26 Fed.

Appx. 87 (2d Cir. 2002), Robert VII v DOJ, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 39616, 193 Fed. Appx. 8

(2d Cir. 2006), cert. den. 127 S.Ct. 1133 (2007), Robert VIII v DOJ, HHS, and SSA, 439 Fed.

Appx 32 (2d Cir. 2011), cert. den. 132 S. Ct. 1549 (2012), Robert I v CIA and DOJ, and Robert

II v. CIA and DOJ case file notes and e-mails reveal an elaborate DOJ “cover up” of intentional

misrepresentations of fact and law made by USG attorneys who knew that plaintiff Robert had

been the illegal target of the illegal 1982-2014 E.O. 12333 Top Secret “FISA exempt” NSA

TSP that has not been subject to FISC Orders. See 12-3-13 OLC FOIA WP §§ X (18).

FBI General Counsel Baker in consultation with EDNY U.S. Attorney Lynch knows

whether the February 7, 2014 de novo FOIA requested FBI documents reveal whether DOJ

attorneys made Judge Garaufis, the Second Circuit, and Supreme Court the “ handmaiden of the

Executive” in both Robert VII v DOJ and Robert VIII v DOJ, HHS, and SSA. “Under no

circumstances should the Judiciary become handmaiden of the Executive.” Emphasis added.

Doe, et. al. v Mukasey, Mueller, and Caproni, 549 F 3d 861, 870 (2d Cir. 2008).

FBI General Counsel Baker also knows the “smoking gun” significance of the # 7 and

# 8 FBI documents and 2010-2013 FBI FOIA case file notes and e-mails. Therefore, FBI

Chief FOIA Officer Hardy should be consulting with FBI General Counsel Baker because a

Robert II v CIA and DOJ quiet settlement offer would moot the need to file a Robert VIII v

DOJ, HHS, and SSA Motion seeking a pre-clearance Order of Judge Garaufis to file a complaint

seeking the release of the eight sets of July 27, 2010 FOIA requested FBI documents.

14

I. Summary

This de novo FBI FOIA request is filed because of President Obama’s January 17, 2014

request that AG Holder provide recommendations re the storage of the NSA TSP data banks and

the President’s October 28, 2013 explanation as to why he trusts FBI Director Comey:

It’s just about impossible to find a matter of justice he has not tackled, and

it’s hard to imagine somebody who is not more uniquely qualified to lead a

bureau that covers all of it -- traditional threats like violent and organized

crime to the constantly changing threats like terrorism and cyber-security.

So he’s got the resume. Emphasis added.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/10/28/remarks-

president-and-fbi-director-james-comey

At his ceremonial taking of his oath, FBI Director Comey explained how “Integrity” on

the FBI shield applies whenever FBI make decisions that are subject to judicial review:

And, finally, integrity. Integrity is derived from the Latin word "integer,"

meaning whole. A person of integrity is complete, undivided. Sincerity,

decency, trustworthy are synonyms of integrity. It's on our shield because

it is the quality that makes possible all the good that we do. Because

everything we do requires that we be believed, whether that's promising a

source that we will protect her, telling a jury what we saw or heard, or

telling a congressional oversight committee or the American people what

we are doing with our power and our authorities. We must be believed.

Without integrity, all is lost. We cannot do the good that all of these

amazing people signed up to do. The FBI's reputation for integrity is a gift

given to every new employee by those who went before. But it is a gift

that must be protected and earned every single day. We protect that gift by

making mistakes and admitting them, by making promises and keeping

them, and by realizing that nothing -- no case, no source, no fear of

embarrassment -- is worth jeopardizing the gift of integrity. Integrity must

be on the FBI shield. White House 10-28-13. Emphasis added.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/10/28/remarks-

president-and-fbi-director-james-comey

Thank you for docketing this de novo FBI FOIA request by February 28, 2014 and

consulting with FBI General Counsel Baker re a March, 2014 Robert II v CIA and DOJ quiet

settlement that would moot this de novo FBI FOIA request and end the “defrauding” of President

Obama in 2014. See 12-3-13 OLC WP §§ X (1)-X (18).

Sincerely,

Charles Robert, pro se

cc. IG Michael Horowitz OIP Director Melanie Pustay

Acting CIA General Counsel EDNY U.S. Attorney Loretta Lynch