Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington - CIA

Plame considers appeal after Court upholds dismissal of case against Cheney and other Bush officials

crew — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 11:55:48 -0500

Today, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia upheld the dismissal of Valerie Plame's lawsuit against Vice President Dick Cheney, Karl Rove, Scooter Libby and Richard Armitage. Plame is considering an appeal:

Melanie Sloan, Plame's attorney at the liberal watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, said Plame was considering an appeal.

"It is simply unacceptable for top government officials to be unaccountable for such a gross abuse of their power," Sloan said.

The lawsuit named former presidential adviser Karl Rove; Cheney's former top aide, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby; and former Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage.

Armitage was the original source for a 2003 newspaper column identifying Plame as a CIA officer. At the time, her husband was criticizing the Bush administration's prewar intelligence on Iraq and had become a thorn in the side of the White House. Rove also discussed Plame's employment with reporters.

The leak touched off a lengthy investigation that resulted in Libby's conviction for obstruction and lying to investigators. Jurors found that he told reporters about Plame and lied about it to the FBI and a federal grand jury. Bush commuted Libby's sentence before he ever served a day in prison.

CIA tells employees: Preserve records, but don't produce records

Anne Weismann — Fri, 14 Dec 2007 15:12:56 -0600

The irony is not lost on us: after destroying detainee interrogation tapes, the CIA issues an order to all employees directing them to preserve all records on the issue. We wonder why they felt a need in the Order to point out that it was "not a request to produce records." Could it be that when they got a FOIA request for the tapes from the ACLU, which was a request to produce records, the agency did not see the need to preserve the requested records?

Here's the CIA "Employee Bulletin":

New CIA regulations aim to prevent FOIA access

crew — Thu, 18 Jan 2007 12:37:15 -0600

It's never easy getting information through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) from the Bush Administration. It's even harder to get information from the CIA. As if that process isn't already difficult enough, the CIA is proposing a new FOIA process that seems designed to discourage FOIA requests, particularly from the public interest community. CREW submitted comments to the CIA outlining our concerns, which are also outlined here:

The CIA is proposing to require all requesters to agree in writing to pay all applicable fees before the agency will even consider the request, and if the agreement is not submitted within a specified time the agency will consider the FOIA request closed. This is completely at odds with FOIA mandate that agencies waive fees for certain categories of requesters, including those seeking documents in the public interest and seems designed to discourage public interest requesters from even filing FOIA requests.

The CIA is proposing to require requesters to prepay fees before the agency will honor their request for form or format of documents (e.g. paper or cd). FOIA prohibits prepayment requirements except where fee exceeds $250 or requester has not paid in the past; again this seems designed to discourage requesters.

The CIA is proposing a new rate schedule for duplication costs that establishes flat rates depending on the number of pages copied. For requests over 1000 pages the flat rate is $1,000 (which at 1001 is almost $1/page). FOIA limits agency to charging only for its direct costs so this seems like an excessive charge.

The CIA is proposing to charge flat rate of $100 per compact disc for electronic duplication. Again, this seems far in excess of agency's actual cost and seems designed to discourage requesters from seeking documents in other than paper format.

The CIA is proposing to add new requirements for public interest fee waivers that seem designed to narrow the scope of who is entitled to a fee waiver because the information they are seeking is in the public interest. This will particularly impact organizations like CREW.

The cumulative effect of these proposed changes will have a debilitating effect on our our ability to get information that the public is entitled to have.