This was found in federal records reports today:


July 27, 2018

United States Department of Energy
FOIA Officer
Department of Energy
Environmental Management Consolidated Business Center
ATTN: FOIA/PA Requester Service Center
250 E. 5th Street, Suite 500
Cincinnati, OH 45202
Fax: (513) 246-0524

BCC: GAO, IG, Congress

The Technology Alliance
Email Response:

RE: Request Under Freedom of Information Act (Expedited Processing & Fee
Waiver Requested)

Dear FOIA officer:

Pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. § 552 et
seq. and the implementing regulations of the United States Department of
Energy (DOE), 43 C.F.R. Part 2, we make the following request for FOIA data.

Requested Records:

Our Office requests that United States Department of Energy produce the
following within twenty business days and further seeks expedited review
of this request for the reasons identified below:

1. All records discussing, referring, or relating to all meetings or
communications between DOE staff and the law firm of Perkins Coie and
their representatives including minutes of those meetings, or any
memorandum written about these meetings by the DOE employees and
contractors who were present.

Our Office seeks all responsive records regardless of format, medium, or
physical characteristics. In conducting  your search, please understand
the terms “records,” “communications,” and “documents” in their broadest
sense, to include any written, typed, recorded, graphic, printed, or
audio material of any kind. We seek records of any kind, including
electronic records, audiotapes, videotapes, and photographs, as well as
letters, emails, facsimiles, telephone messages, voice mail messages and
transcripts, notes, or minutes of any meetings, telephone conversations
or discussions. Our request includes any attachments to these records.
No category of material should be omitted from search, collection, and
production.  You may not exclude searches of files or emails in the
personal custody of your officials, such as personal email accounts.
Records of official business conducted using unofficial systems or
stored outside of official files is subject to the Federal Records Act
and FOIA. It is not adequate to rely on policies and procedures that
require officials to move such information to official systems within a
certain period of time; Our Office has a right to records contained in
those files even if material has not yet been moved to official systems
or if officials have, through negligence or willfulness, failed to meet
their obligations. Custodian searches are still required; agencies may
not have direct access to files stored in .PST files, outside of network
drives, in paper format, or in personal email accounts. In addition,
please note that in conducting a “reasonable search” as required by law,
you must employ the most up-to-date technologies and tools available, in
addition to searches by individual custodians likely to have responsive
information. Recent technology may have rendered the DOE’s prior FOIA
practices unreasonable. In light of the government-wide requirements to
manage information electronically by the end of 2016, it is no longer
reasonable to rely exclusively on custodian-driven searches.
Furthermore, agencies that have adopted the NARA Capstone program, or
similar policies, now maintain emails in a form that is reasonably
likely to be more complete than individual custodians’ files. For
example, a custodian may have deleted a responsive email from his or her
email program, but the DOE’s archiving tools would capture that email
under Capstone.  Accordingly, Our Office insists that the DOE use the
most up-to-date technologies to search for responsive information and
take steps to ensure that the most complete repositories of information
are searched. If any potentially responsive records have been destroyed
and/or transferred to other agencies or offices, such as the National
Archives and Records Agency (NARA), then I request copies of the
destruction or transfer slips as well as any other documentation
relating to, mentioning or describing said transfer or destruction, to
include but not be limited to confirmation that the DOE has no other
copies of said records. Under the FOIA Improvement Act of 2016, agencies
must adopt a presumption of disclosure, withholding information “only if
. . . disclosure would harm an interest protected by an exemption” or
“disclosure is prohibited by law.” If it is your position that any
portion of the requested records is exempt from disclosure,

Our Office requests that you provide an index of those documents as
required under Vaughn v. Rosen, 484 F.2d 820 (D.C. Cir. 1973), cert.
denied, 415 U.S. 977 (1974). As you are aware, a Vaughn index must
describe each document claimed as exempt with sufficient specificity “to
permit a reasoned judgment as to whether the material is actually exempt
under FOIA.” Moreover, the Vaughn index “must describe each  document or
portion thereof withheld, and for each  withholding it must discuss the
consequences of disclosing the sought-after information.” Further, “the
withholding agency must supply ‘a relatively detailed justification,
specifically identifying the reasons why a particular exemption is
relevant and correlating those claims with the particular part of a
withheld document to which they apply.’”

See - Competitive Enter. Inst. v. Office of Sci. & Tech. Policy , 827
F.3d 145, 149–50 (D.C. Cir. 2016);
cf. Judicial Watch, Inc. v. Kerry , 844 F.3d 952, 955–56 (D.C. Cir.
2016)  Id.
at 8 (“The Government argues that because the agency had a policy
requiring [the official] to forward all of his emails from his
[personal] account to his business email, the [personal] account only
contains duplicate agency records at best. Therefore, the Government
claims that any hypothetical deletion of the [personal account] emails
would still leave a copy of those records intact in [the official’s]
work email. However, policies are rarely followed to perfection by
anyone. At this stage of the case, the Court cannot assume that each and
every work-related email in the [personal] account was duplicated in
[the official’s] work email account.” (citations omitted))

See-  Presidential Memorandum—Managing Government Records, 76 Fed. Reg.
75,423 (Nov. 28, 2011),; Office of Mgmt. & Budget,
Exec. Office of the President, Memorandum for the Heads of Executive
Departments & Independent Agencies, “Managing Government Records
Directive,” M-12-18 (Aug. 24, 2012),  

See -  FOIA Improvement Act of 2016 § 2 (Pub. L. No. 114–185)
See-  Founding Church of Scientology v. Bell , 603 F.2d 945, 949 (D.C.
Cir. 1979)
See - King v. U.S. Dep’t of Justice , 830 F.2d 210, 223–24 (D.C. Cir.
1987) (emphasis in original)

See -  Id.  at 224 (citing  Mead Data Central, Inc. v. U.S. Dep’t of the
Air Force , 566 F.2d 242, 251 (D.C. Cir. 1977)

In the event some portions of the requested records are properly exempt
from disclosure, please disclose any reasonably segregable nonexempt
portions of the requested records. If it is your position that a
document contains non-exempt segments, but that those non-exempt
segments are so dispersed throughout the document as to make segregation
impossible, please state what portion of the document is non-exempt, and
how the material is dispersed throughout the document. Claims of
non-segregability must be made with the same degree of detail as
required for claims of exemptions in a Vaughn index. If a request is
denied in whole, please state specifically that it is not reasonable to
segregate portions of the record for release. In addition to the records
requested above, Our Office also requests records describing the
processing of this request, including records sufficient to identify
search terms used and locations and custodians searched and any tracking
sheets used to track the processing of this request. If the DOE uses
FOIA questionnaires or certifications completed by individual custodians
or components to determine whether they possess responsive materials or
to describe how they conducted searches, we also request any such
records prepared in connection  with the processing of this request. 
You should institute a preservation hold on information responsive to
this request. Our Office intends to pursue all legal avenues to enforce
its right of access under FOIA, including litigation if necessary.
Accordingly, the DOE is on notice that litigation is reasonably
foreseeable.  Where possible, please provide responsive material in
electronic format by email (     ) in PDF

Our charity non-commercial public interest Congressional investigation
and distribution group requests rolling production of these records as
they are located and reviewed. 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.

Fee Waiver

In accordance with 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(A)(iii), Our Office requests a
waiver of fees associated with processing this request for records. The
subject of this request concerns the operations of the federal
government, and the disclosures will likely contribute to a better
understanding of relevant government procedures by the general public in
a significant way. Moreover, Our Office provides research to major
online news organizations viewed by millions of voters and therefore we
are 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, we are willing to pay fees for
this request up to $50 without prior approval. If you estimate that the
fees will exceed this limit, please notify me first.

Expedited Processing

Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(6)(E)(1) and 43 C.F.R. § 2.20(a)(2), Our
Office requests that the DOE expedite the processing of this request.
Requests shall receive expedited processing when a requester
demonstrates “an urgency to inform the public about an actual or alleged
Federal Government activity, if made by a person who is primarily
engaged in disseminating information.” First, Our Office is an
organization “primarily engaged in disseminating information.” (finding
that Our Office 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.”)

See - Mead Data Central, 566 F.2d at 261
See -  Am. Civil Liberties Union v. Department of Justice, 321 F. Supp.
2d 24, 29 n.5 (D.D. Cir. 200))

Second, these records are urgently needed to inform the public about
actual or alleged government activity. Specifically, Our Office contends
there exists an urgency to inform the public about what matters of state
that were discussed and that those disclosures are helpful to the
current White House Administration and the American public in their
efforts to end political corruption. The courts have found that the
issue of news coverage to be especially critical in determining whether
a “compelling need” exists for expedited FOIA processing. The Court have
asserted that the “ultimate conclusion” with regards to expedited
processing relies on important underlying facts, such as “the
credibility of a claimant’s allegations regarding government activity,
the existence of a threat to physical safety, or whether an issue is the
subject of news coverage.”


The above information is true and correct to the best of our knowledge.

Further Correspondence

To ensure that this request is properly construed, that searches are
conducted in an adequate but efficient manner, and that extraneous costs
are not incurred, Our Office welcomes an opportunity to discuss its
request  with you before you undertake your search or incur search or
duplication costs. By working together at the outset, Our Office and the
DOE can decrease the likelihood of costly and time-consuming litigation
in the future.  

This matter affects every voting citizen because, if we can't get
justice in America, then no voter will believe they can either.

A handful of corrupt tech billionaires, and their corrupt Senators, are
manipulating  public emotional triggers in order to steer, and
money-launder, a trillion U.S. taxpayer dollars into their private bank
accounts. Over 300 million American voters have said that the #1 issue
with U.S. public policy is “CORRUPTION”. This issue is about that

Their “climate”, “immigrants”, “medical coverage” issues are fake
controversies that they use to scam U.S. Treasury funds that have
nothing to do with those ‘cover issues’. They use Google, Facebook,
Twitter and the Main Stream Media, that they own, in order to pump up
these fake controversies via fake news.  They use "Dark Money" fake
charities, "Invisible Bridge" money laundering, crony stock market
insider trading and pump-and-dump schemes, revolving door payola,
prostitution bribes and other illicit corruption tricks.

We are fighting back and we have already taken out part of the “bad
guys”, and their schemes, using 100% legal tactics and methodologies.
Any member of the public can now accomplish these anti-corruption
efforts using espionage journalism, private investigation methods,
citizen sleuth websites, class-action lawsuits and personal mass public
media distribution. We encourage the public to continue in their efforts
to bankrupt every single corrupt party that abuses our Democracy.

In our matter, the U.S. Government, via the Obama White House and the
U.S. Department of Energy intentionally defrauded us out of years of
work and our life savings! Now they owe us some offsets! We are here to

We could not understand how ‘public servants’ could do these kinds of
crimes to, and with, our government while stealing our, and millions of
other taxpayers, money out of our pockets. We set out to hunt down every
single person, group and process that allowed these crimes to happen,
document their crimes on permanent public record and then make it nearly
impossible for them to ever do this to the public again.

We were tricked by false government promises into spending years of our
lives and millions of dollars of our life savings. We, and our peers,
were used as the “facade” of a “cover story” to operate a criminally
illicit “Dark Money” operation against the American public. We swear,
warrant and certify that we can prove every assertion in a public
federal jury trial, Grand Jury hearing and/or televised Congressional
hearing, given equitable credible legal resources and security protection.

Senior government officials had full knowledge of, and participated in,
this criminal enterprise. They knew, from the start, that the state and
federal funding was covertly hard-wired, in advance, exclusively to
their friends. They then attacked us with “Fusion GPS” , “Lois Lerner
Targeting”, a tabloid character assassination program and worse things.
They attacked us because we properly reported the crime to the FBI and
Congress. They attacked us because we did "the right thing".

The cover-ups of this crime continue to this day. The failure of the
U.S. Government to provide any 1.) apology, 2.) damages offset, 3.)
justice, 4.) whistle-blower and informant fees; in this matter continues
to this day. We are not anti-government. We are anti-corruption. In
fact, top government officials are helping us in our quest.

For our first project, almost every taxpaying member of the public
supported our past efforts and, in fact, provided us with a historically
large number of purchasing letters of support which we hand-delivered to
Congress. Nobody else was able to do that.

The non-crony major international news outlets, every major industrial
publication, most of the non-crony members of the U.S. Congress, and
every other non-crony public official confirmed that "Part Two" of our
project was a “go”. After winning Congressional awards and fully
delivering on our previous government contracts, federal officials asked
us to invest our time and money in the federal government and do even
more to create domestic jobs and new domestic technology opportunities.

BUT… turned out that all of the government “deciders” worked for and
owned stock in our arch competitor. The government officials took the
money they had promised to us and gave it to their friends, who are our
competitors. They gave it to the least qualified party; who also
happened to be their buddy and their campaign financiers. They also gave
part of the taxpayer cash to some of their friends who immediately filed
bankruptcy in order to make huge profits off of tax loss filings and
stock market valuation “pumps” without ever having to create any jobs or
ongoing product deliveries.

We were asked to pay bribes and we refused to pay bribes. We refused to
be part of the Silicon Valley “Dark Money” crimes. We knew these people.
We were invited to their parties and to their most intimate meetings.
When we saw that they were running afoul of Democracy using corrupt
schemes, illegal insider trading, sextortion, money laundering, tax
evasion, bribes, prostitutes, Dark Money conduits, election rigging,
internet manipulation and other crimes against the public; we said NO!

Will the U.S. Government provide us with the justice we seek and the
Constitution demands?

We have worked with exceptional FBI, GAO, SEC, CFTC, IG and
Congressional staff in this matter and we wish to acknowledge their
support. Many have seen the recent news head-lines about top-level law
enforcement firings of corrupt law enforcement executives. Those were
the right moves and we wish to confirm the fact that certain public
officials continue to stall our justice. Treasury and GAO say that over
180 million taxpayer dollars have been spent on cover-ups, attacks and
DOJ stalls against our request in order to avoid political embarrassment
for the Obama Administration. They are no longer around and they SHOULD
be embarrassed by their corruption! You can resolve our matter for
dramatically less money than you are spending trying to cover it up!

We will not give up and we will fight to the end. Our Task Force of
crime victims, journalists, bloggers, mass data scientists, intelligence
specialists and voters is now using 100% legal means to terminate every
single crook in this case until we get justice. We demand a resolution
where our damages are paid for and the whistle-blower and informant fees
we are owed are delivered.

The news articles and Congressional reports prove that this Silicon
Valley Cartel regularly engages in crimes, sex abuse, illicit acts, a
sociopath culture and law-breaking. Fact-based forensic data has now
been published representing the work of tens of thousands of renown,
award-winning journalists and researchers. They prove that what we are
saying really did happen and it really is a criminal abuse of Democracy!
The ICIJ, Snowden, Assange and Binney leaks prove the depth of the
crimes. Hundreds of thousands of documents have now been placed on
public record in the federal courts and P2P archives and those documents
prove who engaged in these crimes and how they did it. The 60 Minutes
episodes, The feature films: Dark Money; Too Big To Fail; Inside Job and
the tens of thousands of broadcast news segments about this corruption
all prove our assertions. The evidence is indisputable!

It is time for the public to take a stand against this kind of organized
crime that is operated by the very people that are meant to serve the

It is time for The U.S. Government and The U.S. Department of Energy to
deliver the 1.) apology, 2.) damages offset, 3.) justice, 4.)
whistle-blower and informant fees that are required.

We look forward to your response and to a personal reply from Rick
Perry, The Secretary of Energy.


The Technology Alliance

For additional confirmation of precedents confirming our rights to this
data, please review the following:
See -  Al-Fayed v. Central Intelligence Agency, 254 F.3d 300, 306 (D.C.
Cir. 2001) (Al-Fayed) Id.
 at 308. (emphasis added)
See - : Wadelton v. Department of State, 13-0412 ESH, 2013 WL 1760853
(D.D. Cir. 2013) (Wadelton
See -  Id. Document 10, Filed 04/25/13, Page 6 of 8 (citing ACLU-NC v.
DOD , 2006 WL 1469418, at *1-2;  Amer. Civil Liberties Union of N. Cal.
v. Dep’t of Justice , No. C 04-4447, 2005 WL 588354, at *5-7 (N.D. Cal
Mar. 11, 2005))
See - Edmonds v. FBI , CIV.A. 02-1294 (ESH), 2002 WL 32539613 (D.D.C.
Dec. 3, 2002)
See - U.S.C. § 552(a)(6)(E)(v)(II

Facebook Insiders Have Sold $4 Billion of Shares Since Scandal (

 by HarryVonZell to news (+26|-0)