Charles Robert 441 B. West Broadway Long Beach, New York 11561 516-889-2251 10-3-14- White Paper (WP) of the Robert II v CIA and DOJ, cv 02-6788 (Seybert, J) plaintiff reporting his last failed quiet settlement offer, facts that occurred after he filed his August 12, 2014 status letter, and his intent to file his Individual Motion Practice Rule F (2) letter request on October 7, 2014 for a Summary Judgment Motion conference This is the Robert I v CIA, cv 00-4325 (Seybert, J), and Robert II v CIA and DOJ, cv 02-6788 (Seybert, J), plaintiff’s final monthly status report that informs the Court of his last failed attempt for a quiet settlement. The plaintiff reports facts that he learned occurred after he had filed his last August 12, 2014 status letter to the Court re his quiet settlement attempts. See the plaintiff’s monthly status letters that were filed after the plaintiff had filed his Court ordered 12-14-11 Robert II v CIA and DOJ Status Affidavit, http://snowflake5391.net/12-14- 11_RIIvCIAandDOJStatusAffidavit%20.pdf, and his 8-15-12 Robert II v CIA and DOJ Status Affidavit, http://snowflake5391.net/8-15-12_RobertIIvCIA_Status_Affidavit.pdf. On October 3, 2014, the plaintiff informed Judge Seybert of his last failed attempt to secure a quiet settlement. He also informed the Court that the co-defendants’ attorneys CIA General Counsel Caroline Krass and EDNY U.S. Attorney Loretta Lynch had not served the plaintiff with co-defendants’ Counter Statement to the plaintiff’s July 28, 2014 “Plaintiff’s Local Rule 56.1 Statement of Material Facts of Motion For Summary Judgment.” Pursuant to Local Rule 56.1, the co-defendants had 14 days to serve the co-defendants’ Counter Statement. The co- defendants’ attorneys did not request an adjournment date. The plaintiff informed the Court that pursuant to the Court’s Individual Motion Practice Rule F (2), the plaintiff will on October 7, 2014 file his three page letter requesting a Summary Judgment Pre-Motion Conference. The co-defendants are to file their opposition to that Motion within seven days. The Court then schedules a Summary Judgment Pre-Motion Conference. The plaintiff informed the Court he would make an arithmetic Summary Judgment argument that President Obama’s December 29, 2009 E.O. 13526, § 3.3 Automatic Declassification 25 year rule, applies to the release of the four 1985 CIA classified documents: 1. 4-22-85 “IMC” Top Secret Working Paper CIA Exemption 3 http://www.snowflake5391.net/NorthNotebook.pdf. 2. 9/6/85 North-CIA-FBI Exemptions 1, 3 with 9/10/85 NHAO notation http://www.snowflake5391.net/9-6-85NorthCIA.pdf. 3. 9/16/85 North-Call to Perot CIA Exemptions 1 and 3 http://snowflake5391.net/perot.pdf. 4. 10/1/85 CIA-DOD FOIA Exemption 1 and 3 and medivac helos http://www.snowflake5391.net/medivachelos.pdf. 1 The plaintiff will also argue that the Court should draw an inference from the fact that the co-defendants CIA Director John Brennan and AG Eric Holder decided not to serve the plaintiff with a Local Rule 56.1 Counter Statement. The plaintiff will argue that the Court should consider this fact an admission that the co-defendants agree to the plaintiff’s July 28, 2014 “Plaintiff’s Local Rule 56.1 Statement of Material Facts of Motion For Summary Judgment.” The plaintiff’s Statement identified the four one-page 1985 CIA classified redacted documents and applied the E.O. 13526, § 3.3 Automatic Declassification 25 year rule: 1985+25=2010. On September 25, 2014, AG Holder announced his resignation that would be effective after President Obama’s new AG is confirmed and takes his/her AG’s Oath to defend the Constitution. The plaintiff anticipates that AG Holder may possibly have as long as the end of 2014 to reconsider the plaintiff’s heretofore rejected quiet settlement offer. See § B below. The plaintiff informed Judge Seybert that he filed this White Paper (WP) with the Clerk of the Court as a deterrent to CIA General Counsel Krass filing an October, 2014 in camera ex parte Declaration with half-truth CIA assertions. The plaintiff has alleged that the Robert II v CIA and DOJ case file notes and e-mails reveal whether the CIA General Counsels had filed in camera ex parte Declarations with the intent to make Magistrate Judge Arlene Lindsay the “handmaiden” of the 2002-2014 CIA Directors. “Under no circumstances should the Judiciary become the handmaiden of the Executive.” Doe, et. al. v Mukasey, Mueller, and Caproni, 549 F 3d 861, 870 (2d Cir. 2008). This 10-3-14 WP is intended to be a deterrent to CIA General Counsel Krass filing an in camera ex parte Declaration opposing the plaintiff’s Motion for a Summary Judgment that withholds material CIA “sources and methods” facts from the Court. The plaintiff has asserted that the Robert II v CIA and DOJ FOIA requested “North Notebook” documents reveal a policy and practice of 1982-2014 AGs’ delegatees approving CIA Directors serial violations of the December 4, 1981 E.O. 12333 prohibition of CIA Directors conducting CIA domestic “special activities.” He alleges that CIA Director Brennan knows that AG Meese knew that CIA Director Casey was conducting CIA domestic “special activities” 1) at the Florida HMO International Medical Center, Inc. (IMC) and 2) at the NSA where CIA Director Casey’s analysts had conducted “back door” warrantless searches of the 1982-1985 E.O. 12333 Top Secret “FISA exempt” NSA TSP “haystacks” of U.S. citizens’ comingled stored content data that included Top Secret “FISC Robert” documents that were withheld pursuant to the CIA’s use of FOIA exemption 1 and the “Glomar Response” defense. The plaintiff filed his first FOIA action, Robert v Holz, cv-85-4205 (Wexler, J), on November 18, 1985. He sought documents that reveal why HHS General Counsel del Real (1981-1985) had initiated a December, 1984 “Fraud Against the Government” investigation of Robert. He made the allegation that HHS General Counsel del Real was CIA Director Casey’s illegal CIA domestic agent who was tasked to eliminate the Ruppert v Schweiker lead counsel who was challenging HHS General Counsel del Real’s 1982-1985 Jackson v. Schweiker, 683 F. 2d 1076 (7th Cir. 1982), “nonacquiescence” policy. The plaintiff alleged that HHS General Counsel del Real was illegally diverting unaudited HHS funds to pay for the illegal CIA domestic “special activities” that could not be funded with OMB classified funds because AG Smith had not complied with the § 413 (a) of the National Security Act “Gang of Eight” Notification duty. He makes the same “Past is Prologue” allegations in this October 3, 2014 White Paper because he believes that a mosaic of FOIA requested documents prove true his grave 1985 allegations. 2 The plaintiff informs the Court of the drumbeat of the following facts that he learned have occurred after he filed his August 12, 2014 status letter with the Clerk of the Court: The September 30, 2014 decision of Acting Associate AG Delery, the 2012-2014 AAG of the Civil Division supervising attorney of Robert II v CIA and DOJ, not to reverse the rejection of the plaintiff’s post-Snowden renewed request for a quiet settlement. See § A below. AG Holder’s September 25, 2014 resignation announcement provides an opportunity for Acting Associate AG Delery to recommend that AG Holder accept the quiet settlement offer and end the DOJ policy of withholding material facts from Article III Judges to protect CIA sources and methods of conducting illegal CIA domestic “special activities.” § B. CIA General Counsel Krass’ August 11, 2014 decision not to file a Robert II v CIA and DOJ Counter Statement was a decision to defend the E.O. 12333 CIA domestic “sources and methods” of implementing a Marbury v Madison “nonacquiescence” policy based on the Top Secret Article II “secret law” not known to Article III Judges. § C. DNI Director Clapper’s August 11, 2014 posting on the DNI website of newly declassified documents re the metadata program that reveal to the public that the FISC was not informed of the “FISA secret law” of the 1982-2014 E.O. 12333 Top Secret “FISA exempt” NSA TSP that is based on the May 24, 1984 Top Secret “OLC Olson FISA Memo.” § D. The August 11, 2014, Second Circuit NY Times v DOJ decision re redacted OLC FOIA opinions and the procedure for District Court in camera ex parte review. § E below. The August 14, 2014 State Department “whistleblower” complaint re the NSA TSP. § F. The August 15, 2014 NY Times v DOJ Notice of Lodging of Classified documents. § G. The August 16, 2014 declassified Top Secret OLC drone killing memo. § H. The August 17, 2014 Dowd article re AG Holder’s decision whether to indict NY Times investigative reporter James Risen re a classified document leak and AG Holder’s knowledge of the accuracy AG Gonzales’ 2005 Motion to secure the December 9, 2005 Robert VII v DOJ injunction re Robert filing new FOIA requests without a pre-clearance Order. § I. The August 18, 2014 Statement of DNI CLPO Officer Joel re “minimization” procedures. § J. The August 18, 2014, Second Circuit NY Times v DOJ denial of AG Holder’s petition for a panel and en banc rehearing re the release of a Top Secret FOIA requested document. § K. The August 21, 2004 GAO Report re the Congressional Notification duty of the President. § L. The August 22, 2014 DNI Clapper declassified 2004 Declaration of CIA Director Tenet.