AMERICAN 


^OVERSIGHT 


August  20,  2018 


VTA  ELECTRONIC  MAIL 


U.S.  Department  of  State 

Office  of  Information  Programs  and  Services 

A/GIS/IPS/RL 

SA-2,  Suite  8100 

Washington,  DC  20522-0208 

FOIAiequest@state.gov 

Re:  Expedited  Freedom  of  Information  Act  Request 

Dear  Freedom  of  Information  Officer: 

Pursuant  to  the  Freedom  of  Information  Act  (FOIA),  5  U.S.C.  §  552,  and  the  implementing 
regulations  of  the  Department  of  State  (State),  22  C.F.R.  Part  171,  American  Oversight  makes  the 
following  request  for  records. 

Ahead  of  President  Trump’s  visit  to  London  in  July  2018,  former  White  House  chief  strategist 
Steve  Hannon  reportedly  hosted  leaders  from  Europe’s  populist  movements  to  ‘“contextualize 
Trump’  for  a  European  audience  that  hates  him.”1  Bannon  held  conversations  with  rightwing 
figures  such  as  Nigel  Farage  and  Louis  Aliot,  Marine  Le  Pen’s  partner.  Conservative  political 
commentator  Sean  Hannity  also  traveled  to  London,  where  he  hosted  shows  with  Bannon  and 
Farage  on  his  Fox  News  program.2 

Multiple  press  reports  indicate  that  Bannon  was  acting  on  behalf  of  the  Trump  administration  in 
his  engagements  with  Europe’s  far-right  leaders.  In  an  interview  with  Politico ,  Bannon  said  he  was 
“here  to  be  a  surrogate  on  British  media”  for  the  president;  Ralreem  Kassam,  a  close  adviser  to 
Bannon  and  former  editor  of  Breitbart  London,  told  The  Atlantic,  “This  is  a  moment  where  die 
White  House  communications  operation  for  one  reason  or  another  needs  bolstering,  and  that’s 
why  I’m  happy  Steve’s  here  doing  it  in  my  country.”3 

American  Oversight  seeks  records  to  determine  (lie  State  Department’s  role,  direct  or  indirect,  in 
arranging  meetings  between  Steve  Bannon  or  Sean  Hannity  and  Europe’s  populist  movements. 


‘Annie  Kami,  Bannon  Hosts  Europopulists  in  London  Ahead  of  Trump’s  Visit,  POLITICO  duly 
11,  2018,  7:09  PM),  https://www.politico.com/storv/20 1 8/07/ 1 1/bannon-london-trump-populists- 
714067. 

2  Nigel  Farage  (@Nigel_Farage),  TWITTER  (July  14,  2014,  4:00  AM), 
https://twitter.eom/N igel  Farage/status/ 1 0 1 80877 1815121 8056  (containing  video). 

Rosie  Gray,  Steve  Bannon’s  British  Sideshow,  THE  ATLANTIC,  July  13,  2018, 
https://www.dieadantic.coni/politics/archive/2018/07/bannon-london-tmmp/5651 18/. 


1030  15th  Street  NW,  Suite  B255,  Washington,  DC  20005  |  AmericanOversight.org 


Requested  Records 

American  Oversight  requests  drat  State  produce  the  following  records  within  twenty  business  days: 

All  records  reflecting  communications  (including  emails,  email  attachments,  text  messages, 
messages  on  messaging  platforms  (such  as  Slack,  GChat  or  Google  Hangouts,  Lync,  Skype, 
or  WhatsApp),  telephone  call  logs,  calendar  invitations/entries,  meeting  notices,  meeting 
agendas,  informational  material,  talking  points,  any  handwritten  or  electronic  notes  taken 
during  any  oral  communications,  summaries  of  any  oral  communications,  or  other 
materials)  between  1)  Steve  Bannon,  2)  Sean  Hannity,  or  3)  Raheem  Kassam,  the  former 
editor  of  Breitbart  London,  and  any  of  the  below: 

A)  The  Ambassador  of  the  U.S.  Embassy  in  London,  Robert  Wood  “Woody” 
Johnson  IV,  or  anyone  communicating  on  his  behalf; 

B)  The  Minister  Counselor  for  Public  Affairs  of  the  U.S.  Embassy  in  London, 
Courtney  Austrian; 

C)  The  Ambassador  of  the  U.S.  Embassy  in  Germany,  Richard  Grenell,  or 
anyone  communicating  on  his  behalf; 

D)  The  Minister  Counselor  for  Public  Affairs  of  the  U.S.  Embassy  in  Germany; 

E)  The  Ambassador  of  the  U.S.  Embassy  in  France,  Jamie  McCourt,  or  anyone 
communicating  on  her  behalf; 

F)  The  Ambassador  of  the  U.S.  Embassy  in  Italy,  Lewis  Eisenberg,  or  anyone 
communicating  on  his  behalf; 

G)  The  Ambassador  of  the  U.S.  Embassy  in  Hungary,  David  Cornstein,  or 
anyone  communicating  on  his  behalf; 

H)  The  Ambassador  of  the  U.S.  Embassy  in  the  Netherlands,  Pete  Hoekstra,  or 
anyone  communicating  on  his  behalf; 

I)  The  Minister  Counselor  for  Public  Affairs  of  the  U.S.  Embassy  in  the 
Netherlands,  Sherry  Keneson-Hall; 

J)  The  Ambassador  of  die  U.S.  Embassy  in  Belgium,  Ron  Gidwitz,  or  anyone 
communicating  on  his  behalf;  or 

K)  The  Minister  Counselor  for  Public  Affairs  of  the  U.S.  Embassy  in  Belgium, 
Carla  Benini. 


2 


STATE-1 8-0440 


Please  provide  all  responsive  records  from  December  1,  2017,  through  the  date  of  the 
search. 

In  addition  to  the  records  requested  above,  American  Oversight  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  State  uses  FOIA  questionnaires  or  certifications  completed  by  individual  custodians  or 
components  to  determine  whether  they  possess  responsive  materials  or  to  describe  how  diey 
conducted  searches,  we  also  request  any  such  records  prepared  in  connection  with  the  processing 
of  this  request. 

American  Oversight  seeks  all  responsive  records  regardless  of  format,  medium,  or  physical 
characteristics.  In  conducting  your  search,  please  understand  the  terms  “record,”  “document,”  and 
“information”  in  dieir  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. 

Please  search  all  records  regarding  agency  business.  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  are  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; 
American  Oversight  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. 

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 


4  See  Competitive  Enter.  Inst.  v.  Office  ofSci.  &  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). 

’  See  Competitive  Enter.  Inst.  v.  Office  ofSci.  &  Tech.  Policy,  No.  14-cv-765,  slip  op.  at  8  (D.D.C. 
Dec.  12,  2016)  (“The  Government  argues  that  because  the  agency  had  a  policy  requiring  [die 
official]  to  forward  all  of  his  emails  from  his  [personal]  account  to  his  business  email,  die 
[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  [die  official’s]  work  email.  However,  policies  are  rarely  followed  to 
perfection  by  anyone.  At  this  stage  of  the  case,  the  Court  cannot  assume  diat  each  and  every  work 
related  email  in  the  [personal]  account  was  duplicated  in  [die  official’s]  work  email  account.” 
(citations  omitted)). 


3 


STATE-1 8-0440 


custodians  likely  to  have  responsive  information.  Recent  technology  may  have  rendered  State’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  National  Archives  and 
Records  Agency  (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  State’s 
archiving  tools  would  capture  that  email  under  Capstone.  Accordingly,  American  Oversight  insists 
that  State  use  the  most  up-to-date  technologies  to  search  for  responsive  information  and  take  steps 
to  ensure  diat  the  most  complete  repositories  of  information  are  searched.  American  Oversight  is 
available  to  work  with  you  to  craft  appropriate  search  terms.  However,  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. 

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,  American  Oversight  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 
LT.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.”* * * * * * * 8  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.”9  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.’”1" 

In  the  event  some  portions  of  the  requested  records  are  properly  exempt  from  disclosure,  please 
disclose  any  reasonably  segregable  non-exempt  portions  of  the  requested  records.  It  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 


"  Presidential  Memorandum— Managing  Government  Records,  76  Fed.  Reg.  75,423  (Nov.  28, 

2011),  https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/201 1/1 1/28/presidential- 

memorandum-managing-government-records;  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), 

https:// www.  archive  s.  gov/  file  s/ records-mgmt/ m- 12-18  .pdf. 

'  EOIA  Improvement  Act  of  2016  §  2  (Pub.  L.  No.  1 14-185). 

8  Founding  Church  of  Scientology  v.  Bell,  603  F.2d  945,  949  (D.C.  Cir.  1979). 

9  King  v.  U.S.  Dep’t  of  Justice,  830  F.2d  210,  223-24  (D.C.  Cir.  1987)  (emphasis  in  original). 
111  Id.  at  224  (citing  Mead  Data  Central,  Inc.  v.  U.S.  Dep’t  of  die  Air  Force,  566  F.2d  242,  251 
(D.C.  Cir.  1977)). 


4 


STATE-1 8-0440 


portion  of  the  document  is  non-exempt,  and  how  the  material  is  dispersed  throughout  the 
document."  Claims  of  nonsegregability  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. 

You  should  institute  a  preservation  hold  on  information  responsive  to  this  request  American 
Oversight  intends  to  pursue  all  legal  avenues  to  enforce  its  right  of  access  under  FOIA,  including 
litigation  il  necessary.  Accordingly,  State  is  on  notice  that  litigation  is  reasonably  foreseeable. 

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

Where  possible,  please  proride  responsive  material  in  electronic  format  by  email  or  in  PDF  or 
TIF  format  on  a  USB  drive.  Please  send  any  responsive  material  being  sent  by  mail  to  American 
Oversight,  1030  15th  Street  NW,  Suite  B255,  Washington,  DC  20005.  If  it  will  accelerate  release 
of  responsive  records  to  American  Oversight,  please  also  provide  responsive  material  on  a  rolling 
basis. 

Fee  Waiver  Request 

In  accordance  with  5  LbS.C.  §  552(a)(4)(A)  (iii)  and  22  C.F.R.  §  171.16(a),  American  Oversight 
requests  a  waiver  of  fees  associated  with  processing  this  request  for  records.  First,  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.12  Second,  the  request  is  primarily  and  fundamentally  for  non-commercial 
purposes.13 

Under  the  public  interest  requirement,  FOIA  requesters  must  satisfy  four  factors  in  sequence.11 
American  Oversight  has  met  these  four  factors  for  the  reasons  set  forth  below.  The  subject  matter 
of  the  requested  records  specifically  relates  to  die  operations  or  activities  of  the  government, 
because  it  concerns  agency  communications  with  private  individuals,  including  Steve  Bannon, 
whose  public  statements  suggest  that  they  are  undertaking  political  or  diplomatic  efforts  on  behalf 


11  Mead  Data  Central,  566  F.2d  at  261. 

12  22  C.F.R.  §  171.16(a)(1). 

13  22  C.F.R.  §  171.16(a)(2). 

14  D.C.  Technical  Assistance  Org.  Inc.  v.  U.S.  Dep’t  of Hous.  and  Urban  Dev.  ( D.C .  Technical 
Assistance),  85  F.Supp.2d  46,  48-49  (D.D.C.  2000)  (requested  documents  will  contribute  to 
“greater  understanding  of  government  activities”). 


5 


STATE-1 8-0440 


of  tlie  Trump  administration.* 1’  The  requested  documents  will  be  “likely  to  contribute”  to  an 
understanding  of  specific  government  operations  because  of  their  potential  to  shed  light  on  any 
role  State  has  played  in  facilitating  meetings  or  communications  between  Steve  Bannon,  Sean 
Hannity,  or  others  and  the  populist  movements  in  Europe. 

Increasing  the  likelihood  that  disclosure  of  these  records  will  contribute  significantly  to  public 
understanding,  there  is  currently  little  or  no  information  available  concerning  the  extent  of  State’s 
communications  with  Mr.  Bannon  and  others  who  have  stated  that  they  are  working  on  behalf  of 
the  Trump  administration  in  connection  with  European  populist  movements.  American 
Oversight’s  objective  is  to  reveal  to  die  public  at  large  any  information  it  receives  related  to  this 
EOIA  request.  American  Oversight  has  die  capacity  to  disseminate  this  information  as  it  posts  all 
records  to  its  public  websites  and  publishes  analyses  of  its  records.  In  the  past,  the  organization  has 
successfully  informed  die  public  of  specific  government  activities  and  operations.  As  an  example, 
American  Oversight  obtained  Education  Secretary  DeVos’s  calendar  entries,  which  revealed 
Secretary  DeVos’s  frequent  absences  from  office,  staffing  choices,  and  die  influence  of  charter 
schools  and  for-profit  colleges  on  the  Education  Department."  The  New  York  Times  and  CNN 
relied  on  American  Oversight’s  analyses  to  report  on  Secretary  DeVos’s  priorities  within  the 
Department  of  Education.1' 

Disclosure  will  contribute  to  a  greater  understanding  on  die  part  of  the  public  at  large  about 
whether  the  State  Department  has  worked  to  promote  Mr.  Bannon’s  efforts  to  engage  European 
populist  movements  on  behalf  of  the  Trump  administration.  Disclosure  will  “significandy” 
contribute  to  die  public’s  understanding  of  government  activities  or  operations  related  to  whether 
State  has  communicated  with  Mr.  Bannon  and  odier  individuals  to  aid  political  or  diplomatic 
efforts  to  strengthen  ties  between  the  Trump  administration  and  European  political  movements. 
The  subject  of  this  request  is  a  matter  of  public  interest,  and  the  public’s  understanding  of  the 
government’s  activities  would  be  enhanced  through  American  Oversight’s  analysis  and  publication 
of  these  records. 

American  Oversight’s  request  is  ;dso  primarily  and  fundamentally  for  non-commercial  purposes.18 
As  a  501(c)(3)  nonprofit,  American  Oversight  does  not  have  a  commercial  purpose  and  die  release 


See  Kami,  supra  note  1;  Gray,  supra  note  3. 

16  See  Influence  &  Access  at  the  Department  of  Education,  AMERICAN  OVERSIGHT  (Oct.  27, 
2017),  https://www.tunericanoversight.org/investigation/inlluence-access-at-the-departnient-of- 

education:  Unexcused  Absences:  DeVos  Calendars  Show  Frequent  Days  Off,  AMERICAN 
OVERSIGHT  (Oct.  27,  2017),  1  ll  I  ps://w\vw.auiericauoycrsigl  il.org/uuexcused-ahscuccs-dcvos. 

1  Eric  Lipton,  Betsy  DeVos’s  School  Schedule  Shows  Focus  on  Religious  and  Nontraditional 
Schools,  N.Y.  TIMES,  Oct.  27,  2017,  https://www.nvtimes.com/20 17/1 0/27/us/politics/betsy-devos- 
work-schedule-education.html;  Gregory  Wallace  et.  al.,  What  Betsy  DeVos’s  Schedule  Tells  Us 
About  Her  Agenda,  CNN  (Oct.  29,  2017,  12:22  PM), 

http://www.cnn.com/20 17/1 0/28/politics/devos-schedules-education/index.html. 

18  22  C.F.R.  §  171.16(a)(2)  (i)-(iii) 


6 


STATE-1 8-0440 


of  the  information  requested  is  not  in  American  Oversight’s  financial  interest.  American 
Oversight’s  mission  is  to  promote  transparency  in  government,  to  educate  tire  public  about 
government  activities,  and  to  ensure  die  accountability  of  government  officials.  American  Oversight 
uses  the  information  gathered,  and  its  analysis  of  it,  to  educate  die  public  through  reports,  press 
releases,  or  other  media.  American  Oversight  also  makes  materials  it  gathers  available  on  our 
public  website  and  promotes  their  availability  on  social  media  platforms,  such  as  Facebook  and 
Twitter.19  American  Oversight  has  demonstrated  its  commitment  to  the  public  disclosure  of 
documents  and  creation  of  editorial  content.  For  example,  after  receiving  records  regarding  an 
ethics  waiver  received  by  a  senior  DOJ  attorney,  American  Oversight  promptly  posted  the  records 
to  its  website20  and  published  an  analysis  of  what  die  records  reflected  about  DOJ’s  process  for 
ethics  waivers.21  As  an  additional  example,  American  Oversight  has  a  project  calk'd  “Audit  the 
Wall,”  where  the  organization  is  gathering  and  analyzing  information  and  commenting  on  public 
releases  of  information  related  to  the  administration’s  proposed  construction  of  a  harrier  along  die 
IkS. -Mexico  border.22 

Accordingly,  American  Oversight  qualifies  for  a  fee  waiver. 

Conclusion 

We  share  a  common  mission  to  promote  transparency  in  government.  American  Oversight  looks 
forward  to  working  with  State  on  this  request.  If  you  do  not  understand  any  part  of  this  request, 
have  any  questions,  or  foresee  any  problems  in  fully  releasing  the  requested  records,  please  contact 
Dan  McGrath  at  foia@iuiiericanoversight.org  or  202.897.4213.  Also,  if  American  Oversight’s 


1  American  Oversight  currently  has  approximately  1 1,900  page  likes  on  Facebook  and  44,500 
followers  on  Twitter.  American  Oversight,  FACEBOOK,  https://www.facebook.com/weareoversight 
(last  visited  August  17,  2018);  American  Oversight  (@weareoversight),  TWITTER, 
https://twitter.com/weareoversight  (last  visited  August  17,  2018). 

20  DOJ  Civil  Division  Response  Noel  Francisco  Compliance,  AMERICAN  OVERSIGHT, 
https://www.ainericanoversight.org/docunient/doi-civil-division-response-noel-francisco- 

compliance. 

21  Francisco  &  the  Travel  Ban:  What  We  Learned  from  the  DOJ  Documents,  AMERICAN 
OVERSIGHT,  https://www.ainericanoversight.org/francisco-tiie-travel-ban-what-we-learned-from-the- 
doj-documents. 

22  Audit  the  Wall,  AMERICAN  OVERSIGHT,  https://www.aniericanoversiglit.org/investigation/audit- 
the-walh 


7 


STATE-1 8-0440 


request  for  a  fee  waiver  is  not  granted  in  full,  please  contact  us  immediately  upon  making  such  a 
determination. 

Sincerely, 


Melanie  Sloan 
Senior  Advisor 
American  Oversight 


8 


STATE-1 8-0440