Charlie Savage’s Twitter Archive—№ 13,008

THREAD: The government has posted in PACER a heavily redacted version of one of the 5 Durham reports to Holder about why no prosecutions were warranted re the CIA torture program, stemming from our long-running FOIA lawsuit. beta.documentcloud.org/documents/20392756-savage-nyt-foia-redacted-durham-report-to-holder-on-cia-detainees-not-in-cia-custody /1
Permalink On twitter.com ♻️ 21 Retweets ❤️ 31 Favorites 2020 Sep 29 Mood -7 🙁

…in reply to @charlie_savage
We received this in January, except for page 7, which has an extra graph un-redacted now. It consists solely of portions that are responsive to the 2nd Circuit ruling that they had to disclose parts about Durham's conclusion that some detainees were never in CIA custody. /2
Permalink On twitter.com ♻️ 1 Retweets ❤️ 5 Favorites 2020 Sep 29 Mood +2 🙂

…in reply to @charlie_savage
I looked at this list in January and showed it to several folks who are in the weeds on the CIA program and it was hard to derive useful insights from it, so we have kept litigating to try to get more pages revealed. /3
Permalink On twitter.com ❤️ 9 Favorites 2020 Sep 29 Mood +1 🙂

…in reply to @charlie_savage
Specifically, we think that there may be pages about detainees where it was ambiguous whether the detainee was in CIA custody (constructively) or a foreign government intel service's custody (formally) that the government is keeping censored./4
Permalink On twitter.com ♻️ 2 Retweets ❤️ 10 Favorites 2020 Sep 29 Mood -2 🙁

…in reply to @charlie_savage
We think that such discussion would fall within the 2nd Circuit's mandate to reveal portions that "relate to the conclusion that some of the detainees were not in CIA custody." /5
On twitter.com ❤️ 4 Favorites 2020 Sep 29 Mood 0