Robert Mueller involved in FBI release of deceptive statements about Sarasota 9/11 probe
By Stew Webb Federal Whistle blower
January 18, 2018
By Dan Christensen, FloridaBulldog.org
A recent government court filing is raising questions about then-FBI Director Robert Mueller’s involvement in the public release of deceptive official statements about a secret FBI investigation of Sarasota Saudis with apparent ties to the 9/11 hijackers.
The misleading statements, issued by FBI officials in Miami and Tampa, were made within days of a September 2011 Florida Bulldog story disclosing the existence of the investigation and reporting that Congress had been kept in the dark about it.
The statements sought to discredit the story, asserting that agents had found no connection between the Sarasota Saudi family and the 9/11 plot. In fact, the FBI’s own files contained at least three reports that said the opposite: that agents found “many connections” between the family and “individuals associated with the terrorist attacks on 9/11/2001.” The FBI released those reports later amid continuing Freedom of Information (FOI) litigation brought by Florida Bulldog.
Mueller, now the special counsel overseeing the investigation into alleged Russian efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election, is referenced in a document index created in late November by the FBI at the direction of U.S. District Judge William J. Zloch of Fort Lauderdale. The index was compiled after Zloch asked the FBI to explain where in its complex file system it had located about 80 pages released earlier in the six-year-old FOI case.
The FBI has produced an additional 80,000 classified pages for Zloch’s private inspection. The judge recently indicated he’d completed his three-year review of those records, but has given no hint as to what they say.
Flurry of 9/11 related activities
News of Mueller’s involvement comes amid a flurry of 9/11 related activities, and not just in Fort Lauderdale. Today, January 18, lawyers for thousands of survivors, relatives and other victims of the 2001 al Qaeda terrorist attacks will appear in federal court in New York City to argue against Saudi Arabia’s renewed motion to dismiss their long-running lawsuit against it, and other matters.
Last week in Atlanta, attorneys for Florida Bulldog replied in a federal appeals court to government arguments that seek to block the further release of records of the 9/11 Review Commission. The filing also opposed the FBI’s effort to overturn rulings by Miami U.S. District Judge Cecilia Altonaga that would require the FBI to restore the names of agents and others whose names were redacted from documents released earlier on privacy grounds.
Abdulaziz al-Hijji, right, in Sarasota prior to 9/11 and leaving his London office in 2012 Photo in London by Warren Allot for The Telegraph
In Washington last month, three members of Congress, two Republicans and one Democrat, introduced House Resolution 663 that calls for the declassification of all 9/11 documents “to the greatest extent possible” to allow for a “full public understanding” of what happened.
The index reference to former FBI Director Mueller is contained in an item about a FBI white paper that was written one week after the Bulldog and the Miami Herald simultaneously published the Bulldog’s story about the abrupt departure of Saudis Abdulaziz and Anoud al-Hijji from their Sarasota area home about two weeks before 9/11. The couple left behind their cars, clothes, furniture, jewelry and other personal items.
“It was created to brief the FBI Director concerning the FBI’s investigation of 4224 Escondito Circle,” the al-Hijjis’ address, the index says.
The white paper, titled “Alleged Sarasota Link to 9/11 Hijackers,” is on stationery of the Counterterrorism Division Guantanamo Detainee Prosecution Section 9:11 Prosecution Unit. It was first released in March 2013 and erroneously begins: “The FBI found no evidence that connected the family members mentioned in the Miami Herald article to any of the 9/11 hijackers, nor was any connection found between the family and the 9/11 plot.”
Same day announcement
The same day the white paper was prepared for Director Mueller, Sept. 15, 2011, FBI Tampa Public Affairs Officer David Couvertier sent a similarly worded email to the Tampa Bay Times on behalf of Special Agent in Charge Steven E. Ibison: “At no time did the FBI develop evidence that connected the family members to any of the 9/11 hijackers as suggested in the article, and there was no connection found to the 9/11 plot.”
Florida Bulldog’s Miami attorney, Thomas Julin, filed court papers last week asserting a “red flag” has been raised in the case by disclosure of the FBI director’s involvement.
“That Mueller received a briefing about the Sarasota investigation suggests that the issues the Bulldog raised required the attention of the FBI’s highest authority,” Julin wrote.
The circumstances further suggest that Director Mueller approved the deception in which the FBI engaged.
Mueller did not respond to questions emailed to his office on Tuesday.
The two-page white paper, not attributed to any individual, is likewise interesting for what it did not tell Mueller. For example, it made no mention of the 2002 FBI reports stating that “many connections” were found between the al-Hijjis and the 9/11 hijackers. Nor did it discuss whether the FBI withheld the results of its Sarasota investigation from Congress, as former Florida Sen. Bob Graham, co-chair of Congress’ Joint Inquiry into 9/11, has said under oath.
The provenance of the “Guantanamo” white paper is also curious. While the source of the document is undoubtedly the FBI, a second altered version was released to Florida Bulldog last year amid another FOI lawsuit seeking records of the 9/11 Review Commission that is now on appeal by both sides. The reference in the heading that indicates the document was generated by Guantanamo’s 9/11 prosecution unit is missing. No explanation for the differences was given.
The white paper appears to have been written in response to a Sept. 14, 2011 request for information about the Sarasota investigation made by Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-VT, then chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, to Mueller and then-Attorney General Eric Holder.
More than two months later, on Nov. 22, Assistant Attorney General Ronald Weich sent Leahy a response that perpetuated the FBI’s deception about its Sarasota findings:
“Contrary to suggestions in media reports, the FBI did not develop any evidence that connected the family members to any of the 9/11 hijackers or to the 9/11 plot.”
Related posts:
- FBI says again it found no ties between Sarasota Saudis and 9/11 hijackers; won’t release details
- Bob Graham: FBI hindered Congress’s 9/11 inquiry, withheld reports about Sarasota Saudis
- Graham: FBI’s public statements are in conflict with still secret records of Sarasota 9/11 probe
- U.S. judge asked to okay deposition of FBI agent in Sarasota Saudi probe
- FBI slams own 9/11 document; New report discounts Sarasota Saudis ties to hijackers
http://www.floridabulldog.org/911-articles/
Florida Bulldog
http://www.floridabulldog.org/
Dan Christensen
dchristensen@browardbulldog.org
Related
Lawsuit #1 – On September 5, 2012, Broward Bulldog — now Florida Bulldog — filed a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit in federal court in Fort Lauderdale against the Department of Justice and the FBI. The 25-page FOIA complaint seeks records of an FBI investigation involving a Saudi family, former residents of Sarasota, who may have provided aid or assistance to the 9/11 hijackers.
Lawsuit #2 – On June 15, 2016, the Bulldog again sued the FBI and Justice Department – this time seeking records about the FBI 9/11 Review Commission. Those records include the commission’s efforts to discredit an April 2002 FBI report released under the Freedom of Information Act that corroborated earlier reporting about the Saudi family’s quick exit from their Sarasota home two weeks before the attacks and their apparent ties to the 9/11 hijackers.
Mandatory Declassification Review – Florida Bulldog Editor Dan Christensen and 9/11 authors Anthony Summers and Robbyn Swan are also pursuing what’s known as a Mandatory Declassification Review of 28 pages that were censored from the report to the nation by Congress’s Joint Inquiry into the terrorist attacks. Those pages involve “specific sources of foreign support” for the hijackers while they were in the U.S. The matter, filed in 2013, is before the Interagency Security Classification Appeals Panel. CASE CLOSED JANUARY 2017. Key documents from the Mandatory Declassification Review and FOIA cases are below.
FOIA LAWSUIT #2 (9/11 Review Commission):
**New** 6/2/17 – Joint Status Report Regarding the Conclusion of this Case
6/2/17 – Motion for Reconsideration of Court’s Order Denying Defendants’s Motion for Summary Judgement
6/2/17 – Exhibit 1 to Motion for Reconsideration
5/16/17 – Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Motions for Summary Judgment
3/28/17 – Plaintiffs Opposition to Motion for Summary Judgment on Count 1
3/14/17 – Defendants Motion for Summary Judgment on Count I
2/27/17 – Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Motion for Partial Summary Judgment
1/19/17 – Defendants’ Reply to Response to Motion for Summary Judgment on Counts 2 and 3
1/13/17 – Plaintiffs Memo in Opposition to Defendants Motion for Summary Judgment on Counts 2 and 3 Hearing set for Feb. 7, 8 a.m. before Miami U.S. District Court Judge Cecilia Altonaga
1/13/17 – Declaration of Dan Christensen Exhibits removed due to large file
1/13/17 – Declaration of Terry Strada
**New** – 12/31/16 – Defendants Motion for Summary Judgment on Counts 2 and 3
12/31/16 – DE-27-1 Second Declaration of David M. Hardy
12/20/16 – Government Motion to Continue Trial denied
8/10/16 – Order Cancelling Mediation
8/3/16 – Scheduling Order
7/25/16 – Answer and Affirmative Defenses
6/15/16 — Complaint
MANDATORY DECLASSIFICATION REVIEW (28 pages and underlying documents):
**New** 1/13/17 — ISCAP Release of the 28 Pages Part1 With asserted reasons for each redaction ISCAP Release of the 28 PagesPart2 ISCAP Release of the 28 PagesPart3
CASE CLOSED
7/15/16 – 28pages released by President Obama. ISCAP proceedings continue regarding underlying FBI, CIA documents
10/1/14 — Letter to ISCAP from Members of Congress
7/15/14 — Letter from John P. Fitzpatrick regarding ISCAP Appeal
7/10/14 — Appeal to Interagency Classification Appeals Panel (ISCAP) regarding the 28 pages
7/3/14 — Letter from David M. Hardy (FBI) Denying Request for a Mandatory Declassification Review
3/17/14 — Review Committee will hear appeal
2/13/14 — Request for Declassification Review Committee Determination
12/3/13 — H. Res. 428 -Congressmen urge Obama to declassify 28 pages from censored 9/11 report
10/2/13 — 9/11 Families press release
6/26/13 — DOJ Response to Request for Mandatory Declassification Review
6/20/13 — 9/11 Families Letter to President Obama
6/10/13 — Request to White House to release 28 censored page from Congress’s report on 9/11
6/10/13 — Request to Department of Justice for Mandatory Declassification Review of the 28 pages
FOIA LAWSUIT #1 (FBI’s Sarasota investigation):
**NEW** 3/31/17 – Order on Interim Motion for Attorneys Fees
8/8/16 – Defense Notice of Declassification
5/31/16 – Interim motion for attorney fees
5/31/16 – Declaration of Thomas R. Julin
3/22/16 – Paperless order by Judge William J. Zloch denying 4/24/15 motion for status conference and to depose FBI agent
5/11/15 – FBI response to request to depose FBI agent
4/24/15 — Request to depose FBI agent
7/1/14 —Document release #4. 11 pages.
6/6/14 — Fourth Hardy Declaration Document Release #3. 31 pages.
5/9/14 — Third Hardy Declaration Document Release #2. 4 pages.
5/1/14 — Defendants Notice of In Camera Filing-boxes
4/18/14 — Order Denying Motion for Reconsideration and Defendants Notice of In Camera Filing
4/17/14 — Government’s Motion for Reconsideration and Second Hardy Declaration
4/6/14 — Further Order on Motion to Compel
4/4/14 Order Compelling Better Search
3/26/14 — Newspapers’ amicus brief
3/20/14 — Order granting leave to file amicus brief
10/9/13 — Government motion opposing the filing of an Amicus brief by The Miami Herald
9/27/13 — Miami Herald Motion for Leave to File Amicus Curiae Brief
9/13/13– Sarasota Herald Tribune Motion to Intervene
8/15/13 — Our Reply to Government’s Response to Motion to Compel
8/7/13 — Government’s Response to Motion to Compel
7/19/13 — Our Motion to Compel Additional Search
7/12/13 — Order from Pretrial Conference
6/28/13 — Order Denying Defendants Motion to Dismiss Complaint
6/19/13 — Defendants Motion for Protective Order
6/26/13 — Joint Pretrial Stipulation
7/6/13 — Plaintiffs Opposition to Motion for Protective Order
6/10/13 — Government’s Reply to Memorandum in Opposition
5/31/13 — Our Memorandum in Opposition to Summary Judgment
5/13/14 — The Government’s Motion for Summary Judgment Government Exhibits
3/29/13 — FBI Document Release — #1. 35 pages.
12/13/12 — The Government’s Reply to our Memorandum in Opposition to Dismissal
12/3/12 — Our Response in Opposition to the Motion to Dismiss the Complaint
11/19/12 — The Government’s Motion to Dismiss
9/5/12 Our FOIA complaint
Your kind Contributions are very much appreciated thank you. – Stew Webb
.jpg)
