FBI's Massive Illegal Immoral Corrupt Mole Informant Entrap Spy Program Exposed

grarpamp grarpamp at gmail.com
Tue Apr 12 22:56:59 PDT 2022


FBI Memos Suggest Agency Had Moles In Media

by Ken Silva

https://www.theepochtimes.com/fbi-memos-suggest-agency-had-moles-in-media_4377070.html

https://publicintegrity.org/accountability/memo-suggests-fbi-had-mole-inside-abc-news-in-1990s/
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/21573520-sensitive-informant-motion
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2022/mar/11/fbi-audit-reveals-agents-rule-breaking-investigati/
https://www.theepochtimes.com/fbis-operation-to-infiltrate-right-wing-extremist-groups-lies-at-center-of-transparency-lawsuit-2_4292365.html
https://www.theepochtimes.com/patcon-explored-records-provide-glimpse-of-fbi-right-wing-infiltration-ops_4344148.html
https://publicintegrity.org/national-security/judge-orders-fbi-to-cough-up-information-about-a-previously-secret-computer-drive/
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/21573636-abc-mole-i
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/21573640-abc-mole-ii
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/21573649-nbc-mole1
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/21573650-nbc-mole2
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/21573651-nbc-mole3
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/21573652-nbc-mole4
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/21573653-nbc-mole5
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/21573654-nbc-mole6
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/21573658-bob-norman
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/21573659-defense-team-mole
https://www.theepochtimes.com/fbis-operation-to-infiltrate-right-wing-extremist-groups-lies-at-center-of-transparency-lawsuit-2_4292365.html
https://www1.villanova.edu/villanova/law/library/specialcollections/alexandercharnscollection.html

Investigator Roger Charles was combing through records of the FBI’s
Oklahoma City bombing investigation more than a decade ago, when he
discovered a memo suggesting that someone working at ABC News provided
a tip to the bureau a day after the deadly April 19, 1995, domestic
terrorist attack.
The FBI seal is attached to a podium at a news conference at FBI
Headquarters in Washington on June 14, 2018. (Mark Wilson/Getty
Images)

It appeared that a senior ABC News journalist had been doubling as an
FBI informant. The memo made a few headlines in 2011, but quickly
passed through the news cycle with little impact and hardly any
coverage by major outlets.

However, Charles’s discovery stoked the curiosity of his friend,
attorney Jesse Trentadue. The Utah resident was suing the FBI for
records related to his brother’s murder, and began filing requests in
2012 to see if the bureau had other informants in the media, as well
as places such as congressional offices, courts, churches, other
government agencies, and the White House.

Trentadue said the U.S. government’s response shocked him.

“I thought they’d come back and say, ‘We would never do that because
that would be illegal and unconstitutional,’” he said. “Instead, they
came back and said, ‘Yeah, we do that. We have manuals on that, but
you can’t have them because of national security.’”

The FBI fought against Trentadue for years in federal court to keep
its manuals secret, and was ultimately successful. A federal judge
dismissed the lawsuit in 2015.

However, Trentadue said the litigation helped him piece together what
he calls the FBI’s “sensitive informant program.” According to his
lawsuit over the matter, this program is used to place informants in
the national media, among other institutions.

The FBI has not responded to questions from The Epoch Times for this
story, including about Trentadue’s description of the sensitive
informant program. The bureau has defended the use of informants in
sensitive institutions as a necessary to root out corruption and other
crime, while former director J. Edgar Hoover deemed such tactics as
necessary to fight communism.

But in the wake of a recently released, scathing internal FBI
audit—which found special agents breaking their own rules more than
twice per reviewed case when investigating sensitive institutions—some
lawmakers are beginning to question the bureau’s sweeping
investigatory powers.

“It has been nearly two weeks since this information was revealed, and
the FBI has thus far declined to comment or provide additional
transparency,” Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) said in a March 31 letter. “I
believe the Senate would benefit from hearing directly from Inspector
General Horowitz, FBI Director Wray, as well as any division directors
with knowledge of the audit or the errors detailed in it.”
Trentadue’s Records

According to Utah attorney Trentadue, the redacted FBI audit only
begins to scratch the surface of the bureau’s purported wrongdoing.

He would know. His litigation against the U.S. government, spanning
four decades, has unearthed numerous revelations about the FBI,
including details about undercover right-wing infiltration operations
and previously hidden databases.

One of Trentadue’s findings that hasn’t received media coverage—until
now—pertains to sensitive informants.

Documents Trentadue provided to The Epoch Times included the initial
FBI memo Charles discovered about the informant within ABC, as well as
previously unpublicized memos written by special agents receiving
information from ABC and NBC.

Among those is a September 1996 FBI memo, reporting that a
“confidential source who works for a news agency [learned] that ABC
News was going to air an expose in the next few days concerning the
OKC bombing.”

“ABC will be interviewing a rescue worker who is going to state that
ATF had stored a large amount of explosives in the MURRAH BUILDING,
which contributed to the explosion. The rescue worker is also going to
advise that evidence of these explosives was found by rescue workers,
and this particular rescue worker had contacted the FBI with this
information, and was told by the FBI to keep quiet,” the FBI memo
says.

“This rescue worker is currently upset because nothing has been done
with this information and he feels the FBI has attempted to cover up
the information.”

The September 1996 memo identifies the person at the news agency as a
“confidential source,” rather than referring to the person by a serial
number—suggesting that this source may be different than the
aforementioned informant. Trentadue said he didn’t know for sure, nor
did he know whether the ABC report referenced in the memo was ever
published.

Then, there’s a series of FBI memos that also serve as the subject of
controversy in another Trentadue lawsuit. These memos describe FBI
agents who were allegedly trying to sell surveillance footage of the
Oklahoma City bombing to NBC.

No arrests resulted from the matter, and the U.S. government says the
surveillance footage discussed in the memos does not exist. Trentadue
is seeking to prove the existence of the footage in a separate,
ongoing lawsuit against the FBI that has been sealed for the past
seven years.

Putting aside the surveillance footage controversy, the memos show
that the FBI was receiving information from within NBC.

The first tip from NBC came on Oct. 27, 1995, when a confidential
source, whose identity is redacted, said the NBC show Dateline had
been contacted by an attorney. According to the FBI memo, the attorney
represented an FBI agent in Los Angeles who was seeking to sell
surveillance footage for more than $1 million.

“It was represented that the video tape would contain lapse
photography of the arrival and then departure of a UPS truck. Then a
Ryder truck pulls up and a male resembling Timothy McVeigh [sic] is
seen exiting the driver’s side of the Ryder truck and then walking
away,” the FBI memo says. “Next, a second male is seen exiting the
passenger side of the Ryder truck and walking to the back of the
truck. The second male then walks away in the same direction as the
first male.”

The FBI received five more tips through Nov. 7 about the
matter—including someone offering to provide a prepublication copy of
a story about “negotiations between an unknown Los Angeles Agent of
the FBI and ‘Dateline,’” the memo said.

Other records suggest that the FBI used reporters as sources of
information—whether the reporter knew it or not. For instance, an
April 25, 1995, FBI memo states that reporter Bob Norman, of the News
Press, a daily newspaper in Florida, called the bureau to provide
information.

The FBI memo said Norman “advised” a special agent that Oklahoma City
bomber Timothy McVeigh had connections to Florida’s militia. But
Norman, currently an active reporter who has recently written for the
Florida Bulldog, said he was simply calling for comment on a story he
was writing at the time.

“I’m sure the agent wanted me to share my source material and, as his
own report shows, I correctly refused to do so,” Norman said in a
statement to The Epoch Times.

The FBI memo indeed reflects that Norman declined to provide the
bureau with a videotape—telling the special agent that “he was not
convinced his superiors will approve of sharing this information with
the FBI, and therefore he cannot provide a copy of the tapes or
further information.”

“While I disagree with the agent’s characterization of the reason for
the call, this is what journalists do,” Norman said. “We present our
found information to authorities in order to get confirmation,
additional information, context, denials, etc. It is, in fact, an
essential part of the fact-gathering process.”

Along with the FBI memos about reporters, Trentadue provided a memo
that suggests the FBI had advance knowledge of a new member joining
McVeigh’s defense team. A special agent reported at the time that he
received information from a confidential witness.

Confidential witnesses differ from typical informants in that they
often testify at trials. This particular confidential witness
identified in the May 1995 memo provided information about a loan
shark scam and a “special forces national convention” set to take
place in Nevada that year.

The confidential witness (CW) also provided information about
McVeigh’s defense team, telling the FBI that a woman named Wilma
Sparks was joining the team.

“The CW advised that WILMA SPARKS is a close associate of the CW and
that SPARKS is taking on the responsibility of investigating certain
aspects of the investigation,” the memo said. “SPARKS advised the CW
that although this was a distasteful assignment, she was willing to
accept the assignment to ensure that the case against MCVEIGH will not
be overturned due to incompetent counsel.”

McVeigh’s lead defense counsel, Stephen Jones, declined to comment on the memo.
Trentadue’s Court Case

Trentadue used the FBI memos and other documents as evidence to
support his Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit in 2012.

At the time, Trentadue was seeking fully un-redacted copies of the FBI
Domestic Investigations and Operations Guide (DIOG), the FBI
Confidential Human Source Validation Standards Manual, the FBI
Confidential Human Source Policy Manual, and the FBI Confidential
Human Source Policy Implementation Guide. The Utah attorney had
received a few pages from those manuals that contained references to
sensitive informants, but offered few details due to the heavy
redactions.

As part of his effort, Trentadue was seeking to conduct discovery. He
wanted to know whether the FBI had informants in the courts, Congress,
media, and other government agencies at any point since January 1995.
He also sought information about how many sensitive informants the FBI
had in each institution.

The U.S. government resisted Trentadue’s efforts to conduct discovery
at every turn. In email correspondence, prosecutors told him he had no
legal standing.

“This case is not one where you have asked the Court to declare an
alleged ‘secret surveillance program’ illegal on any ground … nor have
you sought to enjoin any activity that you allege any such program
might be conducting,” the DOJ told him.

“Instead, this case, like the numerous other FOIA cases that you have
filed in this Court, is about nothing except for whether the FBI
performed an adequate search for records responsive to your FOIA
requests.”

In a January 2013 motion for a Salt Lake City federal judge to order
the FBI to answer his questions, Trentadue argued against the DOJ’s
explanation.

“The issue in this dispute between the parties is not the adequacy of
the FBI’s search for the Manual. The FBI found the Manual,” Trentadue
said in his motion, referring to an FBI book on using sensitive
informants. “The issue for the Court to decide is whether the FOIA
exemptions advanced by the FBI for withholding portions of the Manual
apply and, even if they do apply, can those exemptions be lawfully
asserted to conceal FBI activities that are unconstitutional and/or
otherwise illegal?

“Plaintiff submits that the answers to this two-part question are, ‘NO.’”

However, federal judge Dale Kimball ruled in favor of the FBI in July
2013, writing in his decision that discovery is generally unavailable
in FOIA litigation, and that he found no reason to deviate from that
rule.

In April 2014, the FBI moved for a summary judgment to end the lawsuit
once and for all. FBI agents provided written declarations in support
of the motion, articulating the bureau’s reasons for withholding
information about sensitive informants.

Eric Velez-Villar, then the assistant director of the FBI’s
Directorate of Intelligence (DI), said revealing information in the
manuals would compromise sources and methods for how the bureau
handles informants.

“The effectiveness of techniques involving undisclosed participation
[by informants] is directly contingent upon the FBI keeping its
involvement in such activities undisclosed,” Velez-Villar said. “The
information was intended for an audience of FBI employees only.”

As for information specific to sensitive investigations and
informants, Velez-Villar said disclosing such policies would “disclose
critical tools utilized by the FBI in its investigations and
intelligence gathering efforts.”

“Releasing the policies governing these sensitive investigative
techniques and strategies would compound the harm of such a disclosure
by also revealing how and when the FBI can/will utilize these tools,”
he said.

The FBI’s motion also included sworn statements from officials at the
State Department and CIA, both agreeing that the sensitive informant
manuals should be kept secret.

The head of the CIA’s litigation support unit, Martha Lutz, said
disclosing the FBI manuals could compromise CIA sources.

“In this case, the FBI manual indicates certain traits or
characteristics of FBI confidential human sources that should give
rise to notification or coordination with CIA. By doing so, the
manuals reveal the particular traits or characteristics that may be
associated with CIA human sources, such as an individual’s national
origin or travel habits,” Lutz said.

“Publicly disclosing this information creates the risk that
adversaries of the United States may gain insight into the traits and
characteristics that CIA values in human sources.”

Trentadue opposed the FBI’s motion for summary judgment and the two
parties duked it out at a November 2014 hearing over the matter. But
after reviewing the unredacted manuals in private, Judge Kimball
granted the FBI’s national security exemptions in June 2015.

Kimball noted that government agencies are “entitled to considerable
deference” when they exercise national security or law enforcement
exemptions. Unless there’s evidence of bad faith by government actors,
then the courts have no power to make government agencies disclose
secret information, he said.

In this case—unlike in another, ongoing FOIA lawsuit between Trentadue
and the FBI, where there’s an ongoing witness tampering investigation
taking place—Kimball said he found no evidence of bad faith on the
part of the U.S. government.

“Having conducted a thorough in camera review of the documents (or
portions thereof) withheld by the agency, in conjunction with the
agency’s claimed reasons for so withholding the information, the court
concludes that the claimed exemptions are valid,” the judge said. “The
FBI has demonstrated … that it has withheld sensitive information
because that information logically falls within the scope of the
claimed exemption.”

Kimball ordered the case closed on June 9, 2015.
Trentadue’s Findings

Trentadue argues that his FOIA litigation, coupled with the FBI memos
he’s procured, demonstrates that the FBI has much to hide about its
use of sensitive informants.

“Yes, the FBI does need sensitive informants to, as you say,
investigate corruption and potential violent groups.  Yes, the FBI
should have manuals to make sure that these are done legally. But the
key is that I asked for manuals governing ‘recruitment/management’ of
specific informants, which FBI produced but redacted,” he told this
reporter.

“It is not a case of someone coming to the FBI offering to expose
corruption. The bureau is recruiting spies.”

Other FOIA and legal experts tend to agree.

“My guess is that he’s probably right,” said Sean Dunagan, senior
investigator at the conservative watchdog Judicial Watch. “It’s just
very difficult to reach any conclusions with moral certitude, based on
what the FBI didn’t hand over.”

Attorney and author Alexander Charns, who chronicled how J. Edgar
Hoover’s FBI infiltrated the federal judiciary in his book, “Cloak and
Gavel: FBI Wiretaps, Bugs, Informers, and the Supreme Court,” said
history supports Trentadue’s claims, and that Congress should look
into the matter.

Charns’s book, which covers thousands of Supreme Court and FBI records
obtained by the author, details the many tactics Hoover used to
influence the Supreme Court—from wiretaps to PR campaigns, and
including the use of informants.

“It is disturbing, but not surprising, to find that at least three
Court employees reported directly to the FBI,” he wrote.

Offering the qualifier that his expertise on FBI informants is limited
to the Hoover era, Charns said the bureau has a natural tendency to
push its spying powers to the legal limits—and sometimes beyond.

“I don’t have evidence that this is occurring now, but it seems like
law enforcement is opportunistic. So, if they have an opportunity to
place an informant in an organization that raises constitutional
questions, they often tend to look at it as: They’re not going to
refuse information,” he said.


More information about the cypherpunks mailing list