vault backup: 2026-10-16 01:25:00
This commit is contained in:
parent
837c566626
commit
9173c41b79
199 changed files with 10378 additions and 1741 deletions
|
|
@ -103,7 +103,7 @@ Personnel consequences: Allen Dulles was forced to resign, replaced by John McCo
|
|||
|
||||
Of approximately 1,400 Brigade members: 114 were killed in battle; approximately 1,179 were captured; 1,113 survived to the eventual exchange. Castro announced in April 1962 that the prisoners faced trial as "war criminals," with sentences of 30 years or payment of $62 million in indemnification.
|
||||
|
||||
Robert Kennedy secretly recruited [[New York]] attorney James B. Donovan - who had negotiated the [[Rudolf Abel]] spy exchange - to reopen prisoner talks in June 1962. Donovan worked pro bono. Negotiations were disrupted by the [[Cuban Missile Crisis]] in October 1962 but resumed. On December 21, 1962, Donovan and Castro signed an agreement: 1,113 surviving prisoners were exchanged for $53 million in food, medicines, and other humanitarian supplies, raised through private donations from pharmaceutical companies and other sources.
|
||||
Robert Kennedy secretly recruited [[New York City|New York]] attorney James B. Donovan - who had negotiated the [[Rudolf Abel]] spy exchange - to reopen prisoner talks in June 1962. Donovan worked pro bono. Negotiations were disrupted by the [[Cuban Missile Crisis]] in October 1962 but resumed. On December 21, 1962, Donovan and Castro signed an agreement: 1,113 surviving prisoners were exchanged for $53 million in food, medicines, and other humanitarian supplies, raised through private donations from pharmaceutical companies and other sources.
|
||||
|
||||
Kennedy welcomed the released prisoners at the Orange Bowl in Miami on December 29, 1962. Brigade 2506 presented Kennedy with their battle flag; Kennedy stated he would return it "to a free Havana." He never did.[^6]
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -21,10 +21,13 @@ In November 1934 Major General Smedley Butler informed a congressional committee
|
|||
|
||||
### Financial and Industrial Backing
|
||||
|
||||
The plot was financed through the Guaranty Trust Company, a J.P. Morgan financial institution with ties to City of London financiers. Armaments for the prospective paramilitary units were to be supplied by Remington Arms Co., a firearms subsidiary controlled by the DuPont family. The DuPonts were not merely passive investors; they were literally fascists in the author's assessment, having maintained cartel arrangements with the Nazi chemicals conglomerate I.G. Farben throughout the 1920s and 1930s. Alfred P. Sloan, who managed [[General Motors]] on behalf of the DuPonts from 1923 to 1966, personally authorized the transfer of Ethyl lead to the Luftwaffe as late as 1938. The largest tank manufacturer in Nazi Germany was Opel, a wholly owned GM subsidiary that continued operating under the American corporate umbrella throughout the Second World War.
|
||||
The plot was financed through the Guaranty Trust Company, a J.P. Morgan financial institution with ties to City of London financiers. Armaments for the prospective paramilitary units were to be supplied by Remington Arms Co., a firearms subsidiary controlled by the DuPont family. The DuPonts were not merely passive investors; they were literally fascists in the author's assessment, having maintained cartel arrangements with the Nazi chemicals conglomerate I.G. Farben throughout the 1920s and 1930s. S. Dovey wrote in 2023 that [[Alfred P. Sloan]], who managed [[General Motors]] on behalf of the DuPonts from 1923 to 1966, personally authorized the transfer of Ethyl lead to the [[Luftwaffe]] as late as 1938.[^1] Dovey also wrote that the largest tank manufacturer in Nazi Germany was Opel, a wholly owned GM subsidiary that continued operating under the American corporate umbrella throughout the Second World War.[^1] General Motors' 1974 correspondence to the Senate states that the Nazi government took over the Opel works in November 1939, before the United States entered the war.[^2] The Foreign Claims Settlement Commission recorded that the Russelsheim plant was placed under the control of the German Enemy Property Custodian on November 25, 1942, and that it "sustained severe war damage as a result of allied bombing raids in 1942 and 1944."[^3] The 1974 Senate hearing described Russelsheim as a war plane factory and the Brandenburg works as a truck plant.[^4]
|
||||
|
||||
### Legacy and Connections
|
||||
|
||||
The DuPont family's political influence did not end with the exposure of the Business Plot. Decades later, Joe Biden's first senatorial campaign was fully funded and staffed by DuPont employees in Delaware, and his family moved into an old DuPont mansion following his victory. The corporate culture instilled at General Motors during the DuPont-Sloan era persisted into the 1970s, when executives at the company were accused of participation in organized child abuse rings in Michigan. [[Francis Shelden]] and his North Fox Island operation intersected with this same nexus of old money and impunity.
|
||||
The DuPont family's political influence did not end with the exposure of the Business Plot. Decades later, Joe Biden's first senatorial campaign was fully funded and staffed by DuPont employees in Delaware, and his family moved into an old DuPont mansion following his victory. The corporate culture instilled at General Motors during the DuPont-Sloan era persisted into the 1970s, when executives at the company were accused of participation in organized child abuse rings in Michigan. Francis Shelden and his North Fox Island operation intersected with this same nexus of old money and impunity.
|
||||
|
||||
[^1]: Dovey, S. (2023). *Eye of the Chickenhawk*. United States: Thehotstar.
|
||||
[^2]: Copelin, Philip W., letter to Richard C. Gerstenberg, April 5, 1974, Exhibit 2, pp. 2385-2387; Mooney, Michael M., letter to Senator Philip A. Hart, Exhibit 3, pp. 2387-2389; *The Industrial Reorganization Act: Hearings on S. 1167, Part 4, Ground Transportation Industries* (1974), https://archive.org/details/industrialreorga04unit.
|
||||
[^3]: Foreign Claims Settlement Commission of the United States, *Annual Report to the Congress for the Period January 1-December 31, 1967*, excerpt re General Motors Corporation and General Motors Overseas Corporation, Exhibit 9, *Hearings on S. 1167, Part 4*, pp. 2396-2397, https://archive.org/details/industrialreorga04unit.
|
||||
[^4]: Stradella, C. G., letter to Richard C. Gerstenberg, April 10, 1974, Exhibit 4, *Hearings on S. 1167, Part 4*, pp. 2390-2392, quoting the Snell report, https://archive.org/details/industrialreorga04unit.
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -24,7 +24,7 @@ The Hashemi Sting was a joint U.S. Customs Service and FBI undercover operation
|
|||
|
||||
### Cyrus Hashemi
|
||||
|
||||
Cyrus Hashemi was an Iranian-born businessman and arms dealer based between [[London]] and [[New York]] who became a central figure in the intersection of the October Surprise, Iran-Contra, and Hashemi Sting investigations. His brother Jamshid Hashemi was one of the sources for [[Gary Sick]]'s October Surprise research, claiming knowledge of meetings in [[Madrid]] and [[Paris]] in 1980 in which [[William Casey]] and Iranian representatives agreed to delay the release of the American hostages.
|
||||
Cyrus Hashemi was an Iranian-born businessman and arms dealer based between [[London]] and [[New York City|New York]] who became a central figure in the intersection of the October Surprise, Iran-Contra, and Hashemi Sting investigations. His brother Jamshid Hashemi was one of the sources for [[Gary Sick]]'s October Surprise research, claiming knowledge of meetings in [[Madrid]] and [[Paris]] in 1980 in which [[William Casey]] and Iranian representatives agreed to delay the release of the American hostages.
|
||||
|
||||
Cyrus Hashemi had extensive dealings with Iranian government officials and arms procurement networks, and he simultaneously worked as an informant for U.S. government agencies including the [[CIA]] and the FBI. His dual role - as an active arms dealer and as a government informant - placed him at the center of a web in which it was difficult to determine whether his arms-brokering activities were authorized by the U.S. government as part of intelligence operations, unauthorized criminal conduct, or both simultaneously. This ambiguity was characteristic of the Iran-Contra period generally, when official covert operations and freelance arms dealing coexisted and overlapped.[^2]
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -98,7 +98,7 @@ relations:
|
|||
end: 1953-01-17
|
||||
fn: 13
|
||||
created: 2026-10-01
|
||||
updated: 2026-10-09
|
||||
updated: 2026-10-15
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
The Robertson Panel was a group of five scientists convened by the [[Office of Scientific Intelligence]] of the [[Central Intelligence Agency]] to review [[Air Technical Intelligence Center]] files on unidentified flying objects. It met in January 1953, reported that the sightings showed no direct physical threat to national security, and recommended that the national security agencies "strip the Unidentified Flying Objects of the special status they have been given and the aura of mystery they have unfortunately acquired."[^1]
|
||||
|
|
@ -155,41 +155,43 @@ On reporting channels, the Panel regarded the Air Force reporting system as havi
|
|||
|
||||
The memorandum describes a program with "two major aims: training and 'debunking.'" Training would cover pilots, radar operators, control tower operators and [[Ground Observer Corps]] personnel. The "debunking" aim "would result in reduction in public interest in 'flying saucers'" through "mass media such as television, motion pictures, and popular articles," using case histories "which had been puzzling at first but later explained," on the model of conjuring tricks, to "reduce the current gullibility of the public and consequently their susceptibility to clever hostile propaganda." The memorandum adds that "the general absence of Russian propaganda based on a subject with so many obvious possibilities for exploitation might indicate a possible Russian official policy."[^1]
|
||||
|
||||
Suggested participants were psychologists, including [[Hadley Cantril]] of [[Princeton University|Princeton]], [[Don Marquis]] of the [[University of Michigan]] and [[Leo Roston]]; "someone familiar with mass communications techniques, perhaps an advertising expert"; the radio and television host [[Arthur Godfrey]] as "possibly a valuable channel of communication"; the Navy's [[Special Devices Center]] at [[Sands Point, New York|Sands Point]], [[Long Island]], on Berkner's suggestion; the [[Jam Handy Company]], a maker of Second World War training films; and the animated cartoons of "Walt Disney, Inc.," the studio of [[Walt Disney]]. Hynek suggested amateur astronomers "to spread the gospel." The Panel proposed that the program run for "a minimum of one and one-half to two years" and recorded that some expansion of the Air Technical Intelligence Center would be required. Ruppelt "unofficially" proposed a staff of four analyst officers, four officer investigators, a briefing officer, an air defense liaison officer, a weather and balloon officer, an astronomical consultant and a group leader, which drew "generally favorable comment."[^1]
|
||||
Suggested participants were psychologists, including [[Hadley Cantril]] of [[Princeton University|Princeton]], [[Don Marquis]] of the [[University of Michigan]] and [[Leo Rosten]]; "someone familiar with mass communications techniques, perhaps an advertising expert"; the radio and television host [[Arthur Godfrey]] as "possibly a valuable channel of communication"; the Navy's [[Special Devices Center]] at [[Sands Point, New York|Sands Point]], [[Long Island]], on Berkner's suggestion; the [[Jam Handy Company]], a maker of Second World War training films; and the animated cartoons of "Walt Disney, Inc.," the studio of [[Walt Disney]]. Hynek suggested amateur astronomers "to spread the gospel." The Panel proposed that the program run for "a minimum of one and one-half to two years" and recorded that some expansion of the Air Technical Intelligence Center would be required. Ruppelt "unofficially" proposed a staff of four analyst officers, four officer investigators, a briefing officer, an air defense liaison officer, a weather and balloon officer, an astronomical consultant and a group leader, which drew "generally favorable comment."[^1]
|
||||
|
||||
Cantril and [[Lloyd Free]] of "the Research Council, Inc." met with [[Nelson Rockefeller]], [[Frank Wisner]] and officials of the [[United States Information Agency]] in Rockefeller's office on April 1, 1955.[^17]
|
||||
|
||||
On "Unofficial Investigating Groups," the memorandum states that the "Civilian Flying Saucer Investigators" of [[Los Angeles]] and the "Aerial Phenomena Research Organization (Wisconsin)" "should be watched because of their potentially great influence on mass thinking if widespread sightings should occur," and that "the apparent irresponsibility and the possible use of such groups for subversive purposes should be kept in mind." The Panel predicted that sightings would increase that summer.[^1]
|
||||
|
||||
[[Jennie Zeidman]], Hynek's assistant at Ohio State, wrote in 1991 that after the sessions Hynek told her: "They're not going to have a scientific investigation. For some strange reason they voted it down. They didn't even take a decent look at the data, and they decided to discredit them."[^17]
|
||||
[[Jennie Zeidman]], Hynek's assistant at Ohio State, wrote in 1991 that after the sessions Hynek told her: "They're not going to have a scientific investigation. For some strange reason they voted it down. They didn't even take a decent look at the data, and they decided to discredit them."[^18]
|
||||
|
||||
### Distribution and sponsorship
|
||||
|
||||
The report went to the Intelligence Advisory Committee, the Secretary of Defense, the director of the [[Federal Civil Defense Administration]] and the chairman of the [[National Security Resources Board]]. Strong and Durant briefed the [[Office of National Estimates]]. The Agency dropped its effort to draft a National Security Council directive on unidentified flying objects, and, according to Haines, "any mention of CIA sponsorship of the panel was forbidden." Chadwell transferred monitoring in May 1953 to the Physics and Electronics Division, whose chief, [[Todos M. Odarenko]], proposed treating the project as inactive and, in 1955, terminating it.[^2][^18]
|
||||
The report went to the Intelligence Advisory Committee, the Secretary of Defense, the director of the [[Federal Civil Defense Administration]] and the chairman of the [[National Security Resources Board]]. Strong and Durant briefed the [[Office of National Estimates]]. The Agency dropped its effort to draft a National Security Council directive on unidentified flying objects, and, according to Haines, "any mention of CIA sponsorship of the panel was forbidden." Chadwell transferred monitoring in May 1953 to the Physics and Electronics Division, whose chief, [[Todos M. Odarenko]], proposed treating the project as inactive and, in 1955, terminating it.[^2][^19]
|
||||
|
||||
### Contacts after the sessions
|
||||
|
||||
A note from Ruppelt to Hynek of 11 February 1953, among the Blue Book cables in Hynek's "Project Henry" files, states that Durant had called asking for the pencilled notes Hynek had promised him on a contact with the [[Aerial Phenomena Research Organization]]. A note of 13 July 1953 from Lieutenant [[Robert M. Olsson]] states: "we sent five of our best unsolved reports to Dr. Robinson [Dr. Robertson] on the West Coast" ([[Luke Air Force Base]], Continental Divide, [[Port Austin, Michigan|Port Austin]] and others). [[Jan Aldrich]] of Project 1947 added in a bracketed comment that Robertson was briefed on Blue Book again in 1957 at the Air Technical Intelligence Center and that Durant arranged for the Condon Committee to obtain copies of the Montana and Utah films and corresponded with Condon about official investigations in [[Norway]].[^19]
|
||||
A note from Ruppelt to Hynek of 11 February 1953, among the Blue Book cables in Hynek's "Project Henry" files, states that Durant had called asking for the pencilled notes Hynek had promised him on a contact with the [[Aerial Phenomena Research Organization]]. A note of 13 July 1953 from Lieutenant [[Robert M. Olsson]] states: "we sent five of our best unsolved reports to Dr. Robinson [Dr. Robertson] on the West Coast" ([[Luke Air Force Base]], Continental Divide, [[Port Austin, Michigan|Port Austin]] and others). [[Jan Aldrich]] of Project 1947 added in a bracketed comment that Robertson was briefed on Blue Book again in 1957 at the Air Technical Intelligence Center and that Durant arranged for the Condon Committee to obtain copies of the Montana and Utah films and corresponded with Condon about official investigations in [[Norway]].[^20]
|
||||
|
||||
### Disclosure, 1956 to 1966
|
||||
|
||||
In 1956 [[The Report on Unidentified Flying Objects|Ruppelt's book]] disclosed the existence of the Panel, and civilian groups pressed for the report. The Air Force asked the Agency for permission to declassify; Strong refused to disclose Agency sponsorship. On 20 December 1957 Strong wrote to Berkner, Page, Robertson, Goudsmit and Alvarez and sent a memorandum to Major James F. Byrne of Air Force intelligence on declassification, and the Agency prepared a sanitized version that deleted references to the Agency and to psychological warfare. Berkner (20 November 1957) and Page (4 December 1957) had written to Strong, and the Agency's history states that the panel members "were also reluctant to have their association with the Agency released."[^2][^20]
|
||||
In 1956 [[The Report on Unidentified Flying Objects|Ruppelt's book]] disclosed the existence of the Panel, and civilian groups pressed for the report. The Air Force asked the Agency for permission to declassify; Strong refused to disclose Agency sponsorship. On 20 December 1957 Strong wrote to Berkner, Page, Robertson, Goudsmit and Alvarez and sent a memorandum to Major James F. Byrne of Air Force intelligence on declassification, and the Agency prepared a sanitized version that deleted references to the Agency and to psychological warfare. Berkner (20 November 1957) and Page (4 December 1957) had written to Strong, and the Agency's history states that the panel members "were also reluctant to have their association with the Agency released."[^2][^21]
|
||||
|
||||
On 8 March 1958 [[Donald Keyhoe]] of the [[National Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomena]] told [[Mike Wallace]] on [[CBS]] that the Agency sponsored the Panel, and Keyhoe and the chemical engineer [[Leon Davidson]] wrote to the Agency; Davidson also wrote to Berkner and Goudsmit. Agency officers, according to the history, worried that Keyhoe "had the ear of" Hillenkoetter, who served on the committee's board of governors, and discussed having the General Counsel, [[Lawrence R. Houston]], show him the report. Hillenkoetter resigned from the committee in 1962.[^2][^20]
|
||||
On 8 March 1958 [[Donald Keyhoe]] of the [[National Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomena]] told [[Mike Wallace]] on [[CBS]] that the Agency sponsored the Panel, and Keyhoe and the chemical engineer [[Leon Davidson]] wrote to the Agency; Davidson also wrote to Berkner and Goudsmit. Agency officers, according to the history, worried that Keyhoe "had the ear of" Hillenkoetter, who served on the committee's board of governors, and discussed having the General Counsel, [[Lawrence R. Houston]], show him the report. Hillenkoetter resigned from the committee in 1962.[^2][^21]
|
||||
|
||||
On 22 September 1958 Keyhoe wrote to the Agency as the committee's director that he had been aware since January 1953 that the Agency had assembled a group of scientists to examine the evidence; that an investigator for the McClellan subcommittee on Government Operations had told him the Air Force said the report was not an Air Force document and that it proved to be the Agency's, with a classified summary sent to the investigator; and that the Air Force, which had officially denied the existence of the document, then admitted it and released a summary with no mention of the Agency. He asked for declassification and for an interview with an Agency official, and wrote that Vice Admiral [[Roscoe Hillenkoetter]], formerly director of the Agency and a board member, and all the members of the board would, if questioned, say that they disagree with the secrecy. A routing slip dated 30 September 1958 records that the Air Force's Major [[Lawrence J. Tacker]] had received a letter of the same date and would answer both along the lines that the Air Force was "the only agency qualified to speak on unidentified flying objects," and that "the remaining portions of the report are not only Secret but do not deal with unidentified flying objects"; the writer adds, "Both the above statements are true."[^21]
|
||||
On 22 September 1958 Keyhoe wrote to the Agency as the committee's director that he had been aware since January 1953 that the Agency had assembled a group of scientists to examine the evidence; that an investigator for the McClellan subcommittee on Government Operations had told him the Air Force said the report was not an Air Force document and that it proved to be the Agency's, with a classified summary sent to the investigator; and that the Air Force, which had officially denied the existence of the document, then admitted it and released a summary with no mention of the Agency. He asked for declassification and for an interview with an Agency official, and wrote that Vice Admiral [[Roscoe Hillenkoetter]], formerly director of the Agency and a board member, and all the members of the board would, if questioned, say that they disagree with the secrecy. A routing slip dated 30 September 1958 records that the Air Force's Major [[Lawrence J. Tacker]] had received a letter of the same date and would answer both along the lines that the Air Force was "the only agency qualified to speak on unidentified flying objects," and that "the remaining portions of the report are not only Secret but do not deal with unidentified flying objects"; the writer adds, "Both the above statements are true."[^22]
|
||||
|
||||
Haines wrote that the Air Force again asked in July 1966 for declassification of the Panel report and the Durant report, after the [[House Armed Services Committee]] hearings and "Dr. Robertson's disclosure on a CBS Reports program that CIA indeed had been involved in UFO analysis"; the Condon Report, printed in 1968, refers to Robertson as "the late Prof. H. P. Robertson."[^2][^10] On 15 August 1966 the Office of Scientific Intelligence's deputy director, [[Karl H. Weber]], wrote to the Air Force that "We are most anxious that further publicity not be given to the information that the panel was sponsored by the CIA." [[James E. McDonald]] of the [[University of Arizona]] had read the Durant report at Wright-Patterson on 6 June 1966 and was refused a second look on 30 June as it was an Agency document. The science editor of the [[Saturday Review]], [[John Lear]], criticized the sanitized version on 3 September 1966.[^2][^20]
|
||||
Haines wrote that the Air Force again asked in July 1966 for declassification of the Panel report and the Durant report, after the [[House Armed Services Committee]] hearings and "Dr. Robertson's disclosure on a CBS Reports program that CIA indeed had been involved in UFO analysis"; the Condon Report, printed in 1968, refers to Robertson as "the late Prof. H. P. Robertson."[^2][^10] On 15 August 1966 the Office of Scientific Intelligence's deputy director, [[Karl H. Weber]], wrote to the Air Force that "We are most anxious that further publicity not be given to the information that the panel was sponsored by the CIA." [[James E. McDonald]] of the [[University of Arizona]] had read the Durant report at Wright-Patterson on 6 June 1966 and was refused a second look on 30 June as it was an Agency document. The science editor of the [[Saturday Review]], [[John Lear]], criticized the sanitized version on 3 September 1966.[^2][^21]
|
||||
|
||||
[[Paul E. McCarthy]] wrote that when James E. McDonald first visited [[Wright-Patterson Air Force Base]] on June 6, 1966, the 1953 Robertson Panel report "received routine declassification after 12 years" by Major [[Hector Quintanilla]], who approved his note taking; that when he returned on June 30 and asked for a Xerox copy, Colonel [[Louis DeGoes]] told him it would need an authorization; and that on his third visit, July 20 to 22, DeGoes told him the CIA had decided to reclassify the document. McDonald's note on the episode, written in October 1966, states that neither DeGoes nor Dr. [[Cacciopo]], chief scientist at the [[Foreign Technology Division]], showed interest in the CIA involvement, and McDonald began to discuss the report in his lectures that month. Replying to a letter from McDonald of October 1, [[Richard Hall]] of [[NICAP]] wrote that the sanitized report would be forwarded within a week once the [[John E. Moss|Moss]] subcommittee obtained its release.[^22]
|
||||
[[Paul E. McCarthy]] wrote that when James E. McDonald first visited [[Wright-Patterson Air Force Base]] on June 6, 1966, the 1953 Robertson Panel report "received routine declassification after 12 years" by Major [[Hector Quintanilla]], who approved his note taking; that when he returned on June 30 and asked for a Xerox copy, Colonel [[Louis DeGoes]] told him it would need an authorization; and that on his third visit, July 20 to 22, DeGoes told him the CIA had decided to reclassify the document. McDonald's note on the episode, written in October 1966, states that neither DeGoes nor Dr. [[Cacciopo]], chief scientist at the [[Foreign Technology Division]], showed interest in the CIA involvement, and McDonald began to discuss the report in his lectures that month. Replying to a letter from McDonald of October 1, [[Richard Hall]] of [[NICAP]] wrote that the sanitized report would be forwarded within a week once the [[John E. Moss|Moss]] subcommittee obtained its release.[^23]
|
||||
|
||||
### Publication in the Condon Report
|
||||
|
||||
The report was declassified in the summer of 1966 and printed as Appendix U of the [[Condon Committee]]'s Scientific Study of Unidentified Flying Objects, with some names deleted; the Condon Report states that the record is "still partially classified to the extent that the names of some of the members are deleted."[^10] The editors of the online edition restored deletions, which they marked in braces, from a copy they obtained from the [[Parascope]] site and checked against a [[National Archives and Records Administration|National Archives]] copy. The deleted items included the names of Alvarez, Chadwell, Strong, Oder, Stevenson, Neasham, Woo, Hynek, Fournet, Smith, Possony and Garland, the words "Office of Scientific Intelligence," the "Assistant Director for Scientific Intelligence," "Battelle Memorial Institute" and the Intelligence Advisory Committee, and one tab.[^1][^23] Haines wrote that in 1967 Agency officials agreed that the Condon Committee could release the full Durant report "with only minor deletions."[^2]
|
||||
The report was declassified in the summer of 1966 and printed as Appendix U of the [[Condon Committee]]'s Scientific Study of Unidentified Flying Objects, with some names deleted; the Condon Report states that the record is "still partially classified to the extent that the names of some of the members are deleted."[^10] The editors of the online edition restored deletions, which they marked in braces, from a copy they obtained from the [[Parascope]] site and checked against a [[National Archives and Records Administration|National Archives]] copy. The deleted items included the names of Alvarez, Chadwell, Strong, Oder, Stevenson, Neasham, Woo, Hynek, Fournet, Smith, Possony and Garland, the words "Office of Scientific Intelligence," the "Assistant Director for Scientific Intelligence," "Battelle Memorial Institute" and the Intelligence Advisory Committee, and one tab.[^1][^24] Haines wrote that in 1967 Agency officials agreed that the Condon Committee could release the full Durant report "with only minor deletions."[^2]
|
||||
|
||||
The Condon Report described the Panel as five scientists "who had distinguished themselves in physics research and in their contributions to military research during and after World War II," said that a group of this competence could review the subject in a week, stated that "no official steps were ever taken to put into effect the training and 'debunking' recommendations," and held that "the word debunking means to take the bunk out of a subject."[^10][^24]
|
||||
The Condon Report described the Panel as five scientists "who had distinguished themselves in physics research and in their contributions to military research during and after World War II," said that a group of this competence could review the subject in a week, stated that "no official steps were ever taken to put into effect the training and 'debunking' recommendations," and held that "the word debunking means to take the bunk out of a subject."[^10][^25]
|
||||
|
||||
### Later references
|
||||
|
||||
The Scientific Advisory Board committee under [[Brian O'Brien]] that reviewed Project Blue Book in 1966 gave "particular attention" to the Panel report. An Air Force action memorandum of 20 October 1969 recommending termination of Blue Book quoted the Panel's finding of no direct physical threat and added that "in spite of this finding, the Air Force continued to maintain a special reporting system."[^25][^26]
|
||||
The Scientific Advisory Board committee under [[Brian O'Brien]] that reviewed Project Blue Book in 1966 gave "particular attention" to the Panel report. An Air Force action memorandum of 20 October 1969 recommending termination of Blue Book quoted the Panel's finding of no direct physical threat and added that "in spite of this finding, the Air Force continued to maintain a special reporting system."[^26][^27]
|
||||
|
||||
In 1975 [[William Spaulding]] of [[Ground Saucer Watch]] asked the Agency for the Panel report; a privacy coordinator, [[Gene Wilson]], replied that "at no time prior to the formation of the Robertson Panel and subsequent to the issuance of the panel's report has CIA engaged in the study of the UFO phenomena." Ground Saucer Watch sued under the [[Freedom of Information Act]] in September 1977; a search produced 355 documents of about 900 pages, of which the Agency released all but 57 on 14 December 1978, and a court dismissed the suit in May 1980. Haines wrote that the Agency's Deputy Director for Administration told Director [[Stansfield Turner]] there had been "no organized Agency effort to do research in connection with UFO phenomena nor has there been an organized effort to collect intelligence on UFOs since the 1950s."[^2]
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -211,13 +213,14 @@ In 1975 [[William Spaulding]] of [[Ground Saucer Watch]] asked the Agency for th
|
|||
[^14]: Durant memorandum, Tab B ("Associate Members"), and Part I, Wednesday afternoon through Saturday.
|
||||
[^15]: Durant memorandum, Tab C, "Evidence Presented."
|
||||
[^16]: Durant memorandum, Tab A, "Report of the Scientific Panel on Unidentified Flying Objects," paragraphs 2 to 4.
|
||||
[^17]: Jennie Zeidman, "I Remember Blue Book," International UFO Reporter (Center for UFO Studies), March/April 1991, section "Project Henry," https://www.project1947.com/articles/jzbluebook.htm.
|
||||
[^18]: Haines, text and notes 34 to 39 and 80.
|
||||
[^19]: "Project Henry," Project 1947, notes of 11 February 1953 (Ruppelt) and 13 July 1953 (Olsson) and the bracketed comment of Jan L. Aldrich, http://www.project1947.com/projecthenry/index.htm.
|
||||
[^20]: Haines, notes 47 to 51, 72 to 74 and 79, citing Strong's letters and memorandum of 20 December 1957, Berkner's letter of 20 November 1957, Page's letter of 4 December 1957, Weber's letter of 15 August 1966, and Lear, "The Disputed CIA Document on UFOs," Saturday Review, 3 September 1966, p. 45.
|
||||
[^21]: Donald E. Keyhoe, National Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomena, to the Central Intelligence Agency, 22 September 1958, with Agency routing slips of 30 September 1958 and note of 2 October 1958, CREST document CIA-RDP80B01676R004000110004-4 (5 pages), https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/document/cia-rdp80b01676r004000110004-4.
|
||||
[^22]: Paul E. McCarthy, "Politicking and Paradigm Shifting: James E. McDonald and the UFO Case Study," Ph.D. dissertation, University of Hawaii, 1975, chapter 2, pp. 41 and 58, https://files.ncas.org/mccarthy/chap02.html
|
||||
[^23]: Editors' notes in the online Condon Report, Appendix U, https://files.ncas.org/condon/text/appndx-u.htm ("previously deleted names" shown in braces).
|
||||
[^24]: Condon, Section V, chapter 2, pp. 865 and 877-878.
|
||||
[^25]: Condon, Appendix A, "Special Report of the USAF Scientific Advisory Board Ad Hoc Committee to Review Project 'Blue Book,'" March 1966, section I, https://files.ncas.org/condon/text/appndx-a.htm.
|
||||
[^26]: Air Force action memorandum, "Unidentified Flying Objects (UFO)," 20 October 1969, with signature block of Brigadier General C. H. Bolender, paragraph 4, text at http://www.nicap.org/Bolender_Memo.htm.
|
||||
[^17]: Frank G. Wisner, Deputy Director (Plans), memorandum for the Director of Central Intelligence, "Meeting with Nelson Rockefeller et al on Public Opinion Report," April 1, 1955. CIA reading room, CIA-RDP61S00750A000700100046-2. https://archive.org/details/cia-readingroom-document-cia-rdp61s00750a000700100046-2
|
||||
[^18]: Jennie Zeidman, "I Remember Blue Book," International UFO Reporter (Center for UFO Studies), March/April 1991, section "Project Henry," https://www.project1947.com/articles/jzbluebook.htm.
|
||||
[^19]: Haines, text and notes 34 to 39 and 80.
|
||||
[^20]: "Project Henry," Project 1947, notes of 11 February 1953 (Ruppelt) and 13 July 1953 (Olsson) and the bracketed comment of Jan L. Aldrich, http://www.project1947.com/projecthenry/index.htm.
|
||||
[^21]: Haines, notes 47 to 51, 72 to 74 and 79, citing Strong's letters and memorandum of 20 December 1957, Berkner's letter of 20 November 1957, Page's letter of 4 December 1957, Weber's letter of 15 August 1966, and Lear, "The Disputed CIA Document on UFOs," Saturday Review, 3 September 1966, p. 45.
|
||||
[^22]: Donald E. Keyhoe, National Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomena, to the Central Intelligence Agency, 22 September 1958, with Agency routing slips of 30 September 1958 and note of 2 October 1958, CREST document CIA-RDP80B01676R004000110004-4 (5 pages), https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/document/cia-rdp80b01676r004000110004-4.
|
||||
[^23]: Paul E. McCarthy, "Politicking and Paradigm Shifting: James E. McDonald and the UFO Case Study," Ph.D. dissertation, University of Hawaii, 1975, chapter 2, pp. 41 and 58, https://files.ncas.org/mccarthy/chap02.html
|
||||
[^24]: Editors' notes in the online Condon Report, Appendix U, https://files.ncas.org/condon/text/appndx-u.htm ("previously deleted names" shown in braces).
|
||||
[^25]: Condon, Section V, chapter 2, pp. 865 and 877-878.
|
||||
[^26]: Condon, Appendix A, "Special Report of the USAF Scientific Advisory Board Ad Hoc Committee to Review Project 'Blue Book,'" March 1966, section I, https://files.ncas.org/condon/text/appndx-a.htm.
|
||||
[^27]: Air Force action memorandum, "Unidentified Flying Objects (UFO)," 20 October 1969, with signature block of Brigadier General C. H. Bolender, paragraph 4, text at http://www.nicap.org/Bolender_Memo.htm.
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -76,15 +76,15 @@ The commission had also encountered obstruction in its attempts to investigate C
|
|||
|
||||
### Rockefeller's Position
|
||||
|
||||
In 1955, as special assistant to the president, Nelson Rockefeller chaired the [[Planning Coordination Group]], set up under [[NSC 5412]] as the channel for policy approval of CIA covert operations. In May 1955 [[Charles Geschickter]] asked the CIA to contribute $375,000 toward a research building at Georgetown University Hospital, one-sixth of whose beds were to be reserved for the CIA along with cover for three CIA scientists and "human patients and volunteers for experimental use." The journalist John Marks, working from CIA documents released in 1977, wrote that Allen Dulles personally approved the contribution and then took it to "President Eisenhower's special committee to review covert operations," which assented on the understanding that Geschickter could provide "a reasonable expectation" that the agency would have the space.[^27] The historians Gerard Colby and Charlotte Dennett identified the committee's chairman as Rockefeller and wrote that he gave the approval. The 1977 Senate hearing took testimony on the CIA's use of hospital construction money without naming him. Rockefeller initially opposed even permitting the commission to investigate assassination plots, and it was only Belin's persistence and the threat of adverse publicity that extended the commission's mandate into that territory.[^28]
|
||||
In 1955, as special assistant to the president, Nelson Rockefeller chaired the [[Planning Coordination Group]], set up under [[NSC 5412]] as the channel for policy approval of CIA covert operations. In May 1955 [[Charles Geschickter]] asked the CIA to contribute $375,000 toward a research building at Georgetown University Hospital, one-sixth of whose beds were to be reserved for the CIA along with cover for three CIA scientists and "human patients and volunteers for experimental use." The Subproject 35 file printed in the August 3, 1977 joint hearing records that the Director of Central Intelligence approved the subproject on January 15, 1955 for a contribution of $125,000 through a private fund toward a research wing at Georgetown University Hospital, after a General Counsel memorandum of December 21, 1954; a memorandum of May 10, 1955 requested a further $250,000, bringing the agency's contribution to $375,000, and carries a handwritten note that a resume of the project was circulated at a meeting on May 11, 1955.[^27] The journalist John Marks, working from CIA documents released in 1977, wrote that Allen Dulles personally approved the contribution and then took it to "President Eisenhower's special committee to review covert operations," which assented on the understanding that Geschickter could provide "a reasonable expectation" that the agency would have the space.[^28] The historians Gerard Colby and Charlotte Dennett identified the committee's chairman as Rockefeller and wrote that he gave the approval. The 1977 Senate hearing took testimony on the CIA's use of hospital construction money without naming him. Rockefeller initially opposed even permitting the commission to investigate assassination plots, and it was only Belin's persistence and the threat of adverse publicity that extended the commission's mandate into that territory.[^29]
|
||||
|
||||
### Report Structure and Outcome
|
||||
|
||||
The commission's final report, submitted to President Ford on June 6, 1975, comprised four main parts with 19 chapters plus seven appendices. The chapters covered CIA legal authority, supervision and control mechanisms, mail intercept programs, Operation CHAOS, domestic surveillance of political activists, CIA files on American citizens, and an examination of allegations regarding the assassination of President Kennedy (where the commission upheld the Warren Commission's single-assassin finding). The report contained 27 recommendations, of which 20 were agency-level reforms recommended for immediate implementation and 7 addressed CIA structure, function, and presidential oversight.[^29]
|
||||
The commission's final report, submitted to President Ford on June 6, 1975, comprised four main parts with 19 chapters plus seven appendices. The chapters covered CIA legal authority, supervision and control mechanisms, mail intercept programs, Operation CHAOS, domestic surveillance of political activists, CIA files on American citizens, and an examination of allegations regarding the assassination of President Kennedy (where the commission upheld the Warren Commission's single-assassin finding). The report contained 27 recommendations, of which 20 were agency-level reforms recommended for immediate implementation and 7 addressed CIA structure, function, and presidential oversight.[^30]
|
||||
|
||||
The Ford administration's response to the report was coordinated by a memorandum dated August 9, 1975, from Kissinger, White House counsel Philip Buchen, and [[Office of Management and Budget]] director [[James Lynn]], which argued for prompt action on the domestic-improprieties recommendations while deferring broader intelligence restructuring questions, explicitly noting that congressional committees were simultaneously investigating related matters and that delay risked losing "the initiative entirely."[^30]
|
||||
The Ford administration's response to the report was coordinated by a memorandum dated August 9, 1975, from Kissinger, White House counsel Philip Buchen, and [[Office of Management and Budget]] director [[James Lynn]], which argued for prompt action on the domestic-improprieties recommendations while deferring broader intelligence restructuring questions, explicitly noting that congressional committees were simultaneously investigating related matters and that delay risked losing "the initiative entirely."[^31]
|
||||
|
||||
The commission's records, totaling approximately 41 cubic feet (82,000 pages), are held at the [[Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library]] in Ann Arbor, Michigan. Materials related to Kennedy assassination allegations and anti-Castro activities from 1960 to 1964 were processed for research access following the [[JFK Records Act]]; significant portions of the collection remain classified.[^31]
|
||||
The commission's records, totaling approximately 41 cubic feet (82,000 pages), are held at the [[Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library]] in Ann Arbor, Michigan. Materials related to Kennedy assassination allegations and anti-Castro activities from 1960 to 1964 were processed for research access following the [[JFK Records Act]]; significant portions of the collection remain classified.[^32]
|
||||
|
||||
### Footnotes
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -114,8 +114,9 @@ The commission's records, totaling approximately 41 cubic feet (82,000 pages), a
|
|||
[^24]: Report to the President by the Commission on CIA Activities Within the United States, transmittal letter dated June 6, 1975. https://www.fordlibrarymuseum.gov/LIBRARY/document/0005/1561495.pdf
|
||||
[^25]: Church Committee, "Alleged Assassination Plots Involving Foreign Leaders," Senate Report 94-465, released November 20, 1975. Ford's suppression request sent October 31, 1975; Church's rejection November 4, 1975; Senate vote November 20, 1975.
|
||||
[^26]: National Security Archive, NSAEBB Document 10: Mason Cargill to File, "CIA denial of access to records of Special Group Augmented re Cuba," April 30, 1975.
|
||||
[^27]: Marks, John. *The Search for the "Manchurian Candidate": The CIA and Mind Control.* Times Books, 1979, ch. 12, n. 6, as transcribed at https://cryptome.org/mkultra-0005.htm. The Subproject 35 memorandum of November 15, 1954, does not mention the committee: https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/document/32726-document-11-memorandum-director-central-intelligence-project-mkultra-subproject-35
|
||||
[^28]: Colby and Dennett, Ch. 18, 44, and Ch. 18 n. 32, citing MKULTRA Subproject 35-10, May 16, 1955. The book calls the body he chaired the "Special Group." For the Planning Coordination Group, its membership and its role as the "normal channel for giving policy approval" to covert operations: Rowland Hughes memorandum to Eisenhower, March 3, 1955, *FRUS 1950-1955, The Intelligence Community,* Document 210, https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1950-55Intel/d210. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence and Subcommittee on Health and Scientific Research, *Project MKULTRA, the CIA's Program of Research in Behavioral Modification,* joint hearing, August 3, 1977, testimony of Adm. Stansfield Turner and exchange with Sen. Richard Schweiker, https://archive.org/details/project-mkultra-the-cias-program-of-research-in-behavioral-modification
|
||||
[^29]: Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library, Topic Guide, "Rockefeller Commission Report, June 1975." FRUS 1969-76, Vol. XXXVIII, Part 2, Document 46, Memorandum on implementation of Rockefeller Commission recommendations, August 9, 1975.
|
||||
[^30]: FRUS 1969-76, Vol. XXXVIII, Part 2, Document 46, August 9, 1975, Kissinger, Buchen, and Lynn to Ford on implementation of Rockefeller Commission recommendations.
|
||||
[^31]: Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library, Finding Aid, "U.S. President's Commission on CIA Activities Within the United States Files," collection extent approximately 41 cubic feet.
|
||||
[^27]: "Project MKULTRA, The CIA's Program of Research in Behavioral Modification," joint hearing, Senate Select Committee on Intelligence and Subcommittee on Health and Scientific Research, August 3, 1977, archive.org/details/project-mkultra-congress-hearing-1977, Appendix C, memorandum of December 21, 1954, pp. 121-122; memorandum of May 10, 1955, pp. 127-128.
|
||||
[^28]: Marks, John. *The Search for the "Manchurian Candidate": The CIA and Mind Control.* Times Books, 1979, ch. 12, n. 6, as transcribed at https://cryptome.org/mkultra-0005.htm. The Subproject 35 memorandum of November 15, 1954, does not mention the committee: https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/document/32726-document-11-memorandum-director-central-intelligence-project-mkultra-subproject-35
|
||||
[^29]: Colby and Dennett, Ch. 18, 44, and Ch. 18 n. 32, citing MKULTRA Subproject 35-10, May 16, 1955. The book calls the body he chaired the "Special Group." For the Planning Coordination Group, its membership and its role as the "normal channel for giving policy approval" to covert operations: Rowland Hughes memorandum to Eisenhower, March 3, 1955, *FRUS 1950-1955, The Intelligence Community,* Document 210, https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1950-55Intel/d210. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence and Subcommittee on Health and Scientific Research, *Project MKULTRA, the CIA's Program of Research in Behavioral Modification,* joint hearing, August 3, 1977, testimony of Adm. Stansfield Turner and exchange with Sen. Richard Schweiker, https://archive.org/details/project-mkultra-the-cias-program-of-research-in-behavioral-modification
|
||||
[^30]: Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library, Topic Guide, "Rockefeller Commission Report, June 1975." FRUS 1969-76, Vol. XXXVIII, Part 2, Document 46, Memorandum on implementation of Rockefeller Commission recommendations, August 9, 1975.
|
||||
[^31]: FRUS 1969-76, Vol. XXXVIII, Part 2, Document 46, August 9, 1975, Kissinger, Buchen, and Lynn to Ford on implementation of Rockefeller Commission recommendations.
|
||||
[^32]: Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library, Finding Aid, "U.S. President's Commission on CIA Activities Within the United States Files," collection extent approximately 41 cubic feet.
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -20,7 +20,7 @@ start: 2019-07-02
|
|||
end: 2019-08-29
|
||||
location: "New York, New York"
|
||||
created: 2026-09-25
|
||||
updated: 2026-09-25
|
||||
updated: 2026-10-15
|
||||
relations:
|
||||
- type: participant_in
|
||||
with: "[[Jeffrey Epstein]]"
|
||||
|
|
@ -48,13 +48,13 @@ relations:
|
|||
role: "U.S. Attorney"
|
||||
start: 2019-07-02
|
||||
end: 2019-08-29
|
||||
fn: 5
|
||||
fn: 6
|
||||
- type: participant_in
|
||||
with: "[[Todd Blanche]]"
|
||||
reverse: true
|
||||
role: "counsel for the United States"
|
||||
start: 2025-07-18
|
||||
fn: 7
|
||||
fn: 8
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
United States v. Epstein (No. 1:19-cr-00490) was the federal criminal prosecution of [[Jeffrey Epstein]] in the [[U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York]] on charges of sex trafficking of minors and conspiracy. A grand jury returned the indictment under seal on July 2, 2019; Epstein was arrested on July 6 and ordered detained on July 18 by Judge [[Richard M. Berman]], and on August 10, 2019 he was found dead in the [[Metropolitan Correctional Center, New York|Metropolitan Correctional Center]]. Berman heard his accusers in open court before signing the government's nolle prosequi on August 29, 2019. No ruling on the validity of the 2007 [[Epstein non-prosecution agreement]] was ever made in the case. In 2025 the case reopened on the government's motions to unseal its grand jury record, which Berman denied in August and granted in December after the [[Epstein Files Transparency Act]] became law.[^1][^2]
|
||||
|
|
@ -67,15 +67,15 @@ On July 16 Moe filed a supplement to the government's detention memorandum discl
|
|||
|
||||
### Death and Dismissal
|
||||
|
||||
On July 23, 2019 Epstein was found in his cell with a cloth around his neck. On August 9 the [[Second Circuit]] unsealed about 2,000 pages of the [[Giuffre v. Maxwell]] record. He was found dead the next morning. On August 14 the court docketed a letter from the jail's warden, [[Lamine N'Diaye]], reporting that Epstein "passed away Saturday, August 10, 2019, at around 7:37 a.m." Berman's reply of the same date asked: "One open question, among others, is whether the investigations referenced in your letter will include the incident at MCC involving Mr. Epstein on or about July 23, 2019. To my knowledge, it has never been definitively explained what the BOP concluded about that incident."[^1][^4]
|
||||
On July 23, 2019 Epstein was found in his cell with a cloth around his neck. On July 3 the [[Second Circuit]] had ordered the unsealing of the summary judgment record in [[Giuffre v. Maxwell]], and on August 9 about 2,000 pages of it were released.[^4] He was found dead the next morning. On August 14 the court docketed a letter from the jail's warden, [[Lamine N'Diaye]], reporting that Epstein "passed away Saturday, August 10, 2019, at around 7:37 a.m." Berman's reply of the same date asked: "One open question, among others, is whether the investigations referenced in your letter will include the incident at MCC involving Mr. Epstein on or about July 23, 2019. To my knowledge, it has never been definitively explained what the BOP concluded about that incident."[^1][^5]
|
||||
|
||||
The government moved for an order of nolle prosequi on August 19. Instead of granting it on the papers, Berman scheduled a public hearing, reasoning that "where, as here, a defendant has died before any judgment has been entered against him, the public may still have an informational interest in the process by which the prosecutor seeks dismissal of an indictment," and invited victims and their counsel to be heard. On August 12 his chambers had sent a letter that the [[U.S. Marshals Service]] routed to the U.S. Attorney's Office leadership; on August 26 Geoffrey Berman wrote to a colleague, "M, let me know if you have a report for today. We may have 30 victims tomorrow."[^1][^5]
|
||||
The government moved for an order of nolle prosequi on August 19. Instead of granting it on the papers, Berman scheduled a public hearing, reasoning that "where, as here, a defendant has died before any judgment has been entered against him, the public may still have an informational interest in the process by which the prosecutor seeks dismissal of an indictment," and invited victims and their counsel to be heard. On August 12 his chambers had sent a letter that the [[U.S. Marshals Service]] routed to the U.S. Attorney's Office leadership; on August 26 Geoffrey Berman wrote to a colleague, "M, let me know if you have a report for today. We may have 30 victims tomorrow."[^1][^6]
|
||||
|
||||
At the hearing on August 27, 2019, Comey and Moe appeared for the government and Weingarten, Weinberg and Miller for the dead defendant, with an [[Federal Bureau of Investigation|FBI]] special agent and an NYPD detective. Berman said that "Mr. Epstein's death obviously means that a trial in which he is a defendant cannot take place." The lawyer Gloria Allred read statements from three Jane Does, and other accusers spoke. Berman signed the nolle prosequi on August 29, 2019 (ECF No. 52).[^1][^6]
|
||||
At the hearing on August 27, 2019, Comey and Moe appeared for the government and Weingarten, Weinberg and Miller for the dead defendant, with an [[Federal Bureau of Investigation|FBI]] special agent and an NYPD detective. Berman said that "Mr. Epstein's death obviously means that a trial in which he is a defendant cannot take place." The lawyer Gloria Allred read statements from three Jane Does, and other accusers spoke. Berman signed the nolle prosequi on August 29, 2019 (ECF No. 52).[^1][^7]
|
||||
|
||||
### The 2025 Unsealing Motions
|
||||
|
||||
On July 18, 2025 Deputy Attorney General [[Todd Blanche]] entered an appearance for the government in the closed case and moved to unseal the grand jury transcripts, "subject to appropriate redactions of victim-related and other personal identifying information" (ECF Nos. 60, 61), the same day he filed a matching motion in [[United States v. Maxwell]]. Berman required further submissions, including an analysis of "how the Nolle Prosequi (ECF No. 52) filed in this case impacts proposed disclosure, with legal authorities." The estate's executors, through Daniel H. Weiner and Daniel Ruzumna (ECF No. 71), [[Annie Farmer]]'s counsel Sigrid McCawley (ECF No. 72) and [[Bradley Edwards]] on [[Crime Victims' Rights Act]] grounds (ECF No. 73) filed positions.[^1][^7]
|
||||
On July 18, 2025 Deputy Attorney General [[Todd Blanche]] entered an appearance for the government in the closed case and moved to unseal the grand jury transcripts, "subject to appropriate redactions of victim-related and other personal identifying information" (ECF Nos. 60, 61), the same day he filed a matching motion in [[United States v. Maxwell]]. Berman required further submissions, including an analysis of "how the Nolle Prosequi (ECF No. 52) filed in this case impacts proposed disclosure, with legal authorities." The estate's executors, through Daniel H. Weiner and Daniel Ruzumna (ECF No. 71), [[Annie Farmer]]'s counsel Sigrid McCawley (ECF No. 72) and [[Bradley Edwards]] on [[Crime Victims' Rights Act]] grounds (ECF No. 73) filed positions.[^1][^8]
|
||||
|
||||
On August 20, 2025 Berman denied the motion (ECF No. 77). The record consisted of 70 pages of transcripts of June 18 and July 2, 2019 and exhibits comprising a PowerPoint presentation and four pages of call logs. He held that "the Government concedes that no Rule 6(e)(3) 'exceptions' to grand jury secrecy apply in this case" and that it "fails to demonstrate any 'special circumstance[]' which might justify unsealing." On August 26 he ordered briefing on an NBC News reporter's request to unseal two names redacted from Moe's July 2019 supplement.[^1]
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -86,7 +86,8 @@ After the Epstein Files Transparency Act became law on November 19, 2025, the go
|
|||
[^1]: United States v. Epstein, No. 1:19-cr-00490-RMB (S.D.N.Y.), ECF Nos. 2, 3, 23, 32, 34, 41, 44, 45, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 60, 61, 63, 67, 71, 72, 73, 74, 77 (Aug. 20, 2025), 78, CourtListener docket 15887848. https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/15887848/united-states-v-epstein/
|
||||
[^2]: United States v. Epstein, No. 1:19-cr-00490-RMB (S.D.N.Y.), ECF Nos. 85, 92 (Dec. 10, 2025), 94 to 105 (Jan. 15 to Feb. 5, 2026), CourtListener docket 15887848. https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/15887848/united-states-v-epstein/
|
||||
[^3]: United States v. Epstein, No. 1:19-cr-00490-RMB (S.D.N.Y.), ECF No. 23, Letter from AUSA Alison Moe to Judge Richard M. Berman (Supplement to Detention Memorandum), July 16, 2019, pp. 1 to 3. https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.518649/gov.uscourts.nysd.518649.23.0_2.pdf
|
||||
[^4]: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of the Inspector General, "Investigation and Review of the Federal Bureau of Prisons' Custody, Care, and Supervision of Jeffrey Epstein at the Metropolitan Correctional Center in New York, New York," Report 23-085, June 2023, pp. 14 to 20. https://oig.justice.gov/sites/default/files/reports/23-085.pdf
|
||||
[^5]: U.S. Department of Justice, Epstein Library, EFTA00149487, DataSet 9, email chain, U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York, forwarding the August 12, 2019 letter of Judge Richard M. Berman, August 26, 2019. https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA00149487.pdf
|
||||
[^6]: U.S. Department of Justice, Epstein Library, EFTA02733081, Court Records (CA Florida Holdings, LLC, Publisher of the Palm Beach Post v. Aronberg, No. 50-2019-CA-014681-XXXX-MB (Fla. 15th Cir. Ct. 2019)), appendix item 11, transcript of hearing, United States v. Jeffrey Epstein, 19 Cr. 490 (RMB) (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 27, 2019). https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/Court%20Records/CA%20Florida%20Holdings%2C%20LLC%2C%20Publisher%20of%20the%20Palm%20Beach%20Post%20v.%20Aronberg%2C%20No.%2050-2019-CA-014681-XXXX-MB%20(Fla.%2015th%20Cir.%20Ct.%202019)/EFTA02733081.pdf
|
||||
[^7]: United States v. Maxwell, No. 1:20-cr-00330 (S.D.N.Y.), ECF Nos. 784, 785 (July 18, 2025), CourtListener docket 17318376. https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/17318376/united-states-v-maxwell/
|
||||
[^4]: *Brown v. Maxwell*, 929 F.3d 41 (2d Cir. July 3, 2019) ("we VACATE the District Court's orders entered on November 2, 2016, May 3, 2017, and August 27, 2018, ORDER the unsealing of the summary judgment record as described further herein, and REMAND"). https://static.case.law/f3d/929/cases/0041-01.json
|
||||
[^5]: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of the Inspector General, "Investigation and Review of the Federal Bureau of Prisons' Custody, Care, and Supervision of Jeffrey Epstein at the Metropolitan Correctional Center in New York, New York," Report 23-085, June 2023, pp. 14 to 20. https://oig.justice.gov/sites/default/files/reports/23-085.pdf
|
||||
[^6]: U.S. Department of Justice, Epstein Library, EFTA00149487, DataSet 9, email chain, U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York, forwarding the August 12, 2019 letter of Judge Richard M. Berman, August 26, 2019. https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA00149487.pdf
|
||||
[^7]: U.S. Department of Justice, Epstein Library, EFTA02733081, Court Records (CA Florida Holdings, LLC, Publisher of the Palm Beach Post v. Aronberg, No. 50-2019-CA-014681-XXXX-MB (Fla. 15th Cir. Ct. 2019)), appendix item 11, transcript of hearing, United States v. Jeffrey Epstein, 19 Cr. 490 (RMB) (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 27, 2019). https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/Court%20Records/CA%20Florida%20Holdings%2C%20LLC%2C%20Publisher%20of%20the%20Palm%20Beach%20Post%20v.%20Aronberg%2C%20No.%2050-2019-CA-014681-XXXX-MB%20(Fla.%2015th%20Cir.%20Ct.%202019)/EFTA02733081.pdf
|
||||
[^8]: United States v. Maxwell, No. 1:20-cr-00330 (S.D.N.Y.), ECF Nos. 784, 785 (July 18, 2025), CourtListener docket 17318376. https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/17318376/united-states-v-maxwell/
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -14,8 +14,8 @@ tags:
|
|||
- Surveillance
|
||||
- CivilLiberties
|
||||
created: 2026-05-22
|
||||
updated: 2026-05-22
|
||||
summary: "United States v. Hasbajrami is the federal prosecution that produced the first judicial rulings requiring a warrant for Section 702 backdoor searches of Americans' communications, with the Second Circuit's 2019 decision and the district court's 2025 ruling establishing the leading Fourth Amendment framework for FISA database querying."
|
||||
updated: 2026-10-15
|
||||
summary: "United States v. Hasbajrami is the federal prosecution that produced the first judicial rulings requiring a warrant for Section 702 backdoor searches, in the Second Circuit's 2019 decision and the district court's 2025 ruling."
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
United States v. Hasbajrami is a federal prosecution in the [[Eastern District of New York]] that has, over more than a decade of constitutional litigation, produced the two most significant judicial rulings on whether "backdoor searches" of [[Section 702]] databases require a Fourth Amendment warrant. The case is the principal litigation vehicle through which the [[American Civil Liberties Union]]'s [[ACLU National Security Project]] has pressed the warrant requirement argument, and the January 2025 district court ruling in the case was the first federal ruling to impose a warrant requirement on warrantless U.S. person queries of [[Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act]] Section 702 data.
|
||||
|
|
@ -30,7 +30,7 @@ While Hasbajrami was serving his sentence, prosecutors disclosed that some evide
|
|||
|
||||
### Second Circuit, 2019
|
||||
|
||||
On December 18, 2019, the [[U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit]] issued its decision in United States v. Hasbajrami, 945 F.3d 641. Judge [[Gerard Lynch]], writing for a unanimous panel, ruled that Section 702 collection of the communications of a U.S. person's foreign contacts was permissible as incidental collection. However, the court also held that querying the resulting databases using a U.S. person identifier constitutes a "separate Fourth Amendment event" from the initial collection, and must independently comport with the Fourth Amendment. The Second Circuit remanded to the district court to determine whether a warrant was required for the specific queries at issue.[^1]
|
||||
On December 18, 2019, the [[U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit]] issued its decision in United States v. Hasbajrami, 945 F.3d 641. The case was argued on August 27, 2018 before Judges Lynch, [[Susan L. Carney]] and [[Christopher F. Droney]]. Judge [[Gerard Lynch]], writing for a unanimous panel, ruled that Section 702 collection of the communications of a U.S. person's foreign contacts was permissible as incidental collection. However, the court also held that querying the resulting databases using a U.S. person identifier constitutes a "separate Fourth Amendment event" from the initial collection, and must independently comport with the Fourth Amendment. The Second Circuit remanded to the district court to determine whether a warrant was required for the specific queries at issue.[^1]
|
||||
|
||||
The ruling rejected the government's argument that the "foreign intelligence exception" to the Fourth Amendment's warrant requirement justified warrantless U.S. person queries of Section 702 databases. The court declined to find a categorical exemption, requiring instead a case-specific Fourth Amendment analysis.
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -48,8 +48,6 @@ The Hasbajrami district court's January 2025 ruling, issued after Bredar's Augus
|
|||
|
||||
### Footnotes
|
||||
|
||||
[^1]: United States v. Hasbajrami, 945 F.3d 641 (2d Cir. Dec. 18, 2019). Lawfare analysis: "The Second Circuit Rules in United States v. Hasbajrami," https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/second-circuit-rules-united-states-v-hasbajrami; Just Security analysis: https://www.justsecurity.org/60505/happened-court-hasbajrami-oral-argument-section-702-fisa-fourth-amendment/
|
||||
|
||||
[^1]: United States v. Hasbajrami, 945 F.3d 641 (2d Cir. Dec. 18, 2019). Lawfare analysis: "The Second Circuit Rules in United States v. Hasbajrami," https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/second-circuit-rules-united-states-v-hasbajrami; Just Security analysis: https://www.justsecurity.org/60505/happened-court-hasbajrami-oral-argument-section-702-fisa-fourth-amendment/ ; opinion caption ("Argued; August 27, 2018. Decided: December 18, 2019"; "LYNCH, CARNEY, and DRONEY, Circuit Judges"), https://www.govinfo.gov/metadata/pkg/USCOURTS-ca2-17-02669/mods.xml
|
||||
[^2]: United States v. Hasbajrami, 11-cr-00623-LDH (E.D.N.Y.), Memorandum and Order (declassified Jan. 21, 2025). ACLU press release: https://www.aclu.org/press-releases/court-rules-warrantless-section-702-searches-violated-the-fourth-amendment; ACLU court document: https://www.aclu.org/documents/section-702-memorandum-and-order-u-s-v-hasbajrami-11-cr-00623-ldh; EFF analysis: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2025/01/victory-federal-court-finally-rules-backdoor-searches-702-data-unconstitutional
|
||||
|
||||
[^3]: Baltimore Sun, August 9, 2024. https://www.baltimoresun.com/2024/08/09/feds-evidence-spying-program-neo-nazi-accused-baltimore-power-grid-plot/
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue