VIA FACSIMILE
November 5, 2018
Douglas Hibbard
Chief, Initial Request Staff
Office of Information Policy
Department of Justice
Suite 11050
1425 New York Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C., 20530-0001
Fax: (202) 514-1009
Dear Mr. Hibbard,
This letter constitutes a request under the Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”), 5
U.S.C. § 552(a), and is submitted on behalf of the Electronic Privacy Information Center
(“EPIC”) to the Department of Justice’s (“DOJ”) Office of Information Policy (“OIP”).
EPIC seeks documents, in the possession of the agency, concerning the investigation by
Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller into Russian interference in the 2016 United States
presidential election and related matters.
Documents Requested
EPIC requests the following records concerning the Special Counsel investigation into
Russian interference with the presidential election:1
(1)(a) All “report[s]” and “closing documentation” prepared under 28 C.F.R. § 600.8(c),
whether or not such records were actually provided to the Attorney General or Acting
Attorney General;
(b) All drafts, outlines, exhibits, and supporting materials associated with any actual or
planned “report” or “closing documentation” under 28 C.F.R. § 600.8(c);
(2)(a) All “report[s]” concerning “the status of the investigation” prepared under 28 C.F.R.
§ 600.8(a)(2), whether or not such records were actually provided to the Attorney
General or Acting Attorney General;

1

U.S. Dep't of Justice, Office of the Deputy Attorney General, Order No. 3915-2017, Appointment of
Special Counsel to Investigate Russian Interference with the 2016 Presidential Election and Related
Matters (May 17, 2017), https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release/file/967231/download [hereinafter
Appointment Order].
EPIC FOIA Request
November 5, 2018

1

Special Counsel Report(s)
Department of Justice

 (b) All drafts, outlines, exhibits, and supporting materials associated with any actual or
planned “report” concerning “the status of the investigation” under 28 C.F.R. §
600.8(a)(2);
(3)(a) All records “expla[ining] . . . any investigative or prosecutorial step” under 28 C.F.R.
§ 600.7(b), whether or not such records were actually provided to the Attorney
General or Acting Attorney General;
(b) All drafts, outlines, exhibits, and supporting materials associated with any actual or
planned “explanation for any investigative or prosecutorial step” under 28 C.F.R. §
600.7(b);
(4)(a) All records prepared under 28 C.F.R. § 600.9(a) to “notify the Chairman and Ranking
Minority Member of the Judiciary Committees of each House of Congress” of a
development in the Special Counsel investigation, whether or not such records were
actually transmitted to any member of Congress;
(b) All drafts, outlines, exhibits, and supporting materials associated with any actual or
planned notification under 28 C.F.R. § 600.9(a);
(5)(a) All referrals by the Special Counsel, Attorney General, or Acting Attorney General
for “administrative remedies, civil sanctions or other governmental action outside the
criminal justice system” under 28 C.F.R. § 600.4(c), whether or not such records were
actually transmitted to any party outside of the Special Counsel’s Office;
(b) All drafts, outlines, exhibits, and supporting materials associated with any actual or
planned referral for “administrative remedies, civil sanctions or other governmental
action outside the criminal justice system” under 28 C.F.R. § 600.4(c);
(6)(a) All “report[s],” “recommendation[s],” and other “compilation[s] of information”
prepared for the eventual consideration of one or more members of Congress,2
whether or not such records were actually transmitted to any party outside of the
Special Counsel’s Office;
(b) All drafts, outlines, exhibits, and supporting materials associated with any actual or
planned report, recommendation, or compilation of the type described in Category
(6)(a) of this request;
(7)(a) All other reports summarizing or describing, for one or more persons outside of the
Special Counsel’s Office, (i) any of the Special Counsel’s evidence, findings,
decisions, actions, or planned actions, or (ii) any developments in the Special Counsel
investigation; and
2

In re Report & Recommendation of June 5, 1972 Grand Jury Concerning Transmission of Evidence to
House of Representatives, 370 F. Supp. 1219, 1221, 1226 (D.D.C. 1974), aff’d sub nom. Haldeman v.
Sirica, 501 F.2d 714 (D.C. Cir. 1974).
EPIC FOIA Request
November 5, 2018

2

Special Counsel Report(s)
Department of Justice

 (b) All drafts, outlines, exhibits, and supporting materials associated with any actual or
planned report of the type described in Category (7)(a) of this request.
EPIC does not seek records which have already been disclosed to the public in their complete
and unredacted form (i) in the course of an open judicial proceeding; (ii) available at
https://www.justice.gov/sco; or (iii) available at https://www.justice.gov/news.
Background
EPIC’s FOIA request, and the Special Counsel investigation to which it pertains, arise
out of the Russian government’s coordinated campaign to interfere with the 2016 U.S.
presidential election.
Russian Interference in the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election
In 2016, the Russian government carried out a multi-pronged attack on the U.S.
Presidential Election to destabilize U.S. democratic institutions and aid the candidacy of Donald
J. Trump. As explained in the declassified 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment (“ICA”) on
Russian election interference:3
We assess with high confidence that Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an
influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US presidential election, the consistent
goals of which were to undermine public faith in the US democratic process,
denigrate Secretary Clinton, and harm her electability and potential presidency. We
further assess Putin and the Russian Government developed a clear preference for
President-elect Trump. When it appeared to Moscow that Secretary Clinton was
likely to win the election, the Russian influence campaign then focused on
undermining her expected presidency.
We also assess Putin and the Russian Government aspired to help President-elect
Trump’s election chances when possible by discrediting Secretary Clinton and
publicly contrasting her unfavorably to him.4
The ICA—along with the reports, investigations, and prosecutions that have ensued—
establishes that Russia interfered with the 2016 election on at least four fronts.
First, “Russia’s intelligence services conducted cyber operations against targets
associated with the 2016 US presidential election, including targets associated with both major

3

Office of the Dir. of Nat’l Intelligence, ICA 2017-01D, Intelligence Community Assessment: Assessing
Russian Activities and Intentions in Recent US Elections (Jan. 6, 2017),
https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/ICA_2017_01.pdf [hereinafter Intelligence Community
Assessment]; see also EPIC, EPIC v. ODNI (Russian Hacking) (Dec. 18, 2017),
https://www.epic.org/foia/odni/russian-hacking/ (EPIC FOIA lawsuit to obtain full Intelligence
Community Assessment on which declassified version was based).
4
Intelligence Community Assessment, supra note 3, at 1.
EPIC FOIA Request
November 5, 2018

3

Special Counsel Report(s)
Department of Justice

 US political parties.”5 These operations included the “exfiltrat[ion of] large volumes of data”
from the Democratic National Committee (“DNC”) and “the compromise of the personal e-mail
accounts of Democratic Party officials and political figures.”6
Second, Russian intelligence services “used the Guccifer 2.0 persona, DCLeaks.com, and
WikiLeaks to release US victim data obtained in cyber operations publicly and in exclusives to
media outlets.”7 These disclosures included data extracted by Russian intelligence from DNC
networks.8 Subsequent investigation has also revealed that senior Trump campaign officials
engaged in multiple meetings with Russian intermediaries offering to provide “dirt” on Hillary
Clinton, including “thousands of emails” obtained by Russia.9
Third, “Russian intelligence accessed elements of multiple state or local electoral boards”
in an ongoing effort to assess “US electoral processes and related technology and equipment.”10
Fourth, “Russia’s state-run propaganda machine—comprised of its domestic media
apparatus, outlets targeting global audiences such as RT and Sputnik, and a network of quasigovernment trolls—contributed to the influence campaign by serving as a platform for Kremlin
messaging to Russian and international audiences.”11 As part of this propaganda push, the
Russian government spent millions of dollars and employed hundreds of people to flood
Facebook and Twitter with fraudulent users, posts, articles, groups, and targeted
advertisements.12

5

Id. at 2.
Id.; see also EPIC, EPIC v. FBI (Russian Hacking) (May 22, 2018), https://epic.org/foia/fbi/russianhacking/ (EPIC FOIA lawsuit revealing FBI’s failure to follow its own victim notification procedures in
response to Russian cyberattacks against U.S. officials).
7
Intelligence Community Assessment, supra note 3, at 2–3.
8
Id. at 3.
9
Statement of the Offense at ¶ 14, United States v. Papadopoulos, No. 17-182 (D.D.C. Oct. 5, 2017)
(“The Professor told defendant PAPADOPOULOS . . . that ‘They [the Russians] have dirt on her’; ‘the
Russians had emails of Clinton’; ‘they have thousands of emails.’”); see also House Permanent Select
Committee on Intelligence, Status of the Russia Investigation (Minority Report) (Mar. 13, 2018),
https://democrats-intelligence.house.gov/uploadedfiles/final__minority_status_of_the_russia_investigation_with_appendices.pdf (noting that the “stated purpose” of
“the June 9, 2016 Trump Tower meeting with Russian emissaries” was to “provide damaging information
on Hillary Clinton”).
10
Intelligence Community Assessment, supra note 3, at 3; see also EPIC, EPIC v. DHS (Aug. 17, 2018),
https://epic.org/foia/dhs/cybersecurity/russian-interference/default.html (EPIC FOIA lawsuit revealing
Department of Homeland Security response to Russian cyberattacks on election infrastructure).
11
Intelligence Community Assessment, supra note 3, at 3–4.
12
Indictment at ¶¶ 3–6, 10, United States v. Internet Res. Agency, No. 18-32 (D.D.C. Feb. 16, 2018); see
also Statement from EPIC to U.S. Senate Select Comm. on Intelligence, Sep. 4, 2018,
https://epic.org/testimony/congress/EPIC-SSCI-ForeignSocialMedia-Sept2018.pdf (calling for greater
transparency concerning Russian manipulation of news and information on social networks during and
after the 2016 election).
6

EPIC FOIA Request
November 5, 2018

4

Special Counsel Report(s)
Department of Justice

 In the twenty-two months since the Intelligence Community Assessment was published,
the ICA’s findings have been repeatedly confirmed by federal inquiries13 and investigative
reporting.14 The Senate Intelligence Committee, after an “an in-depth review” of the ICA and
associated intelligence, determined that “the conclusions of the ICA are sound” and noted “that
collection and analysis subsequent to the ICA's publication continue to reinforce its
assessments.”15
Criminal Investigations into Russian Election Interference
On January 20, 2018—two weeks after the public release of the Intelligence Community
Assessment—Donald J. Trump was inaugurated as the 45th President of the United States. On
March 2, 2017, Attorney General Jeff Sessions, who had been a prominent supporter of Mr.
Trump during the campaign, recused himself “from any existing or future investigations of any
matters related in any way to the campaigns for President of the United States.”16 As a result, the
responsibilities of the Attorney General for any such investigation passed to the Deputy Attorney
General.17
On March 20, 2017, James B. Comey, then-Director of the Federal Bureau of
Investigation (“FBI”), confirmed to the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence that
the FBI was conducting an investigation into “the Russian government’s efforts to interfere in
the 2016 presidential election,” including “the nature of any links between individuals associated
with the Trump campaign and the Russian government and whether there was any coordination
between the campaign and Russia’s efforts.”18 Mr. Comey noted that the investigation would
include “an assessment of whether any crimes were committed.”19

13

Senate Select Comm. on Intelligence, The Intelligence Community Assessment: Assessing Russian
Activities and Intentions in Recent U.S. Elections (July 3, 2018),
https://www.burr.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/SSCI%20ICA%20ASSESSMENT_FINALJULY3.pdf
[hereinafter Senate Intelligence Report].
14
E.g., Scott Shane & Mark Mazzetti, The Plot to Subvert an Election: Unraveling the Russia Story So
Far, N.Y. Times (Sep. 20, 2018), https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/09/20/us/politics/russiainterference-election-trump-clinton.html; Philip Bump, A Broad Debunking of Trump’s Claims About
Russian Interference and the Mueller Investigation, Wash. Post (June 28, 2018),
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/politics/wp/2018/06/28/a-broad-debunking-of-trumps-claimsabout-russian-interference-and-the-mueller-investigation/.
15
Senate Intelligence Report, supra note 13, at 7.
16
Press Release, U.S. Dep't of Justice, Attorney General Sessions Statement on Recusal (Mar. 2, 2017),
https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/attorney-general-sessions-statement-recusal; see also 28 C.F.R. § 45.2(a).
17
Id.; see also 28 U.S.C. § 508 (“In case of a vacancy in the office of Attorney General, or of his absence
or disability, the Deputy Attorney General may exercise all the duties of that office[.]”).
18
Russian Active Measures Investigation: Hearing Before the H. Permanent Select Comm. on
Intelligence, 115th Cong. (2017) (Statement of James B. Comey, Dir., Fed. Bureau of Investigation),
https://www.fbi.gov/news/testimony/hpsci-hearing-titled-russian-active-measures-investigation.
19
Id.
EPIC FOIA Request
November 5, 2018

5

Special Counsel Report(s)
Department of Justice

 On May 9, 2017, President Trump removed Director Comey from office and terminated
his employment. 20 Two days later, in a nationally-televised NBC News interview, President
Trump stated:
I was going to fire Comey knowing, there was no good time to do it. And in fact
when I decided to just do it, I said to myself, I said you know, this Russia thing with
Trump and Russia is a made up story, it's an excuse by the Democrats for having
lost an election that they should have won.21
On May 17, 2017, Deputy Attorney General Rod J. Rosenstein—in his capacity as Acting
Attorney General—appointed Robert S. Mueller III “to serve as Special Counsel for the United
States Department of Justice.”22 Mr. Rosenstein authorized Mr. Mueller to “conduct the
investigation confirmed by then-FBI Director James B. Comey in testimony before the House
Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence on March 20, 2017,” including “any links and/or
coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of
President Donald Trump”; “any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation”;
and “any other matters within the scope of 28 C.F.R. § 600.4(a).”23 Mr. Rosenstein also
authorized Mr. Mueller “to prosecute federal crimes arising from the investigation of these
matters” where “it is necessary and appropriate[.]”24
Since Mr. Mueller was appointed, the Special Counsel has brought criminal charges
against 33 individuals and three organizations,25 including:
•
•

Former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn, who pleaded guilty to making
false statements to the FBI;26
Former Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort, who was convicted of multiple
counts of tax fraud and bank fraud27 and pleaded guilty to conspiracy against the
United States and other charges;28

20

Letter from Donald J. Trump, President of the United States, to James B. Comey, Dir., Fed. Bureau of
Investigation (May 9, 2017), https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/DCPD-201700325/pdf/DCPD201700325.pdf.
21
Adam Edelman, Trump says He Didn't Fire Comey 'Because of Russia,' Contradicting Past Statements,
NBC News (May 31, 2018), https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-says-he-didn-t-firecomey-because-russia-contradicting-n878836.
22
Appointment Order, supra note 1, ¶ (a).
23
Id. ¶ (b).
24
Id. ¶ (c).
25
U.S. Dep’t of Justice, Special Counsel’s Office (Sep. 14, 2018), https://www.justice.gov/sco.
26
Plea Agreement, United States v. Flynn, No. 17-232 (Dec. 1, 2017),
https://www.justice.gov/file/1015121/download.
27
U.S. Dep’t of Justice, Special Counsel’s Office, supra note 25 (“On Aug. 21, 2018, a federal jury found
Manafort guilty on eight counts: counts 1-5, subscribing to a false individual income tax return for tax
years 2010-2014; count 12, failure to file reports of foreign bank and financial accounts for year 2012;
count 25, bank fraud; and count 27, bank fraud.”).
28
Plea Agreement, United States v. Manafort, No. 17-201 (Sep. 14, 2018),
https://www.justice.gov/file/1094151/download.
EPIC FOIA Request
November 5, 2018

6

Special Counsel Report(s)
Department of Justice

 •
•
•

•

Former Trump deputy campaign manager Rick Gates, who pleaded guilty to
conspiracy against the United States and making a false statement to the FBI;29
Former Trump campaign foreign policy adviser George Papadopolous, who
pleaded guilty to making false statements to the FBI;30
The Internet Research Agency, Concord Management and Consulting LLC, and
thirteen Russian nationals, who are charged with conspiracy against the United
States and related offenses for flooding social media platforms with fraudulent
content to interfere with U.S. political processes;31 and
Twelve other Russian nationals, who are charged with conspiracy to commit
computer crimes and other offenses for hacking Democratic Party computer
networks and email accounts linked to the Clinton campaign.32

The Special Counsel Report(s)
In addition to the criminal offenses charged by the Special Counsel, major news
organizations33 and President Trump’s own attorneys34 have stated that Mr. Mueller intends to
29

Plea Agreement, United States v. Gates, No. 17-201 (Feb. 23, 2018),
https://www.justice.gov/file/1038801/download.
30
Plea Agreement, United States v. Papadopolous, No. 17-182 (Oct. 5, 2017),
https://www.justice.gov/file/1007341/download.
31
Indictment, United States v. Internet Research Agency LLC, No. 18-32 (Feb. 16, 2018),
https://www.justice.gov/file/1035477/download.
32
Indictment, United States v. Netyksho, No. 18-215 (July 13, 2018),
https://www.justice.gov/file/1080281/download.
33
E.g., Charlie Savage, Legal Experts Urge Release of Watergate Report to Offer Mueller a Road Map,
N.Y. Times (Sep. 14, 2018), https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/14/us/politics/mueller-report-grand-jurywatergate.html (“The leading theory is that Mr. Mueller will write a report for his supervisor at the Justice
Department. . . . But there is historical precedent for another model. Echoing a move by the Watergate
prosecutor in March 1974, the grand jury with which Mr. Mueller has been working could try to send a
report about the evidence it has gathered directly to the House Judiciary Committee.”); Jeffrey Toobin,
How Rudy Giuliani Turned Into Trump’s Clown, New Yorker (Sep. 10, 2018),
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/09/10/how-rudy-giuliani-turned-into-trumps-clown
(“Mueller will file a concluding report with Rod Rosenstein, the Deputy Attorney General, at the end of
the investigation[.]”); Michael S. Schmidt & Maggie Haberman, Mueller Examining Trump’s Tweets in
Wide-Ranging Obstruction Inquiry, N.Y. Times (July 26, 2018),
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/26/us/politics/trump-tweets-mueller-obstruction.html (“If Mr. Mueller
does not plan to make a case in court, a report of his findings could be sent to Congress, leaving it to
lawmakers to decide whether to begin impeachment proceedings.”).
34
E.g., Memorandum from John M. Dowd, Att’y for President Trump, to Robert S. Mueller, Special
Counsel (Jan. 29, 2018), reprinted in The Trump Lawyers’ Confidential Memo to Mueller, Explained,
N.Y. Times (June 2, 2018), https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/06/02/us/politics/trump-legaldocuments.html (“It is our understanding that the reason behind the request for the interview is to allow
the Special Counsel’s office to complete its report.”); @RudyGiuliani, Twitter (Aug. 15, 2018, 9:58 AM),
https://twitter.com/RudyGiuliani/status/1029728984446193664 (“DOJ should require Mueller to submit
his report before September 7.”); Peter Nicholas, Rudy Giuliani Says Trump Lawyers Are Prepared to
Counter Mueller, Wall Street J. (Aug. 12, 2018), https://www.wsj.com/articles/rudy-giuliani-says-trumplawyers-are-prepared-to-counter-mueller-1534110560 (“President Trump’s lawyers believe they can
EPIC FOIA Request
November 5, 2018

7

Special Counsel Report(s)
Department of Justice

 transmit one or more report(s) detailing the Special Counsel’s findings (the “Mueller Report(s)”).
The precise number, character, and subject matter of the Mueller Report(s) are not publicly
known, though at least one such report is said to address allegations that President Trump
obstructed justice by attempting to block a criminal probe into Russian election interference.35
There are several legal authorities under which the Special Counsel, Attorney General, or
Acting Attorney General might issue a report or otherwise release information concerning the
Special Counsel’s investigation. First, under 28 C.F.R. § 600.8(c), the Special Counsel is
required to provide the Attorney General or Acting Attorney General with a report at the
conclusion of the investigation:
(c) Closing documentation. At the conclusion of the Special Counsel's work, he
or she shall provide the Attorney General with a confidential report explaining the
prosecution or declination decisions reached by the Special Counsel.36
Second, under 28 C.F.R. § 600.8(a)(2), the Special Counsel is required to provide annual
status reports to the Attorney General or Acting Attorney General:
(2) Thereafter, 90 days before the beginning of each fiscal year, the Special Counsel
shall report to the Attorney General the status of the investigation, and provide a
budget request for the following year. The Attorney General shall determine
whether the investigation should continue and, if so, establish the budget for the
next year.37
Third, under 28 C.F.R. § 600.7(b), the Attorney General or Acting Attorney General may
request an explanation for any investigative or prosecutorial step taken by the Special Counsel:
(b) The Special Counsel shall not be subject to the day-to-day supervision of any
official of the Department. However, the Attorney General may request that the
Special Counsel provide an explanation for any investigative or prosecutorial step,
and may after review conclude that the action is so inappropriate or unwarranted
under established Departmental practices that it should not be pursued. In
conducting that review, the Attorney General will give great weight to the views of
the Special Counsel. If the Attorney General concludes that a proposed action by a
weather a ‘negative’ report from special counsel Robert Mueller and are prepared to rebut the
conclusions, Rudy Giuliani, one of Mr. Trump’s attorneys, said in an interview.”).
35
Carol D. Leonnig & Robert Costa, Mueller Told Trump’s Attorneys the President Remains Under
Investigation But is Not Currently a Criminal Target, Wash. Post (Apr. 3, 2018),
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/mueller-told-trumps-attorneys-the-president-remains-underinvestigation-but-is-not-currently-a-criminal-target/2018/04/03/d7832cf0-36c1-11e8-acd535eac230e514_story.html (“The special counsel also told Trump’s lawyers that he is preparing a report
about the president’s actions while in office and potential obstruction of justice, according to two people
with knowledge of the conversations.”).
36
28 C.F.R. § 600.8(c); see also Appointment Order, supra note 1, ¶ (d) (“Sections 600.4 through 600.10
of Title 28 of the Code of Federal Regulations are applicable to the Special Counsel.”).
37
28 C.F.R. § 600.8(a)(2).
EPIC FOIA Request
November 5, 2018

8

Special Counsel Report(s)
Department of Justice

 Special Counsel should not be pursued, the Attorney General shall notify Congress
as specified in § 600.9(a)(3).38
Fourth, under 28 C.F.R. § 600.9(a), the Attorney General or Acting Attorney General is
required to notify certain members of Congress of key developments in the Special Counsel’s
investigation:
(a) The Attorney General will notify the Chairman and Ranking Minority Member
of the Judiciary Committees of each House of Congress, with an explanation for
each action —
(1) Upon appointing a Special Counsel;
(2) Upon removing any Special Counsel; and
(3) Upon conclusion of the Special Counsels investigation, including, to the
extent consistent with applicable law, a description and explanation of instances
(if any) in which the Attorney General concluded that a proposed action by a
Special Counsel was so inappropriate or unwarranted under established
Departmental practices that it should not be pursued.39
Fifth, under 28 C.F.R. § 600.4(c), the Special Counsel may take “necessary action” to
pursue penalties “outside the criminal justice system” in consultation with the Attorney General
or Acting Attorney General:
(c) Civil and administrative jurisdiction. If in the course of his or her
investigation the Special Counsel determines that administrative remedies, civil
sanctions or other governmental action outside the criminal justice system might be
appropriate, he or she shall consult with the Attorney General with respect to the
appropriate component to take any necessary action. A Special Counsel shall not
have civil or administrative authority unless specifically granted such jurisdiction
by the Attorney General.40
Sixth, the Special Counsel may use its “full power and independent authority to exercise
all investigative and prosecutorial functions of any United States Attorney”41 to transmit
“report[s],” “recommendation[s],” or other “compilation[s] of information” to Congress via the
grand jury process.42 This procedure was used by Special Counsel Leon Jaworski in 1974 to
convey “material in the Grand Jury’s possession having a material bearing on matters within the

38

28 C.F.R. § 600.7(b).
28 C.F.R. § 600.9(a).
40
28 C.F.R. § 600.4(c).
41
28 C.F.R. § 600.6.
42
In re Report & Recommendation, 370 F. Supp. at 1221, 1226.
39

EPIC FOIA Request
November 5, 2018

9

Special Counsel Report(s)
Department of Justice

 primary jurisdiction of the United States House of Representatives Committee on the Judiciary
relating to questions of impeachment.”43
Finally, the Special Counsel, Attorney General, and/or Acting Attorney General may
rely on their general powers under 28 C.F.R. § 600.1 et seq. (and on other legal authorities) to
disclose developments, evidence, findings, decisions, actions, or planned actions from the
Special Counsel’s investigation.
EPIC, through this FOIA request, seeks all of the above categories of records and
supporting materials generated by or related to Special Counsel Mueller’s investigation.
EPIC’s Interest in the Special Counsel Investigation
EPIC has a particular interest in the release of records related to Special Counsel
Mueller’s investigation because those records will inform EPIC’s project on Democracy and
Cybersecurity, which was launched in response the interference in the 2016 Presidential
Election.44 As part of EPIC’s Democracy and Cybersecurity project, EPIC has filed suits seeking
public release of President Trump’s tax returns and to correct numerous misstatements of fact
concerning the President’s financial ties to Russia.
EPIC v. IRS I (Donald Trump’s Tax Records)
In EPIC v. IRS I, EPIC argues that the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) has the
authority, under § 6103(k)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code,45 to disclose the President’s returns
to correct numerous misstatement of fact concerning his financial ties to Russia.46 For example,
President Trump falsely tweeted that “Russia has never tried to use leverage over me. I HAVE
NOTHING TO DO WITH RUSSIA – NO DEALS, NO LOANS, NO NOTHING.”47 Yet,
numerous news organizations have covered President Trump’s ties to Russian businesses and
government.48 The case is currently pending in the D.C. Circuit.
43

Report & Recommendation at 1, In re Report & Recommendation, 370 F. Supp. at 1221 (Mar. 1, 1974)
(capitalization altered), https://www.archives.gov/files/research/investigations/watergate/roadmap/docid70105890.pdf; see also 105 Cong. Rec. H9,670 (daily ed. Oct. 6, 1998) (statement of Rep. Jackson-Lee)
(“[I]t will be recalled the Watergate special prosecution force did not send to Congress an argumentative
or inflammatory document, but rather a simple road map which merely summarized and identified the
location of relevant evidence.”).
44
See EPIC, Democracy and Cybersecurity: Preserving Democratic Institutions,
https://www.epic.org/democracy/.
45
26 U.S.C. § 6103(k)(3).
46
See EPIC, EPIC v. IRS (Donald Trump’s Tax Records), https://www.epic.org/foia/irs/trump-taxes/.
47
Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump), Twitter (July 26, 2016),
https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/758071952498159616?lang=en.
48
See e.g., Tom Hamburger, Rosalind S. Helderman, & Michael Birnbaum, Inside Trump’s Financial
Ties to Russian and His Unusual Flatters of Vladimir Putin, Wash. Post (June 17, 2016),
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/inside-trumps-financial-ties-to-russia-and-his-unusual-flatteryof-vladimir-putin/2016/06/17/dbdcaac8-31a6-11e6-8ff7-7b6c1998b7a0_story.html; Despite Denial,
Trump’s Connections to Russia Go Back Years, CBS News (July 29, 2016),
EPIC FOIA Request
November 5, 2018

10

Special Counsel Report(s)
Department of Justice

 EPIC v. IRS II (Trump Offers-in-Compromise)
In EPIC v. IRS II, EPIC filed suit to compel the IRS to release certain tax records
pertaining to President Trump’s more than 300 associated business entities.49 EPIC requested all
“offers-in-compromise” used to satisfy a tax debt owed by President Trump or one of his
businesses. Under § 6103(k)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code, taxpayer “return information shall
be disclosed to all members of the general public to the extent necessary to permit inspection of
any accepted offer-in-compromise[.]”50 These records are public as a matter of law. The case is
currently pending in the U.S. Federal Court for the District of Columbia.
Request for Expedition
EPIC is entitled to expedited processing of this request.51 Under the DOJ’s FOIA
regulations, a request “shall be processed on an expedited basis” when (1) there is an “urgency to
inform the public about an actual or alleged federal government activity,” and (2) where the
request is “made by a person who is primarily engaged in disseminating information.”52 This
request satisfies both conditions.
First, there is an “urgency to inform the public about an actual or alleged federal
government activity.”53 The actual federal government activities are (1) the Special Counsel’s
investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election, and (2) the U.S.
government’s response to Russian election interference, as reflected in the requested records of
the Special Counsel.54 The requested records also pertain to President Trump’s alleged
obstruction of justice while in office.55
The urgency to inform the public about these government activities is clear from the
voluminous press coverage of,56 and immense public interest in,57 Mr. Mueller’s investigation
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/election-2016-donald-trump-ties-to-russia-go-back-years-dnc-emailhack/; John Hardwood, Trump Calls the Special Counsel’s Probe a ‘Witch Hunt,’ but His Links to Russia
Go Back a Long Time, CNBC (May 23, 2018), https://www.cnbc.com/2018/05/23/trump-links-to-russiaan-explanation.html.
49
See EPIC, EPIC v. IRS II (Trump Offers-in-Compromise), https://epic.org/foia/irs/trump-taxes-ii/.
50
26 U.S.C. § 6103(k)(1).
51
5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(6)(E)(v)(II); 28 C.F.R. § 16.5(e)(1).
52
28 C.F.R. § 16.5(e)(1), (e)(1)(ii).
53
Id.
54
See Appointment Order, supra note 1.
55
See Leonnig & Costa, supra note 35 (“The special counsel also told Trump’s lawyers that he is
preparing a report about the president’s actions while in office and potential obstruction of justice,
according to two people with knowledge of the conversations.”).
56
See, e.g., Robert Mueller — F.B.I. Director, N.Y. Times (Nov. 1, 2018),
https://www.nytimes.com/topic/person/robert-mueller-mdash-fbi-director (listing over 570 articles
concerning Robert Mueller since his appointment as Special Counsel on May 17, 2017).
57
See, e.g., Morning Consult & Politico, National Tracking Poll (Oct. 30, 2018),
https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000166-cb61-d184-ad67-ff67dddd0000 (finding that over 66% of
respondents were aware of, and had developed an opinion on, Special Counsel Mueller); Robert Mueller,
Google Trends (Nov. 2, 2018), https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=today%205EPIC FOIA Request
November 5, 2018

11

Special Counsel Report(s)
Department of Justice

 and findings. Americans are deeply concerned about the scope of Russian interference in the
2016 presidential election; the U.S. government’s response to that interference; the involvement
of particular individuals in that interference, including possibly President Trump; the
susceptibility of U.S. election systems and democratic institutions to future foreign interference;
and the integrity of the Special Counsel investigation itself.58 The Mueller Report(s) and
supporting materials are critical to the public’s understanding of these issues.
Second, EPIC is an organization “primarily engaged in disseminating information.”59 As
the Court explained in EPIC v. Department of Defense, 241 F. Supp. 2d 5 (D.D.C. 2003), “EPIC
satisfies the definition of ‘representative of the news media’” entitling it to preferred fee status
under FOIA.60
EPIC is also entitled to expedited processing because EPIC’s request involves “[a] matter
of widespread and exceptional media interest in which there exist possible questions about the
government’s integrity that affect public confidence.”61 In addition to the extraordinary media
attention given to the work of the Special Counsel,62 the requested records concern the potential
involvement of the President in a foreign campaign to influence an election that he won; the
possible obstruction of justice by the President while in office; the federal government’s capacity
to defend U.S. election systems and democratic institutions against foreign attacks; and the
discharge of a high-profile Special Counsel investigation.63 These matters unquestionably bear
on the integrity of the government and affect public confidence.
In submitting this request for expedited processing, I certify that this explanation is true
and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.64

y&geo=US&q=Robert%20Mueller (showing a more than 100-fold increase in U.S. Google searches for
Robert Mueller following his appointment as Special Counsel).
58
See, e.g., NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist, The United States’ Relationship with Russia 10, 12–13, 17 (July
25, 2018), http://maristpoll.marist.edu/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/NPR_PBS-Nature-of-the-Sampleand-Tables_The-US-Relationship-with-Russia_July-2018_181807241048.pdf (finding that 69% of
respondents believed Russian interference occurred in the 2016 election, 63% believed Russian
interference impacted the 2016 election, 53% believed President Trump had done something illegal or
unethical “in his dealings with Russia and Russian President Vladimir Putin,” and 57% expected Russia
to interfere in the 2018 election); Suffolk University, Suffolk University/USA Today National Poll Shows
Faith in Mueller’s Russia Investigation but Not in Trump Denials (Aug. 29, 2018),
https://www.suffolk.edu/news/77724.php (“A majority of Americans (55 percent) trust special counsel
Robert Mueller and his investigation into alleged Russian meddling in the 2016 election, but 59 percent
don’t trust President Donald Trump’s denial that his campaign was involved, according to a new Suffolk
University/USA TODAY national poll.”).
59
28 C.F.R. § 16.5(e)(1)(ii).
60
241 F. Supp. at 15.
61
28 C.F.R. § 16.5(e)(1)(iv).
62
Search Results: “Robert Mueller” and “Russia”, Google News (Nov. 2, 2018),
https://www.google.com/search?tbm=nws&q=%22Robert+Mueller%22+and+%22Russia%22
(identifying 941,000 news results containing both “Robert Mueller” and “Russia”).
63
See Shane & Mazzetti, supra note 14.
64
See 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(6)(E)(vi); 28 C.F.R. § 16.5(e)(3).
EPIC FOIA Request
November 5, 2018

12

Special Counsel Report(s)
Department of Justice

 Request for News Media Fee Status and Fee Waiver
EPIC is a “representative of the news media” for fee classification purposes, as the Court
held in EPIC v. Department of Defense.65 Based on EPIC’s status as a “news media” requester,
EPIC is entitled to receive the requested record with only duplication fees assessed.66
Further, any duplication fees should also be waived because disclosure of the requested
information “is in the public interest because it is likely to contribute significantly to public
understanding of the operations or activities of the government and is not primarily in the
commercial interest” of EPIC, the requester.67 The DOJ evaluates the three factors to determine
whether this requirement is met: (i) the “subject of the request must concern identifiable
operations or activities of the Federal Government”; (ii) disclosure must be “likely to contribute
significantly to public understanding of those operations or activities”; and (iii) “disclosure must
not be primarily in the commercial interest of the requester.”68 EPIC’s request satisfies all three
factors.
First, the requested Mueller Report(s) and supporting materials clearly “concern[]
identifiable operations or activities of the Federal Government,”69 namely: (1) the Special
Counsel’s investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election; (2) the
U.S. government’s response to Russian election interference; and (3) possible obstruction of
justice by President Trump while in office.70
Second, disclosure would be “likely to contribute significantly to public understanding of
those operations or activities.”71 Disclosure would be “meaningfully informative about
government operations or activities” because—apart from the charging documents already filed
by Mr. Mueller—little is known about the Special Counsel’s substantive findings concerning
Russian election interference; the Trump campaign’s involvement in that interference; the U.S.
government’s response to that interference; and possible obstruction of justice by President
Trump.
Disclosure will also “contribute to the understanding of a reasonably broad audience of
persons interested in the subject,” because DOJ components must “presume that a representative
of the news media,” such as EPIC, “will satisfy this consideration.”72 The requested Mueller
Report(s) and supporting materials will reach a large audience through EPIC’s widely read
website, https://epic.org, where EPIC routinely posts government documents obtained under the
FOIA.

65

241 F. Supp. 2d 5.
5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(A)(ii)(II).
67
28 C.F.R. § 16.10(k)(1); see also § 552(a)(4)(A)(iii).
68
28 C.F.R. §§ 16.10(k)(2)(i)–(iii).
69
Id. § 16.10(k)(2)(i).
70
See Appointment Order, supra note 1; Leonnig & Costa, supra note 35.
71
28 C.F.R. §§ 16.10(k)(2)(ii)(A)–(B).
72
Id. § 16.10(k)(2)(ii)(B)
66

EPIC FOIA Request
November 5, 2018

13

Special Counsel Report(s)
Department of Justice

 Third, disclosure of the requested information is not “primarily in the commercial
interest” of EPIC.73 EPIC has no “commercial interest . . . that would be furthered by the
requested disclosure.”74 EPIC is a registered non-profit organization committed to open
government, privacy, and civil liberties.75 Moreover, DOJ components “ordinarily will presume
that where a news media requester has satisfied [the public interest standard], the request is not
primarily in the commercial interest of the requester.”76 As described above, EPIC is a news
media requester and satisfies the public interest standard.
For these reasons, a fee waiver should be granted to EPIC’s request.
Conclusion
Thank you for your consideration of this request. I anticipate your determination on our
request within ten calendar days.77 For questions regarding this request, I can be contacted at
202-483-1140 x120 or FOIA@epic.org.
Respectfully submitted,
/s John Davisson
John Davisson
EPIC Counsel
/s Enid Zhou
Enid Zhou
EPIC Open Government Counsel

73

Id. §§ 16.10(k)(2)(iii)(A)–(B).
Id. §§ 16.10(k)(2)(iii)(A).
75
EPIC, About EPIC (2018), https://epic.org/epic/about.html.
76
28 C.F.R. § 16.10(k)(2)(iii)(B).
77
5 U.S.C. § 552 (a)(6)(E)(ii)(I).
74

EPIC FOIA Request
November 5, 2018

14

Special Counsel Report(s)
Department of Justice