While this is a great start, the majority appears to be just evidence inventory. There are some good parts around pg18, which is weirdly continued around pg97, along with an interesting, albeit heavily-redacted, interview on pg98.
Question for anyone who might know: does a judge sign off on what is redacted and the justification for doing so? Redacting names of investigators, etc. makes sense here, but when entire paragraphs are redacted, it makes you wonder if FOIA requests are really worthwhile?
I've heard that that actually varies a lot; sometimes you're working with the world's biggest data center, sometimes it's 30 guys with a building full of cabinets and a single TRS-80 in a closet.
Budgets are tight, FOIA compliance is way down the list. Congress likes keeping the executive branch on short rations, and legal stuff like this is a cost center.
If they were asked to supply the White House with photocopies of non controversial documents, would the photocopies look like that? I'm, (perhaps wrongly) assuming not.
So to me, it hints at a level of contempt for having to comply.
In other words, doing a slap dash crappy job because doing it annoys the person tasked with it or authorizing it. Like a kid who is told to clean it's bedroom and then doing it sloppily because it doesn't want to do it.
