From government accountability and oversight
The Biden Treasury Department tried to conceal an email from Bloomberg NEF Officially Promoting the Climate Agenda with the claim that internal government correspondence; Bloomberg NEF is Serve as a Consultant to the Biden Administrator on ‘climate’?
Courtesy of the Energy Policy Advocates (EPA), the government’s transparency group, the following was obtained in a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit. It represents an odd string. First, take note of one particular, heavily edited email:
Who is this Biden Treasury official, Ethan Zindler, whose Treasury email address also feels compelled to shield, EPA asked? Oh, he, um, Not:
As the email address certainly shows; which the Treasury certainly knows because it also very deliberately edited said email address. There’s no obvious compelling reason, although it’s good that they decided to hide it. Buried in a large documentary production, perhaps no one noticed.
b5 protects “inter-agency or internal memos or correspondence” from dissemination and, under certain circumstances, correspondence external consultant. Huh!
So what happens to the response to the “b5” discussion process between a de facto, senior Treasury official and a representative from Bloomberg New Energy Finance? “The company helps corporate strategy, finance and policy professionals navigate, change, and create opportunities. ”
EPA just asked so. Treasury has come back to this, after reconsidering:
Here, we see Bloomberg New Energy Finance explaining to a senior Treasury appointee how she should do her job, namely by slightly fervently giving the full text of ““ the entire government approach” to confound the execution of this deadly blow of the policy agenda to credible energy even though/because Congress never approved it. Follow their Zoom chat.
Originally, no hidden lobbying activity qualifies as b5… as the Treasury is aware, redacted the non-Bloomberg address. It only, eh, this is embarrassing, let’s call it intentional. Unless the Bloomberg NEF is Biden’s governance consultant on their shared climate agenda (or the admin thinks they’ll do whatever it takes to protect this).
And in dealing with that, the Treasury later withheld some like b6, to replace. FOIA Exemption b6 protects information about individuals in “human and medical records and similar records” where disclosure of that information “would constitute an invasion of individual privacy.” clearly unjustified”. Ah. Except for the first release, which has been largely redacted but, again, only “intentional” correspondence b5, with no mention of such information being withheld by necessity (also as there is no reason to conclude, from the context but now also the history of this document, the document contains is information b6). Does it have to be really bad?
Despite that, Bloomberg New Energy Finance, which is easily touted – as an expert, a “strategic research provider” – has the same agenda set forth by the Biden administration – a Treasury consultants promote?
Related
