FW: DRAFT RESPONSE RE: NYT DISCLOSURE LANGUAGE

• Document Type: SPECIALCOLLECTION
• Collection: FOIA Collection
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): 05929310
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: U
• Document Page Count: 2
• Document Creation Date: March 16, 2022
• Document Release Date: October 12, 2016
• Case Number: F-2012-01498
• Publication Date: May 29, 2012

Approved for Release: 2016/09/21 C05929310
(b)(3)
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Tuesday, May 29, 2012 11:56 AM
Cynthia L Rapp
Fw: Draft response re: NYT disclosure language
Can't tell if this actually went. Resending.
(b)(3)
From:
Sent: Tuesday, May 29 2012 11:43 AM
To: Cynthia L Rapp;
Subject: Re: Draft response re: NYT disclosure language
(b)(3)
(b)(3)
b)(5)
From: Cynthia L Rapp
Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2012 11:18 AM
To:
Subject: Draft response re: NYT disclosure language
From: David Sanger
Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2012 9:19 AM
To: Cynthia L Rapp; Cynthia Rapp
Subject: Re: From David
Didi,
(b)(6)
Hope you had a good long weekend. On the questions we discussed last week about our conversations about
deleting information on current or future operations, if you folks have thoughts I ought to hear them today. The
excerpt is going into its final form.
I think I'll be able to have books to you Thursday or Friday.
Many thanks and all best,
David
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 5:14 PM, David Sanger
Didi,
wrote: (b)(6)
Great to talk to you yesterday. I'll have a more formal invitation coming, but pencil in that CSIS book event,
from 5:30 to as long as the wine lasts, on June 12. Hoping you, the DireCtor, the Deputy Director and anyone
else you think would be interested can stop in; Bob Schieffer will be leading a discussion on Confront and
Conceal.
Here's the paragraph we discussed, at the end of the "Note on Sources"
(b)(3)
(b)(5)
1
Approved for Release: 2016/09/21 C05929310
Approved for Release: 2016/09/21 C05929310
"Following the practice of the Times in reporting on national security, I discussed with senior government
officials the potential risks of publication of senstive information that touches ongoing intelligence operations.
At the government's request, and in consultation with editors, I withheld a lilted number of details that senior
government officials said could jeopardize current or planned operations."
The issue at hand is whether this will be specific enough for the
So we should discuss whether you want to say explicitly that, without confirming or deny details, the
Agency discussed these issues with me and made a series of requests (which I think you will see were
completely fulfilled).
Best,
David
2
Approved for Release: 2016/09/21 C05929310