How presidency take react to US court order to FBI and DEA on Tinubu probe and wetin go happun next
Nigeria Presidency don to react to di order wey United States Court for di District of Columbia bin give Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and Drug Enforcement Administration on President Bola Tinubu.
On Tuesday 8 April, di court order FBI and DEA to release records of dia investigations of President Tinubu involvement in alleged drug trafficking.
On top im X page on Sunday, di president tok-tok pesin Bayo Onanuga say notin new dey to dey revealed by FBI and DEA.
"Journalists don seek di Presidency reaction to di ruling last Tuesday by a Washington DC judge wey order di US FBI and DEA to release reports connected with President Bola Ahmed Tinubu.
"Our response dey as follows.
"Notin dey new to dey revealed. Di report by Agent Moss of di FBI and di DEA report don dey for public space for more dan 30 years. Di reports no indict di Nigerian leader. The lawyers dey examine di ruling," Onanuga write for X.
Wetin dey for di court ruling?
For di ruling wey di court upload for dia site, di district judge, Beryl Howell, order say di FBI and DEA "gatz search for and process non-exempt records responsive to di FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) requests wey one American citizen Aaron Greespan bin direct to dem.
According to di court, di evasive "Glomar responses" previously issued in response to di FOIA requests on di matter gatz dey lifted. Glomar responses dey dey given by goment agencies to neither confam nor deny di existence of a particular information requested.
For 2022 and 2023, Greenspan wey be di founder of PlainSite bin seek investigative records about Tinubu, Lee Andrew Edwards, Mueez Adegboyega Akande, and Abiodun Agbele wey bin allegedly dey associated wit one drug ring.
Greenspan bin file 12 FOIA requests wit six different US federal goment agencies including di FBI and di DEA to request di criminal investigation information of di Chicago heroin ring wey bin operated for di early 1990s.
Oda agencies wey Greenspan write to na di United States Department of State, Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), Internal Revenue Service (IRS), and Executive Office of United States Attorneys (EOUSA).
According to di court document, five of di agencies issued Glomar responses to Greenspan FOIA requests. Di agencies tok say dem fit neither nor confam di requested records.
Greenspan den file a lawsuit to challenge di agencies response to di FOIA requests.
For im Tuesday judgement, Judge Beryl A. Howell rule say di Glomar responses wey di FBI and DEA issue no dey proper and gatz dey lifted.
"Defendants dey correct say di principle dey "well established say 'individuals get obvious privacy interest cognizable under Exemption 7(C) in keeping secret di fact say dem be subjects of one law enforcement investigation," di judge tok.
Di judge also tok say di two agencies fail to provide evidence on di burden to sustain dia Glomar responses.
"Di FBI and DEA don both officially confam investigations of Tinubu wey relate to di drug trafficking ring - any privacy interests implicated by di FOIA requests to di FBI and DEA for records about Tinubu dey overcome by di public interest in release of such information. Di CIA don officially acknowledge records responsive to plaintiff FOIA request about Tinubu," di judge tok.
Wetin be Glomar response?
Agencies dey use Glomar response to refuse to deny or confam di existence of records wey pesin dey request for under Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).
Glomar response no statutory backing, rather di Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) bin create dis form of FOIA determination itself in di case of Phillippi v. CIA wia di CIA bin refuse to confam or deny dia ties to a submarine retrieval ship wey dem dey call "Glomar Explorer.".
Dem dey call di response judicially created response and courts don find say make dem only use am for rare circumstances wia confirming or denying di existence of records fit dey reasonably suspected to cause "cognizable harm" under a FOIA exemption.
Wetin go happun next?
E dey expected say di FBI and DEA go comply wit di court order to release.
Di court say di remaining parties dey directed to file jointly, "by May 2, 2025, a report on di status of any outstanding issues in dis case, as described in di accompanying order".
"An order wey dey consistent wit dis Memorandum Opinion go dey entered contemporaneously."
Though Nigeria Presidency say lawyers dey examine di ruling of di court, e neva dey clear if dem go still comment on di mata afta di examination.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
18 minutes ago
- The Independent
Russian drones and missiles target Ukraine's eastern city of Kharkiv, killing 3, officials say
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging. At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story. The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it. Your support makes all the difference.
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
How stunned Joe Rogan reacted to Trump and Musk war in real time during Kash Patel interview
It was supposed to be just another no-holds-barred conversation on The Joe Rogan Experience, but what unfolded in real time stunned even Joe Rogan himself. Midway through the recording of Rogan's high-profile interview with FBI Director Kash Patel on Thursday afternoon, chaos was erupting on social media. Donald Trump and Elon Musk, once the closest of political allies and collaborators, were detonating their relationship in a flurry of public insults, threats, and finally, an explosive accusation that would leave political world gasping. 'Jesus Christ,' Rogan muttered, his eyes widening as he read aloud Musk's now-infamous post: 'Time to drop the really big bomb. Donald Trump is in the Epstein files. That's the real reason they have not been made public. Have a nice day, DJT!' The podcast had already been knee-deep in a discussion of child sex offender Jeffrey Epstein 's shadowy network, when Rogan's producer put up Musk's incendiary post on the screen. It was an accusation aimed squarely at Trump, dragging him into the murky world of Epstein's infamous island and the so-called 'Epstein files' - flight logs and documents long rumored to implicate the powerful and well-connected. 'I'm not participating in any of that conversation between Elon and Trump,' Patel said immediately, distancing himself from the explosive spat. But Rogan couldn't look away. 'Someone should take his phone away,' Rogan muttered, incredulous. 'Jesus Christ that's a crazy thing to say. How does he know? Does he have access to the Epstein files?' Patel remained calm but firmly replied: 'I don't know how he would. But I'm staying out of it. That's way outside my lane.' Still in disbelief Rogan added: 'What the f*** are they doing?' The Musk-Trump row had been simmering for days, but few expected it to erupt so spectacularly. 'I understand he owns Twitter, but I think it's bad for your mental health,' Rogan said moments later. 'Posting all day and arguing with people all day - that can't be good for you.' 'I know my lane and that ain't it,' Patel said again, staying as far from the blast zone as possible. Hours earlier, at a White House meeting, Trump had lashed out at Musk's blistering critique of his prized 'Big Beautiful Bill,' calling the Tesla founder 'very disappointing.' From there, the tit-for-tat escalated with breathtaking speed. Musk upped the ante by threatening to back a third-party challenger, a nightmare scenario for Republican strategists. Trump, never one to back down, retaliated by publicly musing about cancelling Musk's multi-billion-dollar government contracts with NASA and the Department of Defense. By Friday, as word of the Musk-Trump implosion spread, Washington seemed to be in full crisis mode. Senior Republicans scrambled to contain the damage, fearful that the spectacle could derail crucial legislation, including Trump's controversial tax and border spending bill, which Musk had labeled an 'abomination.' 'I hope it doesn't distract us from getting the job done,' Rep. Dan Newhouse (R-Washington) told reporters nervously. Others practically begged for a reconciliation. 'When the two of them are working together, we get a lot more done,' Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas) said on Fox News. Senator Mike Lee (R-Utah) posted a photo collage of Trump and Musk, pleading: 'Who else really wants @elonmusk and @realDonaldTrump to reconcile?' But Trump, in true Trump fashion, showed no interest in extending an olive branch. 'You mean the man who has lost his mind?' he scoffed when asked about Musk during a phone interview with ABC News. 'I'm not particularly interested in talking to him.' Later, aboard Air Force One en route to his Bedminster golf club, Trump struck a more detached tone. 'Honestly, I've been so busy working on China, Russia, Iran... I'm not thinking about Elon Musk. I just wish him well,' he told reporters, even as aides privately fumed that Musk's accusations could inflict serious damage. Still, the president couldn't resist one last jab: 'He's lost it.' The political earthquake was soon matched by a financial one. Tesla's stock plummeted more than 14% on Thursday amid the very public feud, wiping out nearly $100 billion in market value before recovering slightly by Friday. At the White House, aides whispered that Trump was considering getting rid of the bright red Tesla Model S he famously purchased earlier this year, a symbol of the bromance that once was. Musk is seen jumping on stage as he joined Donald Trump during a campaign rally last October 'He's thinking about it, yes,' a senior White House official confirmed. Meanwhile, Musk remained unusually quiet on Friday, steering clear of his usual rapid-fire posting on X, the platform he owns and has aggressively reshaped. For Trump, Musk's financial and political support had been crucial. The billionaire donated nearly $300 million to Trump's 2024 campaign. But Musk, too, has much to lose.
New Statesman
2 hours ago
- New Statesman
Bruce Springsteen faces the end of America
Photo montage by Gaetan Mariage / Alamy When I met Patti Smith soon after Donald Trump's first victory, she said she'd ended up next to him at various New York dinners over the years, back in the Seventies, when he was pitching Trump Towers. 'We were born in the same year, and I have to look at this person and think: all our hopes and dreams from childhood, going through the Sixties, everything we went through – and that's what came out of our generation. Him.' Smith's sing-song voice was in my head at Anfield Stadium in Liverpool on one of the final nights of Bruce Springsteen's Land of Hope and Dreams tour. Springsteen was born three years after Trump and will also have sat at many New York dinners with him. Those with half an eye on the news would be forgiven for thinking that Bruce has been lobbing disses at the president from the stage between his hits, but his latest show is heavier than that: a conscious recasting of two decades of his more politicised music, with a four-minute incitement to revolution in the middle. Here is a bit of what he says: 'The America I love and have sung to you about for so long, a beacon of hope for 250 years, is currently in the hands of a corrupt, incompetent and treasonous administration. Tonight we ask all of you who believe in democracy and the best of our American experiment to rise with us, raise your voices, stand with us against authoritarianism and let freedom ring. In America right now we have to organise at home, at work, peacefully in the street. We thank the British people for their support…' Clearly few in the US are speaking out like this on stage, and Trump has responded by calling Springsteen a 'dried-out prune of a rocker (his skin is all atrophied!)' and threatening some kind of mysterious action upon his return. Springsteen, the heartland rocker, was never exactly part of the counter-culture, though he did avoid Vietnam by doing the 'basic Sixties rag', as he put it, and acting crazy in his army induction. Yet he has become a true protest singer in his final act. He wears tweed and a tie these days, partly because he's 75 and partly, you suspect, to convey a moral seriousness. When I last saw him, two years ago, I thought I saw some of Joe Biden's easy energy. Well, Bruce still has his faculties. The feeling is: listen to the old man, he has something to say. Springsteen's late years have been something to behold. At some point in the last decade he stopped dyeing his hair and started to talk in a stylised, reedy, story-book voice. The image of the America he seemed to represent shifted back from Seventies Pittsburgh to Thirties California: the bare-armed steelworker became the Marlboro Man, and in 2019 there was a Cowboy album, Western Skies, with an accompanying film in which he was seen on horseback. His autobiography Born to Run revealed recent battles with depression. And it is depression you see tonight in Liverpool – in the wince, the twisted mouth, the accusing index finger; in his entreaty to Liverpool's fans to 'indulge' his sermon against the American administration, delivered night after night, to scatterings of applause. It is a depression I recognise in older American friends who fear they're going to the grave with everything they knew and loved about their country disappearing. But depression is also the stuff of life, of energy. Springsteen has been particularly angry since the early Noughties, since the second Bush administration, but this is his moment somehow, and his song of greedy bankers – 'Death to My Hometown' – is spat out with new meaning in 2025, an ominous abstraction. The father-to-son speech in 'Long Walk Home' feels different in this politically charged world: 'Your flag flying over the courthouse means certain things are set in stone/Who we are, what we'll do and what we won't'). A furious version of 'Rainmaker' ('Sometimes folks need to believe in something so bad, so bad, they'll hire a rainmaker') is dedicated to 'our dear leader'. As much as I admire Springsteen and seem to have followed him around and written about him for years, the Land of Hope and Dreams tour made me realise I hadn't fully known what he was for. When I saw him in Hyde Park in 2023, the first 200 yards of the crowd were given over to media wankers like me, with the paying fans at the back: every single person I had ever met in London was there, mildly pissed up and whirling about with looks of mutual congratulation. Springsteen had become, to the middle classes and above, a global symbol of right-thinking, summed up by his long stint on Broadway at $800 a ticket. His dull podcast with Barack Obama was the American version of The Rest Is Politics with Rory Stewart and Alastair Campbell: men saying stuff you want them to say, to confirm what you already think about stuff (Obama was in awe of Bruce). Subscribe to The New Statesman today from only £8.99 per month Subscribe Politics was easy for Springsteen when politics consisted of external events happening to innocent people, rather than something taking place on the level of psychology, in a movement of masses towards a demagogue. The job he adopted, back in the Seventies, was to set a particular kind of American life in its political and historical context: to tell people who they were, and why they mattered. His appeal as a rock star always lay less in his words than in how sincerely he embodied them: his extraordinary outward energy, his mirroring of his audience, his apparent concern with others over himself. After 9/11, someone apparently rolled down a window and told him, 'We need you now,' so he wrote his song 'The Rising' from the viewpoint of a doomed New York fireman ascending the tower. A recent BBC documentary revealed he'd donated £20,000 to the Northumberland and Durham Miners Support Group during the strikes of 1984 – rather as he donated ten grand to unemployed steelworkers in Pittsburgh the previous year. His self-made success and songs about freedom were the Republican dream, but when Reagan tapped him up for endorsements it was a right of passage for Springsteen as a Democrat rocker to rebuff them (I'm pretty sure they tried to play 'Born in the USA' at Trump rallies too). He is quoted as saying that the working-class American was facing a spiritual crisis, years ago: 'It's like he has nothing left to tie him into society any more. He's isolated from the government. Isolated from his job. Isolated from his family… to the point where nothing makes sense.' Now, Trump has taken Springsteen's people (the Republicans were doing so long before Trump), and the interior life of the working man that Springsteen made it his job to portray has been exploited by someone else. 'For 50 years, I've been an ambassador for this country and let me tell you that the America I was singing about is real,' he says, possessively, on stage. Springsteen, like Jon Bon Jovi, sees his fans as workers. The distances travelled, the money spent, the babysitters paid for: that's what the three-hour gigs are all about. It is part of the psyche of a certain generation of working-class American musician to consider themselves in a contract with the people who buy their records. It is not a particularly British thing – though time and again I am impressed by the commitment required to see these big shows, especially when so many punters are of an age where they would not longer, say, sleep in a tent: £250 a night for a hotel, no taxis to the stadium, a huge Ticketmaster crash that leaves hundreds of fans outside the venue fiddling with their QR codes while Bruce can be heard inside singing the opening lines of 'My Love Will Not Let You Down'. Yet the relationship between a rock star and his fan is not a co-dependency: the fan is having a night out, but the rock star needs the fan to survive. It is hard to underestimate the psychological shift Springsteen might be undergoing, in seeing the working men and women of America moving to a politics that is repellent to him. He has not played on American soil since Trump's re-election and it is likely that this kind of political commentary there will turn the 'Bruuuuuce' into the boo. A Springsteen tribute act in his native New Jersey was recently cancelled (the band offered to play other songs, and the venue said no). Last week, a young American band told me they won't speak out about the administration on stage because they're not all white and they're afraid of getting deported. It is the job of the powerful to do the protesting, and, like Pope Leo, Springsteen's previous good works will mean nothing if he doesn't call out the big nude emperor now. The Maga crowd will still come to see him, of course, and yell the 'woah' in 'Born to Run' just as loud as everyone else does – perhaps because music is bigger than politics, or perhaps because politics is now bigger than Bruce. Though his political speeches in Liverpool (it's UK 'heartland' only this tour: no London gigs) feel slightly out of step with a city that has its own problems, it seems fair enough for Springsteen to be telling the truth about America to a crowd who's enjoyed their romantic visions of the country via his music for 50 years. But their own personal communion is suspended tonight, and the song 'My City of Ruins' has nothing to do with 9/11 any more: 'Come on… rise up…' In the crowd, a very old man is sitting on someone's shoulders. Bruce Springsteen and the E Street Band play Anfield stadium, Liverpool, on 7 June 2025 [See also: Wes Anderson's sense of an ending] Related
