Former USIP security chief says MPD gave 'high-fives and fist bumps' after raid

If you want to support The Handbasket’s 100% independent journalism, subscribe now. You can also become a premium subscriber or leave a tip.

My lawsuit against the DC Metropolitan Police for body camera footage from their March 17, 2025 raid on the US Institute of Peace continues apace. Friday afternoon my lawyers from the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press filed our opposition to MPD’s motion for summary judgement combined with a cross-motion for summary judgement. 

But that’s not all: We also filed six sworn declarations from people who worked for and with USIP and were present the day of the raid. All six oppose the defense’s motion and believe the release of the complete footage is in the public interest.

“MPD seeks to withhold 98.5% of that responsive footage,” the motion reads. “In so doing, MPD takes the extraordinary position that BWC [body-worn camera] footage may not be released if it captures any third party or includes any information about how MPD accomplished the take-over of a nonprofit organization’s headquarters. On both counts, MPD is wrong. No exemption applies to these videos, and FOIA requires that they be released.”

For those unfamiliar [like me, until now] with legalese, a request for summary judgement is a procedural move to avoid a trial. MPD submitted its motion for summary judgement a few weeks back (which I wrote about here) and provided me with just a little more than five minutes of footage total from the USIP raid. The clips showed mostly butts and hallways. They made the argument that this was all they could legally provide and that the case should be dismissed. Of course, my team and I couldn’t possibly disagree more. Now we’ve submitted our own motion for summary judgement, requesting all body camera footage from the raid be released without a trial.

The sworn declarations I mentioned above come from Colin O’Brien, former chief security officer at USIP; George Foote, USIP outside counsel since 1987; George Moose, Acting President and Chief Executive Officer of USIP; Anna Dean, USIP Chief of Staff; Sophia Lin, outside counsel; and Gonzalo Gallegos, USIP Director of Communications. All are essential in supporting the case for MPD releasing the body cam footage, but perhaps most remarkable of all is O’Brien’s testimony.

O’Brien has worked at USIP since 2023 and has 25 years of experience in security operations, previously working for the Peace Corps and FEMA, among others. He’s also a former military police officer for the US Army and Army National Guard. In his declaration, O’Brien writes that he interacted with members of the MPD and observed them getting orders from Kenneth Jackson, the DOGE-installed Acting USIP President, “to get a locksmith and ordering MPD officers to remove myself, George Foote, and Sophia Lin from the building.”

In astonishing testimony, he writes “I observed members of the MPD giving each other high-fives and fist bumps as I was escorted from the USIP headquarters building.” He also testifies that he “observed MPD officers bring a Halligan tool”—a tool used for lockpicking—”out of an MPD vehicle.” 

In addition to his observations of MPD that day, O’Brien’s declaration gives helpful context about the layout of USIP’s Washington, DC headquarters that directly contradict MPD’s claims to privacy.

“The USIP headquarters building is not a high security facility,” according to O’Brien. “It did not store classified materials. There are no secure workspaces or Sensitive Compartmentalized Information Facilities (“SCIFs”) in the building. None of the doors or windows are bullet resistant. There are not layered security measures that you would see at a high security government facility, such as the U.S. embassies that I’ve worked at. Once an individual is inside the USIP headquarters they generally have unrestricted access.”

He adds: “The USIP headquarters held numerous events that were open to the public, something you would not see at the high security facilities I have worked at. There were no restrictions on members of the public photographing or videotaping inside the USIP headquarters building.”

If you’re interested in reading our full motion for summary judgement, you can view it here. It is a rich document prepared by lawyers Adam Marshall and Allyson Veile that contains a blow-by-blow accounting of what happened at USIP back in March from publicly available information and the sworn declarations. It makes what I believe is an unassailable argument for releasing the video footage so the American people can truly understand what happened when DOGE came for USIP—and most importantly in this case, what role MPD played in facilitating that gross overreach.

So what comes next? The defense must submit their opposition and reply by this Friday, November 14th. We’ll see if they’re willing to share any more of the footage based on our argument, or if they’ll maintain it should remain hidden from the public. Stay tuned. 

One quick thing: I’m experimenting with doing super quick audio updates throughout the week when I don’t have the bandwidth for a whole post about a subject. I posted my first “Breaking Basket” today about how SNAP recipients are feeling about Dems helping to reopen the government (as a follow-up to my story from Friday), and details on a lawsuit from states' AG’s to protect SNAP benefits. Give it a listen and look out for more!