Mendel
Senior Member.
I'm reading the USAF response between the lines as "anything we retained at this point is classified, and we can't give you any of it. But we passed a lot of it on to AARO, and maybe they can get some of it declassified for you, or they might have unclassified info of their own." They didn't have to do that.There was no "stonewalling" of Greenewald's FOIA request, as you should have read in the BV blog post you referenced. The USAF response, as shown in that blog post, denied the request under Exemption 1 of FOIA. Their response letter is shown and explains the particulars of the exemption. The letter also provided a PoC, FOIA case number, and instructions for filing an appeal.
USAF's response didn't stonewall Greenewald, just the opposite as they provided a timely reply with the information he would need to contact those responsible for the ruling and how to seek redress under the law. Hard to accuse anyone who is providing information meant to keep lines of communication open between the two parties of stonewalling.
The timeliness of the reply and the instructions for the appeal seem to be a legal requirement, so I wouldn't see that as particularly stonewalling or not, it's just CYA.