3 More Arrested Associated with San Bernardino Attack

Posted on by

FBI arrests brother of San Bernardino terrorist and 2 others on marriage fraud charges

LATimes: Federal agents arrested three people, including the older brother of San Bernardino gunman Syed Rizwan Farook, on charges of marriage fraud and lying to federal investigators on Thursday morning, authorities said.

Syed Raheel Farook, his wife, Tatiana Farook, and her sister Mariya Chernykh are charged in a five-count indictment filed in federal court alleging that Chernykh entered into a fraudulent marriage with Enrique Marquez Jr., who has been accused of providing weapons used in the deadly Dec. 2 attack at the Inland Regional Center.

Two people were arrested at Farook’s home in Corona after the FBI conducted a search warrant Thursday, according to Sgt. Paul Mercado, a spokesman for the Corona Police Department. A second search warrant was served at Chernykh’s home in Ontario, federal prosecutors said.

In the course of the investigation into the terrorist attack, federal authorities said they determined Marquez received money to marry Chernykh, who took part in the wedding only to gain legal status in the U.S. FBI agents interrogated Chernykh as part of the inquiry into the terror attack, and prosecutors say she lied during those interviews by pretending that she lived with Marquez when she actually resided in Ontario.

All three are expected to appear in federal court in Riverside on Thursday afternoon, according to the U.S. Attorney’s Office.

They were charged with conspiring to concoct the illusion of a marriage between Marquez and Chernykh and face up to five years in federal prison if convicted. Chernykh also was charged with fraud, misuse of visas and other documents, perjury and two counts of lying to federal investigators. Those additional charges together carry a maximum sentence of up to 25 years in federal prison, according to the U.S. Attorney’s Office.

“This is the latest step in the comprehensive investigation into the horrific attacks in San Bernardino last year that took the lives of 14 innocent Americans and deeply affected so many more,” U.S. Atty. Eileen M. Decker said in a statement. “As I have said previously, we owe the victims, and the entire community of San Bernardino, a thorough investigation that uncovers all criminal activity surrounding these events.”

Attorneys representing the Farooks and Chernykh did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

While the investigation into the San Bernardino attacks has centered on a battle to gain access to Syed Rizwan Farook’s iPhone 5c in recent months,  two law enforcement sources with knowledge of the investigation told The Times that no information from the phone was used in the investigation that led to Thursday’s arrests. Federal authorities were prepared to battle Apple over access to the phone in court, but were able to gain access with the help of a third party late last month.

A 12-page indictment that was handed up on Wednesday afternoon accuses Chernykh and Marquez of staging photographs of their relationship and later purchasing a wedding ring long after they were supposed to have been wed in order to sustain the illusion of marriage.

Chernykh made three separate $200 deposits in a bank account she shared with Marquez in late 2015, according to the indictment. Federal prosecutors previously alleged that Marquez was paid $200 per month to take part in the sham marriage with Chernykh.

The pair claimed they were married at a “religious institution” in Corona in November 2014, but Chernykh struggled to play the role of blissfully wedded wife early on, according to the indictment.

On Christmas Day 2014, Tatiana Farook told Chernykh to stop posting photos of the father of her child on social media, prosecutors say.

When the couple learned they were going to be interviewed by immigration officials in late 2015, panic set in, according to the indictment. Syed Raheel Farook created a fraudulent lease agreement that suggested Marquez and Chernykh had been living together since November 2014. The agreement said the couple lived with Farook and his wife at their Forum Way home in Corona, prosecutors say, but public records show Chernykh actually resided in Ontario.

In a November 2015 email exchange, Marquez and Chernykh discussed their mutual anxiety over their upcoming immigration interview because of the lack of contact with each other, according to the indictment.

Days later, Marquez posted on social media that he “was involved in terrorist plots and he might go to prison for fraud,” the indictment said.

On Dec. 1, the day before the terror attack, the two sisters traveled to a retail jewelry store in Riverside and purchased a $50 wedding ring for Marquez, according to the indictment.

Federal prosecutors say Tatiana Farook persisted with the lie 24 hours after the deadly attack. When interviewed by the FBI on Dec. 3, she insisted that Marquez and Chernykh had been living together at her Corona home, according to the indictment.

FBI agents have executed three search warrants at Syed Raheel Farook’s home since Dec. 2, when Syed Rizwan Farook and his wife, Tashfeen Malik, killed 14 people and wounded several more in a mass shooting at a conference room at the Inland Regional Center.

The two died hours later in a gun battle with police. Federal agents searched the older brother’s home, where several Farook family members live, in the days after the shooting.

They conducted a second search in February after the investigation pivoted to look for key evidence that might help the FBI track Farook and Malik’s movements after the attack. The hard drive of Farook’s laptop has eluded FBI agents and has become something of a holy grail in the investigation as the FBI tries to determine whether Farook and Malik had any help in planning or carrying out the attack.

The Corona neighborhood where Farook was arrested Thursday morning was mostly quiet in the hours after the FBI raids, save for a throng of reporters.

Many residents said they have grown frustrated at the constant attention they’ve received since the Dec. 2 attacks as the FBI has repeatedly searched Farook’s home.

Stacy Mozer, who has lived in Corona for 26 years, said he was surprised to hear that Farook had been arrested on charges related to marriage fraud.

In private conversations, he said, Farook expressed great regret about the shootings his brother and sister-in-law carried out.

“I was very surprised that’s why they got arrested,” he said. “When they said it was about the marriage thing, well, I was more concerned about the shooting.”

Mozer described Farook and his wife as a happy, friendly pair.

“They’re not hiding from anything,” he said.

 

Another neighbor, who declined to give his name, also said he was surprised that the FBI had arrested the pair on marriage fraud charges.

“The guy spent four years in the Navy. I don’t know what they want from him,” the neighbor said. “It’s his brother that’s the idiot.”

In the days after the shooting, friends and neighbors of the brothers said they were polar opposites. While his younger brother has been named as the architect of the deadliest terror attack on U.S. soil since Sept. 11, 2001, the elder Farook was a Navy veteran who received medals for service in the “Global War on Terrorism.”

 

The older brother was the extrovert of the two, friends say, loud and sociable compared to his brother.

While there has been no indication the older Farook brother had any advance knowledge of the attack on the Inland Regional Center, police were called to his Corona home days after the shooting because of a domestic disturbance. The Riverside County district attorney’s office later declined to file charges in that incident.

Tatiana Farook came to the U.S. on a short-term educational visa in 2003, living in Virginia for a time. She married, and later divorced, a man in Richmond, Va., before moving to Southern California, where she opened a number of businesses, including a cellphone kiosk at the Montebello Town Center, public records show.

Among her employees was her younger sister, Mariya, who left Russia on a short-term visa in 2009.

Tatiana married Syed Raheel Farook in 2011, and the two witnesses listed on their marriage license were Syed Rizwan Farook and Marquez.

In the days after the attacks, Marquez emerged as a central player in the FBI’s terror investigation. While most who knew him described Marquez as a goofy, nervous man who posted cartoons to Facebook and had dreams of enlisting in the Navy, federal prosecutors said he underwent a change after he fell under Syed Rizwan Farook’s sway.

The two began studying radical ideology together in 2011, and mapped out a terror attack that would have involved hurling pipeboms and raining bullets on drivers on the 91 Freeway, according to a criminal complaint filed earlier this year.

Marquez was eventually charged with buying two of the rifles used in the San Bernardino shootings, though prosecutors have said he was not involved in the Dec. 2 attack.

The 24-year-old checked himself into UCLA-Harbor Medical center the day after the shooting. He later told investigators that his marriage was a sham and provided details his role in Farook’s plot during lengthy interview with FBI agents, prosecutors say.

The FBI investigation is continuing.

SCOTUS Ruled and EPA Ignores

Posted on by

EPA Continues To Implement Global Warming Plan Supreme Court Said It Couldn’t

DailyCaller: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) officials are moving ahead with a key part of the Clean Power Plan (CPP) despite the Supreme Court issuing a stay against the agency’s global warming plan in February.

The EPA submitted a proposal to the White House for green energy subsidies for states that meet the federally mandated carbon dioxide reduction goals early. The Clean Energy Incentive Program would give “credit for power generated by new wind and solar projects in 2020 and 2021” and a “double credit for energy efficiency measures in low-income communities,” according to Politico’s Morning Energy.

Te move seems to violate the Supreme Court’s stay against CPP preventing the EPA from implementing its plan to cut carbon dioxide emissions from U.S. power plants. EPA, however, argues it’s doing this for states that want to voluntarily cut emissions — despite this being part of CPP.

“Many states and tribes have indicated that they plan to move forward voluntarily to work to cut carbon pollution from power plants and have asked the agency to continue providing support and developing tools that may support those efforts, including the CEIP,” reads a statement provided to Politico from EPA.

EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy is set to talk more about the plan Wednesday afternoon and will no doubt defend it from critics who will say the agency is violating a Supreme Court order.

“Sending this proposal to OMB for review is a routine step and it is consistent with the Supreme Court stay of the Clean Power Plan,” the EPA said.

EPA has been moving forward with aspects of the CPP despite the Supreme Court’s decision. After the court’s February decision, EPA began signalling it would continue to work with states that want to “voluntarily” move forward.

“Are we going to respect the decision of the Supreme Court? You bet, of course we are,” McCarthy told utility executives in February. “But it doesn’t mean it’s the only thing we’re working on and it doesn’t mean we won’t continue to support any state that voluntarily wants to move forward.”

Likewise, the head of EPA’s air and radiation office, Janet McCabe, has also suggested the rule will eventually be upheld.

“EPA utility rules have been stayed twice before, and ultimately upheld,” McCabe said while participating in a panel discussion in Bloomington, Ind., last week. “It’s only smart for states to keep working on this.”

“We stand ready at EPA to help any state that wants to move forward with their planning activities,” McCabe said, noting that some states pledged to cut CO2 after the Supreme Court stayed CPP.

McCabe was referring to an agreement signed by 17 states in the aftermath of the Supreme Court decision pledging to push forward fighting global warming. The agreement, signed mostly by Democratic governors, promotes cooperation between states in promoting green energy, not explicitly mentioning global warming.

McCabe neglected to mention the 30 states and state agencies suing EPA to get CPP struck down. That coalition of states was also joined by dozens of business groups, the coal industry and labor unions fighting to keep coal-fired power plants from being forced to close.

“EPA has crossed a line by assigning itself vast regulatory authority that surpasses anything ever contemplated by Congress,” Jeffrey Connor, interim CEO of the National Rural Electric Cooperative Association (NRECA), said in a statement. NRECA opposes CPP.

“The fact is that EPA didn’t produce a rule simply to reduce emissions — it crafted a radical plan to restructure the U.S. power sector,” Connor said.

*****

From the White House:

The Clean Power Plan

The Clean Power Plan sets achievable standards to reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 32 percent from 2005 levels by 2030. By setting these goals and enabling states to create tailored plans to meet them, the Plan will:

Protect the health of American families. In 2030, it will:

  • Prevent up to 3,600 premature deaths

  • Prevent 1,700 non-fatal heart attacks

  • Prevent 90,000 asthma attacks in children

  • Prevent 300,000 missed workdays and schooldays

Boost our economy by:

  • Leading to 30 percent more renewable energy generation
    in 2030

  • Creating tens of thousands of jobs

  • Continuing to lower the costs of renewable energy

Save the average American family:

  • Nearly $85 a year on their energy bills in 2030

  • Save enough energy to power 30 million homes
    in 2030

  • Save consumers $155 billion from 2020-2030

 

 

Illegal Immigration, Refusing to Deport is a Deadly Option

Posted on by

Hat tip to this site for listing the victims of illegal immigrants.

Today in the House is a hearing questioning Sarah Saldana, the Director of the DHS for Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Several terrifying facts were revealed and there are solutions to the policies, one is to simply enforce the law and quit with the exceptions. Further, stop releasing into the general population detained illegals arrested and sentenced with discretion. What about Congress eliminating the discretion clause? How about allowing local law enforcement to fully handle cases at the local level? There is additional legislation for loopholes including H.R. 2793 for sex offenders.

Further, what about the victim or the survivors of the victims? They just get a letter in the mail, stating what is not certain.

There is a database for all illegals that have been officially detained for any reason, but local law enforcement does not have the jurisdiction or authority to handle inside cases, they are referred to ICE. Not all jurisdictions participate in the database operation, it is not a mandated procedure. What? . Of note, inside cases means arrests made by agencies other than Customs and Border Patrol.

 

All 58 immigration courts are managed by the U.S. Department of Justice….this is where the politics enter the fray. Additionally, when a court does in fact order a foreign national to be deported, yet another cycle of paperwork and diplomatic procedures is started. Consider, there are many countries that refuse to take back their own citizens and in some cases even after approval when the plane is on the runway. Haiti is one such country. So, the matter is in the hands of the U.S. State Department, do we need to say more?

The statute says there is discretion in all cases. So, in 2015, 19723 criminal illegal aliens have been released for felonies including kidnapping and homicide. An order of removal is required to deport them but that is done by a judge….but if they have requested asylum or other exceptions, it is more often than not granted. For those that have been ordered for deportation, there is a maximum bed space of 33,000 waiting to leave, if those beds are full, then they too are released.

Secure Communities was an immigration enforcement program administered by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) from 2008 to 2014.

The program was replaced by Priority Enforcement Program (PEP) in July 2015. Obama ordered this program terminated.

PEP: The Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) Priority Enforcement Program (PEP) enables DHS to work with state and local law enforcement to take custody of individuals who pose a danger to public safety before those individuals are released into our communities. PEP was established at the direction of DHS Secretary Jeh Johnson in a November 20, 2014 memorandum, entitled Secure Communities, that discontinued the Secure Communities program. PEP focuses on convicted criminals and others who pose a danger to public safety.

How it works

PEP begins at the state and local level when an individual is arrested and booked by a law enforcement officer for a criminal violation and his or her fingerprints are submitted to the FBI for criminal history and warrant checks. This same biometric data is also sent to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) so that ICE can determine whether the individual is a priority for removal, consistent with the DHS enforcement priorities described in Secretary Johnson’s November 20, 2014 Secure Communities memorandum. Under PEP, ICE will seek the transfer of a removable individual when that individual has been convicted of an offense listed under the DHS civil immigration enforcement priorities, has intentionally participated in an organized criminal gang to further the illegal activity of the gang, or poses a danger to national security.

Here is a simple case from April of 2016. Illegal immigrants arrested during Alabama theft, kidnapping mission for Honduran drug enforcer, records state. You are encouraged to read those details.

Here is yet another bizarre case: An illegal immigrant with a 12-year criminal history and 35 arrests under his belt cannot be deported back to Palestine because the U.S. will not recognise his homeland as a country. What? We give millions to the Palestinian Authority and Obama, Hillary and John Kerry have all met with the Palestinian Authority for peace talks with Israel.

 

 

Gang Terrorism in the Bronx, Major Arrests

Posted on by

NY In Biggest Ever Drug Raid On Rival Gangs

 

Eighty eight suspected members of the 2Fly Ygz and Big Money Bosses gangs are arrested following raids in the Bronx.

Sky News US Team

Nearly 700 New York Police officers and federal agents have carried out the biggest drug gang operation in the city’s history, a federal prosecutor has said.

 

Some 88 people were arrested in a series of pre-dawn raids in the Bronx targeting two rival drug gangs from top to bottom on Wednesday.

US Attorney Preet Bharara told a news conference that more suspects were being sought in what he described as the biggest ever gang takedown in New York City.

He said: “We bring these charges so that all New Yorkers, including those in public housing, can live their lives as they deserve: free of drugs, free of guns and free of gang violence.”

Bronx drug bust against two rival gangs

The raids took place in the Eastchester Gardens housing projects. Pic: NYPD

The arrests stemmed from charges brought against 120 gang members and came after a 16-month investigation which began when police moved to address a surge in violence in the Bronx – particularly around the Eastchester Gardens housing projects.

Related: 2012 TEN MEMBERS OF BRONX GANG INDICTED IN VIOLENT TURF BATTLE: MURDER CONSPIRACY CHARGED

Related: Black Mob Crips (BMB)

  1. According to user sources, the Black Mob Crips have bases of operations in Los Angeles, New York, Virginia, Washington DC, Maryland, and Detroit
  2. Lithia Springs High School gang in Lithia Springs, Georgia, associated with the Crips. A BMB gang has also been reported in Jacksonville, North Carolina.

Related: 120 Charged in Bronx Gang Bust

Dozens of shootings, stabbings, beatings and robberies and the killings of a 15-year-old who was stabbed to death and a 92-year-old hit by a stray bullet have been tied to the two gangs – 2Fly Ygz and the Big Money Bosses – Mr Bharara said. More here.

He said 2Fly gang members stores guns and sold drugs at a playground in the centre of the housing project, with the rival gang operating a few blocks away.

  

Both gangs used social media to promote, protect and grow their organisations, including boasting about their exploits on YouTube, Mr Bharara said.

Officials are now investigating whether the city’s 400,000 public housing residents were being protected in safe conditions as required by federal law.

The Housing Authority said: “Many conditions influence the presence of a gang and other illegal activity, and we continue to work closely with the NYPD to address these challenges.”

The raids follow charges being filed against 36 members of two rival drug trafficking gangs operating out of three Housing Authority complexes in East Harlem.

During the raid on Wednesday, a man who was not part of the investigation but was wanted for a string of knife-point robberies jumped from a window and later died, police said.

 

 

WTH Tennessee, Against Pro-Life Voters?

Posted on by
In Tennessee, a Federal Judge Disenfranchises Pro-Life Voters

DFrench/NRO: No one should ever doubt the Left’s commitment to abortion. For the sake of preserving the right to kill an unborn child, the Left will sacrifice democracy and even reason itself. Pro-life lawyers have a term for liberal judges’ tendency to twist the Constitution for the cause of death — the “abortion distortion.” The latest example comes from Nashville, Tenn., where an Obama-appointee federal judge just wrote perhaps the least credible judicial opinion I’ve ever read. But first, some background. Before the 2014 election, Tennessee, one of America’s most conservative and religious states, had become the South’s abortion supermarket, all because of a Tennessee Supreme Court ruling that declared that the Tennessee constitution protected the “right” to an abortion to a greater degree than did even Roe v. Wade or Planned Parenthood v. Casey. Consequently, even if a pro-life law would have passed federal constitutional muster, Tennessee state courts would strike it down.

 KAGSTV

Tennessee voters responded by passing Amendment 1 — a pro-life constitutional amendment that reversed the state’s high court and unequivocally declared that “nothing in this Constitution secures or protects a right to abortion or requires the funding of an abortion.” Tennessee’s amendment process is arduous. First, a proposed amendment has to pass with a majority in both houses. Then, after the next legislative election, the amendment has to pass with a two-thirds majority. Finally, it comes before the people. But even there an amendment faces a double hurdle. It has to pass with a majority of the vote, and the “yes” votes have to equal a “majority of all the citizens of the state voting for Governor.” For decades, Tennessee officials have interpreted this rule as merely requiring that the total “yes” vote exceed half of the total gubernatorial vote. In other words, a person could vote yes on the amendment and still have their vote count even if they didn’t vote for governor. In fact, amendment proponents expressly told voters that they could pursue exactly this strategy — they didn’t have to vote for governor to have their vote count.
After their loss, pro-abortion leftists sued in federal court, making the astonishing claim that this process violated the Fourteenth Amendment. Why? Because it didn’t give the “no” side enough advantages in the fight against the amendment. They claimed that Tennessee’s process violated their right to “participate on an equal basis with other citizens in the jurisdiction.” They also claimed that the Tennessee Constitution required election officials to count only the votes of people who voted for governor. So if you wanted your vote to count for the amendment, you had to vote for governor.
On Friday, Judge Kevin Sharp did what liberal federal judges do: found a way to rule for abortion rights. He backed the plaintiffs, holding that the traditional manner of counting votes for constitutional amendments violated both the state and the federal constitutions. He then ordered a statewide recount, in which only the votes of those who voted in both the amendment contest and the gubernatorial race would be counted.
In an opinion full of insulting asides and other potshots at amendment supporters, Sharp claimed that the votes of those who voted in the governor’s race but against the amendment were “not given the same weight” as those who voted for Amendment 1 but did not vote in the governor’s race. In other words, he claimed that a voter who did not vote for governor but did vote for the amendment had more influence over the process than a voter who chose to vote in both elections. Yet that additional influence was the product not of discrimination but of voter choice, of deliberate voting strategy.
The judge’s solution to this fabricated problem was to give the votes of those who voted for the amendment but not for governor no weight at all. In other words, his concern for voting rights (he called the right to vote “precious” and “fundamental”) was so strong that he just went ahead and disenfranchised thousands of voters who relied on longstanding state-government interpretations of its own constitution. Moreover, he signaled that even if a recount shows that the amendment would still pass under his new, judicially created standard, he may still rule that the election itself should be voided.

When I was in law school, one of my radical leftist professors declared that the role of a judge was to first determine the “right” result, then to manipulate law and precedent to justify the pre-ordained outcome. He turned the process of judicial reasoning on its head, and my classmates loved it. Abortion jurisprudence is the product of exactly this ideology. Sexual revolutionaries aren’t just professors, activists, and lawmakers. Some are robed Robespierres, and you can always count on them to protect the culture of death. — David French is an attorney, and a staff writer at National Review.