Whoa, Could This Be on San Bernardino Shooter’s Phone?

Posted on by

San Bernardino County DA: Dec. 2 terrorist may have been planning cyber attack

SBSun: A legal brief filed Friday in U.S. District Court in Riverside by San Bernardino County’s top prosecutors said Syed Rizwan Farook may have planted a virus on his work-issued iPhone that could launch a cyber attack capable of infecting and crashing the county’s computer network.

iPhone Amicus Brief that explains the infecting malware.

The brief, filed by District Attorney Michael Ramos and Chief Deputy District Attorney Gary Fagan, is one of several that were filed this week supporting a federal magistrate’s Feb. 16 order compelling Apple Inc. to help the FBI access an encrypted work-issued iPhone used by Farook.

“The iPhone is a county owned telephone that may have connected to the San Bernardino County computer network,” Ramos and Fagan wrote in their friend of the court brief, one of several filed this week in support of the government. “The seized iPhone may contain evidence that can only be found on the seized phone that it was used as a weapon to introduce a lying dormant cyber pathogen that endangers San Bernardino County’s infrastructure.”

A plethora of briefs were also filed by some the world’s biggest technology companies, digital privacy advocates and civil liberty organizations including Facebook, Amazon.com, Pinterest, Microsoft, Snapchat, Yahoo, and the American Civil Liberties Union in support of Apple.

Armed with assault rifles and clad in tactical gear, Farook, 28, and his wife, Tashfeen Malik, 29, walked into the Inland Regional Center in San Bernardino shortly before 11 a.m. Dec. 2 and opened fire on a crowd of about 70 people, killing 14 people and wounding 22 others. The Redlands couple were killed in a shootout with police hours after the attack.

Most of those killed or wounded in the mass shooting, including Farook, were employees of the county’s environmental health services division, who were attending a training seminar that morning.

FBI agents found two smashed mobile phones in a dumpster behind Farook’s Redlands townhouse, and his work-issued iPhone 5C was found, intact but passcode encrypted, in a black Lexus parked in front of the residence. Investigators believe that phone contains communications between Farook and some of the victims and possible other information that could be germane to the criminal investigation.

Ramos and Fagen are the first to broach the subject of a possible cyber attack Farook may have been planning.

Advertisement

Farook’s employment with the county provided him access to information that could have made the county vulnerable to a security breach and exposed employees to danger, Ramos said Friday in a telephone interview.

He said survivors of the shooting and family members of those killed in the attack are trying to move on with their lives but still have questions about the attack, such as why they were targeted and if they face future threat.

“All of this information could be on that one phone. (Farook and Malik) were using phones and hard drives, we believe, to prepare for these terrorist attacks,” Ramos said.

He said U.S. Magistrate Sheri Pym’s Feb. 16 order followed the letter of the law, and the U.S. Constitution.

“A federal magistrate determined there was probable cause to issue a search warrant to have Apple allow the FBI access to that information on the phone,” Ramos said. “Nobody’s rights are being violated. No one’s.”

Survivors of the shooting and family members of those who died still have questions about whether there was a third shooter, according to the prosecutors’ brief.

“Although the reports of three individuals were not corroborated, and may ultimately be incorrect, the fact remains that the information contained solely on the seized iPhone could provide evidence to identify, as of yet, unknown coconspirators who would be prosecuted by the district attorney for multiple murders and attempted murders in San Bernardino County,” the brief states.

Those sentiments were raised in another friend of the court brief filed Thursday on behalf of some of the victims of the shooting and surviving family members, one of whom wrote a personal letter to Apple CEO Tim Cook saying many victims claim to have seen “three assailants, not two, walking around in heavy boots as they carried out their murders.”

FBI spokeswoman Laura Eimiller said that forensic evidence indicates two weapons were fired at IRC, and that victim/witness accounts often vary during traumatic events.

While the majority of victims said they saw two shooters, some said there was only one and others said there were three, Eimiller said in an e-mail.

“Our investigation is continuing and we will continue to evaluate any new information that is developed or that comes our way,” Eimiller said.

Do You Know Gilbert Chagoury or Rajiv Fernando? Hillary Does

Posted on by

Rajiv Fernando and  Gilbert Chagoury are very good friends of Hillary and known to Barack Obama as well. Yikes, more emails? This is a story, scandal that seems to have no end. Perhaps it is time to start prosecuting people at the State Department for non compliance, obstruction of a federal investigation and falsification of government documents.

Primer:

ABC: For one of President Obama’s top fundraisers, the appointment last year to an elite group of State Department security advisors appeared to be an odd fit.

Rajiv Fernando, a Chicago securities trader, has never touted any international security credentials, yet he was appointed alongside an august collection of nuclear scientists, former cabinet secretaries and members of Congress to advise Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on crucial security matters.

PBS: Chagoury is a diplomat representing the tiny island nation of St. Lucia. He is also a friend of former President Bill Clinton and a generous philanthropist, who, since the Abacha years, has used his money to establish respectability. He appeared near the top of the Clinton Foundation donor list in 2008 as a $1 million to $5 million contributor, according to foundation documents. (His name made the list again in 2009.)

Release of Clinton Documents Delayed After State Department Discovers ‘Thousands’ of Unsearched Records

Citizens United, Judicial Watch lawsuits affected by development

FreeBeacon: The State Department’s recent discovery of thousands of unsearched records from Hillary Clinton’s tenure has delayed several public records lawsuits and could keep many of the documents out of the public sphere until next fall.

The watchdog groups Citizens United and Judicial Watch, which are suing the State Department for Clinton-related records, are two plaintiffs that have been affected by the discovery. The State Department said the new documents could take months to process, a time period that extends well beyond its court-ordered deadlines.

Citizens United said the State Department has yet to explain how the electronic files were overlooked for the past two years, raising questions about whether this was a stonewalling effort. The group is seeking records related to Clinton donors Gilbert Chagoury and Rajiv Fernando.

“With this 11th hour revelation, the State Department has missed its court-ordered deadline to finish the production of documents in this case,” said David N. Bossie, president of Citizens United. “These newly discovered records could impact document production in other Citizens United FOIA lawsuits as well as cases involving other plaintiffs.”

On Jan. 14, the State Department disclosed in a Judicial Watch case that officials had recently found shared and individual electronic files in the executive secretary’s office that were not previously searched in response to the lawsuit. Judicial Watch filed the lawsuit last May.

Although the court had ordered the State Department to turn over all relevant records by last October, attorneys said they would need until this spring to process the new documents.

State filed a nearly identical status report in the Citizens United lawsuit on Feb. 29, the same day as its court-ordered deadline to turn over all requested documents.

Attorneys for the department told Citizens United the discovery of unsearched records could set back the processing schedule until next fall. The State Department said it had not informed Citizens United earlier because its attorneys did not know about the new sources of records until Feb. 11—even though they had been disclosed to Judicial Watch in early January.

“Neither State’s agency counsel nor undersigned counsel for State was aware of this issue until February 11, 2016,” said the State Department in a Feb. 29 court filing.

According to court statements, the new sources of information come from the executive secretary’s office, which acted as the liaison between Secretary Clinton’s office and the rest of the State Department, the White House, and national security agencies.

One of the new sources is a series of “shared office folders,” computer folders that were used by multiple staff members. State Department public records officials said they first discovered this source in November. They said the files had previously been overlooked because they had been “retired” and removed from the executive secretary’s office last year.

The second new source is “individual folders,” which contain word documents, PDF documents, and the emails of Clinton aides Cheryl Mills and Jake Sullivan. These emails had already been processed, but officials said they did not realize until last December that there were other types of documents in these folders.

The late findings have impacted at least two additional Judicial Watch lawsuits, according to court documents. The House Benghazi Committee last week received over 1,600 pages of documents related to Libya from the new files, which the committee said it had requested nearly a year ago.

The State Department said it could not comment on whether other public records lawsuits could be impacted, or why Citizens United wasn’t informed about the new files at the same time as Judicial Watch.

“The State Department does not comment on matters in litigation,” a State Department official said. “We can confirm that State recently located documents from electronic sources not previously searched that are potentially responsive to certain FOIA cases involving records originating from the Office of the Secretary during Secretary Clinton’s tenure. As a result, the Department is undertaking additional searches of those files.”

“These unsearched materials include a variety of file types, but do not include the email accounts of former Secretary Clinton’s senior staff, which we have been searching for some time,” the official said.

The State Department noted that it has been taking steps to improve records management and hired a transparency coordinator last fall.

Sources also pointed to another recent personnel change at the State Department—the departure of attorney Catherine Duval, who had been involved in processing Clinton’s emails for release last year. Duval was previously in charge of document production at the IRS when many of the agency’s emails were destroyed. Congressional Republicans have accused Duval of obstructing their efforts to obtain Clinton documents.

Duval left the State Department last September. A few weeks later, the Republicans on the House Benghazi Committee released a statement praising increased transparency at the State Department.

“It’s curious the Department is suddenly able to be more productive after recent staff changes involving those responsible for document production,” committee spokesman Jamal Ware said in a Sept. 25, 2015 press release.

But the latest disclosure of unsearched records will still have an impact on groups like Citizens United, which first filed its public records request in 2014 and could be waiting until after the presidential election before it receives all its documents.

In light of the new discovery, the court pushed back the State Department’s production deadline until next August. Citizens United said it would not be surprised by additional delays.

“The public has a right to inspect records that are in the possession of their government,” Bossie said. “These delay tactics by the Obama Administration look like nothing more than an assist to former Secretary Clinton.”

“This latest declaration is more of the constant ‘drip, drip, drip’ that [D.C. District Court] Judge Sullivan spoke of last week,” he added. “Unfortunately, when dealing with the State Department, it’s not a matter if this will happen again, it’s a matter of when.”

Even el Chapo Got into the United States?

Posted on by

Was Border Patrol ordered to deny?

Customs and Border Patrol: Agency has ‘no info’ on report ‘Chapo’ Guzman snuck into U.S.

FoxLatino: Mexican drug lord Joaquín “El Chapo” Guzmán allegedly snuck into the United States twice last year while on the run from authorities following his dramatic prison escape.

The cartel boss’s daughter, Rosa Isela Guzmán Ortiz, said that shortly after “El Chapo” sat down for his Rolling Stone Magazine interview with Sean Penn, he escaped capture with the help of corrupt Mexican officials and evaded U.S. Border Patrol to sneak into California.

Guzmán Ortiz would not disclose the location in southern California where the drug lord was holed up, but said he came to visit her at her five-bedroom house which the drug kingpin bought for her and her four children.

“My dad deposited the money in a bank account with a lawyer and a while after he came to see the house, his house. He came twice,” Guzmán Ortiz told the Guardian.

The claims made by Chapo’s daughter cannot be independently verified and are likely to raise concerns among intelligence authorities in both the U.S. and Mexico.

Jacqueline Wasiluk, a Customs and Border Protection spokeswoman, told the Washington Post on Friday that the agency has “no information that substantiates the claims in news reports” about Guzmán.

Guzmán Ortiz said that she doesn’t know specifically how the drug lord arrived in the U.S. but that “El Chapo” allegedly paid off high-level Mexican officials.

“All I know is that my dad told his lawyer to deliver some checks to [a politician’s] campaign, and asked that he respect him,” she said.

The bombshell story from Guzmán Ortiz comes after “El Chapo’s” lawyer said the drug lord asked him to negotiate with U.S. authorities for a lighter sentence and confinement at a medium-security prison.

The cartel boss was recaptured in early January during a raid by Mexican Marines, which took place in the city of Los Mochis. During the raid, five suspects were killed and six – including Guzmán – were arrested. Marines seized two armored vehicles, eight rifles, one handgun and a rocket-propelled grenade launcher.

He escaped from incarceration last July through a mile-long tunnel dug to what authorities say was a building in plain sight of the Altiplano prison that was set up specifically for the prison break. The tunnel leading from the drug lord’s cell to the building was equipped with a ventilation system and a customized motorcycle.

Guzmán has been indicted on a number of federal jurisdictions throughout the U.S., among them Brooklyn, Manhattan, Chicago and Miami, as well as other cities where the Sinaloa Cartel operates.

Mexican drug lord Guzman seeks to speed up extradition to U.S.

MEXICO CITY (Reuters) – Captive Mexican drug lord Joaquin “El Chapo” Guzman is attempting to accelerate his extradition to the United States in the hope that he will be treated better in prison there, his lawyers said on Wednesday.

Guzman, who has twice escaped from Mexican maximum security prisons, was captured in Mexico in January, six months after his last jailbreak. The Mexican government quickly said it would initiate extradition proceedings for him to the United States.

The world’s most notorious drug kingpin undertook legal steps to block his extradition, but his lawyers said he was so fed up with his treatment in Mexico that he was looking to move.

“He asked me to do whatever we could to put a stop to the situation he’s in, ‘I just want them to let me sleep,’ he kept saying and told me ‘try to get the quickest extradition possible for me, try and see about speaking to the U.S. government,'” one of the lawyers, Jose Refugio Rodriguez, told local radio.

Guzman has also complained about the amount of communication he is allowed with his family, being excessively cooped up in his cell, and that his cell is too cold, the lawyers said.

A second lawyer, Juan Pablo Badillo, told Reuters by telephone that the process would still take time.

“Since I was able to speak to (Guzman) from Feb. 15, he said he would analyze how we could start this process. It would definitely need to be subject to an agreement with the United States,” Badillo said.

Escalating Military Conflict in Iraq and S. China Sea?

Posted on by

US sending nuclear-capable B-52 bombers to ISIS fight

FNC: The United States is sending nuclear-capable B-52 aircraft to drop bombs on the Islamic State terror group, defense officials confirmed to Fox News Friday.

The B-52 Stratofortress will start its first bombing campaign against ISIS in April, the Air Force Times reports. It’s not clear how many B-52s or airmen will be involved.

Officials say the aircraft will replace nuclear-capable B-1 Lancers hitting ISIS targets in Iraq and Syria.

The Lancers returned to home bases in the U.S. in January. They flew only 3% of all strike missions against ISIS, but had dropped 40% of the bombs and other munitions. B-1s could loiter over the battlefield for 10 hours, much longer than jet fighters, and also could fly supersonic, reaching targets across Iraq and Syria within minutes.

“The B-1s are rotated out, so they’re not here right now, they’ve gone back to do some upgrades,” Lieutenant General Charles Q. Brown Jr., commander at U.S. Air Forces Central Command, told reporters.  More here.

The U.S. just sent a carrier strike group to confront China

The U.S. Navy has dispatched a small armada to the South China Sea.

NavyTimes: The carrier John C. Stennis, two destroyers, two cruisers and the 7th Fleet flagship have sailed into the disputed waters in recent days, according to military officials. The carrier strike group is the latest show of force in the tense region, with the U.S. asserting that China is militarizing the region to guard its excessive territorial claims.

Stennis is joined in the region by the cruisers Antietam and Mobile Bay, and the destroyers Chung-Hoon and Stockdale. The command ship Blue Ridge, the floating headquarters of the Japan-based 7th Fleet, is also in the area, en route to a port visit in the Philippines. Stennis deployed from Washington state on Jan. 15.

The Japan-based Antietam, officials said, was conducting a “routine patrol” separate from the Stennis, following up patrols conducted by the destroyer McCambell and the dock landing ship Ashland in late February.

The stand-off has been heating up on both sides. After news in February that the Chinese deployed an advanced surface-to-air missile battery to the Paracel Islands, U.S. Pacific Command head Adm. Harry Harris told lawmakers that China was militarizing the South China Sea.

“In my opinion China is clearly militarizing the South China Sea,” Harris testified on Feb. 24. “You’d have to believe in a flat Earth to believe otherwise.”

Overnight, Chinese officials dismissed claims that China was militarizing the region, pointing to the Stennis’s patrol as evidence that the U.S. was to blame for the increased military tensions.

“The accusation [that China is militarizing the region] can lead to a miscalculation of the situation,” said Fu Ying, a spokeswoman for China’s National People’s Congress. “If you take a look at the matter closely, it’s the US sending the most advanced aircraft and military vessels to the South China Sea.”

A Pacific Fleet spokesman downplayed the heavy U.S. presence in the region.

“Our ships and aircraft operate routinely throughout the Western Pacific — including the South China Sea — and have for decades,” Cmdr. Clay Doss said in a statement. “In 2015 alone, Pacific Fleet ships sailed about 700 combined days in the South China Sea.”

However, experts say sending Stennis and its air wing to the South China Sea is a clear signal to China and the region.

“Clearly the Navy and DoD is demonstrating its full commitment to presence and freedom of navigation in the region,” said Jerry Hendrix, a retired Navy captain and analyst with the Center for a New American Security in Washington, D.C. “With the full carrier strike group and the command ship, the Navy is showing the scope of its interests and ability to project presence and power around world.”

The destroyer Lassen’s vaunted October patrol within the 12-mile limit of China’s man-made South China Sea islands was the first challenge of China’s sovereignty over the Spratly Islands since Chinese land-reclamation projects began there.

On Jan. 30, the destroyer Curtis Wilbur patrolled near Triton Island, part of the Paracel Islands chain China also claims. More here.

Special Counsel for Hillary’s Email-Gate

Posted on by

Brian Pagliano, the part time IT person hired by Hillary’s company called Clinton Executive Services Corporation has already cooperated with the FBI by turning over records from the server.

Politico: Logs for Hillary Clinton’s email server turned over to the FBI by a former aide to Clinton show no evidence of suspicious foreign traffic or hacking from abroad, a person familiar with the investigation said. The records were provided to the FBI by former Clinton information technology staffer Bryan Pagliano, according to the source, who spoke on condition of anonymity. Pagliano worked at the State Department but was also involved in setting up the server at Clinton’s Chappaqua, New York, home. More here.

Hillary did have phishing emails on her server but she did not open those emails. Attempts were clearly made, and for sophisticated hackers, there may be have some successes into her server where no cyber intrusion DNA would be glaring or found.

Special counsel to investigate Hillary urgently needed

TheHill: March at the United Nations, Hillary Clinton stood in front of the world and lied when she stated: “I did not email any classified material to anyone on my email. There is no classified material.”

As a former U.S. attorney, I believe we must follow the evidence.  In this case the evidence leads to one place—an urgent need to appoint special counsel to investigate this most serious breach of national security.
Since the State Department started its monthly release of Clinton’s emails from her time as secretary of State, the evidence has shown that she recklessly communicated with her staff and top political advisors with no regard for the security of classified material that the American people entrusted her to handle ethically and intelligently.
While the much-publicized events and revelations regarding this situation had already made a strong case for special counsel to be appointed, one particular recent discovery has made it absolutely imperative. Not only did Clinton’s emails contain over 1,700 emails with classified information, they contained SAP information—information classified at a level beyond top secret. This information was, and remains, such a security risk that the State Department refused to release even heavily redacted emails—it simply was “too damaging” to release in any form.  At this point, there is no doubt Clinton’s actions put our nation at risk.

Perhaps the need for special counsel would not be as clear and urgent without the troubling track record Clinton has had with the truth in this matter.  Chief among the many examples is that her story has changed from claiming she didn’t traffic in any classified material to she didn’t send anything “marked classified,” while continuing to deny she did anything wrong.  This attempt to excuse her behavior is simply not relevant—she was entrusted to keep marked and unmarked classified information secure.  She created the emails containing the classified material, and it would be absurd to think her failure to mark a document as classified would excuse the mistreatment of the information.  Further, she continued to store classified information in an unsecure manner for years.  Though she claims to have done nothing wrong, the evidence directly contradicts her public statements.

Polling has shown that over the years the American citizens’ trust in government has eroded. This is due, at least partly, to situations like this, where politically powerful individuals make statements that are completely contrary to the evidence, and are not held to the same standards as everyone else.  Ironically, it was President Clinton who in 1994 called the independent counsel “a foundation stone for the trust between the government and our citizens,” and “a force for government integrity and public confidence.”  Although independent counsel is no longer available, the sentiment remains equally applicable to the appointment of special counsel.

While I am encouraged the FBI is seriously investigating Hillary Clinton’s treatment of classified information, it is imperative someone independent from the administration is appointed. Our justice system is built on unbiased and equal treatment.  The political and personal ties between the president and Hillary Clinton prohibit this—President Obama appointed Clinton to the position and has practically endorsed her presidential bid. Both Clinton and Obama have made statements about the criminal case, indicating the outcome of the investigation would be favorable to Clinton in spite of the evidence.  The American people need to know that when the evidence dictates, even a politically powerful individual will be held to the same standard as all other citizens.  The integrity of the justice system requires appointment of special counsel with broad jurisdiction to investigate and prosecute any criminal violations discovered as the result of the use of Clinton’s private email system or discovered from the release of those documents.

It is a rare occurrence to appoint special counsel.  But it is also an unprecedented circumstance to have a secretary of State set up a private email server in her home to transmit classified information and expose the nation to security risks, and for that individual to then run to be commander in chief for the next four years.  Given the facts of this case—that it involves information at the highest echelons of our national defense and security, that the individual involved has misled and deceived at every turn, and that a clear conflict of interest exists with the Executive branch—no subjective person can believe the truth will be unearthed without a special counsel.

The American people deserve the truth, this tool will provide it, and on behalf of the American people—it should be deployed immediately.