Category Archives: Insurgency

Any Strategy for Russian Military Bases in Ukraine?

Posted on by

Per a joint statement from Senators McCain and Rand Paul: “Russia’s use of force in Ukraine is unfolding in clear violation of Russia’s own commitments to respect Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, including under the 1994 Budapest Memorandum. None of us should be under any illusion about what President Putin is capable of doing in Ukraine, especially now that he has requested, and the Russian Duma has approved, the deployment of Russian troops, not just in Crimea but in the country of Ukraine.   In June of 2015, Secretary of Defense Ash Carter spoke to Ukraine not standing alone.

From the Guardian in part:

America’s new military strategy singles out states like China and Russia as aggressive and threatening to US security interests, while warning of growing technological challenges and worsening global stability.

A somber report released Wednesday by General Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, warns of a “low but growing” probability of the US fighting a war with a major power, with “immense” consequences.

Russia has “repeatedly demonstrated that it does not respect the sovereignty of its neighbors and it is willing to use force to achieve its goals”, the 2015 National Military Strategy says.

“Russia’s military actions are undermining regional security directly and through proxy forces.”

It points to Russian troop presence in the Ukraine conflict, though Moscow denies it has deployed its military in eastern Ukraine to bolster a separatist insurgency.

06.30.2015

By Pierre Vaux

…the time for such an attack may be drawing nearer.

Aerial footage finds smoking-gun evidence of Russian army involvement in the conflict. More war is inevitable.
Dnipro-1, one of Ukraine’s many pro-government volunteer regiments, today released a video compiling drone footage of a Russian military camp just south of the village of Sontsevo in the Donetsk region.

Two drone flights were made over the same area, two weeks apart. Over that time, the camp grew from a small collection of tents and engineering vehicles into a fully-fledged forward operating base (FOB), complete with tanks, communications equipment, personnel quarters and even new roads.

What makes this already impressive discovery even more startling is the location—less than 12 kilometers from the Ukrainian front-line settlements of Granitnoye and Novolaspa. This area, to the east of Volnovakha and the Donetsk-Mariupol highway, has seen a slow but steady intensification of violence over recent months, as well as a buildup of Russian troops and armor in separatist-held territory behind the front lines.

What’s significant about where this Russian FOB is located is that it’s sandwiched between (Ukrainian-held Volnovakha) and (separatist-held) Telmanovo, and would therefore play a lead role in any forthcoming Russian offensive on Mariupol, the port city on the Sea of Azov which also happens to the economic powerhouse in the Donetsk region. The separatists have nothing comparable to Mariupol in their possession and they want it, as Alexander Zakharchenko, the head of the so-called Donetsk People’s Republic, has stated repeatedly to journalists. Reinforcements from this FOB would allow separatists to mount a pincer maneuver to cut Ukrainian forces in Mariupol off from support from the north. I outlined such a plan at the beginning of this year and the evidence is now mounting that the Russians are indeed preparing for such a move.

Aerial footage finds smoking-gun evidence of Russian army involvement in the conflict. More war is inevitable.
Earlier this month, the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe reported spotting large quantities of armor and troops in Komsomolskoye and Razdolnoye, which respectively lie 15 and 10 kilometers from the base found by Dnipro-1.

On June 17 our team at The Interpreter reported on evidence culled from social media that proved the presence of a training camp in Razdolnoye, equipped with tanks, infantry fighting vehicles, and Grad rocket launchers.

But today’s video shows something much greater in scale.

When Dnipro-1 first flew over the area on May 20, they filmed around 70 troops, several trucks and engineering vehicles and construction equipment. At least two T-72 tanks and a communications vehicle can also be seen.

Only 15 days later, on June 4, the regiment carried out another drone flight. Russian military engineers had moved fast, constructing a large base, complete with new roads, a parade square, and trenches covering an area of around a hectare. The roads are even lined with reflective markers.

We can now see at least nine T-72 tanks, one of which is equipped with mine-clearing gear, and several fuel bowsers, some of which are parked in protective dugouts. At least one communications vehicle and an anti-tank gun can also be seen. Tents for accommodation, meetings, and cooking are laid out across the camp. Structures have been erected to mask some of the tanks from being seen from ground level and the whole complex is sheltered by woods.

This is quite clearly a base intended for a large-scale future deployment, one that could be instrumental in an assault to the west toward Volnovakha.

Just this morning, the Ukrainian military reported that Russian-backed forces had shelled Granitnoye and Starognatovka, two of the nearest frontline towns to Sontsevo. This has been a regular occurrence, despite the “ceasefire” signed between both parties in Minsk last February, mere hours before the fall of Debaltsevo to the separatists. But June has seen an increase in the number of attacks and, the military command in Mariupol said today, the range.

For the first time since the second Minsk talks, the past month has heralded renewed attacks on Ukrainian positions on the Donetsk-Mariupol highway itself. Last night, the Ukrainians report, the frontline town of Novotroitskoye, just north of Volnovakha, was shelled.

It is in this context that the repeated assaults on Marinka, a southwestern suburb of Donetsk, should be evaluated. Pushing the Ukrainians back from the area southwest of Donetsk and off the highway would allow the Russians to isolate and pin down the defenders of Mariupol from the north, while their forces continue to press through Shirokino on the Azov coast.

The rapid development of this base suggests the time for such an attack may be drawing nearer.

Obama Concessions to Iran Began in 2008

Posted on by

When one takes a macro view and goes back in time, the clues were there as proven when the United States sent an envoy to Venezuela for the funeral of Chavez, or when Obama himself received a book from the Venezuelan leader.

Laying the ground work, Obama while on the campaign trail in 2008 reached out to Iran by dispatching an envoy to Tehran. A letter was also passed on from Barack Obama to Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.  Then in 2009, Obama announced plans to begin talks with Iran and Ahmadinejad without ‘preconditions’.

The communications continued without notice or fanfare even as yet another letter sent to Iran in 2014 from Obama invited talks about the nuclear deal and Islamic State. President Barack Obama secretly wrote to Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei in the middle of last month and described a shared interest in fighting Islamic State militants in Iraq and Syria, according to people briefed on the correspondence.

The letter appeared aimed both at buttressing the campaign against Islamic State and nudging Iran’s religious leader closer to a nuclear deal.

If one thinks there was or is no strategy, guess again. The strategy began in 2008 and it was to side with Iran and cave to all their requests and interests. Those interests include Syria, Lebanon. Venezuela, Cuba and perhaps even more.

Michael Ledeen, an Iran and Middle East expert recently wrote:

The actual strategy is detente first, and then a full alliance with Iran throughout the Middle East and North Africa. It has been on display since before the beginning of the Obama administration. During his first presidential campaign in 2008, Mr. Obama used a secret back channel to Tehran to assure the mullahs that he was a friend of the Islamic Republic, and that they would be very happy with his policies. The secret channel was Ambassador William G. Miller, who served in Iran during the shah’s rule, as chief of staff for the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, and as ambassador to Ukraine. Ambassador Miller has confirmed to me his conversations with Iranian leaders during the 2008 campaign.

Ever since, President Obama’s quest for an alliance with Iran has been conducted through at least four channels:  Iraq, Switzerland (the official U.S. representative to Tehran), Oman, and a variety of American intermediaries, the most notable of whom is probably Valerie Jarrett, his closest adviser. In recent months, Middle Eastern leaders reported personal visits from Ms. Jarrett, who briefed them on her efforts to manage the Iranian relationship. This was confirmed to me by a former high-ranking American official who says he was so informed by several Middle Eastern leaders.

The central theme in Obama’s outreach to Iran is his conviction that the United States has historically played a wicked role in the Middle East, and that the best things he can do for that part of the world is to limit and withdraw American military might and empower our self-declared enemies, whose hostility to traditional American policies he largely shares.

Iran has a long history with Cuba and Venezuela, so reaching renewed diplomatic relations with Cuba and opening mutual embassies should be no surprise when once pays attention to details. It is not unreasonable to question Iran’s early demands of terms of talks and relations where Cuba and Venezuela were part of the conditions. Further, the matter of the Syrian red-line threat made by Obama cannot be dismissed either. Iran has been a deep loyal supporter of Bashir al Assad and Syria, where terror incubates daily.

As noted by Vanessa Lopez: Cuba’s relationships with Iran and Syria have proven to be politically lucrative for the island. Syria has shown itself to be a loyal ally and has increased its political relationship with Cuba over the past five years. Cuba is making great efforts to transform this political relationship into an economically beneficial one; Syria has recently indicated it is willing to engage Cuba more significantly, but it remains to be seen if these statements and memorandums between the two countries will translate into dollars for the Cuban regime. On the other hand, Iran has been completely willing to aid Cuba despite suffering economic losses.

These countries serve to prop up Cuba in the international arena and Iran provides much-needed economic life support. These relationships should be of the utmost concern to the United States, since they place two countries that have been delineated as part of the “axis of evil” closely allied with an anti-American regime only 90 miles off U.S. shores. Cuba’s expertise in espionage and biotechnology can be a significant threat in the hands of these two countries. In its efforts to make Syria an economic supporter, Cuba could be willing to assist it in these areas. Let us not forget also that Cuba was one of the few countries to advocate for the Soviets to use nuclear weapons during the Cuban Missile Crisis. Its ties with a potentially nuclear capable Iran and a resurgent Syria can lead to an unstable situation by our shores – or perhaps more immediately, in Israel and the rest of the Middle East.

Click here for a few headlines between Iran and Cuba since 2013.

Iran Cuba

Cuban envoy calls for broadening ties with Iran
TEHRAN (FNA)- Havana’s Ambassador to Tehran Vladimir Gonzalez called for the further expansion of Iran-Cuba bilateral relations.

Speaking at a press conference in Tehran on Wednesday, the Cuban ambassador pointed to the close relations between Tehran and Havana, and said, “There are extensive grounds for the expansion of the relations between Tehran and Havana.”

Anymore questions on what Barack Obama is really doing?

 

To Stop the Unraveling, Executive Privilege Declared

Posted on by

The obstruction of transparency begins in earnest once again. The State Department released the first court ordered drop of Hillary Clinton’s email from her private server and accounts. It is fascinating reading but a lot of it. At the very beginning of Hillary’s term as Secretary of State, she used Sidney Blumenthal as her ghost front person, the emails define this in undisputed terms.

Speaker Boehner and the Gowdy commission are beyond angry as noted here:

“The Hillary Clinton private emails controversy has new legs and the Democratic frontrunner has only herself to blame,” CNN’s John King reported Sunday. “After the House Select Benghazi Committee released new emails this past week, the Obama State Department was forced to admit it was not in possession of some Clinton emails that clearly discussed department business. … Secretary Clinton can’t definitely prove there aren’t additional things that should have been turned over to the government that were not. She can’t prove that because she erased her private email server without any independent supervision.” Pointing out that Hillary Clinton’s statement that she had turned over all of her work-related emails “is not true,” MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell piled on. “If you care at all about the Freedom of Information Act, which is what liberals should care about here, that was an absolutely unacceptable choice from the start, that she used an email system in that way, and then that she deleted it,” he said Tuesday. “That was to contradict the Freedom of Information Act, Americans’ freedom, the press freedom, to be able to request these kinds of documents.” But it was exactly this accountability and transparency that Hillary Clinton tried so hard to avoid as she performed her taxpayer-funded duties as Secretary of State. That includes periods of time when the Benghazi terrorist attack was front and center, and Sidney Blumenthal was sending her unvetted, unsubstantiated intelligence on Libya. The Obama administration confirmed last week that she deleted specific parts of at least six emails before turning them over to the State Department. What other emails are still missing? More details here.

Here comes the privilege:

In part from the Washington Examiner,

The State Department has informed the House Select Committee on Benghazi that it is withholding “a small number” of documents from investigators on the basis of “important executive branch institutional interests.” The statement, made in a letter from Assistant Secretary of State Julia Frifield to committee chairman Rep. Trey Gowdy, amounts to a de facto claim of executive privilege.

‘Frifield made the claim in a letter turning over 3,600 pages of Benghazi-related documents from three current and former administration officials: Susan Rice, Jake Sullivan, and Cheryl Mills. Rice, a former United Nations ambassador, is now national security adviser, while Sullivan and Mills are close aides to Hillary Clinton who worked at the department when she was secretary of state’. Many more details here. 

The top emails of interest are noted below.

From Politico:

On Tuesday evening the State Department released approximately 3,000 pages of emails sent by and to Hillary Clinton during her time as secretary of state, primarily in 2009.

Most of the messages are mundane, featuring anodyne remarks about scheduling or clipped news releases. But a choice few reveal idiosyncrasies and quirks from America’s highest-ranking diplomats, Washington strategists, and politicos — including the presumptive Democratic 2016 presidential front-runner herself.

Here are some highlights:

Colin Powell Jokes About Richard Holbrooke

After Clinton tripped and fractured her elbow in June 2009, one of her predecessors at the State Department sent her an email wishing her well. “Hillary, Is it true that Holbrooke tripped you?” Colin Powell wrote to Clinton, referring to Richard Holbrooke who at the time was serving as President Barack Obama’s special envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan. “Just kidding. Get better fast, we need you running around.”

John Podesta Rips Off Colin Powell’s Joke

Unwilling to leave the retired four-star general with the last laugh, John Podesta made the same joke in an email only two days later. After wishing the Secretary of State well following her elbow injury, Podesta wrote “PS No matter what anybody says, we refuse to believe that Holbrooke tripped you.”

Grandmother Knows Best

After failing to schedule a late-night phone call with Podesta and rescheduling for the following morning, Hillary Clinton offered the longtime ally a piece of advice before going to bed: “Please wear socks to bed to keep your feet warm.”

Hillary Clinton vs. the Fax Machine

The Secretary of State had an epic battle with the office technology in December 2009. Clinton struggled in an email exchange with aide Huma Abedin to figure out how to establish the fax line. “I thought it was supposed to be off hook to work?” Clinton puzzled.

Keeping the Axe at Bay

After receiving an email from her aide Cheryl Mills with the subject line “axelrod wants your email – remind me to discuss with you if i forget,” Clinton did not respond enthusiastically to the prospect of one of Obama’s top advisers receiving her contact info. “Can you send to him or do you want me to?” Clinton wrote. “Does he know I can’t look at it all day so he needs to contact me thru you or Huma or Lauren during work hours.”

Who Would Criticize Gen. James Jones?

The New York Times’ Mark Landler published an article in May 2009, only a few months into Clinton’s tenure at the State Department, referring to tension between President Obama’s National Security Adviser, retired Gen. James Jones, and the secretary of state. Clinton spokesman Philippe Reines wrote an email to Cheryl Mills, which was forwarded to Clinton, saying that no one in the secretary’s circle could have possibly been Landler’s source. “Someone in her circle is someone like you, or a Jake, or me. And none of us would ever say anything like that,” Reines wrote. “Mark conceded that point and let me know he will be changing the sourcing…It’s a small consolation, but I think a very important one.”

George Packer’s Profile of Richard Holbrooke

In September 2009, as George Packer was deep into his profile of Richard Holbrooke for The New Yorker, Clinton aides emailed back and forth assuring that they were providing the journalist with all of the key facts — and no information that could be damaging to the Secretary of State. “Obviously Richard strayed shall we say from discussion of our strategy,” then-Assistant Secretary of State Philip Crowley wrote. “It ends up being a semi-profile on Richard. I’ll alert the WH. I don’t see anything here that is problematic for the Secretary, but I don’t know that every detail here is correct.”

Clinton responded cryptically, “I know more about this if you wish to discuss.”

Hillary Needs to be Alerted About Bill’s Plans

In 2009 former President Bill Clinton was selected by the United Nations to serve as a special envoy to Haiti. According to emails, Hillary Clinton didn’t find out until it leaked out of the UN. “Wjc said he was going to call hrc but hasn’t had time,” wrote Doug Band, a longtime Clinton aide. “You need to walk this to HRC if she is not gone,” responded Cheryl Mills.

Sid Blumenthal Points Out Denis McDonough’s ‘Trashing Biden’

In an email to Clinton, Sid Blumenthal, a longtime Clinton ally, attaches a piece by Jim Hoagland in the Washington Post that he says “nails McDonough for trashing Biden.” At the time Denis McDonough was working on strategic communications for the National Security Council, but he has since been promoted to Obama’s Chief of Staff. Hoagland wrote, “Denis McDonough, my strategic communications man, sold Biden-as-dove brilliantly. Wasn’t somebody just saying I should promote Denis? Maybe it was Denis?”

Clinton’s Late Night Blumenthal Chat

In October 2009, Hillary Clinton sent an email to Sid Blumenthal at 10:35 p.m. asking in the subject line “Are you still awake?” The body of the email read “I will call if you are.” No response from Blumenthal was included.

Clinton Frets about Canceled Meetings with White House

In a June 2009 email with the subject line “No WH mtg,” Hillary Clinton wrote “I arrived for the 10:15 mtg and was told there was no mtg. Matt said they had ‘released’ the time. This is the second time this has happened. What’s up???”

Financing Clinton’s Debt

In an email to longtime Clinton ally Paul Begala, Capricia Marshall, a former senior adviser to Hillary Clinton’s 2008 campaign wrote that an email contest had raised $500,000, followed by two exclamation points. The money, presumably, went to finance Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign’s debt. “You all are amazing – the world adores you! You put a serious hole in hrc debt! A million thanks!”

If you have the time and inclination, you can read the full first set of released emails here.

 

 

The U.S. $73 Billion Puerto Rico Problem

Posted on by

In a White House briefing, Josh Earnest, the spokesperson revealed that the United States will not bail our Puerto Rico. Oh really? In March of 2009, the White House created one of ‘those’ task forces, this one dedicated to Puerto Rico. 4 years later….financial crisis is worse.

On October 30, 2009, President Obama signed Executive Order 13517, which directed the Task Force to maintain its focus on the status question, but added to the Task Force’s responsibilities by seeking advice and recommendations on policies that promote job creation, education, health care, clean energy, and economic development on the Island.

The current Task Force was convened in December 2009 with members from every Cabinet agency. It organized two public hearings in San Juan, Puerto Rico and Washington, D.C. to hear directly from a broad cross section of voices on the issues of status and economic development. Furthermore, hundreds of citizens from Puerto Rico and the mainland offered input by sending materials through the mail and electronically through a White House public comment e-mail address. Members of the Task Force and White House staff also met with congressional leaders, Puerto Rican elected officials, and other interested parties to hear their views.

 

   

From the WSJ:

As Puerto Rico sinks under the weight of $73 billion in government and agency debt—not to mention billions more in unfunded pension and health-care liabilities—its political class is looking for an escape hatch.

This isn’t about wiping the slate clean. But if a bankruptcy judge approved the write-down of, say, half the municipal debt, it would reduce the fiscal pressure.

There’s an app for that. The trouble for Puerto Rico is that getting it requires a retroactive change in U.S. law. If Congress cares about the future of Puerto Rico or the hundreds of thousands of Americans who hold Puerto Rican debt, it will just say no.

More than half of the outstanding Puerto Rico debt is triple tax-exempt revenue bonds issued by government-owned corporations. Unlike public corporations and municipalities in the 50 states, these enterprises do not have access to Chapter 9 bankruptcy protection under the U.S. code. If they fail to meet their loan obligations, they face receivership.

Last June Puerto Rico enacted a law to allow its government corporations to declare bankruptcy. But in February, a U.S. federal judge in San Juan struck down that law on grounds that the federal bankruptcy code supersedes it.

Greece vs. Puerto Rico

SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico –  The governor warned that Puerto Rico can’t pay its $72 billion public debt on the eve of a private Monday meeting with legislators, delivering another jolt to the recession-gripped U.S. island as well as a world financial system already worrying over Greece’s collapsing finances.

Gov. Alejandro Garcia Padilla is hoping to defer debt payments while negotiating with creditors, spokesman Jesus Manuel Ortiz said Sunday night.

Garcia is expected to air a pre-recorded televised address after meeting with legislators, who are still debating a $9.8 billion budget that calls for $674 million in cuts and sets aside $1.5 billion to help pay off the debt. The budget has to be approved by Tuesday.

Ortiz confirmed comments by Padilla that appeared in a report in The New York Times published late Sunday, less than a day before Garcia planned to meet with legislators.

“There is no other option. I would love to have an easier option. This is not politics, this is math,” Garcia is quoted as saying in the Times.

Puerto Rico’s bonds were popular with U.S. mutual funds because they were tax-free, but hedge funds and distressed-debt buyers began stepping in to buy up debt as the island’s economy worsened and its credit rating dropped.

Garcia’s comments will likely not have much impact on Wall Street, said economist Jose Villamil, a former U.N. consultant and CEO of an economic and planning consulting firm.

“The markets are clear that Puerto Rico is heading to a direction of a restructuring or default,” said the economist, adding that a voluntary restructuring by bondholders might be the best option.

“The last four administrations have kicked the can down the road,” said Villamil. “At this point, there is no more can to kick. So we’re going to take some very strict measures and some very profound measures. It’s going to hurt, but there’s no way out.”

Some legislators were taken aback by Garcia’s comments, including Rep. Jenniffer Gonzalez, spokeswoman for the main opposition party.

“I think it’s irresponsible,” Gonzalez said. “He met privately with The New York Times last week, but he hasn’t met with the leaders of this island.”

Puerto Rico’s constitution dictates that the debt has to be paid before any other financial obligation is met. If Garcia seeks to not pay the debt at all, it will require a referendum and a vote on a constitutional amendment, she said in a phone interview.

Puerto Rico’s situation has drawn comparisons to Greece, where the government decreed this weekend that banks would be shuttered for six business days and restrictions imposed on cash withdrawals. The country’s five-year financial crisis has sparked questions about its continued membership in the 19-nation shared euro currency and the European Union.

Puerto Rico’s governor recently confirmed that he had considered having his government seek permission from the U.S. Congress to declare bankruptcy amid a nearly decade-long economic slump. His administration is currently pushing for the right for Puerto Rico’s public agencies to file for bankruptcy under Chapter 9. Neither the agencies nor the island’s government can file for bankruptcy under current U.S. rules.

Puerto Rico’s public agencies owe a large portion of the debt, with the power company alone owing some $9 billion. The company is facing a restructuring as the government continues to negotiate with creditors as the deadline for a roughly $400 million payment nears.

Garcia has taken several measures to help generate more government revenue, including signing legislation raising the sales tax to 11.5 percent and creating a 4 percent tax on professional services. The sales tax increase goes into effect Wednesday and the new services tax on Oct. 1, to be followed by a transition to a value-added tax by April 1.

When Do Murders by Illegals Become a Crisis?

Posted on by

A murder a day? The numbers are tracking to be almost accurate as Barack Obama’s prisoner release policy of illegals is killing Americans.

Senator Grassley needs our help as his office is demanding answers. It is also most important to track this bill making its way through the congressional legislative path. The sponsors of this bill are also questionable including Congressman Duncan Hunter, (R-CA).

There are on average 44 murders a day in the United States, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Assuming murders by illegal immigrants were prorated as a percentage of the U.S. population, it is not unreasonable to assume one to two murders a day are committed by illegal immigrants.

121 murders attributed to illegals released by Obama administration

Washington Times:

More than 100 immigrants whom the Obama administration released back into the community went on to be charged with subsequent killings, according to government data released Monday that raises more questions about whether immigration authorities are doing enough to detail illegal immigrants awaiting deportation.

In one case, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement acknowledged that its agents didn’t find out about an illegal immigrant’s death threats and court injunctions against him — which should have put him back in detention — until after the man was accused of murder.

That case, involving Apolinar Altamirano, is the latest instance of someone who went through the Obama administration’s deportation system and was released, only to go on to be charged with major crimes.

 

ICE officials say they don’t regularly notify local authorities when they release an immigrant and don’t have a way of finding out from those authorities whether a former detainee gets into trouble with the law, so they didn’t know whether Mr. Altamirano’s $10,000 bond should have been revoked.

“ICE was not aware of the injunctions against Mr. Altamirano until after his January 22, 2015 arrest for first-degree murder, armed robbery and related offenses,” the agency said in a letter to Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, Iowa Republican, and Sen. Jeff Flake, an Arizona Republican in whose state the killing occurred.

All told, 121 immigrants who were held but eventually released by ICE went on to commit “homicide-related offenses” from 2010 through 2014, the agency said.

It said 33 of those were ordered released by immigration courts and another 24 were released because of a 2001 Supreme Court decision capping the time an immigrant can be detained to six months. But a majority of the releases were at ICE’s discretion.

In a statement Monday, ICE said that a criminal record isn’t enough to qualify for mandatory detention under agency policies.

“When making custody determinations, ICE performs an individualized review of the individual’s immigration history and criminal history, pursuant to the Immigration and Naturalization Act (INA),” the agency said. “In accordance with the requirements of the INA, not all criminals are subject to mandatory detention and thus may be eligible for bond.”

Detention cannot be used as a further punishment for their crimes or for being in the country illegally, but rather must be used as a tool for further deportation.

Still, ICE stiffened its policies this year, insisting that a supervisor approve cases when the agency plans to release immigrants with serious criminal records.

Even those released are usually monitored in some fashion, though The Washington Times reported last week that most of those under electronic monitoring violated some conditions of their release. Few violations were deemed serious enough to have their release revoked.

Critics who have been pushing for stiffer immigration enforcement said the violence rate for released immigrants is probably much higher and the 121 charged are only those who have been caught.

“Illegal immigration is not a victimless crime,” said Maria Espinoza, co-founder of the Remembrance Project, which advocates for victims of crimes committed by immigrants. “This further supports what we have been fighting for. The safety and welfare of Americans must be the priority of the administration and the Republican-led Congress.”

Don Rosenberg, whose son was killed in a traffic accident by an illegal immigrant driving without a license, said the government lacks the willpower to deport people and to do it quickly.

“These people can and should be deported. We have that option, and we don’t want to take it, and this is what happens,” he said. “I guess until somebody who has the responsibility to make these decisions has one of their loved ones killed, it’s going to continue to happen.”

In the case of Mr. Altamirano, he was put in deportation proceedings on Jan. 3, 2013, and released after posting bond four days later. His first hearing before the immigration court wasn’t until April 9, 2014, and he was still awaiting a final deportation order in January this year when he was arrested on charges of shooting a convenience store clerk in Mesa, Arizona.

Mr. Grassley and Sen. Jeff Sessions, Alabama Republican and chairman of the immigration subcommittee, are seeking answers from Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson, Attorney General Loretta Lynch and Secretary of State John F. Kerry.

The senators want to know why Mr. Kerry hasn’t put more pressure on other countries to take back their citizens whom the U.S. wants to deport. Under the 2001 Supreme Court ruling known as the Zadvydas case, the U.S. generally cannot detain foreigners longer than six months if their countries won’t accept them. Every year, thousands of immigrants are put back on the streets because of Zadvydas.

Republicans have long pressured the State Department — under President George W. Bush and now under President Obama — to use diplomatic tools such as denying visas to top officials try to force other countries to take back their citizens.

The Times reported that ICE releases hundreds of Cuban criminals into U.S. communities every year because the island nation refuses to take them back.