America has Been Latinized

Posted on August 13, 2015August 13, 2015 by Denise Simon

Census: Record 42.1 million immigrants in U.S., Mexicans drive latest surge

A new analysis of legal and illegal immigrant counts by the Census Bureau revealed Thursday that there is a record 42.1 million in the United States, an explosion that is being driven by Mexicans flooding across the border.

In a report provided to Secrets by the Center for Immigration Studies, the total immigrant population surged 1.7 million since 2014. The growth was led in the last year by an additional 740,000 Mexican immigrants.

The 42.1 million tabulated by Census in the second quarter represent over 13 percent of the U.S. population, the biggest percentage in 105 years.

What’s more, the numbers of immigrants coming and going from the U.S. is actually higher since many return home every years, said the report. “For the immigrant population to increase by one million means that significantly more than one million new immigrants must enter the country because some immigrants already here return to their homeland each year and natural mortality totals 250,000 annually,” said the Center.

The stunning growth is sure to pour fuel on the already white-hot immigration debate in Congress and on the presidential campaign trail.

“Illegal immigration came up in the presidential debates, but there has been little discussion of the level of immigration; this at a time when total immigration is surging according to the latest data,” said Steven Camarota, co-author of the report and the Center for Immigration’s director of research.

“The rapid growth in the immigrant population was foreseeable given the cutbacks in enforcement, our expansive legal immigration system, and the improvement in the economy. But the question remains, is it in the nation’s interest?” he added.

Some key findings in the new report:

• The nation’s immigrant or foreign-born population, which includes legal and illegal immigrants, grew by 4.1 million from the second quarter of 2011 to the second quarter of 2015 — 1.7 million in just the last year.

• Growth in the last year was led by a rebound in the number of Mexican immigrants, which increased by 740,000 from 2014 to 2015 — accounting for 44 percent of the increase in the total immigrant population in the last year.

• The total Mexican immigrant population (legal and illegal) reached 12.1 million in the second quarter of 2015 — the highest quarterly total ever.

• The Department of Homeland Security and other researchers have estimated that eight in 10 illegal immigrants are from Mexico and Latin America, so the increase in immigrants from these countries is an indication that illegal immigration has begun growing again.

Much of the new immigration is due to the explosion of green cards and the flood of younger Latin Americans leaving troubled situations back home.

Many companies, meanwhile are taking advantage of the immigrants and replacing higher paid Americans with cheaper immigrant labor, even in skilled jobs.

Polls, meanwhile, show that the public wants action to stop the surge of illegal immigrants, an issue picked up by some of the Republicans running for president such as Sen. Ted Cruz and Donald Trump.

Additional numbers assessments and trends:

When it comes to the U.S. population, the “mainstream” is shifting from white to multicultural. In 1980, the U.S. was 80% white/non-multicultural. By 2012, that proportion had decreased to 64%. And in the years to come, the multicultural, non-white population will account for larger and larger percentages of the population.

Multicultural America is becoming more Latino. Hispanics, African-Americans, and Asians represented just 20% of the population in 1980. By 2012, that percentage nearly doubled to 36%. Over that more than twenty year period, Hispanics have grown to represent a much larger proportion of the multicultural population. They were 32% of the multicultural segment in 1980 — and grew to 47% in 2012.

By 2050, there will be as many young Latinos in the U.S. as white non-Hispanics. Unlike waves of past immigrants, Hispanics will grow to be equal in size to the host population. In 1980, non-Hispanic whites were 74% of the under-18 population and Hispanics were 9%. By 2050, the two groups will be even, with both projected to represent 36% of the population under 18.

Already, Hispanics are the engine of growth for the 18-34 demographic. From 2015 to 2020, Hispanics 18-34 are projected to increase by over 1.8 million. Over that same period for that age group, non-Hispanic whites will decrease in size by nearly 1.3 million. Blacks and Asians will also grow – but on a much smaller scale (by 84,000 and 267,000, respectively).

The youth population is very Latino. Today, Hispanics represent more than 1 in 5 people under 35. And that proportion rises when it comes to the very young: Latinos account for almost 1 in 4 births in the U.S.

Growth fueled by the second generation. Hispanic population increases are expected to come from immigration and births in the US — but the majority will come from US births. The Census projects that from 2012 to 2050, the US-born Hispanic population will increase at 5 times the rate of foreign-born Hispanics. And while today the US-born group is about 65% larger than foreign-born, in 2050 there will be nearly 4 times more US-born Hispanics than foreign-born.

The second generation is already taking over the 18-34 demographic – and the pace is only going to pick up. Hispanics 18-24 skew heavily US-born, while more than half of 25-29s and 30-34s are foreign-born. By 2020, 85% of 18-24s and 61% of 25-29s will be US-born (and 30-34s will still be more foreign-born (55%).

A mega wave of second-generation Latinos is heading into the key advertiser demos. More than 90% of Hispanic kids under 11 were born in the US – and 6 million of them are second generation. As they get older, they will shape the market in new ways. Every year, nearly 550,000 second-generation Latinos are entering the teen demographic.

Hillary Email Server Timeline and Facts

Posted on August 13, 2015August 13, 2015 by Denise Simon

Like everyone else, tracking the pieces of this scandal takes imagination and could require a spreadsheet that includes names and dates. So, below will be some facts and dates and for sure could be amended as more developments are realized.

1. Bill Clinton had/has his own server dedicated to Clinton business, Foundation operations and speeches.

2. Hillary needed an IT based system during the time she was running for president in 2008, could not use the existing server due to capacity limitations, so she bought yet another which came with an IT person.

3. Server 2 was installed in the basement of the Chappaqua home and managed by a person listed as Eric Hoteham. Likely the real name is Eric Hothem, who was a DC stockbroker and a Democrat fundraiser that worked for Bill. Eric was also an aide to Hillary during her time as First Lady.

4. Several email addresses were created on the 2nd server where they had some numbers assigned like [email protected]. Several identified run from 18-22 but leads to a question ‘were there email addresses created 1-17? There is also a strange email address on the server known as [email protected]. It should be noted that Guccifer hacked the email address of hdr22.

5. Hillary used several communications devices: a Blackberry which is government issued, an iPad and an IPhone. Questions include, were any of these fitted with encryption features, including her server(s)? So far that answer is no.

6. In the handful of emails released to date as required by the Judge via the State Department, Hillary did not know how to use email and there was a time when the server was down which caused issues for Huma Abedin.

7. In June of 2013, the Hillary team went to an outside IT provider known as Platte River, located in Denver. All electronic communications were moved to Platte River and the Hillary server was moved to a data center in New Jersey and subsequently wipe clean. Now the question is what the Denver IT company Platte River providing redundant services and or an encryption platform to protect classified data for the emails? So far the company is not responding to media questions. The decision to transfer the server services was at the same time the emails that included Sidney Blumenthal were hacked by Guccifer.

6. Two weeks ago, the FBI made a call to Platte River to determine the basis of their work for the Hillary communications platform. On Thursday of last week, Hillary’s lawyer, David Kendall surrendered the 3 thumb drives to the FBI. On Wednesday of this week, the FBI took control of the server located in New Jersey.

7. The recent 2 of 4 emails in question that were marked with the top secret classifications due in part that they included geo-spatial information were sent via a compartmentalized system to the State Department. From State Dept., they were then removed from the protected compartmentalized system and sent to the uncertified Hillary system. All the top secret designations were removed, which is a felony.

8. David Kendall, the Hillary lawyer who maintained the 3 thumb drives was also the lawyer of record for General David Petraeus during his email investigation.

9. All of government uses the same ‘sensitive compartmented information security procedures and there is a manual.

10. Additional details on Hillary email server scandals can be found here.

11. Hillary Clinton statements on the email scandals proving the lies so far.

12. Wrap up to date on the server and the law.

13. Huma Abedin, Hillary’s personal aide and confidant has lawyered up with Karen Dunn on two fronts, the overpayment of $10,000 and for the email scandals.

14. In a recent batch of Hillary emails released was an inquiry about a book describing how to delete emails and the consequences that could result in a jail term.

N. Korea Increasing Uranium Production and Weapons Stockpiles For Iran?

Posted on August 12, 2015August 12, 2015 by Denise Simon

A central plank of the Obama administration’s case for the nuclear deal just concluded by the P5+1 powers is that the agreement closes off “all pathways” by which the Iranian regime could acquire a nuclear capability, at least for the coming decade.

That, however, simply isn’t true. The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), as the new nuclear bargain is officially called, only addresses the overt means by which Iran might go nuclear. A covert path to the bomb, entailing the procurement of materiel from foreign suppliers, still remains open to Iran, if it chooses to take that route. If it does, the Islamic Republic will invariably look to Asia. That’s because over the past three decades, Iran and the Stalinist regime of the Kim dynasty in North Korea have erected a formidable alliance—the centerpiece of which is cooperation on nuclear and ballistic-missile capabilities.

As long ago as 1985, the two countries had already launched cooperative missile development, with Iran helping to underwrite North Korea’s production of 300-kilometer-range Scud-B missiles. Their interaction expanded in the 1990s, when Iran and North Korea began joint development of Iran’s Shahab medium-range missile, which is closely based on North Korea’s own nuclear-capable No Dong. More details here.

Recent Imagery Suggests Increased Uranium Production in North Korea, Probably for Expanding Nuclear Weapons Stockpile and Reactor Fuel

By Jeffrey Lewis

Summary

North Korea is expanding its capacity to mine and mill natural uranium. Recent commercial satellite imagery shows that, over the past year, Pyongyang has begun to refurbish a major mill located near Pyongsan that turns uranium ore into yellowcake.[1] The renovation suggests that North Korea is preparing to expand the production of uranium from a nearby mine.

The question is: What will North Korea do with this uranium? One possibility is that North Korea will enrich the uranium to expand its stockpile of nuclear weapons. Another is that Pyongyang plans to produce fuel for the Experimental Light Water Reactor under construction at its Yongbon nuclear scientific research facility as well as future light-water reactors based on that model.

A major challenge in estimating the size of North Korea’s nuclear weapons stockpile is uncertainty about whether Pyongyang has additional centrifuge facilities for enriching uranium. While such facilities may be hard to detect, the expansion of mining and milling near Pyongsan may allow observers to estimate the size of North Korea’s enrichment infrastructure based on its demand for uranium. Closer scrutiny of North Korea’s uranium resources, including its other declared mines and mills as well as suspected sites, may help arrive at more accurate estimates of this key capability.

North Korea’s Uranium Infrastructure

While wonks have turned their pointy heads toward North Korea’s nuclear reactors, reprocessing facility and enrichment capabilities, all of these capabilities depend on a supply of natural uranium. Uranium, whether natural or enriched, is the essential fuel for nuclear reactors that produce plutonium and can also be enriched to produce nuclear weapons.

The North Koreans like to brag about how much uranium they have. One North Korean publication described the DPRK’s uranium resources as “infinite.” And poor Andrea Berger, a non-proliferation expert at the Royal United Services Institute in London, even got a lecture on the subject from a North Korean official.

As it turns out, though, North Korea’s uranium resources are probably paltry, which means that we may be able to locate and monitor a relatively small number of sites. That, in turn could help us get a better grip on the North’s ability to produce reactor fuel and bombs. Thanks to the collapse of the Soviet Union, scholars now have access to internal Soviet and Warsaw Pact documents describing North Korea’s efforts to seek assistance in developing its uranium resources.

North Korea asked the Soviet Union for help in the field of the uranium prospecting as early as 1948. The request is described in an internal Soviet memo, translated by the Wilson Center’s North Korea International Documentation Project, which suggests such prospecting be postponed.[2] North Korea kept bugging the Soviets, though. By the early 1960s, the Soviets had completed a survey, but concluded North Korean uranium deposits were too poor for exploitation. Two Soviet specialists told their Ambassador in Pyongyang: “Korean uranium ore is not rich and is very scarce. The mining and processing of such ore will be extremely expensive for the Koreans.”[3] As it turns out, the North Koreans didn’t care that the uranium was extremely expensive. If you wonder whether Kim Il Sung wanted a bomb or not, his abiding interest in a domestic source of uranium at any cost is a hint.

The memos also include technical information. One memo, reporting on a 1979 North Korean effort to acquire uranium mining equipment from Czechoslovakia (hey, remember Czechoslovakia?) states: “[T]he DPRK has two important uranium quarries. In one of these two places, the uranium content of the ore is 0.26 percent, while in the other it is 0.086 percent.”[4] Based on other information released by the Soviet Union, it appears these mines are near Pakchon and Pyongsan, with Pyongsan likely having the higher quality ore.[5] In 1985, the North Koreans were still pressing the Soviets to speed up prospecting for new sources of ore.

In 1992, the DPRK declared, as part of its Comprehensive Safeguards Agreement with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), two uranium mines (the Wolbisan Uranium Mine and the Pyongsan Uranium Mine) and two mills for concentration (the Pakchon Uranium Concentrate Pilot Plant and the Pyongsan Uranium Concentrate Plant). While there are naturally questions about whether this declaration was complete, the claim of two uranium mines appears consistent with the Soviet surveys.

The IAEA also released videos of Hans Blix, the former Swedish Foreign Minister and then the head of the international organization, visiting both mills. I was able to use the videos to locate both mills and, as best I can tell, the location of these sites was not in the public domain until now:

Pakchon Uranium Concentrate Pilot Plant (39°42’34.73″N, 125°34’8.57″E)
Pyongsan Uranium Concentrate Plant (38°19’4.56″N, 126°25’57.43″E)

Figure 1. North Korea’s Uranium Concentrate Plants.

Figure 2. Overview of the Pyongsan Uranium Mine and Uranium Concentration Plant.

Pyongsan Uranium Mine and Mill

Pyongsan is believed to the most important uranium mine and mill in North Korea. (The other mill, near Pakchon, was described as a pilot facility.) Commercial satellite imagery from Digital Globe and Airbus Defense and Space show the layout of the mine and mill that turns uranium ore into yellowcake. The mine is connected to the mill by a conveyor belt that brings uranium ore into the mill for processing. The various structures within the mill are connected to one another allowing the uranium to be processed in stages (see figure 2 for schematic of a typical mill). Finally, the mill is connected to a large pond where tailings are dumped.

Figure 3. Schematic of a typical mill.

While North Korea has operated the facility intermittently over the past decade, new spoil and tailings appeared sometime between 2006-2011, suggesting that the North resumed uranium mining and milling during that period after what appears to have been a lull of many years. This uranium may have been fabricated into new fuel rods for the 5 MWe gas graphite reactor. North Korea had only 2,500 fresh fuel rods for this reactor—less than a third of a full load. (North Korea also had 12,000 rods that had been fabricated for the never completed 50 MWth reactor, which could be converted into reactor fuel.) The uranium might also have been converted into uranium hexafluoride (UF₆) that could be enriched to build nuclear weapons, either at the enrichment plant that the North constructed and revealed to Americans visiting Yongbyon in 2010 or at a covert site. Based on the size of the spoil pile and the tailings, it may be possible to make a rough estimate of how much uranium was recovered, but this estimate would be very approximate. However, North Korea seems to be mining more uranium to meet what may be increasing needs for fuel or bombs.

Many more details here with satellite imagery.

Conclusion

Pyongyang appears to be modernizing a key facility associated with the production of uranium yellowcake. This suggests that North Korea intends to mine and mill a significant amount of uranium that could serve as fuel for expanding its nuclear weapons stockpile, as well as for providing fuel for future light-water reactors that may be in the planning phase. Mapping and monitoring North Korea’s infrastructure for producing uranium can help estimate the size of North Korea’s uranium enrichment program which is otherwise shrouded in secrecy.

Obama Prematurely Removed Trade Restrictions with Iran

Posted on August 12, 2015August 12, 2015 by Denise Simon

It must have been some waivers that government officials signed that allowed renewed trade with Iran despite no trade under the Bush Administration and in most cases going back to the Carter administration.

Full details on lifted sanctions with Iran is found here.

The exception for the waiver appears to be under the guise of ‘humanitarian reasons’. So exactly how would Marlboro/Philip Morris or Coca Cola exactly be allowed for humanitarian reasons? I don’t know either but read on….the story gets worse.

U.S. Boosts Trade to Iran, Despite Sanctions

WSJ:

The Standard Chartered affair has laid bare a transatlantic rift between the U.S. and Europe over Iran sanctions.

U.K.-listed bank Standard Chartered agreed Tuesday to pay a $340 million sum to a New York regulator to settle allegations it broke U.S. money-laundering laws in handling Iranian customers’ transactions.

The allegations, which were made public by the New York state Department of Financial Services last week, led some U.K. political figures to accuse the regulator of seeking to undermine London as a financial center.

Now there are more grumblings this side of the pond as European companies realize they suffer more from recent Iran restrictions than their U.S. counterparts–and that such advantage may stem in part from better corporate access to decision-makers in Washington than in Brussels.

The Wall Street Journal reported Thursday morning that U.S. exports to Iran were increasing despite mounting enmity between both sides, while European Union exports to Tehran were falling.

Oral-B mouth wash, made by Procter & Gamble Co. of Cincinnati, Ohio, is still on display at local corner shops in Iran—the company confirms it still sells to Iran legally. Coca-Cola Co.’s Coke soft drink is sold in cafes and supermarkets. The Atlanta-based multinational says its syrup is still being legally exported to Iran and bottled by Khoshgovar Co., whose commercial manager Valid Nejati confirmed the information. “There have been no issues” with receiving payments, a Coca-Cola spokesman said.

To be sure, the penalties enforced against European banks for breaching sanctions on Iran were not focused on trade in foodstuffs, as a U.S Treasury official points out.

But European companies say their banks are increasingly refusing to handle letters of credit because they fear they could run into trouble in the U.S. because financial sanctions there have become so complex.

By contrast, the growth of U.S. sales to Iran largely stems from a decision in October to replace the previous cumbersome approval process with a blanket license for non-sanctioned food items, says Michael Burton, a Washington-based sanctions lawyer at Arent Fox.

While some European cereal traders say they can’t find banks to issue letters of credit for Iran, the U.S. this year restarted wheat exports to the Islamic Republic after a two-year gap.

As of last year, the vast majority of U.S. goods were medical preparations or equipment—31%– , pulpwood and woodpulp—25% and agricultural goods and food–17%

But U.S. permits even extend to goods such as cigarettes, though they are not covered by the blanket license and are subject to more stringent control than foodstuffs.

In April, Philip Morris International Inc. obtained a specific licence from the U.S. Treasury, “to sell cigarettes to customers for import into Iran,” a spokesman for the company said, although it has yet to make use of the authorization.

But expect no miracle to explain why Iranians may be allowed to buy Marlboros but not drive the new Peugeot in the future. To put it simply: when it comes to pleading its case with decision-makers, Corporate America does it better.

Mr. Burton also said U.S. companies benefit from well established channels in Washington to plead for sanctions exemptions, while their European peers, “don’t have the same mechanism to lobby the EU bureaucracy.”

For instance, Washington-based lobby group USA*Engage has successfully campaigned for the extension of a humanitarian exemption for food, agricultural products and medical goods from Iran sanctions.

Richard Sawaya, the director of USA* Engage, said “we have been in perpetual conversation with lawmakers and the Treasury,” on keeping the exemption. The primary aim of USA*Engage is humanitarian, but it can also benefit U.S. companies, Mr. Sawaya said, adding its focusis not limited to Iran.

USA*Engage is an offshoot of the Washington-based National Foreign Trade Council, whose board includes Procter & Gamble. More reading here.

*** Don’t go away yet…now due to the Iran deal concluded, the United States is on the hook to help Iran sell its oil.

Washington, 7 August (Argus) — The US administration is taking steps to ensure that Tehran’s oil customers can continue to purchase Iranian crude during an interim period before a nuclear agreement can be fully implemented and sanctions lifted.

The US Treasury and State departments late today issued guidance for how they will handle Iranian oil and petrochemical exports in the wake of a 14 July agreement the US and its P5 + 1 negotiating partners reached with Tehran. That accord swaps sanctions relief for nuclear concessions.

During the nuclear negotiations, Iran’s oil exports have been limited to 1mn-1.1mn b/d, down from 2.5mn b/d before the sanctions were imposed in 2012. Six countries — China, India, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and Turkey — buy oil from Iran.

Under US law, President Barack Obama is authorized to impose sanctions on banks in countries that refuse to reduce their purchases of Iranian oil significantly. The US is pledging not to impose sanctions on financial institutions in those countries. And the US will not target non-US companies that help facilitate those purchases.

Obama on 5 August questioned the feasibility of trying to cut Beijing off from the US financial system, since the Chinese “happen to be major purchasers of our debt.” He warned such an effort “could trigger severe disruptions in our economy” and raise questions about the dollar’s role as the world’s reserve currency.

The US also will allow 14 companies to export petrochemicals from Iran. US administration officials estimate it will take six to nine months before compliance with the nuclear provisions can be assured and sanctions can be lifted.

The Republican-controlled Congress is scheduled to vote by 17 September on a resolution of disapproval to demonstrate their unhappiness with the nuclear agreement. That measure is likely to pass, prompting President Barack Obama to veto the resolution. Obama will need 34 Democrats in the Senate or a third of the House of Representatives to sustain his veto.

But Obama is suffering Democratic defections. Yesterday, New York senator Charles Schumer, who in 2017 is expected to become the Democrats’ new leader in the Senate, said yesterday he will oppose the deal.

Iran produced 2.88mn b/d in July, up from 2.85mn b/d in June, making it Opec’s third largest oil producer. Iranian officials have said repeatedly their oil sector needs $150bn-$200bn in new investment. US officials estimate

California: Pay Bribe for Drivers License

Posted on August 12, 2015August 12, 2015 by Denise Simon

California Governor Jerry Brown is perpetuating a national security crisis and yet no one in any Federal capacity is even considering discipline, a memo or other consequence.

Governor Brown opened the pathway for 1.4 million illegals to get a drivers license while others pay a bribe in the case they cannot read English or pass a written test.

In 2010, the illegal phenomena began by the Obama administration when it came to omitting background investigations of illegals and the trucking industry took notice.

Eleven employees of New York’s Department of Motor Vehicles have received indictments for participation in a fraudulent CDL testing scheme.

Brooklyn’s U.S. District Court issued indictments Oct. 24 for 11 DMV security workers at five NYC-area centers. Applicants allegedly paid $1,800 to $2,500 for test answers and escort assistance through the DMV process.

There was and continues to be a mission to stop illegal trucking with the mission statement noted here.

California DMV employees allegedly traded cash for licenses

FNC: At least 100 commercial truck drivers paid up to $5,000 each to bribe California Department of Motor Vehicles employees for illegal licenses, federal authorities said on Tuesday.

Officials said up to 23 traffic accidents could be related to the fraud, though there were no fatalities.

Emma Klem, a 45-year-old Salinas DMV employee, and trucking school owner Kulwidner Dosanjh Singh, 58, both pleaded guilty Tuesday to commit bribery and identity fraud, U.S. Attorney Benjamin Wagner said.

Two other DMV employees in Salinas and Sacramento and two other Central Valley trucking school operators have been arrested on similar charges.

The employees changed computer records to falsely show that drivers had passed written and behind-the-wheel tests after they were bribed by the owners of three truck-driving schools between June 2011 and March 2015, according to court documents.

“Individuals who use their positions to obtain commercial drivers’ licenses for unskilled and untested drivers jeopardize our nation’s security and safety. Allowing unqualified drivers to operate heavy commercial trucks on our highways is honestly quite chilling,” said Carol Webster, acting assistant special agent in charge of the U.S. Homeland Security Investigations office in Sacramento.

DMV examiners Andrew Kimura, 30, of Sacramento and Robert Turchin, 65, of Salinas were indicted last week on charges of conspiracy, bribery and fraud in connection with identification documents, along with trucking school owners Pavitar Dosangh Singh, 55, of Sacramento, and Mangal Gill, 55, of San Ramon.

Pavitar Singh and Kimura have pleaded not guilty, while Turchin and Gill are expected to be arraigned on Friday in U.S. District Court in Sacramento.

Kimura’s attorney, William Portanova, said his client is a good person caught in an unfortunate situation, “but we’re going to work through it and help this young man.”

Class A commercial drivers’ licenses are required to operate trucks, including 18-wheel cargo semitrailers. They are tougher to obtain than regular driver licenses. Applicants must pass both a written test and a behind-the-wheel test that is offered at a limited number of DMV locations, including Salinas.

The DMV has canceled or revoked more than 600 licenses that are potentially linked to fraud, including 100 that were pinpointed by investigators, DMV chief investigator Frank Alvarez said. Drivers can retake the tests, sometimes after a hearing, and Wagner said none are likely to be prosecuted during the ongoing probe because investigators are targeting the organizers.

It is the latest in several similar bribery schemes in recent years, including a Fresno case involving 15 people that resulted in a sentence of more than five years in federal prison for the DMV ringleader in 2013.

Alvarez said his department is considering additional safeguards to prevent employees from altering computer records, and it’s attempting to better screen its 10,000 employees and the way it issues commercial drivers’ licenses as it tries to prevent more bribery and fraud crimes.

The charges filed in federal court in Sacramento allege three separate conspiracies. Two of them purportedly involved Gill, who owns trucking schools in Fremont, Lathrop, Fresno and Salinas.

The third involved Pavitar Singh, owner of a school in Sacramento. His attorney, Anthony Capozzi of Fresno, and an attorney for Klem did not return telephone messages.

Christopher Morales of San Francisco, attorney for Kulwinder Singh, said his client is a good family man who recognizes that he erred when he “took shortcuts” to help members of the Indian community who had trouble passing the tests.

His client and Klem face up to five years in prison when they are sentenced Nov. 17.

No attorneys were listed for the two defendants who have yet to appear in court