Category Archives: Trump Administration

2003, Sheila Jackson Lee’s Position on Immigration

Posted on by

Actually, I was researching something else that is part of the same topic and came across this Congressional hearing from 2003. Congresswoman, Sheila Jackson Lee offered her opening statement to the hearing. Read it here. Take note, I did.

***

OPENING STATEMENT
The Honorable John N. Hostettler, a Representative in Congress From the State of Indiana, and Chairman, Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security, and Claims

The Honorable Sheila Jackson Lee, a Representative in Congress From the State of Texas, and Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security, and Claims

The Honorable Lamar Smith, a Representative in Congress From the State of Texas

WITNESSES

Mr. John Feinblatt, Criminal Justice Coordinator, City of New York
Oral Testimony
Prepared Statement

Mr. Michael J. Cutler, former Senior Special Agent, New York District Office, Immigration and Naturalization Service
Oral Testimony
Prepared Statement

Mr. John Nickell, Officer, Houston Police Department
Oral Testimony
Prepared Statement

 Page 6       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

Ms. Leslye E. Orloff, Immigrant Women Program, NOW Legal Defense and Education Fund
Oral Testimony
Prepared Statement

LETTERS, STATEMENTS, ETC., SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING

Executive Order 124, City Policy Concerning Aliens, New York City

General Order, Houston Police Department

Immigration and Naturalization Service Memo

APPENDIX

Material Submitted for the Hearing Record

The Honorable Sheila Jackson Lee, a Representative in Congress From the State of Texas, and Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security, and Claims

The Honorable John Conyers, Jr., a Representative in Congress From the State of Michigan, and Ranking Member, Committee on the Judiciary

NEW YORK CITY’S ‘SANCTUARY’ POLICY AND THE EFFECT OF SUCH POLICIES ON PUBLIC SAFETY, LAW ENFORCEMENT, AND IMMIGRATION

 Page 7       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 27, 2003

House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Immigration,
Border Security, and Claims,
Committee on the Judiciary,
Washington, DC.

The Subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 9:07 a.m., in Room 2237, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. John Hostettler [Chairman of the Subcommittee] presiding.

Mr. HOSTETTLER. The Subcommittee will now come to order.

On December 19, 2002, a 42-year-old mother of two was abducted and forced by her assailants into a hideout near some railroad tracks in Queens, New York. She was brutally assaulted before being rescued by a New York Police Department canine unit.

The NYPD arrested five aliens in connection with that assault. According to records that the Judiciary Committee has received from the INS, four of those aliens entered the United States illegally. Three of those four had extensive arrest histories in New York City. The fifth alien, a lawful permanent resident, also had a criminal history prior to the December 19, 2002, attack.

Despite the criminal histories of the four aliens, however, it does not appear from the records that the Committee has received that the NYPD told the INS about these aliens until after the December 19 attack.

 Page 8       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC


These heinous crimes prompted extensive public discussion of whether New York City police were barred from disclosing immigration information to the INS, a policy that may have prevented the removal of these aliens prior to the December 19 attack.

Some suggested that the only reason that the three illegal aliens were in the United States, despite their extensive arrest histories, was because the NYPD officers who arrested these aliens previously were barred by a so-called ”sanctuary” policy from contacting the INS. That policy, critics claimed, prevented NYPD officers from contacting the INS when they arrested an illegal alien.

We will examine New York City’s policy on the NYPD’s disclosure of immigration information to the INS. New York’s Executive Order, or E.O. 124, barred line officers from communicating directly with the INS about criminal aliens. That executive order was issued by Mayor Ed Koch in 1989 and reissued by Mayors Dinkins and Giuliani.

Two Federal provisions, both of which were passed in 1996, preempted this executive order. In particular, section 642 of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act bars States and localities from prohibiting their officers from sending immigration information to the INS. New York City challenged that provision in Federal court and lost.

We will examine whether New York City continued E.O. 124, amended it, or scrapped it altogether. We will also examine what guidance the city has sent to its officers on the street about reporting criminal aliens to the INS.

 Page 9       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC


At this hearing, the Subcommittee will also explore what effect any New York City sanctuary policy had on the fact that the three illegal aliens with arrest histories had not been deported. We will also examine the INS’s responsiveness to the information that it receives from New York City about arrested criminal aliens if, in fact, the INS does receive such information. In addition, we will examine similar policies that other localities have implemented.

In particular, Officer John Nickell of the Houston Police Department will discuss that department’s policy concerning officer contacts with the INS about criminal aliens. That policy bars Houston officers from contacting the INS about suspected illegal aliens, unless the suspected illegal alien is arrested on a separate criminal charge other than a class of misdemeanors ”and the officer knows the prisoner is an illegal alien.”

Significantly, despite this knowledge, requirement for contacting the INS, Houston officers are barred from asking arrested criminal suspects their citizenship status.

The Subcommittee will assess the effect that such policies have had on law enforcement, immigration enforcement, and public safety as well as their consistency with Federal law.

Joining us today are four witnesses. First of all, John Feinblatt is the criminal justice coordinator for the City of New York. He received his law degree from Columbus School of Law at Catholic University, and his bachelor of arts degree from Wesleyan University in Connecticut. He has served as a criminal defense attorney in New York, executive director of victim services, and director of the Midtown Community Court and the Center for Court Innovation.

 Page 10       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC


Michael Cutler is a retired senior special agent with the Immigration and Naturalization Service, New York District Office. He received his bachelor of arts degree from Brooklyn College and the City University of New York in 1971 before joining the INS that same year as an immigration inspector at JFK airport. He also served as a green card adjudicator before becoming an INS criminal investigator, working with the Israeli national police and the FBI.

He was the INS representative to the Unified Intelligence Division of the DEA in New York. Finally, in 1991, Mr. Cutler was assigned to the Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force. Mr. Cutler last testified before this Subcommittee as a witness for the minority in March 2002.

John Nickell is an officer with the Houston Police Department. Officer Nickell has served with the Houston Police Department for 11 years, specializing in DWI detection and drug recognition enforcement. He served 6 years in the United States Marine Corps and is a Desert Storm veteran.

Ms. Leslye Orloff is the director of the Immigrant Women Program for the National Organization for Women’s Legal Defense and Education Fund. She received her law degree from UCLA, and her bachelor of arts degree is from Brandeis University. She has previously worked as the director of the Latino Project at the George Washington University National Law Center, the director of the Clinica Legal Latina, and director of Ayuda’s national policy program. She has also written and testified extensively.

Before I go to the witnesses, I would like to now turn to the Ranking Member of the Subcommittee, Ms. Jackson Lee, for any opening remarks she may have.

 Page 11       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC


Ms. JACKSON LEE. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

As we begin the 108th Congress with the very first hearing for our Subcommittee, I want to express to you my belief that we’ll have an opportunity to work together and work together on issues and commonality for the good of this Nation. And as well, hopefully, to reflect the values that we both have, though they may be distinctive, that we do have the responsibility to govern and oversee the very effective policies of immigration laws here in the United States, many of which are reminding us that we are a Nation of immigrants as we are a Nation of laws.

And so I look forward to the challenges that we will have, and I hope that as we proceed, even in our different perspectives, we’ll have an opportunity to be able to serve this Country and present very effective resolutions to some problems that we will face.

This morning, obviously, we are pursuing an issue that needs addressing. And certainly, we are told of accounts, many accounts, that deal with immigrant issues and the criminal system.

In particular, we are aware of an incident that occurred in New York—Queens, New York, in particular—that an alleged group of young and homeless men surrounded a couple sitting on a bench in an isolated part of Queens, New York. And the allegations of a criminal incident that occurred where they beat and robbed the man and raped the woman.

 Page 12       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Apparently, it was alleged that four of the men were undocumented aliens from Mexico who had been arrested previously.

One of the questions for this hearing, as was stated, is whether a New York City policy prevented the police involved in the previous arrest from reporting the men to the Immigration and Naturalization Service.

The policy in question is set forth in Executive Order No. 124, which was issued by New York Mayor Ed Koch on August 7, 1989. It is entitled, ”City Policy Concerning Aliens.”

[The New York Executive Order follows:]

EO124A.eps

EO124B.eps

EO124C.eps

This order prohibits the transmission of information about an alien to the Immigration Service. But the prohibition has three exceptions, one of which is for the situation in which the alien is suspected of engaging in criminal activity. And I repeat that again. There is an exception. The police did have discretion.

This order, therefore, did not prevent the police from reporting the homeless men to the Immigration Service when they were arrested previously. The pertinent issue regarding that case is whether New York Police Department should have been required by Federal law to report the homeless men to the Immigration Service.

 Page 13       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC


I believe it is imperative to assess the challenges that local police have. They have enormous challenges. And so the question is whether or not you add to them the responsibility of enforcing immigration law.

But when we ask that question, we have to look to the issue of whether or not, by definition, immigration equates to either terrorism or criminal activity.

I think the statistics would prove that that is not the case, so discretion is appropriate. That means that when there is suggestion of criminal activity, when there is any activity—whether it be misdemeanor level or otherwise—and they are engaged in a criminal activity, discretion does come about.

We have to realize that our immigrants do many things. They work for us. They live in our communities. They provide police officers with insight and information about criminal activity going on in their particular communities. They speak, sometimes, two languages. If they’ve learned the English language, which they will and eventually do, and therefore are able to provide information because they are bilingual or maybe even multilingual.

Immigration law is a complicated body of law that requires extensive training and expertise. It is also not a body of only criminal law or criminal law at all. It is a civilian body of law. It is a law that deals with immigrants accessing the process of citizenship.

Local law enforcement officials do not have the training and expertise that is necessary to determine who is presently lawfully in the country and who is not.

 Page 14       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC


Community-based policing is one of the most powerful law enforcement tools available. I know for a fact that it is utilized in New York. I know for a fact it is utilized in Houston. It is effective.

Police get to understand and know the community, and people, by their very nature of wanting to be law-abiding—no matter who they are, immigrant or citizen—come to respect and admire the police and provide them with information to help them solve cases and problems.

By developing strong ties with local communities, police departments are able to obtain valuable information that helps them to fight a crime, even in a bilingual immigrant community or a single-language immigrant community. The development of community-based policing has been widely recognized as an effective tool for keeping kids off drugs, combating gang violence, and reducing crime rates in neighborhoods around the country.

In immigrant communities, it is particularly difficult for the police to establish the relationships that are the foundations for such successful police work. Many immigrants come from countries in which people are afraid of police who may be corrupt or even violent, and the prospect of being reported to the Immigration Service would be further reason for distrusting the police here in the United States of America.

In some cities, criminals have exploited the fear that immigrant communities have of all law enforcement officials, and certainly that should not be the case. For instance, in Durham, North Carolina, thieves told their victims in a community of migrant workers and new immigrants that if they called the police they would be deported, and they may be—may have been under legitimate agricultural visas and provisions to be in this Country.

 Page 15       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC


Local police officers have found that people are being robbed multiple times and are not reporting the crimes because of such fear instilled by robbers. These immigrants are left vulnerable to crimes of all sorts, not just robbery.

In 1998, Elena Gonzalez, an immigrant in New Jersey, was found murdered in the basement of her apartment. Friends of the woman said that the suspected murderer, her former boyfriend, threatened to report her to the INS if she did not do what she was told.

We realize that there are sex slaves. There are young women who are brought into this country and held for months and years at a time, because I know that they are fearful of the police as well.

Many communities find it difficult financially to support a police force with the personnel and equipment necessary to perform regular police work. Requiring State and local police forces to report to the Immigration Service would be, I believe, an imbalanced, misdirected use of these limited resources.

Remember, it is important to note that the police have discretion, that as they encourage and become familiar and involved with the immigrant community, as the police forces are diversified with Hispanics, African Americans, Asians, individuals from the Muslim community, Arab community—those are individuals who are men and women who believe in upholding the law.

Let them become familiar with these neighborhoods, and I can assure you that crime will come down and problems will be solved.

 Page 16       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC


The Immigration Service has limited resources, yes. But as we look toward this new year—the Homeland Security Department, the Justice Department—we know that we’ll be refining these resources and adding training to these particular law enforcement agencies as we give more dollars to the first responders.

Let us be reminded of the terrible, horrific act of the snipers here in this region and the information that was important that was given to solve those problems by immigrants who were first allegedly targeted as the perpetrators, and it was not the case.

The immigrant service does not have the resources it needs to deport dangerous criminals, prevent persons from unlawfully entering or remaining in the United States, and we must give them those resources. And we need to have the INS with the resources that it needs to enforce immigration laws in the interior of the country.

That is what we will be working on. That is an important responsibility, and that is a responsibility that I support.

Having to respond to every State and local police officer’s report of someone who appears to be an illegal alien would prevent the Immigration Service from properly prioritizing its efforts and working to ensure that its major work of getting those dangerously in our Country deported would be delayed.

Local police can and should report immigrants to the immigration service in many situations. I encourage them to do so. With that kind of process and policy, we can work collectively together, keeping our responsibilities as a Federal Government and keeping our responsibilities to our local constituents in the work that the local official should be doing. The decision to contact Immigration Service, however, should be a matter of police discretion and not a Federal law decision.

 Page 17       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC


I would simply say, Mr. Chairman, that this will be an important hearing.

I welcome Mr. Nickell to this particular hearing, and he certainly is a very able representative of the Houston Police Department, of which I count many of them as my friends.

And I want to acknowledge publicly the greatest respect I have for the great work that you do.

And I know that as I listen to you, I will be attentive and certainly know that the police department in my community has been able to work within the laws of this land, with the Federal laws as they are, and your laws using your discretion, your expertise, and of course, your commitment to the community as the basis of serving us.

Thank you very much for your service.

Mr. HOSTETTLER. Thank you, Ms. Jackson Lee.

Read the full testimony from the hearing here.

Complicating the China Trade Talks, Taiwan

Posted on by

Since 1972, the United States has had a policy position titled the ‘One China Policy‘. This policy regarded that Taiwan was part of China. Since 1972, conditions have changed dramatically where Taiwan wants complete independence and should have it. China is now prepared for war to halt that independence move and it could snare the United States into a military conflict.

Without any fanfare, President Trump signed into law the Asia Reassurance Initiative Act of 2018 on New Year’s Eve. As a result of this new law, China’s President Xi told his top military authority to take responsibility for preparing and waging war.

Meanwhile, as a result of the detention of Meng Wanzhou, the CFO of Huawei in Canada and is to be prepared for extradition to the United States, a travel advisory has been issued by the U.S. State Department for Americans traveling in China for either business or pleasure.

Even more importantly, President Trump has taken a harder line on Chinese foreign investment in the United States….finally. Remember it was CFIUS that gave us Uranium One. So, with this harder line, Chinese investors planted in Silicon Valley are bailing out. Silicon Valley is complaining.

Washington demonstrated its tougher stance even before the new law was passed, when Trump in March blocked a $117 billion hostile bid by Singapore-based Broadcom Ltd (AVGO.O) to acquire Qualcomm Inc (QCOM.O) of San Diego. CFIUS said the takeover would weaken the United States in the race to develop next-generation wireless technology.

The above is an example and for more context, go here.

Just in the past few days, a U.S. guided missile destroyer traveled through the South China Sea, quite near the Paracel Island chain. The USS McCampbell did so under the ‘freedom of navigation operation essentially challenging China and China has responded by dispatching military ships and aircraft identifying the U.S. flag and to issue warnings.

China has constructed islands in the region and made them into military bases. Further, Vietnam along with other nations including Malaysia, Taiwan, the Philippines, Indonesia and Brunei also have laid claims to the disputed islands.

USS McCampbell | 121015-N-TG831-208 SOUTH CHINA SEA (Oct ...

As part of the law that was signed by President Trump, a particular section is noted as follows with regard to Taiwan:

SEC. 209.Commitment to Taiwan.

(a) United States commitment to Taiwan.—It is the policy of the United States—

(1) to support the close economic, political, and security relationship between Taiwan and the United States;

(2) to faithfully enforce all existing United States Government commitments to Taiwan, consistent with the Taiwan Relations Act of 1979 (Public Law 96–8), the 3 joint communiques, and the Six Assurances agreed to by President Ronald Reagan in July 1982; and

(3) to counter efforts to change the status quo and to support peaceful resolution acceptable to both sides of the Taiwan Strait.

(b) Arms sales to Taiwan.—The President should conduct regular transfers of defense articles to Taiwan that are tailored to meet the existing and likely future threats from the People’s Republic of China, including supporting the efforts of Taiwan to develop and integrate asymmetric capabilities, as appropriate, including mobile, survivable, and cost-effective capabilities, into its military forces.

(c) Travel.—The President should encourage the travel of highlevel United States officials to Taiwan, in accordance with the Taiwan Travel Act (Public Law 115–135).

When it comes to freedom of navigation in the new law, this is noted:

SEC. 213.Freedom of navigation and overflight; promotion of international law.

(a) Freedom of navigation.—It is the policy of the United States—

(1) to conduct, as part of its global Freedom of Navigation Program, regular freedom of navigation, and overflight operations in the Indo-Pacific region, in accordance with applicable international law; and

(2) to promote genuine multilateral negotiations to peacefully resolve maritime disputes in the South China Sea, in accordance with applicable international law.

(b) Joint Indo-Pacific diplomatic strategy.—It is the sense of Congress that the President should develop a diplomatic strategy that includes working with United States allies and partners to conduct joint maritime training and freedom of navigation operations in the Indo-Pacific region, including the East China Sea and the South China Sea, in support of a rules-based international system benefitting all countries.

Pray for peace, prepare for war. Imagine how complicated those trade talks really are.

 

US Treasury’s Evidence Iran and Russia Cooperating in Syria

Posted on by

The U.S. Treasury Department sanctioned nine targets last week related to an illicit oil network between Iran and Russia.

“We are acting against a complex scheme Iran and Russia have used to bolster the [Bashar] Assad regime and generate funds for Iranian malign activity,” said Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin. “Central Bank of Iran officials continue to exploit the international financial system, and in this case even used a company whose name suggests a trade in humanitarian goods as a tool to facilitate financial transfers supporting this oil scheme.

“The United States is committed to imposing a financial toll on Iran, Russia and others for their efforts to solidify Assad’s authoritarian rule, as well as disrupt the Iranian regime’s funding of terrorist organizations,” he added.

Experts said this move was crucial in combating the Iranian threat.

“The scheme uncovered by the Treasury Department shows just how closely Iran and Russia are cooperating to not only help prop up the Assad regime financially, but to help finance the leading players in Iran’s global terrorism,” Boris Zilberman of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies told JNS. “So when Russia talks about cooperating with the United States to counter-terrorism this is empty rhetoric plain and simple.”

“As this scheme shows, Russia works hand in hand with some of the very terror groups we seek to counter,” he continued. “Russia is not a partner in our counter-terrorism efforts, but is, in fact, an adversary.”

“There are already sanctions on Russian arms exporters, but the United States should continue to uncover and sanction schemes such as this,” added Zilberman. “The administration could also consider, in conjunction with Israel, striking destabilizing arms transfers by Hezbollah.

“It’s an important step, and highlights just how much [Russian President Vladimir] Putin has supported Iran, Hezbollah and Assad, and how committed he is, despite hopes that Putin’s partnership with Iran is skin-deep short-lived,” the Washington Institute for Near East Policy’s Anna Borshchevskaya told JNS.

“Hard to tell if this pressure will succeed without being incorporated into a broader strategy,” she continued. “It comes as no surprise that the Kremlin said earlier this month it will continue to help Iran trade oil. It’s possible to imagine Moscow setting up another intermediary to continue shipping oil to the Syrian regime, but nonetheless, this is an important step.”

The State Department joined Treasury in sending a message to the Islamic Republic.

Islamic State crisis: US hits IS oil targets in Syria ...

“The sanctions levied today directly target the Iranian regime’s exploitation of the international financial system to hide revenue streams it uses to fund terrorist activity, provide support for sectarian militias responsible for abuses against civilian populations and destabilize the region,” said the department in a statement. “The Iranian regime, Iranian-commanded forces inside Syria and the proxy terrorist groups it supports such as those targeted today continue to foment instability to extend their malign influence. These actions by the Iranian and Assad regimes undermine the legitimate processes to resolve the conflict in Syria.”

This development preceded Secretary of State Pompeo blasting Iranian President Hassan Rouhani on Monday for calling Israel a “cancerous tumor” and a “fake regime.”

“This is a dangerous and irresponsible step that will further deepen Iran’s isolation,” warned Pompeo.

“The Iranian regime is no friend of America or Israel when they repeatedly call for the death of millions, including Muslims,” he added. “The Iranian people know better and do not agree with their government, which has badly represented them to the world for 39 years. The people have suffered under this tyranny for far too long.”

*** It is quite right that Iran is no friend of the United States or Israel. That Obama/Kerry nuclear deal was supposed to lay the groundwork for Iran to be a good citizen of the world….read on…not so much.

***

Two Iranian Men Indicted for Deploying Ransomware to Extort Hospitals, Municipalities, and Public Institutions, Causing Over $30 Million in Losses

A federal grand jury returned an indictment unsealed today in Newark, New Jersey charging Faramarz Shahi Savandi, 34, and Mohammad Mehdi Shah Mansouri, 27, both of Iran, in a 34-month-long international computer hacking and extortion scheme involving the deployment of sophisticated ransomware, announced Deputy Attorney General Rod J. Rosenstein, Assistant Attorney General Brian A. Benczkowski of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division, U.S. Attorney Craig Carpenito for the District of New Jersey and Executive Assistant Director Amy S. Hess of the FBI.

The six-count indictment alleges that Savandi and Mansouri, acting from inside Iran, authored malware, known as “SamSam Ransomware,” capable of forcibly encrypting data on the computers of victims.  According to the indictment, beginning in December 2015, Savandi and Mansouri would then allegedly access the computers of victim entities without authorization through security vulnerabilities, and install and execute the SamSam Ransomware on the computers, resulting in the encryption of data on the victims’ computers.  These more than 200 victims included hospitals, municipalities, and public institutions, according to the indictment, including the City of Atlanta, Georgia; the City of Newark, New Jersey; the Port of San Diego, California; the Colorado Department of Transportation; the University of Calgary in Calgary, Alberta, Canada; and six health care-related entities: Hollywood Presbyterian Medical Center in Los Angeles, California; Kansas Heart Hospital in Wichita, Kansas; Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings, more commonly known as LabCorp, headquartered in Burlington, North Carolina; MedStar Health, headquartered in Columbia, Maryland; Nebraska Orthopedic Hospital now known as OrthoNebraska Hospital, in Omaha, Nebraska and Allscripts Healthcare Solutions Inc., headquartered in Chicago, Illinois.

According to the indictment, Savandi and Mansouri would then extort victim entities by demanding a ransom paid in the virtual currency Bitcoin in exchange for decryption keys for the encrypted data, collecting ransom payments from victim entities that paid the ransom, and exchanging the Bitcoin proceeds into Iranian rial using Iran-based Bitcoin exchangers.  The indictment alleges that, as a result of their conduct, Savandi and Mansouri have collected over $6 million USD in ransom payments to date, and caused over $30 million USD in losses to victims.

“The Iranian defendants allegedly used hacking and malware to cause more than $30 million in losses to more than 200 victims,” said Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein.  “According to the indictment, the hackers infiltrated computer systems in 10 states and Canada and then demanded payment. The criminal activity harmed state agencies, city governments, hospitals, and countless innocent victims.”

“The allegations in the indictment unsealed today—the first of its kind—outline an Iran-based international computer hacking and extortion scheme that engaged in 21st-century digital blackmail,” said Assistant Attorney General Benczkowski.  “These defendants allegedly used ransomware to infect the computer networks of municipalities, hospitals, and other key public institutions, locking out the computer owners, and then demanded millions of dollars in payments from them. As today’s charges demonstrate, the Criminal Division and its law enforcement partners will relentlessly pursue cybercriminals who harm American citizens, businesses, and institutions, regardless of where those criminals may reside.”

“The defendants in this case developed and deployed the SamSam Ransomware in order to hold public and private entities hostage and then extort money from them,” said U.S. Attorney Carpenito.  “As the indictment in this case details, they started with a business in Mercer County and then moved on to major public entities, like the City of Newark, and healthcare providers, like the Hollywood Presbyterian Medical Center in Los Angeles and the Kansas Heart Hospital in Wichita—cravenly taking advantage of the fact that these victims depend on their computer networks to serve the public, the sick, and the injured without interruption.  The charges announced today show that the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of New Jersey will continue to act to disrupt such criminal acts, and identify those who are responsible for them, no matter where in the world they may seek to hide.”

“This indictment demonstrates the FBI’s continuous commitment to unmasking malicious actors behind the world’s most egregious cyberattacks,” said Executive Assistant Director Hess.  “By calling out those who threaten American systems, we expose criminals who hide behind their computer and launch attacks that threaten our public safety and national security.  The actions highlighted today, which represent a continuing trend of cyber criminal activity emanating from Iran, were particularly threatening, as they targeted public safety institutions, including U.S. hospital systems and governmental entities.  The FBI, with the assistance of our private sector and U.S. government partners, are sending a strong message that we will work together to investigate and hold all criminals accountable.”

Savandi and Mansouri are charged with one count of conspiracy to commit wire fraud, one count of conspiracy to commit fraud and related activity in connection with computers, two substantive counts of intentional damage to a protected computer and two substantive counts of transmitting a demand in relation to damaging a protected computer.

According to the indictment, Savandi and Mansouri created the first version of the SamSam Ransomware in December 2015, and created further refined versions in June and October 2017.  In addition to employing Iran-based Bitcoin exchangers, the indictment alleges that the defendants also utilized overseas computer infrastructure to commit their attacks.   Savandi and Mansouri would also use sophisticated online reconnaissance techniques (such as scanning for computer network vulnerabilities) and conduct online research in order to select and target potential victims, according to the indictment.  According to the indictment, the defendants would also disguise their attacks to appear like legitimate network activity.

To carry out their scheme, the indictment alleges that the defendants also employed the use of Tor, a computer network designed to facilitate anonymous communication over the internet.  According to the indictment, the defendants maximized the damage caused to victims by launching attacks outside regular business hours, when a victim would find it more difficult to mitigate the attack, and by encrypting backups of the victims’ computers.  This was intended to—and often did—cripple the regular business operations of the victims, according to the indictment.  The most recent ransomware attack against a victim alleged in the indictment took place on Sept. 25, 2018.

This case was investigated by the FBI’s Newark Field Office.  Senior Counsel William A. Hall Jr. of the Criminal Division’s Computer Crime and Intellectual Property Section (CCIPS) and Assistant U.S. Attorney and Chief of the Cybercrimes Unit Justin S. Herring of the District of New Jersey are prosecuting the case.  The Department thanks its law enforcement colleagues at the National Crime Agency (UK), West Yorkshire Police (UK), Calgary Police Service (Canada), and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police.  Significant assistance was provided by the Justice Department’s National Security Division and the Criminal Division’s Office of International Affairs.

Facts on CARA and Pueblo Sin Fronteras

Posted on by

In Spring 2018, hundreds of migrants from Central America approached the U.S.-Mexico border seeking asylum in the United States and threatening to enter illegally if their request was denied. Pueblo Sin Fronteras organized the caravan in conjunction with the CARA Family Detention Pro Bono Project.[24] [25] The CARA coalition consists of the Catholic Legal Immigration Network, the American Immigration Council, the Refugee and Immigrant Center for Education and Legal Services, and the American Immigration Lawyers Association, all groups advocating for legal status for illegal immigrants and expanded immigration overall.[26]  These organizations have been funded by a number of major left-of-center grantmaking foundations, including the Open Society Foundations, MacArthur Foundation, Ford Foundation, and Carnegie Corporation of New York. [27] The caravan eventually halted in Mexico City on April 4 instead of reaching the United States border.[28]

One year of CARA Pro Bono Project, thousands helped | CLINIC

In a press release released by Pueblo Sin Fronteras on March 23, 2018, the group “demand[ed]” the governments of Mexico and the United States “open the[ir] borders to us because we are as much citizens as the people of the counties where we are and/or travel.” Other demands were “that deportations, which destroy families, come to an end” and “that the U.S. government not end TPS [Temporary Protected Status] for those who need it.” [29] Temporary Protected Status is a status designated by the Secretary of Homeland Security which grants eligible foreign nationals protected status during “extraordinary and temporary conditions.”[30] The demands appear to violate U.S. law, which prohibits behavior by individuals that “encourages or induces an alien to come to, enter, or reside in the United States” illegally.[31]

Alex Mensing is an organizer and program coordinator for Pueblo Sin Fronteras and its affiliates. [34] Mensing has spent a significant amount of time with economic migrants in Central America and organizing illegal immigrant caravans to the United States.[35] According to a 2016 report by the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), Mensing was a staffer for the CARA Family Detention Project, a coalition of left-of-center organizations providing legal aid and representation to illegal immigrants in the United States.[36]

Irineo Mujica, an Arizona-based activist holding dual United States and Mexican citizenship, is a caravan organizer for Pueblo Sin Fronteras.[37] In October 2018, he was arrested by Mexican officials in Ciudad Hidalgo, Mexico, for his involvement in a pro-illegal immigration protest.[38]

Rodrigo Abeja is an activist and organizer for Pueblo Sin Fronteras. He has been involved in at least two caravans from Central America to the U.S. and Mexico.[39] [40] Abeja was identified in a 2013 article by the news group Vice as a representative for the Popular Assembly of Migrant Families, an left-wing organization based in Mexico which organizes migrants to the United States.[41]

Citations found here.

Know the other operatives….

In 2015 the Catholic Legal Immigration Network, the American Immigration Council, the Refugee and Immigrant Center for Education and Legal Services, and the American Immigration Lawyers Association, collectively known as CARA, joined forces in response to Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s (ICE) significant expansion of its family detention capacity. The opening of the “South Texas Family Residential Center” in Dilley, Texas – with an initial capacity of 480 beds and the potential to hold 2,400 individuals – and the detention of families at the “Karnes Residential Center” in Karnes City – with a current capacity of 532 beds and plans to double the number – reflect the Obama Administration’s continuing commitment to the flawed deterrence policy it began in June 2014 with the opening of a temporary family detention center in Artesia, New Mexico.

In early 2016, the pro bono work at the South Texas Family Residential Center became known as the Dilley Pro Bono Project (DPBP). DPBP is a collaboration of the American Immigration Council and other partners. It operates a non-traditional pro bono model of legal services that directly represents detained mothers and children who are fleeing extreme violence in Central America and elsewhere and are seeking asylum in the United States. DPBP is an Immigration Justice Campaign local partner.

The detention of children and their mothers is not only inhumane, but incompatible with a fair legal process. The project builds on the volunteer’s collective experiences providing legal services, running a pro bono project for detained families, training lawyers and BIA accredited representatives, and leading advocacy and litigation efforts to challenge unlawful asylum, detention, and deportation policies.

The volunteers behind CARA are committed to ensuring that detained children and their mothers receive competent, pro bono representation, and developing aggressive, effective advocacy and litigation strategies to end the practice of family detention.

Background

In December 2014, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) significantly expanded its detention capacity for families (i.e., women with minor children) with the opening of the “South Texas Family Residential Center” in Dilley, Texas. Dilley is a small town located approximately one hour and fifteen minutes southwest of San Antonio. That privately owned detention facility will be the largest family detention center in the United States, with a current capacity of 480 beds and the potential to hold 2,400 individuals.

A few months earlier, ICE converted a detention center in Karnes City—one hour southeast of San Antonio—from an all-male facility into a detention center for children and mothers. Its current capacity is 532 beds, but the private company that owns the facility has already broken ground on a project to double that number.

When the government opened a similar facility in 2014 in Artesia, New Mexico, over 250 individuals, lawyers and non-lawyers alike, traveled there to fight for the rights of these families during the five–month period it was open (July through December 2014). In this new model, volunteers worked in weekly shifts to represent detainees, handing off the client matter to a new attorney each week. Much to everyone’s surprise, however, not only did the model work and grow, but pro bono attorneys continued to be drawn to it. This concept of what some called “lawyer camp” captured the hearts and minds of willing volunteers. Rather than just taking over a paper file handed to them, they were taking over the legal care of a human being desperately needing their help.

The volunteers at CARA are building on the success and volunteer enthusiasm of the Artesia Project. The dedication and sacrifice of the pro bono attorneys demonstrates how open individual attorneys are to this type of service. Primarily, these volunteers hailed from small and solo firms where every billable hour is precious. They left their practices for up to 14 days to head to Artesia to fight for their clients against the unjust machine of family detention. They left their families and purchased plane tickets, paid for rental cars, hotels and meals all on their own, a cost that ran over $1,500 per week, for the opportunity to be part of this amazing pro bono effort representing women and children in the New Mexico desert.

Currently the American Immigration Council, CLINIC, AILA and Texas Rio Grande Legal Aid are coordinating pro bono representation for women and children detained at Dilley. In 2017 alone, the Dilley Pro Bono Project represented more than 12,000 detained families, with a 98 percent success rate.

Since the opening of Karnes in August 2014, RAICES and a team of local and national pro bono attorneys, advocates, and faith-based community members have been representing the women and children at Karnes. In addition to providing significant legal representation and pro se assistance, the Karnes Pro Bono Project created a bond fund that has raised nearly $200,000 in donations to enable women and children to bond out of detention, has met released women and children at the local bus station to assist with transportation to final destinations throughout the United States, and has provided basic supplies (clothing, food, and hygiene products) to families for their journeys outside of Texas.

CLINIC is the supporting organization for the nation’s largest network of nonprofit immigration service providers. Among its activities, CLINIC’s attorneys conduct training and provide technical support on all of the immigration-related legal problems faced by low-income immigrants. The Training and Legal Support Section is staffed with eight attorneys who specialize in a range of subject areas, including asylum, the credible fear standard, Special Immigrant Juvenile Status (SIJS), release from detention, and other relief for those in removal proceedings. CLINIC has authored the seminal book in this area, Representing Clients in Immigration Court, published and sold by AILA. CLINIC staff played an important supportive role in responding to the need for representation of families detained in the Artesia facility. CLINIC staff collectively spent over two months at the facility last summer, immediately after it opened, interviewing clients, coordinating the work of volunteer attorneys, and reporting on conditions.

CLINIC has developed several immigration courses and integrated them into an online format. Last year, in response to the sudden need for representation for minors apprehended at the Mexican border, CLINIC developed and conducted a four-week course, “Representing Unaccompanied Children: What to Do and How to Do It,” and offered it free to over 400 attorneys and BIA-accredited staff. The course is now housed on CLINIC’s website and is available using recorded webinars as an “independent study” for those wanting to learn more about this subject area and improve their skills.

The American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) is the national association of more than 14,000 attorneys and law professors who practice and teach immigration law. AILA member attorneys represent U.S. families seeking permanent residence for close family members, as well as U.S. businesses seeking talent from the global marketplace. AILA members also represent foreign students, entertainers, athletes, and asylum seekers, often on a pro bono basis. Founded in 1946, AILA is a nonpartisan, not-for-profit organization that provides continuing legal education, information, professional services, and expertise through its 39 chapters and over 50 national committees.

Ending family detention is a national priority of AILA. The CARA pro bono project is part of AILA’s work to end the inhumane treatment of children, women and men seeking asylum in the United States.

 

RAICES (Refugee and Immigrant Center for Education and Legal Services) was founded and incorporated in 1986 under the name of the Refugee Aid Project. During this time, Central Americans flooded into Texas after fleeing the civil wars and social upheavals of El Salvador, Honduras, Guatemala and Nicaragua.

Several churches and religious orders answered the needs of the new arrivals by providing food, clothing, language classes, housing, medical and legal referrals. The agency provided a forum for San Antonians to meet the new arrivals and learn first hand about the situation in Central America. In 2008, RAICES enlarged its office in order to keep pace with its growing staff and programs. Located five minutes from the San Antonio Immigration Court and in the heart of the city’s historic Five Points neighborhood, RAICES continues to provide counsel and representation in a full range of defenses against deportation before the Immigration Court, as well as representation before United States Citizenship and Immigration Services in family-based immigration cases, visas and other affirmative applications.

In its third decade, RAICES has a dedicated team of attorneys, accredited representatives, and legal assistants, in addition to volunteers, student interns and partnering pro bono attorneys.

Since the opening of Karnes in August 2014, RAICES and a team of local and national pro bono attorneys, advocates, and faith-based community members have been representing the women and children at Karnes. In addition to providing significant legal representation and pro se assistance, the Karnes Pro Bono Project created a bond fund that has raised nearly $200,000 in donations to enable women and children to bond out of detention, has met released women and children at the local bus station to assist with transportation to final destinations throughout the United States, and has provided basic supplies (clothing, food, and hygiene products) to families for their journeys outside of Texas.

The American Immigration Council is a non-profit, non-partisan, organization based in Washington D.C. Our legal, education, policy and exchange programs work to strengthen America by honoring our immigrant history and shaping how Americans think and act towards immigration now and in the future.

The American Immigration Council exists to promote the prosperity and cultural richness of our diverse nation by educating citizens about the enduring contributions of America’s immigrants; standing up for sensible and humane immigration policies that reflect American values; insisting that our immigration laws be enacted and implemented in a way that honors fundamental constitutional and human rights; working tirelessly to achieve justice and fairness for immigrants under the law.

The Council’s motto is: Honoring our immigrant past; shaping our immigrant future.

 

The Innovation Law Lab is a Portland, Oregon-based non-profit that provides the technology and data management systems at CARA and offers a limited number of supplemental stipends for individuals traveling to Dilley through its Applied Scholars program. The Law Lab creates innovative strategies that advance the rights, protections, and modes of integration of immigrant communities in the United States by creating capacity within immigrant legal service providers, developing scholarship and research into emerging legal theories, and providing education about the law’s impact on immigrants in the United States.

New Committee Chair Cummings has 64 Subpoenas for Trump

Posted on by

Yup, Maryland Congressman Elijah Cummings will become the Oversight Committee Chairman in the new Congress and he has readied 64 subpoenas for Trump and his family over conflicting business deals, the hotel and more.

Meanwhile, the democrats are likely going to work to cut funding for the military, ICE and DHS. They will advance legislation to move the Federal minimum wage to $15.00 an hour and will continue to bail out health insurers to save Obamacare.

Ah but this democrat agenda can become more contentious and nasty if the democrats want to play a legal warfare game as the republicans can take some major counter-measures. Of course none of this is really good for the country but as President Trump declared more than once, we will restore law and order and those who violated law should in fact receive a consequence.

So, what should the republicans consider?

  1. Declassify and release all Fast and Furious documents.
  2. Declassify and release all HolyLand Foundation trial documents.
  3. Declassify and release and IRS targeting scandal documents and subpoena emails and documents of Lois Lerner, Eric Holder, Doug Shulman, John Koskinen, Steven T. Miller, Daniel Werfel, Peter Kadzik, Elijah Cummings among others.
  4. Department of Justice to formally open a case on Debbie Wasserman Schultz and the Pakistan IT scandal.
  5. Announce a formal investigation into Dianne Feinstein’s Chinese operative employed in her California office and to demand Feinstein submit her investments in Chinese corporations/organizations.
  6. Defund Planned Parenthood.
  7. Defund Export Import Bank.
  8. Investigate Maxine Waters and her use of campaign funds employing her daughter’s company.
  9. Investigate newly elected congresswoman Debbie Muscarel Powell and her association(s) with Ihor Kolomoisky, a corrupt Ukrainian oligarch.
  10. Open formal investigation into Keith Ellison.
  11. Re-open criminal case against New Jersey Senator Robert Menendez.
  12. Refer Bernie Sanders to the Senate Ethics Committee on loan scandal.
  13. Release all the text messages and emails of Peter Strzok and Lisa Page.
  14. Open a formal and announced investigation into the Clinton Foundation and release what is in the file now.
  15. Need we explain the Hillary email server thing? Git ‘er done.
  16. Comey, McCabe, Ohr, and that crowd with the FISA warrant, communications and the dossier.
  17. Investigate Sheila Jackson Lee’s office for the staffer’s doxxing operation.
  18. How about Uranium One, Rosemont Capital and Vistria?
  19. Then there is John Podesta, Tony Podesta, Huma Abedin, Cheryl Mills and all of that.
  20. But we cannot overlook the tarmac meeting and the role Loretta Lynch and her DoJ played in the coverup.
  21. Benghazi? Was that ever resolved or the billions to Iran?
  22. How about release of details on the side deals or payments for the Taliban 5 and Bergdahl or the Iran nuclear deal? Include Susan Rice and Ben Rhodes in these details.
  23. Release communications on why Obama and the Justice Department canceled Operation Cassandra.
  24. Release full report on John Brennan, former Director of the CIA and his role in ‘spygate’ along his spying on member of the senate.
  25. Declare via Treasury and DHS, ANTIFA a domestic terror organization.
  26. Release all payments made by Office of Compliance due to congressional member’s misconduct.

There of course are many other things to add to this list. You are invited to include some of your own ideas in the comments.