NewzIntel.com

Category: Natural Disasters

  • MIL-OSI Security: Assistant Attorney General Leslie R. Caldwell Delivers Remarks Highlighting Cybercrime Enforcement at Center for Strategic and International Studies

    Source: United States Attorneys General 13

    Good morning, and thank you, Jim [Lewis], for that kind introduction.  I am pleased to be here speaking to you today, and I want to thank the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) for having me.  

    Over the past two and a half years, I have had the honor of serving as the Justice Department’s Assistant Attorney General for the Criminal Division – and with that, the responsibility of ensuring that the division and its over 700 prosecutors have the support and authorities they need to fulfill their responsibilities to the American people.  I have also had the opportunity to see first-hand the dedication, rigor, intelligence and respect that America’s prosecutors bring to their work every day.  As my time as the Assistant Attorney General of the Criminal Division comes to a close, I am incredibly proud of where the division stands today and all that we have accomplished together.

    One constant truth about investigating and prosecuting crime is that it is never without its challenges, although the precise nature of the difficulties and obstacles we face changes with the times.  Today, some of the most significant hurdles we encounter relate to technology and the Internet.  

    Innovation in computing, the Internet, and related services has had tremendous benefits for our economy, our ability to connect with others, and the convenience, efficiency, and security of our everyday lives.  It has also transformed how we in law enforcement do our jobs by expanding our ability to detect, investigate and prosecute criminal activity.  

    However, these same innovations permit criminals to more easily victimize Americans, including from afar, while concealing their identities and enabling destruction of evidence.  We face an enormous task in responding to these new threats – ranging from botnets and ransomware to online child sexual exploitation and firearms trafficking, to name just a few – and that task is not getting any easier.  This morning I will focus on four challenges that have been and must continue to be the center of our work if we intend to succeed: 
    •    First, the growth of sophisticated, global cyber threats; 
    •    Second, dangerous loopholes in our legal authorities; 
    •    Third, the widespread use of warrant-proof encryption; and, 
    •    Fourth, inefficient cross-border access to electronic evidence.

    As I will explain in more detail, the past few years have marked some significant progress in some of these areas.  We have grown more nimble and effective in cooperative international law enforcement efforts to bring cyber criminals to justice and remediate cybercrime.  And we have managed to effect some targeted and common-sense improvements in legal authorities.  But in other areas, the challenges remain, and in some cases have become more prominent.  Let me begin with the threat.  The global nature of the Internet means that criminals now can easily victimize more people within the United States in more dangerous ways, all without ever setting foot here.  Some of the most significant criminal activity in recent years is the result of sophisticated criminal groups reaching across our borders from perceived safe harbors.  As we rely more and more on network communications to handle virtually every aspect of our lives, the cost of cybercrime will only rise – to over two trillion globally by 2019, according to some estimates – and the United States is a uniquely attractive target.

    We have responded first and foremost by aggressively identifying, apprehending, and prosecuting offenders.  This past October, for example, the Russian cybercriminal Roman Seleznev was convicted by a jury in Seattle.  Seleznev was a hacker who, from the other side of the world, pilfered data for millions of payment cards from the computer systems of small business owners across America – a crime that strikes at the trust and security of our everyday financial transactions.  Seleznev was the son of a member of the Russian parliament, and the Russian government filed diplomatic protests and tried to pressure us into releasing him.  But that’s not how justice in America works, and he is now in an American prison.

    We recognize that we cannot prosecute our way out of cybercrime, but prosecution must remain an integral component of our response to global cyber threats.  That is why foreign hackers like “Guccifer” – who hacked into the email and social media accounts of about a hundred Americans, including two former U.S. presidents – as well as Vladimir Drinkman and Dmitriy Smilianets – who, along with co-conspirators, conducted a worldwide hacking scheme that compromised more than 160 million credit card numbers – have likewise found themselves within the reach of American law enforcement.  Thanks to the work of our colleagues in the National Security Division, the same holds true for individuals like Su Bin – who conspired with Chinese military hackers to steal cutting-edge U.S. aircraft designs – and Ardit Ferizi – who shared stolen PII belonging to 1,300 U.S. military and government personnel with a member of ISIL, for publication on a hit list.  All have now been brought to the United States to face justice.  

    The department’s strong track record in this area is a critical deterrent to would-be attackers.  Over the last twenty years, for example, our Computer Crime and Intellectual Property Section (CCIPS) – the centerpiece of our prosecutorial response to criminal cyber threats – has successfully prosecuted cases involving more than one billion stolen pieces of information, including payment card data, email addresses and social security numbers – more than three pieces of data for every American alive today.

    Our international partnerships make this work possible.  And they have been key in another way as well.  Even when prosecution is not yet an option – for example, because we have been unable to identify or apprehend a criminal target – we have developed operational expertise in disrupting cybercriminal infrastructure in the United States and abroad.  For example, we have worked hand-in-hand with our foreign partners to address technical threats like botnets, so-called “bulletproof” hosts, Darknet markets and international hacking forums.  

    Indeed, just last week, the department led a multinational operation to dismantle a vast network of dedicated criminal servers known as “Avalanche,” which allegedly hosted more than two dozen of the world’s most dangerous and persistent malware campaigns.  The Avalanche network served clients operating as many as 500,000 infected computers on a daily basis and is associated with monetary losses in the hundreds of millions of dollars worldwide.  We were joined in this effort by investigators and prosecutors from more than 40 jurisdictions across the globe.  We must maintain existing international law enforcement cooperation – and develop new mechanisms to work with foreign partners – if we hope to continue these successes.

    These efforts have also benefitted from growth in our technical and investigative capacity.  The Criminal Division has steadily increased resources for CCIPS, along with its in-house Cybercrime Lab, over the last two years.  The Cybercrime Lab has become the go-to resource across U.S. law enforcement for intractable problems in accessing and understanding digital evidence, whether that means uncovering evidence that a defendant accessed online terrorist radicalization materials to rebut a claim of entrapment, or cracking passwords to dozens of devices that hold key evidence of serious crimes.

    We have also found that augmenting our own expertise and legal authorities with insight from private sector institutions allows us to identify and develop new, creative responses.  For example, in 2014, the FBI, in conjunction with a coalition of nearly a dozen foreign countries and a group of elite computer security firms, dismantled the Gameover Zeus botnet.  That botnet, which infected more than one million computers around the world, inflicted over $100 million in losses on American victims alone, and was responsible for the spread of the Cryptolocker ransomware.  The Gameover Zeus operation represents what we can achieve when law enforcement agencies collaborate with private sector experts, and indeed, many private organizations provided similar assistance in the recent Avalanche take-down.  I hope that it will continue to serve as a model for the department’s future work.

    This relationship works in both directions.  The investigative experience of our CCIPS prosecutors can offer important lessons for private sector entities.  In addition, navigating the federal laws that govern network monitoring practices – laws in which CCIPS specializes – can be fraught for organizations seeking to improve their cybersecurity.  That is why, two years ago, we created the Cybersecurity Unit, a group of CCIPS prosecutors who can leverage their case-related experience to develop and share practical cybersecurity advice with the private sector.  The Unit has also played an integral role in implementation of the Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act (CISA).  So not only have we benefitted from private sector experts for our operational needs, but we have made a practice of sharing our knowledge base as well.

    Even as the department addresses technical obstacles to preventing and prosecuting cybercrime, however, we confront a second challenge: arbitrary gaps in the law that frustrate some of our most pressing investigations.  One example of such a loophole was the venue provision of Rule 41 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. 

    As that Rule existed prior to Dec. 1, 2016, when law enforcement sought court approval for a search warrant, it generally was required to seek authorization from a court sitting in the same geographic district where the property to be searched was located.   This Rule made perfect sense in dealing with the physical world.  But in the cyber-world, we increasingly face scenarios where criminals use technology to hide the location of their computers, meaning that we could not know where the computers were located.  In those circumstances, federal law did not clearly identify which judge could authorize a search.   

    Similarly, we regularly encounter crimes like mass hacking through botnets that are carried out in multiple districts at once, all across the country.  But in order to respond in a timely, comprehensive manner, the prior version of the Rule arguably required authorities to obtain a warrant in each district – up to 94 in all, across 9 time zones, ranging from the Virgin Islands to Guam.  

    Last week, a three year effort, spearheaded by the Criminal Division, and approved by the U.S. Supreme Court, culminated in a targeted, procedural fix to the venue provisions of the Rule to ensure that technology does not render our investigative abilities obsolete.  The update to the Rule does not alter the probable cause or other standards we must meet to obtain a search warrant.   What the Rule does change is that now, when criminals hide the location of their computers through anonymizing technology, we don’t have to figure out in which federal district the computers are physically located before we can act to stop criminal activity.  Likewise, when a criminal deploys a botnet that indiscriminately infects computers nationwide – as many botnets now do – we don’t have to go to as many as 94 different judges. 

    The need to update Rule 41 was not theoretical.  Today, dozens of websites on Tor – a proxy network – openly distribute images of child rape and sexual exploitation, where they are frequented by tens of thousands of pedophiles.  These sites can thrive in the open because proxy networks, like Tor, hide the locations of the criminals’ servers and the identities of their administrators and users.  While law enforcement – and the general public – can easily find images of child sexual exploitation by visiting one of these sites, we often cannot locate and shut down the websites or identify and apprehend the abusers.  More troubling, the child victims stand little chance of rescue.

    The recent investigation of “Playpen,” a Tor site used by more than 100,000 pedophiles to encourage child sexual abuse and trade sexually explicit images of that abuse, illustrates why a Rule 41 fix was necessary.  In that case, authorities were able to wrest control of the site from the administrators, and then obtained court approval to use a remote search tool to retrieve limited information, including the user’s IP address, only if a user accessed child pornography on the site.  This enabled a traditional, real-world investigation, leading to more than 200 active prosecutions and the identification or rescue of at least 49 American children who were subject to sexual abuse.  

    Yet in some of the resulting cases, federal courts relying on the language of the prior version of Rule 41 found that even though the probable cause and other standards for obtaining a warrant were satisfied, evidence obtained in searches nevertheless had to be excluded because the judges who issued warrants lacked venue over the computers, which turned out to be physically located outside their geographic districts.  This is a perverse result, as it would mean that criminals who are savvy enough to hide their locations – which is not difficult given current technologies – could place themselves beyond the reach of law enforcement.  

    This is a good example of why the amendments to Rule 41 are such a crucial step forward.  They make clear which courts are available to consider whether a particular warrant application comports with the Fourth Amendment, without altering in any way the substantive requirements for – or privacy protections provided by – a warrant.  This will ensure that criminals who use anonymizing technologies are not immune from justice, and that threats like botnets are not too big to investigate and remediate effectively.

    This fix is a not a cure-all, however.  Our response to cyber threats requires revisiting laws that simply did not anticipate and cannot adjust to modern technology.  We must continue to move forward – not backward – to ensure that our laws protect Americans from criminals, and not the other way around.

    I now want to turn to some challenges that, despite the best efforts of many, will continue to confront policymakers in the years to come.  As society’s use of computers and the Internet has grown, so too has the importance of digital evidence in criminal investigations.  In nearly every criminal investigation we undertake at the federal level – from homicides and kidnappings to drug trafficking, organized crime, financial fraud and child exploitation – critical information comes from smart phones, computers and online communications, often instead of physical evidence.  Yet, these materials are increasingly unavailable to law enforcement as a result of certain implementations of encryption, even when we have a warrant to examine them.

    This is because, in an attempt to market products and services as protective of personal privacy and data security, companies increasingly are offering products with built-in encryption technologies that preclude access to data even when a court has issued a search warrant.  Service providers with more than a billion user accounts, that transmit tens of billions of messages per day around the world, now advertise themselves as unable to comply with warrants.  And device manufacturers that have placed hundreds of millions of products in the market have embraced the same principle.  We in law enforcement often describe this sort of encryption as “warrant-proof encryption.”  

    Let me be clear: the Criminal Division is on the front lines of the fight against cybercrime.  We recognize that the development and adoption of strong encryption is essential to counteracting cyber threats and to promote our overall safety and privacy.  But certain implementations of encryption pose an undeniable and growing threat to our ability to protect the American people.  Our inability to access such data can stop our investigations and prosecutions in their tracks.

    Inaction is not a suitable response.  Our occasional success in accessing information protected by seemingly “warrant-proof encryption” is unpredictable and inadequate.  There are devices in evidence lockers across the country that remain locked.  

    As the President reminded us recently, the Government has different responsibilities – a different “balance sheet” and different “stakeholders” – than a corporation.  There is nothing wrong with companies pursuing profits and marketing strategies, but no one should expect that they will take into account all of the societal interests that are at stake.  And that is especially true for our public safety mission.  Our ability to protect Americans from crime has become dependent, in thousands of cases, on the business decisions of for-profit corporations.  More troublingly, even when companies have the technical ability to reasonably assist us in accessing encrypted information, they have refused to do so for fear of “tarnishing” their image.  Regardless of which side of this issue you are on, we can all agree that market-driven decisions are not and have never been a substitute for sound public safety policies. 

    Business decisions made by for-profit companies have had enormous effects on our public safety in other ways as well.  Data held by major Internet service providers can be crucial to identifying and holding accountable the perpetrators of virtually every federal crime we handle.  Increasingly, however, American providers and other providers subject to the jurisdiction of the United States are storing such information outside the United States, and not always at rest and in the same location.  The data can be partitioned and stored in multiple locations, or moved about on an ongoing basis, and some providers may not even know where all data relating to a particular user is at a given time.  

    It is this last challenge – foreign-stored digital evidence – that I will close with today.  The department has worked diligently to increase the cross-border availability of data, through mechanisms like the 24/7 Network, which facilitates the preservation of digital evidence, as well as mutual legal assistance treaties and the Budapest Convention on Cybercrime, which enhance international cooperation in obtaining that evidence.  The Criminal Division has also directed additional resources toward a dedicated cyber mutual legal assistance unit in our Office of International Affairs, which has seen a 1,000 percent increase in incoming requests for computer records since 2000.

    But while these are important crime-fighting tools, they have significant shortcomings.  The United States has mutual legal assistance treaties with less than half the countries in the world, some of which place limitations on when assistance is available or the types of evidence that can be obtained.  Even then, obtaining evidence can take months, if not years.  Ireland, for example, reports that in routine cases it takes 15 to 18 months to execute a request for assistance from a foreign country.  In less experienced or less cooperative countries, the process can take even longer.  Sometimes we never receive a response at all.  

    Recently, the difficulties caused by foreign-stored data for public safety have become more acute.  In July, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, in the so-called “Microsoft Ireland” case, held that U.S. authorities cannot use a search warrant issued by a U.S. court pursuant to the Stored Communications Act (SCA) to compel a U.S. service provider, such as Microsoft, to produce data that it chooses to store for its own business purposes (and typically without the knowledge or input of its subscribers) outside the United States.

    So, what is already a difficult and time-consuming process of gathering electronic evidence may now also become an impossible one, for both the United States and our partners.  Since the Microsoft decision was handed down, U.S. providers such as Google, Microsoft and Yahoo! have refused to produce information that they have chosen to store abroad in response to search warrants issued by courts even outside the Second Circuit.  This has been the case even in instances where the account-holder was an American citizen residing in the United States, and when the crime under investigation is carried out on American soil.  And this includes warrants obtained on behalf of foreign countries pursuant to mutual legal assistant requests.

    U.S. law generally does not require our providers to store this data in a particular location or make it accessible in any particular way.  But as a result, the ability of law enforcement to effectively investigate serious crime may now be determined entirely by a provider’s data management practices, well-intentioned or not.  One major American provider, for example, is unable to determine the country in which foreign-stored data is located; and even if it could, the data is frequently moved and may not be in the same country from day to day.  Under the Second Circuit’s decision, a SCA warrant is not available.  But sending an MLAT request to a foreign country could result – after months of delay – in a notification that the relevant data is no longer there.

    It is for this reason that, in October, the department filed a petition for the case to be reheard by the entire Second Circuit en banc.  It is also why we intend to submit legislation to Congress to address the decision’s significant public safety implications.  This issue must be resolved before we move to other important initiatives, such as legislation to implement a cross-border data agreement with the United Kingdom.

    Looking forward, I cannot predict how the rehearing petition, or the broader concerns implicated by the Microsoft decision, will play out.  And I suspect that, whether the issue relates to warrant-proof encryption or cross-border access to evidence, reaching a resolution will be challenging.  But these decisions must be made in the policy arena, not by the private sector alone.  We cannot allow changing technologies or the economic interests of the private sector to overwhelm larger policy issues relating to the needs of public safety and national security.  And we must let government fulfill its fundamental responsibilities to protect the American people.

    I know that the panel to follow will focus on some of these challenges for the future, but let me offer my own thoughts here.  In each of these areas, we must proceed thoughtfully and balance multiple different legitimate interests.  Yet several basic principles should be obvious.  First, sitting back and doing nothing is not an acceptable option.  The world is changing around us, and those seeking to do harm are evolving with it; if those responsible for ensuring public safety do not have the same ability to adapt, public safety will suffer.  Second, these changes pose policy challenges, and we need to develop policy responses.  Rather than let evolutions in technology dictate our responses, we must think ahead as a society and develop appropriate frameworks to address new and upcoming challenges before they become crises.  And finally, when there are multiple interests at stake – public safety, cybersecurity, international comity and civil rights and civil liberties – we cannot allow the most consequential decisions to be made by a single stakeholder, or leave them to the whim of the commercial marketplace.  We would never tolerate that approach in other areas of importance to society, and we should not do so here.  Thank you.

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch Delivers Remarks at Interfaith Event on the Justice Department’s Commitment to Combatting Hate Crimes

    Source: United States Attorneys General 13

    Thank you, Imam [Mohamed] Magid, for your kind words; for your hospitality in welcoming me today; and for your outstanding leadership of the All Dulles Area Muslim Society (ADAMS) Center, especially during what I know has been a difficult time for many Muslim Americans.  I am proud to stand beside you today.  I also want to thank all of the inspiring faith leaders that we just heard from for their moving words.  And I want to thank all of you – faith leaders and community leaders; activists and advocates – for all that you do, each and every day, to strengthen, empower and unite our communities.

    It is truly inspiring to stand in this space, in front of this audience.  This morning, we have gathered under this roof, in this mosque, as men and women of all races, creeds and colors.  Some of us were born in the United States, our immigration status having been resolved several generations ago; some of us came here more recently in search of a better life.  We may speak different languages; we may read from different books of scripture; we may call our God by different names.  But we all love this country and the ideals for which it stands.  We all want our children to lead lives of safety and opportunity.   We all proudly claim the title of American.  And we all hold, as Justice Brandeis proclaimed, “the most important political office … that of the private citizen.”  In this assembly, I see a living expression of the American promise: the conviction that every person’s dignity is inherent and equal. 

    That promise is as old as our nation itself.  Twelve score years ago, our forefathers boldly proclaimed that “all men are created equal.”  But of course, when those words were written, a large gap existed between America’s founding ideals and America’s founding reality.  The very hand that put those words on parchment had also signed the deeds for the sale and purchase of other human beings.  For many of our ancestors – for women, African Americans, Native Americans, immigrants and countless others – the promise of American life rang hollow. 

    But the declaration’s revolutionary statement of equality was too plain and powerful – too “self-evident”, in Jefferson’s words – for that state of affairs to endure.  Generation after generation of Americans heard the promise set forth in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, and they demanded that it be fulfilled: women who endured ridicule and condescension for seeking the ballot; black soldiers who defended freedom overseas, only to return home to a nation that wouldn’t let them vote, and that sometimes repaid their service with angry violence; marchers who braved the jaws of police dogs at Birmingham, and the sting of cattle prods at Selma; LGBTQ individuals who fought for their civil rights at the Stonewall Inn – through the courage and determination of these and countless others who have gone before us, we have slowly built a society that more fully reflects our founding creed of liberty and justice for all.

    That does not mean our work is finished; as you are all well aware, the opposite is true.  We all know this work is never finished.   Just last month, the FBI released its statistics on the number of hate crimes committed in 2015.  The report was a sobering indication of how much work remains to be done.  Overall, the number of reported hate crimes increased six percent from 2014.  That figure includes increases in hate crimes committed against Jewish Americans, African Americans, and LGBTQ Americans.  And, perhaps most troublingly of all, it showed a 67 percent increase in hate crimes committed against Muslim Americans, and the highest total of anti-Muslim incidents since 2001, when 9/11 spurred so many reprehensible acts.  And we know that there are many more hate crimes in communities across the country that go unreported.  

    In addition, all of us have seen the flurry of recent news reports about alleged hate crimes and harassment – from hijabs yanked off of women’s heads; to swastikas sprayed on the sides of synagogues; to slurs and epithets hurled in classrooms.  The FBI is working with local authorities to review multiple incidents, and our agents and prosecutors are working to assess whether particular cases constitute violations of federal law.  

    These incidents – and these statistics – should be of the deepest concern to every American.  Because hate crimes don’t just target individuals.  They tear at the fabric of our communities, and they also stain our dearest ideals and our nation’s very soul.  There is a pernicious thread that connects the act of violence against a woman wearing a hijab to the assault on a transgender man to the tragic deaths of nine innocent African Americans during a Bible study at Mother Emanuel AME in Charleston, South Carolina.  As President Obama has said, it is “the moment we fail to see in another our common humanity – the very moment when we fail to recognize in a person the same hopes and fears, the same passions and imperfections, the same dreams that we all share.”  The reason we have a cross-section of so many leaders from different faiths here today is because we believe so deeply in certain common values.  Regardless of our faith, we believe that we must treat others as we would wish to be treated.  Regardless of our faith, we believe that every individual is precious.  Regardless of our faith, we believe in our common humanity, and we believe that, in the famous words of Martin Luther King Jr., “injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.”  That is why the Department of Justice – and the entire Obama Administration – regards hate crimes with the utmost seriousness, whether they target individuals because of their race, their religion, their gender or their sexual orientation.  And that is why we have worked tirelessly over the last several years to bring those who perpetrate these heinous deeds to justice.

    A cornerstone of that work is investigating and prosecuting hate crimes against Muslim Americans, as well as those perceived to be Muslim.  Muslim Americans are our friends and family members, our doctors and nurses, our police officers and firefighters.  They own businesses and teach in classrooms.  Thousands of them have fought for the American flag.  Many have died defending it.  And yet, too often – especially in the last year, following a number of tragic terrorist incidents, and amidst an increase in divisive and fearful rhetoric – we have seen Muslim Americans targeted and demonized simply because of their faith.  And to impose a blanket stereotype on all members of any faith because of the actions of those who pervert that faith is to go backwards in our thinking and our discourse, and to repudiate the founding ideals of this country.  This is unacceptable in a nation whose Bill of Rights guarantees the freedom of religion in its very first clause, and the Department of Justice has vigorously prosecuted a number of these repugnant acts.   

    In recent months, our Civil Rights Division – led by Vanita Gupta, who is here with us today – along with our U.S. Attorneys’ Offices, have convicted a Connecticut man for firing a high-powered rifle at a mosque; a Florida man for threatening to firebomb two mosques and shoot their congregants; a Missouri man for the arson of a local mosque; and a North Carolina man who yelled at a woman and ripped off her hijab on an airplane.  And in October, our National Security Division and the U.S Attorney’s Office in Kansas charged three men in connection with their plot to detonate bombs at an apartment complex in Garden City, Kansas, which included a mosque where many members of the local Somali immigrant community gather to pray.  These are only a few examples of the Justice Department’s recent prosecutions.  There are many more matters that we, often in close partnership with our state and local law enforcement partners, are investigating.  

    The Justice Department is also working to protect the rights of religious communities to build houses of worship without unlawful interference or harassment.  Unfortunately, that task has only become more urgent in recent years.  Members of the Civil Rights Division have heard repeatedly about more overt discrimination in both the tone and framing of objections to planned religious institutions, especially mosques and Islamic centers.  Our primary tool to combat such discrimination is the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act, or RLUIPA.  Since September 2010, the department has opened 50 RLUIPA land-use investigations, filed ten lawsuits involving land use, and filed eight amicus briefs in private parties’ RLUIPA cases to inform courts about the law’s provisions and requirements.  In the last six years, 38 percent of the Civil Rights Division’s RLUIPA land use cases involved mosques or Islamic schools – a dramatic increase over the percentage of such cases brought during the previous decade. 

    Religious institutions aren’t the only vulnerable spaces we are determined to keep free of hatred and bias.  We all know that in order for our children to learn and thrive, they need access to safe and inclusive classrooms.  Earlier this year, the Civil Rights Division launched a new initiative with our U.S. Attorneys’ Offices that will significantly advance our ability to address religious discrimination in schools.  And our Community Relations Service, or CRS – led by Paul Monteiro, who is also here with us today – works to ease tensions and promote understanding in communities and schools that have been rocked by traumatic incidents.  For example, after a student was allegedly forced to remove her hijab in a school in Massachusetts, the school invited CRS to present its Arab, Muslim, and Sikh Cultural Awareness Program to the school’s staff.  CRS also recently appointed its first ever National Program Manager for Muslim, Arab, Sikh and South Asian Communities, and I am so pleased that Harpreet Singh Mokha has joined us here today.   

    We are also concerned with crimes against our LGBT brothers and sisters.  In October, we commemorated the seventh anniversary of the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act, which expanded the federal definition of hate crimes to included crimes based on gender, disability, gender identity, and sexual orientation.  Here, too, we have been active, bringing hate crimes cases in a number of states around the country.  Tomorrow, I am traveling to New York to meet with LGBT youth, and to reaffirm the department’s steadfast commitment to the rights and well-being of all LGBTQ Americans.

    These are all important efforts, and their impact has been amplified by our efforts to train local and federal law enforcement agencies in how to recognize and investigate hate crimes; how to engage with communities; and how to encourage better hate crime reporting and data collection.  These initiatives have helped us to build stronger partnerships between law enforcement officers and the communities we serve, and I am hopeful that those partnerships will stand as a bulwark against hate crimes for years to come.

    I am encouraged by what we have accomplished together over the last eight years.  But I also know that we face many challenges in the years ahead – challenges that will require the Department of Justice to remain an active force for good in communities from coast to coast.  Our federal hate crimes laws are among the most powerful tools we have for creating a more just and equal nation, and career Justice Department prosecutors will continue to enforce them.

    Nevertheless, I know that many Americans are feeling uncertainty and anxiety as we witness the recent eruption of divisive rhetoric and hateful deeds.  I know that many Americans are wondering if they are in danger simply because of what they look like or where they pray.  I know that some are wondering whether the progress we have made at such great cost, and over so many years, is in danger of sliding backwards.  

    I understand those feelings.  I know that as we continue to demand a nation where all people are truly treated equally, we will be met with prejudice, bigotry and condemnation.  

    It is true that there is nothing foreordained about our march towards a more just and peaceful future.  There never has been.  Our centuries-long project of creating a more perfect union was not the product of fate, or destiny.  It was the result of countless individuals making the choice to stand up, to demand recognition, to refuse to rest until they knew that their children were inheriting a nation that was more tolerant, more inclusive and more equal.  That is why it is so fitting that we are here today in this beautiful house of worship, this place of deep and abiding faith.  It has been faith that has sustained this fight since the beginning.  

    Faith – a small band of colonies could separate from the most powerful nation on earth and chart a course of freedom and equality.

    Faith – a new nation and its ideas could survive a bloody and divisive civil war that arose from its original sin of slavery.  And not just faith – the works that made it so when there was no guarantee of success. 

    I have been fortunate to have such people in my life.  Two of them happen to be faith leaders: my grandfather and my father.  They both lived at a time when their country regarded them as less than fully human, simply because of the color of their skin.  And they both did their part to make the United States just a little more free and a little more fair.  In 1930s North Carolina – where the law offered little protection to people of color – my grandfather used to hide neighbors in trouble under the floorboards of his house.  My own father let civil rights activists meet in the basement of his church in Greensboro, North Carolina.  

    These were acts of enormous courage.  But they were also acts of enormous faith and hope.  Here were two men living in a country that put obstacles in their path to prevent them from voting; that told them they could only use certain drinking fountains; that told them that when the Declaration of Independence said, “All men are created equal,” it wasn’t referring to them.  But they knew what those words meant, and they chose to act accordingly.  They knew their portion of fear.  They knew their portion of anger.  And yet they never lost their hope that although their country was far from perfect, it was certainly capable of perfection.  They both risked a great deal for that faith – never knowing if would work out or not – never imagining that the daughter of one and the granddaughter of the other would one day become the chief law enforcement officer of the united states.

    My friends, that hope is still alive in our country.  You and I know what the declaration means when it says, “All men are created equal.”  You and I know what the Constitution means when it says, “We, the people.”  So let us leave here united in our confidence, inspired by our faith and strengthened by our courage.  Let us leave here with a renewed commitment to demanding nothing less than a country that is true to its founding promises.  And let us leave here in hope – the hope that has brought the United States so far in the last 240 years; the hope that I am confident will carry us even further in the days to come.

    Will this work be hard?  It has always been hard. 

    Will there be challenges ahead?  We have always known that “the price of freedom is constant vigilance.”  

    Will we persevere?  We always do.

    Let me recall a song from my faith, made famous by Mahalia Jackson: “Lord, don’t move the mountain, but give me the strength to climb.”

    I want to thank you for allowing me to spend a few moments with you today to talk about the country we all love, and the future we all cherish.  Thank you for all that you do in your congregations and your communities to vindicate the promise of American life.  And let me assure you that long after I leave the Attorney General’s seat, I will continue to stand beside you in the cause of liberty and justice for all.  Thank you.

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Update on fire at Barrow Centre, Mount Edgcumbe

    Source: City of Plymouth

    Mount Edgcumbe House and Country Park has been closed to all visitors today (Wednesday) following a fire at the Barrow Centre yesterday evening.

    Two flats and two holiday lets at the Centre have been seriously damaged by the fire, which was put out by crews from Cornwall Fire and Rescue Service assisted by Devon and Somerset Fire and Rescue Service, who are still on site this morning.

    The Barrow Centre was evacuated as soon as the fire was discovered and fortunately no one was injured.

    Other sections of the Barrow Centre housing businesses and flats are now being assessed. Mount Edgcumbe House itself has not been impacted.

    Sadly, those living in the damaged flats have lost their personal belongings. They were provided with temporary accommodation elsewhere in the park last night.

    The cause of the fire is being investigated.

    The buildings will now be assessed by structural engineers and the area around the Barrow Centre made safe and cordoned off.

    The park is expected to reopen tomorrow and an update on when businesses in the Barrow Centre can re-open will be provided once all the assessments have been completed.

    The Mount Edgcumbe House and Country Park team is contacting anyone who have any upcoming events or bookings that may be affected by the fire.

    Mount Edgcumbe House and Country Park is jointly owned and managed by Plymouth City Council and Cornwall Council.

    Plymouth councillor Tom Briars-Delve, Joint chair of the Mount Edgcumbe Joint Committee, said: “Everyone here is obviously devastated by the damage caused to the properties on the estate and our sympathies are with the families who have lost their possessions and the affected business owners. We will be supporting those families and the affected businesses however we can.

    “We are very thankful no one was injured by the fire and will leave it to the fire service to investigate its cause and how it spread. We are grateful for the efforts of the fire crews throughout the night.

    “Our priority is to support the families affected and to make the area safe so we can reopen the park and help the businesses resume their operations as soon as possible.”

    Cornwall councillor Kate Ewert, Joint chair of the Mount Edgcumbe Joint Committee, said: “The fire is devastating for everyone involved and I know there is a sense of shock amongst those who live and work here but we can be thankful that no one has been hurt. The fire service did an incredible job in getting to the site quickly and protecting the remainder of the property.

    “Our thoughts are with those who have lost all their possessions and I know the community is keen to pull together and provide support in whatever way it can. We will all be working together to help those impacted by this to get the Barrow Centre back up and running as soon possible.”

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Register now to avoid missing out on this year’s Sperrins and Killeter Walking Festival

    Source: Northern Ireland – City of Derry

    Register now to avoid missing out on this year’s Sperrins and Killeter Walking Festival

    5 February 2025

    Demand for the annual Sperrins and Killeter Walking Festival is extremely high this year, with one day of the event already sold out.

    This year’s festival will take place on Saturday, 1st and Sunday 2nd March. Part of the Sperrins Walking Programme this event provides a unique chance to discover the breath-taking landscapes of the Sperrins and Killeter, all while supporting physical, mental, and emotional wellbeing. Led by the outdoor experts at Far and Wild in collaboration with Derry City and Strabane District Council, it is a must-attend for every avid walker!

    Due to high demand, the Saturday, 1st March 8km walk, ‘The Moat at the Heart of Glenelly,’ is now sold out. But don’t miss your chance to join the stunning Killeter walk on Sunday, 2nd March ‘Myths & Stories from the Edge of Time’. This moderate 8km walk will take you from Lettercran in Co Donegal to Killeter village in Co Tyrone via the scenic Carrickaholten Forest. This fascinating walk traces the footsteps of emigrants, market-goers, smugglers, and travellers who have crossed the border area throughout history. Along the way, participants will learn stories at key landmarks and hear about the region’s rich cultural heritage.  Registration will begin at 10am at the Killeter Heritage Centre but remember to pre-book your place at www.farandwild.org. The cost is £10.

    A highlight of both days is the incredible community spirit and hospitality shown to all walkers. Whether at registration at Watt’s Bar in Plumbridge on Saturday, 1st March or at the Killeter Heritage Centre on Sunday, 2nd March, and after the walks, participants will experience the warm local welcome the Sperrins and Killeter are famous for. Enjoy refreshments, home-baked scones and bread, and the cosy comfort of open fires to dry off those soggy socks and rest tired feet. It’s the perfect opportunity to relax, swap stories, and enjoy some good craic with fellow walkers.

    Encouraging people to come out and take part in the Killeter walk, the Mayor of Derry City and Strabane District Council, Cllr Lilian Seenoi Barr said: “It’s brilliant to see so many people have already registered for the Glenelly walk, and I’m sure the Killeter walk will sell-out soon. So please make sure and register to take part in the walk today.

    “These walks will take you through the spectacular scenery that is the Sperrins, and it’s right on our doorsteps. We have no excuses, get out and enjoy all that this beautiful area has to offer. As well as experiencing the benefits of a day in the outdoors, you’ll also learn some fascinating facts about the history of the area and meet lots of new people. And when the hard miles are over, you can relax and enjoy a cuppa and a chat among friends.”

    Both walks are part of the Sperrins Walking Programme, offering an excellent chance to discover the area’s scenic beauty and historical depth. While Saturday’s walk is fully booked, don’t miss out on the remaining spaces for Sunday’s event.

    For further information and to book your place visit: www.farandwild.org

    For more information about the whole Sperrins Walking Programme visit: https://sperrinspartnershipproject.com/sperrins-walking/

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker Delivers Remarks to State and Local Law Enforcement on Efforts to Combat Violent Crime and the Opioid Crisis

    Source: United States Attorneys General 13

    Remarks as prepared for delivery

    Thank you, Marc for that kind introduction and thank you for your leadership as United States Attorney.  You are carrying the torch on a lot of the work that we did back when I was U.S. Attorney for this district.

    Thank you also to:

    • Commissioner Roxann Ryan and Director of Investigative Operations Kevin Winker of the Iowa Department of Public Safety,
    • Acting Director Joyce Flinn of the Iowa Department of Homeland Security and Emergency Management,
    • Marshall County Sheriff Steve Hoffman,
    • Marion County Sheriff Jason Sandholdt,
    • Chief Dana Wingert and Major Stephen Waymire of the Des Moines Police Department,
    • Chief Chad McCluskey of Windsor Heights,
    • Chief Al Pizzano of Pleasant Hill,
    • Chief John Quinn of Waukee,
    • Chief Greg Stallman of Altoona,
    • Chief Michael Tupper of Marshalltown,
    • Polk County Attorney John Sarcone,
    • David Lorenzen, Motor Vehicle Enforcement Chief with the Iowa Department of Transportation, and
    • Polk County Chief Medical Examiner Dr. Gregory Schmunk.

    Thank you all for being here.

    It is good to be back. 

    This is the office where I served for nearly five and a half years.  It was the honor of a lifetime, and it was an experience that only deepened my appreciation for law enforcement.

    I worked every day with officers from the federal, state, and local levels—including people in this room—to find evidence of crime and to keep the people of Iowa safe.

    I am proud of what we accomplished together.

    I am especially proud because I have seen the results firsthand.  This is the community where I grew up, where I played football, where I went to law school and business school, where I ran a small business, and where I’m still raising my family.  I know that Iowans are safer because of what we achieved.

    Some of you may have heard that there have been some changes at the Department in recent weeks.  One thing that hasn’t changed is our unwavering support for state and local law enforcement.

    The Trump administration will always be a law-and-order administration.  We recognize that public safety is government’s first and most important task—and we honor the role that law enforcement officers play in protecting our society.

    Our federal officers are known all over the world for their professionalism and their competence.

    But we are well aware that about 85 percent of the law enforcement officers in this country serve at the state and local levels.  It is simple arithmetic that we cannot succeed without you.

    That is why this Department of Justice under President Donald Trump has given you more resources and more tools to help you succeed.

    One of President Trump’s very first Executive Orders to Attorney General Sessions was to “back the blue” and enhance the safety of law enforcement officers in this country.

    We have embraced that goal and we’ve been faithful to it every day.

    Over these last two years we have helped hire hundreds of police officers across America, including 10 here in Iowa.

    We have reinvigorated the Project Safe Neighborhoods program, which directs our U.S. Attorneys to work with you to develop a customized crime reduction plan—and to target the most violent criminals in the most violent areas.

    I ran this program as United States Attorney and I know that it works.  We are more successful at the federal level when we listen to our partners at the state and local levels.

    Our strong law enforcement partnerships are paying off.

    In fiscal year 2017, the Department of Justice prosecuted more violent criminals than in any year on record to that point.

    And then, in fiscal year 2018—we broke that record by a margin of 15 percent.

    In fiscal year 2018, we charged the highest number of federal firearm defendants in Department history.  We broke that record by a margin of 17 percent.  We charged nearly 20 percent more firearm defendants than we did in 2017 and 30 percent more than we charged in 2016.

    Over the past fiscal year we also broke records for fentanyl prosecutions and for illegal entry by illegal aliens.

    At the same time, we increased the number of white collar defendants and the number of drug defendants overall.  And we increased the number of deported illegal aliens prosecuted for re-entering our country by 38 percent.

    These are remarkable achievements.  There can be no doubt that they have had an impact on this nation.  And we’ve achieved them together with you, our partners.

    The evidence is already coming in that we’ve reduced violent crime and drug overdose deaths.

    The FBI’s violent crime numbers for 2017 show that violent crime and murder both went down in 2017 after increasing for two years in a row.  And for 2018, one estimate projects that the murder rate in our 29 biggest cities will decline by 7.6 percent.

    The DEA’s National Prescription Audit shows that in the first eight months of 2018, opioid prescriptions went down by nearly 12 percent—and last year they went down by seven percent.

    While 2017 saw more overdose deaths than 2016, overdose deaths declined by two percent from September 2017 to March 2018, the most recent month for which we have data.

    This is what we can achieve when we work together.

    Our work is not finished.  We are going to continue to support our state and local partners—and I believe that our partnerships are going to continue to deliver results.

    I want to conclude with something a mentor of mine used to say every time he spoke to law enforcement, and I believe it too: we have your back, and you have our thanks.

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Principal Deputy Associate Attorney General Jesse Panuccio Delivers Remarks to the American Bar Association Section of Antitrust Law Fall Forum

    Source: United States Attorneys General 13

    Remarks as prepared for delivery

    Good morning.  Thank you, Jim, for that kind introduction, and special thanks to you and your co-chair of this Fall Forum, Debbie Feinstein, for inviting me.  It is an honor to join the distinguished attorneys in attendance here.

    As you just heard, the Office of the Associate Attorney General works closely with the Antitrust Division, and I’d like to begin by saying just a few words about the men and women who work there.  The Division is led by a superlative team.  Assistant Attorney General Makan Delrahim is an expert in the field and a tireless advocate for the American consumer.  Andrew Finch, his principal deputy, draws on his broad private-sector antitrust experience to supervise all aspects of the Division’s civil and criminal matters.  Barry Nigro, another deputy, is a walking encyclopedia of merger law and practice.  And the many other front office appointees bring to the Division an incredible breadth and depth of knowledge and determination.  Behind them, of course, stand the career lawyers, economists, and staff of the Antitrust Division who, as many of you know firsthand, are smart, resourceful, and tenacious in upholding the law and protecting competition for the benefit of the American economy.  We appreciate their public service and hard work, and we are so fortunate that they have chosen to lend their expertise and talent to our shared mission at the Department of Justice.

    Speaking of which, it is worth reciting the DOJ mission statement for those of you who have never heard it.  It reads as follows: “To enforce the law and defend the interests of the United States according to the law; to ensure public safety against threats foreign and domestic; to provide federal leadership in preventing and controlling crime; to seek just punishment for those guilty of unlawful behavior; and to ensure fair and impartial administration of justice for all Americans.”  Much of this mission statement is outward facing—we are the cops and we go after the robbers.  But the first and last clauses of the mission statement require something more: we must “enforce the law” and “ensure fair and impartial administration of justice.”  And if we are truly to “enforce the law” and fairly administer justice, we cannot be focused solely on how legal commands apply to those outside the Department.  We must also focus on how the law constrains and cabins the Department—and the federal government as a whole.

    This is a theme, and a tension, as old as our government itself.  James Madison, famously lamenting in Federalist 51 that men are not angels and thus need a government, explained: “In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself.”  Our government is adept at creating rules to control the governed, but it sometimes fails to control itself.  Over the last two years, some of our priorities at the Department have been aimed at this latter virtue—at controlling ourselves.

    I would like to discuss one of those priorities today—namely, regulatory reform, which is an imperative need for an administrative state that has grown mightily over the last seventy-five years and in ways that Madison and his compatriots could have never imagined when they created the checks and balances they thought would oblige the government to control itself.

    Early in 2017, the President issued several executive orders on regulatory reform.  For example, Executive Order 13771 directs agencies to eliminate two regulations for each new one and to impose zero net regulatory costs.  Executive Order 13777 directs agency heads to appoint Regulatory Reform Officers and Task Forces to implement regulatory reform initiatives and identify burdensome regulations for repeal, replacement, or modification.  These are important measures.  As Neomi Rao, Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), recently explained in a Washington Post editorial, lifting unduly burdensome regulations promotes economic growth and “the spirit of liberty that animates our productive and innovative society.”

    Accordingly, at the Department of Justice, we take this regulatory reform mandate very seriously.  While the Department does not generate the same volume of regulations as, say, the Environmental Protection Agency, we do have components that issue regulations, such as the Drug Enforcement Agency, which regulates doctors, pharmacies, and hospitals under the Controlled Substances Act; the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms, which regulates the firearms and explosives industries; and the Civil Rights Division, which regulates state and local governments, public accommodations, and commercial facilities under the Americans with Disabilities Act.  Each of these components is working to ensure that their regulatory agendas comply with the executive orders. 

    But, in my view, the Department’s most critical contribution to regulatory reform has not come by way of any particular substantive regulatory change, but rather through our focus on improving the regulatory process by promoting transparency, accountability, and public participation.  Such procedural reforms can often outlive more newsworthy substantive changes to individual rules, and they can lead to better and less burdensome substantive decisionmaking.

    One of the first areas of procedural reform we focused upon is reigning in the use of guidance documents.  To understand why this is so important, let me first set the stage by returning to Federalist 51.  There, Madison wrote that “[i]n republican government, the legislative authority necessarily predominates.”  Accordingly, as Madison explained in Federalist 48, “it is against the enterprising ambition of this department that the people ought to indulge all their jealousy and exhaust all their precautions.”  Acting on this belief, the Founders wrote a Constitution in which the first article (establishing Congress) is much more finely wrought than, and is more than double the length of, the second article (establishing the executive).  The Founders viewed the legislative branch—with the power to make policy and thus restrict liberty—as the foremost danger among equals, and thus much more carefully cabined that branch through structural protections (or “precautions” as Madison called them in both Federalist 48 and 51).

    But we twenty-first century Americans, for better or worse, live in the age of the administrative state, where most substantive rules that are binding on the People are created by Executive Branch agencies exercising rulemaking powers delegated by Congress.  That means that the threat from the “enterprising ambition” that Madison feared now comes more often from the administrators than from the legislators.  Accordingly, we also need procedural protections—“precautions,” as Madison called them—to cabin those ambitions. 

    We have some such protections in the form of the Administrative Procedure Act.  When Congress delegates to an executive agency the authority to regulate—that is, to create binding rights and obligations for the public—the APA normally requires that such authority be exercised through notice-and-comment rulemaking.  These rulemaking processes require a lot of input and serious deliberation; there are many steps, and they sometimes proceed slowly or not at all.  They are designed this way, just like the Constitution is designed to require many steps for the enactment of statutes.  Process protects liberty. 

    But regulators like to regulate, and everyone likes a shortcut.  So it has come to pass that, with increasing frequency, administrative agencies, including the Department of Justice, issue so-called guidance documents that effectively bind the public.  The guidance documents do not go through the notice-and-comment process required by the APA; indeed, they do not go through any transparent or regularized process at all.  They just spring forth fully formed, and the public is expected to comply.  Some commentators have begun to call such guidance, perhaps fairly, “regulatory dark matter.”  The threat such a regime poses to our constitutional structure, and the liberty it protects, is manifest.

    Accordingly, with this in mind, in November 2017, Attorney General Sessions signed a memorandum prohibiting the Department of Justice from issuing guidance documents that “impose new requirements on entities outside the Executive Branch.”  The memorandum lays out five principles that must govern any future guidance, including that the document should disclaim any force or effect of law and “should not be used for the purpose of coercing persons or entities” to take or refrain from taking any actions beyond what is already required under the law.

    A few months later, in January 2018, we took the next step to reign in inappropriate use of subregulatory guidance.  The Associate Attorney General issued a new policy that prohibits the use of agency guidance documents in affirmative civil litigation in a manner that would convert such guidance into binding rules of conduct.  This ensures that DOJ will not do with another agency’s guidance what it cannot do with its own under the Sessions Memo.  As the memorandum explains: “That a party fails to comply with agency guidance expanding upon statutory or regulatory requirements does not mean that the party violated those underlying legal requirements; agency guidance documents cannot create any additional legal obligations.”

    Now, I realize that I am at an antitrust, and not an administrative law, conference.  So what does all of this mean for the Antitrust Division?  Well, the Division, often in conjunction with the Federal Trade Commission, has issued numerous guidance documents, including, for example, intellectual property guidelines and, of course, the horizontal merger guidelines.  Under our view, none of these guidelines create binding rights or rules that have the force of law.  The guidelines can be useful in ensuring transparency by explaining how the Antitrust Division uses its prosecutorial discretion.  But the Antitrust Division will not treat a violation of the guidelines as presumptively or conclusively establishing a violation of the underlying legal requirements.  The Division must bring cases in court if it seeks to assert that a violation of the law has occurred, and it must prove such a violation by reference to statutory law and judicial precedent.

    With that, let me turn from the dark matter of guidance documents to another particle in the regulatory cosmos, but one that is even less visible: the consent decree.

    A consent decree is a binding court judgment, and it can serve an important function in a range of cases and enforcement areas.  But some consent decree are voluminous in their requirements and have virtually perpetual life.  They are, in effect, a set of regulations for a single party, overseen by the Department of Justice, a federal judge, and, quite often, a private-party monitor appointed by the court.  In practice, consent decrees can result in one or all of these entities directing the day-to-day operations of a business or local government agency for years on end.  As should be obvious from the description, such a regime can be as intrusive as—if not more intrusive than—a regulation.

    Thirty years ago, Assistant Attorney General Rick Rule, whom many of you know, gave a speech about telecommunications policy to the Brookings Institution.  He noted that the Reagan Administration’s best known accomplishment in antitrust law was the breakup of AT&T.   The ongoing monitoring required under the AT&T consent decree, however, created, in his words, a “mixed legacy” because of the institutional harms flowing from requiring the Antitrust Division and a federal court to be, in effect, telecommunications regulators.  Federal courts and the Antitrust Division, Rule said, “inherently lack many of the resources crucial to successful regulation.”  He explained that effective regulation requires technical expertise, regulatory experience, and administrative processes that federal courts and federal prosecutors simply lack.

    That is one problem, but it is not the only problem.  Some consent decrees stray not only beyond the practical resources and expertise of the enforcers, but also beyond the legal authority of what the government could do by other means.  Imposing conditions that could not be obtained through litigation to judgment is similar to creating regulations beyond the bounds of law.  And just because a court imposes such a decree does not make it appropriate or wise.  Courts, like executive branch agencies, can exceed their powers and distort constitutional norms.  As with our commitment to abstaining from regulation through guidance, the Department of Justice must take care to avoid going beyond our lawful authority through the entry of consent decrees.

    Accordingly, while consent decrees can be necessary and appropriate in certain circumstances, we are requiring Department litigators in all components to proceed with due caution and care before entering into new cosent decrees.  Effective consent decree management is a key part of our regulatory reform and good government efforts. 

    And, as with our other efforts, the Antitrust Division has been doing its part.  For example, last year, at this every forum, Assistant Attorney General Delrahim gave a speech on antitrust and deregulation.  He made the case that a behavioral consent decree substitutes regulation for competition.  He also announced that the Antitrust Division would disfavor behavioral consent decrees, calling them “the wolf of regulation dressed in . . . sheep’s clothing.”   Indeed.  The notion that the Department of Justice can fine-tune the operations of large businesses, for years on end, to prevent competitive harm is simply untenable from a first principles standpoint and unwarranted from a pro-competitive and pro-liberty standpoint. 

    Avoiding behavioral consent decrees is not the only step that the Antitrust Division is taking in this area.  Earlier this year, the Division launched its Judgment Termination Initiative, through which the Division is identifying and terminating legacy consent decrees that no longer protect competition.  To understand why this is important, it is helpful to turn again to something Administrator Rao explained earlier this year.  She described the problem of “cumulative regulations.”   When the government is always adding regulations but never repealing old ones, regulatory accretion occurs—the regulatory text expands and expands, with some regulations serving no purpose and others affirmatively harming economic growth and American competitiveness.

    Consent decrees can suffer from the same infirmity.  Indeed, from the first cases brought under the Sherman Act until 1979, antitrust consent decrees were perpetual.  In that year, the Division changed its policy such that future settlements would have “sunset” provisions that would automatically terminate a decree on a date certain, usually after ten years.  But while the Division recognized forty years ago that perpetual decrees were not in the public interest, there has been no effort to address the perpetual decrees that were entered prior to that date. 

    Until now.  Assistant Attorney General Delrahim and his team deserve great credit for tackling this issue.  And there is a lot of work to do.  There are nearly 1,300 legacy judgments still on the books, including some decrees that are more than one hundred years old.  There is, for example, a decree from 1914 concerning rubber hoof pads for horseshoes.  Another one from 1921 relates to music rolls for player pianos.  And yet another, my personal favorite, controls the market for horse-buggy whips.  This state of affairs, my friends, is not good government.  This is not prudent and careful regulatory action.  This is ancient, cosmic junk unnecessarily floating around the regulatory atmosphere.

    These outdated decrees pose a particular problem given the common-law nature of the antitrust laws, the construction of which evolve through judicial decisionmaking closely informed by economic analysis.  Under the Sherman Act, only unreasonable—which is to say anticompetitive—restraints of trade are condemned.  Courts look to economic analysis to understand what is unreasonable.  And as economic analysis has matured and been refined over decades, courts have recognized that certain practices, once condemned, are not only not harmful to competition, but can even be procompetitive.

    The Supreme Court’s 2007 decision in the Leegin case provides one example of such a change.   In that case, the Court overturned a nearly century-old per se prohibition on resale price maintenance.   It recognized that resale price maintenance can help stimulate interbrand competition.  The antitrust laws are designed to protect just such competition because it is output enhancing.  By contrast, intrabrand competition, such as when independent retailers engage in a price war to undersell a product from the same manufacturer, is not output enhancing.

    Yet a perpetual consent decree related to resale price maintenance entered any year between 1911 and 1979 would have frozen the old prohibition in place.  Such an ongoing, indefinite prohibition against lawful behavior does not serve to protect competition or to advance the rule of law.  Indeed, it affirmatively undermines both.

    Perpetual consent decrees rarely continue to protect competition, and those that are more than ten years old should be terminated absent compelling circumstances.  To expedite the termination of outdated consent decrees, the Antitrust Division has engaged in a comprehensive effort to review all of its legacy judgments.  Each judgment was assigned to a Division attorney, who examined court papers, internal case files, and publicly available information to determine whether the judgment continued to serve competition.  Judgments for which termination is recommended are then posted, by judicial district, to the Division’s website for a thirty-day public comment period.

    The judgments in sixty of seventy-nine judicial districts have been posted to the Division’s website for public comment.  Once the thirty-day public comment period closes for a particular judicial district, the Division will review any comments received and, if appropriate, prepare a motion to terminate the judgments.

    Already, in July, the Division moved to terminate nineteen legacy judgments in the District Court here in the District of Columbia.  And the court granted that motion on August 15.  The Division is actively working to prepare other motions in other districts.

    The Division will move to terminate such decrees where the essential terms of the judgment have been satisfied, where most defendants no longer exist, where the judgment largely prohibits that which the antitrust laws already prohibit, or where market conditions likely have changed.  Of course, as with the Leegin example, the Division will also seek to terminate decrees for which the relevant antitrust jurisprudence has changed and the conduct prohibited might actually be procompetitive.

    I know that the Judgment Termination Initiative is a top priority for AAG Delrahim and the Division.  I applaud the hard work that has gone into this effort already and the commitment of the Division to see it through.

    With that, let me close by saying thank you, again, for the opportunity to be here.  We are hard at work at the Department of Justice, including at the Antitrust Division, in our efforts to enforce the law and fairly administer justice.  As I have stated, that includes applying the limits of the law to ourselves, or, as Madison put it, to controlling ourselves.  We will continue to advance this cause, and we hope it makes a difference in helping the American people and economy flourish.  Thank you very much.

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Assistant Attorney General Makan Delrahim Remarks at the American Bar Association Antitrust Section Fall Forum

    Source: United States Attorneys General 13

    “November Rain”: Antitrust Enforcement on Behalf of American Consumers and Taxpayers

    Good morning, and thank you for the kind introduction.  I’d like to thank the American Bar Association for your invitation to this year’s Fall Forum and Deb Garza for her leadership of the Section this year. 

    I find it hard to believe it’s been only a little more than a year since I was confirmed as AAG and spoke at last year’s Fall Forum.  Over the past year, the Antitrust Division has been hard at work on behalf of American consumers. We made a number of significant enforcement actions this week, but before I turn to those, I’d like to update you on a few recent changes in the Front Office. 

    First, Michael Murray recently joined us from the Deputy Attorney General’s office, where he served as Associate Deputy Attorney General.  Mike now will be a Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the Front Office, where he will be overseeing our Appellate Section and our 4A damage actions on behalf of the American taxpayer.  Mike has significant appellate experience, including as a law clerk for Justice Anthony Kennedy. 

    In addition, our new acting Deputy Assistant Attorney General for Economics is Jeff Wilder.  Jeff received his Ph.D. from MIT and has distinguished himself as an outstanding economist serving as one of the leaders in the Division’s Economic Analysis Group, and we’re happy to have him join us in the Front Office.

    Some of you may remember that at last year’s Fall Forum, I spoke about antitrust and deregulation.  In those remarks, I focused on remedies, including our preference for structural remedies and our emphasis on making consent decrees more enforceable.  I also discussed our commitment to the view that antitrust enforcement is law enforcement, not industrial regulation, and that the Antitrust Division should strive to accomplish its law enforcement mission in the most efficient and effective way possible.  The Division has stood by those principles. 

    More recently, in a speech at Georgetown, I announced several improvements to the merger review process.  We are making good on those changes as well.  Today, we posted a model timing agreement and a model voluntary request letter on our website.  Those documents increase transparency and predictability and will help merging businesses and their counsel know what to expect as part of the merger review process.  We’ve also begun tracking the duration of merger reviews more carefully, so that we can monitor our performance and factors affecting it.  You will recall our goal is to resolve investigations within six months of filing, provided that the parties cooperate and comply with our document and data requests during the entire process.

    I would like to focus the remainder of my remarks today on four important settlements in the last week that reflect the Antitrust Division’s commitment to vigilant and effective antitrust enforcement. 

    As some of you may have seen, the Division announced just yesterday a set of global settlements with three South Korean companies.  Those unprecedented settlements resolve criminal charges and civil claims arising from a bid-rigging conspiracy that targeted fuel supply contracts to U.S. military bases in South Korea.  They are the result of tremendous hard work in parallel criminal and civil investigations by the Antitrust Division’s Washington Criminal I Section, the Transportation, Energy, and Agriculture Section, and the Fraud Section of the Civil Division.  We were assisted ably by our partners at the FBI and the Defense Criminal Investigative Service.

    The United States currently maintains numerous military bases in South Korea, housing American soldiers, marines, airmen, and sailors in the region.  These military bases need fuel for various purposes, and two Department of Defense agencies, the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) and Army and Air Force Exchange Service (AAFES), contract with South Korean companies to supply fuel to the numerous U.S. military bases throughout South Korea. 

    Our investigation, which is ongoing, revealed that SK Energy, GS Caltex, Hanjin Transportation, along with other co-conspirators, rigged bids and fixed prices for fuel supply contracts issued by the U.S. military in South Korea for over a decade.  They cheated the Military and American taxpayers out of precious limited resources.  As a result of the conspiracy, the Department of Defense paid substantially more for fuel supply services.  Although the immediate victim here was the U.S. military, the American taxpayer, you and me, ultimately footed the bill. 

    The three companies agreed yesterday to plead guilty to criminal charges under Section 1 of the Sherman Act, and they will pay at least $82 million in criminal fines for their involvement in the conspiracy.  Importantly, the three defendants have also agreed to cooperate with the ongoing criminal investigation of the conduct. 

    Robert Jackson, who is one of my legal heroes, recognized that bid rigging is particularly harmful to government purchasers.  When he served as Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Antitrust Division, Jackson broadly denounced arrangements that “compel purchasers to pay a price based on calculation, not competition,” and specifically emphasized that “[w]hatever the effect of this on private buyers, it completely destroys the mechanism set up by federal, state, and municipal governments to keep favoritism and corruption out of public buying.”

    The harm Jackson recognized still exists today, and these settlements serve as an important reminder that the Justice Department and its law enforcement partners will investigate aggressively and prosecute without hesitation companies who cheat the United States government and the American taxpayer. 

    We did not stop there.  We are committed to using all authorities Congress has granted to us to remedy antitrust injuries to the American taxpayer.  Those tools include the authority conferred in Section 4A of the Clayton Act.  Section 4A is an important but underused enforcement tool that allows the government to recover treble damages for antitrust violations when the government itself is the victim. 

    To that end, the Division established a parallel civil enforcement team, led by Kathy O’Neill and a group of capable litigators from the Transportation, Energy, and Agriculture Section to pursue parallel civil actions for damages.  We negotiated separate civil resolutions with each of the three defendants on behalf of American taxpayers.  We also worked alongside our partners in the Civil Division’s Fraud Section, who pursued charges against the defendants under the False Claims Act for making false statements to the government in connection with their conspiracy. 

    To resolve both the civil antitrust and the False Claims Act violations, these three defendants have agreed to pay an additional $154 million in total.  They also have agreed to cooperate fully with the Division’s ongoing civil investigation and to implement effective antitrust compliance programs.

    These historic cases mark the first significant settlements under Section 4A in many years.  In fact, as far as we can tell based on our records, they are the largest settlements the government has ever recovered since the enactment of Section 4A.    

    Let me take a step back to review the history of Section 4A. 

    When Congress enacted the Sherman Act in 1890 and the Clayton Act in 1914, neither statute contained a provision specifically allowing the government to recover damages it suffered as a result of an antitrust violation.  In 1939, the United States, led by Assistant Attorney General Thurman Arnold, brought its first-ever antitrust suit for damages on its own behalf.   The government claimed authority to do so under Section 7 of the Sherman Act, which was the predecessor of Section 4 of the Clayton Act.  As most of you know, Section 4 permits “any person” injured by an antitrust violation to recover the damages they suffered. 

    In that pioneering case, United States v. Cooper, the government alleged that eighteen defendants had “collusively fixed” bids that were “identical to the penny on eighty-two different sizes of tires” sold to the United States.  The defendants successfully moved to dismiss the action on the question of whether the government is a “person” entitled to bring an action for damages under the statute.  The Second Circuit affirmed, and the Supreme Court ultimately held that the United States is not a “person” entitled to sue. 

    In 1955, Congress amended the Clayton Act in response to the Court’s ruling in Cooper by adding Section 4A.  As originally enacted, Section 4A allowed the government to recover only single damages, so that the government could recover damages where it was the victim of an antitrust violation. 

    At first, the Division used Section 4A aggressively, filing numerous cases for damages throughout the 1960s and 1970s.  In the 1980s, however, the government brought only four cases under Section 4A—a remarkable decline from the prior two decades.  Some attributed this drop, in part, to the Supreme Court’s Illinois Brick decision in 1978, because many of the cases brought in the ‘60s and ‘70s involved claims by the United States as an indirect purchaser.  The government, however, increasingly purchases goods and services directly.

    The next milestone came in 1990, when Congress amended the Clayton Act again to allow the government to seek treble damages in Section 4A cases. 

    Since 1990, a span of nearly thirty years, only three Section 4A cases have been filed.  In 1991, the Division recovered $250,000 from two companies for rigging bids to purchase surplus gunpowder.  In 1994, the Division filed suit against two defense contractors for entering into a “teaming” arrangement that eliminated competition in supplying the Department of Defense with cluster bombs.  In that case, the Division recovered $4 million on behalf of American taxpayers and obtained an $8 million discount on the bid price.  In 2012, the Division challenged collusion between two companies bidding on four natural gas leases at auctions run by the Bureau of Land Management.  The Division recovered $275,000 from each company. 

    The American Taxpayer deserves to see a revitalization of the government’s Section 4A authority.  This week’s settlements are only the first in that direction.  Going forward, the Division will exercise 4A authority to seek compensation for taxpayers when the government has been the victim of an antitrust violation.  We hope that these efforts will also deter future violations. 

    In light of our policy of seeking damages under Section 4A where available, I would like to address how parallel criminal and civil enforcement will proceed going forward. 

    First, the Division’s new focus on Section 4A enforcement will not require any changes to the Division’s leniency policy.  The Division offers strong incentives to come forward to report criminal antitrust violations in exchange for leniency, and those incentives do not change when the government is harmed by the violation. 

    The Antitrust Criminal Penalty Enhancement and Reform Act of 2004, better known as ACPERA, created another valuable incentive for leniency applications.  Under ACPERA’s detrebling provision, those who successfully qualify for leniency will be subject only to single damages in follow-on civil suits, rather than treble damages.  In addition, those who successfully qualify for leniency are not subject to joint and several liability.

    This detrebling incentive will apply to any Section 4A claims brought by the government.  We will also follow the underlying requirements for ACPERA in Section 4A cases: companies will need to cooperate with the civil team, as they would with any private plaintiff, in order to reap the detrebling benefits.

    The bottom line is that the Division’s enforcement of Section 4A will increase the incentive for co-conspirators in cartel cases to come forward. 

    Separately, I should note that global resolutions like the ones announced yesterday should serve the interests of the parties as well.  Cooperating companies subject to penalties under multiple statutes can gain certainty and finality.  Employees, customers, and investors can resolve the problem and move on. This is consistent with the Department’s broader policies on coordination of corporate penalties.

    Next, as we pursue Section 4A damages going forward, global resolutions of criminal and civil antitrust liability will help maintain a consistent policy on how to calculate civil damages.  Yesterday’s settlements underscore this point.  They provide that SK Energy, GS Caltex, and Hanjin each will pay an amount calculated to exceed the overcharge paid by the government.  At the same time, the amount reflects both the value of the cooperation commitments each defendant made as a condition of settlement and the cost savings the Division realized by avoiding extended litigation.  

    As a general matter, if the government is required to litigate claims it brings under Section 4A, the government will seek treble damages.  In addition, we anticipate that earlier cooperators will benefit by paying a lower multiple of damages, because the value of their cooperation is higher earlier in our investigation. 

    I will turn now to another significant settlement the Division filed this week, one which resolves a complaint against six broadcast television companies alleging that they engaged in widespread, unlawful sharing of non-public, competitively sensitive information.  Along with the complaint, the Division filed proposed final judgments requiring the companies to cease such conduct and to undergo rigorous compliance and reporting measures for the next seven years.

    We uncovered this conduct during our investigation into Sinclair Broadcasting Group’s proposed acquisition of Tribune Media Company, which has since been abandoned. 

    As we allege in the complaint, the defendants agreed in local broadcasting markets throughout the United States to exchange revenue pacing information and other competitively sensitive information.  “Pacing” compares a broadcast station’s revenues booked for a certain time period to the revenues booked in the same point in the previous year.  Pacing indicates how each station is performing versus the rest of the market and provides insight into each station’s remaining spot advertising for the period. 

    We discovered that the defendants had been exchanging pacing information either directly between stations or corporate headquarters, or indirectly through national representatives that help local stations sell advertisements to national advertisers.  By exchanging this information, the broadcasters were better able to anticipate whether their competitors were likely to raise, maintain, or lower spot advertising prices, which in turn helped inform the stations’ own pricing strategies and negotiations with advertisers.  As a result, the information exchanges harmed the competitive price-setting process.

    We have not heard any legitimate pro-competitive justification for this conduct.  We are therefore pleased that these companies recognized that a protracted investigation and litigation would serve no purpose, and we welcome their cooperation as our investigation continues.  We also want to remind businesses, as well as the antitrust practitioners that advise them, that agreements between competitors to exchange competitively sensitive information can violate the antitrust laws and lead to a civil enforcement action even if the conduct does not amount to the type of hard core cartel conduct that the Antitrust Division prosecutes criminally.

    Finally, this morning we announced the third significant enforcement resolution this week—a settlement with Atrium Health, formerly known as Carolinas Healthcare System.  We were joined in the settlement by the North Carolina Attorney General’s Office, and we thank them for their partnership in this action.  The settlement resolves over two years of civil antitrust litigation challenging the hospital system’s use of anticompetitive steering restrictions in its contracts with major health insurers.  These steering restrictions prevented health insurers from promoting innovative health plans and more cost-effective healthcare providers.  

    Atrium is the dominant hospital system in the Charlotte, North Carolina metropolitan area.  It used its market power to limit major health insurers’ ability to introduce plans designed to encourage consumers to choose cost-effective healthcare providers.  Specifically, Atrium would agree to participate in a broad network plan only if the insurer would commit not to introduce other plans that would steer patients away from Atrium.  The steering restrictions also deliberately constrained insurers from providing consumers with transparency into the comparative cost and quality of their healthcare alternatives.

    Because the steering restrictions were in place, insurers could not introduce more innovative health insurance plans that create financial incentives for patients to use lower-cost healthcare services.  Needless to say, competition for patients encourages healthcare providers to reduce costs, lower prices, and increase quality.  These steering restrictions inhibited competition among healthcare providers to provide higher quality, lower-cost services.  

    The resolution prevents Atrium from enforcing the steering restrictions in its contracts with major health insurers.  If approved by the Court, it will restore competition between healthcare providers in Charlotte, North Carolina.

    I would like to make a broader point about the Division’s settlements this week.  The consent decrees in all three cases, like all other decrees the Division has entered into the past 13 months, include specific new provisions designed to improve their enforceability. 

    These provisions (i) address the burden of proof in a civil contempt action by providing that the preponderance standard will apply; (ii) make defendants responsible for reimbursing the government for all costs it incurs in connection with enforcing the decree; (iii) allow the United States to seek a one-time extension of the term of the decree in the event of a violation, or to terminate the decree early if continuation is no longer necessary or in the public interest.  Another provision addresses interpretation of the decree by stating that courts can enforce any provisions that are stated specifically and in reasonable detail, whether or not they are clear and unambiguous on their face.

    The Division serves as a guardian of American consumers, and we act in the public’s trust.  When the Division enters into a consent decree to resolve charges of anticompetitive conduct, we will hold parties’ feet to the fire and enforce the decrees. 

    Finally, last Friday, three defendants pled guilty to conspiring to rig bids and allocate the market in auctions of foreclosed properties in Palm Beach County, Florida.  This case is unlike the Division’s prior foreclosure auction prosecutions because the auction occurred online rather than in-person, and the collusion occurred primarily by text message rather than in-person.  It is a good illustration of the fact that while defendants may use new platforms and technologies to commit antitrust crimes, the Division too is evolving and stands ready to prosecute these crimes in the digital age.

    The conspiracy took place in the aftermath of the financial crisis, which affected the housing market nationwide and the Florida real estate market in particular.  Defendants and their affiliated business entities were the largest buyers of foreclosed properties in Palm Beach County.  Together, the commerce affected by the defendants’ collusion was $25 million. 

    The Division began an investigation into possible collusion in online foreclosure auctions in Palm Beach County, Florida after receiving an anonymous citizen complaint that included a link to a YouTube video detailing the collusion. 

    Co-conspirators texted each other to coordinate their bidding and facilitate the conspiracy to obtain foreclosed homes at suppressed prices.  Most commonly, bidders would agree to stop bidding or to refrain from bidding at their co-conspirators’ request.  In some instances, they lowered bids for each other’s benefit. 

    After learning of the investigation, one of the defendants used and encouraged other co-conspirators to use a text messaging application to continue colluding.  He believed that law enforcement would be unable to read or trace any messages sent through the application.

    The three defendants were indicted by a grand jury in November 2017.  Since then, all three have pleaded guilty.

    I will conclude by taking this opportunity to highlight the outstanding attorneys and economists at the Antitrust Division.  They are the core of executing the Division’s mission and work tirelessly in their commitment to protect competition and consumers.    

    It has been a busy year at the Antitrust Division.  We have been working hard on behalf of America’s consumers and taxpayers, and look forward to continuing our efforts on their behalf in the year to come. 

    Thank you.

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker Delivers Remarks to the Joint Terrorism Task Force

    Source: United States Attorneys General 13

    NOTE: The remarks originally included a case that was scheduled to be sentenced but was continued, and so that case was removed from the speech. However, a reference to the case was inadvertently left in. As such, there is no extradition relating to the Chelsea bomber case.

    Remarks as prepared for delivery

    Thank you, Geoff (Berman), for that kind introduction, and thank you for your leadership as United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York. And thank you also to United States Attorney Richard Donoghue from the Eastern District of New York.

    It is wonderful to be in New York during the holiday season.  I’m told that this is the best time of year to visit—but I must say I am looking forward to Thanksgiving in Des Moines.

    But before I say anything else, I want to take a moment to acknowledge that the law enforcement community is in mourning today.

    Chicago police officer Samuel Jimenez was shot and killed during Monday’s shooting at Mercy hospital. Officer Jimenez had just joined the force in 2017 and he was only 28 years old.  He leaves behind a wife—his high school sweetheart—and three young children.

    Officer Jimenez was on his way to respond to a different call when he heard of shots fired at the hospital.  Then he did what police officers do every day in America: he went toward the danger, so that the rest of us could run away from it.  He and his fellow officers saved a lot of lives that day.

    This tragedy is another reminder of both the danger and the nobility of police work.  Today, as we prepare for Thanksgiving Day, we should all be especially grateful for our police officers.

    It is an honor to be here in the J.O.C., where so many consequential law enforcement decisions have been made—so many decisions that have saved American lives.

    This is where a number of terrorism investigations have begun—and it’s where security is monitored for events like the Thanksgiving Day parade or New Year’s Eve.

    And it is an even greater honor to be with some of the most respected law enforcement leaders in the world.  Thank you to:

    • Commissioner O’Neill,
    • FBI Assistant Director in Charge, William Sweeney,
    • Deputy Commissioner Miller,
    • NYPD Chief Paul Ciorra,
    • Chief Owen Monaghan,
    • Ashan Benedict of ATF,
    • Michael Greco with the Marshals Service,
    • Troy Miller with CBP,
    • Director Frank Russo,
    • Phil Bartlett and our Postal Inspectors, and
    • Scott Sarafian with Secret Service.

    It is an honor to be with all of you.

    NYPD in particular has earned a reputation as perhaps the greatest police department on Earth.

    There are more NYPD officers than there are members of the military in entire nations, like Belgium or Ireland.

    But even more impressive than the quantity of your officers is the quality of your officers.

    You are known all over the country for your Compstat program, which enables you to monitor crime rates in real time and to quickly reallocate officers when crime begins to rise.

    And over the past three decades, your achievements have been staggering.  In 1990, there were 2,245 murders in New York City.  Last year there were 292.  Since 2000, burglaries are down by nearly two-thirds and robberies have been cut in half.  One weekend in October there were zero murders or shootings in New York City for the first time in 25 years.

    These results are a testament to the effectiveness of NYPD, and of many people in this room.  You’ve been able to start a virtuous cycle of safety, prosperity—and more safety.  That is what we want to achieve all across America.

    President Donald Trump is a lifelong New Yorker.  He invested in this city when its future was in doubt.  He bet on this city—and that proved to be a smart bet. 

    The President witnessed New York’s transformation firsthand. I think that made his support for law enforcement even stronger.

    One of his very first Executive Orders was to tell the Department of Justice to improve the safety of state and local law enforcement officers.  And over these past two years, we have followed that order.

    Today I am announcing our next step to carry out that order.  Today I am announcing that the Department of Justice is providing $56 million in grant funding to support law enforcement all across America.

    That includes $29 million for bulletproof vests, $12.2 million for body-worn cameras, and $2 million in health and safety research.

    This is just a small way of saying thank you to the officers who take care of us every day.  We understand the sacrifices that you make—and so we want you to have the right equipment and the right training.

    If anybody out there doesn’t appreciate the role of law enforcement officers in our society, then I would tell them to come to New York.

    Earlier today I visited the 9/11 Memorial.  It was an extremely moving experience.

    We all remember where we were when we heard the news.  I know I do.

    Some of you were here.  Some of you were at Ground Zero.

    It was the worst terrorist attack in American history and the most shocking attack on our soil since Pearl Harbor.  It led to the largest investigation in FBI history.

    None of us have ever been the same.  Speaking for myself, 9/11 strengthened my appreciation for our servicemembers and our first responders and law enforcement officers.

    More than 70 police officers were killed in New York City that day.  Dozens more died of illnesses related to their service at Ground Zero.  Some of you knew them.

    The Department of Justice honors their memory and law enforcement holds them up as examples of our highest ideals.  They died in a rescue mission that saved thousands of lives.

    We are indescribably proud of our federal officers.  But we recognize that the vast majority of the officers in American law enforcement is at the state and local levels.  We cannot succeed without you.

    We’re at our best when we work together—and that’s what the JTTF is all about.

    This is the oldest JTTF in America.  Today there are more than 100 JTTFs nationwide, including at least one in each of our FBI field offices.  The vast majority of these were created in response to 9/11.

    This JTTF set the model for the rest to follow.  You bring together 500 employees from 50 different partner agencies.

    And you’ve achieved so much for this city and for this country.

    You investigated the 2007 JFK bomb plot, the 2009 Subway bomb plot, and the 2010 attempted bombing of Times Square.

    And I am well aware that, under this administration, you’ve continued to have success in investigating terrorism.

    Three times a week, I receive a threat briefing where the FBI and the National Security Division tell me about the national security investigations that we are working on in our United States Attorneys’ offices.  We’ve talked about the work done here.

    People in this room have achieved successes that have made this country safer.

    This February, prosecutors in Geoff’s office secured a life sentence for the Chelsea bomber, Ahmad Rahimi. He planted nine improvised explosive devices in New Jersey and New York, including two not far from here in Chelsea.  He detonated one of them and injured more than 30 people.  The bomb was so powerful that it launched a 100-pound dumpster more than 120 feet.  It shattered windows 400 feet away and three stories above ground level.

    Another bomb here in Chelsea was rendered safe by law enforcement before it was detonated.

    That investigation started right here in this room.

    And so to all of the agents, officers, and the AUSAs who worked on this case—Emil Bove, Andrew DeFilippis, and Shawn Crowley—thank you for this outstanding work.

    People in this room also worked to convict the Bangladeshi national who detonated a bomb near the Port Authority bus terminal last December. The explosion was caught on surveillance video and the defendant was found lying on the ground with parts of a pipe bomb on and around his body.  After he was arrested, he admitted that he detonated the bomb to express his support for ISIS.  He attempted to make the bomb as dangerous as he could and to target a public place during rush hour.

    Just two weeks ago, thanks to the hard work of Geoff’s Assistant U.S. Attorneys Shawn Crowley, Rebekah Donaleski, and George Turner, he was convicted on six counts.  Now he is facing a potential life sentence.

    These are terrific accomplishments.  The dangerous terrorists in these cases can’t hurt anyone now—and that’s because of your hard work.

    But these cases are also a reminder that the terrorist threat is not going away on its own.  Sadly, our work is not finished.

    Terrorists are going to continue to target us.  So we’ve got to keep targeting them—during this holiday season and all year round.

    And so I want to assure all of you that this work remains the top priority of the Department of Justice.  We will not let up.

    We will continue to support you with resources—like the grant funding that I mentioned—with personnel, and with intelligence.

    I want to conclude with something a mentor of mine used to say every time he spoke to law enforcement, and I believe it too: we have your back, and you have our thanks.

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Deputy Attorney General Rod J. Rosenstein Delivers Remarks at the Department of Justice American Indian and Alaska Native Heritage Month Observance Program

    Source: United States Attorneys General 13

    Remarks as prepared for delivery

    Thank you, Tracy, for your kind introduction. I appreciate your devoted service as Director of the Office of Tribal Justice. I first met Tracy more than 20 years ago when we were young attorneys in the Criminal Division.  I am grateful to the employees of the Office of Tribal Justice for everything that they do to promote public safety in Indian Country.

    I also want to thank everyone throughout the Department who works to improve our relationship with tribes and to further tribal justice, as well as those who worked to create today’s event.

    It is my great privilege to join you in celebrating American Indian and Alaska Native Heritage Month.

    The theme for this year’s observance is, “Sovereignty, Trust and Resilience.” It encourages us to reflect on the important contributions of Native Americans and Alaska Natives to the Department, and to our nation’s economic, academic, and cultural institutions.

    American Indians and Alaska Natives are an indispensable part of our national fabric. They are business owners, teachers, first responders, law enforcement offices, and community leaders. They serve with honor in our Armed Forces. And they work proudly in the Department of Justice.

    President Donald Trump said last month, “Native Americans have fortified our country with their traditions and values, making tremendous contributions to every aspect of our national life.  We remain committed to preserving and protecting Native American cultures, languages, and history, while ensuring prosperity and opportunity for all Native Americans.”

    Consistent with the President’s words, we recognize the many contributions and sacrifices by members of this community. Today, we recommit ourselves to ensuring opportunities for all Americans. Every American enriches the quality and character of our great nation.

    The Department of Justice plays a unique role in the government-to-government relationship between the United States and Tribal Nations.

    Our U.S. Attorney’s Offices and law enforcement components, such as the FBI and the DEA, are responsible for investigations, prosecutions, and victim services in 51 judicial districts that include Indian country. Federal prosecutors exercise criminal jurisdiction over 250 distinct regions of Indian country, covering more than 55 million acres of land.

    Our offices work together with Tribal law enforcement, state and local law enforcement agencies, and the Bureau of Indian Affairs to improve the safety and security of Native American and Alaska Native communities.

    The Justice Department also handles a large caseload of civil litigation in Indian country. Our civil cases include matters relating to environmental and natural resources, Tribal treaty rights, and Native Americans’ civil rights.

    Our grant making components provided over $259 million to Tribes last year. Those components include the Office of Justice Programs, the Office for Victims of Crime, the Office on Violence Against Women, and the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services. Their grants support police, serve victims, combat domestic violence and sexual abuse, and strengthen tribal justice systems.

    We are particularly proud of the Tribal Access Program. That effort is coordinated by the Office of Tribal Justice and the Department’s Chief Information Officer. It provides computer kiosks that allow Tribes to access federal crime databases. The kiosks allow Tribes to protect victims of domestic violence, identify sex offenders, keep guns out of criminals’ hands, and help locate missing people.

    There are many success stories involving the kiosks.

    Last year, the Gila River Police Department received a report about a sexual assault against a juvenile. Police quickly identified a suspect, and a warrant followed. But the suspect fled.

    Using a kiosk, tribal police entered the warrant into the FBI’s National Crime Information Center, which we call NCIC. NCIC is a computerized index of criminal justice information. One of its most important functions is to help police apprehend fugitives.

    When police encountered the suspect outside Tribal territory, an NCIC check revealed the tribal warrant. Police took the suspect into custody and transported him to the tribal jail where he was booked using a federal workstation.

    Successes likes that would not be possible without the kiosk system. Since the program started in 2015, 47 participating Tribes have entered more than 600 sex offender registrations into the system. Participating Tribes also have entered arrest data that prevents criminals from purchasing firearms. And Tribes have conducted more than 4,500 fingerprint-based record checks for civil purposes, including employment.

    The total number of tribes with kiosk access will expand to 114 by the end of 2019.

    We are also proud of the Department’s new program to appoint Special Assistant United States Attorneys to work on Tribal issues. The initiative, funded through the Office on Violence Against Women, hires prosecutors to bring cases in both tribal and federal courts. That increases prosecution capacity and helps to prevent criminals from avoiding prosecution because of jurisdiction or sovereignty issues. It will promote the goal of ensuring that every perpetrator of domestic or sexual violence is brought to justice.

    These initiatives demonstrate our Department’s steadfast commitment to improving public safety in Indian country by promoting coordination among tribal, state, and federal law enforcement agencies.

    As part of our observance today, we are fortunate that John Tahsuda is here as a guest speaker.

    Mr. Tahsuda is an enrolled member of the Kiowa Tribe of Oklahoma. He earned a Bachelor of Science degree from Oklahoma State University, and a law degree from Cornell Law School.

    Mr. Tahsuda then worked as the acting general counsel of the Oneida Indian Nation of New York. He also taught classes at Cornell Law School about federal Indian law, policy, and history.

    Mr. Tahsuda later served as general counsel and legislative director of the National Indian Gaming Association, where he monitored legislation and policy issues affecting the organization’s 180 member tribes and assisted with their lobbying efforts.

    In 2002, Mr. Tahsuda joined the staff of the U.S. Senate Committee on Indian Affairs, first as senior counsel and later as staff director. He handled policy and legislation affecting gaming, federal recognition, self-governance, and Indian health care.

    From 2007 through 2017, Mr. Tahsuda worked in the private sector, providing clients with advocacy and counsel services about tribal affairs policy issues.

    Last year, Mr. Tahsuda was appointed as the Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs at the Department of the Interior. Indian Affairs manages Federal trust, treaty, and other responsibilities to 573 federally recognized Indian Tribes. Mr. Tahsuda helps to develop and interpret policies affecting Indian Affairs bureaus, offices, and programs.

    He is a strong advocate for Indian country issues, and we are grateful to him for joining us today. Please welcome John Tahsuda.

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Twenty-Nine Individuals Sentenced to 378 Combined Years in Federal Prison for Running Armed Fentanyl and Methamphetamine Trafficking Ring

    Source: Federal Bureau of Investigation FBI Crime News (b)

    EVANSVILE- 29 defendants have been sentenced to a combined 378 years in federal prison for their roles in a large methamphetamine and fentanyl drug trafficking organization that operated in Southern Indiana.

    According to court documents, between January 2020 and November 2021, the following 29 individuals conspired together to distribute a total of nearly 500 pounds of methamphetamine and over three kilograms of fentanyl. This investigation led to the seizure of over 80 pounds of methamphetamine, over 560 grams of fentanyl, and $240,000 in United States currency.

    Jeramey Smith served as the leader of the drug trafficking operation. Smith began obtaining multiple pound quantities of crystal methamphetamine from Julian Green in early 2020 until April of 2021 when he changed his source of supply to a cartel linked individual based in Houston, Texas. In June of 2021, Smith was robbed of a large amount of cash and was unable to pay his supplier for the lost product. Smith resorted back to Green to obtain the crystal methamphetamine.

    DeJarnett was one of Smith’s top methamphetamine customers, often purchasing up to 20 pounds at a time. After Smith obtained the methamphetamine from either Green or his Mexican source of supply, he then distributed the methamphetamine to mid -level distributors in Indianapolis and Evansville.   

    In September 2021, Smith branched out to also begin selling large quantities of fentanyl-laced pills. Smith would obtain fentanyl powder from Markey and/or Moore, who would then press the powder into pills. Smith then used his same distributors to distribute the fentanyl throughout Southern Indiana. Law enforcement seized an automated pill press during the course of the investigation. Smith also used violence and intimidation to further his drug business by having his distributors robbed of their drug proceeds at gun point.

    Additionally, several members of the drug trafficking used firearms to protect themselves and their profits. In total, law enforcement officers seized over 30 firearms from the defendants during court-authorized searches at multiple locations in Indianapolis and Evansville.

    The charges and sentences are described below:

    Defendant Charge(s) Prison Sentence
    Jeramey Smith, 35
    Indianapolis, IN

    Conspiracy to Possess with the Intent to Distribute Methamphetamine

    Conspiracy to Possess with the Intent to Distribute Fentanyl

    Felon in Possession of a Firearm

    Obstruction of Commerce by Robbery

    240 months (20 years)

    5 years supervised release

    Julian Green, 36

    Indianapolis, IN

    Conspiracy to Possess with the Intent to Distribute Methamphetamine

    Felon in Possession of a Firearm

    210 months (17.5 years)

    Indianapolis, IN

    Hannah Kissel, 28

    Indianapolis, IN

    Conspiracy to Possess with the Intent to Distribute Methamphetamine

    Conspiracy to Possess with the Intent to Distribute Fentanyl

    97 months (8 years)

    3 years supervised release

    Jordan Wilson, 41

    Evansville, IN

    Conspiracy to Possess with the Intent to Distribute Methamphetamine

    Conspiracy to Possess with the Intent to Distribute Fentanyl

    Felon in Possession of a Firearm

    216 months (15.7 years)

    5 years supervised release

    Timothy Rice, 35

    Evansville, IN

    		 Conspiracy to Possess with the Intent to Distribute Methamphetamine

    204 months (17 years)

    5 years supervised release

    Archilles Johnson, 40

    Evansville, IN

    		 Conspiracy to Distribute Methamphetamine

    180 months (15 years)

    5 years supervised release

    Deonte Howard, 36

    Evansville, IN

    		 Conspiracy to Distribute Methamphetamine

    180 months (15 years)

    5 years supervised release

    Julie Hunt, 37

    Petersburg, IN

    Conspiracy to Possess with the Intent to Distribute Methamphetamine

    Conspiracy to Possess with the Intent to Distribute Fentanyl

    60 months (5 years)

    3 years supervised release

    Torrance Mimms, 34

    Evansville, IN

    		 Conspiracy to Possess with the Intent to Distribute Methamphetamine

    180 months (15 years)

    5 years supervised release

    Keisha Jewell, 40

    Princeton, IN

    Conspiracy to Possess with the Intent to Distribute Methamphetamine

    Conspiracy to Possess with the Intent to Distribute Fentanyl

    108 years (9 years)

    3 years supervised release

    Davion Hays, 38

    Evansville, IN

    		 Conspiracy to Distribute Methamphetamine

    144 months (12 years)

    5 years supervised release

    Jason Mitchell, 43

    Henderson, KY

    		 Conspiracy to Distribute Methamphetamine

    204 months (17 years)

    5 years supervised release

    Denny Taylor, 49

    Princeton, IN

    		 Conspiracy to Distribute Methamphetamine

    180 months (15 years)

    5 years supervised release

    Aaron Hardiman, 42

    Princeton, IN

    		 Conspiracy to Distribute Fentanyl

    120 months (10 years)

    5 years supervised release

    Roman Wills, 43

    Evansville, IN

    		 Conspiracy to Distribute Methamphetamine

    180 months (15 years)

    5 years supervised release

    Michael Sanders, 48

    Owensboro, KY

    		 Conspiracy to Possess with the Intent to Distribute Methamphetamine

    168 months (14 years)

    5 years supervised release

    Gregory Snyder, 62

    Evansville, IN

    		 Conspiracy to Distribute Methamphetamine

    36 months (3 years)

    4 years supervised release

    Joshua Gahagan, 41

    Evansville, IN

    		 Conspiracy to Distribute Methamphetamine

    180 months (15 years)

    5 years supervised release

    Gregory Markey, 35

    Indianapolis, IN

    		 Conspiracy to Possess with the Intent to Distribute Fentanyl

    168 months (14 years)

    5 years supervised release

    L.C. Moore, II, 31

    Indianapolis, IN

    		 Conspiracy to Possess with the Intent to Distribute Fentanyl

    120 months (5 years)

    5 years supervised release

    Dominique Baquet, 31

    Indianapolis, IN

    		 Obstruction of Commerce by Robbery

    57 months (4.7 years)

    3 years supervised release

    Antonio DeJarnett, 36

    Evansville, IN

    		 Conspiracy to Distribute Methamphetamine

    264 months (22 years)

    5 years supervised release

    Ryan Pinkston, 42

    Evansville, IN

    Conspiracy to Possess with the Intent to Distribute Methamphetamine

    Felon in Possession of Ammunition

    240 months (20 years)

    5 years supervised release

    Robert Embry, 46

    Evansville, IN

    		 Conspiracy to Possess with the Intent to Distribute Methamphetamine

    60 months (5 years)

    5 years supervised release

    Becky Edwards, 39

    Evansville, IN

    		 Conspiracy to Possess with the Intent to Distribute Methamphetamine

    120 months (10 years)

    5 years supervised release

    Edward Meredith, 59

    Evansville, IN

    		 Conspiracy to Possess with the Intent to Distribute Methamphetamine

    120 months (10 years)

    5 years supervised release

    Joshua Wilson, 33

    Evansville, IN

    		 Use of a Communication Facility with the Intent to Commit or Facilitate the Distribution of Methamphetamine

    30 months (2.5 years)

    No supervised release

    Tabitha Seabeck, 32

    Henderson, KY

    		 Conspiracy to Possess with the Intent to Distribute Methamphetamine

    180 months (15 years)

    5 years supervised release

    Zachary Addison, 42

    Evansville, IN

    Conspiracy to Possess with the Intent to Distribute Methamphetamine

    Felon in Possession of a Firearm

    300 months (25 years)

    5 years supervised release

    “The members of this conspiracy will spend decades in federal prison for pumping pounds of methamphetamine and fentanyl onto our streets,” said John E. Childress, Acting United States Attorney for the Southern District of Indiana. “Drug use devastates so many families and kills hundreds of Hoosiers every year. That’s why we will work with our federal, state, and local law enforcement partners to dismantle armed organizations trafficking in deadly drugs. The sentences imposed in this case demonstrate our continued commitment to protecting the public from these dangerous criminals.”

    “Dismantling a major drug trafficking organization that was responsible for distributing multi-hundred-pound quantities of methamphetamine and kilogram quantities of fentanyl onto the streets of Indiana was a big win for law enforcement. Because of the exceptional collaborative efforts by law enforcement, we were able to achieve this remarkable outcome,” said DEA Assistant Special Agent in Charge, Michael Gannon. “This investigation was a wonderful victory for all Hoosiers and sends a crystal-clear message to major drug dealers we will continue working together with our partners to dismantle their illicit operations.”   

    “This sentencing is a significant victory in the relentless fight against the trafficking of deadly drugs and underscores the FBI’s commitment to pursue those who wreak havoc on our communities through their illegal drug trade,” said FBI Indianapolis Special Agent in Charge Herbert J. Stapleton. “The FBI will continue to work with our law enforcement partners to ensure those who endanger public safety and contribute to this crisis are held accountable.”

    “I would like to thank the dedicated Evansville Police Officers and Vanderburgh County Sheriff’s Office Deputies as well as our federal partners in the DEA and US Attorney’s Office for their roles in getting these individuals off our streets. The manufacturing and distribution of methamphetamine and fentanyl have brought death and destruction to our communities and have done irreversible damage to families in the worst way possible. This community will not tolerate that kind of behavior and illegal activity, and we will use every resource available to us to stop it and put dealers behind bars.”

    This case was investigated by the Drug Enforcement Administration’s Evansville Resident Office, with the FBI, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, Evansville Vanderburgh County Joint Task Force, DEA Indianapolis and Indianapolis Metro Drug Task Force providing valuable assistance. The sentenced were imposed by U.S. District Court Judge Matthew P. Brookman.

    Acting U.S. Attorney John E. Childress thanked Assistant United States Attorneys Lauren Wheatley and Jeremy Kemper, who prosecuted this case. 

    According to the Drug Enforcement Administration, as little as two milligrams of fentanyl can be fatal, depending on a person’s body size, tolerance, and past usage—a tiny amount that can fit on the tip of a pencil. Seven out of ten illegal fentanyl tablets seized from U.S. streets and analyzed by the DEA have been found to contain a potentially lethal dose of the drug.

    One Pill Can Kill: Avoid pills bought on the street because One Pill Can Kill. Fentanyl has now become the leading cause of death for adults in the United States. Fentanyl is a highly potent opioid that drug dealers dilute with cutting agents to make counterfeit prescription pills that appear to be Oxycodone, Percocet, Xanax, and other drugs. Fake prescription pills laced with fentanyl are usually shaped and colored to look like pills sold at pharmacies. For example, fake prescription pills known as “M30s” imitate Oxycodone obtained from a pharmacy, but when sold on the street the pills routinely contain fentanyl. These pills are usually round tablets and often light blue in color, though they may be in different shapes and a rainbow of colors. They often have “M” and “30” imprinted on opposite sides of the pill. Do not take these or any other pills bought on the street – they are routinely fake and poisonous, and you won’t know until it’s too late.

    ###

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Convicted Felon Sentenced to Seven Years for Possession of Firearm

    Source: Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) State Crime News

    Tampa, FL – U.S. District Judge Thomas P. Barber has sentenced Sherron Gary (41, Tampa) to seven years in federal prison for possessing a firearm and ammunition as a convicted felon. Gary pleaded guilty in October 2024.

    According to court documents, on April 9, 2023, officers with the Tampa Police Department (TPD) attempted a traffic stop on a vehicle driven by Gary after observing the vehicle had a broken taillight. Gary failed to pull over and instead fled from the officers at a high rate of speed. A police helicopter followed Gary. After Gary’s vehicle was boxed in by law enforcement, Gary fled from the officers on foot, which the helicopter was also able to capture.

    As Gary fled, the helicopter crew observed Gary discard an item as he was running that resembled a firearm. TPD officers apprehended Gary. After the arrest, the helicopter crew directed officers back to the location where they had observed Gary discard the firearm. Officers located a 9mm Walther Creed semiautomatic pistol at the location.

    At the time, Gary had four prior felony convictions, including aggravated battery and armed burglary of a dwelling, trafficking of cocaine, delivery of cocaine, and delivery of cocaine within 1,000 feet of church. As a convicted felon, Gary is prohibited from possessing firearms or ammunition under federal law.

    This case was investigated by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Tampa Police Department, and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. It was prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorney Samantha Newman. The forfeiture was handled by Assistant United States Attorney Suzanne Nebesky.

    This case is part of Project Safe Neighborhoods (PSN), a program bringing together all levels of law enforcement and the communities they serve to reduce violent crime and gun violence, and to make our neighborhoods safer for everyone. On May 26, 2021, the Department launched a violent crime reduction strategy strengthening PSN based on these core principles: fostering trust and legitimacy in our communities, supporting community-based organizations that help prevent violence from occurring in the first place, setting focused and strategic enforcement priorities, and measuring the results.

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Serial Fraudster Sentenced to 10 Years in Federal Prison for Stealing Nearly $3 Million and Five Indianapolis Homes

    Source: Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) State Crime News

    EVANSVILLE— James Henley, 35, of Greenwood, Indiana, has been sentenced to ten years in federal prison, followed by three years of supervised release after pleading guilty to aggravated identity theft, conspiracy to commit access device fraud, two counts of money laundering, and eight counts of wire fraud. Henley has also been ordered to pay $1,887,426.63 in restitution.

    According to court documents, over the course of three years, Henley orchestrated multiple large and complex fraud schemes, resulting in a total loss of $2,927,758.95 to individual homeowners, an Indiana attorney, a bank, and ten state governments. As part of his fraud schemes, Henley registered five fake businesses (OnTrack Real Estate Solutions, LDI Investments Corp, Lucario Investments, 317 Traffic, and Henley Real Estate Solutions) with the states of Indiana and Kentucky, claiming to serve as the Chief Executive Officer for most of them. None of the businesses were legitimate. Instead, Henley used the businesses to mask his identity, make his schemes appear more credible, and launder the stolen money.

    Henley’s schemes are broken down as follows:

    COVID-19 Fraud:

    Between May 2020 and March 2021, James Henley, his wife Jameka Henley, and his associate Jimmie Bickers used the stolen personally identifiable information of 76 real individuals to submit 120 unemployment insurance applications to ten states during the COVID-19 pandemic. Once the applications were approved, the trio used 65 unemployment insurance debit cards to make purchases at retailers and withdraw cash at ATMs in the Evansville and Indianapolis areas. The states paid a total of $1,119,426.63 in unemployment benefits in connection with the group’s fraudulent applications.  In July 2020, Henley used funds withdrawn from ATMs to buy a Chevrolet Camaro for $22,801.

    Bickers and Jameka Henley have been formally charged for their roles in this scheme but have not pleaded guilty.

    Home Title Fraud:

    Between December 2021 and May 2023, Henley stole five homes in Indianapolis by filing fraudulent deeds with the Marion County Recorder’s Office. Through the filings, Henley claimed that the homeowners had sold their homes to his fake businesses, but, in reality, he had never even spoken with the homeowners.  Unbeknownst to the victims, Henley filed these fraudulent deeds and then sold the homes for significantly less than their market value, pocketing more than $260,000 in profits.

    Henley also attempted to steal and sell an additional 14 homes in Indianapolis and Evansville.  With one exception, the individuals who bought the homes from Henley took possession and ultimately kept the homes.

    For one homeowner, the property Henley stole was her childhood home. She purchased the home while her mother was in the hospital with the hope that, when her mother’s condition improved, her mother would be able to live out her remaining years in the house.

    Mortgage Fraud:

    In November 2021, an associate of Henley’s purchased a home in Indianapolis, using a mortgage loan from a bank.  In April 2022, Henley filed a fraudulent document with the Marion County Recorder’s Office to make it seem as if the mortgage loan had been paid off, when it had not been paid. Henley then filed a deed naming himself a joint owner of the home. Henley and his associate subsequently sold the property for $255,000, pocketing all the proceeds, even though the bank should have received the majority of the funds.

    Auto Loan Fraud:

    In March 2023, Henley purchased a Dodge Durango in Indianapolis for $71,479, using an auto loan from Everwise Credit Union. A few months later, in June 2023, Henley purchased a Chevrolet Silverado in Plainfield for $54,270, using a second loan from Everwise Credit Union.

    In October 2023, Henley connected a JPMorgan Chase bank account to his auto loans, via Everwise’s online payment portal.  Henley falsely represented that the Chase account belonged to Jimmie Bickers, and that he had authority to make payments on his loans using funds from the Chase account.

    The Chase account was actually an Indiana attorney’s Interest on Lawyers’ Trust Account (IOLTA), which is a highly regulated bank account used by lawyers to hold client funds.  The interest earned on IOLTA accounts is used to fund grants for nonprofit groups that promote pro bono and access to justice programs. Henley did not have the attorney’s permission to access or withdraw funds from the IOLTA account.

    Between October and November 2023, Henley used the IOLTA account to make two payments, totaling $98,000, toward his auto loans.

    Henley has prior felony convictions for financial crimes, including theft, forgery, and fraud.

    “James Henley went to great lengths to coordinate exceptionally greedy, complex schemes that exploited hard-working families and state government programs,” said John E. Childress, Acting U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Indiana. “Undeterred by prior felony convictions for the same conduct, this defendant stole over a million dollars, wreaking financial and logistical havoc on hundreds of victims. The Department of Justice will continue to work with our law enforcement partners to investigate allegations of fraud and seek prosecution as appropriate.”

    “James Henley filed fraudulent unemployment insurance (UI) claims in the names of identity theft victims in order to receive UI benefits to which he was not entitled. He enriched himself by defrauding a program that was intended to assist struggling American workers during an unprecedented global pandemic,” said Megan Howell, Acting Special Agent-in-Charge, Great Lakes Region, U.S. Department of Labor, Office of Inspector General. “We and our law enforcement partners are committed to protecting the integrity of the UI system from those who seek to exploit this critical benefit program.”

    “This lengthy prison sentence sends a clear message: individuals who attempt to exploit and commit financial crime and identity theft will be brought to justice,” said Ramsey E. Covington, Acting Special Agent in Charge, IRS Criminal Investigation, Chicago Field Office. “IRS Criminal Investigation and our fellow law enforcement partners are committed to protecting the integrity of our financial institutions and will continue to hold criminals like James Henley accountable to the fullest extent of the law.”

    “This case should serve as a powerful reminder that individuals with a history of financial crimes will face significant consequences when they demonstrate a blatant disregard for the law and continue to exploit and deceive others for personal gain,” said FBI Indianapolis Special Agent in Charge Herbert J. Stapleton. “The FBI, working alongside our law enforcement partners, will continue to hold those who perpetuate such offenses accountable and protect the public from those who manipulate the system for their own benefit.”

    The Federal Bureau of Investigation, Internal Revenue Service-Criminal Investigation, Department of Labor-Office of the Inspector General, and the Indiana Attorney General’s Office Homeowner Protection Unit investigated this case. The sentence was imposed by U.S. District Judge Matthew B. Brookman.

    Acting U.S. Attorney Childress thanked Assistant U.S. Attorney Matthew Miller, who prosecuted this case.

    On May 17, 2021, the Attorney General established the COVID‑19 Fraud Enforcement Task Force to marshal the resources of the Department of Justice in partnership with agencies across government to enhance efforts to combat and prevent pandemic-related fraud. The Task Force bolsters efforts to investigate and prosecute the most culpable domestic and international criminal actors and assists agencies tasked with administering relief programs to prevent fraud by augmenting and incorporating existing coordination mechanisms, identifying resources and techniques to uncover fraudulent actors and their schemes, and sharing and harnessing information and insights gained from prior enforcement efforts.

    Anyone with information about allegations of attempted fraud involving COVID‑19  can report it by calling the Department of Justice’s National Center for Disaster Fraud (NCDF) Hotline at 866-720-5721 or via the NCDF Web Complaint Form at https://www.justice.gov/disaster-fraud/ncdf-disaster-complaint-form

    ###

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Providence Man Pleads Guilty to Fentanyl Trafficking Charge

    Source: Office of United States Attorneys

    PROVIDENCE, RI – A Providence man who was the target of an FBI Safe Streets Task Force investigation into drug trafficking pleaded guilty on Tuesday in federal court to a charge of possession with intent to distribute fentanyl, announced United States Attorney Zachary A. Cunha.

    According to charging documents and information presented to the court, a court authorized search of the Providence residence of Montrell Dennis, 34, on May 3, 2024, resulted in the discovery of several plastic baggies containing fentanyl and an assortment of other drugs. Toxicology reports of the seized narcotics indicate there were 29.4 grams of a mixture containing Fentanyl, Heroin, Cocaine, and Xylazine and 1.37 grams of crack cocaine. Multiple digital scales, multiple smartphones, and two firearms were also seized.

    Dennis, who has been detained since his arrest on May 3, 2025, is scheduled to be sentenced on April 22, 2025. The defendant’s sentence will be determined by a federal district judge after consideration of the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors.

    The case is being prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorneys Peter I. Roklan and Taylor A. Dean.

    The matter was investigated by the FBI Rhode Island Safe Streets Gang Task Force.

    ###

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI: Regarding the approval of INVL Technology prospectus

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    INVL Technology (hereinafter – the Company) informs that under the provision of the Law on Collective Investment Undertakings of the Republic of Lithuania (hereinafter – CIU), the Company operating under the CIU is under an obligation to have a valid prospectus (hereinafter – the Prospectus) prepared in accordance with the requirements of the CIU or of the Law on Securities of the Republic of Lithuania (hereinafter – LS).

    In order to meet the above-mentioned requirement, in August 2019 the Company’s management company INVL Asset Management, UAB (hereinafter – the Management company) prepared a Prospectus in compliance with CIU. Considering that at the time of publication of the information there are no grounds that the Company should prepare and own a prospectus complying with the requirements of the LS, on 5 February 2025, the Management company of the Company approved the updated version of the Prospectus and approved its publication.

    The Prospectus was submitted to the Bank of Lithuania in accordance with the CIU. 

    The person authorized to provide additional information:
    Kazimieras Tonkūnas
    INVL Technology Managing Partner
    E-mail k.tonkunas@invltechnology.lt

    Attachment

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Guatemalan Nationals Charged for Alleged Possession of Firearms Following IH-35 Road Rage Complaint

    Source: Office of United States Attorneys

    WACO, Texas – Two Guatemalan nationals were arrested in Waco on criminal charges related to their alleged aiding and abetting the possession of a firearm as undocumented noncitizens.

    According to court documents, Anderson Morales-Calderon and Ever Morales-Calderon were subjected to a traffic stop on Jan. 24, by officers from the Troy Police Department (TPD) and Lorena Police Department (LPD) as response to a road rage complaint called into 911. The 911 caller alleged that an individual pointed a rifle at a semi-truck on IH-35. During the traffic stop, officers observed two air rifles and one .22 rifle in plain view in the back seat and on the back floorboard of the vehicle. Further investigation revealed that both Anderson and Ever Morales-Calderon were unlawfully present in the United States.

    The two defendants were in federal court in Austin Tuesday for their initial appearances. If convicted, they each face up to 10 years in federal prison. A federal district court judge will determine any sentence after considering the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors.

    U.S. Attorney Jaime Esparza for the Western District of Texas made the announcement.

    The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement are investigating the case with the assistance of the TPD and LPD.

    Assistant U.S. Attorney Stephanie Smith-Burris is prosecuting the case.

    A criminal complaint is merely an allegation and all defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.

    ###

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Mississippi Man Sentenced to Over Eight Years in Federal Prison After Being Convicted for Being a Felon in Possession of a Firearm and Ammunition

    Source: United States Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms and Explosives (ATF)

          JONESBORO—Robert Wilburn, a multi-convicted felon, will spend the next 100 months in federal prison for being a felon in possession of a firearm and ammunition. Jonathan D. Ross, United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Arkansas, announced the sentence, which was handed down today by United States District Lee P. Rudofsky.

          On March 15, 2022, deputies from the Mississippi County Sheriff’s Office responded to a vehicle that was stopped on the side of the road. Deputies located Wilburn asleep behind the wheel of the vehicle. While attempting to wake Wilburn, deputies noticed the smell of intoxicants and marijuana in the vehicle. After repeated attempts, deputies were finally able to wake Wilburn, whose speech was incoherent. Deputies removed Wilburn from the vehicle and placed him in handcuffs. During a search of Wilburn’s vehicle, deputies located in plain view next to the center console a Glock 43, 9mm firearm that contained a loaded magazine and one round in the chamber. In the center console, deputies located a box of 9mm ammunition that matched the ammunition found inside of the firearm. Deputies also located a second magazine in the glovebox. Deputies found an open beer can in the center cup holder that was cold to the touch and a small amount of marijuana in the pocket of the driver’s side door.

          On February 9, 2023, Wilburn, 32, of Inverness, Mississippi, was indicted on one count of being a felon in possession of a firearm and ammunition. On August 21, 2024, a jury found Wilburn guilty after a two-day jury trial conducted in the Jonesboro federal courthouse.

          Judge Rudofsky also sentenced Wilburn to three years’ supervised release. There is no parole in the federal system.

          The investigation was conducted by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives with assistance from the Mississippi County Sheriff’s Office. This case was prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorneys Erin O’Leary and Katie Hinojosa.

    # # #

    Additional information about the office of the

    United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Arkansas, is available online at

    https://www.justice.gov/edar

    X (formerly known as Twitter):

    @USAO_EDAR 

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Update on fire at Mount Edgcumbe

    Source: City of Plymouth

    Mount Edgcumbe House and Country Park has been closed to all visitors today (Wednesday) following a fire at the Barrow Centre yesterday evening.

    Two flats and two holiday lets at the Centre have been seriously damaged by the fire, which was put out by crews from Cornwall Fire and Rescue Service assisted by Devon and Somerset Fire and Rescue Service, who are still on site this morning.

    The Barrow Centre was evacuated as soon as the fire was discovered and fortunately no one was injured.

    Other sections of the Barrow Centre housing businesses and flats are now being assessed. Mount Edgcumbe House itself has not been impacted.

    Sadly, those living in the damaged flats have lost their personal belongings. They were provided with temporary accommodation elsewhere in the park last night.

    The cause of the fire is being investigated.

    The buildings will now be assessed by structural engineers and the area around the Barrow Centre made safe and cordoned off.

    The park is expected to reopen tomorrow and an update on when businesses in the Barrow Centre can re-open will be provided once all the assessments have been completed.

    The Mount Edgcumbe House and Country Park team is contacting anyone who have any upcoming events or bookings that may be affected by the fire.

    Mount Edgcumbe House and Country Park is jointly owned and managed by Plymouth City Council and Cornwall Council.

    Plymouth councillor Tom Briars-Delve, Joint chair of the Mount Edgcumbe Joint Committee, said: “Everyone here is obviously devastated by the damage caused to the properties on the estate and our sympathies are with the families who have lost their possessions and the affected business owners. We will be supporting those families and the affected businesses however we can.

    “We are very thankful no one was injured by the fire and will leave it to the fire service to investigate its cause and how it spread. We are grateful for the efforts of the fire crews throughout the night.

    “Our priority is to support the families affected and to make the area safe so we can reopen the park and help the businesses resume their operations as soon as possible.”

    Cornwall councillor Kate Ewert, Joint chair of the Mount Edgcumbe Joint Committee, said: “The fire is devastating for everyone involved and I know there is a sense of shock amongst those who live and work here but we can be thankful that no one has been hurt. The fire service did an incredible job in getting to the site quickly and protecting the remainder of the property.

    “Our thoughts are with those who have lost all their possessions and I know the community is keen to pull together and provide support in whatever way it can. We will all be working together to help those impacted by this to get the Barrow Centre back up and running as soon possible.”

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

  • MIL-OSI: Phunware Mobile Hospitality Solution Deployed at JW Marriott Phoenix Desert Ridge Resort & Spa

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    Phunware Technology for Location-Based Services and Enhanced Connectivity Providing Guests Seamless, Property-Wide Navigation

    Integrated Solutions for Data-Driven Insights and Location Based Services to Boost Efficiency, Revenue, and Guest Satisfaction

    AUSTIN, Texas, Feb. 05, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Phunware, Inc. (“Phunware” or the “Company”) (NASDAQ: PHUN), a leader in enterprise cloud solutions for mobile applications, announced today that JW Marriott Phoenix Desert Ridge Resort & Spa is deploying its enhanced Smart Hospitality Solution. The app will provide JW Marriott Desert Ridge guests using iOS and Android operating systems with real time navigation capabilities across 950 guest rooms and meeting space as well as the amenities including: AquaRidge WaterPark, Revive Spa, multiple restaurants, golf club and other features at this Marriott resort property.

    JW Marriott Desert Ridge chose Phunware to develop the resort property app based on experience and capabilities developing mobile solutions that enhance guest experiences across complex facilities.

    “Working with Phunware enables us to provide guests the tools to navigate and discover everything the property has to offer,” said Christa Wood, Director of Marketing at JW Marriott Phoenix Desert Ridge Resort & Spa. “Our new mobile app showcases amenities and seasonal activities throughout the year, ensuring guest enjoyment and engagement with our resort.”

    Phunware’s enhanced Smart Hospitality Solution perfectly aligns with Marriott’s requirements for mobile-first guest experiences by enabling resort guests to access features such as:

    • On-Property Navigation
      Navigate seamlessly throughout the resort with step-by-step directions. Guests can easily locate rooms, event venues, dining options, pools, and other amenities. This feature enhances the guest experience by eliminating the stress of finding their way around large properties.
    • Dining Reservations
      Explore and reserve exceptional dining options at the JW Marriott Desert Ridge, from the inventive Southwestern flavors of Tía Carmen to the Asian-inspired creations at Kembara, or the refined atmosphere of Meritage, an Urban Tavern by the golf course.
    • Cabana and Experience Bookings
      Conveniently book poolside cabanas to relax by the water and participate in resort-hosted events and activities, such as family-friendly experiences, fitness classes, or entertainment nights.
    • Spa and Golf Reservations
      Effortlessly schedule spa treatments, including massages, facials, body treatments, and salon services, through the app. Guests can also reserve tee times at the resort golf course, making it simple to plan a relaxing or active day.

    “Technology has become a cornerstone of modern hospitality and forward-looking companies are providing the seamless, personalized mobile-first experiences that guests expect,” said Stephen Chen, CEO of Phunware. “JW Marriott Desert Ridge Resort & Spa is a perfect example of how personalized, easy-to-use digital interfaces will help luxury hotels, resorts and other large complex facilities exceed guest and other user expectations. For example, mobile hospitality solutions allow guests to check in, unlock their rooms, order room service and book activities — all from their smartphones.”

    Click here to learn more about how Phunware’s mobile experience platform unifies the guest experience in hospitality.

    About JW Marriott Phoenix Desert Ridge Resort & Spa

    Set on 316 acres of sweeping Sonoran Desert, JW Marriott Phoenix Desert Ridge Resort & Spa features 950 rooms with dramatic desert and mountain views among lush grounds and gardens. The elements of fire, water, earth, and sky are woven into the resort experience, amenities, and decor. Arizona’s largest luxury resort offers Marriott’s first Revive Spa, a fitness center and movement studio, seven dining outlets, 240,000 square feet of indoor and outdoor meeting space, and the exclusive Griffin Club. The AAA Four Diamond resort also boasts four acres of elaborately landscaped waterways, including five pools, a 1,600-foot Lazy River and three unique multi-story waterslides that opened in summer 2023. A destination for the active, the expansive resort offers ample opportunity to explore the outdoors and delight in 330+ days of sunshine a year, with on-site amenities such as 17 pickleball courts, three tennis courts, 36 holes of championship golf at Wildfire Golf Club, and bike rentals, along with convenient access to nearby hiking and fitness trails.

    About Phunware

    Phunware, Inc. (NASDAQ: PHUN) is an enterprise software company specializing in mobile app solutions with integrated intelligent capabilities. We provide businesses with the tools to create, implement, and manage custom mobile applications, analytics, digital advertising, and location-based services. Phunware is transforming mobile engagement by delivering scalable, personalized, and data-driven mobile app experiences.

    Phunware’s mission is to achieve unparalleled connectivity and monetization through the widespread adoption of Phunware mobile technologies, leveraging brands, consumers, partners, digital asset holders, and market participants. Phunware is poised to expand its software products and services audience through its new Generative AI platform, utilize and monetize its patents and other intellectual property, and reintroduce its digital asset ecosystem for existing holders and new market participants.

    For more information on Phunware, please visit www.phunware.com. To better understand and leverage generative AI and Phunware’s mobile app technologies, visit ai.phunware.com.

    Safe Harbor / Forward-Looking Statements

    This press release includes forward-looking statements. All statements other than statements of historical facts contained in this press release, including statements regarding our future results of operations and financial position, business strategy and plans, and our objectives for future operations, are forward-looking statements. The words “anticipate,” “believe,” “continue,” “could,” “estimate,” “expect,” “intend,” “may,” “might,” “plan,” “possible,” “potential,” “predict,” “project,” “should,” “will,” and similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements. For example, Phunware is using forward-looking statements when it discusses the adoption and impact of emerging technologies and their use across mobile engagement platforms.

    The forward-looking statements contained in this press release are based on our current expectations and beliefs concerning future developments and their potential effects on us. These forward-looking statements involve risks, uncertainties, and other assumptions that may cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed or implied. These risks and uncertainties include, but are not limited to, those factors described under the heading “Risk Factors” in our filings with the SEC. We undertake no obligation to update any forward-looking statements.

    By their nature, forward-looking statements involve risks and uncertainties. We caution you that forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance and that our actual results may differ materially from those expressed or implied by these forward-looking statements.

    Investor Relations Contact:

    Chris Tyson, Executive Vice President
    MZ Group – MZ North America
    949-491-8235
    PHUN@mzgroup.us
    www.mzgroup.us

    Phunware Media Contact:

    Joe McGurk, Managing Director
    917-259-6895
    PHUN@mzgroup.us

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Ukraine: prospects for peace are slim unless Europe grips the reality of Trump’s world

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Stefan Wolff, Professor of International Security, University of Birmingham

    When EU leaders gathered for their first ever meeting solely dedicated to defence issues on February 3, in Brussels, the war in Ukraine was uppermost on their minds. Yet, three weeks before the third anniversary of Russia’s full-scale invasion, Ukraine is only the tip of an iceberg of security challenges that Europe faces.

    War on a scale not seen in Europe since 1945 has returned to the continent. Russian sabotage of everything from critical infrastructure to elections is at levels reminiscent of the cold war. And the future of the EU’s most important defence alliance, Nato, is uncertain.

    In light of these challenges alone, let alone the ongoing instability in the Middle East, western Balkans and south Caucasus, it’s hard to disagree with the observation by EU council president António Costa that: “Europe needs to assume greater responsibility for its own defence.”

    But it’s hardly a groundbreaking statement. And at the end of proceedings, the outcome of what was ultimately only an informal meeting, was underwhelmingly summarised by Costa as “progress in our discussions on building the Europe of defence”.

    This does not bode well for Ukraine. US support is unlikely to continue at the levels reached during the final months of the Biden administration. In fact, ongoing debates in the White House on Ukraine policy have already caused some disruption to arms shipments from Washington to Kyiv.

    Building blocs

    If there is a silver lining for Ukraine here, it is Trump’s continuous search for a good deal. His latest idea is that Ukraine could pay for US support with favourable concessions on rare earths, and potentially other strategic resources.

    These would include preferential deals to supply the US with titanium, iron ore and coal, as well as critical minerals, including lithium. Whether this is a sustainable basis for US support in the long term is as unclear as whether it will make any material difference to Trump thinking beyond a ceasefire.

    The other ray of hope for Ukraine is that there is a much greater recognition in EU capitals now about the need for a common European approach to defence. A greater focus on building a “coalition of the willing” including non-EU members UK and Norway is a potentially promising path.

    But hope, as they say, is not a winning strategy. In a Trump-like transactional fashion, Brussels – in exchange for a deal on defence with London – is insisting on UK concessions on youth mobility and fishing rights. It’s unlikely that this will prove an insurmountable stumbling bloc, but it will create yet more delays at a moment when time is of the essence for Europe as a whole to signal determination about security and defence.

    This is further complicated by two factors. On the one hand, there is the looming threat of a trade war between the US and the EU. That the UK may still be able to avoid a similar fate, according to Trump, feels like good news for London. But it will also put the UK in a potentially awkward position as it seeks an ambitious post-Brexit reset with the EU and harbours hopes to improve relations with China.

    With Trump clearly hostile towards both Brussels and Beijing, this may become an impossible balancing act for the British government to pull off.

    Europe’s fragile unity

    On the other hand, EU unity has become more fragile. Trump’s victory has emboldened other populist leaders in Europe – notably the significantly more pro-Russian Slovak and Hungarian prime ministers, Robert Fico and Viktor Orbán. The same applies to the UK, where Nigel Farage, leader of the Reform UK party – which has overtaken the ruling Labour party in the latest public opinion polls – is known for his Ukraine-sceptical views.

    To that equation add a weak government in France and the likelihood of protracted coalition negotiations in Germany after hotly contested parliamentary elections at the end of February. The prospects for decisive EU and wider European action on strengthening its own security and defence capabilities right now appear vanishingly slim.

    Seen in the light of such multiple and complex challenges, it is astonishing how much the EU is still trapped in a wishful thinking exercise – and one that appears more and more disconnected from reality. Contrary to Costa’s fulsome pronouncements after the EU leaders’ meeting, there is little evidence that the US under Trump will remain Europe’s friend, ally and partner.

    There’s also little to suggest that the American president shares the values and principles that once underpinned the now rapidly dismantling international order. Other countries’ national sovereignty, territorial integrity and the inviolability of their borders are not at the forefront of Trump’s foreign policy doctrine.

    If, as Costa proclaimed, “peace in Europe depends on Ukraine winning a comprehensive, just and lasting peace”, then the future looks bleak indeed for Europe and Ukraine. At this point the EU and its member states are a long way off from being able to provide Ukraine with the support it needs to win. This is not just because they lack the military and defence-industrial capabilities. They also lack a credible, shared vision of how to acquire them while navigating a Trumpian world.

    Stefan Wolff is a past recipient of grant funding from the Natural Environment Research Council of the UK, the United States Institute of Peace, the Economic and Social Research Council of the UK, the British Academy, the NATO Science for Peace Programme, the EU Framework Programmes 6 and 7 and Horizon 2020, as well as the EU’s Jean Monnet Programme. He is a Trustee and Honorary Treasurer of the Political Studies Association of the UK and a Senior Research Fellow at the Foreign Policy Centre in London.

    – ref. Ukraine: prospects for peace are slim unless Europe grips the reality of Trump’s world – https://theconversation.com/ukraine-prospects-for-peace-are-slim-unless-europe-grips-the-reality-of-trumps-world-248911

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: September 5: tense and taut drama vividly recreates the Munich massacre

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Barry Langford, Professor of Film Studies, Royal Holloway University of London

    In the 21st-century, it’s become horrifyingly normal for terrorist atrocities to play out over live visual media. Countless millions watched the fall of the twin towers on television in September 2001. The 2019 Christchurch mass murderer live streamed his assault on Facebook Live. Hamas commandos on October 7 wore bodycams.

    Director Tim Fehlbaum’s new film September 5 vividly recreates the historical moment when this relationship arguably snapped into sharp focus for the first time. The US network ABC’s live coverage of the Black September attack on the Israeli team at the 1972 Munich Olympics introduced the term “terrorist” to many viewers for the first time.

    The Munich attack unfolded over a single day and culminated in the murder of all nine Israeli hostages. Two athletes were also killed during the initial attack on their residence, as were all of the Palestinian gunmen during a firefight with West German police.

    There have been numerous film and television treatments of the Munich attack. One of the best-known is Kevin Macdonald’s Oscar-winning 1999 documentary One Day in September, which prosecutes the negligence and incompetence of the German authorities. Another is Steven Spielberg’s drama Munich (2005). A heavily fictionalised account of the Mossad reprisals against Palestinians allegedly associated with the Munich attack, it includes a detailed and graphic flashback of the massacre itself.

    The trailer for September 5.

    Fehlbaum opts against providing another synoptic overview of this well-known sequence of events. Instead, September 5 focuses exclusively on the ABC Sports team whose assignment switched in an instant from broadcasting the achievements of record-breaking athletes to covering the unfolding crisis and its bloody denouement.

    Running a tense and taut 94 minutes, the drama unfolds almost entirely within the cramped, sweaty confines of the ABC control room. Located adjacent to the athletes’ village, the sports reporters must suddenly adapt to documenting actual, not sporting, disaster. We share their perspective on the unravelling catastrophe, from a distance, trying to cut through the chaotic and confused stream of conflicting information, all filtered through the cumbersome broadcast technologies of the time.

    Decades before smartphones and the internet, ABC Sports chief Roone Arledge (Peter Sarsgaard) and inexperienced director Geoffrey Mason (John Magaro) battle myriad challenges. They haggle with rival networks for scarce satellite time (live satellite transmission was used for the first time at the Munich Games). They struggle to manoeuvre a weighty studio camera rig outdoors to gain a precious live feed on the apartment where the athletes are being held hostage. They even have to turn around magazines of 16mm film (in 1972 still the standard format for TV news reporting) in just minutes from negative to broadcast-ready clips.

    The meticulous period recreation, low-light filming and handheld camerawork lend the film an immediacy and a grainy intensity. It recalls classic journalistic 1970s thrillers such as All the President’s Men (1976).

    The unit transforms from a hardworking but relaxed outfit choosing whether to cover water polo or “soccer” to a team covering a grimly determined band of brothers (and one crucial sister, German translator Marianne, played by Leonie Benesch). Overcoming the odds to pursue the story to its bitter end, the story takes on the quality of a classic platoon movie.

    The film’s real focus is not so much the technical, but rather the novel ethical challenges the team must confront and decide, live and on-air. The young Peter Jennings (an uncanny impersonation by Benjamin Walker) is their sole trained news correspondent. But the sports crew need to parse the complex contexts of the conflict for a home audience far less steeped than today’s in Middle Eastern geopolitics.

    At the same time, they must fend off the intrusions of West German authorities increasingly panicked by the unfolding PR catastrophe, as Jews once again fall victim on German soil, less than three decades after the Holocaust.

    Looking for something good? Cut through the noise with a carefully curated selection of the latest releases, live events and exhibitions, straight to your inbox every fortnight, on Fridays. Sign up here.

    Meanwhile, it becomes increasingly clear that the Palestinian guerrillas have chosen the Olympics precisely because of the opportunity to stage their cause to a global audience. Hence, the broadcasters are inescapably complicit in the crisis. They’re not simply reporters, but participants.

    In the film’s highest stakes sequence – and a moment of head-spinning reflexivity – the team become aware the terrorists are watching their live broadcast. It means they are able to see the German police manoeuvring into place as they ineptly prepare a rescue.

    Predictably, the pressure to nail the story in an era of scarce information collides with the ethical imperative to get the story right. This leads to the film’s grim climax, where Arledge initially directs anchor Jim McKay (seen only in archive broadcast footage) to repeat the German authorities’ claim that the hostages have been successfully rescued. Only to have to go back on his words when the awful truth emerges and McKay is forced into his famous declaration: “They’re all gone.”

    In the aftermath, the reporters must prepare for another day’s work, while wondering to what degree they may have contributed to the disaster. September 5 is all the more powerful for leaving us, like its protagonists, without ready answers to the weighty questions it so deftly raises, and which have become only more pressing over half a century later.

    Barry Langford does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. September 5: tense and taut drama vividly recreates the Munich massacre – https://theconversation.com/september-5-tense-and-taut-drama-vividly-recreates-the-munich-massacre-248725

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Enoch — Enoch RCMP charge male with pointing a firearm

    Source: Royal Canadian Mounted Police

    On Jan. 25, 2025, Enoch RCMP received a report of a break and enter where the suspect broke down the victim’s door and pointed a firearm at them before leaving.

    Enoch RCMP immediately attended and began to search for the suspect. RCMP were successful in locating and arresting the suspect at another residence.

    A search was conducted and RCMP seized a sawed-off rifle, which is believed to have been used in the offence.

    RCMP have charged a 32-year-old individual, a resident of Enoch, with:

    • Pointing a firearm (x4);
    • Weapons offences (x3);
    • Breaking and entering;
    • Fail to comply with release conditions (x2);
    • Mischief.

    The individual was taken before a justice of the peace and remanded into custody with his net court date set for Jan. 29, 2025, at the Alberta Court of Justice in Stony Plain, Alta.

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Rarely used oil, coal helped power New England during recent cold snap

    Source: US Energy Information Administration

    In-brief analysis

    February 5, 2025

    Below average temperatures in the eastern United States during the week of January 19, 2025, resulted in high demand for electricity. On January 21 at 6:00 p.m. eastern time, ISO-New England (ISO-NE), the organization operating an integrated grid in Maine, Vermont, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Connecticut, recorded peak hourly demand of 19,600 megawatts (MW). Although demand was elevated, it was lower than the 20,308 MW that ISO-NE forecast peak demand would be in its 2024/2025 winter assessment published on November 7, 2024. Temperatures were more moderate in New England than in the Midwest, which tempered electricity demand somewhat in New England.

    Although the grid had sufficient generating capacity to satisfy demand, a significant share of that supply came from sources that rarely operate. The grid required running older thermal generating plants that burn oil and coal. Between the hours of 11:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. eastern time on January 20, 2025, and between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 1:00 p.m. on January 21, 2025, thermal plants that burn oil provided more electricity to the ISO-NE electricity grid than plants that burn natural gas, which is relatively uncommon. On January 21, 2025, the same group of thermal plants in ISO-NE provided more than 4,000 MW of electricity per hour to the grid between 7:00 a.m. and 11:00 p.m. At the same time, one of the two remaining coal-fired plants that burns coal in the region, the Merrimack facility in New Hampshire, supplied close to 300 MW to the grid from the evening of January 19 to the morning of January 25.

    Oil and coal offset curtailed generation from natural gas-fired power plants from January 18 to January 22. Prices for natural gas were high, and supplies were short during this period because of more demand for natural gas from other consumers, such as homes and businesses. Later in the week, more natural gas was made available, including supply received from a liquefied natural gas (LNG) import terminal in Everett, Massachusetts. This supply helped boost generation from natural gas-fired power plants beginning on January 22.

    Two other major sources of electricity in New England were steady suppliers during the cold snap. The region’s three nuclear reactors steadily provided 3,350 MW of power throughout the period, joined by consistent imports of power from Canada. At 11:00 p.m. on January 18, imports of electricity from Canada surpassed 4,200 MW and averaged 2,886 MW per hour between midnight on January 18 and midnight on January 26.

    Principal contributors: Kimberly Peterson, Sue Smith

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Why Trump’s rage defies historical and literary comparisons, according to a classics expert

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Rachel Hadas, Professor of English, Rutgers University – Newark

    Donald Trump’s anger has been building and now seems volcanic. Abstract Aerial Art/Getty Images

    The Greek divinity Nemesis, rarely depicted in art, has no place in the Olympian pantheon of a dozen gods and goddesses. But she’s an omnipresent force of retribution, an implacable force of punishment that arrives, if not sooner, then later.

    Nemesis can bide her time for generations, but there’s no escaping her.

    So too, it seems, with President Donald Trump, who is “clearly not a man who discards his grudges easily,” William Galston of the Brookings Institution said recently. This observation is an understatement.

    Trump’s resentment has been steaming since the 2020 presidential election. Now that he is again president, he’s far from appeased; his ire is boiling over.

    “Flooding the zone,” a term borrowed from football, was former Trump adviser Steve Bannon’s way of describing the Trumpian tactic of issuing a barrage of statements whose sheer pace and multiplicity, not to mention contents, are intended to stymie any impulse at rational response.

    As he has gained fame and power, Trump’s contemptuous rage at his opponents and his appetite for vengeance appear to have sharpened.

    Like Nemesis, Trump is now pursuing his perceived enemies, using the power of the presidency. Among his recent retribution: He has
    fired Department of Justice officials and staff who worked on criminal investigations and prosecutions of him; he has revoked security clearances for intelligence officials to “punish his perceived opponents,” as one news story put it. And he has removed the portrait of Gen. Mark Milley from the Pentagon wall that traditionally features portraits of the retired chairmen of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, as Milley was. In 2024, journalist Bob Woodward reported that Milley had told him, “No one has ever been as dangerous to this country as Donald Trump. Now I realize he’s a total fascist. He is the most dangerous person to this country” – clearly sparking Trump’s ire.

    As a poet and student of the classics, my impulse is to find analogs for this behavior, this temperament – precedents that might help provide some perspective.

    Trump displays his anger during a rally on Nov. 3, 2024, in Lancaster County, Pennsylvania.

    Tyrants, heroes and horses

    Historians, I thought, would be able to come up with analogs. For example, Trump’s initial choice of a political ally, Florida Rep. Matt Gaetz, as attorney general – widely seen as unqualified for the post and who later withdrew – was likened to the Roman emperor Caligula, who made his horse a senator. Figures from Greek history, from the Athenian tyrant Pisistratus to Alexander the Great, could be famously power-hungry and vindictive.

    Classical epic and drama furnish plenty of rage, which is the first word of the Homeric epic “The Iliad.”

    Since epic and tragic heroes are in positions of power, temperament and action mesh. The Greek hero Achilles’ clash with the Greek army’s commander Agamemnon at the outset of “The Iliad” is psychologically plausible. Each man feels insulted and slighted by the other; both have cause for resentment.

    Achilles nurses his rage at all his fellow Greeks until, much later in the epic, his grief at the death of his beloved Patroklos sends him back into battle. This larger-than-life hero is vulnerable, changeable and human.

    Perhaps the most famous example of vengeance in Greek tragedy is Aeschylus’ trilogy, “The Oresteia.” When Clytemnestra murders her husband, Agamemnon, on his return from Troy, she has three comprehensible motives. Agamemnon has sacrificed their daughter; he has brought home a mistress, Cassandra; and Clytemnestra feels loyalty, both personal and political, to Aegisthus, her husband’s cousin, whom she has taken as a lover in her husband’s absence and who has his own reasons for hating Agamemnon.

    So vindicated does Clytemnestra feel in having murdered Agamemnon – and Cassandra as well – that she proudly compares her action to rain that fertilizes the crops. As rain is part of the cycle of the seasons, her act has righted the balance of justice.

    Agamemnon was murdered in cold blood by Clytemnestra and Aegisthus, in vengeance for Iphigenia’s death and all the grief he’d given them both.
    Flaxman, artist, from The Print Collector/Getty Images

    Cunning rage leads to death

    Turning to a few of Shakespeare’s more vengeful characters, Iago in “Othello” is an embodiment of a cunning rage that leads him to systematically destroy the innocent Othello’s marriage. He does this by falsely hinting – and then planting a chain of evidence suggesting – that Othello’s bride, Desdemona, is unfaithful.

    Othello eventually kills both Desdemona and himself. But the Romantic critic Samuel Taylor Coleridge famously referred to Iago’s “motiveless malignancy,” since it’s hard to be sure exactly why Iago is so set on destroying Othello.

    Hamlet himself is a reluctant avenger who keeps putting off the act of revenging his father’s murder. In the history play named for him, Richard III’s resentment, going back to having been a deformed and unloved child, makes more sense. Richard lusts after power; he systematically and clandestinely murders his own brother and nephews, who would stand between him and his elder brother Edward’s throne.

    Whether motivated by political ambition, generalized rancor or an inherited assignment, none of these figures ends well. They all have enemies, and they all – except Iago, who will be tortured and executed – die on stage. All have done plenty of damage; none survives long to feel vindicated. Even Clytemnestra’s triumph is short-lived, since her own son, Orestes, will soon avenge his father’s death by murdering his mother – Clytemnestra.

    But all these figures seem to feel personal passion. Even the opaque Iago has one chief target: Othello. They don’t present compelling parallels to Trump, whose anger appears to be simultaneously private and public.

    Easily offended, Trump is quick to strike back with insults; but he also seems to have an insatiable appetite for broader and deeper punishment, meted out to more people and even after a lapse of time. Hence literary parallels are less than compelling.

    Trump’s anger seems more general than personal. His aggrieved sense of having been wronged, victimized by his enemies, is a constant in his career. But his targets shift. One day it’s judges; another day it’s election officials. Yet another day, it’s the “deep state.”

    And Trump’s implacable resentment has struck a chord among many Americans whose resentment has a more rational basis. Trump’s base may believe he is speaking for them – “I am your warrior. I am your justice,” he said in a speech at a conservative forum, but his first priority has always been himself.

    A spirit, ranging for revenge

    The damage done by Trump is often inflicted by others. Their threats, harassment and even violence are done in the name of Trump.

    He has pardoned almost all of the Jan. 6 insurrectionists, some of whom have now boasted they will acquire guns.

    Trump has removed government protection from figures who have dared to disagree with him and have received death threats, including Dr. Anthony Fauci.

    Shakespeare, turning history into great poetry, comes to mind after all. In “Julius Caesar,” knowing that his funeral oration over the body of the assassinated Caesar will stir up an angry mob, Mark Antony muses:

    “And Caesar’s spirit, ranging for revenge,
    With Ate by his side come hot from hell,
    Shall in these confines with a monarch’s voice
    Cry ‘Havoc!’ and let slip the dogs of war”

    Antony imagines Caesar’s vengeful spirit rising from the underworld to incite further violence. Not only will Caesar’s assassins be punished, but the hell of civil war will be let loose to cause widespread suffering. Precisely who Trump wants to punish appears secondary to his delight in releasing precisely those hellish dogs. Everyone is a potential enemy and a potential victim.

    “I am your retribution,” Trump has said. Nothing in Trump’s continuing story more clearly echoes the classics than this ominous melding of self with a superhuman principle of revenge.

    Such a merging of a mortal individual with a pitilessly abstract power like Nemesis is closer to myth than to history. Or so it would be comforting to assume.

    Rachel Hadas does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. Why Trump’s rage defies historical and literary comparisons, according to a classics expert – https://theconversation.com/why-trumps-rage-defies-historical-and-literary-comparisons-according-to-a-classics-expert-248510

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: As Trump tries to slash US foreign aid, here are 3 common myths many Americans mistakenly believe about it

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Joannie Tremblay-Boire, Assistant Professor of Public Policy, University of Maryland

    U.S. lawmakers and employees and supporters of the U.S. Agency for International Development speak outside the agency’s headquarters on Feb. 3, 2025. Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images

    U.S. foreign aid is in disarray.

    The Trump administration froze most aid disbursements on Jan. 20. According to billionaire Elon Musk, an adviser to President Donald Trump with “special government employee status,” the U.S. Agency for International Development, widely known as USAID, had been shut down as of Feb. 3, 2025.

    Although the Trump administration lacks the legal authority to do this, hundreds of people on the agency’s staff have been put on unpaid leave or fired, according to news reports.

    And the agency’s official website wasn’t working. A partial replacement, however, had appeared within the State Department’s website.

    I’m a scholar of public policy who researches nonprofits, which in the foreign aid sphere are often called nongovernmental organizations. These groups are responsible for carrying out many programs funded by foreign aid from governments such as the United States.

    In light of the Trump administration’s attack on the government’s main foreign aid agency and the disruption of this funding, I believe it’s important to debunk three common myths:

    1. The U.S. spends too much on foreign aid.
    2. The U.S. spends more than its fair share on foreign aid compared with other countries.
    3. Corrupt governments squander U.S. foreign aid.

    What is foreign aid?

    Foreign aid consists of money, goods and services – such as training – that government agencies provide to other countries. Foreign aid falls into two broad categories: economic assistance and military – sometimes called security – aid.

    Economic assistance includes all programs with development or humanitarian objectives. That tends to include projects related to health, disaster relief, the promotion of civil society, agriculture and the like. Most U.S. economic aid dollars come from the State Department budget, including spending allocated by USAID, which has operated as an independent agency since the Kennedy administration.

    On Feb. 3, Secretary of State Marco Rubio declared that he was serving as USAID’s acting director, indicating that the agency was no longer independent of the State Department.

    While U.S. taxpayers have long spent just a few bucks each on foreign aid every year, the impact is profound, saving millions of people from hunger, averting the worst of natural disasters such as droughts and flooding, tackling life-threatening diseases such as tuberculosis and malaria, and more.

    Myth No. 1: US spends too much on foreign aid

    The United States consistently spends only about 1% of its budget on foreign aid, including military and economic support. The 2023 aid managed by USAID totaled about US$40 billion.

    Americans tend to believe that their government spends a far bigger share of its budget on foreign aid than it does.

    In a survey the Kaiser Family Foundation conducted in 2015, it found that, on average, Americans believed that foreign aid accounts for nearly one-third of the budget. Only 3% of those polled answered correctly that foreign aid constituted 1% or less of total federal spending.

    Myth No. 2: US spends more than its fair share

    According to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, the United States is by far the leading national source of economic assistance dollars. In 2023, it contributed $64.7 billion in overseas development assistance, far outpacing the $37.9 billion spent by Germany, the second-biggest source of that kind of aid. Some of this assistance is managed by USAID, some by the Department of State, and a small portion by other government agencies, such as the Treasury and Health and Human Services departments.

    That tells only part of the story, however. The United States spends very little on foreign aid relative to the size of its economy, particularly compared with other rich countries. The U.S. spent about 0.24% of its gross national income on overseas development assistance in 2023. By comparison, Norway, the top contributor by this metric, gave 1.09% of its gross national income in overseas development aid that year. The United States ranks toward the bottom of OECD countries, close to Portugal and Spain, by this measurement.

    In 1970, the United Nations General Assembly agreed that “economically advanced countries” would aim to direct at least 0.7% of their national income to overseas development assistance. Although developed countries have repeatedly mentioned this target in agreements and at summits since then, very few countries have reached that goal. In 2023, only five countries met the 0.7% target.

    The OECD average was just 0.37% in 2023 – far higher than the 0.24% the U.S. provided that year.

    Myth No. 3: Corrupt governments squander US aid

    You may think that foreign aid consists of government-to-government transfers of money. But governments channel most aid through nonprofits such as Catholic Relief Services, public-private partnerships, private companies such as Chemonics International and Deloitte, and multilateral organizations such as the United Nations and the World Bank.

    In fact, according to the Congressional Research Service, between 2013 and 2022, most U.S. foreign assistance bypassed governments altogether: NGOs received 24% of the money, for-profit companies 21%, multilateral organizations 34%, and other organizations, such as universities, research institutes and faith-based organizations, 7%.

    When the political scientist Simone Dietrich researched this question, she found that the United States outsources a lot of its foreign aid to NGOs. This is especially the case with the support it provides countries with bad governance and rampant corruption such as Sudan and Sri Lanka, which could be likely to squander or swipe those funds.

    To be sure, corrupt governments sometimes do squander U.S. foreign aid. But it is important to understand that most aid never enters the coffers of those corrupt governments in the first place.

    Even without Trump’s proposed cuts, US fails to lead

    Even if Trump fails at his current bid to greatly reduce foreign aid spending, other countries, including the United Kingdom and Denmark, are spending far more on economic assistance for the world’s poorest people, as a share of their economies, than the U.S. does.

    Slashing foreign aid would damage U.S. credibility with American allies, reduce U.S. influence around the globe and – as a group of more than 120 retired generals and admirals predicted when Trump tried to slash foreign aid in his first administration – make Americans less safe.

    Parts of this article appeared in a story first published on April 6, 2017, and have been updated.

    Joannie Tremblay-Boire does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. As Trump tries to slash US foreign aid, here are 3 common myths many Americans mistakenly believe about it – https://theconversation.com/as-trump-tries-to-slash-us-foreign-aid-here-are-3-common-myths-many-americans-mistakenly-believe-about-it-248979

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Water is the other US-Mexico border crisis, and the supply crunch is getting worse

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Gabriel Eckstein, Professor of Law, Texas A&M University

    View of the Rio Grande flowing through Ciudad Juarez, Mexico, photographed from the Paso Del Norte International Bridge. Paul Rarje/AFP via Getty Images

    Immigration and border security will be the likely focus of U.S.-Mexico relations under the new Trump administration. But there also is a growing water crisis along the U.S.–Mexico border that affects tens of millions of people on both sides, and it can only be managed if the two governments work together.

    Climate change is shrinking surface and groundwater supplies in the southwestern U.S. Higher air temperatures are increasing evaporation rates from rivers and streams and intensifying drought. Mexico is also experiencing multiyear droughts and heat waves.

    Growing water use is already overtaxing limited supplies from nearly all of the region’s cross-border rivers, streams and aquifers. Many of these sources are contaminated with agricultural pollutants, untreated waste and other substances, further reducing the usability of available water.

    As Texas-based scholars who study the legal and scientific aspects of water policy, we know that communities, farms and businesses in both countries rely on these scarce water supplies. In our view, water conditions on the border have changed so much that the current legal framework for managing them is inadequate.

    Unless both nations recognize this fact, we believe that water problems in the region are likely to worsen, and supplies may never recover to levels seen as recently as the 1950s. Although the U.S. and Mexico have moved to address these concerns by updating the 1944 water treaty, these steps are not long-term solutions.

    The Rio Grande flows south from Colorado and forms the 1,250-mile (2,000-kilometer) Texas-Mexico border.
    Kmusser/Wikimedia, CC BY-SA

    Growing demand, shrinking supply

    The U.S.-Mexico border region is mostly arid, with water coming from a few rivers and an unknown amount of groundwater. The main rivers that cross the border are the Colorado and the Rio Grande – two of the most water-stressed systems in the world.

    The Colorado River provides water to more than 44 million people, including seven U.S. and two Mexican states, 29 Indian tribes and 5.5 million acres of farmland. Only about 10% of its total flow reaches Mexico. The river once emptied into the Gulf of California, but now so much water is withdrawn along its course that since the 1960s it typically peters out in the desert.

    The Rio Grande supplies water to roughly 15 million people, including 22 Indian tribes, three U.S. and four Mexican states and 2.8 million irrigated acres. It forms the 1,250-mile (2,000-kilometer) Texas-Mexico border, winding from El Paso in the west to the Gulf of Mexico in the east.

    The Colorado River flows through seven U.S. states and crosses into Mexico at the Arizona-California border.
    USGS

    Other rivers that cross the border include the Tijuana, San Pedro, Santa Cruz, New and Gila. These are all significantly smaller and have less economic impact than the Colorado and the Rio Grande.

    At least 28 aquifers – underground rock formations that contain water – also traverse the border. With a few exceptions, very little information on these shared resources exists. One thing that is known is that many of them are severely overtapped and contaminated.

    Nonetheless, reliance on aquifers is growing as surface water supplies dwindle. Some 80% of groundwater used in the border region goes to agriculture. The rest is used by farmers and industries, such as automotive and appliance manufacturers.

    Over 10 million people in 30 cities and communities throughout the border region rely on groundwater for domestic use. Many communities, including Ciudad Juarez; the sister cities of Nogales in both Arizona and Sonora; and the sister cities of Columbus in New Mexico and Puerto Palomas in Chihuahua, get all or most of their fresh water from these aquifers.

    A booming region

    About 30 million people live within 100 miles (160 kilometers) of the border on both sides. Over the next 30 years, that figure is expected to double.

    Municipal and industrial water use throughout the region is also expected to increase. In Texas’ lower Rio Grande Valley, municipal use alone could more than double by 2040.

    At the same time, as climate change continues to worsen, scientists project that snowmelt will decrease and evaporation rates will increase. The Colorado River’s baseflow – the portion of its volume that comes from groundwater, rather than from rain and snow – may decline by nearly 30% in the next 30 years.

    Precipitation patterns across the region are projected to be uncertain and erratic for the foreseeable future. This trend will fuel more extreme weather events, such as droughts and floods, which could cause widespread harm to crops, industrial activity, human health and the environment.

    Further stress comes from growth and development. Both the Colorado River and Rio Grande are tainted by pollutants from agricultural, municipal and industrial sources. Cities on both sides of the border, especially on the Mexican side, have a long history of dumping untreated sewage into the Rio Grande. Of the 55 water treatment plants located along the border, 80% reported ongoing maintenance, capacity and operating problems as of 2019.

    Drought across the border region is already stoking domestic and bilateral tensions. Competing water users are struggling to meet their needs, and the U.S. and Mexico are straining to comply with treaty obligations for sharing water.

    Cross-border water politics

    Mexico and the United States manage water allocations in the border region mainly under two treaties: a 1906 agreement focused on the Upper Rio Grande Basin and a 1944 treaty covering the Colorado River and Lower Rio Grande.

    Under the 1906 treaty, the U.S. is obligated to deliver 60,000 acre-feet of water to Mexico where the Rio Grande reaches the border. This target may be reduced during droughts, which have occurred frequently in recent decades. An acre-foot is enough water to flood an acre of land 1 foot deep – about 325,000 gallons (1.2 million liters).

    Allocations under the 1944 treaty are more complicated. The U.S. is required to deliver 1.5 million acre-feet of Colorado River water to Mexico at the border – but as with the 1906 treaty, reductions are allowed in cases of extraordinary drought.

    Until the mid-2010s, the U.S. met its full obligation each year. Since then, however, regional drought and climate change have severely reduced the Colorado River’s flow, requiring substantial allocation reductions for both the U.S. and Mexico.

    In 2025, states in the U.S. section of the lower Colorado River basin will see a reduction of over 1 million acre-feet from prior years. Mexico’s allocation will decline by approximately 280,500 acre-feet under the 1944 treaty.

    This agreement provides each nation with designated fractions of flows from the Lower Rio Grande and specific tributaries. Regardless of water availability or climatic conditions, Mexico also is required to deliver to the U.S. a minimum of 1,750,000 acre-feet of water from six named tributaries, averaged over five-year cycles. If Mexico falls short in one cycle, it can make up the deficit in the next five-year cycle, but cannot delay repayment further.

    The U.S. and Mexico are struggling to share a shrinking water supply in the border region.

    Since the 1990s, extraordinary droughts have caused Mexico to miss its delivery obligations three times. Although Mexico repaid its water debts in subsequent cycles, these shortfalls raised diplomatic tensions that led to last-minute negotiations and large-scale water transfers from Mexico to the U.S.

    Mexican farmers in Lower Rio Grande irrigation districts who had to shoulder these cuts felt betrayed. In 2020, they protested, confronting federal soldiers and temporarily seizing control of a dam.

    U.S. President Donald Trump and Mexican President Claudia Scheinbaum clearly appreciate the political and economic importance of the border region. But if water scarcity worsens, it could supplant other border priorities.

    In our view, the best way to prevent this would be for the two countries to recognize that conditions are deteriorating and update the existing cross-border governance regime so that it reflects today’s new water realities.

    Gabriel Eckstein is affiliated with the Permanent Forum on Binational Waters, International Association for Water Law, and International Water Resources Association.

    Rosario Sanchez receives funding from the USGS under the Transboundary Aquifer Assessment Program Act. She is affiliated with Texas A&M University and the non-profit as a volunteer to the Permanent Forum of Binational Waters, the International Association of Hydrogeologists, and the International Water Resources Association.

    – ref. Water is the other US-Mexico border crisis, and the supply crunch is getting worse – https://theconversation.com/water-is-the-other-us-mexico-border-crisis-and-the-supply-crunch-is-getting-worse-244722

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Lightning strikes link weather on Earth and weather in space

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Lauren Blum, Assistant Professor of Atmospheric and Space Physics, University of Colorado Boulder

    Lightning, when coupled with solar flares, can knock electrons flying above the Earth out of place. AP Photo/David Zalubowski

    There are trillions of charged particles – protons and electrons, the basic building blocks of matter – whizzing around above your head at any given time. These high-energy particles, which can travel at close to the speed of light, typically remain thousands of kilometers away from Earth, trapped there by the shape of Earth’s magnetic field.

    Occasionally, though, an event happens that can jostle them out of place, sending electrons raining down into Earth’s atmosphere. These high-energy particles in space make up what are known as the Van Allen radiation belts, and their discovery was one of the first of the space age. A new study from my research team has found that electromagnetic waves generated by lightning can trigger these electron showers.

    A brief history lesson

    At the start of the space race in the 1950s, professor James Van Allen and his research team at the University of Iowa were tasked with building an experiment to fly on the United States’ very first satellite, Explorer 1. They designed sensors to study cosmic radiation, which is caused by high-energy particles originating from the Sun, the Milky Way galaxy, or beyond.

    James Van Allen, middle, poses with a model of the Explorer 1 satellite.
    NASA

    After Explorer 1 launched, though, they noticed that their instrument was detecting significantly higher levels of radiation than expected. Rather than measuring a distant source of radiation beyond our solar system, they appeared to be measuring a local and extremely intense source.

    This measurement led to the discovery of the Van Allen radiation belts, two doughnut-shaped regions of high-energy electrons and ions encircling the planet.

    Scientists believe that the inner radiation belt, peaking about 621 miles (1000 kilometers) from Earth, is composed of electrons and high-energy protons and is relatively stable over time.

    The outer radiation belt, about three times farther away, is made up of high-energy electrons. This belt can be highly dynamic. Its location, density and energy content may vary significantly by the hour in response to solar activity.

    Charged particles, with their trajectories shown as blue and yellow lines here, exist in the radiation belts around Earth, depicted here as the yellow, green and blue regions.

    The discovery of these high-radiation regions is not only an interesting story about the early days of the space race; it also serves as a reminder that many scientific discoveries have come about by happy accident.

    It is a lesson for experimental scientists, myself included, to keep an open mind when analyzing and evaluating data. If the data doesn’t match our theories or expectations, those theories may need to be revisited.

    Our curious observations

    While I teach the history of the space race in a space policy course at the University of Colorado, Boulder, I rarely connect it to my own experience as a scientist researching Earth’s radiation belts. Or, at least, I didn’t until recently.

    In a study led by Max Feinland, an undergraduate student in my research group, we stumbled upon some of our own unexpected observations of Earth’s radiation belts. Our findings have made us rethink our understanding of Earth’s inner radiation belt and the processes affecting it.

    Originally, we set out to look for very rapid – sub-second – bursts of high-energy electrons entering the atmosphere from the outer radiation belt, where they are typically observed.

    Many scientists believe that a type of electromagnetic wave known as “chorus” can knock these electrons out of position and send them toward the atmosphere. They’re called chorus waves due to their distinct chirping sound when listened to on a radio receiver.

    Feinland developed an algorithm to search for these events in decades of measurements from the SAMPEX satellite. When he showed me a plot with the location of all the events he’d detected, we noticed a number of them were not where we expected. Some events mapped to the inner radiation belt rather than the outer belt.

    This finding was curious for two reasons. For one, chorus waves aren’t prevalent in this region, so something else had to be shaking these electrons loose.

    The other surprise was finding electrons this energetic in the inner radiation belt at all. Measurements from NASA’s Van Allen Probes mission prompted renewed interest in the inner radiation belt. Observations from the Van Allen Probes suggested that high-energy electrons are often not present in this inner radiation belt, at least not during the first few years of that mission, from 2012 to 2014.

    Our observations now showed that, in fact, there are times that the inner belt contains high-energy electrons. How often this is true and under what conditions remain open questions to explore. These high-energy particles can damage spacecraft and harm humans in space, so researchers need to know when and where in space they are present to better design spacecraft.

    Determining the culprit

    One of the ways to disturb electrons in the inner radiation belt and kick them into Earth’s atmosphere actually begins in the atmosphere itself.

    Lightning, the large electromagnetic discharges that light up the sky during thunderstorms, can actually generate electromagnetic waves known as lightning-generated whistlers.

    Lightning strikes generate electromagnetic waves, which can travel into the radiation belts above the Earth’s atmosphere.
    mdesigner125/iStock via Getty Images Plus

    These waves can then travel through the atmosphere out into space, where they interact with electrons in the inner radiation belt – much as chorus waves interact with electrons in the outer radiation belt.

    To test whether lightning was behind our inner radiation belt detections, we looked back at the electron bursts and compared them with thunderstorm data. Some lightning activity seemed correlated with our electron events, but much of it was not.

    Specifically, only lightning that occurred right after so-called geomagnetic storms resulted in the bursts of electrons we detected.

    Geomagnetic storms are disturbances in the near-Earth space environment often caused by large eruptions on the Sun’s surface. This solar activity, if directed toward Earth, can produce what researchers term space weather. Space weather can result in stunning auroras, but it can also disrupt satellite and power grid operations.

    We discovered that a combination of weather on Earth and weather in space produces the unique electron signatures we observed in our study. The solar activity disturbs Earth’s radiation belts and populates the inner belt with very high-energy electrons, then the lightning interacts with these electrons and creates the rapid bursts that we observed.

    These results provide a nice reminder of the interconnected nature of Earth and space. They were also a welcome reminder to me of the often nonlinear process of scientific discovery.

    Lauren Blum receives funding from NASA and the NSF.

    – ref. Lightning strikes link weather on Earth and weather in space – https://theconversation.com/lightning-strikes-link-weather-on-earth-and-weather-in-space-243772

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Asia-Pac: Golden Week visitors reach 1.4m

    Source: Hong Kong Information Services

    The interdepartmental working group on festival arrangements today said that the overall number of visitors to Hong Kong reached around 1.4 million for the Chinese New Year Golden Week of the Mainland from January 28 to yesterday, with various arrangements for receiving visitors rolling out smoothly.

    During the eight-day Golden Week, the Immigration Department recorded around 1.4 million inbound visitors to Hong Kong through sea, land and air control points, with Mainland visitors accounting for about 1.2 million. The daily average of Mainland visitors was around 150,000.

    Visitor arrivals peaked at around 190,000 on January 30, the second day of the Lunar New Year. The Express Rail Link West Kowloon Control Point received the highest number, followed by the Lok Ma Chau Spur Line Control Point.

    They visited different parts of Hong Kong during Golden Week, with high visitor flow seen at major tourist attractions, including the West Kowloon Cultural District, Ocean Park, Hong Kong Disneyland, the Peak Tram and Ngong Ping 360.

    The hotel occupancy rate during this period generally reached 90%, according to industry information.

    While the Travel Industry Authority revealed that over 2,200 Mainland inbound tour groups came to the city during Golden Week, with around 83% engaging in overnight itineraries. These tour groups covered around 79,000 visitors, accounting for about 7% of all Mainland visitors.

    Chief Secretary Chan Kwok-ki, who leads the interdepartmental working group, noted that the wide range of celebration events held in Hong Kong during this period were well received by the public and visitors alike.

    The events included the Cathay International Chinese New Year Night Parade, the fireworks display, the Chinese New Year Raceday and the Chinese New Year Cup football match, taking place on the first four days of the Lunar New Year respectively.

    “Thanks to the collaboration of relevant government departments, organisations and the trade as well as the co-operation of the public and tourists, the reception arrangements operated smoothly this year, enabling citizens and tourists to celebrate the Chinese New Year in Hong Kong in a joyous and festive manner,” Mr Chan added.

    MIL OSI Asia Pacific News –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Georgia Man Indicted for Firearm Charge in 2023 Shooting of SCHP Trooper

    Source: United States Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms and Explosives (ATF)

    COLUMBIA, S.C. — A federal grand jury in Columbia returned a single-count indictment against Derrick Gathers, 38, of Augusta, Georgia, for being a felon in possession of a firearm.

    The indictment alleges that on April 16, 2023, Gathers possessed a firearm and ammunition during an incident where he shot at a South Carolina State Trooper. Gathers has been charged in state court for a number of other charges related to the incident. Gathers has a previous felony conviction that prevents him from possessing a firearm or ammunition.

    The trooper, Lance Corporal Frazier, has recovered.

    Gathers faces a maximum penalty of 15 years. Gathers was already detained on state charges.

    This case is part of Project Safe Neighborhoods (PSN), a program bringing together all levels of law enforcement and the communities they serve to reduce violent crime and gun violence, and to make our neighborhoods safer for everyone. On May 26, 2021, the department launched a violent crime reduction strategy strengthening PSN based on these core principles: fostering trust and legitimacy in our communities, supporting community-based organizations that help prevent violence from occurring in the first place, setting focused and strategic enforcement priorities, and measuring the results.

    The case was investigated by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, the South Carolina Law Enforcement Division, Orangeburg County Sheriff’s Office, Dorchester County Sheriff’s Office, and the Bamberg Police Department.  Assistant U.S. Attorney Lamar Fyall is prosecuting the case.

    All charges in the indictment are merely accusations and defendants are presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Kanawha County Man Pleads Guilty to Federal Gun Crime

    Source: United States Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms and Explosives (ATF)

    CHARLESTON, W.Va. – Jason Douglas MaComber, 52, of St. Albans, pleaded guilty today to being a felon in possession of a firearm.

    According to court documents and statements made in court, on June 12, 2023, MaComber possessed a Remington model 870 Wingmaster 12-gauge shotgun in St. Albans.

    Federal law prohibits a person with a prior felony conviction from possessing a firearm or ammunition. MaComber knew he was prohibited from possessing a firearm because of his prior felony convictions for possession of dangerous drugs/controlled substances on November 20, 2007, possession of a firearm by a felon on June 24, 2014, and illegal firearm transportation on July 1, 2019, all in San Bernardino, California, Superior Court.

    The shotgun had a modified and shortened barrel. The short-barreled shotgun was not registered to MaComber in the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record as required by federal law.

    MaComber is scheduled to be sentenced on April 22, 2025, and faces a maximum penalty of 15 years in prison, up to three years of supervised release, and a $250,000 fine.

    United States Attorney Will Thompson made the announcement and commended the investigative work of the South Charleston Police Department and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF).

    United States District Judge Joseph R. Goodwin presided over the hearing. Assistant United States Attorney JC MacCallum is prosecuting the case.

    This case is part of Project Safe Neighborhoods (PSN), a program bringing together all levels of law enforcement and the communities they serve to reduce violent crime and gun violence, and to make our neighborhoods safer for everyone. On May 26, 2021, the Department launched a violent crime reduction strategy strengthening PSN based on these core principles: fostering trust and legitimacy in our communities, supporting community-based organizations that help prevent violence from occurring in the first place, setting focused and strategic enforcement priorities, and measuring the results.

    A copy of this press release is located on the website of the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of West Virginia. Related court documents and information can be found on PACER by searching for Case No. 2:24-cr-148.

    ###

     

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Asia-Pac: Interdepartmental working group on festival arrangements summarises visitor arrivals to Hong Kong during Chinese New Year Golden Week of Mainland

    Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region

         The interdepartmental working group on festival arrangements, led by the Chief Secretary for Administration, Mr Chan Kwok-ki, today (February 5) announced that the overall number of visitors to Hong Kong reached around 1.4 million following the conclusion of the eight-day Chinese New Year Golden Week of the Mainland (January 28 to February 4) yesterday, with various arrangements for receiving visitors rolling out smoothly.
     
         Mr Chan said, “During this Chinese New Year Golden Week, the wide range of celebration events held in Hong Kong, including the Cathay International Chinese New Year Night Parade on the first day of Chinese New Year, the fireworks display on the second day, the Chinse New Year Raceday on the third day and the Chinese New Year Cup football match on the fourth day, were well received by the public and visitors from the Mainland and different parts of the world, allowing them to immerse themselves in a vibrant festive atmosphere.”
     
    Visitor flow and situation of boundary control points
     
         During the eight-day Chinese New Year Golden Week, the Immigration Department recorded a total of around 1.4 million inbound visitors to Hong Kong through various sea, land and air control points. Among them, Mainland visitors accounted for about 1.2 million, representing around 85 per cent of the total arrivals. The daily average of Mainland visitors was around 150 000.
     
         The arrival of Mainland visitors peaked on January 30 (the second day of Chinese New Year) with around 190 000 Mainland visitors arriving in Hong Kong. During the Chinese New Year Golden Week, the Express Rail Link West Kowloon Control Point received the highest number of Mainland visitors, followed by the Lok Ma Chau Spur Line Control Point. The overall operation of the control points and transport services ran smoothly.
     
    Major tourist attractions, inbound tour groups and hotel occupancy rate
     
         Visitors went to different parts of Hong Kong during the Chinese New Year Golden Week, with high visitor flow observed at major tourist attractions including the West Kowloon Cultural District, Ocean Park, Hong Kong Disneyland, the Peak Tram and Ngong Ping 360. Smooth and effective crowd management measures were implemented. In addition, according to the information provided by the hotel industry, the hotel occupancy rate during the Chinese New Year Golden Week reached 90 per cent in general.
     
         In terms of Mainland inbound tour groups, according to the Travel Industry Authority’s information, over 2 200 Mainland inbound tour groups visited Hong Kong during the Chinese New Year Golden Week, with around 83 per cent engaged in overnight itineraries. These tour groups involved around 79 000 visitors, accounting for around 7 per cent of all Mainland visitors, and they were orderly in general.
     
    Cross-boundary traffic
     
         Throughout the Chinese New Year Golden Week, the Transport Department had been steering public transport operators to enhance their service capacity with a view to meeting the cross-boundary passenger demand. The traffic conditions at various boundary control points were mostly smooth.
     
         Mr Chan said, “Thanks to the close collaboration of all relevant government departments, organisations and the trade in making comprehensive preparations and responses, as well as the co-operation of the public and tourists, the various reception arrangements during the Chinese New Year Golden Week operated smoothly this year, enabling citizens and tourists to celebrate the Chinese New Year in Hong Kong in a joyous and festive manner.”

    MIL OSI Asia Pacific News –