Showing posts with label FBI. Show all posts
Showing posts with label FBI. Show all posts

Tuesday, April 24, 2007

FBI In Talks With GOP Rep Feeney In Abramoff Scandal

FBI asks Tom Feeney about trip with Abramoff

Early edition: Feeney's office said the congressman is cooperating voluntarily.

By ANITA KUMAR
Published April 23, 2007


WASHINGTON - The FBI has asked U.S. Rep. Tom Feeney for information about his dealings with Jack Abramoff as part of its ongoing investigation into the lobbyist convicted of defrauding clients.

FBI agent Kevin Luebke refused to say whether Feeney, a Republican from the Orlando area, is under federal investigation.

Federal agents also have asked the St. Petersburg Times for an email sent to the newspaper by Feeney's office describing a golfing trip the congressman took with Abramoff to Scotland in 2003.

Feeney did not return calls for comment Monday. But his Washington office released a statement to the Times late Monday.

"Rep. Feeney considers this an embarrassing episode in his 17-year career as an elected official and an expensive lesson for him as a public servant," according to the statement.

Feeney is one of three House members who accompanied Abramoff to Scotland on trips that included rounds of golf at the legendary Royal & Ancient Golf Club at St. Andrews.

The others are: former Rep. Bob Ney, R-Ohio, who is serving prison time for corruption, and former House Republican leader Tom DeLay, indicted in Texas for alleged improper fundraising, is under investigation.

"The Justice Department has been investigating activity surrounding Jack Abramoff," according to Feeney's statement. "The Justice Department has contacted Rep. Feeney to request more information regarding this matter and he is pleased to voluntarily cooperate."

The FBI contacted the Times last week to ask for the February 2006 email that Feeney's then chief of staff Jason Roe wrote to the newspaper in response to a series of questions about interactions between Feeney and Abramoff. The Times has referred the FBI's request to its attorney.

Roe, now deputy campaign manager for presidential candidate Mitt Romney, said Monday he has not been contacted by the FBI and has no knowledge of an investigation. But, he said, he was not surprised to hear federal agents are asking questions.

"I'm sure they're doing due diligence," he said. "I guess it would be my expectation they would look into everything" associated with Abramoff.

Feeney, 48, who spent a decade in the Florida Legislature where he was speaker of the House, has paid $23,000 in legal fees this year - more than any other expense - according to his latest campaign finance reports.

"Rep. Feeney anticipates voluntarily cooperating with the Justice Department in any further investigation of this trip and looks forward to promptly resolving this matter," according to Feeney's statement.

The U.S. House announced in January that Feeney violated its rules by apparently letting Abramoff pay for the trip to Scotland. Feeney agreed to pay the cost of the trip - $5,643 - to the U.S. Treasury.

Feeney said he thought a conservative think tank - the National Center for Public Policy Research - was paying for the trip. He said he learned later from newspaper reporters that Abramoff may have paid in violation of House rules that forbid members from taking free trips from lobbyists and asked the ethics committee to investigate.

"Any assertion that this office knew Abramoff paid for the Scotland trip is a g--d----- lie," Roe wrote in the email being sought by the FBI. The email was quoted in a newspaper article last year.

Records and media reports show lawmakers - including Ney and DeLay - have helped Abramoff with his lobbying.

Last week, Rep. John Doolittle, R--Calif., gave up his coveted seat on the House Appropriations Committee after the FBI raided his home.

In last year's email, Roe vehemently denied any improper relationship with Abramoff as a result of the trip.

"Tom has never written a letter for Abramoff. Abramoff has never been in our office. Abramoff has never asked anything of us," Roe wrote in the email. "There is no accusation of a quid pro quo. No quid pro quo exists."

Feeney received $4,000 from Abramoff and three of his clients but recently gave the $1,000 from Abramoff to charity. Money also went the other direction: Feeney paid the tab at Abramoff's Washington restaurant, Signatures, at least three times, twice when the costs were more than $2,000, according to Feeney's campaign finance reports.

Times researcher Angie Drobnic Holan contributed to this report. Times staff writer Anita Kumar can be reached at akumar@sptimes.com or 202-463-0576.

Friday, April 13, 2007

New light on the Nick Berg case: US contractors ‘tortured’ for talking to the FBI

Occupation turf war sheds new light on the Nick Berg case
US contractors ‘tortured’ for talking to the FBI

11 April 2007

The case of Donald Vance, an American citizen secretly imprisoned by the US military in Iraq after making accusations against an Iraqi-owned security company for which he worked, has revealing parallels with the 2004 disappearance of Nick Berg, a US contractor whose murder is officially attributed to Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.

Vance was last week awarded the prestigious Ridenhour Prize for Truth-Telling at a ceremony at the National Press Club in Washington (see "My Name Used to Be 200343" by David Phinney here). The case constitutes further evidence that US military intelligence forces have secretly detained and tortured citizens of the US and probably other Western nations whom they believe may have compromised ‘unconventional operations’ in Iraq.

Vance is a US Navy veteran who signed on with an Iraqi-owned security company based in Baghdad. He and a fellow-worker, Nathan Ertel, came to suspect that the company was involved in illegal arms dealing “and other nefarious activity”.
He contends that he fell foul of the Occupation military authorities because he shared this information with the US Federal Bureau of Investigation. According to David Phinney:

Vance claims that during the months leading up to his arrest, he worked as an unpaid informant for the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Sometimes twice a day, he would share information with an agent in Chicago about the Iraqi-owned Shield Group Security, whose principals and managers appeared to be involved in weapons deals and violence against Iraqi civilians. One company employee regularly bartered alcohol with U.S. military personnel in exchange for ammunition they delivered …

Vance and Ertel barricaded themselves in their office after the Iraqi firm confiscated their ID tags. They were rescued by US soldiers and taken back to the Green Zone. There they were arrested and held, secretly, for three months. They were systematically mistreated and tortured with very loud music.

In a lawsuit now pending against former Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and "other unidentified agents," Vance and Ertel accuse their U.S. government captors of subjecting them to psychological torture day and night. Lights were kept on in their cell around the clock. They endured solitary confinement. They had only thin plastic mattresses on concrete for sleeping. Meals were of powdered milk and bread or rice and chicken, but interrupted by selective deprivation of food and water. Ceaseless heavy metal and country music screamed in their ears for hours on end, their legal complaint alleges.


But darker allegations are included in the complaint over false imprisonment. Because he worked with the FBI, Vance contends, U.S. government officials in Iraq decided to retaliate against him and Ertel. He believes these officials conspired to jail the two not because they worked for a security company suspected of selling weapons to insurgents, but because they were sharing information with law enforcement agents outside the control of U.S. officials in Baghdad.

“In other words,” claims the lawsuit, “United States officials in Iraq were concerned and wanted to find out about what intelligence agents in the United States knew about their territory and their operations. The unconstitutional policies that Rumsfeld and other unidentified agents had implemented for 'enemies' provided ample cover to detain plaintiffs and interrogate them toward that end.”

If this is true, Vance and Ertel fell victim to a vicious turf war between the shadowy special operations and intelligence forces created by the Neocons and Vice President Cheney – the ‘Other Agencies’ (OAs) set up by Rumsfeld’s Office of Special Plans – and anti-Neocon forces represented by the State Department and the FBI.

This, I have long contended, is probably what happened to Nicholas Berg in April 2004. (For a full list of the material about the Nick Berg case published on my website see links below).

For those new to the case, a brief summary follows …

Nick Berg was a 26 year-old US businessman of Jewish extraction. He was a specialist in radio communications tower repair and construction. Although Berg was, by all accounts, a supporter of George Bush and the US invasion of Iraq, his father, a member of the Democracy Now! group, was an open opponent of the war.

In Iraq, Berg found a commercial partner in Aziz al-Taee, a seedy Iraqi businessman, previously resident in the US, who was an associate of the Iranian-aligned Shiite businessman, Ahmad Chalabi. Aziz had an interesting criminal record in the US but had been instrumental in organising pro-invasion rallies before the war. It is likely that Berg combined his own fledgeling business endeavours with simple commercial intelligence-gathering for others.

Berg also had Iraqi relatives resident in Mosul. It was during a visit to Mosul, on 24 April 2004 that he was arrested by the Iraqi Police at a checkpoint because his Jewish name and Israeli stamps in his passport aroused suspicion. He was reportedly carrying a Farsi phrase book and anti-Zionist literature.

The Iraqi police turned Berg over to US military custody where he was interviewed on three occasions by the FBI. Berg was already well known to the Bureau. It is a curious fact that, while briefly a student at Oklahoma University, and before the events of 11 September 2001, his computer user ID had been used by Zacarias Moussaoui. The FBI had investigated this incident but found him innocent of any wrongdoing. The 911 investigator Michael Wright unearthed evidence supporting the view that Berg was working under CIA supervision at OU, perhaps spying on some of the alleged 911 hijackers who were living nearby at the time. Whatever the truth of this, suspicion must arise that Nick Berg was a part-time CIA operative and/or FBI informant. Certainly Berg made no complaints about his treatment by the FBI while he was in US custody in Mosul.

On 5 April, Berg’s father, who had learned of his incarceration from the US Consul in Baghdad, commenced legal proceedings for his release in the US Federal Court. The circumstances suggest that the US Consulate and the FBI spoke up for him. He was quickly released and offered a flight from Baghdad to Jordan. Reportedly he didn’t take up this offer, saying that he preferred to travel by road, with persons unknown whom he had somehow met. He left the al-Fanar Hotel on 10 April and disappeared.

No credible claim has ever surfaced that ransom demands were made, although Berg would have been a valuable, high-profile captive. A month later his decapitated body was found in Baghdad. Shortly afterwards, the infamous video of his decapitation, officially attributed to al-Qaeda, appeared on the internet. For George Bush, the timing was fortuitous, because the video provided a tailor-made “moral relativity”argument to bolster the US Government just as the story of the US torture of Iraqi prisoners at Abu Ghraib broke.

It is not difficult to see what might have happened in Berg’s case.

Remember that in early 2004, it was still possible for small-time would-be entrepreneurs like Berg to move about Iraq relatively freely. But operations by the Sunni and Baathist resistance were increasing. In late May, four US mercenaries were killed in an ambush in the Fallujah, a Sunni stronghold. The subsequent US attempt to subdue the city resulted in a minor disaster for US forces. A few days later US troops raided the offices of the cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, triggering a Shiite uprising. Suddenly, US troops were being attacked by the Shiites whom the US had relied upon to remain moderately well-disposed towards the occupation or at least neutral in relation to the escalating conflict with the Sunni and Baathist resistance. At the same time, in the US mainstream media, the view that the US had been tricked into invading Iraq on behalf of Iran began to be advanced. The fortunes of Ahmad Chalabi, until then something of a favourite with US ruling circles, suddenly plunged. The whole Neocon game-plan was falling apart. Behind the scenes rampant political confusion and paranoia would have reigned.

The Neocon-aligned OAs controlling much of the action in Iraq would certainly have known of Berg’s arrest in Mosul and would have resented the FBI and the Consulate’s interference in the case. And Berg’s relationship to a businessman close to the now discredited Ahmad Chalabi would not have helped. Under the confusing circumstance of the time, Berg looked like a highly suspicious character and he was one with whom the Neocon OAs would have felt they had unfinished business. It isn’t difficult to imagine they would have wanted to have a little chat with him. Nor is it difficult to imagine he might have died “accidentally” while under interrogation. Having seized Berg after his first incarceration had become a legal issue in the United States, his captors would have been in a lot of trouble had they later released him, but his death, apparently at the hands of al-Qaeda, would have been a safe resolution.

Donald Vance was lucky he got a prisoner registration number. At the time Berg was picked up, the CIA and OAs were holding unregistered “ghost prisoners” and they may still be doing so. Vance was probably given a number because the circumstances under which he was rescued by US troops from the Iraqi security company meant that several people whose loyalty and silence could not be relied on by the OAs, knew he had been taken into custody. In Berg’s case he was probably picked, unobserved, by an OA squad.

Donald Vance and his friend Nathan Ertel were very lucky indeed. In slightly different circumstances they might have ended up featuring in an “al-Qaeda” atrocity video, or perhaps, more likely these days, in one featuring “Iranian terrorists”.

Oh, and the Iraqi security company for which they worked is still in business, but under a slightly different name, and is still receiving US funds.

The Nick Berg case on the Nick Possum Home Page
WARNING: some articles contain disturbing images

The Nicholas Berg execution:
A working hypothesis and a resolution for the orange jumpsuit mystery

23 May 2004
Why was Nick Berg wearing a US prison "jumpsuit" when he was apparently executed on video by what are claimed to be al-Qaeda-linked terrorists? Something fishy there, but there was an elegant explanation. This was my first work on the case, later elaborated by …

New evidence and observations on the Berg case
18 July 2004
A close comparison of frames from the Berg video and pictures from Abu Ghraib prison reveals more evidence that the execution video was recorded in the notorious prison complex. Also, a refinement on the issue of the orange jumpsuit, which was actually a two-piece US prison uniform. And for an "off camera" view of a videotaped interrogation like the one seen in the opening 13 seconds of the Berg execution video, see the postscript to this piece. WARNING: disturbing images.

Nick Berg: the missing month
1 June 2004
A lot of people would like to know what happened to Nicholas Berg after he walked out of Baghdad’s Fanar Hotel on 10 April. They say the 26 year-old American contractor was looking for a taxi when he walked off down the street and into history.

Nagging questions about Nicholas Berg's last days:
An open letter to Beth A. Payne, US Consul, Baghdad, Iraq

9 June 2004
Millions want to know the truth about the last days of the young American contractor murdered in Iraq. Was he seized a second time by US forces? The US Consul in Baghdad should tell us all she knows.

Our man in Kabul:
Torturing Afghanis with Fox News' celebrity mercenary

1 August 2004
The fascinating case of Jonathan Keith Idema a mercenary headhunter and one of Donald Rumsfeld's OA boys until he fell foul of the US State Department and the Afghan regime.

FBI: Hizbullah avoiding attacks on US

The Jerusalem Post Internet Edition

Hizbullah hasn't conducted attacks in America out of concern that it would provoke too strong a response and disrupt the organization's fund-raising in the US, according to Federal Bureau of Investigation assessments.

"They want to maintain a low profile by engaging in criminal activity [but] not direct attacks," Thomas Fuentes, special agent in charge of the FBI's International Operations, said Wednesday at a foreign press briefing. "They've not been enthusiastic about doing it on US soil because of the attention and reaction that would occur." Fuentes said any attack in America would mean a large boost in US resources devoted to countering Hizbullah.

Fuentes described the FBI as having a "close relationship" with Israel when it comes to combating terrorism, adding that that was also true for the FBI's counterparts in neighboring countries.

Fuentes contrasted Hizbullah's strategy with that of al-Qaida. "If they could come in an attack us again, they would," he said of the latter.

Hizbullah, for its part, has focused its efforts in America on recruiting money. "These are fund-raising support cells in the organization as opposed to planning cells," according to Fuentes.

He pointed to a case in Charlotte, North Carolina in which brothers Muhammad and Chawki Hamoud were sentenced in 2002 for funneling funds to Hizbullah. They made money by smuggling cigarettes, for which they and their ring were also charged, along with money laundering, credit card fraud, marriage fraud and immigrations violations.

Speaking generally, Fuentes said organized crime syndicates will sometimes perform services such as document falsification for terrorists. But, he explained, that doesn't mean there are "true partnerships" between the two entities, as terrorist and organized crime groups tend not to trust each other and don't have shared goals.

"The motive of a terrorist is to make a statement - political, religious," Fuentes said. "Usually the motive of organized crime is greed."

Wednesday, April 11, 2007

A Black Mark

D.C. police and the FBI need to explain their actions in a 2002 protest incident.

Wednesday, April 11, 2007; A14

IF YOU DON'T like something your government is doing, you should be able to come to Washington, D.C., and say so in peaceful protest. You shouldn't have to worry that the color of your shirt will get you arrested. Or that police will call in the FBI to grill you about your political or religious views. It's distressing, then, when authorities in the nation's capital show so little regard for the basic American tenet of free assembly and trample on the rights of citizens.

A lawsuit brought by a group of protesters in a 2002 incident paints a disturbing picture of the actions of D.C. police and the FBI, and it raises questions about whether there was an attempt to hide some of those actions. As reported by The Post's Carol D. Leonnig, the protesters not only were wrongly arrested (the charges were dropped and any records expunged), but they were also interrogated by the FBI, allegedly including inappropriate questions about their and others' beliefs. The protesters say the interrogations were videotaped, and one aim of their lawsuit is to find out what happened to those records.

There's no question that police should investigate suspicious behavior, particularly in this era of heightened concern over terrorism. Yet the worst offense of these protesters is that they were wearing black; police were apparently confusing fashion with dangerous anarchism. That they were arrested on trespassing charges even after showing they had a parking pass for the garage where they were detained suggests that public safety was not the paramount concern. Either the arrests were a pretense to gather intelligence or a bid to discourage dissent -- perhaps both.

The involvement of the FBI, which is supposed to monitor domestic groups only when there is clear suspicion of criminal activity, is particularly disturbing. For years, authorities refused even to acknowledge that FBI agents were present in the garage, only to have their presence confirmed by a newly discovered document. What makes that revelation even more troubling is that city officials had vowed to the court that no such document existed. Was that oversight an honest mistake or a coverup?

Both the FBI and D.C. police have stumbled in the area of individual rights -- the FBI of late with its misuse of "national security letters" to obtain private information about U.S. citizens. The District's most notable transgression was the infamous mass arrests in Pershing Park, also during anti-globalization protests in 2002. Police officials say they have reformed their ways since that costly incident. We would like to think so. But the apparent nonchalance of local and federal officials about getting to the bottom of what happened to those people dressed in black is not reassuring.

Focus on national security after 9/11 means that the agency has turned its back on thousands of white-collar crimes

SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER

The FBI's terrorism trade-off

Wednesday, April 11, 2007

By PAUL SHUKOVSKY, TRACY JOHNSON AND DANIEL LATHROP
P-I REPORTERS

Thousands of white-collar criminals across the country are no longer being prosecuted in federal court -- and, in many cases, not at all -- leaving a trail of frustrated victims and potentially billions of dollars in fraud and theft losses.

It is the untold story of the Bush administration's massive restructuring of the FBI after the terrorism attacks of 9/11.

Five-and-a-half years later, the White House and the Justice Department have failed to replace at least 2,400 agents transferred to counterterrorism squads, leaving far fewer agents on the trail of identity thieves, con artists, hatemongers and other criminals.

Two successive attorneys general have rejected the FBI's pleas for reinforcements behind closed doors.

While there hasn't been a terrorism strike on American soil since the realignment, few are aware of the hidden cost: a dramatic plunge in FBI investigations and case referrals in many of the crimes that the bureau has traditionally fought, including sophisticated fraud, embezzlement schemes and civil rights violations.

"Politically, this trade-off has been accepted," said Charles Mandigo, a former FBI congressional liaison who retired four years ago as special agent in charge in Seattle. "But do the American people know this trade-off has been made?"

Among the findings of a six-month Seattle P-I investigation, analyzing more than a quarter-million cases touched by FBI agents and federal prosecutors before and after 9/11:

  • Overall, the number of criminal cases investigated by the FBI nationally has steadily declined. In 2005, the bureau brought slightly more than 20,000 cases to federal prosecutors, compared with about 31,000 in 2000 -- a 34 percent drop.
  • White-collar crime investigations by the bureau have plummeted in recent years. In 2005, the FBI sent prosecutors 3,500 cases -- a fraction of the more than 10,000 cases assigned to agents in 2000.

    In Western Washington, the drop has been even more dramatic. Records show that the FBI sent 28 white-collar cases to prosecutors in 2005, down 90 percent from five years earlier.

  • Civil rights investigations, which include hate crimes and police abuse, have continued a steady decline since the late 1990s. FBI agents pursued 65 percent fewer cases in 2005 than they did in 2000.
  • Already hit hard by the shift of agents to terrorism duties, Washington state's FBI offices suffer from staffing levels that are significantly below the national average.

    While other federal agencies have stepped in to pick up more of the load in drug enforcement, and the FBI has worked to keep agents on Indian reservations, the gaps created by the Bush administration's war on terrorism are troubling to criminal justice experts, police chiefs -- even many current and former FBI officials and agents.

    "There's a niche of fraudsters that are floating around unprosecuted," said one recently retired top FBI official, who spoke on condition of anonymity. "They are not going to jail. There is no law enforcement solution in sight."

    In most cases, local law enforcement agencies haven't been able to take up the slack.

    Seattle police Chief Gil Kerlikowske said his department isn't as equipped to handle complex white-collar investigations -- particularly when officers must also join anti-terrorism efforts and when federal funding for local police departments has shrunk.

    Whether the solution is to hire more FBI agents or shift some away from the counterterrorism effort, he said, more resources should be devoted to solving white-collar crime.

    "This is like the perfect storm," Kerlikowske said. "It's now five years later. We should be rethinking our priorities."

    A solution can't come soon enough for a growing number of discouraged fraud victims: A 75-year-old Issaquah woman who was allegedly swindled out of more than $1 million. A cancer patient whose identity was stolen from a Seattle hospital. People who fell victim to a nationwide investment scam worth about $70 million.

    They all sought the FBI's help. They got little or none.

    "As far as I'm concerned, the FBI has no interest in protecting people from these kinds of crimes," said Lloyd Martindale Jr., a Bellingham man who put $500,000 into an investment con and is still fighting to get some of it back. "They were not responsive to this at all."

    If the FBI had continued investigating financial crimes at the same rate as it had before the World Trade Center came down, about 2,000 more white-collar criminals would be behind bars, according to the P-I analysis, which was based on Justice Department data from 1996 through June 2006. Since 9/11, the number of white-collar convictions in federal courts has dropped about 30 percent.

    White-collar crimes often affect the people least able to afford it -- lower-income and elderly people, according to Peter Henning, a former Justice prosecutor who teaches law at Wayne State University in Detroit. "If you keep it small, and act quickly and get out of the jurisdiction, you can avoid being prosecuted," he said. "Scam artists know that."

    Large numbers of FBI agents also were transferred out of violent-crime programs because bureau officials knew that local police -- who have overlapping jurisdiction in violent crimes -- would have to help.

    The retired FBI official said the Bush administration is forcing the bureau to "cannibalize" its traditional crime-fighting units in the name of fighting terrorism.

    "The administration is starving the criminal program," the former official said.


    'Fairly awful situation'

    Margarita MacDonald, a 75-year-old widow who has Parkinson's disease, may never get back more than $1 million from a man who helped her with household tasks and then allegedly betrayed her trust.

    She was nearly deaf, all alone and living in Canada when he befriended her. He began helping her with chores and errands in exchange for room and board. He won her trust and persuaded her to move to Issaquah with him.

    The man told her that he had her best interests at heart, but he began manipulating her, persuading her to sign documents and threatening that he wouldn't bring her food or medicine if she didn't do what he wanted, MacDonald stated in court documents.

    He gradually stole about $1 million from her, buying furniture, electronics, jewelry -- even vacations to Banff, Alberta, and Hawaii, she wrote.

    Larry Gold, a lawyer in Vancouver, B.C., who represented her, called the Seattle office of the FBI in January 2005. The duty officer seemed interested and told him to put the information in writing, he said.

    Gold did. In several carefully detailed pages, he explained that the man stole most of MacDonald's savings and even got his hands on $400,000 worth of gold she kept in a safe deposit box in Canada. He said the FBI never responded.

    "It was a fairly awful situation, and I thought they might be interested in it," Gold said. "What can I say? They weren't."

    Frustrated, Gold sought help from Issaquah police, but Lynnwood attorney John Tollefsen took over the case and made getting MacDonald's money back, not prosecution, his main priority. He is still fighting to help MacDonald get back her savings.

    A judge ordered the man to pay MacDonald more than $1.4 million last year. The man filed for bankruptcy. He hasn't been charged with a crime.

    'Dead on arrival'

    Tensions were growing inside Robert Mueller's inner circle. In the months after 9/11, when the first waves of agents were funneled into counterterrorism, the FBI director was made aware of the consequences to come.

    Without a major influx of new agents, there was no way to maintain the bureau's grip on a long list of traditional crimes, particularly time-consuming fraud investigations.

    Mueller asked for help from two attorneys general -- John Ashcroft and his successor, Alberto Gonzales -- only to be rebuffed each time.

    "We were told to do more with less," said David Szady, a former FBI assistant director who stepped down last year as head of counterintelligence.

    "There was always discussion on backfilling," Szady said. "Always the push that we need to ask for more bodies."


    Dale Watson, who left in 2002 as the FBI's executive assistant director over counterterrorism programs, also blames the White House Office of Management and Budget and the Justice Department for failing to heed the warnings.

    "The budget should be backfilled with additional agents," Watson said. "We've got to do this. But you could request 2,000 agents for white collar, and it would never see the light of day at OMB."

    By the time the bureau started putting together its fiscal 2007 budget in mid-2005, "we realized we were going to have to pull out of some areas -- bank fraud, investment fraud, ID theft -- cases that protect the financial infrastructure of the country," the retired top FBI official said.

    Also in 2005, the FBI sent a five-year, strategic plan to the Justice Department that Szady called "the director's attempt to get this agency where it needed to be, including a robust criminal footprint. I know for a fact that the Justice Department beat that down. It was dead on arrival."

    A report in September 2005 by the department's inspector general asserted that in addition to the 1,143 agents transferred away from traditional crime programs, the FBI used 1,279 agents on counterterrorism work, even though they were on the books as criminal-program agents. The inspector general concluded that the FBI "reduced its investigative efforts related to traditional crimes by more than 2,400 agents."

    More recently, scaled-back staffing requests weren't granted. In fiscal 2006, the bureau sought 250 to 350 new agents. It was given money for fewer than 75, a former official said. Over the past eight years, the ranks of FBI agents have increased, from about 11,000 to 12,575, and virtually all have been assigned to anti-terrorism duties, records show.

    Officially, the Justice Department and the Office of Management and Budget assert that traditional criminal enforcement by the FBI hasn't suffered in the wake of 9/11. They say federal law enforcement agencies are working more efficiently to compensate for the continuing emphasis on homeland security.

    "The administration strongly disagrees that the FBI has been anything less than effective in the years since 9/11 in combating domestic crime issues," said OMB spokesman Sean Kevelighan. "We have worked to achieve a balance between the FBI's homeland security and criminal investigative missions."

    "We'll just abide by what the president's budget is," said FBI Assistant Director Chip Burrus. "We work a lot smarter than we have in the past."

    Mueller, Gonzales and Ashcroft declined to be interviewed for this story.

    Burrus acknowledges that the bureau has reduced its efforts to fight fraud. He likened the FBI's current fraud-enforcement policies -- in which losses below $150,000 have little chance of being addressed -- to "triage." Even cases with losses approaching $500,000 are much less likely to be accepted for investigation than before 9/11, he said.

    There is "no question" that America's financial losses from frauds below $150,000 amount to billions a year, Burrus said. The top security official for a major American bank agreed, saying unprosecuted fraud losses easily total "multibillions."

    Citing the new policy, an informed source said the Seattle FBI office would have rejected the MacDonald case, despite the million-dollar loss, because she was the only victim.

    Experts say American consumers are paying for banks' and businesses' fraud losses; they are passed on through higher interest rates, bank fees and retail prices.

    Enforcing civil rights laws has been a core FBI mission since the Johnson presidency, but after 9/11 those efforts declined substantially. The number of cases brought by the FBI to federal prosecutors for any reason -- from getting subpoenas to seeking charges -- fell 65 percent between 2000 and 2005, the P-I found.

    While the FBI disputes the degree of the decline, the bureau's own figures show drops in cases investigated, indictments and convictions -- particularly hate crimes. Civil rights cases against local police -- including allegations of brutality and misuse of power -- also dropped following 9/11, but FBI data show a rebound in indictments and convictions since 2005.

    There were 24 percent fewer agents working on civil rights cases in 2004 than in 2000, according to the 2005 inspector general's report.

    Sarah Dunne, legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Washington, said the decline in civil rights investigations means "people's rights are not protected."

    "It's been sort of sad to see," said Dunne, a former trial attorney in the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division. "What type of message is the Bush administration sending if they say this is not a significant concern?"

    Increasing counterterrorism and security efforts may actually lead to more situations in which police are violating people's civil rights, said James Bible, president of the Seattle-King County branch of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People.

    "We're essentially put in a place that we're sacrificing civil rights in the name of security," Bible said. "It would seem that, as we build one, we necessarily have to build the other."

    John McKay, the former U.S. attorney for Western Washington, said he is surprised that the FBI's post-9/11 trade-offs weren't addressed years ago.

    "I can't figure out for the life of me why, with the war on terror, asking for more FBI agents isn't a priority," said McKay, who was one of eight U.S. attorneys fired last year by the Bush administration. "If the president of the United States, a law-enforcement Republican, is not going to propose an increase in FBI agents -- what Democrat will? There's plenty of blame to go around."

    One leading Democrat, Sen. Joe Biden of Delaware, introduced legislation in February that aims to address the problem. The bill calls for hiring 1,000 agents at a cost of $160 million a year.

    "There's no doubt that fighting terrorism should be a top priority for the FBI, but we can't forget about the risk to our neighborhoods from everyday crime," Biden told the P-I.

    "To add insult to injury, President Bush hasn't replaced the FBI agents who transitioned over from working criminal cases to counterterrorism," he said. "The FBI is at a breaking point. ... They're overworked and overburdened and, frankly, they need some relief."

    'Risk-free crime'

    Eric Drew was near death when someone stole his identity. Weak and in intense pain from leukemia and chemotherapy, he was about to have a bone-marrow transplant at a Seattle hospital in 2003 when collectors began calling, demanding payments on credit-card accounts he'd never opened.

    He got little response from Seattle police and called the FBI. There, he said, a duty officer told him the FBI was focused on national security and didn't deal with fraud anymore.

    "Basically, I was in the hospital dying, and nobody would lift a finger or even take a statement from me," he said.

    Drew was furious. After his transplant, though sick and weak, he tracked down the culprit himself. He got the Seattle addresses where some of the fraudulently purchased merchandise had been shipped, and he found surveillance footage from a hardware store where some had been bought.

    A local TV station picked up on his cause and aired footage of the thief using a credit card opened in Drew's name. Tips flooded in to Seattle police, and the guy turned himself in, Drew said.

    The culprit was Richard Gibson, a hospital worker at Seattle Cancer Care Alliance who had had regular contact with Drew during his hospital stay.

    Drew, 39, said the FBI finally took the case -- but only after it became a public spectacle that a dying man couldn't get law enforcement to help him. Once the FBI took over, Gibson was swiftly prosecuted.

    Drew, who is now cancer-free after a 2004 stem-cell transplant, believes that the FBI is the best agency to handle most identity-theft cases because they often cross state lines.

    But for now, he said, the message from the FBI and other law-enforcement agencies is unsettling: "It's a risk-free crime. Go out and steal identities. No one will come after you."

    Crime squads tapped

    In the late 1990s, the FBI in Seattle had at least 16 agents working on two white-collar crime squads.

    "It was like one-stop shopping," said Jason Moulton, a former FBI official who ran one of those squads. "SPD was there, the IGs were there, the Department of Financial Institutions was there. IRS was there. They all had desks in the space. We were running (wiretaps), doing complex cases."

    All of the agents "were extremely busy," and there were still plenty of cases they couldn't get to, Moulton recalled.

    By last summer, the effect of shifting agents to anti-terrorism squads was clear: The FBI's white-collar effort had been whittled down to four agents statewide. Hard-pressed agents are now routinely urging banks or lawyers representing victims to do most of the investigating themselves. Even then, the FBI won't necessarily pursue criminal charges.

    A few years ago, a Shoreline couple with a home-repair business allegedly used phony financial information to get Columbia Bank to loan them more than $2 million and then stopped paying it back.

    The bank sued, and a King County Superior Court judge ordered the couple to pay more than $1.6 million. The couple moved to Colorado and declared bankruptcy. There, a judge found that the man -- and to a lesser extent, the woman -- purposely deceived the bank.

    A dogged Columbia Bank investigator put the case together in a nice package to hand off to the FBI for possible criminal charges, according to an FBI agent. The bureau, however, declined to take the case.

    The FBI also declines to investigate most cases of an increasingly common financial crime that can leave victims financially and emotionally drained: identity theft.

    "When cases come in that you have to decline, you are supposed to find a home for them," an FBI agent in Seattle said. "But you've got a lot of balls in the air. You have so much you are trying to do with so little resources."

    Seattle police say they have been investigating more white-collar crime cases in recent years -- partly because the FBI is handling fewer, and partly owing to an explosion in identity theft and Internet-related crimes.

    "We're now really having to make hard decisions about which cases will get worked, and when," said Lt. Mike Edwards, who supervises the Fraud, Forgery and Financial Exploitation Unit.

    King County sheriff's detectives have also struggled to investigate an increasing number of fraud cases without FBI help, Sgt. John Urquhart said.

    There are many reasons why federal agents are better suited than the locals to conduct complex fraud investigations. The FBI has agents around the nation and the world to run down leads. Even if a local detective could get her chief to approve an investigative trip across country, she has no jurisdiction in another state.

    If agents need to subpoena business records, they simply call a federal prosecutor, who can get an order easily. That's not true in many state jurisdictions, including Washington, where it can take a couple of days for the prosecutor to prepare documentation and present it to a judge for a subpoena. Federal agents can obtain warrants for wiretaps; local officers in Washington cannot, except in rare circumstances. Locals need a court order for a body wire; federal agents don't. FBI agents can record telephone calls if one party consents without going to a judge; locals can't.


    And federal sentences for white-collar crimes are generally tougher than those meted out in state courts. In Washington, for example, the average federal money-launderer was sentenced to 35 months in prison in 2006, while the average state court sentence was probation.

    The difference in penalties means that not only are fewer people getting prosecuted for white-collar crimes, they are also serving less time behind bars. And just when coordination among state, local and federal law enforcement in Washington and other states needed to be at its best, there were signs of major breakdowns.

    In 2001, the FBI office in Seattle launched the King County Fraud Investigation Team, which included investigators from the Seattle and Bellevue police departments, the King County Sheriff's Office and the Secret Service. Less than two years later, the bureau dissolved it, according to a Seattle-area fraud investigator.

    About the same time, FBI supervisors in Seattle also stopped attending monthly meetings where they talked about fighting fraud with executives from major retailers, such as Nordstrom and Costco.

    Said one agent: "What did we bring to the table? We got out of that game. Why go and give them a no?"

    But the bureau's new mantra of doing more with less seems to be paying off in the handling of bank robberies. The five FBI agents in Seattle that had been assigned to bank heists have been reduced to one, but there are no complaints of languishing cases. The conviction rate last year was a lofty 85 percent.

    Special Agent Larry Carr now works with local detectives to coordinate the investigations and determine whether defendants will be prosecuted in state or federal court. Increasingly, the cases are going to King County Superior Court.

    "It is a testament to doing a lot more with a lot less," Carr said.

    Scam artists unpunished?

    A few years ago, more than 1,000 people across the country invested roughly $70 million in a scam known as Resource Development International, led by two men who set up headquarters in Tacoma.

    Though victims in Washington urged the FBI to investigate, the two men didn't face federal charges -- or even a criminal case here in Washington, where they ran the scam.

    The district attorney's office in Santa Clara County, Calif., ended up taking on the case after an elderly victim in the San Jose area came forward. Deputy District Attorney Paul Colin prosecuted the kingpins, John and David Edwards, a father-and-son team who are now serving 27-year sentences in state prison, and two other men who had sold the investments to people in California.

    But dozens of others were involved in the scam -- six to eight people who worked in the Edwardses' office, and 50 to 100 people who sold the phony investments across the country, Colin said. Most haven't faced charges. That includes nine Washington men who, according to the state Department of Financial Institutions, sold more than $6.6 million worth of the sham investments to 53 people in Washington.

    "If the feds had taken this on, it might have been caught sooner, and more of the people who assisted the Edwardses might have been brought to justice," Colin said. "These scams happen every day to the rich and the poor, and they should be a priority of law enforcement -- particularly at the federal level."

    After trying several times, Lloyd Martindale Jr., one of the Washington victims, finally got an FBI agent to meet with him in August 2002. The agent showed up late, explaining that he'd been out late dealing with terrorist activities and border issues, he said.

    "He wanted my evidence and a description of my role," he said. "It sounded like the FBI was going to take this thing."

    Retired Tacoma schoolteacher Dick Mansfield, who said he was persuaded by one of the scam's "slick operators" to invest $175,000 from his state pension, also finally got a special agent at the FBI's Tacoma office to hear his story.

    "She did listen to me," he said, "but nothing ever came of it."

    Gina Davis, supervisory special agent of the Tacoma office, said they didn't act because an FBI office in California was already investigating the investment scam. But John Gliatta, supervisory special agent in Fresno, Calif., said their investigation was limited to two men in the Fresno area. One was charged with perjury and sentenced to probation.

    Mansfield and Martindale believe that many more people should have been prosecuted, and Mansfield still struggles to explain how devastating it is "to have your future ripped off."

    "I feel angry that we don't have a culture that sees the horror of financial theft," he said. "It is horrendous. It is not taken seriously."

    WEB LINKS

    To learn more about the effects of FBI's post-9/11reorganization:

  • The inspector general's report on "The External Effects of the Federal Bureau of Investigation's Reprioritization Efforts": usdoj.gov/oig/reports/FBI/a0537/index.htm
  • The IG's report on "Internal Effects of the Federal Bureau of Investigation's Reprioritization": usdoj.gov/oig/reports/FBI/a0439/index.htm
  • General Accounting Office reports on the "FBI Transformation": gao.gov/new.items/d041036.pdf (PDF)


    P-I reporter Paul Shukovsky can be reached at 206-448-8072 or paulshukovsky@seattlepi.com. P-I reporter Tracy Johnson can be reached at 206-467-5942 or tracyjohnson@seattlepi.com.

  • Tuesday, March 27, 2007

    FBI Provided Inaccurate Data for Surveillance Warrants

    By John Solomon

    Washington Post Staff Writer
    Tuesday, March 27, 2007; A05

    FBI agents repeatedly provided inaccurate information to win secret court approval of surveillance warrants in terrorism and espionage cases, prompting officials to tighten controls on the way the bureau uses that powerful anti-terrorism tool, according to Justice Department and FBI officials.

    The errors were pervasive enough that the chief judge of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, Colleen Kollar-Kotelly, wrote the Justice Department in December 2005 to complain. She raised the possibility of requiring counterterrorism agents to swear in her courtroom that the information they were providing was accurate, a procedure that could have slowed such investigations drastically.

    A internal FBI review in early 2006 of some of the more than 2,000 surveillance warrants the bureau obtains each year confirmed that dozens of inaccuracies had been provided to the court. The errors ranged from innocuous lapses, such as the wrong description of family relationships, to more serious problems, such as citing information from informants who were no longer active, officials said.

    The FBI contends that none of the mistakes were serious enough to reverse judges' findings that there was probable cause to issue a surveillance warrant. But officials said the errors were significant enough to prompt reforms bureau-wide.

    "It is clear to everybody this is a serious matter. This is something that has to happen quickly. We have to have the confidence of the American people that we are using these tools appropriately," said Kenneth Wainstein, the Justice Department's new assistant attorney general for national security.

    The department's acknowledgment of the problems with the FISA court applications comes nearly two weeks after a blistering inspector general's report revealed widespread violations of the use of "national security" and "exigent circumstances" letters, which allow FBI agents to collect phone, e-mail and Internet records from telecommunications companies without review by a judge. The problems included failing to document relevant evidence, claiming emergencies that did not exist and failing to show that phone records requests were connected to authorized investigations.

    In the use of both national security letters and the FISA warrant applications, officials acknowledged that the problems resulted from agents' haste or sloppiness -- or both -- and that there was inadequate supervision.

    "We've oftentimes been better at setting the rules than we have been at establishing the internal controls and audits necessary to enforce them," FBI Assistant Director John Miller said.

    FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III is scheduled to appear before the Senate Judiciary Committee today to answer questions about the use of national security letters. Congress will receive its annual report on FISA warrants next month.

    Experts said Congress, the courts and the Justice Department share the blame for not conducting more aggressive oversight of FBI agents.

    "It is a little too easy to blame the FBI, because the FBI gets away with this stuff when the other institutions of government fail to do their jobs," said Marc Rotenberg, president of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, which monitors civil liberties issues.

    Records show that the FISA court approves almost every application for the warrants, which give agents broad powers to electronically monitor and surveil people who they allege are connected to terrorism or espionage cases. The number of requests rose from 886 in 1999 to 2,074 in 2005. The court did not reject a single application in 2005 but "modified" 61, according to a Justice Department report to Congress.

    Senior Justice officials said they have begun a comprehensive review of all terrorism-fighting tools and their compliance with the law. That will be followed by regular audits and training to ensure that agents do not lapse into shortcuts that can cause unintended legal consequences.

    Wainstein noted that before his division was created last year, the Justice Department could not systematically check FBI compliance with rules in all types of national security investigations. He acknowledged, for instance, that the department was told of 26 potential violations that the FBI had disclosed in its use of national security letters but did not focus on them.

    Earlier this year, President Bush agreed to allow the FISA court to review surveillance requests from the National Security Agency after a battle with civil liberties groups and some lawmakers over the legality of that agency's spying effort, in which some suspects were overseas.

    Last year's problems involving the FISA court, however, involved the issuance of secret warrants that authorized FBI agents to conduct surveillance inside the United States.

    Shortly before the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, the FISA court complained that there were inaccuracies in 75 warrants that the court had approved going back several years. The FBI responded by instituting new policies to better ensure that the information agents provided in warrant applications was accurate and could be verified if questioned.

    But audits conducted beginning in 2003 showed an increasing number of errors and corrections in applications. On Dec. 12, 2005, the court sent a letter of complaint that raised the idea of agents being compelled to swear to the accuracy of information.

    Justice and the FBI are reviewing about 10 percent of the 60,000 ongoing terrorism investigation files in search of problems. "We are learning to live in a different environment, and now we are aware and working on problems, and I think we are creating a lot of fixes," said Jane Horvath, the Justice Department's first chief privacy and civil liberties officer.

    FBI officials said they expect the audit of national security letters for 2006 to show the same problems as those identified in the current audit, which covered 2003 through 2005.

    "You are never going to be at a zero error rate because this is a human endeavor," Wainstein said. "Therefore it is subject to error on occasion. But we're going to do everything we can to minimize them."

    Live: FBI director testifies about improper spying

    Live: FBI director testifies about improper spying

    GOP Rep. Gary Miller's fishy land deals

    FBI inquires about Miller land deals

    Tuesday, March 20, 2007

    Watchdog calls FBI abuses inexcusable

    By MICHAEL J. SNIFFEN, Associated Press Writer 1 hour, 15 minutes ago

    The FBI engaged in widespread and serious misuse of its authority in illegally gathering telephone, e-mail and financial records of Americans and foreigners while hunting terrorists, the Justice Department's chief inspector said Tuesday.

    The FBI's failure to establish sufficient controls or oversight for collecting the information through so-called national security letters constituted "serious and unacceptable" failures, said Glenn A. Fine, the internal watchdog who revealed the data-gathering abuses in a 130-page report last week.

    Testifying before the House Judiciary Committee, Fine said he did not believe the problems were intentional, but were generally the result of confusion and carelessness.

    "It really was unacceptable and inexcusable what happened here," Fine said under questioning.

    Democrats said that Fine's findings were an example of how the Justice Department has used broad counterterrorism authorities Congress granted in the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks to trample on privacy rights.

    "This was a serious breach of trust," said Rep. John Conyers (news, bio, voting record), D-Mich., the Judiciary chairman. "The department had converted this tool into a handy shortcut to illegally gather vast amounts of private information while at the same time significantly underreporting its activities to Congress."

    Rep. James Sensenbrenner of Wisconsin, the committee's former Republican chairman, said: "I hope that this would be a lesson to the FBI that they can't get away with this and expect to maintain public support," said "Let this be a warning."

    Other Republicans, however, said the FBI's expanded spying powers were vital to tracking terrorists.

    "The problem is enforcement of the law, not the law itself," said Rep. Lamar Smith (news, bio, voting record) of Texas, the committee's senior GOP member. "We need to be vigilant to make sure these problems are fixed."

    Valerie Caproni, the FBI's general counsel, took responsibility for the abuses detailed in Fine's report.

    "We're going to have to work to get the trust of this committee back, and we know that's what we have to do, and we're going to do it," she said.

    In a review of headquarters files and a sampling of just four of the FBI's 56 field offices, Fine found 48 violations of law or presidential directives during 2003-2005 and estimated that "a significant number of ... violations throughout the FBI have not been identified or reported."

    The bureau has launched an audit of all 56 field offices to determine the full extent of the problem. The Senate Judiciary Committee is to hear Wednesday from Fine and FBI Director Robert Mueller on the same topic.

    A key concern in Congress is whether the USA Patriot Act, which substantially loosened controls over the letters, should be revised.

    "Many of us have been saying that the potential for abuse of the Patriot Act's national security letter authority is almost without limit," Conyers said. "The Justice Department's total lack of internal control and cavalier attitude toward the few legal restrictions that exist in the act have possibly resulted in the illegal seizure of American citizen's private information.,"

    In 1986, Congress first authorized FBI agents to obtain electronic records without approval from a judge using national security letters. The letters can be used to acquire e-mails, telephone, travel records and financial information, like credit and bank transactions. They can be sent to telephone and Internet access companies, universities, public interest organizations, nearly all libraries, financial and credit companies.

    In 2001, the Patriot Act eliminated any requirement that the records belong to someone under suspicion. Now an innocent person's records can be obtained if FBI field agents consider them merely relevant to an ongoing terrorism or spying investigation.

    Fine's review, authorized by Congress over Bush administration objections, concluded the number of national security letters requested by the FBI skyrocketed after the Patriot Act became law. Each letter may contain several requests.

    In 2000, the FBI issued an estimated 8,500 requests. That number peaked in 2004 with 56,000. Overall, the FBI reported issuing 143,074 requests in national security letters between 2003 and 2005. In 2005, 53 percent were for records of U.S. citizens or permanent residents.

    In a sampling of 77 case files in four FBI field offices, Fine discovered an additional 8,850 requests that were never recorded in the FBI's database, and he estimated there were many more nationwide.

    The 48 possible violations Fine uncovered included failing to get proper authorization, making improper requests under the law and unauthorized collection of telephone or Internet e-mail records.

    Fine said the violations were unintentional, but that conclusion has been disputed by critics of the Patriot Act.

    "What the inspector general documented shows a pattern of intentional misconduct that goes far beyond mismanagement," said Mike German, a former FBI agent who is a national security counsel to the American Civil Liberties Union. More than 700 "exigent circumstances" letters "said the FBI had already asked for grand jury subpoenas although the agents knew they hadn't."