Salvador Cienfuegos Zepeda: Billy Barr Goes Soft on Crime

Bill Barr just let a key cog in Mexican drug trafficking go free.

Yesterday, prosecutors in Brooklyn requested that Judge Carol Amon dismiss the prosecution of Salvador Cienfuegos Zepeda, Mexico’s former Secretary of Defense indicted in August 2019 for narcotics trafficking and money laundering and arrested, while on a trip to Los Angeles, this October.

A detention memo from October described Cienfuegos’ role in protecting the H-2 cartel during the period he was Secretary of Defense.

Evidence obtained by law enforcement officials, including the interception of thousands of Blackberry Messenger communications, has revealed that, while he was the Secretary of National Defense in Mexico, the defendant, in exchange for bribe payments, assisted the H-2 Cartel in numerous ways, including by: (i) ensuring that military operations were not conducted against the H-2 Cartel; (ii) initiating military operations against its rival drug trafficking organizations; (iii) locating maritime transportation for drug shipments; (iv) acting to expand the territory controlled by the H-2 Cartel to Mazatlán and the rest of Sinaloa; (v) introducing senior leaders of the H-2 Cartel to other corrupt Mexican government officials willing to assist in exchange for bribes; and (vi) warning the H-2 Cartel about the ongoing U.S. law enforcement investigation into the H-2 Cartel and its use of cooperating witnesses and informants—which ultimately resulted in the murder of a member of the H-2 Cartel that the H-2 Cartel senior leadership incorrectly believed was assisting U.S. law enforcement authorities.

Among the many communications captured during the course of this investigation are numerous direct communications between the defendant and a senior leader of the H-2 Cartel, including communications in which the defendant discussed his historical assistance to another drug trafficking organization, as well as communications in which the defendant is identified by name, title and photograph as the Mexican government official assisting the H-2 Cartel. Due in part to the defendant’s corrupt assistance, the H-2 Cartel conducted its criminal activity in Mexico without significant interference from the Mexican military and imported thousands of kilograms of cocaine, heroin, methamphetamine, and marijuana into the United States.

These thousands of intercepted communications amongst the members of the H-2 Cartel are corroborated by numerous drug seizures of hundreds of kilograms of cocaine, heroin and methamphetamine, as well as the seizure of hundreds of thousands of dollars in drug proceeds in the United States. In addition, witnesses have provided a wealth of information to the government about the operations of the H-2 Cartel, its regular employment of violence to further its drug trafficking, its use of bribery to ensure government protection, as well as the assistance of the defendant to the H-2 Cartel and other drug trafficking organizations.

The motion to dismiss explained that after Cienfuegos was arrested, Mexican government officials told the US that their own government had started an investigation. Purportedly, the US is dismissing this prosecution so Mexico can carry out its own investigation.

Following the arrest of the defendant, officials for the government of Mexico, which was not aware of the sealed indictment against the defendant at the time of the arrest, engaged in discussions with United States government officials concerning the pending charges against the defendant in the United States. During the course of those discussions, the United States was informed that the Fiscalia General de la Republica of Mexico had initiated its own investigation into the defendant’s alleged conduct. As a result of these discussions, the government of the United States concluded, with the concurrence of the government of Mexico, that the United States would seek to dismiss the indictment against the defendant without prejudice, so that Mexico could proceed first with investigating and potentially prosecuting the defendant under Mexican law for the alleged conduct at issue, which occurred in Mexico.

A joint statement from Barr and Mexico’s Fiscalía General of Mexico Alejandro Gertz Manero yesterday spoke — among other things — of cooperation on all forms of criminality and “sovereignty.”

In recognition of the strong law enforcement partnership between Mexico and the United States, and in the interests of demonstrating our united front against all forms of criminality, the U.S. Department of Justice has made the decision to seek dismissal of the U.S. criminal charges against former Secretary Cienfuegos, so that he may be investigated and, if appropriate, charged, under Mexican law.

At the request of the Fiscalía General de la República, the U.S. Department of Justice, under the Treaty that governs the sharing of evidence, has provided Mexico evidence in this case and commits to continued cooperation, within that framework, to support the investigation by Mexican authorities.

Our two countries remain committed to cooperation on this matter, as well as all our bilateral law enforcement cooperation. As the decision today reflects, we are stronger when we work together and respect the sovereignty of our nations and their institutions. This close partnership increases the security of the citizens of both our countries.

This morning, Judge Amon found no evidence of bad faith and so dismissed the indictment (without prejudice, so the US could refile it if Mexico does not prosecute him).

It’s a stunning turn of events, particularly given the slim likelihood that Mexico really will prosecute Cienfuegos (and they make no promises they will).

For the purposes of this post, I will assume this is all about Mexico’s displeasure at being surprised by this indictment, as NYT reported on the move, reflecting a justifiable sensitivity about the footprint that DEA has in the country.

Mexico’s anger at the charges stemmed from largely being kept out of the loop on the case, officials have said. Mr. López Obrador himself expressed some surprise at the detention of a military leader who had long commanded respect inside Mexico.

Mexican officials have said privately that they were angry at a lack of communication by Justice Department officials on a case that had clearly taken time to build, given how closely the two countries collaborate in fighting organized crime.

I will assume this is not why Billy Barr swapped in Seth DuCharme to oversee EDNY in July. I will assume there’s no deal for a Trump golf course in Cancun. I will assume this involved no call between Trump and Andrés Manuel López Obrador (who, almost alone with Vladimir Putin, has not yet congratulated President-Elect Biden) on which Trump said, “I’d like to do us a favor, though.”

We can’t rule those things out, because twice before, with at least Turkey and Ukraine, Barr and other Trump AGs have intervened to facilitate Trump’s personal corruption with foreign leaders.

But for the moment, I will assume Barr made this move for precisely the reason his joint statement claimed he did, because Mexico views this as an issue of sovereignty and the US needed to make this concession in order for Mexico to continue partnering on law enforcement, including narcotics trafficking.

Even still, it is either a testament to an unbelievable fuck up by the Trump Administration, an abject failure at diplomacy to lay adequate groundwork to avoid shocking Mexico with this arrest. And/or it is a testament that Trump has squandered our privilege (for better and worse) of playing policeman of the world.

For decades, the United States has been able to find crimes that impact America and others — particularly drug trafficking — and reach overseas (or wait for a timely visit) to pluck citizens of other countries up and try them in our justice department. Other countries rarely complained, much less our weaker neighbors in the hemisphere.

Admittedly, Cienfuegos was very senior. But so, too, was Manuel Noriega, among others.

Yet, today, a DOJ that has almost never set limits on its reach, bowed down to Mexico and let a powerful alleged criminal go free.

image_print
44 replies
  1. Dave K says:

    Not sure what will happen to this guy in Mexico, but I would be happy to no longer see the US go after people like Noriega or Lula or Estrada in Guatemala legally. Maybe if this was all about combatting drug trafficking and corruption, and was done in cooperation with those countries it would be ok. But too often it seems to be cover for imperialism and advancing US corporate interests.

    • bmaz says:

      Yeah? But what if it is about “drug trafficking” that directly impinges on the US? Do you think “all” extraterritorial jurisdiction is improper? Personally, I think some of it is excessive. But you think it is all bad?

      • Dave K says:

        I think criminally charging leaders or candidates in another country is bad. I understand this guy is an ex-official, but I am not sure how prominent he is, or how involved in politics he still is. Seems to me that the best way to deal with someone like Noriega is diplomacy and (targeted) sanctions. I think charging El Chapo is ok, and should also involve diplomacy with Mexico.

        • bmaz says:

          Oh, you do, do you? You understand he was arrested in Los Angeles for crimes against the United States, right?

          “These thousands of intercepted communications amongst the members of the H-2 Cartel are corroborated by numerous drug seizures of hundreds of kilograms of cocaine, heroin and methamphetamine, as well as the seizure of hundreds of thousands of dollars in drug proceeds in the United States.”

          And you think that shit should be magically washed away? Seriously? What is wrong with you? You think El Chapo is okay, even arrested in Mexico is okay, but this guy is not? That is beyond vacuous and hypocritical.

          [By the way, this is the third name you have used here. Pick one and stick with it so everybody knows who they are talking to, or be gone]

        • Dave K says:

          I disagree with the overall US strategy on drugs, and with the US selectively prosecuting certain political leaders of other countries with corrupt motives. The Noriega example brought up in the original article is particularly toxic because the US supported Noriega at first and eventually illegally invaded Panama. I have been looking around for a comparison between this situation, and say, the lawfare against Lula in Brazil. This prosecution may have been justified, but maybe should have involved some diplomacy with Mexico.

        • bmaz says:

          Or maybe you are full of shit, and have no clue about jurisdiction and locus of arrest. Thank you for using a consistent screen name, for once.

        • Dave K says:

          Sorry about the username issue. Got feedback a few months ago to change it, and I don’t remember the first username I used.

        • Dave K says:

          To clarify a little, “Trump has squandered our privilege (for better and worse) of playing policeman of the world.” I think this privilege was at its absolute worst with Noriega, and probably at its best with El Chapo (for the murder charges). This case seems to be somewhere in the middle, and I think we should err on the side of avoiding doing more imperialism in Latin America.

      • e.a.f. says:

        The Americans could try cleaning up either own country before going after foreign leaders.

        Drugs come in through ports. All they have to do is start inspecting all those containers. Of course that isn’t going to happen. It cost money and some big retailers in the U.S.A. complained when it was discussed some years ago.

        Arresting people from other countries is just so much show, like deflecting from the real problems, the drug industry in the U.S.A.. The Americans made a big show of bringing El Chapo to the U.S.A. What a bunch of b.s. It hasn’t impacted the drug trade at all. Hasn’t reduced the supply, hasn’t reduce the money being made, hadn’t reduced the number of drug addicts or deaths due to drugs. All its done is given some one else a promotion within the cartel.

        Arresting the Mexican official was just a bunch of theatre and pissed off a lot of Mexicans and their government. Gave Trump and his something to point their finger at, but in my opinion, when they do the final tally Trump and his will have done more damage to the U.S.A. than the Mexican government official.

  2. rosalind says:

    “as well as the seizure of hundreds of thousands of dollars in drug proceeds in the United States.”

    gee, I wonder which financial institutions were holding these ill gotten gains?

  3. earlofhuntingdon says:

    Mexico’s interests seem obvious. A SecDef has the ear of his head of state and his justice minister. If he’s bent, he would know a lot of other bent senior politicians. A successful prosecution here might topple the government. More immediately, H-2 might kill a lot of them – and many others – in reprisal for disclosure of its people, money, and ops.

    A competent US team would presumably involve coordination among the DoJ, State, DEA, DHS, and DoD. Of necessity, it would have involved the president. It would have gamed out all those issues before indictment, arrest, and prosecution. But that sort of coordination and decision making is beyond this administration.

    Nor is Trump fond of holding the powerful to account – no matter how much he derides their “shithole” countries. This sort of prosecution also involves large-scale money laundering, something else Trump doesn’t want investigated. There’s also the client and distribution side in the US, which might have weighed in.

    Withdrawing the prosecution after it’s started and already public has the stink of corruption and incompetence. Much damage will already have been done, to no avail. Mostly the weak will pay the price. That’s also typical of this contemptuous president.

    • emptywheel says:

      I half wonder whether AMLO plans to go after EPN etc. So a way to ensure that PRI remains out of power for the foreseeable future. Not necessarily a bad thing, either.

      • Manuel Gonzalez says:

        Mexico’s current President asked the Senate to endorse a National Referendum that would open a Constitutional path that could end the immunity enjoyed by former Presidents. He is under a lot of pressure for it. It helps that he won 53.19% of the popular vote (31 million more than closest rival) in 2018. Those opposed appealed to the Supreme Court but failed.
        https://apnews.com/article/virus-outbreak-mexico-archive-courts-referendums-6bcaa317dc2690cfb229e37b9003ff1e

        • bmaz says:

          Well, you have been profligate here on this subject. What is your goal? And, no, the cooperation between the US and Mexico has never been that solid in deed, if not words. And that, too, is going back to the early 90’s.

        • Manuel Gonzalez says:

          Profligate, I was here indeed! An apology for the redundancy in the reply to the question below. Goal 1.- Welcome Marcy’s amazing gaze on the unprecedented process aimed to hold Mexico’s neo-liberal Presidents accountable for their crimes. Goal 2.- Acknowledge the diplomatic relevance that negotiated treaties and agreements with the rest of the Americas have as opposed to covert military interventions.

  4. Jim195 says:

    Anabel Hernandez (one of the most accomplished and courageous of Mexican investigative journalists) was on Carmen Aristegui’s program this morning saying in very strong terms that this was likely connected to two things: assuring continued Mexican cooperation in the drug war; and AMLO’s continued refusal to congratulate Biden.

    • earlofhuntingdon says:

      What sort of Mexican cooperation would that be that’s worth derailing the prosecution of one of the drug world’s great enablers?

      • Manuel Gonzalez says:

        Bi-national accord negotiated in 1992.
        Over the last five years, the law enforcement agencies in both countries DEA, FBI, Customs, DOJ, PGR, FEADS have established specific collaboration mechanisms for the development and exchange of intelligence; the development of coordinated investigations; the attack on organizations and the arrest of its members; and collaboration in prosecuting criminal cases. Cooperation and consultation among the PGR,DOJ, DEA, FBI, and the U.S. Customs Service have produced results in combating transnational criminal organizations. Stemming from the HLCG and the consolidation of the work by the Plenary Group of Senior Law Enforcement Officials, authorities from both countries have been able to develop effective and secure mechanisms to obtain and share information regarding transnational criminal organizations operating in both countries, as well as their members. The exchange of information between high-level officials, as well as the liaison mechanisms among Mexican and U.S. units that have served to plan and execute strategies for coordinated investigation, can be highlighted.

        DEA did not follow communication protocols agreed upon since 1992
        US-Mexico Bi-National Cooperation Against Illicit it Drugs.
        https://www.hsdl.org/?view&did=3442
        “Over the last five years, the law enforcement agencies in both countries DEA, FBI, Customs, DOJ, PGR, FEADS have established specific collaboration mechanisms for the development and exchange of intelligence; the development of coordinated investigations; the attack on organizations and the arrest of its members; and collaboration in prosecuting criminal cases. Cooperation and consultation among the PGR,DOJ, DEA, FBI, and the U.S. Customs Service have produced results in combating transnational criminal organizations. Stemming from the HLCG and the consolidation of the work by the Plenary Group of Senior Law Enforcement Officials, authorities from both countries have been able to develop effective and secure mechanisms to obtain and share information regarding transnational criminal organizations operating in both countries, as well as their members. The exchange of information between high-level officials, as well as the liaison mechanisms among Mexican and U.S. units that have served to plan and execute strategies for coordinated investigation, can be highlighted.”

      • Manuel Gonzalez says:

        DEA did not follow specific communication protocols agreed upon since the early 90’s in the US-Mexico Bi-National Cooperation against Illicit drugs accord…..
        “Over the last five years, the law enforcement agencies in both countries DEA, FBI, Customs, DOJ, PGR, FEADS have established specific collaboration mechanisms for the development and exchange of intelligence; the development of coordinated investigations; the attack on organizations and the arrest of its members; and collaboration in prosecuting criminal cases. Cooperation and consultation among the PGR,DOJ, DEA, FBI, and the U.S. Customs Service have produced results in combating transnational criminal organizations. Stemming from the HLCG and the consolidation of the work by the Plenary Group of Senior Law Enforcement Officials, authorities from both countries have been able to develop effective and secure mechanisms to obtain and share information regarding transnational criminal organizations operating in both countries, as well as their members. The exchange of information between high-level officials, as well as the liaison mechanisms among Mexican and U.S. units that have served to plan and execute strategies for coordinated investigation, can be highlighted.”
        https://www.hsdl.org/?view&did=3442

  5. Peterr says:

    In all this coverage, there is a name missing: Mike Pompeo.

    I went back to see what the State Dept had to say in August 2019 when Cienfuegos was arrested, and their search engine turns up *crickets.* That’s mighty hard to swallow, given that the USG just arrested the former secretary of defense of a neighboring country. State had no comment at all? At that time, however, there were a number of statements and press releases related to NAFTA 2/USMCA negotiations, including some joint US-Canada press availabilities, which suggests that perhaps State didn’t want to rock the boat with Mexico any further as they tried to negotiate the trade agreement – let DOJ handle it.

    But there’s one other oddity here.

    Before Pompeo came to State in April 2018, he was Director of the CIA. Hmmm . . . From The Hill, in their story about the initial arrest:

    Bilaterally, the Cienfuegos arrest could hinder the Pentagon’s larger strategic goal of wooing SEDENA [the Mexican ministry of defense], but is unlikely to significantly alter security cooperation, particularly on drug trafficking, in part because of the roles played by other Mexican security institutions.

    “What’s the future of this continued dance of trying to establish a relationship with SEDENA, which has always been a really reluctant dance partner? It’s just gone through ups and downs and it looks like it’s headed for another down,” said Isacson.

    In many ways, Cienfuegos personified a three-decades long effort to get SEDENA to let its guard down vis-a-vis the Pentagon, which Mexican military doctrine considers its primary external threat.

    In 2018, Cienfuegos was awarded the William J. Perry Award for Excellence in Security and Defense Education by the Center for Hemispheric Defense Studies, a Department of Defense school dedicated to regional military diplomacy.

    And in June 2017, Cienfuegos led then-CIA Director Mike Pompeo and then-White House Chief of Staff John Kelly on a tour of poppy plantations in the southern state of Guerrero.

    According to the indictment revealed Friday, Cienfuegos’s alleged illicit activities took place between December 2015 and February 2017, shortly before he received Pompeo and Kelly.

    Something tells me that Pompeo knows a helluva lot more about Cienfuegos’ activitities, including some less-than-legal cooperation with CIA and potentially DOD or other parts of the US government.

    The dropping of charges against Cienfuegos right now – during the interregnum prior to Biden’s inauguration – smells to high heaven of graymail. I can imagine Cienfuegos telling the DOJ something like “You put me on trial, and I will testify to certain black operations which Secretary Pompeo (then the CIA director) not only knew about but also assisted with or consented to. How many CIA secrets would you like disclosed in open court?”

    • earlofhuntingdon says:

      I agree. But that was always a risk in prosecuting a former high government official, who would have had information on a number of black ops and fuck-ups by the American DoD, CIA, DEA, ATF, and so on in his and perhaps neighboring countries. What’s changed since August 2019?

      • Peterr says:

        Trump lost.

        From Cienfuego’s POV, getting a deal from Trump is a lot more likely than from Biden. Trump would take revelations of anything ugly/illegal involving Pompeo as a personal hit on himself. Thus, Trump would be more inclined to protect his secretary of state so as to protect himself. The fact that Trump lost the election means that Trump only has a couple of months to make this go away, rather than play it out and see what happens along the way. Trump has to make a deal now or a deal isn’t going to happen, and Cienfuego knows it.

        There’s nothing like negotiating with a desperate person.

        In fact, it’s kind of like being in hock to a bunch of banks for a ton of money, and you’re about to get hauled into bankruptcy court. On the eve of the trial, you tell the banks “OK, you know I can’t pay right now, and if we go to trial and make that official, the end result will be that I look bad you lose every dime you lent me and then some. That’s not going to help your end-of-the-year bonus very much. Instead, why don’t you take these financial handcuffs off me, and let’s renegotiate the debt so that you at least will get something out of all this . . .”

        In this case, though, Trump is playing the unfamiliar and uncomfortable role of the bank.

      • bmaz says:

        You have information and/or evidence that Epstein did not, in fact, commit suicide? If so, please relate. I’ll be waiting….

        • Fraud Guy says:

          Nothing that would rise beyond reasonable suspicion, although possibly better than Trump’s election lawsuits.

        • bmaz says:

          Heh, good one, and fair. I fully understand the suspicion, though I have yet to see anything that supports anything more than asking the question. People who say that kind of incompetence by guards, failure of equipment or that suicides never happen like that have not spent enough time around jails and prisons. That stuff does indeed happen.

          Maybe it was other than suicide, but I have seen nothing yet to dispute the original medical examiner’s conclusion that it was a suicide. And you would think things would be breaking loose a little if there were such facts out there. But, who knows?

    • MB says:

      As a congressman from the 4th (Wichita), I guess he wasn’t your congressman, but I’d imagine you got a good glimpse over your shoulder of young Pompeo as he started his political career in KS.

      A carpetbagger in a way, as he was born and raised in southern California (Orange County, of course). A 5-minute scan of his WP entry reveals (in no particular order) that he was a Sunday school teacher, all his congressional elections were heavily subsidized by the Kochs, he had a 66-32 Senate vote for his CIA appointment, but that margin decreased to 57-42 for State. He made his money prior to politics in aerospace, and appointed his business buddy to a CIA post when he got the job.

      A “perfect storm” combination of cronyism, ambition, evangelical smugness and arrogance all in one roly-poly form. And I note that he has mastered the “Bill Barr school of vocal stylistics”: a low-frequency barely audible tone that seems to maximize the effectiveness of lies.

      Sorry – venting – I think the guy is dangerous and is also under the radar to many…

    • Jim195 says:

      Are you thinking of Genaro Garcia Luna (arrested Dec. 2019)? Because Cienfuegos was arrested in LA just over a month ago–Oct. 15, 2020.

  6. rosalind says:

    hmm, for some reason i’m reminded of this story from Noel Casler, who’s worked in live event production for years and has worked with the Trump Family up close and personal, most recently as Ivanka’s handler on “The Apprentice”. from his 10/22/20 twitter feed:

    “Does everyone know the story of Trump’s helicopter pilot? He got busted in OH for flying up kilos of cocaine. Bad news in OH. They moved his case to Trump’s sisters district in NJ-she recused but they appointed a judge who read a letter from Trump in court. Pilot got off with a small sentence at Danbury and then bought a condo in Trump Tower upon his release and resumed business.

    Here’s where it gets interesting: Keith Schiller was NYPD on narcotics squad, his job was literally to bust down doors and take possession of large scale drug-seizures. Around this time he saw Trump in court and approached him saying you need to hire me for your private security. He then retired from NYPD and became his full time bodyguard. And miraculously ‘product loss’ for Donnie & Co. became a thing of the past. Capiche?”

    • subtropolis says:

      Schiller’s son (cannot recall first name) is now the Director of Surveillance for Trump Org. Perhaps that’s not so odd — hotels and the like need security cameras. But that’s nonetheless always struck me as odd, given my opinion of Schiller pére. You see, I’ve long understood that Trump has had a fascination with hidden cameras, wiretaps, and the like. He seems to have had some close connections with several former NYPD and ex-FBI types who’ve since become private spooks. It’s only a hunch, but I’ve also long wondered whether the movie Sliver was based on Donald Trump and his tower in Manhattan.

  7. earlofhuntingdon says:

    South Dakota’s GOP governor, Kristi Noem (Freeedom! is not wearing a mask), is the new Sarah Palin.

  8. I Never Lie and am Always Right says:

    This really stinks, but I suspect that many more smelly events like this are on the way, aside from the anticipated pardons.

    • earlofhuntingdon says:

      That’s Trump setting fire to the Monopoly board because he landed on a hotel-filled Park Place he didn’t own.

      Lifelong tantrum-based behavior for him, but it’s dangerous. Someone else will come along who is much better at sedition than Trump.

      • Rapier says:

        Luckily Tom Cotton is ugly with that long neck and an Adam’s apple bigger than Ann Coulter’s. The ugly but in this case fortuitous truth is Americans won’t elect an ugly president.

Comments are closed.