Jakubec Indicted in Federal Charges, Still No WMD Charge

/in /by

As TPM reported, yesterday the federal government indicted George Djura Jakubec–the guy who had so many terrorist-favored explosives at his house they’ve decided to burn down the house rather than collect it all. But just two of the charges focus on those explosives. The other six charges focus on four alleged bank robberies, two of them armed.

In other words, in spite of the fact that he had what might, depending on the use for which he intended them, be classified as WMD and Mohamed Osman Mohamud never had an active explosive, unlike Mohamud, Jakubec was still not charged with the possession of a WMD.

Now, as I discussed, the charging difference likely has everything to do with the fact that the Feds knew what Mohamud intended to do with the explosives he never had (largely because they helped him plot out his plan for them). Whereas they appear to not yet know why Jakubec was creating a massive stockpile in his Escondido home. That is, the charging difference does seem to accord with the crime (if you ignore the fact that Mohamud never had an active explosive).

But it seems worth tracking the different fates of these two men, if only to see how much more severely the Feds prosecute the crimes the FBI creates for them than those created by alleged criminals themselves.

image_print
  1. zapkitty says:

    It’s all about efficiency in streamlining the work flow and lessening the subsequent burden on the healthcare system… if they charged every winger who’d accumulated a few hundred kilos of illegal explosives with WMD possession then they’d be swamped in cases and the punditry would overwhelm the nation’s chiropractic profession with their attempts to bend over backwards while explaining why wingers with bombs can’t possibly be considered as terrorists.

  2. MadDog says:

    Sorry to go all OT here, but just so folks don’t miss it, from Spencer S. Hsu of the WaPo:

    Government reports violations of limits on spying aimed at U.S. citizens

    The federal government has repeatedly violated legal limits governing the surveillance of U.S. citizens, according to previously secret internal documents obtained through a court battle by the American Civil Liberties Union.

    In releasing 900 pages of documents, U.S. government agencies refused to say how many Americans’ telephone, e-mail or other communications have been intercepted under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act – or FISA – Amendments Act of 2008, or to discuss any specific abuses, the ACLU said. Most of the documents were heavily redacted.

    However, semiannual internal oversight reports by the offices of the attorney general and director of national intelligence identify ongoing breaches of legal requirements that limit when Americans are targeted and minimize the amount of data collected…

    And from the ACLU, here’s what the WaPo was referring to:

    FAA FOIA Documents

    In response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit for records related to the U.S. government’s implementation of the invasive FISA Amendments Act (FAA) surveillance power, the government released over 900 pages of records to the ACLU. Although many of these records are heavily or even entirely redacted, the documents do shine some light on the government’s interpretation, use, and abuse of the FAA spying power…

    That ACLU link has links to all the above mentioned FOIA documents.

      • MadDog says:

        Obama was elected to manage the government. Ever get the feeling that our permanent goverment overlords are managing him?

        Ditto!

    • MadDog says:

      As folks peruse the latest ACLU document dump, you will encounter a new acronym from the government of “CXS”.

      That is the acronym used for the FBI Counterterrorism Division’s “Communications Exploitation Section”.

      • MadDog says:

        An “interesting” Powerpoint slide entitled “How Do I Disseminate FISA 702 Information?” and it is mostly redacted.

        However, note the titles of the various Powerpoint slides:

        Non-USPER (Internal) and USPER (Internal) on page 3 of the 5 page PDF.

        On the first slide for USPER (Internal), the first bullet states “Very similar to Non-USPER process.”

        I guess that means they’re treating the wiretapping of US persons in a very similar manner to that of non-US persons.

        Or to put it another way, there’s no discrimination – we’re all equally fooked!

        • MadDog says:

          And continuing on to page 4 of that same 5 page PDF, I’m pretty sure this wasn’t what Congress meant about “minimization” on US citizens:

          …USPER (Internal)

          – Once it is marked, the message can be disseminated just like it would be done with a Non-USPER…

  3. MadDog says:

    A couple of noteworthy slides in this “Section 702 of the FAA” Powerpoint presentation (5 page PDF).

    First is the 2nd slide on Page 2:

    Elements of Section 702
    “Assistance of an Electronic Communications
    Service Provider”

    – Electronic Communications Service
    Provider

    – Electronic surveillance and stored
    communications from e-mail providers

    – [Redacted bullet item]

    – Collections occur in U.S.

    – [Redacted bullet item]

    (My Bold)

    And keeping in mind the slide above, then there is the very next slide on Page 3:

    Elements of Section 702
    “Without the need for
    individualized FISC Orders”

    – In the absense of a compliance issue,
    nothing is filed with the FISC with regards
    to 702 collection on a facility

    – If the facility passes the Target
    Procedures, collection commences without
    going to the FISC

    (My Bold again)

    These 2 slides confirm that the electronic surveillance is in fact being collected here from both traditional communications providers (folks like AT&T, Verizon, etc.) as well as email providers (Google’s Gmail, Microsoft’s Hotmail, etc.) in the US, and that it is also being collected in a “driftnet” fashion by “facility”.

    • MadDog says:

      And continuing on with this “Section 702 of the FAA” Powerpoint presentation (5 page PDF), Slide 2:

      Noteworthy Aspects
      of Section 702

      – No Probable Cause required

      (My Bold)

      And then Slide 4:

      Noteworthy Aspects
      of Section 702

      – No FISA application
      – Significantly less documentation
      – FBI nomination-field will document FIA purpose, non-USPER
      status, and “foreignness”
      – No Woods requirements
      – No accuracy review
      – No renewals
      – Coverage rolls over with each cert renewal

      (My Bold again)

      So “no probable cause requirement”, “no FISA application”, “no accuracy review”, and the “coverage rolls over with each renewal”.

      Forever Surveillance for the Forever War!

      • MadDog says:

        And continuing on with this “Section 702 of the FAA” Powerpoint presentation (5 page PDF), Slide 6 is particularly scrumptious:

        Benefits of Section 702

        – “Filling the Gaps
        – Section 702 can fill certain pleading “gaps” in
        FISA
        – Target need not be a FP or agent of FP
        – Target need not act in the U.S.
        – Particularly relevant in Counterintelligence cases.
        – No Probable Cause required

        (My Bold)

        I’m guessing those “Pleading Gaps” would be those things a Judge would insist upon but the US government can’t seem to find.

  4. MadDog says:

    And finishing with this “Section 702 of the FAA” Powerpoint presentation (5 page PDF), Slide 8 on Page 4 seals the deal:

    Costs of Section 702

    – Must monitor take for signs of U.S. travel

    [Multiple bullet items redacted]

    –Litigation risks
    -Uncertainty re ability to use in court

    (My Bold)

    Court, shmourt! Who’s gotta bother worrying about court. We be the fookin’ US government!

  5. msobel says:

    I think you are a very silly person. There has been no suggestion in any of the charging documents or media or even anonymous sources to suggest that George Djura Jakubec is not a white male. Obviously he cannot be charged with WMD. It’s like saying Edward Teller and Robert Oppenheimer were involved with WMDs.

    I suspect that it will turn out that he is a Serbian Freedom fighter just preparing to thwart the Muslim threat to Western Civilization.

  6. prostratedragon says:

    depending on the use for which he intended them

    Preparing for the business opportunity posed by a future stage in the agonizing deflation of our housing bubble?