Ex-Mexico Defense Chief's Drug Case Dropped on Barr Request
By: Patricia Hurtado (MSN)
It's official. We will be a banana republic for the next 68 days.
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
(Bloomberg) -- A federal judge dismissed drug-trafficking and money-laundering charges against Mexico's former defense minister after Attorney General William Barr asked the court to drop the case to preserve the U.S. law enforcement partnership with Mexico.
Barr on Tuesday said he would seek the dismissal of his own department's charges against General Salvador Cienfuegos so that Mexico could investigate him in his home country.
"This was a decision made by the attorney general of the United States?" U.S. District Judge Carol Amon asked Seth DuCharme, the acting U.S. attorney in Brooklyn, in a hearing on Wednesday.
"Yes," DuCharme said.
Cienfuegos, who pleaded not guilty on Nov. 5, has been held without bail on charges unveiled last month that he helped a narcotics-trafficking ring while he was Mexico's defense chief, and after two U.S. magistrate judges ruled that he posed a flight risk if Released on bail.
Barr's decision to drop the case raises questions about the chances that Cienfuegos will be properly investigated and about why the U.S. changed course so suddenly.
'No Reason to Doubt'
Nonetheless, the judge quickly granted the dismissal application.
"There is no reason to doubt the government's determination that the Mexican prosecuting authorities sincerely wish to pursue an investigation and possible prosecution of the defendant," Amon said. She said there was "no suggestion that this application is being made in bad faith" or that accepting the government's reasoning was "against the public interest."
The U.S. says it intercepted thousands of BlackBerry Messenger communications that show Cienfuegos helped the H-2 drug cartel, locating maritime transport for its shipments and even introducing senior leaders of the cartel to other Mexican government officials willing to help the group in exchange for bribes.
Cienfuegos is also accused of warning the cartel about ongoing U.S. law enforcement investigations into the group and its use of cooperating witnesses and informants, which ultimately resulted in the murder of a member of the cartel.
©2020 Bloomberg L.P.
.
Article is LOCKED by moderator [Split Personality]
Does anyone think this General will be properly prosecuted and punished in Mexico?
How much partnership is there with Mexican law enforcement to preserve?
Let's leave Trump, Pence, Biden & Harris out of this...
bill barr seems to have a lot of confidence in the safety of a legal system he's so intent on subverting. he and his family should visit mexico after january.
as the guests of General Salvador Cienfuegos
Is there a reason he wouldn't be? I mean if we think that Mexico is that corrupt, why have any kind of law enforcement partnership with them at all?
Good question, everyone south of the border is rumored to be on the take...
[deleted]
[deleted]
This seems like a pretty bizarre decision on Barr's part. I'm not sure nor have I read much about US/Mexico partnership but I suppose that it's possible. It was there in the past.
Isn't this the 2nd time Barr has done this? Mike Flynn?
Although he initially won in a 3 judge decision, the full appeals court smacked down Flynn & Barr with an 8-2
ruling against DOJ efforts to force Judge Sullivan to dismiss the case or remove Sullivan from the case.
That case crawls on...
Ya think?
Understatement of the year?
It does? Why? Is the author trying to imply something about Mexico? Why not say it straight out? How about including some evidence supporting this apparent presumption of corruption?
Barr stepped in, the case was dismissed. How much more 'straight out' would you like?
I think the implication is about Barr...
Then I don't understand the problem. Barr wants to let Mexico handle this and Barr is doing something wrong?
Generally ( No pun intended ) when you catch the bad guy, arrest him and deny him bail as a flight risk, you have a pretty good case against him. Why release him?
Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador knows that the General will get away with it in Mexico.
Barr would be fool not to know it either.
Can't help but think, who could get Barr to do this and why?
Really?
THIS implication from the article?
I think they explained that. Diplomacy. Why does the United States need to prosecute this Mexican citizen if Mexico is going to do it?
That's not what he said at all. He said pre-existing corruption led to this.
President Obrador presents himself as a reformer who is rooting out corruption. You really think he is going to just stand by while the general gets off scot free?
So did all of the previous Mexican presidents...
OK but diplomatically, if we insist on prosecuting, then we declare publicly that we think the current president of Mexico and his administration are corrupt and lawless. Does that seem like a smart idea?
The administration gets ripped for suggesting that our NAFTA trade agreement with Mexico was unfair, and it was similarly ripped for putting pressure on Mexico to update the agreement. But now we're saying we're just fine with the United States calling the Mexican government a bunch of criminals?
The previous President has been mentioned in several high profile corruption cases among which one alleges El Chappo paid Niento $100 million US
and Obrador has already said it's bad policy to charge previous Presidents...
I don't see what NAFTA or the renamed & tweaked USMCA has to do with this.
Fairness was in the eye of the beholder.
First I would ask where was that said? Secondly there are members here who disparage the Russians and Chinese
daily. Are they commies? For the most part, yes. Do we trust them? Not at all. Why are the Mexican government
deserving of better treatment? Have they stopped the drug cartels? No Have they stemmed the flow of drugs into the
USA ? No, because too many have a hand in it including the military and the police.
The point is in how we treat countries that are supposed to be allies or friends.
It's clearly implied. Either we think justice will be served in Mexican courts or we don't. If we believe Mexican courts to be just, then we should have no problem letting them prosecute this criminal. But if we say justice can only be served in American courts, then we have made a clear statement about Mexican courts and government.
They might not be deserving. But for now - unlike Russia and China - we go around saying that Mexico is our friend. You seem to be saying Mexico shouldn't have that status. In which case, it seems to me we should be tightening our border with a nation that is not our friend.
Well it's clearly implied by me.
Like Ed and 1st, I lived along the border for a time in Tubac AZ just north of Nogalez on US19.
I don't think the General will see another day in jail once he is returned to Mexico.
JMHO
I sincerely hope that's not true. I know that Mexico has struggled with corruption for the last couple of centuries. It would be nice to see our neighbors to the south come out from under that cloud.
[deleted]
But it is not OK to release someone we are holding to a "supposed" ally, so they can try a citizen of their country there?
I thought the left were all for diplomacy; and Latinos were all great? Now it is "everyone south of the border is on the take"; and "why are we trusting them".
[deleted]
For any Law abiding US citizen not denying how LOW the Barr has been set, Mexico will be paying for that wall, and i'll bet, Trumpp will be pardon happy without manners, as he tries to save his LYING THIEVING sucker deceiving cronies, you know, the best and the brightest the swamp had to offer, asz Barr has proven repeatedly to be influenced and corrupt, just like his leader, and no, his departure won't be abrupt,like a wife beater shirt wearing not caring about much to do with N E Thing Law, cause disorder was his draw, and make up artists galore, paint a happy face on any thing so obviously sad, as make up artists in this country, have never been so bad.
According to the second link. Mexico had no idea the DEA was investigating the General and were very annoyed that they weren't informed.
The DEA implied that if the Mexican government had been informed, the General would have avoided landing in the USA because
someone would have inevitably warned him. So much for good law enforcement practices.
It should not be a left/right issue.