The head of the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) is making no promises on a timeline to come clean on the agency providing intelligence and resources to a known Sinaloa Cartel drug trafficker.
After avoiding any commitment to offering any self-imposed deadlines on providing records on the aid, DEA Administrator Anne Milgram told lawmakers that she could only give them “hope” and her word for answers.
“I will give you hope, and I will tell you that I will prioritize it,” said Milgram.
The exchange with Milgram occurred during Thursday’s House Judiciary GOP hearing on oversight of the DEA. Rep. Andy Biggs (R-AZ-05) led the hearing and the line of questioning concerning the trafficker: former Mexican secretary of public security Genaro García Luna, who was convicted of his crimes in January.
Biggs asked for a follow-up on Sen. Chuck Grassley’s (R-IA) two letters sent February and June to the DEA and FBI requesting records on García Luna. Grassley requested recordings of García Luna with dates of their creation and when the DEA became aware; all reports, notes, and other documents relating to García Luna’s criminal activity; content from García Luna’s cell phone and laptop; a detailed explanation of what, when, and how the FBI and DEA knew about García Luna’s corruption and criminal activity; the vetting the FBI and DEA conducted of García Luna, and the persons responsible; and all trial transcripts and exhibits from United States v. García Luna.
“Ignoring Congressional oversight questions relating to the Sinaloa cartel and foreign corruption demonstrates a lack of commitment to bringing criminals to justice,” wrote Grassley in his June letter.
Biggs also asked for copies of the records. Milgram promised to “check on the status of the letter[s].” Biggs then requested a “self-imposed action-item deadline” for the committee, to which Milgram indicated she had no idea how long it would take for the DEA to coordinate with the Department of Justice (DOJ) on obtaining the records.
Biggs pressed again for a timeline, to which Milgram said she could only give him “hope” for answers.
The U.S. Embassy reportedly knew of García Luna’s corruption before receiving a 2008 report filed by a Mexican police commander. The embassy informed the commander that the U.S. was already investigating García Luna. A week later, the commander was arrested and tortured; he was imprisoned for four years before being released.
In 2010, the DEA learned from a key cartel witness that García Luna accepted money from the cartel.
García Luna remained in office until 2012, and wasn’t arrested until December 2019.
Even with ongoing investigations, the federal government provided patrol cars used to transport cocaine, as well as training and equipment for García Luna’s officers who were trafficking the cocaine.
Milgram’s hesitancy to issue a stricter timeline for the records may be related to the ongoing investigation into the administrator for allegedly not having clean hands herself.
The hearing opened with brief acknowledgement of the allegations against Milgram concerning investigations of millions of dollars in outside, no-bid contracts to hire former associates.
The remainder of the hearing focused on DEA efforts to counter and disrupt drug trafficking.
Nearly 100,000 overdoses occurred last year. Drug overdoses, specifically fentanyl overdoses, are the leading cause of death to those aged 18-45. Chief among the increase in overdoses is fentanyl. This type of overdose accounted for 84 percent of overdose deaths in teens.
Milgram described the current drug epidemic as “nothing we’ve ever seen before” — a crisis of unprecedented proportions — and identified fentanyl as the cause. She reported the DEA has developed two counter-threat teams to defeat the primary fentanyl traffickers: the Sinaloa and Jalisco cartels, both based in Mexico.
“One drug, fentanyl, has transformed the criminal landscape,” said Milgram. “We are actively targeting every aspect of the global fentanyl supply chain.”
A mere two milligrams of fentanyl, equivalent to a few grains of salt, can be lethal. Milgram described fentanyl as cheap to make and easy to disguise as other drugs in order to drive addiction.
In April, the DEA identified the Chapitos network of the Sinaloa cartel as the pioneer and primary manufacturer and trafficker of fentanyl into the U.S. Chinese suppliers, manufacturers in Mexico, and U.S. distributors. 28 members and associates were charged; nine were taken into custody.
In May, the DEA publicized their results of Operation Last Mile: the arrest of 3,337 associates of the Sinaloa and Jalisco cartels operating within the U.S. Milgram reported that they rely on social media and encrypted messaging apps for their trafficking.
In June, the DEA announced the outcome of Operation Killer Chemicals: three cases charging four Chinese chemical companies and eight Chinese nationals, four of whom are in custody, with supplying precursor chemicals and scientific knowledge of creating fentanyl. Milgram reported that these charges marked the first of their kind.
Milgram also confirmed that DEA agents are stationed along the southwest border, and in Mexican plazas. Biggs asked what DEA’s role in interdiction at ports of entry along the southwest border; Milgram clarified that the DEA focuses on the border to some degree, but noted that their work covers a global scale.
Biggs indicated that cartels have an easier time trafficking drugs across the border between ports of entry, citing his past solo trips to the border where he could drive for miles without encountering any Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agents.
“Not most of it comes through ports of entry, you would agree with me that most of it comes through between ports of entry where we don’t have any personnel, we don’t have the one-on-one, we don’t have the capacity to interdict between ports of entry,” said Biggs. “I think too many times people think because we seize a lot at the ports of entry, we forget that there’s a massive, wide open border.”
CBP agents work diligently to seize fentanyl at US ports of entry.
We have no way of knowing how many thousands of pounds of fentanyl are being smuggled into our country between ports of entry.
A coalition of Arizona lawmakers are pushing back against the recent ruling from the U.S. Supreme Court on President Joe Biden’s student debt cancellation efforts.
Earlier in July, a group of Arizona Democrat legislators wrote a letter to President Biden, calling on his administration to “deliver its campaign promise to cancel student debt.”
“While members of the (SCOTUS) majority enjoy vacations paid for by billionaires, this ruling shows blatant disregard for 43 million American borrowers being crushed by student debt.” — letter to President @JoeBiden from @Aguilar4AZ & Dem lawmakers on student debt relief. 👇 pic.twitter.com/KCTl3h3Uwa
— Arizona House Democrats (@AZHouseDems) July 18, 2023
The legislators, led by Representative Cesar Aguilar, expressed their collective outrage over the Supreme Court opinion in June, which overturned the president’s student debt cancellation plans. They wrote, “While members of the Court’s majority enjoy vacations paid for by billionaires, this ruling shows blatant disregard and disrespect for the 43 million American borrowers being crushed by student debt and desperate for relief.”
In their letter, the lawmakers included information about Arizonans who were in line to benefit from the president’s debt cancellation scheme that was thwarted by the nation’s high court, stating, “Nearly 900,000 Arizonans stood to benefit from your Student Loan Cancelation Plan – 12.4 percent of our state’s population. The average student loan debt in Arizona is $33,396. Your Student Loan Cancellation Plan could cancel $10,000 for those making less than $125,000 and up to $20,000 for those who are Pell Grant Recipients. Arizona has the 15th highest number of borrowers in the country and would have seen a significant financial release and economic impact.”
The Democrats warned of the consequences that could come with the Court’s decision, adding, “Without relief Arizonans will have less money in their pockets to pay for bills, goods and services strained by inflation. Less consumer spending reduces economic growth and moves the American Dream further out of reach for millions. … We urge you to act as swiftly as possible so Arizonans still recovering financially due to the pandemic can get back on their feet.”
On the last day of its recent term, the U.S. Supreme Court released its opinion in Biden v. Nebraska, striking down the president’s student loan cancellation program. Chief Justice John Roberts authored the opinion, and he was joined by Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett.
The majority opinion stated that “the ‘economic and political significance’ of the Secretary’s action is staggering by any measure. Practically every student borrower benefits, regardless of circumstances. A budget model issued by the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania estimates that the program will cost taxpayers ‘between $469 billion and $569 billion,’ depending on the total number of borrowers ultimately covered.”
At that time, freshman Republican Representative Austin Smith reacted, “Cancelling student loan debt is and always will be an irresponsible and brainless ‘policy’ proposal. It deserved this fiery death at SCOTUS. Do not take astronomically large loans for a career with a salary you will never be able to pay off.”
Cancelling student loan debt is and always will be an irresponsible and brainless “policy” proposal. It deserved this fiery death at SCOTUS.
Do not take out astronomically large loans for a career with a salary you will never be able to pay off.
Arizona State University (ASU) leaders accused of retaliation by a former employee for hosting two “faith-based” events have kept quiet on the allegations raised against them.
The former events operator of the ASU Gammage theater alleged retaliation in a letter last week to the Arizona Board of Regents (ABOR) for allowing “faith-based” events to take place.
The complainant, Lin Blake, alleged in a timeline spanning six pages that she had only received positive performance reviews for the nearly three years leading up to the controversial events. It wasn’t until January, the month leading up to the controversial events, that Blake faced challenges to her work performance. Blake allegedly experienced unprecedented scrutiny throughout the planning, preparation, production, and post-event processes concerning the event, though she noted the event was approved last fall.
“This marked the beginning of the micromanagement of my duties and the overall hostile work environment that would become my future,” stated Blake.
AZ Free News reached out to each of the individuals allegedly behind the intimidation campaign and punitive measures against Blake regarding the controversial events. None of them responded by press time.
One of the controversial events, hosted by the now-dissolved T.W. Lewis Center at Barrett Honors College, featured conservative speakers Charlie Kirk, president and founder of activist group Turning Point USA; Dennis Prager, radio host and founder of PragerU; and Robert Kiyosaki, a personal finance book bestseller and PragerU presenter.
The other controversial event, hosted by Bethel Chandler Church, focused on raising awareness for sex trafficking.
Ahead of the events, Blake alleged that ASU Gammage leadership convened a meeting to express concern that she was allowing a “church program” and “white supremacists” to have a platform at their theater. She also alleged enduring public condemnation and boycotting from her colleagues.
“While I was left with the obligation to run two large and high-profile events, my colleagues that did not show up to work received praise for standing by their personal beliefs,” said Blake. “ASU Gammage staff and leadership should not discriminate against any views, yet they did in plain sight.”
In addition to the accusations of supporting white supremacy, AZ Free News reported previously that Gammage Executive Director Colleen Jennings-Roggensack was alleged to have told staff that they were aligned in beliefs, that they all had voted for President Joe Biden and Gov. Katie Hobbs — even if they hadn’t.
At a faculty and leadership meeting following the upbraiding from Jennings-Roggensack, Blake said she was singled out to explain Gammage’s core values.
Blake further alleged that two ASU Dean of Students representatives breached security to enter a restricted backstage area and intimidate former Lewis Center director Ann Atkinson.
“[I]f speech was truly free at ASU, producing events with unpopular viewpoints would not have cost my job. There is no freedom of speech when it comes with the punishment of job loss for those who administer it,” wrote Blake.
The partner to Gov. Katie Hobbs’ chief campaign advisor now works as a lobbyist for the Saudi Arabian company targeted for taking the state’s water supply.
The partner, Chad Guzmán, co-manages the lobbying firm Fillmore Strategy with Hobbs’ senior campaign advisor, Joe Wolf. The Saudi Arabian company tapping into Arizona’s dwindling water supply, Fondomonte, enlisted Guzmán’s firm, Signal Peak Consulting, about two months ago according to a Fondomonte spokesperson. However, Fondomonte didn’t register their hire of Guzmán with the secretary of state’s office until Wednesday. Guzmán is the sole member of his firm, which was registered in January. Fillmore Strategy and Signal Peak Consulting have the same address listed on their registration with the Arizona Corporation Commission.
Guzmán formerly worked as a lobbyist for former Attorney General Tom Horne for one year in 2011, Arizona Public Services (APS) and Pinnacle West Capital Corporation from 2013 to 2020, and EPCOR Water from 2020 to 2023.
Wolf told The Arizona Republic that he no longer receives payments from Hobbs’ campaign, and that he has no business dealings with Fondomonte.
“Given I’ve never had a contract, been paid by Fondomonte or provided consultation, I’d say this is a nothingburger,” said Wolf. “Chad’s extensive experience over the years makes him a valuable asset to any client and he maintains a separate and solely owned consulting practice, of which I am not involved.”
In April, Attorney General Kris Mayes revoked Fondomonte’s drill permits for two deep-water wells. Fondomonte received permission under former governor, Doug Ducey, to use Arizona water for growing alfalfa to feed cattle overseas.
Just 8 months ago, Arizona state agencies approved new deep-water wells in La Paz County for a Saudi-owned company to pump thousands of gallons of water per-minute.
I can tell you that today – just before Earth Day – that's not happening. Those drill permits have been revoked.
— AZ Attorney General Kris Mayes (@AZAGMayes) April 21, 2023
Fondomonte originally grew its alfalfa in Saudi Arabia, but moved their operations due to a long-term drought similar to the one plaguing Arizona.
Prior to Guzmán, Fondomonte hired Rose Law Group and former Republican congressman John Shadegg: six months earlier on the same day in January.
Hobbs’ office wouldn’t comment on Guzmán’s hire or proximity to her campaign advisor, Wolf.
Wolf came into the spotlight after Project Veritasdocumented him driving around with an AR-15 to campaign events. Wolf said he traveled with an AR-15 because it was “easier to fire than a handgun.” In a separate clip, Wolf stated that Hobbs would do everything in her power to issue an assault weapons ban.
“There’s nothing she could do about it, at least immediately, right? Except advocating for it publicly, which is really more impactful once you’re governor,” said Wolf. “This state is unfortunately crazy in love with their guns.”
Wolf again came into the spotlight for retrieving Hobbs last October, who fled and hid in a restaurant’s bathroom after reporters attempted to ask her questions about her aversion to discussing policy.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
Two Arizona Republican legislators are raising concerns over a draft of the new Elections Procedures Manual (EPM) from Secretary of State Adrian Fontes.
On July 18, Representatives Jacqueline Parker, the Chairwoman of the Arizona House Committee on Municipal Oversight & Elections, and Alexander Kolodin, the Committee’s Vice Chair, transmitted a letter to Secretary Fontes, highlighting certain issues with the initial copy of the EPM that they had seen from his office.
MOE Committee is also pouring through the EPM with a fine toothed comb. There are many violations of statute so far. pic.twitter.com/ktD9F9mSNe
— Rep. Jacqueline Parker (@electjacqparker) July 19, 2023
The lawmakers were grateful that Fontes allowed them to see his draft, and they expressed optimism that “with legislative guidance, the 2023 EPM will not meet the same fate as the 2021 EPM, and that Arizonans will be assured that all drafts, including the final draft presented to the Governor and Attorney General, are legally consistent with Arizona election law.” They called the 2021 saga “both unprecedented and unacceptable,” writing, “Your predecessor’s failure to issue a lawful EPM ultimately led a court to decide that the 2019 EPM was in effect for Arizona’s 2022 elections, rather than an updated, legally compliant 2021 EPM.”
— Rep. Alexander Kolodin (@realAlexKolodin) July 19, 2023
In their letter to Secretary Fontes, Parker and Kolodin identified eight possible violations of Arizona statutes in four chapters of the draft EPM:
– Chapter 1: Early Voting
o “Part I, page 5 moves ‘date of birth’ from required information to additional information that may be provided by a voter to receive an early ballot.”
o “Part I, page 3 allows the County Recorder to send a requested early ballot ‘after 5:00pm the 11th day preceding the election if the County Recorder has sufficient time to do so.”
o “Part I, page 16 requires the County Recorder or officer in charge of elections to supply printed instructions that ‘provide the voter instructions on how to make their intent clear if they inadvertently mark the target area for a candidate or ballot measure.’”
o “Part I, page 18 includes the exclusion of an established Ballot Replacement Center.”
– Chapter 2: Ballot-by-Mail Elections
o “Part I, page 31 refers to ‘precinct with 300 or less registered voters.’”
– Chapter 7: Pre-Election Procedures
o “Part II, page 34 allows the officer in charge of elections to allocate specified duties to any board member as deemed appropriate, including ‘taking appropriate measures to preserve order, prevent voter intimidation, and manage voter lines.’”
– Chapter 8: Election Day Operations
o “Part III, page 8 adds additional examples ‘potentially intimidating conduct’ that supersedes statutory law.”
o “Part III, page 19 adds language that prohibits a challenger from speaking to a challenged voter to ‘prevent harassment and intimidation of the challenger voter.’”
The two Representatives also requested that “future drafts of the EPM contain statutory references for each provision to provide county officials with the statutory source of each EPM provision.” Parker and Kolodin pointed out two sections in the draft EPM where there were no statutory references – as examples to illustrate their issue.
As they concluded their letter to the state’s elections chief, the legislators commented that they “are looking forward to seeing these provisions addressed prior to the EPM’s submittal to the Governor and the Attorney General on October 1, 2023.” They promised to communicate in a timely manner with the Secretary’s Office “about any other concerns that might arise,” and they asked for a written response to their letter by July 25.
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
A former state legislator is seeking to return to the Arizona House of Representatives.
On Thursday, former Representative Jeff Weninger sent out an email announcing that he was “back in the fight,” telling those on his email list that he was “excited to announce that I’m running for State Representative in the new Legislative District 13.”
Weninger served in the state house for four terms before running for Arizona Treasurer in the Republican primary in 2022. He also was a member of the Chandler City Council for eight years.
Constituents of this legislative district are currently served in the state house by Representatives Jennifer Pawlik (a Democrat) and Julie Willoughby (a Republican). Willoughby was selected by the Maricopa Board of Supervisors to fill a vacated seat earlier this legislative session. On May 2, Pawlik announced that she would not be seeking reelection. The Democrat wrote that “it’s time to take my leadership and service in a new direction and to open the door for new candidates to run in this district.”
In his email, Weninger shared that, over the past year, he had moved his son to college, helped his daughter begin her high school journey, spent more time with his business, and invested in his community. He noted that “things are going really well” for him – but “unfortunately not every Arizonan feels the same way.” The former lawmaker stated that “inflation and prices are climbing, energy costs are higher than ever, and parents are struggling with decisions on the best educational environment for their kids.”
He went on to boost his track record with his prior service in the state house, highlighting that he “fought to lower your taxes, keep our cost of living affordable, support our first responders, and make Arizona one of the most business-friendly states in the country.”
Just last month, Weninger engaged Democrat Senator Mitzi Epstein on Twitter over the issue of the food municipal tax repeal, which was vetoed by Governor Hobbs after passing through the Republican-controlled Legislature in the spring. Weninger posted: “Sen. Epstein…. In your tweet you said “And NOT another regressive sales tax causing the middle class to pay for everything – again!” How do you square that with your opposition to eliminating tax on food? (essential item to live)”
Sen. Epstein. Maybe you can address what @johninphx said. In your tweet you said "And NOT another regressive sales tax causing the middle class to pay for everything – again!" How do you square that with your opposition to eliminating tax on food ? (essential item to live)
After Epstein replied to his query with her worry that the elimination of the food tax would result in “less funding for after-school childcare,” Weninger responded, “Why not just let those folks who need after school care just keep more of their money from food taxes? Also Schools and Boys & Girls Club & ICAN provide after school care in Chandler & they do a wonderful job.”
He later added another comment to the discussion, saying, “I don’t really hear an argument against it. It is just the same parlor tricks of telling people that by letting them keep their money it somehow takes something away from them.”
It is a serious response. We are talking about tax on food. I don’t really hear an argument against it. It is just the same parlor tricks of telling people that by letting them keep their money it somehow takes something away from them.
