A Florida attorney and former outside counsel for 1 Global Capital LLC (1 Global), has been charged today with conspiring to commit wire fraud and securities fraud in connection with an investment fraud scheme that as alleged impacted more than 3,600 investors in 42 different states, and involved him personally and fraudulently raising more than $100 million from investors.
Andrew Dale Ledbetter, 78, of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, is charged in an information with conspiracy to commit wire fraud and securities fraud. The case is assigned to U.S. District Judge Darrin P. Gayles of the Southern District of Florida.
According to the allegations in the information, 1 Global was a commercial lending business based in Hallandale Beach, Florida, that made the equivalent of “pay day” loans with high interest rates to small businesses, termed merchant cash advance loans (MCAs). To fund these loans, 1 Global obtained funds from investors nationwide, offering short-term investment contracts that promised to “place” the investors’ money onto MCAs. The investors would supposedly receive a proportionate share of the principal and interest payments as the loans were repaid. 1 Global raised money using investment advisors and other intermediaries, with promises to these advisors of significant commissions. In many cases, according to court documents, the commissions were not fully disclosed to investors. Ledbetter was an attorney licensed in the State of Florida who worked at Law Firm #1 and acted in a fundraising capacity at 1 Global beginning in or around 2015.
Substantial questions arose during the operation of the business as to whether 1 Global was offering or selling a security and whether the investment offering was required to be registered with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. These questions were raised by investors, investment advisors, and regulators. Ledbetter and Jan Douglas Atlas, a partner at Law Firm #1 who also acted as outside counsel for 1 Global, knew that if 1 Global’s investment offering were determined to be a security, it would undermine the ability of 1 Global to raise funds from retail investors and to continue to operate without substantial additional expenses and reporting requirements. Such a classification would undermine the profits and fees that Ledbetter and other principals at 1 Global would be able to obtain from 1 Global’s operations.
The information alleges that at the request of 1 Global’s principals, Atlas authored two opinion letters in 2016 containing false information that Atlas knew would be used by 1 Global to operate the business unlawfully. The opinion letters falsely described the duration of the investment, among other things, omitting the automatic renewal aspect and that the investment was being targeted toward retail, non-sophisticated investors (such as IRA account holders). According to the information, Ledbetter used and relied on Atlas’s opinion letters to continue to raise money illegally, knowing that the opinion letters falsely described the investment opportunity and were thus misleading. Ledbetter cited and used the false letters in numerous pitches and communications to investment advisors and investors.
According to the information, Ledbetter was personally involved in raising more than $100 million in investor funds that went to 1 Global, through his own pitches as well as through investment advisors he attracted to 1 Global. Over the years, Ledbetter received approximately $3 million from 1 Global, the majority of which was for commissions. Ledbetter routinely held himself out to investors and investment advisers as outside counsel to 1 Global, and also personally vouched for 1 Global in pitches and marketing materials. However, Ledbetter did not disclose the commissions that he received from 1 Global to investors, according to the information. Ledbetter also made misrepresentations to investors regarding the involvement of an outside auditing firm.
A number of individuals have entered guilty pleas in connection with the 1 Global fraud scheme. Alan G. Heide, the former 1 Global chief financial officer, was charged via information and sentenced to 60 months, in Case No. 19-60231-CR-RKA. Atlas, former outside counsel for 1 Global, was charged via information, pleaded guilty, and is awaiting sentencing in Case No. 19-60258-RKA, currently scheduled for Nov. 17, 2020. Steven Schwartz, a former director of 1 Global, was charged via information, pleaded guilty, and is awaiting sentencing in Case No. 20-60003-RKA, currently scheduled for Nov. 13, 2020. Information about the related cases can be found here: https://www.justice.gov/criminal-vns/case/1Global-Capital.
In connection with a parallel civil enforcement action, the SEC today announced the filing of civil fraud charges against Ledbetter. In related cases, the SEC previously has filed civil fraud actions, SEC v. 1 Global Capital LLC and Carl C. Ruderman, Case No. 18-61991-CV-BB (Sothern District of Florida) SEC v. Alan G. Heide, Case No. 19-62047-CV-FAM (Southern District of Florida), and SEC v. Jan Atlas, Case No. 19-62303-WPD (Southern District of Florida). The bankruptcy case, In re: 1 Global Capital LLC, et al., No. 18-19121-RBR (Southern District of Florida), remains pending.
A criminal information is merely an accusation. A defendant is presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.
This case was investigated by the FBI’s Miami Field Office, IRS-CI, and FDIC-OIG. Deputy Chief Jerrob Duffy, Principal Assistant Deputy Chief Lisa H. Miller, and Assistant Chief L. Rush Atkinson of the Criminal Division’s Fraud Section, and Special Assistant U.S. Attorney Elizabeth Young are prosecuting the case. Assistant U.S. Attorney Nicole Grosnoff is handling asset forfeiture related to the matter. The SEC’s Miami Regional Office is also thanked for their contributions.
The year 2020 marks the 150th anniversary of the Department of Justice. Learn more about the history of our agency at www.Justice.gov/Celebrating150Years.
Greetings I’m Sam.
I edit, report and maintain this site. If you have any questions You can mail below me but it could be a while before I get back to you.
- Joint Statement on the U.S.-Jamaica Strategic DialogueBy Sam NewsDecember 9, 2020
- Russian Cybercriminal Sentenced to Prison for Role in $100 Million Botnet ConspiracyBy Sam NewsNovember 2, 2020A Russian national was sentenced Oct. 30 to eight years in prison for his role in operating a sophisticated scheme to steal and traffic sensitive personal and financial information in the online criminal underground that resulted in an estimated loss of over $100 million.[Read More…]
- Whither Arms Control in Outer Space? Space Threats, Space Hypocrisy, and the Hope of Space NormsBy Sam NewsSeptember 26, 2020Dr. Christopher Ashley [Read More…]
- Elder Justice: HHS Could Do More to Encourage State Reporting on the Costs of Financial ExploitationBy Sam NewsJanuary 19, 2021Most state Adult Protective Services (APS) agencies have been providing data on reports of abuse to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), including data on financial exploitation, although some faced challenges collecting and submitting these data. Since states began providing data to HHS's National Adult Maltreatment Reporting System (NAMRS) in 2017, they have been voluntarily submitting more detailed data on financial exploitation and perpetrators each year (see figure). However, some APS officials GAO interviewed in selected states said collecting data is difficult, in part, because victims are reluctant to implicate others, especially family members or other caregivers. APS officials also said submitting data to NAMRS was challenging initially because their data systems often did not align with NAMRS, and caseworkers may not have entered data in the system correctly. HHS has provided technical assistance and grant funding to help states address some of these challenges and help provide a better picture of the prevalence of the various types of financial exploitation and its perpetrators nationwide. Number of States That Provide Data on Financial Exploitation and Perpetrators to NAMRS Studies estimate some of the costs of financial exploitation to be in the billions, but comprehensive data on total costs do not exist and NAMRS does not currently collect cost data from APS agencies. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau found actual losses and attempts at elder financial exploitation reported by financial institutions nationwide were $1.7 billion in 2017. Also, studies published from 2016 to 2020 from three states—New York, Pennsylvania, and Virginia—estimated the costs of financial exploitation could be more than $1 billion in each state alone. HHS does not currently ask states to submit cost data from APS casefiles to NAMRS, though officials said they have begun to reevaluate NAMRS with state APS agencies and other interested parties, including researchers, and may consider asking states to submit cost data moving forward. Adding cost data to NAMRS could make a valuable contribution to the national picture of the cost of financial exploitation. Recognizing the importance of these data, some APS officials GAO interviewed said their states have developed new data fields or other tools to help caseworkers collect and track cost data more systematically. HHS officials said they plan to share this information with other states to make them aware of practices that could help them collect cost data, but they have not established a timeframe for doing so. Elder financial exploitation—the fraudulent or illegal use of an older adult's funds or property—has far-reaching effects on victims and society. Understanding the scope of the problem has thus far been hindered by a lack of nationwide data. In 2013, HHS worked with states to create NAMRS, a voluntary system for collecting APS data on elder abuse, including financial exploitation. GAO was asked to study the extent to which NAMRS provides information on elder financial exploitation. This report examines (1) the status of HHS's efforts to compile nationwide data through NAMRS on the extent of financial exploitation and the challenges involved, and (2) what is known about the costs of financial exploitation to victims and others. GAO analyzed NAMRS data from fiscal year 2016 through 2019 (the most recent available); reviewed relevant federal laws; and interviewed officials from HHS, other federal agencies, elder abuse prevention organizations, and researchers. GAO also reviewed APS documents and spoke with officials in eight states, selected based on their efforts to study, collect, and report cost data; and reviewed studies on financial exploitation. GAO recommends that HHS (1) work with state APS agencies to collect and submit cost data to NAMRS, and (2) develop a timeframe to share states' tools to help collect cost data. HHS did not agree with the first recommendation, but GAO maintains that it is warranted, as discussed in the report. HHS agreed with the second recommendation. For more information, contact Kathryn A. Larin at (202) 512-7215 or firstname.lastname@example.org.[Read More…]
- Justice Department Settles Citizenship-Status Discrimination Against South Carolina Security Guard Firm Involving Former Interpreter for the U.S. Military in IraqBy Sam NewsOctober 6, 2020The Justice Department announced today that it reached a settlement with Security Management of South Carolina LLC (Security Management), a private security company that provides armed and unarmed security services throughout South Carolina and Georgia.[Read More…]
- Justice Department Announces Results in Fight Against the Opioid Crisis Two Years after Launch of Operation S.O.S.By Sam NewsSeptember 24, 2020In July 2018, the Department of Justice announced the launch of Operation Synthetic Opioid Surge (S.O.S), a program aimed at reducing the supply of synthetic opioids in 10 high impact areas and identifying wholesale distribution networks and international and domestic suppliers.[Read More…]
- Special Envoy Rayburn Travel to the United Arab Emirates and JordanBy Sam NewsJanuary 3, 2021Joel D. Rayburn, Special [Read More…]
- Anesthesia Services: Differences between Private and Medicare Payments Likely Due to Providers’ Strong Negotiating PositionBy Sam NewsOctober 26, 2020Literature GAO reviewed indicated that private insurance payments for anesthesia services on average were more than 3-1/2 times those of Medicare payments. This payment difference increased from what GAO reported in 2007—average private insurance payments for certain anesthesia services in 2004 were about 3 times those of Medicare. While Medicare rates for anesthesia services are set by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), private insurance rates are set through negotiations between providers and private insurers. GAO identified three recent studies with analyses of private insurance and Medicare payments for anesthesia services: Researchers from Yale University calculated that private insurance payments were 3.67 times Medicare payments, on average, for services provided by anesthesiologists for one large private insurer in 2015 operating across all 50 states and the District of Columbia. The Health Care Cost Institute calculated that in 2017 private insurance payments ranged from 2 to 7 times Medicare payments, on average, across six common services provided by anesthesiologists in 33 states. Wide state-to-state variation within specific services was reported. The American Society of Anesthesiologists reported that private insurance payments were 3.46 times Medicare payments, on average, based on a survey of its members in 2019. According to studies GAO reviewed and stakeholders GAO interviewed, market factors likely enhanced anesthesia providers' negotiating position and allowed them to secure higher private payments. For example, several studies and stakeholders cited market concentration as a key factor that increased private payments for anesthesia services. In a market with high provider concentration—or relatively few providers in a given market—there is little competition between providers, enabling the providers within that market to negotiate for higher payments from private insurers. Studies also indicated that specialists, including anesthesia providers, could negotiate higher in-network payment rates because they were able to leave an insurer's network with little risk of losing patients or revenue. In addition, when anesthesia providers are not a part of a private insurer's network, they are typically able to bill for a higher amount than the insurer would pay for an in-network provider, known as out-of-network billing. This dynamic decreases providers' incentives to participate in insurer networks because it creates an attractive alternative to network participation. GAO's interviews with stakeholders, literature review, and review of agency data generally did not indicate that the supply of anesthesia providers was insufficient for Medicare beneficiaries. CMS data indicate that the number of active anesthesia providers per 100,000 Medicare beneficiaries increased from 2010 through 2018 and that a very small number of anesthesia providers opted out of the Medicare program. Furthermore, researchers and stakeholders GAO interviewed were not aware of any issues with access to anesthesia services for Medicare beneficiaries, including those in traditionally underserved rural areas. In 2018, Medicare paid over $2 billion for anesthesia services, such as general anesthesia administered to beneficiaries undergoing surgical or other invasive procedures. The joint explanatory statement for the Further Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2020 included a provision for GAO to update its 2007 report and examine how differences in payment rates for anesthesia services have changed since that time. In 2007, GAO reported that Medicare payments in 2004 for certain anesthesia services provided by anesthesiologists were on average 67 percent lower than private insurance payments in certain geographic areas—indicating that private payments were about 3 times more than Medicare payments at that time. This report describes what is known about (1) recent trends in differences between Medicare and private payments for anesthesia services, and (2) the sufficiency of the supply of anesthesia providers for Medicare beneficiaries. GAO reviewed literature and available published data on payment differences for anesthesia services, published in the United States since 2010. GAO also reviewed data from CMS on the number of anesthesia providers from 2010, 2018, and 2020. GAO also interviewed a nongeneralizable selection of three research groups, two beneficiary advocacy groups, and five stakeholder groups, including those representing anesthesiologists, nurse anesthetists, and hospitals, to obtain their perspectives on these issues. The Department of Health and Human Services provided no comments on this report. For more information, contact Jessica Farb at (202) 512-7114 or email@example.com.[Read More…]
- Statement By Department Of Justice Spokesperson Kerri Kupec On The Execution Of William Emmett Lecroy Jr.By Sam NewsSeptember 23, 2020Department of Justice Spokesperson Kerri Kupec has issued the following statement.[Read More…]
- Fifteen Members and Associates of Philadelphia La Cosa Nostra Indicted on Federal Racketeering ChargesBy Sam NewsNovember 23, 2020A superseding indictment [Read More…]
- Former Deputy Jailer Sentenced to 48 Months for Violating the Civil Rights of an InmateBy Sam NewsAugust 17, 2020A former Shelby County Deputy Jailer, William Anthony Carey, 31, was sentenced by U.S. District Judge Gregory F. VanTatenhove to serve 48 months in federal prison for violating the civil rights of an inmate in his custody.[Read More…]
- Close Air Support: Actions Needed to Enhance Friendly Force Tracking Capabilities and Fully Evaluate TrainingBy Sam NewsJanuary 21, 2021The Department of Defense (DOD) has made progress implementing initiatives to enhance capabilities that are used to identify friendly force locations during close air support (CAS) missions, but GAO identified additional actions that are needed to strengthen these efforts. Specifically, DOD has made limited progress in implementing 10 changes the department approved to address gaps in the interoperability of digital communications systems used to conduct CAS, hindering efforts to improve the speed and accuracy of information exchanges. DOD's efforts to assess the interoperability of digital systems used to perform CAS have been limited in scope. GAO found that DOD had formally assessed two out of 10 approved changes during joint service and multinational events, and these assessments were not conducted in a training environment that replicated capabilities of near-peer adversaries. DOD implemented a new capability in the U.S. Central Command area of responsibility to help identify the positions of friendly forces during CAS missions. However, GAO found that DOD did not provide adequate training for personnel who operate it or conduct an evaluation to resolve implementation challenges that have hampered its performance. DOD conducts evaluations of training programs for forces that participate in CAS missions, but GAO identified two areas where DOD can improve its efforts. First, the Army and Marine Corps have not systematically evaluated the effectiveness of periodic training for ground observers providing targeting information due to a lack of centralized systems for tracking training data and the absence of designated entities to monitor service-wide training. Second, the use of contract aircraft for training increased substantially between 2017 and 2019, but DOD has not fully evaluated the use of non-military contract aircraft to train air controllers for CAS (see fig.). GAO found that differences between U.S. military aircraft and contract aircraft (e.g., airspeed) can result in a misalignment of aircraft capabilities for certain types of training events. Without evaluating CAS training fully, DOD cannot have assurance that its forces are prepared to conduct CAS missions safely and effectively. Number of Hours Non-Military Aircraft Were Used to Train for Close Air Support for Fiscal Years 2017 through 2019 The use of ordnance delivered by aircraft to support U.S. military forces that are in close proximity to enemy forces on the ground requires detailed planning, seamless communications, and effective training. Mistakes in communications or procedures used to identify and maintain an awareness of the positions of friendly forces on the battlefield during CAS can result in the loss of U.S. military personnel. Senate Report 116-48 and House Report 116-120, accompanying bills for the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020, included provisions for GAO to evaluate issues related to friendly-force identification capabilities in CAS missions. Among other things, this report evaluates the extent to which DOD has (1) implemented initiatives to enhance friendly-force identification capabilities during CAS, and (2) evaluated training for forces that participate in CAS. GAO analyzed documentation and interviewed officials regarding DOD efforts to develop and implement friendly force tracking capabilities for CAS; reviewed CAS training programs; and analyzed training data, including the number of hours that DOD used non-military contract aircraft for CAS training from 2017 through 2019. GAO is making 11 recommendations to DOD, including that DOD implement and assess initiatives to improve the interoperability of digital systems used in CAS and take additional steps to evaluate the training for certain forces that participate in CAS missions. DOD concurred with the recommendations. For more information, contact Cary Russell at (202) 512-5431 or RussellC@gao.gov.[Read More…]
- Secretary Pompeo’s Meeting with Vietnamese Minister for Public Security LamBy Sam NewsOctober 30, 2020
- Turkmenistan Travel AdvisoryBy Sam NewsSeptember 26, 2020Do not travel to [Read More…]
- Department Of Justice Acts To Stop Sale Of “Nano Silver” Product As Treatment For Covid-19By Sam NewsNovember 13, 2020The United States filed suit to halt the sale by a New Jersey entity of an unapproved “nano silver” product previously touted as a COVID-19 treatment, the Department of Justice announced today.[Read More…]
- Judiciary Launches Redesigned PACER WebsiteBy Sam NewsIn U.S CourtsJune 26, 2020The Administrative Office of the U.S Courts on June 28 will launch a redesigned informational website for the Judiciary’s electronic court records system, known as PACER (Public Access to Court Electronic Records).[Read More…]
- Drinking Water: EPA Could Use Available Data to Better Identify Neighborhoods at Risk of Lead ExposureBy Sam NewsDecember 18, 2020GAO's statistical analysis indicates that areas with older housing and vulnerable populations (e.g., families in poverty) have higher concentrations of lead service lines in the selected cities GAO examined. By using geospatial lead service line data from the selected water systems and geospatial data from the U.S. Census Bureau's American Community Survey (ACS), GAO identified characteristics of neighborhoods with higher concentrations of lead service lines. The Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) guidance for water systems on how to identify the location of sites at high-risk of having lead service lines has not been updated since 1991 and many water systems face challenges identifying areas at risk of having lead service lines. By developing guidance for water systems that outlines methods for identifying high-risk locations using publicly available data, EPA could better ensure that public water systems test water samples from locations at greater risk of having lead service lines and identify areas with vulnerable populations to focus lead service line replacement efforts. (See figure for common sources of lead in home drinking water.) Common Sources of Lead in Drinking Water within Homes and Residences EPA has taken some actions to address the Water Infrastructure Improvements for the Nation (WIIN) Act requirement, which include developing a strategic plan regarding lead in public water systems. However, EPA's published plan did not satisfy the statutory requirement that the agency's strategic plan address targeted outreach, education, technical assistance, and risk communication undertaken by EPA, states, and public water systems. For example, the plan does not discuss public education, technical assistance or risk communication. Instead, EPA's plan focused solely on how to notify households when EPA learns of certain exceedances of lead in their drinking water. Moreover, EPA's plan is not consistent with leading practices for strategic planning. For example, EPA's plan does not set a mission statement or define long-term goals. Developing a strategic plan that meets the statutory requirement and fully reflects leading practices for strategic planning would give EPA greater assurance that it has effectively planned for how it will communicate the risks of lead in drinking water to the public. Lead in drinking water comes primarily from corrosion of service lines connecting the water main to a house or building, pipes inside a building, or plumbing fixtures. As GAO reported in September 2018, the total number of lead service lines in drinking water systems is unknown, and less than 20 of the 100 largest water systems have such data publicly available. GAO was asked to examine the actions EPA and water systems are taking to educate the public on the risks of lead in drinking water. This report examines, among other things: (1) the extent to which neighborhood data on cities served by lead service lines can be used to focus lead reduction efforts; and (2) actions EPA has taken to address WIIN Act requirements, and EPA's risk communication documents. GAO conducted a statistical analysis combining geospatial lead service line and ACS data to identify characteristics of selected communities; reviewed legal requirements and EPA documents; and interviewed EPA officials. GAO is making four recommendations, including that EPA develop (1) guidance for water systems on lead reduction efforts, and (2) a strategic plan that meets the WIIN Act requirement. EPA agreed with one recommendation and disagreed with the others. GAO continues to believe the recommendations are warranted, as discussed in the report. For more information, contact J. Alfredo Gómez at (202) 512-3841 or firstname.lastname@example.org.[Read More…]
- Senior State Department Officials Previewing Secretary Pompeo’s Travel to France, Turkey, Georgia, Israel, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, and Saudi ArabiaBy Sam NewsNovember 13, 2020
- Three Additional States Ask Court To Join Justice Department Antitrust Suit Against GoogleBy Sam NewsDecember 17, 2020Today, the Attorneys General of Michigan and Wisconsin filed for permission to join the antitrust lawsuit filed by the United States and eleven other state Attorneys General against monopolist Google. This follows a similar recent motion by the California Attorney General to join the lawsuit on December 11, 2020.[Read More…]
- Aviation Safety: Actions Needed to Evaluate Changes to FAA’s Enforcement Policy on Safety StandardsBy Sam NewsAugust 18, 2020The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) directed individual offices to implement the Compliance Program, and FAA has increasingly used compliance actions rather than enforcement actions to address violations of safety standards since starting the Compliance Program. FAA revised agency-wide guidance in September 2015 to emphasize using compliance actions, such as counseling or changes to policies. Compliance actions are to be used when a regulated entity is willing and able to comply and enforcement action is not required or warranted, e.g., for repeated violations, according to FAA guidance. FAA then directed its offices—for example, Flight Standards Service and Drug Abatement Division—to implement the Compliance Program as appropriate, given their different responsibilities and existing processes. Under the Compliance Program, data show that selected FAA offices have made increasing use of compliance actions. Total Number of Federal Aviation Administration Enforcement Actions and Number of Compliance Actions Closed for Selected Program Offices, Fiscal Years 2012-2019 No specific FAA office or entity oversees the Compliance Program. FAA tasked a working group to lead some initial implementation efforts. However, the group no longer regularly discusses the Compliance Program, and no office or entity was then assigned oversight authority. As a result, FAA is not positioned to identify and share best practices or other valuable information across offices. FAA established goals for the Compliance Program—to promote the highest level of safety and compliance with standards and to foster an open, transparent exchange of data. FAA, however, has not taken steps to evaluate if or determine how the program accomplishes these goals. Key considerations for agency enforcement decisions state that an agency should establish an evaluation plan to determine if its enforcement policy achieves desired goals. Three of eight FAA offices have started to evaluate the effects of the Compliance Program, but two offices have not yet started. Three other offices do not plan to do so—in one case, because FAA has not told the office to. FAA officials generally believe the Compliance Program is achieving its safety goals based on examples of its use. However, without an evaluation, FAA will not know if the Compliance Program is improving safety or having other effects—intended or unintended. FAA supports the safety of the U.S. aviation system by ensuring air carriers, pilots, and other regulated entities comply with safety standards. In 2015, FAA announced a new enforcement policy with a more collaborative and problem-solving approach called the Compliance Program. Under the program, FAA emphasizes using compliance actions, for example, counseling or training, to address many violations more efficiently, according to FAA. Enforcement actions such as civil penalties are reserved for more serious violations, such as when a violation is reckless or intentional. The FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018 included a provision that GAO review FAA's Compliance Program. This report examines (1) how FAA implemented and used the Compliance Program and (2) how FAA evaluates the effectiveness of the program. GAO analyzed FAA data on enforcement actions agency-wide and on compliance actions for three selected offices for fiscal years 2012 to 2019 (4 years before and after program start).GAO also reviewed FAA guidance and interviewed FAA officials, including those from the eight offices that oversee compliance with safety standards. GAO is making three recommendations including that FAA assign authority to oversee the Compliance Program and evaluate the effectiveness of the program in meeting goals. FAA concurred with the recommendations. For more information, contact Heather Krause at (202) 512-2834 or email@example.com.[Read More…]
- Travel of Special Envoy for the Sahel Region Dr. J. Peter Pham to MaliBy Sam NewsSeptember 30, 2020
- Secretary Michael R. Pompeo With Tony Katz of The Morning News on WIBC IndianapolisBy Sam NewsOctober 15, 2020
- Sanctions Against Businesses Linked to Mexican CartelsBy Sam NewsSeptember 26, 2020
- U.S. Announces Humanitarian Assistance at the International Conference on Sustaining Support for the Rohingya Refugee ResponseBy Sam NewsOctober 22, 2020
- Statement by Acting Attorney General Jeffrey A. Rosen on the Pakistani Proceedings Relating to the Abduction and Murder of Daniel PearlBy Sam NewsDecember 29, 2020Acting Attorney General Jeffrey A. Rosen has released the following statement:[Read More…]
- Statement of Acting Attorney General Jeffrey A. Rosen on the Death of U.S. Capitol Police Officer Brian D. SicknickBy Sam NewsJanuary 8, 2021Acting Attorney General Jeffrey A. Rosen issued the following statement:[Read More…]
- Arrests Made in Conspiracy to Illegally Manufacture FirearmsBy Sam NewsOctober 27, 2020On Oct. 20, 2020, a former United States Marine Lance Corporal, recently stationed at Camp Lejeune in Jacksonville, North Carolina, and two co-defendants were arrested in Boise, Idaho on the federal charge of conspiracy to unlawfully manufacture, possess, and distribute various weapons, ammunition, and suppressors. Liam Montgomery Collins, 21, and Paul James Kryscuk, 35, recently of Boise, were charged via an indictment, while Jordan Duncan, 25, a North Carolina native also currently residing in Boise, was charged via a complaint, both obtained in the Eastern District of North Carolina.[Read More…]
- New York Man Pleads Guilty to Conspiring to File False ReturnsBy Sam NewsOctober 20, 2020A resident of Newburgh, New York, pleaded guilty today to conspiracy to defraud the United States, announced Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Richard E. Zuckerman of the Justice Department’s Tax Division.[Read More…]
- Operation Legend: Case of the DayBy Sam NewsOctober 7, 2020An Indiana man has been charged with a federal firearm offense for allegedly illegally selling dozens of handguns and assault rifles in the Chicago area.[Read More…]
- Jamaica Travel AdvisoryBy Sam NewsSeptember 26, 2020Reconsider travel [Read More…]
- Somerset County Man Admits Concealing Material Support to HamasBy Sam NewsSeptember 15, 2020A Somerset County, New Jersey, man admitted today that he concealed his attempts to provide material support to Hamas, Assistant Attorney General John C. Demers of the U.S. Department of Justice’s National Security Division, U.S. Attorney Craig Carpenito, FBI-Newark Special Agent in Charge George M. Crouch Jr., and FBI Assistant Director for Counterterrorism Jill Sanborn announced.[Read More…]
- Warsaw Process Humanitarian Issues and Refugees Working Group Convenes in BrasiliaBy Sam NewsSeptember 27, 2020
- Operation Legend Expanded to Memphis and St. LouisBy Sam NewsAugust 6, 2020Today, the expansion of [Read More…]
- Arkansas Businessman Pleads Guilty to Income Tax EvasionBy Sam NewsOctober 14, 2020A Bentonville, Arkansas, resident pleaded guilty today to income tax evasion announced Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Richard E. Zuckerman of the Justice Department’s Tax Division.[Read More…]
- Deputy Secretary Biegun’s Travel to the Republic of KoreaBy Sam NewsDecember 6, 2020
- Michigan Man Pleads Guilty to Conspiring to Defraud the IRS and to Steal Crash Reports from the Detroit Police DepartmentBy Sam NewsOctober 15, 2020A Birmingham, Michigan, resident pleaded guilty today to conspiring to defraud the IRS and to steal from an organization receiving federal funds, announced Acting Deputy Assistant Attorney General Stuart M. Goldberg of the Justice Department’s Tax Division.[Read More…]
- Join NASA for the Launch of the Mars 2020 Perseverance RoverBy Sam NewsSeptember 26, 2020No matter where you [Read More…]
- San Antonio Return Preparer Pleads Guilty in Tax Fraud SchemeBy Sam NewsOctober 20, 2020A San Antonio, Texas, tax return preparer pleaded guilty today to aiding and assisting in the preparation of false tax returns, announced Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Richard E. Zuckerman of the Department of Justice’s Tax Division and U.S. Attorney Gregg N. Sofer of the Western District of Texas.[Read More…]
- New 3D Mapping Technique Improves Landslide Hazard PredictionBy Sam NewsSeptember 26, 2020Landslides cause loss of [Read More…]
- Chief Justice Names Conference Committee ChairsBy Sam NewsIn U.S CourtsOctober 30, 2020Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr. has named eight new chairs of Judicial Conference committees and extended the term of a current chair by one year.[Read More…]
- Mystery Solved: Bright Areas on Ceres Come From Salty Water BelowBy Sam NewsSeptember 26, 2020Data from NASA’s [Read More…]
- Statement by Attorney General William P. Barr on Senate ResolutionBy Sam NewsDecember 11, 2020Online child sexual exploitation is a global crime that demands a continued global response.[Read More…]
- Jordan Travel AdvisoryBy Sam NewsSeptember 26, 2020Reconsider travel to [Read More…]
- Statement from Assistant Attorney General Eric Dreiband and Acting U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Michael Sherwin on Legal Victory Protecting Religious Worship in the Nation’s CapitalBy Sam NewsOctober 10, 2020Judge enjoins District [Read More…]
- Assistant Attorney General Beth A. Williams Delivers Capital Conversations Speech Highlighting Department of Justice Policy AccomplishmentsBy Sam NewsOctober 30, 2020Thank you, Dean, for inviting me. I am honored to be here and to be part of the Capital Conversations series.[Read More…]
- Justice Department Finds Yale Illegally Discriminates Against Asians and Whites in Undergraduate Admissions in Violation of Federal Civil-Rights LawsBy Sam NewsAugust 13, 2020The Department of Justice today notified Yale University of its findings that Yale illegally discriminates against Asian American and white applicants in its undergraduate admissions process in violation of Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. The findings are the result of a two-year investigation in response to a complaint by Asian American groups concerning Yale’s conduct.[Read More…]
- Taxpayer Service: IRS Could Improve the Taxpayer Experience by Using Better Service Performance MeasuresBy Sam NewsSeptember 23, 2020The Internal Revenue Service's (IRS) mission and strategic plan state expectations for IRS to improve the taxpayer experience and services it provides. However, IRS and its divisions that manage programs serving the largest taxpayer groups—the Wage and Investment (W&I) and the Small Business/Self-Employed (SB/SE) divisions—did not have performance goals to specify the desired improvements. For example, W&I aligned its service programs to IRS's strategic objectives for taxpayer services that state broad types of management activities such as monitoring the taxpayer experience and addressing issues. However, it did not have performance goals that specify outcomes to improve the taxpayer experience, such as reducing taxpayer wait times for telephone assistance. Because IRS and these two divisions do not have performance goals for improving the taxpayer experience, IRS does not have related performance measures. IRS has many performance measures—including more than 80 for W&I and SB/SE—for assessing the services it provides, such as related to timeliness and accuracy of information provided to taxpayers. However, these existing measures do not assess improvements to the taxpayer experience, such as whether tax processes were simpler or specific services met taxpayers' needs. The division-level measures also lack targets for improving the taxpayer experience. Further, the existing measures do not capture all of the key factors identified in Office of Management and Budget guidance for how customers experience federal services, including customer satisfaction and how easy it was to receive the services. As a result, IRS does not have complete information about how well it is satisfying taxpayers and improving their experiences. IRS analyzes its taxpayer service measures to compare performance with targets but the analyses provide few insights and no recommendations to improve the taxpayer experience, such as to provide more timely tax filing guidance. Also, IRS does not have a process to use service measures to guide decisions on allocating resources to improve the taxpayer experience. As a result, IRS is challenged to use performance data to balance resource allocation for efforts to improve the taxpayer experience compared with other IRS efforts. Finally, IRS reports limited information to the public about performance related to the taxpayer experience for transparency and accountability. The table below summarizes important management practices that IRS did not fully follow to provide taxpayers a top-quality service experience. According to IRS, providing top-quality service is a critical part of its mission to help taxpayers understand and meet their tax responsibilities. Congress, the National Taxpayer Advocate, and the administration have recognized the importance of improving how taxpayers experience IRS services. Setting goals and objectives with related performance measures and targets are important tools to focus an agency's activities on achieving mission results. GAO was asked to review IRS's customer service performance measures. This report assesses IRS's (1) goals and objectives to improve the taxpayer experience; (2) performance measures to support improved experiences; and (3) use of performance information to improve the experience, allocate resources, and report performance. To assess IRS's goals, measures, targets, and use of them, GAO compared IRS's practices to key practices in results-oriented management. GAO is making 7 recommendations, including that IRS identify performance goals, measures, and targets; as well as analyze performance; develop processes to make decisions on resources needed; and report performance on improving the taxpayer experience. IRS indicated that it generally agreed with the recommendations, but that details around their implementation were under consideration and would be provided at a later date. For more information, contact Jessica Lucas-Judy at (202) 512-9110 or LucasJudyJ@gao.gov.[Read More…]
- The Scripps Research Institute To Pay $10 Million To Settle False Claims Act Allegations Related To Mischarging NIH-Sponsored Research GrantsBy Sam NewsSeptember 11, 2020The Scripps Research Institute (TSRI) has agreed to pay the U.S. $10 million to settle claims that it improperly charged NIH-funded research grants for time spent by researchers on non-grant related activities such as developing, preparing, and writing new grant applications, teaching, and engaging in other administrative activities, the Department of Justice announced today.[Read More…]
- The United States Leads the Fight Against Foreign Bribery and Transnational CorruptionBy Sam NewsNovember 17, 2020Cale Brown, Deputy [Read More…]
- U.S. Seizes Virtual Currencies Valued at $24 Million Assisting Brazil in Major Internet Fraud InvestigationBy Sam NewsNovember 4, 2020The Department of Justice announced today that it has seized virtual currency worth an estimated $24 million on behalf of the Brazilian government.[Read More…]
- Justice Department Announces $5.3 Million in Awards to Support Operation LegendBy Sam NewsOctober 22, 2020At a roundtable with law [Read More…]
- Oman Travel AdvisoryBy Sam NewsSeptember 26, 2020Do not travel to Oman [Read More…]
- Eight Individuals Charged With Conspiring to Act as Illegal Agents of the People’s Republic of ChinaBy Sam NewsOctober 28, 2020A complaint and arrest warrants were unsealed today in federal court in Brooklyn charging eight defendants with conspiring to act in the United States as illegal agents of the People’s Republic of China (PRC). Six defendants also face related charges of conspiring to commit interstate and international stalking. The defendants, allegedly acting at the direction and under the control of PRC government officials, conducted surveillance of and engaged in a campaign to harass, stalk, and coerce certain residents of the United States to return to the PRC as part of a global, concerted, and extralegal repatriation effort known as “Operation Fox Hunt.”[Read More…]
- On the UN Human Rights Council’s Embrace of Authoritarian RegimesBy Sam NewsOctober 13, 2020
- Five Charged in Connection with COVID-Relief Fraud SchemeBy Sam NewsOctober 22, 2020Five individuals were charged in an indictment unsealed today for their alleged participation in a scheme to file fraudulent loan applications seeking more than $1.1 million in forgivable Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) loans guaranteed by the Small Business Administration (SBA) under the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act, announced Acting Assistant Attorney General Brian C. Rabbitt of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division and U.S. Attorney Matthew D. Krueger of the Eastern District of Wisconsin.[Read More…]
- Two Individuals Charged with Bribery Related to Iraq ContractsBy Sam NewsSeptember 18, 2020Two individuals have been charged with bribery offenses in connection with Department of Defense contracts as part of the Fraud Section’s ongoing efforts to combat corruption and fraud in contracting on U.S. military installations overseas.[Read More…]
- Designation of a United States Special Coordinator for Tibetan IssuesBy Sam NewsOctober 14, 2020
- Promoting and Protecting Human Rights: A Re-Dedication to the Universal Declaration of Human RightsBy Sam NewsSeptember 26, 2020
- Federal Prison Industries: Actions Needed to Evaluate Program EffectivenessBy Sam NewsJuly 30, 2020The First Step Act of 2018 made new, nonfederal markets and potential buyers available to Federal Prison Industries (FPI), a government corporation organized within the Bureau of Prisons (BOP); however, various challenges could limit FPI's ability to sell to customers in these markets. FPI makes apparel, personal protective equipment, and furniture, among other products. FPI may now sell to the District of Columbia government, including, for example, to its firefighters; nonfederal, governmental entities for use in correctional settings or in response to a disaster or emergency, such as local jails and first responders; and nonprofit organizations, such as universities. However, a lack of information makes it difficult to estimate the dollar value of these new markets. The following figure depicts the new markets made available to FPI. New Markets for Federal Prison Industries' Products under the First Step Act Data on the size of most of the new markets are very limited. For example, GAO found no existing national information to help estimate the size and scope of relevant spending by nonfederal entities on disaster relief and emergencies. Also, challenges related to state and local government operations, for example, could limit FPI's ability to sell products in the new markets made available under the First Step Act. Specifically, state-level prison industries and in-state vendors often have preferential access to many of the procurement markets now available to FPI. FPI and the private sector share some similar operating requirements, such as those related to keeping workers safe. They also face different requirements and business practices, such as those related to the legal framework, security, and costs. Available data indicate that buyers are generally satisfied with the delivery and quality of FPI products. GAO analyzed 231 performance reports on FPI in the federal government's database for contractor performance, as of August 2019. Customers rated FPI's performance in the delivery schedule and quality categories as exceptional, very good, or satisfactory on about 80 and 90 percent, respectively, of performance reports. There were too few ratings on cost to analyze them. FPI aims to assist inmates in their reentry into society by providing marketable job skills, but BOP has not reviewed FPI's impact on recidivism in over 2 decades. BOP relies on outdated studies that assessed the impact of FPI on inmates released in the 1980s. In January 2020, BOP cited a 1992 study as the basis for the Attorney General's designation of FPI as an Evidence-Based Recidivism Reduction Program under the First Step Act 0f 2018 . BOP made a plan to evaluate FPI but the plan's timeline passed and the BOP has not set a new one. Without an updated plan for evaluating FPI, BOP continues to rely on outdated evaluations of FPI and has limited information about FPI's effectiveness amidst changes to its inmate population Additionally, while BOP has reported some descriptive statistics on recidivism rates, it has not developed a goal. Without a timeline for evaluation and a goal for reducing recidivism, BOP's ability to assess the effectiveness of FPI will be limited. FPI is a government owned corporation that, as a national reentry program, manages, trains, and rehabilitates inmates through employment. FPI sells inmate-produced goods and services primarily to federal government agencies. The First Step Act of 2018 authorized FPI to sell its products to new markets. A provision in the First Step Act of 2018 required GAO to review various aspects of FPI. This report addresses (1) the potential size and scope of the additional markets made available to FPI under the First Step Act; (2) the similarities and differences in selected requirements and business practices of FPI and private sector sellers of products and services; (3) customers' satisfaction with FPI regarding quality, price, and timely delivery of its products and services; and (4) the extent to which BOP has evaluated the effectiveness of FPI and other vocational programs in reducing recidivism and the results. GAO examined recidivism studies and data, analyzed performance data, conducted fieldwork at four FPI facilities selected based on security level and type of products produced, met with industry associations, and interviewed agency officials and employed inmates. GAO is making two recommendations: (1) BOP should update its evaluation plan for FPI by setting a new timeline for evaluation and (2) BOP should set a goal to reduce recidivism. DOJ concurred with the recommendations. For more information, contact Gretta L. Goodwin at (202) 512-8777 or firstname.lastname@example.org or William T. Woods at (202) 512-4841 or email@example.com.[Read More…]
- Senior State Department Officials Briefing to Traveling PressBy Sam NewsNovember 16, 2020Istanbul, Turkey [Read More…]