Posted on 02/28/2020 7:01:42 PM PST by ransomnote
A dual U.S.-Mexican citizen had her initial appearance in federal court in the District of Columbia Wednesday on charges related to her alleged involvement in five business entities designated by the Department of Treasury’s Office of Foreign Asset Control (OFAC) as providing material support to the international narcotics trafficking activities of the Mexican narcotics trafficking organization known as the Cartel de Jalisco Nueva Generacion (CJNG).
Assistant Attorney General Brian A. Benczkowski of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division and Special Agent in Charge William Bodner of the Drug Enforcement Administration’s (DEA) Los Angeles Field Division made the announcement.
Jessica Johanna Oseguera Gonzalez, known as “La Negra,” 33, who was residing in Guadalajara, Mexico, was arrested in Washington, D.C. Wednesday pursuant to a warrant stemming from a Feb. 13, 2020, indictment. The charges were unsealed earlier today and she remains in U.S. custody. Her detention hearing is on Monday before U.S. Magistrate Judge Robin M. Meriweather in the District of Columbia.
The five-count indictment alleges that Oseguera Gonzalez, engaged in transactions or dealings in property or interests in property with five business entities, which have been designated by OFAC as Specially Designated Narcotics Traffickers pursuant to the Foreign Narcotics Kingpin Designation Act. The businesses are alleged to provide financial support to, and are subject to the control of, the CJNG. As a result, U.S. persons are generally prohibited from engaging in transactions with them.
The indictment alleges that Oseguera Gonzalez continued her involvement with J&P Advertising S.A. de C.V., JJGON S.P.R. de R.L. de C.V., Las Flores Cabanas, Mizu Sushi Lounge and Operadora Los Famosas S.A. de C.V., and Onze Black, after their designations by OFAC on Sept. 17, 2015.
The charges contained in the indictment are merely accusations, and the defendant is presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.
The DEA’s Los Angeles Field Division led the investigation in conjunction with the Department of Treasury’s Office of Foreign Asset Control. Assistant Deputy Chief Anthony Nardozzi, and Trial Attorneys Brett Reynolds, Kaitlin Sahni, and Cole Radovich of the Criminal Division’s Narcotic and Dangerous Drug Section are prosecuting the case.
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.
Another argument for the wall, another argument against Dual Citizenship, & another win for Trump DOJ!
A handful of SOCTUS rulings says that Congress has to correct this.
El Chapo has realized he isn’t going anywhere and he’s singing his ass off.
I have no problem with Dual Citizenship. In fact both of my children were natural born Dual Citizens and there is nothing they could do to change this status until they became Adults.
What I have a problem with is when US citizens try to use citizenship with another country as an excuse to get away with breaking US laws. That’s unacceptable as US law only recognizes US citizenship for people and when they are naturalized they take an oath to renounce all allegiances to other countries.
If they don’t want to obey US laws then go to a US consulate overseas and renounce their citizenship.
Now as a practical matter (and there are many dummies in America who don’t understand this) they really can’t give up citizenship to the other countries (in the eyes of those countries) unless they go through the other countries’ process for renouncing citizenship. But that’s a matter for them to take care of with those other governments. We don’t need to have USA law enforcement agencies stationed overseas or at consulates/embassies verifying that everyone has gone through the renouncement process as that would open up a huge can of worms & liabilities that we don’t want to get involved with. If you think the “ICE Cages for Children” stories are bad just wait til you see what the ACLU would try to have the US military budget pay for (so our military can’t actually do its job) at various foreign governments’ offices in their own countries.
As far as the US government (and all government agencies and non-government entities in the USA) is concerned they should only be considered as US citizens. The people take an oath of citizenship in a federal court saying they renounce. That’s a legal proceeding with full documentation and verifications.
It’s time we consider illegal entry by any person who is a non Mexican citizen illegally entering the United States through the US Mexican border a defacto Mexican citizen with limited Mexican constitutional rights subject to their laws while transiting. As well as any Mexican citizen entering illegally exempting those who do so legally and meet US citizenship requirements.
But consider subjecting them to reciprocal citizen treatment a citizen of the United States receives in Mexico through the Mexican constitution on citizenship .
According to the Mexican constitution any American legally in Mexico Besides being unable to vote one must also be a citizen to own land and Mexico is very restrictive about granting citizenship. Because of that a US citizen besides not being able to vote,and cannot have title in their name to any land property in Mexico.
And until that is changed the US and the affected state should consider making that reciprocal. Prohibiting any illegal entrant employment, voting, and land ownership privileges fully enforced .. In other words Sneak into this country before expulsion no job, no voting, no landowning ..
Just to be clear - people who are trying to renounce their US citizenship to escape criminal prosecution won’t be able to use that process as an excuse to avoid prosecution/punishment.
If I recollect, I think that if you a child of an American born in Scotland you are forever Scottish in Scottish law. (They may have changed their law in the last 30 years!)
My comment was more a throw in comment. Looking at it more closely I would say that dual citizenship creates conflicts of interest in politicians at the very least. Do we want people with divided loyalties to create and uphold our laws?
(Q.v. Barrack Obama aka Barry Soetero aka Barry Obama, et al. )
To me it seems that there is also a fairness issue if you are a dual citizen who is using benefits in 2 countries when you have not contributed significantly in support of those benefits in one of the countries (this applies more to illegal aliens than Dual Citz.s)
https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2018/12/10/dual-citizens-in-congress-we-need-to-know/
“Until the Supreme Court decided otherwise in the 1967 case of Afroyim v. Rusk, a U.S. citizen who voted in a political election in a foreign state would lose his or her U.S. citizenship. Afroyim removed that penalty. It made dual or multiple citizenship legally permissible.”
Before I am accused of anti-Semitism or a McCarthyite witch hunt, let me repeat: there is nothing illegal about dual citizenship for any American, including Members of Congress. Though some may argue that dual citizenship of Senators and Representatives carries an inherent conflict of interest that should require renunciation, my case here is simply for transparency—public disclosure of any dual or multiple citizenship. I single out Israel only because of the possibly automatic nature of its Law of Return. Transparency as to dual citizenship should be required of any Member of Congress who accepts another citizenship, regardless of country.
So why is it important for citizens to know if any of their representatives in Congress is a dual citizen? Because both real and apparent conflicts of interest erode the public trust. When a Member of Congress speaks out in support of a policy that favors a country in which he or she holds citizenship, the public should be able to assess which loyalty motivates the speech....entire article/more at link.”
I agree that the focus should be on Transparency and Full Disclosure. This is especially important if some challenge comes up involving another country. Of course the official is going to need to stick up for truth, justice, and the American way. If they don’t they’ll lose their political clout in American and in Congress.
It bothers me when people say “America is BAD because America did [list of bad things]” because every time on those list of bad things if they were done wrongly its because the principles of Americanism were grossly violated. The goal of America has always been to form a more perfect Union. So when people say “America has been bad” then our answer should be “bad things have been done in America, since the Constitution we have been trying to form a more perfect Union, we’ve made a lot of progress, and we will continue to do so if we stick with the Constitution and these principles.”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.