Leaked memo: Corrupt DEA agents in Colombia help narcos and paramilitaries
By Bill Conroy
Online Journal Contributing Writer
Jan 13, 2006, 01:05
Internal Justice Dept. Document Alleges Drug Trafficking
Links, Money Laundering and Conspiracy to Murder
The drug war is
supposed to follow a very clear script: According to the official
screenwriters, the U.S. justice system is pitted against corrupt players in
foreign countries who are trying to flood American streets with illicit drugs.
The narco-traffickers, crooked cops, and thieving politicians in the drug war
are always over there, in Latin America, and elsewhere, and U.S. law enforcers
and government officials are always the good guys battling these forces of
evil.
But what happens
when evidence surfaces that turns that script on its ear? What happens if proof
emerges that it is the U.S. justice system that is corrupt? A document obtained
recently by Narco News makes those questions more than hypothetical queries. In
this document, Department of Justice attorney Thomas M. Kent claims that
federal agents with the Drug Enforcement Administration's office in Bogotá,
Colombia, are the corrupt players in the war on drugs. (The DEA is part of the
larger Justice Department.)
The information in
that document is also corroborated by a number of other sources that spoke
directly to Narco News, including former government officials who are familiar
with the DEA's Bogotá operations
Kent's memorandum
contains some of the most serious allegations ever raised against U.S. anti-narcotics
officers: that DEA agents on the front lines of the drug war in Colombia are on
drug traffickers' payrolls, complicit in the murders of informants who knew too
much, and, most startlingly, directly involved in helping Colombia's infamous
right-wing paramilitary death squads to launder drug money.
The memo further
claims that, rather than being simply a few "bad apples" who need to
be reported to their superiors, these allegedly dirty agents are being
protected by an ongoing cover-up orchestrated by "watchdog" agencies
within the Justice Department.
These charges blow
away the smoke concealing the pretense of the war on drugs. If they are true,
there will be no brushing them aside at pre-scripted press conferences;
everyone who becomes aware of these allegations will be forced to consider
where we go from here in that so-called war.
The Kent Memo
On Dec. 19, 2004,
Thomas M. Kent, an attorney in the wiretap unit of the Justice Department's
Narcotic and Dangerous Drugs Section (NDDS), sent off a memo to his section
chief. Law enforcement sources tell Narco News that a number of other
high-level officials within Justice and the DEA soon received copies of the
same memo. In it, Kent raised a series of corruption allegations centering on
the DEA's office in Bogotá.
Kent says his
claims are supported by a number of DEA agents in Florida whom the agency
muzzled and retaliated against after they tried to expose the corruption.
Specifically, Kent contends that the DEA's Office of Professional Responsibility
(or OPR, essentially the agency's Internal Affairs department) and elements of
DOJ's Office of the Inspector General (OIG) have worked to keep a lid on the
corruption charges. According to Kent, these offices -- which are supposed to
serve as watchdog agencies that investigate corruption -- sabotaged
investigations being carried out by the Florida DEA agents and by one of the
OIG's own agents.
From Kent's memo:
As discussed in my (prior) memorandum dated December 13,
2004, several unrelated investigations, including Operation Snowplow,
identified corrupt agents within DEA. As further discussed in my memorandum,
OPR's handling of the investigations into those allegations has come into
question and the OIG investigator who was actively looking into the allegations
has been removed from the investigation. As discussed in my email, dated
December 17, 2004, I want to speak directly with the (DOJ) Public Integrity
Section because I want to ensure that the allegations are fully investigated
and acted upon if true.
As promised, I am providing you with further information
on the allegations and evidence that is already in files at OPR and OIG. Agents
I know were able to vouch for my credibility and several individuals close to
the prior investigations that uncovered corruption agreed to speak with me. I
had a limited time frame in which to speak with them and ask questions. They
were able to provide me with some of the highlights, but certainly not all of
the information that is sitting at OPR and OIG. Such a debriefing, based on
what I learned in a few hours, would take days.
Having been failed by so many before and facing
tremendous risks to their careers and their safety and the safety of their
families, they were understandably hesitant to reveal the information I
requested, including the names of those directly involved in criminal activity
in Bogotá and the United States. They agreed to reveal the names to me on the
condition that I not further disseminate these for the time being. They are
prepared to provide the Public Integrity Section with those names and
everything in the files at OPR and OIG, and then some, if called upon to do so.
Why is an attorney
within Justice afraid to reveal the names of the DEA whistleblowers out of fear
that it might jeopardize their law enforcement careers and the lives of their
families? And why, as Kent contends, is it all being covered up?
What do Glenn Fine,
the head of the DOJ's OIG, and Rogelio E. Guevara, who currently oversees the
DEA's OPR, know about Kent's charges, which were brought forth in his memo more
than a year ago?
A look at the
nature of the alleged corruption may give us some clues.
(Remember that all
of these allegations come strictly from the Kent memo, though law enforcement
sources have corroborated much of this information on condition of anonymity.)
Money Laundering and Paramilitaries
Kent alleges that
one of the corrupt agents from Bogotá was caught on a wiretap some time in 2004
discussing criminal activity related to the huge right-wing paramilitary group
known as the United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia (AUC in its Spanish
initials). The group is widely recognized to be involved in narco-trafficking
and arms dealing at the highest levels. Working closely with various sectors of
the Colombian military, it has fielded death squads responsible for murdering
thousands of Colombians.
The following is
from a 2004 report prepared for Congress by the Congressional Research Service:
The AUC targets real and perceived supporters of the
Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), the National Liberation Army
(ELN), as well as political activists, police officials and judges. The group
is known for its brutality and has killed more civilians than the leftist
insurgencies have killed: in 2001, the AUC killed at least 1,015 civilians,
compared to the 197 civilians killed by the FARC. The AUC also committed over
100 massacres in 2001, a tactic it used to displace large portions of the
peasant population in order maintain firmer control over the major coca-growing
lands.
Kent contends, in
the memorandum, that during the wiretap, the corrupt Bogotá DEA agent "discusses
his involvement in laundering money for the AUC." But despite being caught
on tape admitting to helping the most murderous political force in the
hemisphere today to launder the money from their extensive drug trafficking
operations, the agent faced no punishment. In fact, says Kent, the agent was
essentially promoted: "That call has been documented by the DEA and that
agent is now in charge of numerous narcotics and money laundering
investigations."
Kent, in the
memorandum, also alleges that DOJ officials shut down a money laundering
investigation because they discovered that it was linked to the alleged DEA
corruption in Bogotá. He claims that the nail in that coffin was driven in by
OPR after it discovered that an OIG agent was investigating the Bogotá
corruption and related money laundering operation
"In June 2004,
OPR and DEA, the two agencies embarrassed by the prior allegations (involving
the Bogotá agents) and likely to come under tremendous scrutiny for their own
actions in response, demanded that my case agent turn all of the
(investigation) information . . . over to OPR," Kent states in the
memorandum. "One week after submitting the (information) to OPR, the money
laundering investigation was shut down."
Kent details three
further cases of extreme corruption in his memo, all involving Bogotá DEA
agents persecuting or conspiring to kill Colombian informants who threatened to
bring down their activities. Sources told Narco News that these corruption
allegations involve cases launched in 1999 or 2000, but which resulted in
investigations that carried on for months or years.
(Kent wrote his
memo in late 2004 only after he became aware of the alleged corruption and then
had exhausted other internal channels within DOJ for addressing the problems.)
Allegation One: Corrupt DEA Agents in Bogotá Conspired to
Murder Informants Who Betrayed Them
During the course
of an investigation into a Colombian narco-trafficking operation, a group of
DEA agents in Florida had zeroed in on several targets, with the help of
several Colombian informants. Once the targets were identified as being part of
the drug ring, they began to cooperate with the Florida-based agents.
" . . . They
made startling revelations concerning DEA agents in Bogotá," Kent writes. "They
alleged that they were assisted in their narcotics activities by the [Bogotá]
agents. Specifically, they alleged that the agents provided them with information
on investigations and other law enforcement activities in Colombia."
The traffickers
eventually gave the Florida agents copies of confidential DEA reports, which
the Bogotá agents allegedly had handed over to the traffickers. After the
Florida agents turned these documents over to the OPR and OIG, one of them was
put on "administrative leave" -- the first sign that a cover-up was
underway.
While the Florida
agent was out on leave, the Bogotá agents set up a meeting with one of the
informants.
"As the informant
left that meeting, he was murdered," Kent states. "Other informants .
. . who also worked with the DEA group in Florida were also murdered. Each
murder was preceded by a request for their identity by an agent in Bogotá."
Allegation Two: Bogotá DEA Agents Imprison and Possibly
Conspire to Murder Informants to Prevent Their Travel to U.S.
A separate DEA
group, also based in Florida, ran into trouble with the same DEA office in
Bogotá while investigating another Colombian narco-trafficking operation. Informants
tipped off the Florida agents that that this drug ring had developed an
ingenious method for smuggling cocaine into the United States, a method that
seems to have been lifted right out of the script of the drug-war movie Traffic.
"Specifically,
the narcotics traffickers in Colombia were infusing acrylic with cocaine and
shaping it into any number of commercial goods," Kent states. "The
acrylic was then shipped to the United States and Europe where, during
processing, the cocaine was extracted from the acrylic."
Informants working
for the Florida agents sent samples of the cocaine-laced acrylic to the DEA,
but the agency's chemists couldn't figure out how to extract the cocaine. As a
result, the Florida agents decided to have the informants come to the United
States with a sample of the acrylic, so they could walk DEA's chemists through
the extraction process.
"Agents
contacted the Bogotá Country Office to discuss the informants' planned travel
and their bringing cocaine out of Colombia infused in acrylic," writes
Kent. "They were advised that the best tact was for the informants to
carry it out themselves."
But when the
informants got to the airport to leave for the U.S., they were arrested. A DEA
agent in Bogotá, it turns out, had told Colombian officials to "lock them
(the informants) up and throw away the key," according to Kent. The Bogotá
agent then claimed that he had no idea the Florida agents had given the
informants permission to transport the cocaine.
"His
misrepresentations were backed by another agent in Bogotá," Kent states. "The
informants were imprisoned for nine months while the accusations flew back and
forth. Once it was determined that the agents in Bogotá were lying, the
informants were released. One of the informants was kidnapped and murdered in
Bogotá where he had gone into hiding."
Allegation Three: Informant Outed by Traffickers with Ties
to Bogotá Agents
In yet another case
outlined in Kent's memorandum, the second Florida DEA group was working with an
informant in Colombia who claimed to have made contact with a FARC guerilla
while in prison. Sources told Narco News that the informant is a wealthy
Colombian businessman with investments in high-tech firms and ties to
narco-trafficking. The FARC (Spanish initials for Revolutionary Armed Forces of
Colombia, the largest leftist insurgent group in that country's civil war,
accused by U.S. officials of drug and arms trafficking) was supposedly
interested in buying communications equipment from him.
While this
investigation eventually ended up in the hands of the National Security Agency,
from the beginning it appeared to be related to drug trafficking and the
Florida DEA agents decided to investigate. Agents from the Bogotá office
promised to help, one of them assuring the Florida agents that the informant's
release from prison could be arranged. But when the Florida agents arrived in
Colombia, another Bogotá DEA agent told them that the informant was going to
stay in prison.
The Bogotá agents
seemed obsessed with stopping the informant from working with the Florida
agents, and began doing everything in their power to prevent the investigation
from moving forward. "As the two sides argued back and forth, the
informant was challenged by the Bogotá agents to prove his allegations,"
the memorandum states. "He did so by making a videotape of a conversation
he then had with a member of the FARC in jail in which they discussed their
desire for him to provide them with communications equipment. When confronted
with the actual tape that confirmed the informant's story, the agents in Bogotá
complained that what the informant and DEA group from Florida had done was
illegal and they would be unable to obtain the informant's release (from
prison)."
The Florida agents
kept trying to revive the investigation, but Bogotá agents continued to thwart
it one way or another. Eventually, the informant was released from prison and
tried to start working with the Florida agents again, but an agent from the
Bogotá office traveled to Washington, D.C., and managed to convince DEA brass
to derail the investigation.
When the informant
approached the DEA once again with information, writes Kent, "the Bogotá
agent that traveled to Washington, D.C., now claimed that the informant was a
pedophile. The investigation was halted. The Bogotá agent was called on his
claim and could not provide any evidence." The agent then switched
tactics, arguing that the DEA could not work with the informant because the
FARC might end up with the communications equipment. He also claimed that one
of the targets of the FARC-related investigation was not involved in
narco-trafficking -- even though the Bogotá office had previously identified
that individual as a narco-trafficker.
"The (Bogotá)
agent was unable to dissuade those involved in the investigation, and it
finally took off with the assistance of the NSA," the memo states. "The
investigation continued until the informant was faxed a document that
identified him as a DEA informant on the FARC. The document mirrored
information the DEA group in Florida provided the corrupt agents in Bogotá
previously."
In other words,
someone outed the Florida group's informant, making him into a target for many
dangerous people including the FARC guerrillas, and the tool used to expose him
was proprietary DEA information that appeared to have come out of the Bogotá
DEA office. The DEA agents in Florida looked further into the source of that
information and followed the trail to several other DEA informants. The Florida
agents then set up a wiretap and recorded conversations between their own
informants and the other DEA informants who were tied to the leaked DEA
information. The recordings revealed that a narco-trafficker had indeed
obtained the internal DEA information that was used to expose the Florida group's
informant.
"That person
(the narco-trafficker) is also a DEA informant," the memorandum states, "and
is believed to have been controlled by the Bogotá Country Office. Among other
things, it was alleged that the informant (the narco-trafficker) had several
agents on his payroll who provided him with classified information. The agents
were believed to work in Colombia and Washington, D.C."
The tape recordings
that revealed this damning information were turned over to both the Office of
Professional Responsibility and the Office of the Inspector General, Kent
states in the memorandum. The agents in the Florida DEA office also tried to
set up a sting targeting the allegedly corrupt agents from Bogotá and
Washington, D.C.
"The meeting
(the sting) was called off when it was learned the agents likely knew of the
trap," the memorandum states. " . . . The informant who was
identified . . . as the narcotics trafficker with several agents on his payroll
was eventually brought to Florida to take a polygraph test on the allegations
that he was obtaining classified documents from agents in Bogotá and elsewhere."
Kent says that the
narco-trafficker passed the lie detector test in Florida, at which he was asked
whether agents had passed him classified documents and he claimed that they
hadn't. But the OPR mysteriously ordered the polygrapher not to report on the
test: "He was instructed (to say) that the test never took place."
The Deluge
The corruption
allegations raised in Kent's memorandum are startling, but agents in the Bogotá
DEA office are not the first to have been accused of participating in a
narco-trafficking conspiracy. Similar tales of corruption involving overseas
DEA agents have surfaced in the past. And although the charges raised by Kent
in his 2004 memorandum have now passed before many eyes, they have still not
been addressed in the light of day. Instead, as in similar past cases, they
have been buried in the contorted layers of the Justice Department bureaucracy.
Kent is no longer
with the Washington, D.C.-based wiretap unit of NDDS. He has been transferred
to Nashville, according to sources familiar with the memorandum. Ironically,
the NDDS chief to whom Kent addressed the memorandum, Jodi L. Avergun, is now
the chief of staff for DEA.
In addition, Kent's
request to send the Bogotá corruption allegations to the Justice Department's
Public Integrity Section was denied, and his memorandum deep-sixed -- until
now.
A full
investigation of his allegations may well prove that the DEA's Bogotá office is
clean as a whistle. But if that is indeed the case, then why has Justice chosen
to silence and punish the whistleblowers in this case rather than look into
their claims?
From Kent's
memorandum:
If we are unable to arrange for a sit-down between the
reporting agents and those attorneys within the Department of Justice who are
tasked with ensuring that corrupted agents and officials are held accountable,
then I firmly believe that we will watch from the sidelines as the allegations
play out in a courtroom, on the news, and/or on Capital Hill. The reporting
agents have placed their trust in me. . . . I have assured them that I will lay
the issue before you with a much more detailed accounting of the allegations
and how the DEA and OPR, and now seemingly OIG, have failed to fully
investigate the allegations and hold those responsible accountable.
If we can put them together with the Public Integrity
Section, they assured me that other agents who have to this point remained
silent for fear of retaliation will come forward. Those agents have additional
evidence not in the files maintained by OPR and OIG. I believe, based on their
representations, that that new evidence alone would put the corrupt agents in
prison.
Given the pretense that defines the war on drugs, Kent's
memorandum (which basically rewrites the script of that war) is not likely to
be a hot seller in Washington, D.C., anytime soon—absent pressure from a major
media blitz.
And what of the
mainstream-media guardians of our liberty? Will they step up to the plate on
this story, given their penchant for adhering to the standard drug-war script?
The fact that Narco News is breaking this story first may tell us all we need
to know on that front.
But the truth, like
water, always brings the scum to the surface. And in this case, the dam holding
back the truth in the so-called war on drugs may be close to breaking. For how
much longer will nations in Latin America and around the world accept U.S. drug
warriors' imposing presence in their lands, when those same agents and
bureaucrats get neck-deep in the very drug trade they are supposedly trying to
wipe out, with complete impunity and protection from their superiors back home?
"The agents
who reported the . . . allegations (of corruption) did so to correct wrongs
committed by other members of the DEA and OPR," Kent states in the
memorandum. "Their attempts to do so led to retaliation. . . . The cracks
in the lid DEA and OPR has attempted to place on this problem are getting
bigger.
"It is only a
matter of time before this thing explodes. . . ."
Click here to read
Kent's memorandum for yourself.
Bill
Conroy is an investigative reporter and correspondent for Narco News, where
this article originally appeared. He can be contacted at wkc6428@aol.com.
Copyright © 1998-2007 Online Journal
Email Online Journal Editor