
Inside the Trump administration's overhaul of organized crime investigations
Officials said the plan to bring law enforcement agencies together in the new Homeland Security Task Forces has been driven primarily by President Donald Trump's homeland security adviser, Stephen Miller, who is closely overseeing the project's implementation.
Advertisement
Current and former officials said the proposed reorganization would make it easier for senior officials like Miller to disregard norms that have long walled off the White House from active criminal investigations.
'To the administration's credit, they are trying to break down barriers that are hard to break down,' said Adam W. Cohen, a career Justice Department attorney who was fired in March as head of the office that coordinates organized crime investigations involving often-competing federal agencies. 'But you won't have neutral prosecutors weighing the facts and making decisions about who to investigate,' he added of the task force plan. 'The White House will be able to decide.'
The proposed reorganization would elevate the stature and influence of Homeland Security Investigations and Immigration and Customs Enforcement among law enforcement agencies, while continuing to push other agencies to pursue immigration-related crimes.
Advertisement
The task forces would at least formally subordinate the Drug Enforcement Administration to HSI and the FBI after half a century in which the DEA has been the government's lead agency for narcotics enforcement.
Trump's directive to establish the new task forces was included in an Inauguration Day executive order,
The new task forces will seek 'to end the presence of criminal cartels, foreign gangs and transnational criminal organizations throughout the United States,' the order states. They will also aim to 'end the scourge of human smuggling and trafficking, with a particular focus on such offenses involving children.'
Since that order was issued, the administration has proceeded with considerable secrecy. Some Justice Department officials who work on organized crime have been excluded from planning meetings, as have leaders of the DEA, people familiar with the process said.
A White House spokesperson, Abigail Jackson, did not comment on Miller's role in directing the task force project or the secrecy of the process. 'While the Biden Administration opened the border and looked the other way while Americans were put at risk,' she said, 'the Trump Administration is taking action to dismantle cross-border human smuggling and trafficking and ensure the use of all available law enforcement tools to faithfully execute immigration laws and to Make America Safe Again.'
The task force project was described in interviews with current and former officials who have been briefed on it. ProPublica also reviewed documents about the implementation of the task forces, including a briefing paper prepared for Cabinet-level officials on the president's Homeland Security Council.
Advertisement
The Homeland Security Task Forces will take a 'coordinated, whole-of-government approach' to combatting transnational criminal groups, the paper states. They will also draw support from state and local police forces and U.S. intelligence agencies.
Until now, the government has coordinated that same work through a Justice Department program established by President Ronald Reagan, the
Known by the ungainly acronym OCDETF (pronounced 'oh-suh-def'), the $550-million program is above all an incentive system: To receive funding, different agencies (including the DEA, the FBI and HSI) must come together to propose investigations, which are then vetted and approved by prosecutor-led OCDETF teams.
The agents are required to include a financial investigation of the criminal activity, typically with help from the Treasury Department, and they often recruit support from state and local police. The OCDETF intelligence center, located in the northern Virginia suburbs, manages the only federal database in which different law-enforcement agencies share their raw investigative files.
While officials describe OCDETF as an imperfect structure, they also say it has become a crucial means of law enforcement cooperation. Its mandate was expanded under the Biden and first Trump administrations to encompass all types of organized crime, not just drug trafficking.
As recently as a few months ago, the deputy attorney general, Todd Blanche, declared that
But just weeks after Blanche's announcement, the administration informed OCDETF officials their operations would be shut down by the end of the fiscal year in September. In a letter to Democratic senators on June 23, the Justice Department confirmed that the Homeland Security Task Forces would absorb OCDETF's 'mission and resources' but did not explain how the new structure would take charge of the roughly 5,000 investigations OCDETF now oversees.
Advertisement
'These were not broken programs,' said a former Homeland Security official who, like others, would only discuss the administration's plans on condition of anonymity. 'If you wanted to build them out and make sure that the immigration side of things got more importance, you could have done that. You did not have to build a new wheel.'
Officials also cited other concerns about the administration's plan, including whether the new task force system will incorporate some version of the elaborate safeguards OCDETF has used to persuade law enforcement agencies to share their case files in its intelligence database. Under those rules, OCDETF analysts must obtain permission from the agency that provided the records before sharing them with others.
Many officials said they worried that the new task forces seem to be abandoning OCDETF's incentive structure. OCDETF funds are conditioned on multiple agencies working together on important cases; officials said the monies will now be distributed to law enforcement agencies directly and without the requirement that they collaborate.
'They are taking away a lot of the organization that the government uses to attack organized crime,' a Justice Department official said. 'If you want to improve something, great, but they don't even seem to have a vision for how this is going to work. There are no specifics.'
The Homeland Security Task Forces will try to enforce interagency cooperation by a 'supremacy clause,' that gives task force leaders the right to pursue the cases they want and shut down others that might overlap.
Advertisement
The clause will require 'that any new or existing investigative and/or intelligence initiatives' targeting transnational criminal organizations 'must be presented to the HSTF with a right of first refusal,' according to the briefing paper reviewed by ProPublica.
'Further,' it adds, 'the supremacy clause prohibits parallel or competitive activities by member agencies, effectively eliminating duplicative structures such as stand-alone task forces or specialized units, to include narcotics, financial, or others.'
Several senior law enforcement officials said that approach would curtail the independence that investigators need to follow good leads when they see them; newer and less-visible criminal organizations would be more likely to escape scrutiny.
In recent years, those officials noted, both Democratic and Republican administrations have tried at times to short-circuit competition for big cases among law enforcement agencies and judicial districts. But that has often led to as many problems as it has solved, they said.
One notable example, several officials said, was a move by the Biden administration's DEA administrator, Anne Milgram, to limit her agency's cooperation with FBI and HSI investigations into fentanyl smuggling by Los Chapitos, the mafia led by sons of the Mexican drug boss Joaquín Guzmán Loera, known as 'El Chapo.'
Although the DEA eventually indicted the Chapitos' leaders in New York, officials from other agencies complained that Milgram's approach wasted months of work and delayed the indictments of some traffickers. Later, when the FBI secretly arranged the surrender of one of the sons, Joaquín Guzmán López, DEA officials were not told about the operation until it was underway, officials said. (Guzmán López initially pleaded not guilty but is believed to be negotiating with the government. Milgram did not respond to messages asking for comment.)
Advertisement
As to the benefits of competition, prosecutors and agents cite the case of El Chapo himself. Before he was extradited to the United States in January 2017, Guzmán Loera had been indicted by seven U.S. attorneys' offices, reflecting yearslong investigations by the DEA, the FBI and HSI, among others. In the agreement that the Obama Justice Department brokered, three offices led the prosecution, which used the best evidence gathered by the others.
Under the new structure of the Homeland Security Task Forces, several officials said, federal prosecutors will still generally decide whether to bring charges against criminal groups, but they will have less of a role in determining which criminals to investigate.
Regional and national task forces will be overseen by 'executive committees' that are expected to include political appointees, officials said. The committees will guide broader decisions about which criminal groups to target, they said.
'The HSTF model unleashes the full might of our federal law enforcement agencies and federal prosecutors to deliver justice for the American people, whose plight Biden and Garland ignored for four years,' a Justice Department spokesperson said, referring to former Attorney General Merrick Garland. 'Any suggestion that the Department is abandoning its mission of cracking down on violent organized crime is unequivocally false.'
During Trump's first term, veteran officials of the FBI, DEA and HSI all complained that the administration's overarching focus on immigration diverted agents from more urgent national security threats, including the fentanyl epidemic. Now, as hundreds more agents have been dispatched to immigration enforcement, those officials worry that the new task forces will focus on rounding up undocumented immigrants who have any sort of criminal record at the cost of more significant organized crime investigations.
The first task forces to begin operating under the new model have not assuaged such concerns. In late May,
On June 16, the Gulf of America Homeland Security Task Force, a new unit based in Alabama and Georgia, announced the arrests of 60 people, nearly all of them undocumented immigrants, at a cockfighting event in northern Alabama. Although cockfighting is typically subject to a maximum fine of $50 in the state, a senior HSI official claimed the suspects were 'tied to a broader network of serious crimes, including illegal gambling, drug trafficking and violent offenses.' Once again, however, no details were provided.
It is unclear how widely the new task force rules might be applied. While OCDETF funds the salaries of more than a thousand federal agents and hundreds of prosecutors, thousands more DEA, FBI and HSI agents work on other narcotics and organized crime cases.
In early June, five Democratic senators wrote to Bondi questioning the decision to dismantle OCDETF. That decision was first reported by Bloomberg News.
'As the Department's website notes, OCDETF 'is the centerpiece of the Attorney General's strategy to combat transnational-organized crime and to reduce the availability of illicit narcotics in the nation,''
In a June 23 response, a Justice Department official, Daniel Boatright, wrote that OCDETF's operations would be taken over by the new task forces and managed by the office of the Deputy Attorney General. But Boatright did not clarify what role federal prosecutors would play in the new system.
'A lot of good, smart people are trying to make this work,' said one former senior official. 'But without having prosecutors drive the process, it is going to completely fracture how we do things.'
Veteran officials at the DEA — who appear to have had almost no say in the creation of the new task forces— are said to be even more concerned. Already the DEA has been fighting pressure to provide access to investigative files without assurances that the safeguards of the OCDETF intelligence center will remain in place, officials said.
'DEA has not even been invited to any of the task force meetings,' one former senior official said. 'It is mind-boggling. They're just getting orders saying, 'This is what Stephen Miller wants and you've got to give it to us.''
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


San Francisco Chronicle
22 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Iran's top diplomat says talks with US 'complicated' by American strike on nuclear sites
DUBAI, United Arab Emirates (AP) — Iran's top diplomat said the possibility of new negotiations with the United States on his country's nuclear program has been 'complicated' by the American attack on three of the sites, which he conceded caused 'serious damage." The U.S. was one of the parties to the 2015 nuclear deal in which Iran agreed to limits on its uranium enrichment program in exchange for sanctions relief and other benefits. That deal unraveled after U.S. President Donald Trump pulled the U.S. out unilaterally during his first term. Trump has suggested he is interested in new talks with Iran, and said that the two sides would meet next week. In an interview on Iranian state television broadcast late Thursday, Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi left open the possibility that his country would again enter talks on its nuclear program, but suggested it would not be anytime soon. 'No agreement has been made for resuming the negotiations,' he said. 'No time has been set, no promise has been made, and we haven't even talked about restarting the talks.' The American decision to intervene militarily 'made it more complicated and more difficult' for talks on Iran's nuclear program, Araghchi said. Israel attacked Iran on June 13, targeting its nuclear sites, defense systems, high-ranking military officials and atomic scientists in relentless attacks. In 12 days of strikes, Israel said it killed some 30 Iranian commanders and hit eight nuclear-related facilities and more than 720 military infrastructure sites. More than 1,000 people were killed, including at least 417 civilians, according to the Washington-based Human Rights Activists group. Iran fired more than 550 ballistic missiles at Israel, most of which were intercepted but those that got through caused damage in many areas and killed 28 people. The U.S. stepped in on Sunday to hit Iran's three most important strikes with a wave of cruise missiles and bunker-buster bombs dropped by B-2 bombers, designed to penetrate deep into the ground to damage the heavily-fortified targets. Iran, in retaliation, fired missiles at a U.S. base in Qatar on Monday but caused no known casualties. Trump said the American attacks 'completely and fully obliterated' Iran's nuclear program, though Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei on Thursday accused the U.S. president of exaggerating the damage, saying the strikes did not 'achieve anything significant.' There has been speculation that Iran moved much of its highly-enriched uranium before the strikes, something that it told the U.N. nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency, that it planned to do. Even if that turns out to be true, IAEA Director Rafael Grossi told Radio France International that the damage done to the Fordo site, which was built into a mountain, 'is very, very, very considerable.' Among other things, he said, centrifuges are 'quite precise machines' and it's 'not possible' that the concussion from multiple 30,000-pound bombs would not have caused 'important physical damage.' 'These centrifuges are no longer operational,' he said. Araghchi himself acknowledged that 'the level of damage is high, and it's serious damage.'


CNN
24 minutes ago
- CNN
Trump may name a ‘shadow' Fed chair, an unprecedented development in American history
President Donald Trump said last week that he will announce his pick to succeed Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell 'very soon.' The problem is that Powell still has 11 months left until the end of his term. Trump remains frustrated as ever with the Fed because it has not yet lowered interest rates. He has relentlessly attacked Powell for months. But announcing a Fed chair nominee this far in advance — if he makes good on that plan — would be an unprecedented development in the central bank's 111-year history. This person would effectively be acting as America's 'shadow' Fed chair — a proposal Scott Bessent first floated last year before he became Trump's Treasury secretary. Such an extraordinary move could undermine the current Fed chief and intensify the uncertainty that has bedeviled the US economy since Trump took office, former Fed officials and academics tell CNN. 'It's an absolutely horrible idea,' Alan Blinder, who served as the No. 2 official at the Fed during the mid-1990s, told CNN in a phone interview. Blinder said a shadow Fed chair would mean markets would have to make sense of two influential voices speaking about monetary policy at the same time, but offering potentially very different visions. 'If they're not singing from the same playbook, which seems likely, this is just going to cause confusion in markets,' said Blinder, a former Clinton economic adviser who is now a professor at Princeton University. Greg Valliere, chief US policy strategist at AGF Investments, expressed a similar sentiment in a note to investors on Thursday: 'This is a terrible idea, sure to annoy and confuse financial markets if there are two Fed Chairs.' 'It all depends on just how loyal this person is expected to be to Trump,' said Kathryn Judge, a professor at Columbia Law School who researches financial markets and central banking. 'But we don't we know what the ramifications would be or what they'd be willing to do, because this is unprecedented.' US presidents have historically waited until the final months of the incumbent Fed chair's term before naming a successor. RSM chief economist Joe Brusuelas cautioned that naming an early Fed chair could backfire, causing a jump in the very interest rates Trump is seeking to drive lower. 'Undermining Powell is in no one's best interest as it will almost certainly translate to a weaker dollar and rising rates,' Brusuelas said. On Wednesday, the Wall Street Journal reported that Trump, frustrated by Powell's reluctance to slash interest rates, could announce his nominee as early as this summer. The US dollar index, which measures the dollar's strength against six major foreign currencies, subsequently illustrated investors' discomfort with the idea of a shadow Fed chair. After the Journal's report, the US dollar was down 0.3% Thursday morning and hovered around its lowest level since February 2022. The stock market, in contrast, appeared largely unfazed by the idea of Trump naming a shadow Fed chair. US stocks moved solidly higher on Thursday, flirting with record highs. Valliere worries the plan for naming an early Fed chair 'would politicize the Fed for a few months before stability is restored next May.' 'The damage to the Fed's independence would be considerable if Trump becomes a monetary back-seat driver, second-guessing Fed policies this fall,' Valliere said. There are at least three contenders for the top job at the Fed, CNN has previously reported: Bessent; Kevin Warsh, a former Fed governor; and Christopher Waller, a current Fed governor. The Journal reported that Kevin Hassett, the director of the White House's National Economic Council, is also being considered; as well as David Malpass, who Trump in his first term nominated to helm the World Bank. Narayana Kocherlakota, a former president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis who is now a professor at the University of Rochester, told CNN that a shadow Fed chair is 'not great policy' because the person could step on Powell's current messaging. 'However, it might be better than having the president tweet about monetary policy,' Kocherlakota said, alluding to Trump's intensifying attacks on Powell via social media. Austan Goolsbee, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, told CNBC on Thursday that the naming of a new Fed chair this far in advance would have 'no effect' on Fed policymakers. One former Fed official who sat on the rate-setting committee alongside Powell also stressed that naming a shadow Fed chair would not sway policymakers. 'I can tell you with absolute certainty it will have no impact on Jay Powell and the existing FOMC,' this former official told CNN on the condition of anonymity, referencing the Fed's 12-member voting committee. The former Fed official said some candidates Trump is considering may have second thoughts about getting announced this early in the process. 'I wouldn't want to be named at this juncture because you'd be saying I am Trump's lackey. That would hurt my credibility on the Street and in Corporate America,' the former official said. As Goolsbee alluded to, a shadow Fed chair won't have any real power before assuming the role. Trump's pick would also need to be confirmed by the Senate, though that likely won't be much of an obstacle with Republicans controlling both chambers of Congress through 2026. Even then, it won't be easy for this person to bend the Fed to their will. All monetary policy decisions are voted on by the FOMC, also known as the Federal Open Market Committee. The chair cannot unilaterally veto what the members vote for and, in theory, could even be outvoted. Blinder, the former Fed vice chair, said the risk is that a shadow Fed chair provokes their future colleagues by speaking out before taking power. 'If he or she contradicts what Powell is saying, that will aggravate the FOMC, almost all of whose members will still be there when the new chair takes over,' Blinder said. 'It opens the door to an open or silent revolt against the chair, which is a rare thing in Fed history.' CNN's John Towfighi contributed to this report.


Axios
29 minutes ago
- Axios
Exclusive poll: Most voters back Iran strikes, but worry about attacks on U.S.
The U.S. attacks on Iran's nuclear facilities Saturday have left American voters with contradictory feelings, a new poll finds: A majority favored limited strikes, but nearly as many said they were worried about a widening war and Iran retaliating on U.S. soil. Meanwhile, most viewed the U.S. attacks as a success — and are likely to back similar military action as a result. Why it matters: The survey sheds light on Americans' nuanced views of war and rapidly evolving foreign policy. Republicans overwhelmingly approved of bombing Iran; sizable majorities of Democrats and independents did not. But once they were told the bombings only targeted Iran's uranium enrichment for its nuclear program, support increased in each group. The big picture:"When voters understand the strategic rationale behind the strikes, support increases," said pollster Ryan Tyson, head of the Tyson Group, which conducted the survey. It recently worked for Elon Musk's political committee when it supported President Trump's re-election. The broad support for military action that the survey found among Republicans and self-identified MAGA voters suggested that the divisions within Trump's base over Iran were more talk than reality. The poll also measured Trump's job performance, finding that 46% of Americans approve and 51% disapprove. Voters are deadlocked on his handling of foreign policy, but he's underwater by double digits when it comes to handling inflation. More concerns for Trump: There's persistent worry in the U.S. electorate about blowback from the bombings and the contagion of war. 75% of voters think that despite the Israel-Iran ceasefire, the conflict could escalate into a wider war. 46% think some sort of Iranian attack on U.S. soil is now likely. And 45% believe the strikes didn't make the U.S. safer, while just 36% said they did. The good news for Trump: By 50-33, voters would support airstrikes similar to those launched Saturday, a sign they see it as a success and a manageable risk. Two-thirds believe more U.S. attacks like last Saturday's are likely. 56% agree with the sentiment that military force is justified to stop a nuclear Iran. 55% believe that Iran's nuclear program was either "obliterated," to use Trump's words, or dealt a major setback. Just 25% thought it was barely affected or was unscathed. 62% said the strikes will have been worth it if Iran stops enriching uranium. The intrigue: The poll also reflected how Israel's war against Hamas in Gaza has been a drag on how U.S. voters view America's ally. By 2 percentage points, U.S. voters oppose the war in Gaza, the poll found. By 54-27%, they believe Israel has too much influence on American foreign policy. Voters are more inclined to arm Ukraine than Israel, the survey found. Ukraine's president, Volodymyr Zelensky, has solid favorability numbers as well, but Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's ratings are negative. Methodology: The Tyson Group's national survey of 1,027 U.S. voters was conducted online June 25-26. The survey has a margin of error of ±3.1 percentage points at the 95% confidence level. To analyze only the responses of those identifying as Republicans, an oversample was used to ensure the margin of error remained consistent. That did not affect the top-line results of the survey.