Defense News: WEST 2023 Media Availability

Source: United States Navy

CMDR. COURTNEY HILLSON: Alright, we are going to be limited to about 10 minutes. So we’ll get to as many questions as we possibly can. All right, who wants to start? Go ahead, please.

USNI (Mongilio): Hi, Heather Mongilio with USNI News.

CNO ADM. GILDAY: Hi, Heather.

MONGILIO: So I just saw that the Navy put out its operational standard guidance for COVID-19.

ADM. GILDAY: Yes.

MONGILIO: And so now all Sailors that don’t have the vaccine are considered operational and deployable. Any comments on that? And also, any thoughts on whether the Navy’s going to be pursuing reinstation for Sailors?

GILDAY: So we’re following OSD’s guidance, which is obviously consistent with the law in the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). So, I would tell you that we will continue to monitor very closely our fleet concentration areas with respect to COVID levels, because we want to be – particularly if there’s a new strain of COVID – we want to make sure that we have enough of the supplies on board – like masks and those kinds of things – that if we have to – if we have to revert back to the way we’re doing things before the vaccine, that we’re able to do that fairly quickly.

MONGILIO: And just quickly as a follow up – the SECNAV, before the NDAA, had said that there’s going be two classes of Sailors, those who are vaccinated and those who are not vaccinated. Do you think this guidance kind of gets against that?

GILDAY: It’s consistent with the law. So we are not creating a – in my view – creating a distinction between both of those.

USNI: Thank you.

GILDAY: You bet.

HILLSON: Chris.

CHRIS CAVAS: Hi, Sir. Can you talk a bit about some Chinese activities lately in the western Pacific? We know there’s a lot of generic stuff out there. They’re being more aggressive. They’ve been making wider forays out to Guam and past – can you talk about characterize what you’ve been seeing in the last month or three from the Chinese?

GILDAY: I think you’ve seen increasingly more aggressive behavior after then-Speaker Pelosi’s visit.

So the missile shots, I think, were concerning –particularly for partners, Allies like the Philippines, where some of those missiles landed either very close to or within their exclusive economic zones (EEZ), as an example. There was a lazing incident just this past week, against the Philippines as well. And so those kinds of activities, those kinds of aggressive activities, by the Chinese, we think, highlights the points that we’ve been trying to make all along with respect to their aggressive behavior in the South China Sea, against their neighbors.

CAVAS: Have there been any more incidents coming out? Going around Guam? That sort of thing? What are you seeing there?

GILDAY: Haven’t seen that – haven’t seen that lately. Have seen them in a few exercises where they, where they’ve headed east, but haven’t seen any massing of forces in that in that area specifically.

HILLSON: Sam.

GILDAY: Hi, Sam. Good to see you.

LaGrone: One of the big themes that kind of keeps coming up at this conference is baking in the requirements correctly, right? So that’s been, you know, you’ve got three big major acquisition programs kind of coming at you with SSN(X), DDG(X), and NGAD.

Looking at those, and thinking about how to do that, without really re-litigating Zumwalt or littoral combat ship (LCS), or any of those other things. Where are you all at in terms of trying to figure out how to build in the sustainment costs versus the actual leading edge capability? You could have, you know, 5% more, you know, radar output or engineer output for the interface, but it’s going cost that much more down the road. And, you know, NAVAIR made that point, ‘80% of my expenditure is going into maintaining these kind of like exquisite systems.’

So what are you all thinking about? Especially DDG(X)? Is about [inaudible] engineering part of it?

GILDAY: So that’s why we’re bringing in a diverse group of people. We’re bringing in people from Bath, we’re bringing in people from HII Ingalls, to get better insights on exactly – besides getting the best design that we can to the capabilities that we need – to take a look at end-to-end sustainment issues that we might face.

So, Sam, it’s part of the it’s part of the upfront design. If I could get you together with Adm. Galinis (NAVSEA), I could probably give you more fidelity to that, in terms of how we’re doing it.

HILLSON: Please.

Abbott: Richard Abbott, Defense Daily. I saw today that EPF-13 was delivered to the Navy. How important do you think that ship is as you work on the manned unmanned teaming they were talking about in your speech, autonomous capabilities.

GILDAY: Yeah, I think one step at a time. And so, in terms of that ship, it has the capability. But I would integrate it – we will integrate it – to fleet in a very deliberate manner. And so, you know, we won’t have a deployment – an unmanned deployment right off the bat. I think what you’re going to see in unmanned surface is a phasing – we’ll have minimally manned, and then unmanned. We want to make sure we get it right.

And, you know, one ship does not necessarily solve the command and control problems, the engineering reliability problems. And so we’re going to want to make sure that we have it right before we move too fast – [both] operationally, and in terms of building more of them.

HILLSON: Justin.

KATZ: Sir, Justin Katz with Breaking Defense. On Ukraine – in the past year, the focus has understandably been on the land war. It’s been tanks. It’s been on jets. It’s been on missiles. There’s been some naval elements, but they’re not as clearly in the headlines, perhaps. I was wondering, kind of based on what you’ve seen this past year, what do you think the place of naval warfare is in the fight in Ukraine over the next year? You know, I asked a similar question to ONI yesterday and the point that I took away from him was, he said, Ukrainians have achieved that anti-axis area denial, and that has – that is – going to marginalize how much naval warfare plays a part. I wanted to get your thoughts on that question.

GILDAY: So you’ve seen the Russian effectiveness from the maritime has been declining, for the very reason that, that the Ukrainians have become better at targeting and using the weapons that that we’ve provided them. So I think in terms of anti-axis, you hit it right. They’ve given the Russians – they’ve limited the Russians maneuverability to put themselves in a better position to shoot. Now, they still have some of the LACMs (land-attack cruise missiles) that they’re still firing, but they’ve been less of a threat directly to the coastline of, of Ukraine.

KATZ: And I’m sorry, LACMs? I didn’t catch the abbreviation.

GILDAY: Land attack cruise missile.

KATZ: Thank you.

HILLSON: Yes.

ZIEZULEWICZ: Hi, Geoff Ziezulewicz, Navy Times. The Navy’s HR transformation effort is resulting in disruptions to pay, benefits, retirement paperwork for thousands of Sailors in recent years. You know, are you tracking this? Well, I’m sure you’re aware of it, obviously – I didn’t mean to imply that. But, you know, they’re, you know, by the admission of some other flags has not gone as planned. Are you pretty confident in the path that you know, CNP Cheeseman now has the effort on, and did you want to, you know, offer any comment, into what is, admittedly, a very difficult job in the best of scenarios.

GILDAY: I will. So on both pay and DD 214s, those have both been a “Get Real, Get Better” sprint for us under Adm. Cheeseman. And so in terms of – if I could just give you a discrete numbers – in terms of DD 214s, we have zero Sailors leaving the Navy now without their DD 214. That’s not good enough. They need to have their DD 214s 60 days before they get out, at a minimum.

So that’s the new aim point for us. And we’re trying to find out what the constraints are to being able to have that in their hands at the 60-day point. But we’ve driven down the, you know, we’ve driven down the number to zero in terms of those that have separated without, without a 214.

In terms of in terms of travel claims – so our average resolution of a travel claim – of a fully completed travel claim – is now 14 days, the DoD requirement is 30. But that’s not good enough, because it takes 60 days to get to the point where you have that finalized travel claim to submit – and then it’s processed within two weeks. So again, more work to be done, and finding out what that lag is and getting after it. But I will tell you, Geoff, we are sighted on that and we so we’re seeing improvement, we’re not satisfied yet, and we owe Sailors better.

HILLSON: Andrew.

DYER: Hi, Andrew Dyer KPBS News. I’ve talked to Sailors who say that they’ve been kicked out of the Navy after having mental health problems. What, if anything, is the Navy doing to address mental health of Sailors? And do you think that the fear of career repercussions prevents Sailors from seeking help? And what is being done to address that?

GILDAY: I’ll give you a few examples of things that we’re doing. Every deploying destroyer has a chaplain that now deploys with it. Every strike group and every amphibious ready group (ARG) that deploys has a resiliency team. So chaplains, behavioral health technicians, psychologist, wellness experts — so in the area of physical fitness and diet and so we’re trying to take a more holistic approach, and to have those people available for Sailors to connect. In terms of if we would go to, let’s say, Groton, Connecticut, or if we go to down to Norfolk, Virginia, you’ll see waterfront wellness centers that have psychologists, social workers, behavioral health technicians, for Sailors to, for Sailors to be able to use.

The challenge is still breaking down the stigma to have people have people reach out and use those resources. But that said, there are a lot of other resources available in terms of medical health, telephonic medical help, as an example, if they want to be more anonymous and talk to talk to a counselor, we are trying to focus on connectedness of senior leaders to their Sailors so that we’re looking them in the eye and we get a better sense of perhaps when they’re having a bad day, and we can help them out.

Not every problem is, not every mental health problem should be characterized as mental health disease, or somebody needs to be hospitalized, in many cases that somebody’s having a bad day, and they just needed, they just need to talk to somebody.

On the USS George Washington, we have this resiliency course that we began to offer kind of mid-level supervisors in the fleet. And we tried to do that at a at a much we try to scale it up on board, GW as a pilot program, just to see if we could improve, you know, the ability to stay connected to sales. And so I would tell you, where we’re trying to use best practices, wherever weekend, wherever we can find them, whether it’s from another service, whether it’s from mental health professionals out and out in the commercial world.

DYER: And this message is getting out to the CO level who are often that point of contact with Sailors who are NJPed or when they are discharged?

GILDAY: I think so I can’t think of — perhaps there’s a medical separation where somebody goes, you know, through a process, but we’re not trying to in any way avoid helping people. If that’s you know, kind of the insinuation. We want to help people — we don’t want to, you know, ignore problems.

HILLSON: And that’s all the time we have.

GILDAY: Thank you everyone.

New York Pharmacist Pleads Guilty to Narcotics and Tax Offenses

Source: United States Department of Justice News

A New York pharmacist pleaded guilty today to conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute oxycodone, distribution and possession of oxycodone and filing false business and personal income tax returns.

According to court documents and statements made in court, Daniel E. Russo owned and operated Russo’s Pharmacy, Inc., a drug store located in Far Rockaway, Queens. From 2011 through 2014, Russo conspired with others to illegally distribute oxycodone, a controlled substance. For the years 2013 through 2016, Russo filed false tax returns with the IRS on behalf of Russo’s Pharmacy that underreported the gross receipts and ordinary business income of the pharmacy. Russo also filed false personal tax returns for the years 2012 through 2016 that underreported the income he received from Russo’s Pharmacy. In total, Russo caused a tax loss of more than $415,000.

“At the same time Daniel Russo was illegally peddling oxycodone out of his pharmacy, he was pocketing – and not paying taxes on – income from those sales and others in his business,” said Acting Deputy Assistant Attorney General Stuart M. Goldberg of the Justice Department’s Tax Division. “Everyone is required to pay their fair share of taxes, whether they make their money legitimately or through criminal activity.”

“All too often the opioid epidemic has shown that health care professionals wearing white coats are drug dealers,” said U.S. Attorney Breon Peace from the Eastern District of New York. “Russo abused his pharmacy license and the trust placed in him by the community to illegally distribute enormous amounts of oxycodone, spreading misery in the community and fueling addiction, all to enrich himself. My Office will continue working with federal and local law enforcement partners to investigate and prosecute medical professionals who illegally deal dangerous drugs with the same vigor as those who distribute drugs on the street.”

Russo faces a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison for each of the conspiracy and possession with intent to distribute counts, and three years in prison for each count of filing a false tax return. The defendant also faces a period of supervised release, restitution and monetary penalties, as well as forfeiture. U.S. District Court Judge Dora L. Irizarry will determine any sentence after considering the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors.

Special agents of the Drug Enforcement Administration, Department of Health and Human Services, and IRS-Criminal Investigation investigated the case.

Trial Attorney Michael C. Vasiliadis of the Justice Department’s Tax Division and Assistant U.S. Attorneys Francisco Navarro, Nomi D. Berenson and Andrew D. Wang prosecuted the case.

Senior Oil and Gas Trader and Brazil-Based Intermediary Charged in Bribery and Money Laundering Scheme

Source: United States Department of Justice Criminal Division

An indictment was unsealed today in the District of Connecticut charging a Connecticut man and a foreign national with conspiracy, multiple counts of violating the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA), and money laundering in connection with an alleged scheme to pay bribes to Brazilian officials to win contracts with Brazil’s state-owned and state-controlled energy company, Petróleo Brasileiro S.A. – Petrobras (Petrobras).  

According to court documents, Glenn Oztemel, 64, of Westport, worked as a senior oil and gas trader at two Connecticut-based trading companies (Trading Company #1 and Trading Company #2). Eduardo Innecco, 73, a dual Brazilian and Italian citizen, worked as an oil and gas broker and agent for Trading Company #1 and Trading Company #2 in Brazil. Between approximately mid-2010 and continuing into 2018, Oztemel, Innecco, and others allegedly paid bribes to Petrobras officials for their assistance in helping Trading Company #1 and Trading Company #2 obtain and retain business with Petrobras, including by providing Oztemel, Innecco, and others with confidential information regarding Petrobras’ fuel oil business. As alleged, Oztemel and his co-conspirators caused Trading Company #1 and Trading Company #2 to make corrupt payments – disguised as purported consulting fees and commissions – to Innecco, knowing that Innecco would pay a portion of those funds to Brazilian officials as bribes. To conceal the scheme, Oztemel, Innecco, and their co-conspirators allegedly used coded language to refer to the bribes and communicated using personal email accounts, fictitious names, and encrypted messaging applications. 

Oztemel and Innecco are each charged with conspiracy to violate the FCPA, conspiracy to commit money laundering, three counts of violating the FCPA, and two counts of money laundering. They face up to five years in prison for each of the bribery conspiracy and bribery charges, and up to 20 years in prison for each of the money laundering conspiracy and money laundering charges.

Assistant Attorney General Kenneth A. Polite, Jr. of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division, U.S. Attorney Vanessa R. Avery for the District of Connecticut, Assistant Director Luis Quesada of the FBI’s Criminal Investigative Division, and Assistant Director in Charge Donald Alway of the FBI Los Angeles Field Office made the announcement.

The FBI is investigating the case.

Trial Attorney Clayton P. Solomon and Assistant Chiefs Derek J. Ettinger and Jonathan P. Robell of the Criminal Division’s Fraud Section and Assistant U.S. Attorney Michael McGarry for the District of Connecticut are prosecuting the case.

The Fraud Section is responsible for investigating and prosecuting FCPA matters. Additional information about the Justice Department’s FCPA enforcement efforts can be found at www.justice.gov/criminal/fraud/fcpa.

An indictment is merely an allegation. All defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.

United States Files Complaint Against Illegal Robocall Telemarketers and Telecommunications Service Providers

Source: United States Department of Justice News

The Justice Department, together with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), today announced a civil enforcement action against several corporate and individual defendants for alleged violations of the FTC Act and the Telemarketing Sales Rule (TSR) in connection with telemarketing campaigns that have illegally bombarded American consumers with millions of robocalls.

According to a complaint filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California, defendant telecommunications service companies Stratics Networks, Inc. and Netlatitude Inc., along with defendant Kurt Hannigan, Netlatitude’s  president, violated the TSR by providing substantial assistance and support in the form of technological services to telemarketers that unlawfully called consumers with robocalls delivering prerecorded marketing messages, called numbers listed on the National Do Not Call Registry, and failed to truthfully identify the seller of the goods and services being marketed. These alleged robocalls include numerous “ringless voicemails” delivered to consumers without making their phones ring.

The complaint also brings claims against several additional defendants that allegedly used Stratics Networks, Inc.’s ringless voicemail platform to illegally telemarket credit-card debt relief services. According to the complaint, defendants Tek Ventures, LLC (also doing business as Provident Solutions), Atlas Marketing Partners, Inc., Atlas Investment Ventures, LLC, Eric Petersen and Todd DiRoberto (who are co-owners of those three companies), Kasm, and Kenan Azzeh (owner and director of Kasm) violated the FTC Act by misrepresenting the terms and outcomes of their debt relief services. These defendants also violated the TSR by making those misrepresentations, by failing to clearly and truthfully identify the seller of their services, and by calling consumers with prerecorded messages without first obtaining their consent. The complaint also alleges that defendants Tek Ventures, LLC, Atlas Marketing Partners, Inc., Atlas Investment Ventures, LLC, Eric Petersen, Todd DiRoberto, and two additional defendants – Ace Business Solutions LLC and its owner and director Sandra Barnes – violated the TSR by requesting and receiving payments from their debt relief customers before renegotiating or otherwise altering the terms of those customers’ debts.

The complaint seeks a permanent injunction to prohibit the defendants from future violations, as well as monetary civil penalties and relief to redress injury caused to consumers. 

Two defendants in this action, Kasm and its owner and director Kenan Azzeh, have agreed to entry of a court order that resolves the claims against them. The stipulated order, if entered by the court, would prohibit these defendants from further violations and impose a monetary judgment of $3,380,000, suspended to $7,500 due to their limited ability to pay.

“The Department of Justice is committed to stopping individuals and companies from making illegal robocalls and peddling predatory debt relief services,” said Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Brian M. Boynton, head of the Justice Department’s Civil Division. “We will continue to work with the FTC to enforce the FTC Act and the Telemarketing Sales Rule against those who use misleading sales tactics to prey on consumers.”

“This case targets the ecosystem of companies who perpetrate illegal telemarketing to cheat American consumers who are struggling financially,” said Director Samuel Levine of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection. “The FTC will continue to take aggressive action to protect consumers from the scourge of illegal robocalls.”

Senior Trial Attorney Daniel K. Crane-Hirsch and Trial Attorneys Matthew A. Robinson and Zachary A. Dietert of the Civil Division’s Consumer Protection Branch, in conjunction with staff at the FTC’s Division of Marketing Practices, are prosecuting the case. 

For more information about the Consumer Protection Branch and its enforcement efforts, visit its website at https://www.justice.gov/civil/consumer-protection-branch. For more information about the FTC, visit its website at https://www.FTC.gov.

A complaint is merely an allegation. All defendants are presumed innocent unless proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.  

Political Consultant Sentenced for Scheme Involving Illegal Foreign Campaign Contribution to 2016 Presidential Campaign

Source: United States Department of Justice News

A Texas man was sentenced today to 18 months in prison for his role in funneling illegal foreign campaign contributions from a Russian national to a 2016 presidential campaign. 

According to court documents, Jessie R. Benton, 45, of The Woodlands, schemed with another political advisor to funnel political contributions to a 2016 presidential campaign from a Russian national seeking to meet and take a picture with the presidential candidate. Benton arranged for the Russian national – whose nationality Benton concealed from the campaign and the candidate – to attend a campaign fundraising event and to take a picture with the candidate.

As such attendance and engagement required a contribution, Benton caused the Russian national to wire $100,000 to Benton’s political consulting firm to make an illegal foreign contribution to the campaign. To disguise the scheme, Benton created a fake invoice, which falsely identified the funds as payment for consulting services. Benton acted as a straw donor and contributed $25,000 of the Russian national’s money to the campaign, falsely identified himself as the contributor, and pocketed the remaining $75,000. Because Benton falsely claimed to have given the contribution himself, the relevant campaign entities unwittingly filed reports with the Federal Election Commission (FEC) that inaccurately reported Benton – instead of the Russian national – as the source of the funds.

In November 2022, Benton was convicted at trial of conspiring to solicit and cause an illegal campaign contribution by a foreign national, effecting a conduit contribution, and causing false records to be filed with the FEC.

Assistant Attorney General Kenneth A. Polite, Jr. of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division, U.S. Attorney Randy Grossman for the Southern District of California, U.S. Attorney Matthew M. Graves for the District of Columbia, Assistant Director Luis Quesada of the FBI’s Criminal Investigative Division, and Special Agent in Charge Stacey Moy of the FBI San Diego Field Office made the announcement.

The FBI San Diego Field Office investigated the case.

Trial Attorneys Rebecca G. Ross and Michelle K. Parikh of the Criminal Division’s Public Integrity Section and Assistant U.S. Attorney Michelle L. Wasserman for the Southern District of California, while serving in her capacity as a Special Assistant U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, prosecuted the case.