SIX MONTHS AFTER THE NEW ADMINISTRATION TOOK OFFICE, WHERE ARE ALL THOSE FOREIGN CORRUPT PRACTICES ACT INDICTMENTS ?

 

 Unofficial inquiries regarding the progress of major FCPA investigations during the Trump Administration were often met with promises that those indictments would come soon after a new Attorney General took office. It was said that any efforts to move forward against companies, many of whose leaders were active Trump financial contributors, would be interdicted at the highest level, by the successor administration.

Recent revelations, regarding such an action over at EDNY, on a pending investigation, would tend to support that proposition. In that case the senior official involved in nixing an indictment was reportedly promoted by then-AG Barr.

 It has now been six and one-half months since the new administration came into office, but we are still not seeing what should surely have been cases presented to a Grand Jury, and Indictments as a result, but this has not occurred. Given that the new AG instituted a policy to not discharge AUSAs who blindly followed questionable orders from Main Justice, originating from Trump political appointees, a number of those individual remain on the job. we are particularly interested in FCPA cases at SDNY that remain pending for no evidentiary reason.

While justice as DOJ is supposed to be politically blind, there are many conservatives among assistant US Attorneys, though they are required to disregard their personal politics on the job. While we are aware of specific cases, disclosing the identities of targets would alert their attorneys to seek out favorable settlements, and potentially avoid any prison time whatsoever, so we are not naming them at this time.

A  darker reason for slow-walking, or even freezing, any indictments of Trump allies could be that some actually believe that the former President could return to office after the next Presidential Election, and the prosecutors fear believe that they, like in the EDNY case, will be rewarded for their "loyalty." We sincerely hope that this is not true.

Perhaps the Attorney General might want to send this issue over to the Office of Public Integrity (OPI), to determine if our theory is correct, and if so, to what extent it exists.