Is the Government Hiding Chase’s Cooperation in the Scary Iran Plot?

As I noted in this post, earlier this month, the government unsealed the redacted first complaint in the Scary Iran Plot. I will do a post summarizing the differences between the original and amended complaint later (short version: in a number of ways seeing both complaints weakens their case slightly against Quds Force).

But in this post, I want to suggest–and this is speculation–that the secrecy about the complaint may serve, in part, to protect JP Morgan Chase.

The redactions in the original complaint are minimal, most of which hide the details by which Arbabsiar transferred money from what appears to be a European bank to the FBI account. These redactions are:

¶3a: An 8-character word modifying “country” describing the bank from which the first installment of money was sent. I believe the redacted word is “European.”

¶3b: An 8-character word modifying “country” describing the bank from which the first installment of money was sent. I believe the redacted word is “European.”

Footnote 5: A 14-character word modifying “country” that we know to be “Latin American” (a reference to the planned attacks in Argentina). A 14-character word modifying “country” that is probably “Middle-Eastern” (the reference to planned attacks on Israeli targets), followed by a longer redaction that may describe the location of the intended Israeli targets.

¶22c: A 5-character word modifying “bank” that–the amended complaint makes clear–is a US bank.

¶25: An 8-character word modifying “country” that is likely “European” and a 9-character word naming the bank in question.

¶27: An 8-character word naming a bank from which the second chunk of money was transferred. Since the Amended Complaint makes it clear the money came from two different foreign entities (and since the lengths of the redaction appear to be different), this must be a different bank.

In other words, the only things redacted from the original complaint are the other intended targets–which have already been made public–and the details surrounding the transfer of money from Arbabsiar (or his brother) to the FBI Account.

Now, generally, the redactions may just be an attempt to hide the fact that the FBI used SWIFT to track the money from Arbabsiar to the FBI or that one or more European partners helped them make build this case. But if the government’s allegations are correct and this plot was orchestrated by the Quds Force and Abdul Reza Shahlai specifically (both of whom were and are designated terrorists) then all of the banks involved in the transfer would presumably be party to the transfer of money that ultimately derived from sanctioned entities (though by laundering through Arbabsiar and his brother that may not have been apparent to them).

And I can’t help but note that one of the big international banks in Manhattan with a 5-character name is Chase. And I can’t help but note something I already pointed out: roughly two weeks after the transfers were completed but before Arbabsiar’s arrest, JP Morgan Chase agreed to pay $88.3 million to settle charges it had violated sanctions against Sudan, Cuba, Liberia and … Iran. Now, the sanction violations JPMC admitted to with respect to Iran were in 2009. It also admitted to failing to stop wire transfers from sanctioned entities in 2006-2008. But I do wonder whether the coincidence between these transfers–allegedly supporting the assassination of the Saudi Ambassador–and JPMC’s sanction suggest either that the government got Chase to cooperate in this investigation as part of their settlement, or that Treasury forced JPMC to settle based on their role in accepting wired money for such an alleged crime.

In any case, the big thing that the government seems most intent on hiding are which European and American banks are still accepting wire transfers that ultimately (allegedly) tie back to the Quds Force. Because as we know, the government’s job is to hide evidence of the banksters’ crimes, not prosecute them.

Tweet about this on Twitter15Share on Reddit0Share on Facebook18Google+0Email to someone

7 Responses to Is the Government Hiding Chase’s Cooperation in the Scary Iran Plot?

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7

Emptywheel Twitterverse
emptywheel @MarkSZaidEsq Some interesting people you might know actually did! @BradMossEsq
1mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @HanniFakhoury Wait...what?
16mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @joshgerstein What the heck kind of useful tweet is THAT? Telling ... what?
28mreplyretweetfavorite
JimWhiteGNV RT @teddysanfran: #JunkBonds4Joe Lieberman by Lieberman for Lieberman in the Lieberman Chair http://t.co/9DrGIOb1nh
56mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @MuskegonCritic But you were willing to send him all the carp he wanted to fertilize his fields?
2hreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @sarahjeong There's a special exception for you on the terrorist watchlist guidelines because of it too.
2hreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @HinaShamsi Also, generally, girls.
2hreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel Ut oh. Arms merchants selling to terrorists are also suspected terrorists. Long line of Americans and their friends on that puppy.
2hreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel If corporations are people can we put the whole damn thing on a No Fly list?
2hreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel Also, HSBC should be on this terrorist watchlist thingie. That one's a no-brainer. JP Morgan Chase too.
3hreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel RT @srubenfeld: Exclusive: SEC turns over anonymous whistleblower tip - on judge's order - to hedge fund where tip alleged wrongdoing http:…
3hreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel Certainly terrorist activities 20 years ago still count, per exmple. How about 30 years ago?
3hreplyretweetfavorite
November 2011
S M T W T F S
« Oct   Dec »
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
27282930