Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Leak On Obama's Aunt Violates ICE Guidelines

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
cal04 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-01-08 06:43 PM
Original message
Leak On Obama's Aunt Violates ICE Guidelines
http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/11/leak_on_obamas_aunt_violates_i.php

The leaking of information about the immigration status of Barack Obama's aunt appears to directly violate guidelines for confidentiality laid out in an Immigration and Customs Enforcement memo obtained by TPMmuckraker.

As we reported earlier, ICE has begun an internal probe into the leak to the Associated Press, which revealed early this morning that Obama's aunt "is in the United States illegally after an immigration judge rejected her request for asylum four years ago."

The memo, written in 2005 by Joseph Langlois, director of the Asylum Division in the Office of Refugee, Asylum, and International Operations, reads in part:

The federal regulations at 8 CFR 208.6 generally prohibit the disclosure to third parties of information contained in or pertaining to asylum applications, credible fear determinations, and reasonable fear determinations--including information contained in RAPS or APSS1--except under certain limited circumstances. These regulations safeguard information that, if disclosed publicly, could subject the claimant to retaliatory measures by government authorities or non-state actors in the event that the claimant is repatriated, or endanger the security of the claimant's family members who may still be residing in the country of origin.
...

According to established guidance, confidentiality is breached when information contained in or pertaining to an asylum application (including information contained in RAPS or APSS) is disclosed to a third party in violation of the regulations, and the unauthorized disclosure is of a nature that allows the third party to link the identity of the applicant to: (1) the fact that the applicant has applied for asylum; (2) specific facts or allegations pertaining to the individual asylum claim contained in an asylum application; or (3) facts or allegations that are sufficient to give rise to a reasonable inference that the applicant has applied for asylum.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
corkhead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-01-08 06:44 PM
Response to Original message
1. Hopefully we are seeing the end of IOKIYR
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
itsrobert Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-01-08 06:44 PM
Response to Original message
2. The only way this is a story is
if a United States Senator (Obama) pulled some strings to get a relative a green card. Apparently, he has not. No story.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rebel with a cause Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-01-08 06:54 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. Oh, but he is wanting immigration reform
Edited on Sat Nov-01-08 06:55 PM by rebel with a cause
and don't you think those idiots will try to say it is just so he can get his relatives a break. They will not take into consideration that he has very little connection to his relatives from Kenya. And their big question will be: what did he know and when did he know it? Again they are stupid and idiotic.

If I was running for office and my opponent knew all the secrets I know about other people, I wonder what I would be categorized as. After all, I use to be the confidant to many that I knew well, and for some that I barely knew. My brain got so tired that I finally just withdrew from everyone. I personally don't like secrets.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dennis4868 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-01-08 06:48 PM
Response to Original message
3. hmmmm.
Bush's administration leaking confidential information for political gain?? They would never do that, right? hahaha....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-01-08 06:54 PM
Response to Original message
5. They don't need no stinkin' rules.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 30th 2024, 02:48 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC