UPDATE: AP has this:
A statement given to the AP by Obama's campaign said, "Senator Obama has no knowledge of her status but obviously believes that any and all appropriate laws be followed."What?
"any and all appropriate laws be followed"
Here's a new quote to exploit, kids. Obama's view of the law is that you only need to follow the "appropriate laws." [AND: Click the "kids" link and consider what I said here before freaking out.)
Posts
67 comments:
I think that picking on Senator Obama's illegal aunt is useless. Looking into how his poor illegal aunt made campaign donations is totally cool though. We cannot pick our relations, but we should not put illegal campaign contributions in their name.
Trey
So information about a deportation case just happens to come out a couple of days before the election. What curious timing.
So, no one is authorized to discuss this case, yet details are leaked to the press. . .And this differs from somebody illegally rooting through Joe the Plumber's records how?
Republican dirty tricks again!*
* Please disregard the trash diving about Palin, and the illegal searches of private citizen Joe the Plumber, and the assaults on McCain's character.
If McCain wins, we will have to ask ourselves again how Americans could fall for Republican dirty tricks, and not Democratic dirty tricks. Furthermore, how can Americans be so racist? Furthermore, it's Diebold rigging the election again.**
** Please take whichever of these criticisms works best at the time, and disregard the fact that they are wholly at odds with one another.
And she'll be getting in on National Health Care if Obama and his gang get into power.
As will 15+ million other illegal aliens and the tens of millions more in the years to come once they learn about all of the socialist-middle class-productive people-tax payer funded programs the Democrats want to create.
She's here illegally, she's getting public housing and she has illegally contributed to Obama's campaign.
So, no one is authorized to discuss this case, yet details are leaked to the press. . .And this differs from somebody illegally rooting through Joe the Plumber's records how?
Is Joe the Plumber an uncle of John McCain?
That's easy. She lives in Boston. Laws don't apply there.
Freder Frederson said...
So, no one is authorized to discuss this case, yet details are leaked to the press. . .And this differs from somebody illegally rooting through Joe the Plumber's records how?
9:59 AM
Well, it differs in that you never objected to the latter. And in other respects, such as the implications of guilty knowledge on Obama's part. And in other ways. And of course Joe is one of many-many, whereas O being ratted on is a real man-bites-dog story.
BTW, did I ever tell you what a little rat-clawed fuck, to paraphrase Pvt. Mellish, Freder was in Metropolis?
From TPM: "The information they made available is known to officials in the federal government, but the AP could not establish whether anyone at a political level in the Bush administration or in the McCain campaign had been involved in its release."
So, I guess we should assume Bush admin or McCain campaign had something to do with it. You know, since there is no evidence and all...
Well, it differs in that you never objected to the latter. And in other respects, such as the implications of guilty knowledge on Obama's part. And in other ways. And of course Joe is one of many-many, whereas O being ratted on is a real man-bites-dog story.
Who says I didn't object to the latter? In fact I object to both.
Leave Obama's auntie alone. Just like he does.
If she lived in Wasilla we'd have learned about her far sooner!
"Who says I didn't object to the latter? In fact I object to both."
And the record reflects this how? Please to cite yourself on this blog objecting to the JTP rectal probe. To Palin's free and ongoing OBGYN exams. Hell, did you object to the spreading of that McCain-affair story?
I would credit you if I saw the ev. Walking the corridors of my memory with a hand to my ear, I get nothing but crickets and the echoes of my own footsteps.
-------------
Now after you've dealt with that, and I don't want to sidetrack you from providing info which would elevate you in my opinion, let's get past Tu quoque/the-biter-bit.
This scoop was undoable by the US press (hmm, why would a criminal relative be news) and we owe the Brits for bringing it out. I think the media generally operates in a sucky manner but we seem to have to accept that - in the US we have no D notice-to-editors.
That aside, can you imagine that a GOP operative fed this to the Brits? SRSLY?!?1?
And of course the icing on the cake is government malfeasance in the case of Joe's records. We object t that too, right?
Come now, Ann, you're just trolling. I'm sure when he says "appropriate" he means "relevant."
Or no? Wouldn't want to miss a clear shot. Since he is such a sooper-genius, I guess his word choices shouldn't be blown off so readily?
The funny thing is you pretending to care, Ann. At least in my attack on your virtue I don't descend to such hypocrisy. In Neal Stephenson's deathless prose regarding Eliza and William of Orange, my interest in you may focus on what lies at both ends of your spinal column; but even if I pull your hair, I won't make you either say or think that 2+2=5.
Boob bait for suckers. You could provide much better boobs for bait if you chose.
And the record reflects this how?
Actually, I think you will find very little comment by me either way. My forte is pointing out the hypocrisy of Ms. Althouse and her commentors. When she has one post condemning unnamed "Obama supporters" for probing JTP, but then doesn't seem to think there is a similar problem when somebody (maybe even a "McCain supporter") did the very same thing with Obama's aunt, then I will point it out.
The truly interesting thing is that she went to his Senate swearing-in ceremony. At one point not long ago, she was someone important to him, someone with whom he shared a big, important moment.
For the Presidential election, with all the talk about family and about his goat herding father from Kenya, she never took the stage. Never made an appearance, and never got a mention.
What does that mean?
Do we know that there was necessarily a probe into records that are not legally available to the press? An immigration judge denied her request for asylum. Isn't that a matter of public record?
Obama seems to be bad luck for relatives.
If it were anyone other than the immaculate Obama, I'd assume that by "appropriate" he meant "applicable".
My favorite was the quote from the Boston Mayor about how illegal aliens with deportation orders could be housed by the city and have city jobs:
Boston Mayor Thomas Menino said Saturday that he had no idea how Onyango might have qualified for public housing with a standing deportation order. He said he's not involved in the operations of the agency, even though he appoints the head, because it runs mainly on federal and state dollars.
Course if you go to the Mayor's web site or the BTA you discover that the BTA is a city department and when the Mayor was happy with the BTA, he doesn't mind having a "Message from the Mayor" featured on the BTA front page, but when there's a problem, he can't spell BTA and blames it on Bush :)
as for the basic Auntie story, that was Times of London. No wonder the NYC stock is in the tank. They (their Boston paper) can get scooped by the Brits on home turf.
I think the key is to see which party preference she has given on her voter registration.
On the other hand, "appropriate" laws, "relevant" laws. Those are just filler adjectives, given with little thought. I wouldn't make much of it.
Do we know that there was necessarily a probe into records that are not legally available to the press? An immigration judge denied her request for asylum. Isn't that a matter of public record?
From the facts as presented in the article--yes we do. The information on her current status should not have been released
Freder Frederson said...
So, no one is authorized to discuss this case, yet details are leaked to the press. . .And this differs from somebody illegally rooting through Joe the Plumber's records how?
Freder makes it almost too easy.
The case of the Queen Bee ordering an employee to get all she could find on Joe the Plumber appears to have violated the State of Ohio's privacy laws and internal regs on keeping confidentiality of citizen records. The woman ordered to do the search knew of others fired for privacy act violations, fired another herself. On October 24th, when she found out who Joe the Plumber was and that the reason she was given to get his files to the Queen Bee did not match up, she contacted the Ohio Inspector General to CYA.
In Seijawanii Obamapongo or whatever her name is case, it is also about lawbreaking. Someone found out the "Auntie" was in a Boston neighborhood. A reporter goes out for a public interest story - finds she won't talk to the press, and is sponging welfare and living in public housing. A check of public records (not the legally protected kind accessed with the Plumber) - reveals she was in the country illegally, violated a deportation order 4 years ago, and somehow is living on the taxpayer dole. Which makes for an interesting story and an entirely above-board job by the reporter, from a liberal rag...
No Inspector General is investigating him.
Another sign of how inept the McCain camp is, though. They didn't know about many of the shady characters Obama is involved with, didn't use Jeremiah Wright after he was offered on a silver platter, and only went after Ayers after many months had passed and to a big "so what?" after Wall Street imploded and 180 million Americans saw their retirement savings ravaged...
My forte is pointing out the hypocrisy of Ms. Althouse and her commentors.
Saying that assumes you have the brains and analytical ability to have such a "forte" of pointing out hypocrisy. Unfortunately for you, you don't.
Maybe it's time to shoot for another "forte" Freder. You already washed out on the terrorist civil liberties front, and being an "expert" on thermodynamics..It appears you have a similar lack of ability on the "hypocrisy detection" front.
Love the Drudge light!
"Obama seems to be bad luck for relatives."
Indeed. And to think that soon he'll be Big Brother. Then we'll all be his relative. But one way or another, we will all love him.
"little thought"
I would be content to agree, John, but as we all recall, with the Clintons there are no accidents, no accidental words. It seems fair to wonder if the same holds for Obama. At least let's give him to wish he'd curbed his unruly tongue!
But you define the choice in the classic manner: stupid or evil? Yes, for the sake of this exercise let's confine ourselves to choosing only one ;>.
One law it was apparently not "appropriate" to follow was campaign finance law.
Unless he refunded her donation.
nichevo - I fall on the stupid end of that scale. Oh, I said that with little thought.
I meant that Obama, possibly responding to a question without benefit of teleprompter, added a filler. Just saying "all laws" is so ... uncomfortably naked.
What a sad story all around. And WTF?? A creepy statement by Obama's campaign. But nothing to see here...no hint of something other than The One who heals all.
Feeling badly for the aunt, though. I hope the media gives her some peace.
First off, I doubt he meant it the way it is being portrayed here. More likely the word "appropriate" is being used interchangeably with the word "applicable".
But then, maybe not. Perhaps he is just following in the footsteps of Bill Clinton.
That would be a big step forward from the steps of Ayers or Wright.
Aw c'mon....following only appropriate laws is "pragmatic". You love Obama's pragmatism!
I took "appropriate" to mean "relevant" but the sentence still doesn't make any sense as written; is it saying Obama believes that any and all appropriate laws should be followed, or that he believes that any and all appropriate laws are being followed?
I think Obama meant to take back his statement that Americans are selfish. Since it seems we are paying to house an illegal immigrant. Heh.
Maybe it's time to shoot for another "forte" Freder. You already washed out on the terrorist civil liberties front, and being an "expert" on thermodynamics..It appears you have a similar lack of ability on the "hypocrisy detection" front.
You obviously didn't read the article as it clearly stated that the government released sealed information.
Stick to explaining how the Jews invented communism, Nazism, the NAACP, the ACLU and every other evil in the world--including the interstate highway system. That is your forte.
Seems strange that Obama couldn't spread some of his wealth around to his illegal alien auntie. Maybe the way he neglected his kin is a harbinger of the sort of care the US populace can expect under an Obama administration.
Just another distraction...
I wonder if Obama's aunt is registered to vote here?
In my experience of public housing, some housing projects are more desirable than others. The desirable projects are peopled not with persons of clout but with persons related to people of clout. There were comments a few posts ago about how Obama was neglecting his family. Perhaps this is not the case. Maybe he pulled a few strings to get her in public housing and on welfare. Don't expect any reporter to break his neck trying to ferret out this story, but it is a definite possibility....This will not cost him any votes in NYC. Most of the people I know here have relatives that they wish to bring over. If you speak out against illegal immigration, it costs more votes than it gains. I suppose there's a kind of thermostatic balance. Eventually conditions in this country will become as bad as those in Mexico, and illegal immigration will cease to be a problem.
Are they using "appropriate" synonymously with "pertinent?"
Let us examine the nuance and subtlety of Obama's thinking here. Appropriate is an elitist word. Those who believe themselves superior in judgement use it on those they believe to have bad judgement. The standards are not universal. "Applicable" has mutally agreed upon protocols. This says to me that Obama will only enforce the laws he finds appropriate. I offer up campaign finance laws as an example of his discriminating judgement to date.
Yeah, the parsing of "appropriate" seems a bit of a stretch to me. I'm gonna give them the benefit of the doubt on that one.
But frankly I don't believe that the campaign was unaware of her residency status. I think that kind of thing would have been vetted by the campaign itself or by the Secret Service. Obama may genuinely not have known but I think someone in the campaign did.
No one's "picking on" his aunt, except Obama himself.
By his own definition, he's not being "humane" but instead is throwing her under the bus and daring the Bush admin to deport her.
They don't call him The One for nothing.
For those accusing the GOP of dirty tricks, my understanding is this story was first reported by the Times online (UK).
mcg - absolutely. She told the reporter she "couldn't" say anything until after the 4th. There are a large number of people who will be released from their vows of silence this week, and there is going to be some interesting reading.
For those accusing the GOP of dirty tricks, my understanding is this story was first reported by the Times online (UK).
Yes, because it is unheard of for people to plant stories to the foreign press, so as to make the story harder to trace back to them. That's never happened. Plus, the UK press is never paid attention to in the US, which also makes it unlikely that anyone would plant a story there for consumption here. Also, as pointed out in the article I linked above, the paper in question is a Murdoch paper, which also makes the possibility of dirty tricks unlikely.
Sorry - the fact that the story came from the Times of London isn't evidence of a lack of connection to Obama's political opponents. However, as Ann rightly points out, this may have been of public record, with regard to the immigration case.
That having been said, the person who put two and two together and noticed the case and its familial links to Obama may be someone with the McCain camp. Good opposition research often involves going through the public record and noticing linkages and connections. That's what makes it so much fun.
Freder asked: "And this differs from somebody illegally rooting through Joe the Plumber's records how?"
It differs not at all. It is reprehensible.
So you and I are similar people in that we hate and eschew unfairness. I await your denouncing the focus on Governor Palin's child.
Trey
Freder, your post condemning the crypto-Nazi police state tactics used against Joe the Plumber got deleted. Please repost it, my brother in fighting state oppression.
I will check back to revel in your patriotism and nonpartisanship!
Trey
Please leave the poor dear lady alone, she's suffered enough plus she no longer has any money to live on after giving it all to her step-nephew!
After all, we're a nation that obeys appropriate laws!
So this was their big, final-weekend "October Surprise". Psh!
The fact that the Clinton's could find no real dirt on Obama during the primaries, and the GOP couldn't find any real dirt on him now, shows just how clean Obama is!
And people have been waiting hours in line in some places to vote for him early. That seems a bit strange to me, as I've never had to wait more than a few minutes on an election day (if I had to wait long to vote, I wouldn't vote at all). But I guess people really, really wanna vote Obama! Gonna be a landslide.
Yes, reporting on the facts of an Obama relative = dirty trick.
The logic is impecable.
The fact that the Clinton's could find no real dirt on Obama during the primaries, and the GOP couldn't find any real dirt on him now, shows just how clean Obama is!
Wow. That's ... something.
I don't understand: Althouse has already stated that she thinks it would be horrible to have laws that are enforced all the time.
I'd link to the post where I express my horror at that notion, but I can't find it.
"Who says I didn't object to the latter? In fact I object to both."
I'm not at all sure I can believe you.
"From the facts as presented in the article--yes we do. The information on her current status should not have been released."
Look at the article again. Where do you see that "information on her current status" was somehow "released." I see news of a decision by an immigration judge and an inference that she is therefore in the country illegally.
"I don't understand: Althouse has already stated that she thinks it would be horrible to have laws that are enforced all the time."
Of course, there is discretion in enforcing the law. Do you want a ticket to arrive in your mailbox every time you exceed the speed limit?
However, the question here is whether we should always follow the law, not whether the govt should always enforce it to the hilt.
Actually, there are some evil laws that one ought to decline to follow, but if I were running for President, I would not imply that I thought that any such laws existed in the United States.
Do non-citizens have the same rights as citizens?
Does JTP have the same rights as Obama's aunt or does he have more rights?
Sarah Palin's pussy is still hiding under LoafingOaf's bed, scaring him.
I know the poor woman is an illegal, but I still feel sorry for her, nonetheless.
For some reason, it was the UK press that tracked her down. I don't have references handy, but the UK press has been searching for Obama's relatives all over the world in the last few months.
After she was found living in Boston public housing, the AP story implies that "they" (AP? who?) confirmed from federal law enforcement that her asylum petition was rejected, and she is now living illegally in the US.
I have looked but I cannot find if asylum hearings are public record. Many immigration records are actually considered personal and can be released only with the content of the person involved. I am not sure if asylum falls into this category.
To answer Ann's question about how the aunt "might have qualified for public housing with a standing deportation order." - you give the different layers of our government way too much credit for efficient communication. I doubt that the feds share this routinely with non-law enforcement agencies. Moreover, a person with a deportation order likely still has the ability to challenge the order in court, so you shouldn't just kick them out while they are doing so.
There may well be dirty tricks involved, but folks alleging them will have to come up with actual evidence. Such as this evidence about the inquisition of Joe the Plumber.
The only person I mentioned, Palladian, was Barack Obama. You know, the next President of the United States, set to win in a historic landslide.
Bruce Springsteen's coming to Cleveland tomorrow with Barack. I guess the partying is starting early!
Sarah Palin can go back to Alaska with her new 150 grand wardrobe now, and try to ween her children off oxy contin.
Ok, I found a USCIS memo from 2005. You have to have some knowledge of the immigration system to understand it, but I interpret it to say that the asylum application is confidential to protect the identity and safety of the applicant and relatives, and cannot be released without the written consent of the applicant.
It is possible that this memo has been superseded, or that the ultimate denial of an asylum application is somehow not covered by the memo (we're dealing with the government here, remember). Unless this is the case, it appears that the federal law enforcement officer who leaked this to the press violated the CFR and needs to be fired or sanctioned. With the timeline as we know it, it is likely that the AP contacted a friendly anonymous source who looked up the aunt's immigration record for them and explained to them what it meant.
No doubt, the folks who applauded leaks from the government dealing with the War on Terror will be applauding this leak as well.
Nice work, Kevin.
Kevin said...
1. the UK press has been searching for Obama's relatives all over the world in the last few months.
2. Many immigration records are actually considered personal and can be released only with the content of the person involved. I am not sure if asylum falls into this category.
3. I doubt that the feds share this routinely with non-law enforcement agencies.
4. Moreover, a person with a deportation order likely still has the ability to challenge the order in court, so you shouldn't just kick them out while they are doing so.
5. but I interpret it to say that the asylum application is confidential to protect the identity and safety of the applicant and relatives, and cannot be released without the written consent of the applicant
6. To answer Ann's question about how the aunt "might have qualified for public housing with a standing deportation order."
Kevin, I hacked up and shortened your post to address various topics.
1. I suspect that the ToL considers this to be a local story. They do a lot of "News from the Commonwealth", as Kenya would be, and of course the US was once...
2. & 3 & 5. I think you need to separate the asylum filing which would be sensitive, from the deportation order, which is certainly if not public public, is released via the NCIC to all law enforcement folks across the country.
4. If she had a chance to challenge the order, it would have long passed 4 years later after failing to report for deportation.
6. I don't know what proof one needs in Boston, but beyond how she could get public assistance with a deportation order, how could she get housing in the first place if all she had was an expired tourist visa? Don't housing folks want a birth certificate or a SSN card or a green card, or, or...
Of course, there is discretion in enforcing the law. Do you want a ticket to arrive in your mailbox every time you exceed the speed limit?
I don't want a speed limit. It's arbitrary and largely unenforceable and cheapens the law by allowing what are tantamount to random stops.
On the other hand, I obey the speed limit, believe it or not.
However, the question here is whether we should always follow the law, not whether the govt should always enforce it to the hilt.
The laws I am generally for are those that should be enforced to the hilt: Laws against murder, theft, rape and the like. The more laws we have, the more we live by the rule of men.
As Trooper points out, in New York, you'd best keep your head down, because if they want to, they can shut you down.
No matter how big.
Actually, there are some evil laws that one ought to decline to follow, but if I were running for President, I would not imply that I thought that any such laws existed in the United States.
You wouldn't? Even racist laws? Or are you just talking about today?
Hi Drill Sgt,
I agree that the deportation order is likely legitimate public knowledge. If the AP's anonymous source had stopped there, there would be no problem. But the asylum application itself should have remained confidential.
Regarding the Boston public housing: I am a naturalized citizen and went through the entire immigration process from A to Z. In my experience, outside the federal agencies that are related to immigration, all other branches and levels of the government and indeed society in general are clueless about immigration law and its intricacies. I suspect the Boston public housing authority is no different.
I can speculate however, about an avenue where she may have appeared legitimate: Asylum applications take some time to be reviewed and adjudicated. During this period, an asylum applicant can apply for an EAD (employment authorization document) in order to work. With this EAD card, one can apply for a Social Security number. I have no idea if the aunt indeed took this route, but it does exist and is routine.
And just to clarify my last sentence, once you have a Social Security number, I have found that a great number of people automatically assume that you are legally residing in the US, even though the SSN really has little to do with immigration status. I have had this experience numerous times.
Frederson says: "So, no one is authorized to discuss this case, yet details are leaked to the press. . .And this differs from somebody illegally rooting through Joe the Plumber's records how?"
and
"You obviously didn't read the article as it clearly stated that the government released sealed information."
Frederson, you suffer from the typical liberal's poor reading comprehension. I just read the entire AP story twice. The AP DOES NOT say that the record from the immigration court's proceedings was sealed. The AP story merely states that its source was not authorized to discuss the case and they didn't. There is nothing in the story that says the proceedings were under seal and therein lies the difference between what Obama's supporters in Ohio did to JTP. His records at the Ohio Dept. of Job and Family Services were private and there was no legal basis for Ms. Jones-Kelley to access them. Those public officials inappropriately accessed his records and just today, the employee who actually accessed them on orders from Jones-Kelley said that the nonsensical excuse given to the press by Jones-Kelley was BS. This is the problem that intelligent people face. This country is full of people like Frederson. He doesn't have the slightest idea what he's talking about but, by god, he's got absolute certitude.
Perhaps an immigration attorney could weigh in on this. However, Drill Sgt. is correct in pointing out that the asylum application and the EOIR judge's ruling on the asylum request are two separate things. I haven't seen any evidence that the the actual ruling is private or was somehow sealed. Perhaps it was, but there is no evidence of that disclosed in the Ap article. Here is another link to an EOIR fact sheet explaining the process. http://www.justice.gov/eoir/press/05/AsylumProtectionFactsheetQAApr05.htm
Those are just filler adjectives, given with little thought.
But...but...but he's so articulate! And clean. And intelligent!
The joy part is, if he isn't wrung out for a clarification, as anyone else would be, he can do it and then say "I told you I would do it!" and the best you'll be able to say is "D'oh!" I bet he'd like a license to apply "appropriate" laws however he felt like doing it. He sure applied them to auntie.
And just remember he screwed you on FISA, too. At what time, in fact, has Obama ever proved himself worthy of your trust?
Don't push the little red button!
You don't know what it does!
NObama '08!
Post a Comment