Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano (Photo: Flickr/The National Guard)

Former members of a task force on Secure Communities sent a letter this week to Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano calling on her to suspend the immigration enforcement program.

The letter also expressed their concern that an Arizona law enforcement agency that has committed a “wide range of civil rights violations” still has access to Secure Communities.

Brittney Nystrom of the National Immigration Forum and Andrea Zuniga DiBitetto of the AFL-CIO write in the letter:

As former members of the Homeland Security Advisory Council, Task Force on Secure Communities, we note with concern the multiple findings of racial profiling of Latinos and other civil rights violations by the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office released by the Department of Justice (DOJ) on December 15.

The findings of a pattern and practice of racial profiling of Latinos in Maricopa County, Arizona, demonstrate that abuse can occur while the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is actively collaborating with enforcement agencies through both the 287(g) program and the Secure Communities program and through informal collaboration between DHS and law enforcement agencies.

“My understanding is that [Immigration and Customs Enforcement] is continuing to operate Secure Communities in Maricopa County despite the findings of discriminatory policing by that sheriffs department,” Nystrom tells The Florida Independent.

Secure Communities allows local law enforcement agencies to check the fingerprints of people they detain and match them up with federal immigration and criminal databases, with the stated goal of deporting undocumented immigrant criminals. All 67 Florida jurisdictions participate in Secure Communities.

Napolitano said in October that the termination of Secure Communities “would only weaken public safety, and move the immigration enforcement system back towards the ad hoc approach where non-criminal aliens are more likely to be removed than criminals.”

Opponents of Secure Communities have repeatedly called on the Obama administration to end the fingerprint-sharing program because immigrants who have committed no crime are being detained and deported, leaving behind U.S.-born children and families that, in many cases, will struggle to make ends meet.

Nystrom says that Homeland Security officials said they were “limiting” the Maricopa sheriff’s office’s “access to Secure Communities, but that in [her] thinking and Andrea’s thinking doesn’t go far enough to prevent someone who was picked up in a biased manner from being put into the deportation machine.”

The letter adds that the Secure Communities termination should also include Alabama, “where immigration enforcement laws that have been challenged as unconstitutional by the Department of Justice are in effect.”

“I certainly support the need to prevent certain sensitive, personal, classified, or law enforcement information from being disclosed under FOIA,” Udall wrote in his letter. “But I also believe it is extremely important that we do not attempt to protect our citizens by lying to them.”

Under the new regulation, government officials could simply tell citizens that the records they’re looking for don’t exist, when in fact the records do exist. A “no record” response, writes Udall, is very likely to head off any further inquiry. Yet all parties would know that the “no records” response could well be a lie. The regulation would erode trust and rightly lead to legal action on the part of skeptical investigators of all stripes.

Udall suggests an alternative approach drafted by government watchdog and civil liberties groups– the ACLU, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) and Open The Government– where government agencies could instead simply inform requestors that the documents they seek, if they exist, “are not subject to the disclosure requirements established by the Freedom of Information Act.”

Such an approach would be effective as well as “truthful and informative,” writes Udall.

Concerns expressed among the public, media and watchdog organizations prompted the justice department to keep the comments period on the proposed regulation open longer than planned. That period closed last week. Udall’s letter is a personal response aimed to throw additional weight behind calls to rethink the new regulation.

The history behind the debate is one of tug of war between the right to information and the need to protect government sources and secret investigations. It’s also a history of the battle to ensure that checks and balances between branches of government can operate effectively.

Criminal organizations, for example, have worked the FOIA system for years. They submit information requests and, based on the varied responses of the government agencies, try to uncover the identity of informants. A “No records exist” kind of response regarding, say, a “Johnny Fingers” would mean Fingers was no snitch. A “Will not confirm or deny” kind of response regarding, say, a “Leftie Knuckles” would suggest Knuckles couldn’t be trusted.

Yet, in the post-9/11 era, government agencies have become increasingly brash in denying information to all sorts of requestors– including those with no intention of whacking informants– and in flatly lying to requestors and to judges tasked with reviewing paper trails meant to detail the reason for request denials.

In a case heard this past spring titled Islamic Shura Council of Southern California, et al. v. FBI, the FBI lied to the plaintiffs about the existence of documents and then lied to the district court judge as well. When the fact came out that the documents did exist, it was clear that judicial review of national security document hoarding had been seriously eroded.

As the judge in the case put it, the information the FBI delivered to the court was “blatantly false.” It was a fundamental breech in accountability laws, he said.

“The Government’s… submission raised a very disturbing issue,” the district judge wrote in the Islamic Shura case. “The Government asserts that it had to mislead the Court regarding the Government‟s response to Plaintiff’s FOIA request to avoid compromising national security. The Government’s argument is untenable. The Government cannot, under any circumstance, affirmatively mislead the Court. The United States Constitution entrusts the Judiciary with the power to determine compliance with the law. It is impossible for the court to determine compliance with the law and to protect the public from Government misconduct if the Government misleads the Court. The Court simply cannot perform its constitutional function if the Government does not tell the truth.”

If 16.6 is accepted the way it stands, the kind of legal breech on display in Islamic Shura would be written into standard procedures.

Below view Udall’s letter to Attorney General Holder and a fairly comprehensive brief on the matter filed to the Department of Justice by the ACLU.

Letter to Attorney General Holder on the Freedom of Information Act

FOIAACLUbrief

Got a tip? Story pitch? Send us an e-mail. Follow The Colorado Independent on Twitter.

Per the Office of Congressional Ethics review process, “preliminary reviews” last 30 days and are initiated only after two board members (one appointed by the Speaker, one by the Minority Leader) have submitted written requests. Upon initiation, the office must inform the subject of the investigation. Buchanan’s office did not respond to requests for comment.

If the investigation is terminated within those 30 days, no public disclosure is required. Following the preliminary review, if there is “probable cause to believe [the] allegations,” three members can vote to initiate a second phase of review. Should the office find “substantial cause to believe allegations,” the case is referred to the standards committee for further review or dismissal and only made public under certain circumstances.

The preliminary review of Buchanan, says a source, began in late September and is yet another response to allegations that the Longboat Key Republican pressured employees into donating to his congressional campaigns, then reimbursed them with funds from one of his car dealerships.

Last December, the Federal Election Commission filed suit over a pattern of questionable contributions made to his 2006 and 2008 campaigns. Though Buchanan wasn’t named in the suit, his former business partner and a car dealership he once owned were accused of offering reimbursements for money donated to his campaign, and of violating excessive contribution laws. Though the FEC eventually deemed it an “extensive and ongoing scheme,” and fined his former dealership almost $68,000, Buchanan himself was never found to be at fault.

In August, the watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington filed a complaint asking the FBI to investigate Buchanan for “witness tampering, obstruction of justice, and bribery.” CREW also asked the House Office of Congressional Ethics to conduct an inquiry.

Venice retiree Donna Cubit-Swoyer also recently filed a complaint with the Office of Congressional Ethics, requesting an investigation of Buchanan.

Earlier this month, reports surfaced that the Department of Justice had begun its own investigation into the allegations that Buchanan offered reimbursements for donations made to his campaigns. The DOJ has neither confirmed nor denied the investigation, but the Buchanan camp has said that the investigation was to be expected.

Buchanan is currently in his third term in Congress, and acts as a finance official at the National Republican Congressional Committee.

According to our source, who wishes to remain anonymous, the Office of Congressional Ethics has requested documents from some of Buchanan’s former business partners and employees, and is also in the process of conducting interviews with them, to collect information relevant to its review.

But after protest from women’s groups this year, the FBI this week announced it would expand its definition of rape in its Uniform Crime Reports (UCR).

The new definition of rape — no longer “forcible” — resembles that of sexual assault, defining the crime as “penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim.”

The old “forcible rape” definition read simply: “the carnal knowledge of a female, forcibly and against her will.” This previous definition included the note: “Attempts or assaults to commit rape by force or threat of force are also included; however, statutory rape (without force) and other sex offenses are excluded.”

The FBI has said it will continue to collect data on “forcible rape,” but only for research and comparison.

How the FBI defines rape made headlines this year, because the term “forcible rape” appeared in Republican Rep. Chris Smith’s “No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act” early this year. The bill stipulated only women who were victims of “forcible rape” (and incest and to save the life of the mother) could use Medicaid to pay for an abortion. After public outcry, the language was changed from “forcible rape” to “rape.”

Soon after, Ms. Magazine and the Feminist Majority Foundation launched the “Rape is Rape,” campaign in conjunction with Change.org. In the form of a petition, the organizations called on the FBI to count all rapes in the UCR. Nearly 140,000 emails were sent to the FBI and the Department of Justice, according to Ms. Magazine.

The definition change could impact how cities are rated in terms of safety. Every year, the FBI releases its Uniform Crime Reports, which rank major U.S. cities based on violent crimes, which consist of murder, forcible rape, robbery and aggravated assault.

The Uniform Crime Report Subcommittee of the FBI’s Criminal Justice Information Services (CJIS) voted unanimously on Tuesday broaden its rape definition. Next, the International Association of Chiefs of Police will review the new definition and make final recommendation to the CJIS Advisory Policy Board (APB) at their December 6-7, 2011, meeting to be held in Albuquerque, N.M. A final definition will be recommended to FBI Director Robert Mueller. A new definition will likely not be decided before 2012.

Though it was widely rumored that Buchanan would run for Senate, the Sarasota Republican ended speculation last week, saying he preferred to keep his current seat as chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee.

Launching a campaign against a three-term incumbent may seem no easy feat, but Fitzgerald’s rival has become a rich target. Buchanan has been plagued by allegations of campaign fraud in recent months, and cited in numerous complaints alleging he pressured employees to donate to his various congressional campaigns. Though Buchanan himself was never fined over the allegations, his ex-business partner (whom Buchanan once purportedly referred to as his “golden child”) was fined, to the tune of $67,9000, for reimbursing employees that donated to Buchanan’s 2006 and 2008 campaigns.

In August, the watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington called on the FBI to investigate Buchanan over the allegations. Last week, a Venice retiree filed her own complaint with the Office of Congressional Ethics, also requesting an investigation of Buchanan.

Fitzgerald alluded to the allegations while announcing his candidacy to the St. Petersburg Times this morning:

“Instead of focusing on creating jobs or helping families struggling to make ends meet, Congressman Vern Buchanan has tried to end Medicare and protect tax giveaways for big oil while running from one scandal to the next,” said Fitzgerald, to the Times.  “His tarnished leadership in a perfect example of what is wrong with Washington, and it’s time for him to go.”

Venice retiree Donna Cubit-Swoyer has filed a complaint with the Office of Congressional Ethics, requesting an investigation of Rep. Vern Buchanan, R-Sarasota.

Buchanan has been plagued with rumors of campaign fraud in recent years. In June, his former business partner was fined nearly $68,000 for reimbursing employees who donated to Buchanan’s 2006 and 2008 campaigns. That business partner alleges Buchanan himself orchestrated the scheme. At least 14 other lawsuits have made similar allegations.

Cubit-Swoyer’s complaint highlights recently filed court documents as a “basis to believe that Rep. Buchanan may have violated federal law and House standards of conduct by making untruthful statements to the Federal Election Commission in a matter involving illegal conduit contributions to his campaign.”

In an email, Cubit-Swoyer writes that she has no connection with Buchanan, other than that she is one of his constituents.

“I am disturbed by the allegations of Vern Buchanan’s contribution scheme,” she writes. “I expect my elected representatives to hold to the highest possible ethical standard. Everything I have read about Congressman Buchanan’s actions gives me reason to believe that he was less than truthful and brought disgrace upon himself and the Congress.”

According to the complaint, the Office of Congressional Ethics “has jurisdiction to investigate any allegation that a Member, officer or employee of the House, on or after March 11, 2008, has violated a law, rule, regulation or other standard of conduct in effect at the time the conduct occurred and applicable to the subject in the performance of his or her duties or the discharge of his or her responsibilities.”

View the full complaint:

Buchanan Suit – signature document _img-928154228_ –

The Adrian Star Telegram reports that prosecutors asked the court to dismiss a charge of possession of an unregistered rifle against David Brian Stone Jr. The paper quotes the one paragraph filing as saying “the ends of justice would best be served” by the dismissal.

Stone would still face a series of other charges in an alleged plot the members of the Hutaree militia were alleged to be planning. The plot including killing a police officer, then attacking the funeral procession. The members allegedly believed this would bring on a way with the New World Order.

The FBI arrested nine members of the militia in raids in March of 2010. People were arrested in raids in Ohio, Indiana and Michigan and charged with sedition and other charges.

The trial against the other eight defendants is scheduled to begin Feb. 7 in Detroit. The other eight are leader David Stone Sr. and his wife, Tina Stone, of Clayton; Stone’s sons, Joshua Stone of Clayton and David Stone Jr. of Adrian; Joshua Clough of Blissfield; Michael Meeks of Manchester; Thomas Piatek of Whiting, Ind.; and Kristopher Sickles of Sandusky, Ohio.

Five of the members arrested remain in prison awaiting trial.

On Wednesday, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (aka CREW) sent a letter to the FBI, asking that the Bureau launch a thorough investigation into Buchanan, R-Sarasota. Buchanan has long been dogged by rumors of campaign fraud and the release of a sworn deposition by one of his former business partners, Sam Kazran, further highlights the alleged improprieties. #

Buchanan has yet to comment on CREW’s FBI complaint (a spokesperson has continued pointing the finger at Kazran), but he has been busy trying to sell his $4.49 million yacht. (According to the Sarasota Herald-Tribune, Buchanan sold the boat Wednesday, thanks to all of the attention.) The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee is now using the yacht sale to highlight Buchanan’s ethics issues. #

The DCCC recently penned a faux ad for the luxury boat on Craigslist: #

IN WAKE OF MOUNTING ETHICS INVESTIGATION
MUST SELL LUXURY YACHT #

2004 110 FOOT LUXURY YACHT
ONLY $4,490,000 (Loophole Protected) #

• Asking Price of $4,500,000 But Can Be Reimbursed by Employer and Friends
• VIP Stateroom Used for Wining and Dining Guests Such as Speaker John Boehner
• Previous Bankruptcy Does Not Disqualify You
• Takes No Responsibility for Condition. The Business Partner Did It. #

Please Contact Congressman Vern Buchanan at (941) 951-6643 (Serious Inquiries Only) #

With estimated assets of $77 million, Buchanan is the 10th richest member of Congress. And though over a dozen people have accused Buchanan of campaign schemes (which involved pressuring employees to donate to his campaigns, then reimbursing them with funds from his various car dealerships), the Federal Election Commission fined his former business partner (Kazran) nearly $68,000. Kazran has long maintained that, while he was aware that reimbursements were being made, he had no idea they were illegal and he was operating under the direction of Buchanan who, at the time, was a majority owner in their dealership. #

The Islamic Center of Northeast Florida was pipe-bombed just before evening prayer services on May 10, 2010. The bomb caused no injuries and only $500 worth of damage to the mosque, but was thought by many to be a hate crime possibly linked to the appointment of a Muslim man to the Jacksonville Human Rights Commission.

Though video surveillance captured the suspect on tape, his face wasn’t clearly visible and police never named a suspect. But nearly a year later, the FBI announced that a suspect had been killed following a “confrontation” with FBI agents. Sandlin Matthew Smith, a 46-year old bus driver from Julington Creek, Fla., is said to have been responsible for last year’s bombing.

According to the FBI, the “critical lead” in linking Smith to the pipe bomb was the discovery of explosive materials in his residence found after executing a search warrant.

According to Jacksonville’s First Coast News, Smith had been bragging to friends that he was responsible for the bombing.

After speaking to more than a dozen of Smith’s acquaintances, the FBI tracked him to Oklahoma. Smith was shot and killed following a “confrontation” with FBI agents. He was armed.

“Yes, this is, in my opinion, fraud,” Hertel said. “This is a situation where people were forging someone else’s name to a legal document to take another person’s property. That is fraud.”

As Register of Deeds, Hertel is responsible for overseeing all the documentation of property sales in the county, including mortgage assignments. Mortgage assignments are documents that transfer ownership of a mortgage from one lending company to another.

Hertel says he was tipped off to the alleged fraud when he saw a report on CBS’ 60 Minutes. That story helped unwind the Byzantine labyrinth of paper work and investments under which the mortgages were sold as investments. But now that the banks are facing down homeowners who can’t afford the payments of their mortgage agreements, they are finding that in the rush to bundle the mortgages, there were corners cut. The original paperwork is missing.

60 Minutes uncovered a widespread program wherein people were named as vice president of various banking entities. Those people, including Linda Green, signed these documents by the dozens every day. Green, it turned out, was more desperately needed than one person could handle. Therefore people were paid $13 an hour for signing Linda Green’s name.

Green’s name was used on thousands of mortgage assignment documents in the U.S. — including here in Michigan. But in Michigan, foreclosure is simply a matter of advertising the foreclosure plan. In order for a homeowner to stop the process, a home owner would have to file suit in circuit court and receive an injunction to stop the foreclosure process and force the foreclosure agency — usually a company like Republican donor Trott and Trott — to cease the foreclosure until clear title to the property can be established.

Hertel says he identified one case in which a person was in the process of foreclosure, and the alleged fraudulent document was used. That person is preparing to fight the foreclosure with the newly discovered documentation.

Hertel tells Michigan Messenger that he has spoken with registers of deeds from at least half of the state’s 83 counties. Each register told Hertel they found allegedly fraudulent documents. In Hertel’s case, he has already identified 60 such cases in Ingham county and he has barely begun to dig through the thousands of documents being held in his office.

In addition to the investigations by the Ingham County Sheriff’s Department and the FBI,tThe story has also gotten the attention of Michigan State Sen. Steve Bieda. He serves on the Senate Judiciary Committee.

“I will be requesting that the Senate Judiciary Committee conduct an investigation on this,” Bieda tells Michigan Messenger.