News on the street is Corey Stewart made Obama blink. Well, is that so? How funny. Actually, I think what really happened is, I.C.E. made Stewart look befuddled and confused. Or perhaps they just caught him lying, again, like he does about the crime statistics.
According to the Washington Post in the political blog:
According to Stewart, ICE officials also said they will increase detention center space in Virginia to hold illegal immigrants until deportation.
But ICE spokesman Richard Rocha denied that ICE will turn over any names or personal information to Stewart.
“ICE told Prince William County Supervisor Corey Stewart the agency would provide available statistics, for instance about the crimes and custody status of individuals referred to ICE by 287(g) trained officers,” Rocha said. “We anticipate that research to take a few weeks. To clarify, ICE will not be providing personally identifiable information — like names or addresses — to Stewart or others. Under DHS’s Privacy Policy, the Privacy Act, which protects against the release of certain personal information, extends to aliens as well as U.S. citizens.”
Stewart said he was disappointed to hear Rocha’s response. “They are backing down.”
Huh? Who is backing down? It sounds to me like Corey is backing down and I.C.E. is sticking to its guns.
We will be watching to see who is the blinker and who is the blinkee. Place your bets now.
I saw that article earlier today and meant to snag it. It certainly appears to contradict the hot air that has been blowing around lately. Wonder if the dark screen will amend its thread title? I’m not holding my breath.
Of course they won’t alter their title. I can lend them one though, if they would like. 🙄
It sure does contradict the hot air blowing across the county. I wonder if he deliberately misunderstood or if he deliberately storied?
I think it’s ridiculous that ICE will not provide names and addresses to individual counties of illegal aliens. According to privacy act regulations, individual refers to a citizen or alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence to the U.S. See http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/waisidx_02/45cfr5b_02.html,
From section b1 of the Privacy Act:
“(e) Individual means a living person
who is a citizen of the United States or
an alien lawfully admitted for permanent
residence. It does not include persons
such as sole proprietorships, partnerships,
or corporations. A business
firm which is identified by the name of
one or more persons is not an individual
within the meaning of this part.
activity for which the record
is sought.”
I think that it is ICE that is blowing smoke. There is nothing in the Privacy Act that precludes disclosure of names/addresses of illegal aliens.
We should treat ILLEGALS as the unwelcome interlopers that they are!!
Oops. This ICE BS got me so perturbed that I cut and pasted from the wrong website. The relevant website is http://www.justice.gov/opcl/privstat.htm for 5 U.S.C. § 552a. The relevant part in the definition of an individual is still the same:
(2) the term “individual” means a citizen of the United States or an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence;
I actually think that ICE probably should notifiy a county or city if they release someone back into the community.
As for a list, at this stage of the game, what purpose would that serve? It would probably be a good idea in the future just to notify the jurisdiction of the disposition.
However, that is ICE’s call and one of the reason some of us opposed spending millions of dollars over something we ultimately had no control over.
Considering what has been done with lists of illegal immigrants, I can almost understand why they don’t want to release a list of names into a politically charged arena.
And lastly, there is just something humorous about Stewart big-assing and then getting iced by ICE.
I don’t think it is ICE’s call whether to release that information or not. As a former active-duty military officer, I took annual Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) training for years. My understanding is that government agencies must release information unless it is covered by one of nine exemptions or three exclusions. Exemption Six regarding personal privacy should not apply to illegal aliens since they are not covered by the Privacy Act.
The BOCS should file an FOIA request to test the legality of ICE’s policy to deny information to counties.
Some of the deportation hearings may involve gang members or subjects of other criminal investigations and the release of data may interfere with further investigations of those gangs or enterprises.
Oh my goodness Moon-howler, are you suggesting that Corey was grandstanding??????
Censored — Gangs in our area are the active target of both regional and local police anti-gang task forces. They co-operate closely with federal agencies when such is warranted. Federal money has been allocated to them for this very purpose. They would certainly have a vested interest in knowing what I.C.E. or the feds in general know about the identity of gang members and their probably locations. I.C.E. would be doing a disservice to all of us if they withheld such information from these task forces, regardless of immigration status.
I am curious as to why a gang member would be released back into the community. I thought they fit the worst of the worst def?
I think that withholding information from Corey Stewart and his merry band of seven is a little different than withholding information from the NoVA gang task force. Corey would probably plaster the information all over facebook. He is not law enforcement.
Wolverine, wouldn’t the various police agencies be privy to some of this information without the info being released to the general public or the local pols? I imagine the Feds are interested in working up the food chain – both in gang members and narcotic dealers. If every low level member is picked up and his info is made public, it makes it easier for the leaders to keep track of what the Feds are working on. I also would guess that the Feds have sealed indictments which I would hope wouldn’t be part of any release of information – or even hinted at.
Censored, no one is suggesting that information should be released if it compromises an investigation. But ICE (see above) stated that they would not release information on illegal aliens due to privacy concerns. I take them at their word. There was no mention of any concern about interference with criminal investigations, so your red herring is unlikely to be a significant issue.
Even if it were an issue, ICE could release information for non-gang-related cases.
Censored — I recently had a long conversation with a law enforcement officer who has dealt with the gang problem on the street. He expressed the view that when some gang members or suspected gang members fall into the hands of law enforcement, they tend to lose their tough guy personas pretty fast and start singing. This applies especially to those who are not the older, toughened members. I presume that I.C.E. also comes across this type of individual and that they are able to collect information on other suspected gang members not in custody and pass such info on to the various regional and local task forces. Even if such leads are passed only to the regional outfit, I would suspect that it gets down to the county-level and city-level components since they are all part of the regional effort and work together.
With regard specifically to your Chief Deane, I understand that he is an appointed police commander, unlike the Loudoun Sheriff, who is directly elected by the people. Is Deane then not under some obligation to keep Corey Stewart and the rest of your board of supervisors abreast on what he is doing and what he is facing? I would think this passage of information would be especially critical at budget time, if not SOP for your governmental chain of command on a regular basis. Your BCOS hired Deane and can presumably fire him for cause. Given the way a chain of command ought to work, it seems to me that failure to pass the word to the higher ups in your chain would not only be disruptive but also grounds for termination — sort of lke the Director of the FBI refusing to keep the President of the United States truthfully informed. (Which is precisely why most U.S. presidents were not too fond of a chap named J. Edgar Hoover.) Quite frankly, I sometimes get the impression from this blog that some of you think that Deane is a power unto himself and answers to no higher authority. With the exception of cases which are highly sensitive and to which access must be limited for judicial reasons, I do not see what authority Deane has to keep Corey Stewart in the dark on anything. How many of you, when asked by your boss to explain what you are doing, are going to tell that boss to kiss off and stop asking?
Chief Deane answers to the CXO, who now is Melissa Peacor. Before her appointment he answered to the interim appointee and before that for Craig Gerhart for many years. I don’t know why you think he is a power unto himself.
Are we assuming that the Chair is more important than the other 7 supervisors? That is not the case. His main control is over that agenda for the meetings. He does represent all of us rather than a supervisor for one of the magisterial districts.
I wouldn’t tell Corey Stewart any more than I had to because he might not use the information correctly which has been proven time and time again. For instance, he takes the crime stats and he flat out lies about them. We can all go look and see that he is lying, but he simply doesn’t care. It accomplished his goals.
Having said that, the military and the FBI don’t tell Congress and individual congressmen and women everything they know either. Corey Stewart is not law enforcement. I am not sure he is entitled to sensitive information. The BOCS hires a county executive to run the show. She does. I see no reason for them to demand minutia unless there is a specific need to know.
Perhaps this is all the difference in a county with a police dept and one without. We also have an elected sheriff. He and his folks are at the court house.
For the record, Chief Deane has saluted whatever resolution is out there regarding immigration, regardless of what is said on other blogs. He had done what the board directed him to do.
Check out the video in the other thread.
I did check out the other video and found it to be a very good exchange between the police and the Board as a whole. In Loudoun our county manager, the senior executive in the administration, is recruited and hired by the Board. He/she answers to the Board and is not the top of the chain of command. A majority vote on the Board as a whole holds that position. Is that not also the case in PWC, with the difference being that your chain of command includes a hired police chief?
I didn’t state that I personally thought that Deane was a power unto himself or, at the least, was acting like he was. That was just the impression I received from some of the PWC posters here and, incidentally, from the BVBL as well — for opposite philosophical reasons, of course. Here it seemed to be applause for trying to resist a majority vote of your Board. Over there it was looked upon as insubordination by Deane.
One of the reasons this interests me is because some on our own Board of Supervisors have been making noises about switching from a directly elected sheriff with full police powers to a system like that in PWC and Fairfax where you have a full-power police force answerable to the politicians who hire them and an elected sheriff limited largely to the jail and other lesser duties. The principal argument being used to defend our current system is that an appointed police chief, unlike a directly elected sheriff, would be at the beck and call of the politicians at any particular moment. For that reason, I would think that scoping out the interplay between Chief Deane and your Board would be of considerable interest in some circles here, with a principal question being just how independent of the Board can a hired police chief get without being asked for his badge and gun at some point.
We have had an separate police force since the early 70’s. I know that I like the PD better than the sheriff’s department. Of course I base this on having a peeping Tom many years ago. We were told by the sheriff’s dept that they couldn’t stop people from taking out their garbage. The PD took quite a different approach and soon there was no more peeping Tom. It was a bit more than just taking out the garbage. It was coming right up under the windows, behind the bushes and looking the in windows between the blinds.
I believe the Chief Deane has always had a great working relationship with the board up until the incident with the Mexican consulate. That was contrived. Political theater and politics of mass destruction at its ugliest actually were the undoing of the whole plan cooked up between Corey and HSM. Many people, including the many supervisors were repulsed by what being said about their chief. In fact, it appeared to be one board member and a blogger leading the charge. No one else bought in to that stupidity.
He reports directly to the CXO. He has lasted a long time so I doubt there has been a problem. He does what he is directed to do by the CXO and by the board. In the incident in question, he was directed to go out and educate the community at large. He did that and worked with other jurisdictions. There really isn’t much else to say about it. He is a well-respected public servant who has directed the police dept well.
You can pick up on all of that in the BVBL.net archives from March 2008 towards the end of the month.
Deane is a competent professional who has done a great deal to raise the level of general police work in Prince William. He had no real critics other than from a renegade Sheriff’s office in the late 90s and early part of this decade until this immigration issue came up. Connaughton did everyone in PWC a favor by eliminating the ambiguity about the Sheriff’s department and making sure the county police were the go to guys for law enforcement. Deane has brought the place to a much better than he found it at the beginning of his tenure. I think the Prince William police department can now credibly claim to be as competent and respected as Fairfax, which is a very difficult jurisdiction to police effectively.