Flaws, Ooops, Bad Address, Green Cards?

How US green cards ended up being sent to the wrong people…..

A system implemented by US Customs and Immigration Services in 2012 failed on several levels, a report has concluded.

WaPo: Green cards sent to wrong places, even after change-of-address requests

A green card is like a green light for foreigners living in the United States.

Officially called “permanent resident” cards, they authorize holders to live and work here. Given the millions of people who reside here illegally, the documents are a valuable commodity among those who can’t get them through proper channels.

So when the government sends cards to the wrong address, it’s a big problem for those who should have them but don’t and for government officials who wince at the thought of the cards in the wrong hands.

Now comes word that since U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS) installed its Electronic Immigration System (ELIS) in 2012, the number of cards going to the wrong places has only increased.

By how much, no one seems to know.

In this age of terror, this can be more serious than an employee working without proper papers.

A new report from the office of John Roth, the inspector general in the Department of Homeland Security, which includes CIS, says officials acknowledge there is “no accurate means of identifying the exact number of potentially hundreds of cards sent to incorrect addresses for cases processed in ELIS.”

As seems to be the case repeatedly in government lately, the blame goes to the computer systems, as if they are beyond the control of chief information officers. But that’s apparently the case at CIS.

The report says the cards were sent erroneously “due to a system limitation” that prevented humans from changing the addresses. Even when green-card holders requested a change of address, employees could not update the system.

“Further,” the report continued, “the system did not always accurately display address information, often eliminating or cutting off critical elements such as apartment numbers.”

The report said CIS officials told investigators the “only option for addressing the problem of incorrect addresses was to manually send out notices with instructions on how to mail the cards back.”

Not surprisingly, that strategy didn’t work.

When the Federal Insider asked the CIS public affairs office about the report’s green-card findings, it did not take long for the agency to respond with a lengthy statement from CIS Director León Rodríguez.

Unfortunately, his statement said nothing about green cards.

Rodríguez was critical of the report, however, saying it “does not fully recognize the extent of USCIS’ efforts to implement new technology and the extraordinary impact that these changes have had on the effectiveness of the system.” Several of the findings “do not reflect the drastically improved approaches put into place as we rebuilt our Electronic Immigration System,” he said, adding that the report did not “fully acknowledge” improvements made after an inspector general’s audit period, which ended in July.

Roth’s office sought comment on the report from CIS management before publication. The document said Rodríguez “did not understand our ‘report’s assertion that national security was impacted based on address changes by applicants.’ ”

Roth’s office did not understand that misunderstanding.

“It is intuitive,” the report said, “that sending official USCIS credentials to unauthorized individuals poses potential national security risks.”

It certainly is intuitive for Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), chairman of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.

Not only is ELIS “years behind schedule and billions over budget, its continued shortcomings put our nation at risk,” he said. “With ISIS and other terrorist groups active around the world and committed to attacks on our country, our national security depends on our systems for screening visa and immigration applications working effectively.”

At a minimum, that means fixing a system that sends green cards to the wrong place even after a change of address was requested.

ICE Director Insensitive to Death, Enforcing Law

Is there an agency director, secretary or anyone within the Obama administration that is sensitive to their failures of law and policy which results in death? How about Barack Obama himself or his national security council or even the Department of Homeland Security that is without dispute complicit in the death of innocents? This administration cant even determine what genocide means, they have lawyers looking at cases, law and evidence. Scary right? No worries, these matters are all ‘learning experiences’.

The Obama administration is remarkably slow to list organizations such as the Muslim Brotherhood as a terror organization if at all. Further, drug cartels which have created war zones in Mexico and at our southern border are NOT listed as terror organizations even with Congress calling on this to be done.

ICE Director Gives Shocking Excuse For Failure To Detain Killer Illegal Alien [VIDEO]

Ross/DC: U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) director Sarah Saldana gave a baffling — and seemingly inaccurate — explanation during a Senate hearing on Tuesday for why federal immigration agents failed to detain an illegal alien who killed a 21-year-old Iowa woman in a drunken street race in Omaha in January.

ICE ignored a detainer request made by the Omaha police department last month for 19-year-old Eswin Mejia, Saldana said, because his victim, Sarah Root, had “not passed away” at the time the illegal alien drunk driver bailed out of jail.

That comment appears to be inaccurate since Root died hours after the Jan. 31 crash, in which Mejia was street racing with a .241 blood-alcohol level — three times the legal limit.

Mejia, a Honduran national, left jail on Feb. 5 after posting $5,000 bail. He is now on the run.

During Tuesday’s hearing, Nebraska Sen. Ben Sasse asked Saldana why ICE did not respond to the Omaha police department’s request to detain Mejia after he posted his bail.

According to the Omaha World-Herald, Root’s father contacted an Omaha police accident investigator expressing his concern with a county judge’s Feb. 4 decision to set a $50,000 bond for Mejia. The illegal alien’s flight risk was also of concern for Root’s father. Mejia had a record for various traffic infractions and for failure to appear in court. ICE never detained him after those run-ins with the law.

The police investigator contacted ICE requesting an immigration hold for Mejia based on Root’s father’s concerns.

But ICE denied the initial request, and so the investigator and her lieutenant placed a call to an ICE supervisor. Their call was never returned, however, deputy Omaha police chief Dave Baker told the World-Herald.

Saldana gave conflicting excuses for why ICE failed to detain Mejia. During one part of her testimony she claimed that the agency did not have enough time to respond to the Omaha police department’s request. In another part, she said that ICE field officers should have used better judgement in exercising prosecutorial discretion.

“We tried to act,” Saldana told Sasse at one point. “But I believe there was a matter of hours between the time that we were contacted and the actual release.”

“It is very hard for us to get to every inquiry that is made by law enforcement,” she added.

Saldana said later in her testimony that ICE field officers can use prosecutorial discretion to detain illegal aliens if they believe that the person “presents a public safety threat.”

“In this case Sarah Root is dead,” Sasse pointed out. “What if someone kills a U.S. citizen? That doesn’t meet the threshold?”

Saldana responded with a confusing if not inaccurate answer.

“That was after the fact, sir,” she said.

“I understand that that person was injured and had not, when that four hour period of time, seriously injured, but had not passed away until later.”

It is unclear what Saldana meant by that statement. Root died on Jan. 31. Mejia bonded out of jail a week later.

ICE did not respond to a request for comment seeking clarification.

According to Sasse and various news reports, ICE spokesman Shawn Neudauer said last month that the case “did not meet ICE’s enforcement priorities” under President Obama’s Nov. 2014 enforcement priority policy because Mejia “had no prior significant misdemeanor or felony conviction record.”

ICE does not necessarily detain illegal aliens who have pending felony charges, apparently even in cases of felony vehicular homicide.

Obama’s enforcement priority executive action, which has come under intense criticism, places a priority on deporting illegal aliens with felony records, significant misdemeanor convictions, gang ties and those who pose terrorist threats.

He de-prioritized illegal aliens with convictions for drunk driving and lesser assault charges, including even domestic assault.

“It is a judgement that is being exercised by the person based on what they see at the time,” Saldana said of prosecutorial discretion, adding that in the Root case it “could have been exercised a different way.”

“That’s us looking back,” she continued. “I want to look forward so that we don’t have that situation arise again.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ruh Roh, Hillary Worked to Change Policy for her Blackberry

Clinton tried to change rules to use BlackBerry in secure facility for classified information

FNC: Less than a month after becoming secretary of state, and registering the personal email domain that she would use exclusively for government business, Hillary Clinton’s team aggressively pursued changes to existing State Department security protocols so she could use her BlackBerry in secure facilities for classified information, according to new documents released under the Freedom of Information Act.

“Anyone who has any appreciation at all of security, you don’t ask a question like that,”cybersecurity analyst Morgan Wright told Fox News.  “It is contempt for the system, contempt for the rules that are designed to protect the exact kind of information that was exposed through this email set up. “

Current and former intelligence officials grimaced when asked by Fox News about the use of wireless communications devices, such as a BlackBerry, in a SCIF (Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility) emphasizing its use would defeat the purpose of the secure facility, and it is standard practice to leave all electronics outside.

A former State Department employee familiar with the Clinton request emphasized security personnel at the time thought the BlackBerry was only for unclassified material, adding their concerns would have been magnified if they had known Clinton’s email account also held classified material.

“When you allow devices like this into a SCIF, you can allow the bad guys to listen in,” Wright added.

A February 17, 2009 email marked SECRET and cleared through the NSA says, “Ms. Mills described the requirement as chiefly driven by Secretary Clinton, who does not use standard computer equipment but relies exclusively on her Blackberry for emailing and remaining in contact on her schedule etc. Ideally all members of her suite would be allowed to use Blackberries for communication in the SCIF (Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility)”

Cheryl Mills was Clinton’s chief of staff from 2009-13.

The emails, obtained by Judicial Watch as part of a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit also show that a specialized NSA team was brought in to assess the vulnerabilities and feasibility of using wireless communications, including within a secure facility.

The NSA State Department liaison, whose name was withheld, told Mills in a now highly redacted email:  “Sometimes the distinction between what can be done and what is, or is not, recommended to be done differ; this is one of those instances.  (State Department Diplomatic Security) DS’s response illustrates their level of concern based on their extensive professional expertise. “

Clinton never used a State Department issued BlackBerry. It is not clear from the documents whether Clinton and her team went ahead and used their BlackBerrys in SCIFs despite the concerns, including those of the NSA.

A February 18 2009 email from the State Department’s Senior Coordinator for Security Infrastructure, Donald R. Reid, states “…once she (Clinton) got the hang of it, she was hooked, now every day, she feels hamstrung because she has to lock up her BB up.  She does go out several times a day to an office they have crafted for her outside the SCIF and plays email catch-up.  Cheryl Mills and others who are dedicated BB addicts are frustrated because they too are not near their desktop very often during the working day…”

The reference to a secondary office for Clinton appears to conflict with a February statement from the State Department that no stand-alone computer was set up outside Clinton’s main office on the executive floor, known as Mahogany Row, to check her personal account.

On February 25, Fox News pressed the State Department spokesman about a January 2009 email, also obtained by Judicial Watch, between Under Secretary for Management Patrick Kennedy and then Clinton chief of staff Mills where Kennedy said it was a “great idea” to setup a stand-alone PC for Clinton to check her email.

Asked by Fox News, State Department spokesman John Kirby said, “There was no stand-alone computer ever set up.”Fox News has asked Kirby to further clarify his statement.

In January 2009, Clinton signed at least two non-disclosure agreements in which she promised to protect classified information. Since then, more than 2,100 emails containing classified information have been identified, as well as 22 Top Secret that are too damaging to national security to release.

Earlier this week, Judicial Watch presented the federal court in Washington with a list of 7 Clinton aides it wants to question under oath about Clinton’s use of a private email sever when she was secretary of state.

Meanwhile, Judicial Watch is aggressively working on additional subpoenas for interrogatories of those within Hillary’s circle. One issue, in my humble opinion, they omitted Jake Sullivan.

Judicial Watch Submits Proposed Witness List, Discovery Plan to Federal Court in Clinton Email Matter

(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch today filed a plan for “narrowly tailored discovery” into former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s email matter with a federal court.  Judicial Watch’s discovery plan seeks the testimony of eight current and former State Department officials, including top State Department official Patrick Kennedy, former State IT employee Bryan Pagliano, and Clinton’s two top aides at the State Department:  Cheryl Mills and Huma Abedin.  Judicial Watch’s plan says that “based on information learned during discovery, the deposition of Mrs. Clinton may be necessary” but would only occur with permission by the Court.

During a court hearing on February 23, U.S. District Court Judge Emmet G. Sullivan granted Judicial Watch’s motion for discovery into whether the State Department and Clinton deliberately thwarted the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) for six years.  The discovery arises in a Judicial Watch FOIA lawsuit that seeks records about the controversial employment status of Huma Abedin, former Deputy Chief of Staff to Clinton.  The lawsuit was reopened because of revelations about the clintonemail.com system. (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of State (No. 1:13-cv-01363)).

Judicial Watch seeks testimony from:

Stephen D. Mull (Executive Secretary of the State Department from June 2009 to October 2012 and suggested that Mrs. Clinton be issued a State Department BlackBerry, which would protect her identity and would also be subject to FOIA requests);

Lewis A. Lukens (Executive Director of the Executive Secretariat from 2008 to 2011 and emailed with Patrick Kennedy and Cheryl Smith about setting up a computer for Mrs. Clinton to check her clintonemail.com email account);

Patrick F. Kennedy (Under Secretary for Management since 2007 and the Secretary’s principal advisor on management issues, including technology and information services);

Donald R. Reid (Senior Coordinator for Security Infrastructure, Bureau of Diplomatic Security since 2003 and was involved in early discussions about Mrs. Clinton using her BlackBerry and other devices to conduct official State Department business);

30(b)(6) deposition(s) of Defendant [designated witness(es) for the State Department] regarding the processing of FOIA requests, including Plaintiff’s FOIA request, for emails of Mrs. Clinton and Ms. Abedin both during Mrs. Clinton’s tenure as Secretary of State and after;

Cheryl D. Mills (Mrs. Clinton’s Chief of Staff throughout her four years as Secretary of State);

Huma Abedin (Mrs. Clinton’s Deputy Chief of Staff and a senior advisor to Mrs. Clinton throughout her four years as Secretary of State and also had an email account on clintonemail.com); and

Bryan Pagliano (State Department Schedule C employee who has been reported to have serviced and maintained the server that hosted the “clintonemail.com” system during Mrs. Clinton’s tenure as Secretary of State four years as secretary).

With respect to testimony of Clinton, the Judicial Watch court filing states:

Based on information learned during discovery, the deposition of Mrs. Clinton may be necessary.  If [Judicial Watch] believes Mrs. Clinton’s testimony is required, it will request permission from the Court at the appropriate time.

Judicial Watch also seeks court approval of written questions requiring answers under oath by the State Department:

Who was responsible for processing and/or responding to record requests, including FOIA requests, concerning emails of Mrs. Clinton and other employees of the Office of the Secretary;

Who was responsible for the inventorying or other accounting of Mrs. Clinton’s and Ms. Abedin’s emails, records, and information;

Who was responsible for responding to Plaintiff’s FOIA request from the date of submission to the present; and

Which State Department officials and employees had and/or used an account on the clintonemail.com system to conduct official government business.

Judicial Watch also seeks testimony from a 30 (b)(6) witness or witnesses who can provide testimony on behalf of the State Department on the following issues:

the creation or establishment of the clintonemail.com system as well as any maintenance, service, or support provided by the State Department of that system;

the knowledge or awareness of State Department officials and employees about the existence and use of the clintonemail.com system;

any instructions or directions given to State Department officials and employees about communicating with Mrs. Clinton and Ms. Abedin via email;

any inquiries into Mrs. Clinton’s use of the clintonemail.com system as well as any discussions about responding to such inquiries or publicly revealing the existence and use of the clintonemail.com system to the public; and

the inventorying or other accounting of Mrs. Clinton’s and Ms. Abedin’s email upon their departure from the State Department.

The Judicial Watch plan requests only eight weeks to conduct the requested depositions.  Judge Sullivan will rule on Judicial Watch’s proposed discovery plan after April 15.

“This discovery will help Judicial Watch get all of the facts behind Hillary Clinton’s and the Obama State Department’s thwarting of FOIA so that the public can be sure that all of the emails from her illicit email system are reviewed and released to the public as the law requires,” stated Judicial Watch president Tom Fitton.

Killing the Top ISIS Leadership Enough?

These Are the Most Wanted Members of ISIS

And why picking off top leaders won’t be enough

Time: U.S. forces killed another to ISIS leader this week, but experts say removing top officials won’t be enough to take the terror organization down.

The U.S.-led coalition against ISIS confirmed the death on Tuesday of one of the group’s biggest operatives, Omar al-Shishani. The Georgian national, who is also known as Omar the Chechen, is believed to have died from injuries sustained in a U.S. airstrike earlier in March.

But while killing top ISIS officials is sure to negatively affect the organization, it’s unlikely to be decisive. Patrick Skinner, special projects director of the Soufan Group, a private intelligence firm based in New York, says that ISIS has become so large that, like al-Qaeda, killing even its top leader won’t bring it down. “They are not going to fall apart if they lose one person,” Skinner says.

The assassination campaign has also been a victim of its own success. ISIS has filled the roles of slain leaders who, like Shishani, have been targeted during airstrikes over the past few months. But according to Skinner, the replacements won’t be announced because doing so would cause “that person to become a target.”

That said, experts have identified other top ISIS leaders who remain on the coalition’s hit list. Still at large are:

Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi

The group’s leader and self-proclaimed caliph has played an instrumental part in creating and gathering new supporters for ISIS. The shadowy figure, who has a $10 million bounty on his head, has revealed little about himself, reportedly wearing a mask while addressing fighters. He is thought to be 44 years old. Compared to Shishani, who was a decorated military man, al-Baghdadi “is not the main military figure in ISIS,” according to Omar Ashour, a lecturer in security studies at the University of Exeter and an associate fellow at Chatham House. Instead, Ashour says the ISIS leader’s strengths lie in theology—al-Baghdadi received a PhD in Islamic studies—while also symbolizing the successes of ISIS’s expansion from Mosul in Iraq to Aleppo in Syria. His skill at warping Islam for his own ends have enabled ISIS to recruit thousands members and helped justify the group’s trademark atrocities in the eyes of some believers.

Abd al-Rahman Mustafa al-Qaduli

This senior ISIS operative was one of the oldest members of al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI), an al-Qaeda offshoot started by the notorious Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, who masterminded the Sunni insurgency in Iraq and created the foundation of what would become ISIS. Al-Qaduli, like al-Baghdadi after him, served as al-Zarqawi’s right-hand man before Zarqawi was killed in an airstrike in 2006. In 2012, al-Qaduli allegedly escaped from prison and joined the early iteration of ISIS, since becoming a second-in-command to al-Baghdadi. According to the BBC, he is alleged to have acted as ISIS’s leader when al-Baghdadi was wounded in an airstrike in March. There has been an unconfirmed report of his death during an airstrike in Tal Afar, Iraq, but the Department of Justice continues to offer up to $7 million for any information his whereabouts. “Many allege that he is one of the main figures of ISIS,” says Ashour of al-Qaduli. “He is certainly the most experienced.”

Abu Mohammed al-Adnani

The 38-year-old Syrian from the northwestern city of Idlib became the senior spokesman for the group in 2014. According to CNN, it is believed he spent time in a U.S. detention facility, Camp Bucca, between 2005 and 2010, and he was also the first to declare ISIS’s “caliphate” for areas in Syria and Iraq. The charismatic spokesperson is also known for his bombing campaigns against Iraqis and the expansion of ISIS into Syria, reports the Associated Press. Iraq officials say al-Adnani was wounded in an Iraqi airstrike in January, but the Syrian still has a $5 million bounty on his head. “He would be a top target,” says Skinner, of the Soufan Group, who explains that Adnani’s role as “a really effective press secretary” would have given him access to unreleased operational details of ISIS. “He is a guy you want to capture because he is clearly plugged in, he has access (al-)Baghdadi,” Skinner adds.

****

For more reading:

The War between ISIS and al-Qaeda for Supremacy of the Global Jihadist Movement

Zelin: Since the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS) shot into the news after its  takeover of Mosul, many have been confused

over how to describe the group in relation to al-Qaeda,1the global jihadist organization best known for its audacious terror attacks against the West from the late 1990s through the mid-2000s. Relations between ISIS—and its prior incarnations, to be discussed—and al-Qaeda have been fraught with distrust, open competition, and outright hostility that have grown over time. The two groups are now in an open war for supremacy of the global jihadist movement. ISIS holds an advantage,2 but the battle is not over yet.

Background

Both Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, who founded Jamaat

al-Tawhid wa-l-Jihad ( JTWJ) in 1999 (see Table 1

for the history of ISIS names), and al-Qaeda head

Usama bin Laden came of age during the Afghan

jihad against the Soviet Union in the 1980s, but their

respective organizations have distinct genetic material,

attributable in part to their different backgrounds,

leadership styles, and aims. This is the case even

though the two groups formed a marriage of convenience

beginning in 2004.

One key difference involves the socioeconomic

background of the groups’ founders. Whereas bin

Laden and his cadre grew up in at least the upper

middle class and had a university education, Zarqawi

and those closest to him came from poorer, less

educated backgrounds. Zarqawi’s criminal past and

extreme views on takfir (accusing another Muslim

of heresy and thereby justifying his killing) created

major friction3 and distrust with bin Laden when the

two first met in Afghanistan in 1999. Full document here.

 

FOIA: U.S. Airport Employees Ties to Terror

US airport employees had ties to terror, report says

FNC: A dozen employees at three U.S. airports were identified as having potential ties to terrorists, according to Freedom of Information Act requests filed by FOX 25’s Washington Bureau.

But those 12 workers are just a fraction of 73 private employees at nearly 40 airports across the nation flagged for ties to terror in a June 2015 report from the Homeland Security Inspector General’s Office.

FOIA requests identified two employees at Logan International Airport in Boston, Mass., four employees at Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport in Georgia and six employees at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport in Washington.

The 2015 report did not reveal where the 73 workers were employed.

The Transportation Security Administration did not have access to the terrorism-related database during the vetting process for those employees, according to the report.

The TSA pushed back on the report as a whole, however, in a statement to FOX25.

“There is no evidence to support the suggestion by some that 73 DHS employees are on the U.S. government’s consolidated terrorist watch list,” national spokesman Michael England wrote in a statement.

*****

Meanwhile, perhaps ‘some’ of the items in the Senate Gang of 8 Immigration Reform Bill should have been passed…..

Outmoded U.S. immigration system poses security risk: study

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – U.S. immigration authorities’ lack of progress in automating their systems is compromising border security, making it more difficult to process people seeking to get into the country, a report said on Tuesday.

“We may be admitting individuals who wish to do us harm, or who do not meet the requirements for a visa,” John Roth, the Inspector General for the Department of Homeland Security, told a Senate Homeland Security Committee hearing.

The report from Roth’s office, released on Tuesday, said immigration officials expect it will take $1 billion and another three years, 11 years into the effort, to move from a paper-based system to automated benefit processing.

U.S. lawmakers have been calling for a tighter visa system since the November Paris attacks and December San Bernardino shootings. In Paris, some of the militants were Europeans radicalized after visiting Syria, and a California attacker had been admitted on a fiance visa.

They want to ensure that potential militants cannot enter the United States under programs, such as the “visa waiver” granted citizens of most western countries.

Roth told the Senate Homeland Security Committee that workers processing millions of applications for immigrant benefits work with a system “more suited to an office environment from 1950 rather than 2016.”

He said some green cards and other immigration documents had been mailed to wrong addresses, or printed with incorrect names, which meant they could have fallen into the wrong hands.

The poor quality of electronic data that is kept makes it more difficult to engage in data matching, to root out fraud and identify security risks, Roth said.

Shipping, storing and handling over 20 million immigrant files costs more than $300 million a year, he added.

The report also said the EB-5 visa program, which admits investors who spend $500,000 or $1 million in the United States, depending on the area, may not be subject to close enough scrutiny to ensure Americans’ safety.

The current system also allows “known human traffickers” to use work and fiance visas to bring victims into the country, the report said.

Republican Senator Ron Johnson, the committee’s chairman, said the modernization was too slow and expensive. “It should not take years and years and billions and billions of dollars,” he said.