« | »

Judge Gave Zeituni Amnesty Based On Lies

From the Boston Globe:

Obama’s aunt was ruled at risk

Disclosure of case made US asylum vital, judge said

By Maria Sacchetti, Globe Staff  |  August 17, 2010

The immigration judge who granted President Obama’s aunt asylum three months ago based his decision on the fact that an anonymous federal official had disclosed information about her immigration status to the media, a “reckless’’ act that exposed her to heightened threats of persecution in her native Kenya, according to the ruling, obtained yesterday by the Globe.

Although the grant of asylum to Zeituni Onyango in May was made public, the written decision detailing the reason for it was kept under wraps because of federal privacy laws. But the secrecy sparked accusations that she had received favorable treatment.

The decision was released yesterday through the Freedom of Information Act…

And it is now painfully obvious that in fact Ms. Onyango did receive favorable treatment. (Which is the real reason why his decision was kept under wraps.)

Immigration Judge Leonard I. Shapiro, who presided over her deportation case in February, said a federal law enforcement official’s public revelations about her confidential case catapulted Onyango into the spotlight in a “highly publicized and highly politicized manner’’ just days before Obama’s historic election in November 2008. The publicity and her status as Obama’s aunt are the crux of his 29-page decision.

Shapiro, a veteran immigration judge and Republican appointee, wrote harshly of the anonymous Bush administration official’s leak to the Associated Press for using confidential information for political purposes and said it was a “clear violation of federal regulations.’’

“Moreover,’’ he wrote, “the disclosure . . . was a reckless and illegal violation of her right to privacy which has exposed her to great risk.’’

Never mind that it was the UK’s Times that first uncovered that Aunt Zeituni was living in the United States. They even posted an article describing how they came to make that discovery. Or that the Times began to investigate because of Mr. Obama’s own mention of his aunt in his first autobiography, ‘Dreams From My Father.’

Besides,  it is very hard to see how “the disclosure… exposed her to great risk.’’ After all, Kenya’s current prime minister and former opposition leader, Raila Odinga, proudly claims to be related to Obama’s family. Moreover, we know that, quite to the contrary, Mr. Obama’s relatives, such as his (non) ‘grandmother,’ are celebrated and treated like celebrities in Kenya.

The decision cleared the way for the former computer programmer to remain in the United States and one day become a US citizen. Asylum applicants must prove that they have a well-founded fear of persecution in their homelands, and because of that their cases are generally kept confidential

Something she did not "prove."

In December 2008, Onyango’s lawyers persuaded the immigration court to reconsider her request for asylum. They argued that news of her attempts to gain asylum in the past would render her a “traitor’’ in Kenya and that the media had singled her out as the “illegal immigrant aunt’’ of Obama.

Notice the use of the word “would.” Ms. Onyango’s attorneys claimed this “would” happen. Two years have passed, and there is not one iota of evidence that any of this has happened.

Her lawyers said she also asked to stay because of health problems. Details of these problems were redacted in the report — along with details of her past asylum cases — for privacy reasons, said Cecelia M. Espenoza, the lawyer who released the decision from the Executive Office for Immigration Review, which governs the immigration courts within the Department of Justice.

Previous articles have reported that Ms. Onyango claims she cannot go back to Kenya because she cannot walk. Even though there are video clips and news photos of her walking out of the courtroom after her hearings. (Though she was always wheeled in.)

In any case, Ms. Onyango is not being asked to walk back to Kenya.

The Department of Homeland Security, which sought her deportation, countered that the Associated Press article did not create a new risk for Onyango because it did not reveal details about her asylum claim and because Onyango and her lawyers had talked to the media..


Shapiro agreed with Onyango’s assertion that she had been singled out for publicity and, unlike her relatives in Kenya, would be a “target.’’

Ms. Onyango has been trying to get asylum since at least 2004. What was her excuse then?

He also outlined “serious interethnic conflict’’ that had consumed Kenya in recent years and resulted in hundreds of deaths. She belongs to the minority Luo ethnic group and said that she feared for her life if she had to return to Kenya.

Again, none of Mr. Obama’s remarkably extensive family in Kenya has reported any persecution.

In his ruling, Shapiro said Onyango’s testimony in February was sometimes confusing and inconsistent with what she said during her last quest for asylum six years ago.

In other words, she lied her head off.

While Onyango did not prove that she suffered persecution while she lived in Kenya, he said he believed that her fear of future persecution was genuine.

People have all kinds of irrational fears. They should not be given citizenship because of them. People also lie. They should not be rewarded for lying.

He also acknowledged Onyango’s illegal status but did not hold it against her because there was no evidence that the federal government had ever pursued her deportation

So you can break the law with impunity as long as no one actively pursues you. And to think, this man is a judge.

Shapiro’s ruling cleared the way for Onyango to apply for a work permit and a green card and to become a US citizen, after a required waiting period. She has settled into a new apartment in public housing in South Boston, Bratton said…

Isn’t that wonderful.

It’s all too obvious that Mr. Shapiro is just another black robed mullah who cares not one whit about the law or even the facts. He should be removed from the bench.

This article was posted by Steve on Wednesday, August 18th, 2010. Comments are currently closed.

4 Responses to “Judge Gave Zeituni Amnesty Based On Lies”

  1. BannedbytheTaliban says:

    I somehow knew it was going to be Bush’s fault.

  2. Liberals Demise says:

    All the while Auntie Oingoboingo is living the highlife on the taxpayers back.
    Looking more like another obama deadbeat has beat the system.
    This Kenyan deadbeat ain’t gonna work………
    “My back, my legs, my eyes, my fingers……..where’s my checks?”

  3. wardmama4 says:

    Computer programmer – WTF – Kenya would/should hold her near and dear – she sounds like a very vital and good person for a country that is (pardon me while I gag) attempting to improve its lifestyle & world image.

    And how does this late (wasn’t this like the 2nd or 3rd hearing after her original deportation order?) I mean if at any time a ‘leak’ or threats would have been dangerous, it would have been the first deportation trial not this one.

    And aren’t these the same li(e)brals who lauded the leakers during the evil bushitlerburtonco as ‘speaking truth to power’ courageous souls whose only desire is that the truth get out???????

    What a crock – and on our dime – and she has never ever contributed a plug nickel to deserve a stinking penny of it.

  4. Petronius says:

    SG : “It’s all too obvious that Mr. Shapiro is just another black robed mullah who cares not one whit about the law or even the facts. He should be removed from the bench.”

    But his vulnerability to removal may be part of the problem. Or rather, it became a problem two years ago, when our Federal government began to operate as a Chicago thugocracy.

    Because unlike Federal judges, who are appointed for life, immigration judges (in this case, Immigration Judge Leonard I. Shapiro) are not political appointees and do not have life tenure. Instead, they are DOJ hires in “excepted service” who serve at the pleasure of the Attorney General. And the current Attorney General is Tigellinus-Holder.

    And AG Tigellinus-Holder, acting through his deputies, has applied considerable pressure on the immigration judges to reach politically “correct” results in their decisions.

    Those IJs who were hired during the term of Pres. George W. Bush have already been removed. Other IJs who, like Shapiro, were hired during other Republican administrations, or who are suspected of having Republican connections or sympathies, or who do not kiss the regime’s patootie with sufficient gusto, have been threatened with removal.

    Most IJs are not born heroes or whistleblowers like J. Christian Adams. Most are unwilling to sacrifice themselves and their families for a principle of law. Most of them are not independently wealthy and do not have the means to hire bodyguards. So when judges are threatened with the end of their careers, with loss of their pensions, and with who-knows-what-other-threats that may have been made behind-closed-doors, threats that will never be exposed by the cover-up artists in the press, then the rule of law is compromised.

    Under these circumstances, the average IJ is not going to fall on his sword. Instead, he is going to take the path of least resistance, he is going to knuckle-under and rationalize: “If I deny this asylum application, my decision will be reversed on appeal by the Board of Immigration Appeals, and I will lose my job, maybe worse, for nothing. Everybody remembers Alberto Gonzales and the controversy over his dismissal of the U.S. Attorneys, but nobody will remember me. They’ll never even hear about me. Besides, the country is being swamped by tens of millions of immigrants, both documented and undocumented, and nobody cares, so what difference is one more going to make? This is what the American people voted for, so let them have it.”

    When we place our government in the hands of Chicago thugs, we are going to get strained decisions such as the case of Auntie Onyango.

    Elections have consequences.

« Front Page | To Top
« | »