Wow, when you do a search on this item, every FOX station is parroting it. No one else is, though.
The claim: FOX News Channel is reporting that the Obama Administration sent a memo telling Border Patrol it does not have to arrest drunken drivers along the US/Mexico border. FOX also claims that "advocacy groups" (it only mentions Mothers Against Drunk Driving [MADD] in the article however) are outraged.
Below the swirl of orange desert dust is more on this shocking, I tell you shocking, development.
Citing the article:
The Department of Homeland Security issued the advisory, which informs agents in the Tucson, Ariz., sector that they have three options if they encounter suspected drunk drivers -- detain them at the request of local law enforcement, detain them without the involvement of another agency or let them go.
It claims it has seen this memo, and that the memo informs Border Patrol agents the first option is the most risky for a lawsuit, whilst the last option is the least risky.
The article then goes on to claim that the right-wing group Judicial Watch obtained the memo, and lambastes the administration for allowing such a hole in border security.
From Judicial Watch's last paragraph in its own article:
As a whole, the Border Patrol is the critical frontline Homeland Security agency charged with preventing terrorists and weapons—including those of mass destruction—from entering the United States. Its primary mission is to protect the nation by reducing the likelihood that dangerous people and capabilities slip into the country through our many ports of entry. It’s beyond belief that the Obama administration has asked the federal officers tasked with this important duty to turn the other way when they encounter a drunk driver.
Judicial Watch missed the boat on Customs and Border Protection's mission. On the CPB's Website it indeed
lists keeping terrorists and dangerous people out, but not as its "primary mission." No mention of weapons of mass destruction (which would be easier to build here than transport across the Sonora Desert or smuggle through a customs house). CBP has many duties, and it does not list one as more important than another.
The article also cites the Center for Immigration Studies' Jessica Vaughn, who "said Tuesday the advisory is consistent with the administration’s long-held strategy of trying to end federal agents’ close cooperation with state and local law enforcement, which has led to deportations."
Since when did Federal agents have close cooperation with local law enforcement? I thought they were all about protecting their own turf.
Of note, Ms. Vaughn has nothing about this on her page at the Center for Immigration Studies either.
More to the point, the Center for Immigration Studies does not have this on its Website.
The article says Judicial Watch notes the memo "highlights the third option – letting them [drunk drivers] 'go on their way.' The advisory makes clear agents have no legal obligation to intervene in state crimes and that with the third option, 'there is generally no liability that will attach to the agent or agency for failing to act in this situation.'" (Judicial Watch's article is available here, in all its improbable glory. It is worth reading to learn how to write unsupported tripe. It also shows just how deeply FOX seems to research many of its articles, as in it doesn't.)
Never mind Judicial Watch though. There is also the claim about MADD, that its president was outraged. So outraged in fact that MADD did not post her outrage on its own Website. Not in its blog, not in its press releases, nowhere, no place.
Now I am not going to accuse either FOX News Channel or Judicial Watch of making up a story out of whole cloth. I am just going to use the tried and true FOX fallacy of "just askin' questions."
Like:
If MADD is so worked up about this, why doesn't MADD have it on its Website?
If Judicial Watch obtained this memo, why didn't it name the person who signed the memo (or show a picture of the memo, or give the date of the memo, &c)
If FOX News Channel saw this memo, why didn't it do the same as I outlined for Judicial Watch?
Where's the beef? Or more precisely, where's the proof that this memo exists, or that the Obama Administration suggested any such thing? You would think that MADD would be incensed, outraged, livid, screaming bloody murder all over the airwaves if such a thing were true.
Maybe it is so important MADD just hasn't gotten around to it yet. Or, maybe President Obama is trying to save Customs and Border Protection money, since the Republican Party seems intent on shutting off its funding.
5:46 AM MT: I am off to bed for a bit; I have been up all night. I will be back to follow up on this dangerous development along the border though (snark off)
6:13 AM MT: Another thought: Why would Homeland Security tell the Tucson area they do not have to do it, rather than the entire Border Patrol both along the Mexican and Canadian borders?
Just a thought. Perhaps there is something special about Arizona?