Dashinka

One thing he is right about is gun laws do not stop criminals, so I guess he is all for KK’s plan of confiscation. I do love his attempt at trying to justify the leftist hate rhetoric, a truly gaslighted individual.

He also said all the bomb threat hoaxes have been from overseas implying there is foreign collusion occurring. Who does this help? As to the cat eating, who knows, but it has shed light on the way the Biden/Harris administration has completely opened the border allowing everyone with almost no vetting. If these memes did not occur, MSM would have ignored the real story for the benefit of our current border tsar.

I agree, this is a big red flag, and as you said the visa application was rejected which implies he went to an interview at the consulate and was rejected for the visa by the consulate officer. If that is the case, he knows why the visa application was denied, and it is not uncommon for K1 applications to be denied from MENA countries. Since this petition was from another USC, there is no way you can get a copy of that information, so you only have his side of the story. As this is a social media site devoted to legal immigration, we have no way to determine your relationship with him, but I would be very careful. Good Luck!

The marriage certificate should function as a legal name change document regardless if it explicitly shows that.

I agree, this will require a good lawyer, and you laid out the real only option. Definitely will be a slog for the OP to get back their LPR status.

Just Wow.

Trump was subjected to a primary, if anyone is an "anointed one" it is the candidate that did not win a single primary vote, and has not actual platform or policy position. If you deny the divisive and hate rhetoric of the left by their leaders and MSM activists, you are as gaslighted as many other Democrat voters.

A lot like my wife, and we were only married 3 yrs when she naturalized. You should be fine, the N400 only requires you to be living in marital union, trips abroad alone to visit family do not break that. Good Luck!

Her doppelganger Gwen Whipple (Tim Walz's spouse) was getting too much news I guess.

If you notified USCIS after you naturalized you should be fine (actually USCIS should automatically change from F2A to IR1). As to expediting the process, you can try, but I would not hold my breathe. Good Luck! Relevant criteria or circumstances that may be considered in determining whether to grant an expedite request include, but are not limited to, the below: Severe financial loss to a company or person, provided that the need for urgent action is not the result of the petitioner’s or applicant’s failure to timely file the benefit request or to timely respond to any requests for evidence; Emergencies or urgent humanitarian situations; Nonprofit organization (as designated by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS)) whose request is in furtherance of the cultural or social interests of the United States; Government interests, including cases identified by the government as urgent because they involve the public interest, public safety, national interest, or national security interests; and Clear USCIS error. Not every circumstance that fits under the criteria or examples above will result in expedited processing. See more information below on expedite criteria and circumstances. For USCIS’ expedite policy guidance, see Volume 1 of the USCIS Policy Manual. https://www.uscis.gov/forms/filing-guidance/expedite-requests

You are correct, but technically 21 unless he marries before then. CSPA for Immediate Relatives If you are an immediate relative, a VAWA self-petitioning abused spouse or child of a U.S. citizen, or a derivative child of a VAWA self-petitioning abused spouse or child of a U.S. citizen, your age is frozen on the date the Form I-130 or Form I-360 is filed. If you were under the age of 21 at the time the petition was filed, you are eligible for CSPA and will not age out. However, you must remain unmarried in order to qualify. https://www.uscis.gov/green-card/green-card-processes-and-procedures/child-status-protection-act-cspa

Is 21 the age a majority in Singapore?

Not on the I130, that comes later when you are actually applying for a visa for him and he is under 21, or whatever age family law in Singapore is the age a majority. As to what you need custody wise, as @Boiler mentioned, that is best asked of a family law attorney in Singapore, but I do believe legal sole custody would suffice if required. However if your ex- is allowing this it is really a moot point. Good Luck!

As long as the marriage takes place before he turns 18, your USC spouse can file for him. The custody question will come up when your son actually applies for a visa at the consulate.

They are still suggesting a complete re-filing of the package making sure all pages are included. You do not have to redo all N400 pages, hopefully you kept a copy of what was previously submitted, you just need to send a new, complete package (do not just send in pg. 12). Good Luck!

If the check was not cashed, then the filing was rejected. You need to include all pages of a form when filing, so if you saved a copy of your filing, add page 12 and re-submit with a new check. You can cancel the old check just to make sure. Alternatively, since it does not appear you are required to file by mail, maybe fill out the form online, and scan and upload all the evidence you included with your first filing. Good Luck!

Many on the left are easily gaslighted. Stolen Valor perpetrator Tim Walz is really weird, and his wife is even more so.

So can anyone shed light on what are the rules? It seems extreme leftist rhetoric fine, any rhetoric from the right bad. Btw, still waiting on a policy or position from Kackling Kamala. What Are the Rules? Consider this a forlorn cry for exposition and specificity. Will someone, somewhere, in the name of all that is good and true, tell me what the bloody rules are for determining whether rhetorical bombast counts as mere everyday hyperbole or as the ineluctable prerequisite to political violence? I have looked and looked for a pattern, but, despite having pried up the floorboards and scoured the attic and investigated every last corner of the basement, I can find no standard that I find satisfactory. Surely, there must be more undergirding all this than just Calvinball? Yesterday, Donald Trump’s life was threatened for the second time in two months. In response, I have seen two lines emerge from the media. The first is that the attempt should not be blamed on his critics but on the would-be shooter, who is crazy. The second line is that, by some extraordinary alchemy that I evidently lack the intellect to comprehend, the blame for his having been targeted lies with Trump himself. As a writer who has uniformly rejected the idea that political arguments ought to be blamed for the actions of vicious criminals, I am in instinctive agreement with the first approach. But I am also aware that, unlike myself, those who are currently advancing that case do not do so consistently. Thus, my inquiry: If my one-size-fits-all rule has not been adopted writ large, then what has been? Back when Nancy Pelosi’s husband was attacked with a hammer, I was informed that, if the victim of an attack had at any point been “demonized” by a political party, then that political party was responsible for what follows. Indeed, in the immediate aftermath of that ugly incident, the Washington Post recruited no fewer than three of its top writers to draw a direct line between the assault on Paul Pelosi and a series of anti-Nancy political commercials that were run in 2010 — twelve years earlier. The “years of vilification,” the Post proposed, “culminated Friday when Pelosi’s husband, Paul, was attacked with a hammer during an early-morning break-in at the couple’s home in San Francisco by a man searching for the speaker and shouting ‘Where is Nancy? Where is Nancy?’” Lest anyone misunderstand what it meant by “culminated,” the paper made sure to spell it out. “For many Democrats,” the piece concluded, “the attack on Nancy Pelosi’s husband represents the all-but-inevitable conclusion of Republicans’ increasingly violent and threatening rhetoric toward their political opponent.” https://www.nationalreview.com/2024/09/what-are-the-rules/

I am going to post this in two places since it fits in both threads. I would also like to understand the rules. What Are the Rules? Consider this a forlorn cry for exposition and specificity. Will someone, somewhere, in the name of all that is good and true, tell me what the bloody rules are for determining whether rhetorical bombast counts as mere everyday hyperbole or as the ineluctable prerequisite to political violence? I have looked and looked for a pattern, but, despite having pried up the floorboards and scoured the attic and investigated every last corner of the basement, I can find no standard that I find satisfactory. Surely, there must be more undergirding all this than just Calvinball? Yesterday, Donald Trump’s life was threatened for the second time in two months. In response, I have seen two lines emerge from the media. The first is that the attempt should not be blamed on his critics but on the would-be shooter, who is crazy. The second line is that, by some extraordinary alchemy that I evidently lack the intellect to comprehend, the blame for his having been targeted lies with Trump himself. As a writer who has uniformly rejected the idea that political arguments ought to be blamed for the actions of vicious criminals, I am in instinctive agreement with the first approach. But I am also aware that, unlike myself, those who are currently advancing that case do not do so consistently. Thus, my inquiry: If my one-size-fits-all rule has not been adopted writ large, then what has been? Back when Nancy Pelosi’s husband was attacked with a hammer, I was informed that, if the victim of an attack had at any point been “demonized” by a political party, then that political party was responsible for what follows. Indeed, in the immediate aftermath of that ugly incident, the Washington Post recruited no fewer than three of its top writers to draw a direct line between the assault on Paul Pelosi and a series of anti-Nancy political commercials that were run in 2010 — twelve years earlier. The “years of vilification,” the Post proposed, “culminated Friday when Pelosi’s husband, Paul, was attacked with a hammer during an early-morning break-in at the couple’s home in San Francisco by a man searching for the speaker and shouting ‘Where is Nancy? Where is Nancy?’” Lest anyone misunderstand what it meant by “culminated,” the paper made sure to spell it out. “For many Democrats,” the piece concluded, “the attack on Nancy Pelosi’s husband represents the all-but-inevitable conclusion of Republicans’ increasingly violent and threatening rhetoric toward their political opponent.” https://www.nationalreview.com/2024/09/what-are-the-rules/

Hmm, they go after right wing extremist early, but let the left wing/Democrat extremist free to do their damage even when on the FBI's radar. Makes a lot of sense, no wonder the FBI has become a laughingstock. Btw, nice deflection.

Just a tip, don't go to the SSA early in the morning when it opens as they tend to be very busy, wait until after lunch. Good Luck!

Depends, was the entire package rejected, and the check not cashed, or did you receive and RFE? If the latter, then yes, send in a new complete application, or file online if that is possible (i.e. requesting a fee waiver or reduced fee you cannot file online). If an RFE, you need to follow the instructions on the RFE and respond accordingly. Good Luck! Q. Can I file online? A. Yes, you can file the Form N-400 online. However, if you are requesting a fee waiver (Form I-912) or a reduced fee, you cannot file online and must file a paper Form N-400. You can download the N-400 form and instructions at https://www.uscis.gov/n-400. https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/questions-and-answers/Form-N400-FAQ-6-18-24.pdf

Personally, I would not worry about it as by the time you apply you will have been married 9-10 years, so you will have plenty of marital evidence. Back when my wife applied, she had taken multiple trips outside of the US alone to visit our family there which was more than 120 days in total over three years (I joined her on a couple of those trips), and we had no issues. Also, back then, my wife filed by paper, and the marital evidence was only required at the interview, so we did not include any of that evidence of our marriage with the filing, but we did bring it to the interview, with the online filing, most people upload all that information up front which is fine. Now to be absolutely safe, you might want to wait 120 days, but IMO that is not necessary in your case unless the 120 days was spent all at one time. Good Luck!

Not sure now post Covid, but I always found that the SSA offices had a big line first thing in the mornings and were much less busy after lunch. I remember walking into my nearest office around 9:30am and it was SRO, then after my wife got her GC we went back to get the DHS note removed and we went around 2pm to the same office and there was like three people in line. YMMV.