J+J

I can confirm that the Myanmar embassy approved K-1 visas on Monday  2/23 - good news for K-1 applicants.

I can confirm that the Myanmar embassy approved K-1 visas on Monday  2/23 - good news for K-1 applicants.

I can confirm that the Myanmar embassy approved K-1 visas on Monday  2/23 - good news for K-1 applicants.

May have been approved in a House Committee, but not relevant. Political posturing.

You can just go ahead and file for AOS. Other than that you can disregard what the lawyer said together with the shaming of some members here for that matter. 
 
Only thing you need to keep in mind is that they won’t be able to work and leave the country for about 4-5 months until they receive their EAD and AP. 
 
Additionally familiarise yourself with the income requirements for sponsorship and the new public charge guidelines (the latter is irrelevant if in some way you manage to get a courthouse wedding and get a packet together send before the 23rs, but that’s unlikely). 
 
Other than that welcome here. Some personal advice regarding VJ. There’s a loud part of the member base that's right leaning to say the least some of which are of the calibre that would love to pull up the ladder behind them. More often than not they’re seasoned members around here. If you’re not interested in useless debates I’d advise to just keep to yourself.
 
Additionally there’s a general contempt for people that adjust status inside the US that manifests amongst other ways by scaring you into thinking things are gonna go bad, scary warnings on certain pages here and shaming people to name a few ways. It typically stems out of a feeling of envy or unfairness, it’s typically not personal though. 
 
Either way, good luck to the two of you

I'm watching the FAM to see if/when the DOS sets a formal guideline for the consulates. See towards the bottom for the existing ban.
https://fam.state.gov/FAM/09FAM/09FAM030214.html

Has anybody been able to confirm that the expanded presidential proclamation ban impacts K-1 visas as well?
I have been under the assumption that it does, until I read this today on the Myanmar embassy website:
 
https://mm.usembassy.gov/faq-on-212f-visa-restrictions-for-burma-under-presidential-proclamation/
 
"Q: Will these new restrictions affect fiancé visas or asylee and refugee following-to-join spouse and children (V92 and V93, respectively)?
A: No. The Proclamation only restricts the entry of immigrant and diversity visa applicants from the subject countries."
 
The K-1 is technically not classified as an immigrant visa although in all practicality, it has immigration intent.  Maybe this technicality is allowing K-1 to be excluded from the ban?

I am referring to Trump's extension of the immigration ban for several countries, not any travel ban regarding corona virus (which as of today is only impacting China).
 
The new presidential proclamation states that on February 21st, immigrant visas will no longer be approved for citizens of Myanmar (along with several other countries).  This appears to include K-1.
 
As to the justification for the ban - you can read the actual proclamation and decide for yourself.  The civil unrest may be part of it but I believe it is more in regards to the difficulty (or total inability) for the US to perform background checks on Myanmar immigrants - they have no electronic passport, no electronic records that the US is able to access.  Personally I do not believe Trump cares at all about a genocide in a country halfway around the world, and he is just trying to curtail legal immigration.
 
That is what I'm referring to  in my post, all that said, as Greenbaum stated it is still unclear how the embassies will proceed.  It's also unclear how long the ban will last and all the typical unpredictability that comes with US politics. 

I am referring to Trump's extension of the immigration ban for several countries, not any travel ban regarding corona virus (which as of today is only impacting China).
 
The new presidential proclamation states that on February 21st, immigrant visas will no longer be approved for citizens of Myanmar (along with several other countries).  This appears to include K-1.
 
As to the justification for the ban - you can read the actual proclamation and decide for yourself.  The civil unrest may be part of it but I believe it is more in regards to the difficulty (or total inability) for the US to perform background checks on Myanmar immigrants - they have no electronic passport, no electronic records that the US is able to access.  Personally I do not believe Trump cares at all about a genocide in a country halfway around the world, and he is just trying to curtail legal immigration.
 
That is what I'm referring to  in my post, all that said, as Greenbaum stated it is still unclear how the embassies will proceed.  It's also unclear how long the ban will last and all the typical unpredictability that comes with US politics. 

Under the climate of this health issue, maybe you will hear something from the embassy concerning alternatives. It's still too early and embassies have not figured this out yet. Stay in touch with the embassy's website for current details but If it were me, I would keep moving forward. You're still many months away from the interview, so it is premature to make any decisions at this point. Good luck. Please return to this post and let us know what is transpiring if there is any new news. Good luck.

Voting Trump out of office in November is an option to getting this ban removed. That's just my opinion!!

I don't think anybody is saying that having a lawyer means the immigration process itself is easier or faster.  I'm certainly not saying that.
 
However you could argue that for the document gathering process and compiling the application, a knowledgeable attorney could help a not-so-knowledgeable applicant get that together faster and with a lower chance of errors (if the attorney is competent!).  Yes, of course you could DIY with help from this forum, as most do, but IMO a competent attorney would get you there faster, if you are just starting and know nothing.   
 
By the way I advocate the DIY approach, but this person is asking about attorneys so I figured I'd answer the question rather than just say "you don't need that".

This forum is very quick to say you don't need a lawyer, while knowing nothing of your case.  If you want one then I will try to answer your question.
 
You have a tough situation where it sounds like you wouldn't be able to meet your lawyer face to face, if the lawyer is in the US.  The phone always can work if you are comfortable enough with that option.  
 
To find a lawyer you should go to avvo.com and find a highly rated lawyer who specializes in immigration only.  I don't know that it matters what state.  Make sure they are "tech savvy" and are able to use email and file sharing apps like Dropbox because you will be exchanging a lot of documents.  You may have to pay for a phone consult, that's normal, but attorneys may roll that into their cost if you hire them.  Expect to pay $2000-$3000 to get you all the way through AOS.  Ask lots of questions before hiring.
 
Good luck.
 
 
 
 

While this is true, OP may be looking to front load the petition.  Rather than say "not needed" it might be more helpful to just answer the question - that said, I don't know the answer!   I don't use FB but I think a quick google search would get you what you need.  I took a quick look  and there are Youtube videos explaining how to do it for chat logs - but not sure about video logs.

All these government forms are available online to view, for free.  Here is DS-160.
https://travel.state.gov/content/dam/visas/PDF-other/DS-160-Example_11012019.pdf
 
See page 19 which lists all the social media accounts that are asked about.
 
Why are you so worried about social media accounts this early in the process?

Mike - yes, my records were sealed, not expunged.   So I did have the option to unseal my records, but opted not to.
I submitted a CORI report from before I sealed the records, showing that charges had been dismissed.  My attorney believed that would be sufficient for my situation and charges.
 
If you don't have any paperwork at all for these charges, you need to see if the court will give you a letter declaring that there are no records in your name, then in 129F you explain that the charges were expunged.  The court letter backs up your statement.  Keep in mind I am far from an expert and just going through the process myself.
 
I think you are right that this all does need to be handled at the petition stage so I misspoke.  
 
 

Don't rely on the text/email by the way - I filled out G-1145 and didn't receive any e-notification, just the mailed NOA1 about two weeks later.

Don't rely on the text/email by the way - I filled out G-1145 and didn't receive any e-notification, just the mailed NOA1 about two weeks later.

While this is true, OP may be looking to front load the petition.  Rather than say "not needed" it might be more helpful to just answer the question - that said, I don't know the answer!   I don't use FB but I think a quick google search would get you what you need.  I took a quick look  and there are Youtube videos explaining how to do it for chat logs - but not sure about video logs.

That’s grounds for inadmissibility moral turpitude level fraud right there.

you send PROOF. photos are not PROOF. when my son was little i photoshopped santa into a christmas eve photo and told him it came from our security camera.
 
do you really think santa was in my family room?
 
send copies of boarding passes, hotel reservations, items with concrete dates in CONJUNCTION WITH THE PHOTOS that PROVE you met within 2 years.

Just get the flu shot and spare yourself the worry.

Not true, especially for cases in Casablanca. Yes, the minimum requirements are the same everywhere, but the more visits you have the better, for both K1 and CR1 visas. I made 5 visits before our K1 interview and I truly believe that we were approved rather easily because I had visited so often.

I strongly disagree.  Multiple visits for some consulates IS important........even with a K-1.  What you stated MIGHT get a person past the initial I-129f filing, but trying to get  through the interview in some consulates (high fraud) with only a single visit would be foolish.  
but incorrect.

Don't you need two separate letter of intent to marry letters?
The way you word it sounds like you have one letter that both of you signed - my understanding is that you need two separate letters, one from you one from fiance.