rich rich

12 minutes ago, Family said:

I guess you are right…maybe these fellows don’t like it

 

 

Republican Sen. Jeff Flake was another politician who feuded with Trump this year. Trump called him 'Jeff Flakey.'

 

Steve Bannon, Trump's ex-chief strategist, was named 'Sloppy Steve' by the President in January after his contributions to Michael Wolff's book 'Fire and Fury.'

 

https://www.tmj4.com/news/16-people-president-trump-has-nicknamed

Hehe, glad you're enjoying it. Gotta kill time somehow lol. 

I got one for you. This one's a tongue twister. Ron Desanctimonious. Wonder where his ancestors immigrated from

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2022/11/ron-desanctimonious-trump-desantis-nickname.html

9 minutes ago, Mike E said:

Another slur.  Welcome to the list.  This will be my last reply to you.  
 

The INA act says assets can count in lieu of income at a rate of 5 to 1 of the minimum required income.  So yes the law yes we should be treated differently based on net worth or income.  
 

When you get a job  with USCIS, ICE, or CBP as an officer you can look it up.  
 

But then again if you had such a job you wouldn’t have difficulty producing an acceptable I-134 or I-864.  

I'm happy to be on that coveted list. I hope you mean it will be your last reply to anything I post. 

Before you go though, how's that a slur? He might actually have gotten that golden ticket bond. 

I think I'll treat you like a thousand-aire. But see, this is America. I treat everyone equally. It's why we're all here and why everyone wants to come. 

17 minutes ago, Mike E said:

When your ancestors immigrated to America, did they keep their original name or did they AmericanIze it? If so, do you like it when people insist on using the name that is not on your U.S. birth certificate?

 

As a person of 100 percent ethnic  German, ancestry, I find your slur  to be offensive.  German immigrants were victims of bigotry and discrimination in this country and it appears to continue here on Visajourney.  We changed our names. We gave up our language.  It will never be enough for us to assimilate, will it?

 

Assuming:

 

1. he filled out an I-864 for his wife’s parents (presumptuous given Melania Trump was a well paid model and it is likely she had sufficient income, even if just residuals)

 

2. he did an income based I-864

 

then he likely hired attorneys that understood the INA law better than you, me, and any consular officer, and thus showed his real income versus taxable income was enough per the INA law. Any consular officer with an incorrect understanding of INA would be corrected.  
 

If he did sign an I-864, I doubt it was income based. There are asset based I-864s and given he is a billionaire he would easily have had enough assets. 
 

Regardless he is a billionaire and based your posts you aren’t even a ten thousand-aire. You should not expect to be treated equally to him.  

Yes, they kept their original name. 

Who knows, maybe he did a bond, eh?

So we should be treated based on our net worth? What's your net worth Mike? I'll need that info before I decide how to treat you. 

Someone asked how Drumpf was tied to the immigration process.  The exact timeline is not publicly available info.

M. Drumpf's parents were given citizenship in 2018.  As her husband, Drumpf was possibly on the I-864 form as part of her household in the LPR process.  "Trump on his federal tax returns declared negative income in 2015, 2016, 2017 and 2020, and that he paid a total of $1,500 in income taxes for the years 2016 and 2017."  

sources:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-45137752

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/12/21/trump-income-tax-returns-detailed-in-new-report-.html

9 hours ago, wazzujoel said:

@rich rich

 

Yes you're correct I was more specifically addressing K1 as opposed to other types of immigration cases. Since I am going through K1, I am plugged into a lot of communities that are also going through the same K1 process. And I am personally amazed by the number of people that are going through this process, but get the one-time meeting requirement, and then think they are ready to marry this person. It seems that there are many people living below the poverty line that think the K1 process is a good idea, and that's what I don't understand or agree with. 

 

someone in capital intensive businesses are still filing taxes and still have an AGI and thus aren't below the poverty line probably.  You know someone working full time at minimum wage will be above the minimum poverty line. 

 

Good point on bringing your wife's parents or siblings here and I agree with you this sort of immigration where someone comes and is supported by the government is a rounding error on our massive military budget. The motivation behind my post wasn't that I was concerned about the taxpayer burden. My motivation was more coming from the K1 perspective where I feel that if you are living below the poverty line than you wont have the means to really get to know your partner in the way you should before marrying someone. 

Thanks for your thoughts and thanks for reposting.

I originally brought up the bond question because it seemed like an easy way to meet the support requirement.  Some of the other posters did not bother to see the entire video before commenting.  The lawyer does mention that you get the bond back at some point (e.g. like a loan).

There's been deleted posts and other comments, so I'll try to address everything:

1) It's not a loophole if it is part of immigration rules and regs. It's a way to make things easier.

2) I bring up Drumpf because whether you like him or not, he is a billionaire and was POTUS.  He has NEGATIVE AGI for many years.  So he would hypothetically have to fill out negative income on his affidavit of support.  Yes, a billionaire can "make less money" and pay less taxes than someone on minimum wage.  So if a billionaire can have negative AGI, so can a mid-level investor, especially a real estate investor.  That's the whole point of investing in real estate.

3) You could be living abroad as a very successful corporate drone with a high salary - you could be the god-loving CEO of BMW and Tata.  But guess what?  Your US-based income is a big fat ZERO.  So that's what you put down for your income on the I-134.  Yes, less income than minimum wage.

4) In regards to bringing in destitute people, I don't want to get too much into illegal immigration, but just watch the news to understand the status of our borders.

5) There are arguments back and forth across this forum on whether asses with zero income would allow you to meet the support reqs.  Some people swear they have done it.  The naysayers have not tried it but swear that won't work.  See #1 - bond would make things easier.

1 minute ago, Jorgedig said:

🤷🏼‍♀️.  Why are all of your posts about looking for ways game  the system or look for loopholes? 

Oh, so this is personal.  How is this a loophole?

I see you got your noa2 in 7 months. The wait time is double that now. You wouldn't want to find a legal way to speed things up?

You should think more and talk less. Keep the negatively to yourself

On 12/25/2022 at 11:20 PM, JeanneAdil said:

• Determined you were inadmissible on the public charge grounds (INA 212(a)(4)); and
• Notified you that you may submit a public charge bond. 

We will reject this form if we have not notified you that you may submit a public charge bond. 

 

don't think i have ever heard the bond being offered 

 

u can afford a lawyer but think u need a bond??

understand the bond if determined u may use one can be expensive as the amount is determined by the agency

i would consider to get a 2nd job or a joint sponsor

 

this is the same lawyer who told u to overstay a tourist visa and AOS 

No I can't afford a lawyer, I can barely afford to post on this free forum.

Bond is easier.  You want to be my cosponsor?

On 12/25/2022 at 11:31 PM, Jorgedig said:

If you are worried about this for the I-134, what will you do for the I-865 when it comes time to AOS?   Time to get a job or find a joint sponsor.

Why do you feel the need to post negative, unconstructive comments?

23 minutes ago, iwannaplay54 said:

I have never seen anyone on this site post a bond in 17 years.  
If you can post a bond shouldn’t you be able to qualify on assets?  Build a timeline or advise where you are in this process if you wish specific help.

Still waiting for noa2. Just looking down the road

2 minutes ago, Mike E said:

https://www.uscis.gov/i-945
 

“If we determine that an applicant is deter inadmissible based on the public charge ground, but is otherwise admissible, the applicant may be admitted in the discretion of the secretary of homeland security after posting a suitable and proper bond. Before an applicant may post a public charge bond (on Form I-945), we must invite them to do so.”

 

Good luck with that. 
 

Lots of erroneous advice being posted by lawyers these days. 
 

 

 

 

Thanks Mike

Lawyer talks about using a bond as a last resort if you can't get a joint sponsor.

The immigration officer handbook mentions this but it's unclear who requests to post the bond, the sponsor or immigration officer.  Has anyone used this?  Seems like an informal kind of deal, there doesn't appear to be any additional forms to fill out.

1 minute ago, amh123 said:

Did you mean to link the video talking about religious ceremonies?

In my situation, we never did any sort of ceremony, just text messages using the word "spouse" I didn't see any mention of that in the video you linked, but still good information on ceremonies thank you!

 

I couldn't find anything specific on calling each other husband and wife. This was the closest thing I could find. If someone can have a religious ceremony and be considered unmarried, then perhaps calling each other husband and wife isn't a huge deal?

7 minutes ago, Boiler said:

What is wrong with this? Other than the 60 days.

Absolutely nothing. Just an FYI. Why is 60 days wrong?

Yet another instance where Hacking recommended changing from consular processing to AOS

On 12/18/2022 at 4:08 AM, amh123 said:

Hello,

When I submitted my I-129F, I attached 23 pages of WhatsApp chat logs spread out over the timeline of the relationship.  I didn't think much of it and didn't read through every single line until reading another forum post. My fiance is Colombian and she uses the term "husband(esposo)" as a term of endearment and her way she feels of being sweet in our texts. 

I went back and reviewed the copy I made of what I submitted in my K-1 Packet, and of the 23 pages of texts, she used "husband" 3 times and I called her "wife" once.  We also have plenty of uses of boyfriend/girlfriend in the earlier messages as well as fiance. Also are conversations where she says "marry meee" in a playful manner which in text may not come off that way. All our social medias show engaged/fiance. Bad mistake on my end, I know, that just didn't cross my mind when I was submitting the packet.

 From what I've read, this will be an issue during the interview for my fiance and this looks like i'll be denied? My question is if the interviewer will read through each line of the 23 pages of text messages and what our chances of approval are at now?  I only submitted the K-1 packet 2 months ago. Trying to decide if it's a high chance of denial because of those text messages, would it be better to pivot to CR-1 now instead of waiting 1.5 years for a rejection and then starting the CR-1 process?

 

Thanks for any advice!

I think this will alleviate your concerns

https://youtu.be/dcqWBNHDN2g

1 hour ago, ROK2USA said:

Sounds like he changed his mind about K1 visas... a few months ago Hacking was saying he wouldn't file lawsuits for K1 visas because they were being denied. Perhaps he has had some successful cases recently. 

IMO I would wait the 3 months, I don't think suing would speed up the case at all because the majority of people are in the same situation as you... 

Thanks for the info. I wonder how many fiance or marriage cases Hacking does. From the processing data posted on the i-129f filers by month, it doesn't seem like there is a significant change in the number of denials. 

13 minutes ago, usmsbow said:

USCIS is funded by application fees and not an annual appropriation, so its work does not stop when other parts of the government shut down.

Yes you're right! But this law firm says shutdown would increase delays unfortunately.

https://corporateimmigrationpartners.com/us-government-shutdown-looms-immigration-might-be-affected/

1 hour ago, ROK2USA said:

Sounds like he changed his mind about K1 visas... a few months ago Hacking was saying he wouldn't file lawsuits for K1 visas because they were being denied. Perhaps he has had some successful cases recently. 

IMO I would wait the 3 months, I don't think suing would speed up the case at all because the majority of people are in the same situation as you... 

Thanks. My main concern is that because i-129f's are being filed faster than they are being processed, waiting time will increase by 0.5-1 month as each month passes. Also, there is a chance of government shutdown. I don't know if visa processing continues under shutdown. 

1 hour ago, TBoneTX said:

I wouldn't try it until you're past 15 months or whatever the estimated time.

 

Phone, wait interminably on the line while listening to that infuriating "hold" music, play hardball with the first USCIS clown who picks up, insist on escalation, and closely query the officer regarding where your file is, what's the status, and can it be moved to the next int

Ok.  I've called before and the only way to get a live person is to ask for an in person appointment.  But the person you speak to will only schedule an appointment.  They won't answer any other questions.  Are you calling a different number?

10 minutes ago, TBoneTX said:

Don't bother.  At most, phone USCIS, escalate to an immigration officer, and ask if your petition is someplace where it can be moved along to the next place it needs to go.

So if I'm still at NOA1 10-11 months in, I can do that?  I've been unable to even reach a live person on USCIS.  I have to request an appointment and even then they don't always call back when they say they will.

Could you please outline the process?

Just now, nastra30 said:

You'll lose if you sue while case is within processing time.

I think so too. Otherwise, why couldn't you sue at 6 months?

https://youtu.be/FVBMAiTQLd0?t=826

Immigration lawyer advises suing to speed up progress for k1 at the 12 month mark. But USCIS website says waiting time is 15.5 months. Can we really sue at 12 months or is lawyer just drumming up business? May be worth it saving 3.5 months. Backlog just keeps growing. 

13 minutes ago, FilledesEtoiles said:

Wow, that is insane! I saw someone on a FB group who did that with another lawyer, and they got approved a few weeks later, at the 12 month mark.

It's just that, like you say, processing times are way passed that mark right now for everybody ...

 

Really? Do you have a link? Thanks. Might be worth suing to save 3.5 months. Backlog keeps getting longer 

https://youtu.be/FVBMAiTQLd0?t=826

Immigration lawyer advises suing to speed up progress for k1 at the 12 month mark.  But USCIS website says waiting time is 15.5 months.  Can we really sue at 12 months or is lawyer just drumming up business?

A bit off topic, but government funding constraints really should play no part in hiring for USCIS.  How much money do they waste on stupid things?  DoD can't even pass an audit?  Even Enron, Worldcom, Lehman passed their audits.  USCIS literally is in the business of creating new taxpayers. 

saw this video on another post advising against trying to AOS from visitor visa or ESTA, but it it 2 years old, and references the DtrumPF administration coming down on legal immigration.

she seems a bit more cautious.  Hacking just seems a bit cavalier in his advice on the show

https://www.visajourney.com/forums/topic/786717-esta-to-aos-potential-problem/?do=findComment&comment=10706480