Gary and Alla

what do you expect a lawyer to do for you?
The consulate can return any visa application at any time, it is not correct to think "She should have been issued the visa". They do not randomly deny visas, they had a reason to send it back, the reason was corrected or explained and the petition was returned.
The petition has an expiration date, if it has been more than a year, I am surprised they even made an interview appointment, unless you have extended the petition several times (you do not say you have) If the petition is expired, she will not get a visa and there is nothing a lawyer can do...the petition is expired. A lawyer cannot "unexpire" the visa. Your health problems are very unlikely to play into the matter, YOU are not required at a visa interview, if YOU made a choice for her not to come earlier, for wahtever reason, that is your choice. No do-overs for personal choices. ANY lawyer will take your money and "try", but he cannot un-do what is done.
If she has plenty of evidence of your relationship to present at the interview then that may not be a problem. She should be prepared, with documentation, that you have been unable to travel. Send her medical records and a statement from your doctor. Obviously you know your situation and you need to prepare for it.
I see yuour problem as ...
1. Question about validity of petition approval
2. Evidence of relationship in the absence of personal visits over a longer than normal period of visa processing
If you know any attorneys that can change either one of those things...pay them lots of money, they are GOLD.

At some point you just have to give up and marry a woman from a country where "feminism" means high heels and stockings. It is quite likely English will not be her native language. After that...who cares?

Yeah, good idea, the other thing we could do is drop our average annual temperature 22 degrees or so, convert 90% of our country's territory to uninhabitable frozen tundra or snowy forest and perpetual bogs, subject ALL our ports to 4 months of frozen inoperation. That would cut down on illegal immigration. But we would have free healthcare. Oh...IF the neighboring country where 90% of our population lived within 30 minutes of (to escape uninhabitable frozen tundra, snowy foresta and perpetual bogs)had a profit based health system we could use as needed to relieve congestion in our own system and IF they provided nearly all our military capacity, FREE, on an "as-needed" basis.
Yes, lets be like Canada.

At some point you just have to give up and marry a woman from a country where "feminism" means high heels and stockings. It is quite likely English will not be her native language. After that...who cares?

when I read these things I often think "Who is surprised by this?" And also "Who am I supposed to feel sorry for?" The banks that loaned losers money without documenting income? The banks that loaned losers money with no investment of the loser's own? Like it or not, politically correct or not...some people are just freakin' losers and always will be. when you loan them money you will lose it.
The real problem is that the government allowed these morons to privatize the profit and socialize the loss. I really couldn't care less if my neighbor buys a boat instead of paying his mortgage, just don't come to me to bail out the bank that was stupid enough to give a loser a mortgage.

when I read these things I often think "Who is surprised by this?" And also "Who am I supposed to feel sorry for?" The banks that loaned losers money without documenting income? The banks that loaned losers money with no investment of the loser's own? Like it or not, politically correct or not...some people are just freakin' losers and always will be. when you loan them money you will lose it.
The real problem is that the government allowed these morons to privatize the profit and socialize the loss. I really couldn't care less if my neighbor buys a boat instead of paying his mortgage, just don't come to me to bail out the bank that was stupid enough to give a loser a mortgage.

I knew you would get pounced on by the "I-really-don't-care-about-anyone-but-me-but-internet-ink-is-free-so-why-not-act-like-it" crowd that thinks some greater purpose is served by pretending it is an outrage to have a 4 month delay in a lifelong process. They offer no advice to the OP but lots of internet "hugs". They are almost always flying a UK or Canadian flag. Mostly people that never did any work with the government (but want them to run their healthcare) and do not understand it can take one department of the government YEARS to approve a permit application for another part of the government.
These same people, if marrying a domestic mate without government approval, would think nothing of waiting 4 months to get the banquet hall date they want, or 4 months to have a wedding dress made, but because they are in love and can't stand to be apart the government should fly through the process so they aren't kept apart.
I was never apart from Alla for more than 6 weeks. Just get on a plane and GO, there are non-stops every day from New York, the government is NOT keeping you apart. The OP is free to go visit anytime she wants. She can wait outside the consulate with her fiancee for word.

oui, oui monsieur!

Like I said Danno, you want to ban gays because they are Gay and because it has some benefit to the military, they say so and state the reasons. Give me the benefits gained.
The military does not ALLOW short people IF they do not SAY they are short. What a dumb@ss form of reasoning. This is the problem with political HACKS, they have no sense, they just go with the party line no matter what and when they can't reasonably explain a position they stammer out some horribly ridiculous utterance. Dummycrats are just as guilty, which is why I can never understand anyone who has loyalty to a political party that only wants to impose it's views on others by force.
Please name ANY OTHER condition that is OK if you do not tell about it, but gets you kicked out of the military, by expressed policy, if you do. PLEASE. What this proves is that the whole thing is ridiculous. Somehow the military is protected if gays don't talk about sex, but the world goes to hell in a hand basket if they do? Are you seriously putting forth this argument?
Short people are sought out in the tank corps and submarine service, BTW not to mention several other specialties. A short, really strong guy is ideal for tank duty, no matter who he has sex with. I never tried it, but I have been inside tanks and it does not seem a good place for sex.

Paul, soare me the fake outrage, OK? Your post began with how sex and who you sleep with should never be an issue "at work". Give me a break. If straight military men can discuss ANY subject better than sex and the girls they are banging at the moment I do not know which one it is. Maybe their rifles. To suggest that they aren't is totally ignorant at best, just plain stupid at worst.
It was the entire (false) premise of your post which has now been changed to levels of discomfort, purposes of themilitary, arguing about other reasons men and women and not admited etc. All of which proves it is not a "reason" it is an excuse. It is also why I said, if you just want to exclude gays because you are homophobic, just say so.
Personally I do not care if someone else is gay, if they talk about it or not, live together or not, whatever. I guess I am secure enough in my own relationship that what others do just doesn't concern me.
On this memorial day weekend I give thanks to all our service men and women, past and present regardless of who they have sex with when I am not looking.
Thank You!

Yeah, one thing about the military, the STRAIGHT guys never talk about girls or sex...ever. Well, not until they started letting the HOMOs in, then I guess, why not, I mean THEY talk about it. Before Bill Clinton was elected, you know, when there were NO homosexuals in the military, the men NEVER talked about sex, who they slept with, etc. Ever. Such things should never be discussed at "work" and they never did. And they never talked about VD (condoms were for rifle muzzles to keep mud out) and it is completely not true that Navy guys had a PCOD. In fact the is no such thing as an "Amerasian" baby because the men "working" in VietNam and Korea never had sex with women...they were working. Thta was just lying oriental chicks trying to get a green card.
Get a grip, will you. And stop pretending that you were ever OK with "Don't ask, Don't tell"
You hate gays, you hate that they share the planet with you and you want their rights taken away and their jobs if you can...so just fess up and say so. The only thing worse than a party-line hack is one that tries to be PC about it.

It VERY LIKELY will be mentioned and if his reaction is "WHAT?????????????" that would not be a good thing. It does not go far to demonstrate a legitimate relationship.
The interviewers premise is that they never ask questions which would not be easily answered by a couple in a legitimate relationship. They are also known for NOT putting you in the best light.
You didn't tell him because you are not secure enough in your relationship to think he can handle knowing you cared about someone else before. I do not know what his reaction to this would be...MINE would be, "Oh well, it was before you knew me and knew what you were missing out on, I really don't care how many idiots you had to wade through to get to a good guy like me. In fact. the more you dumped before keeping me is a compliment to me" Of course, if you were with me, you would know that and never be uncomfortable to say so. Go figure.
At any rate, NOTHING will be better if he finds out about it from the interviewing officer at his interview.

Yeah, one thing about the military, the STRAIGHT guys never talk about girls or sex...ever. Well, not until they started letting the HOMOs in, then I guess, why not, I mean THEY talk about it. Before Bill Clinton was elected, you know, when there were NO homosexuals in the military, the men NEVER talked about sex, who they slept with, etc. Ever. Such things should never be discussed at "work" and they never did. And they never talked about VD (condoms were for rifle muzzles to keep mud out) and it is completely not true that Navy guys had a PCOD. In fact the is no such thing as an "Amerasian" baby because the men "working" in VietNam and Korea never had sex with women...they were working. Thta was just lying oriental chicks trying to get a green card.
Get a grip, will you. And stop pretending that you were ever OK with "Don't ask, Don't tell"
You hate gays, you hate that they share the planet with you and you want their rights taken away and their jobs if you can...so just fess up and say so. The only thing worse than a party-line hack is one that tries to be PC about it.

Yeah, one thing about the military, the STRAIGHT guys never talk about girls or sex...ever. Well, not until they started letting the HOMOs in, then I guess, why not, I mean THEY talk about it. Before Bill Clinton was elected, you know, when there were NO homosexuals in the military, the men NEVER talked about sex, who they slept with, etc. Ever. Such things should never be discussed at "work" and they never did. And they never talked about VD (condoms were for rifle muzzles to keep mud out) and it is completely not true that Navy guys had a PCOD. In fact the is no such thing as an "Amerasian" baby because the men "working" in VietNam and Korea never had sex with women...they were working. Thta was just lying oriental chicks trying to get a green card.
Get a grip, will you. And stop pretending that you were ever OK with "Don't ask, Don't tell"
You hate gays, you hate that they share the planet with you and you want their rights taken away and their jobs if you can...so just fess up and say so. The only thing worse than a party-line hack is one that tries to be PC about it.

Yeah, one thing about the military, the STRAIGHT guys never talk about girls or sex...ever. Well, not until they started letting the HOMOs in, then I guess, why not, I mean THEY talk about it. Before Bill Clinton was elected, you know, when there were NO homosexuals in the military, the men NEVER talked about sex, who they slept with, etc. Ever. Such things should never be discussed at "work" and they never did. And they never talked about VD (condoms were for rifle muzzles to keep mud out) and it is completely not true that Navy guys had a PCOD. In fact the is no such thing as an "Amerasian" baby because the men "working" in VietNam and Korea never had sex with women...they were working. Thta was just lying oriental chicks trying to get a green card.
Get a grip, will you. And stop pretending that you were ever OK with "Don't ask, Don't tell"
You hate gays, you hate that they share the planet with you and you want their rights taken away and their jobs if you can...so just fess up and say so. The only thing worse than a party-line hack is one that tries to be PC about it.

His income is how much he is making and how much he can document. A person may have several sources of income and some may be non-taxable and not even included on a tax return. It is still income and still counts (interest on tax free investments, child support, workman's comp., combat pay, overseas bonus, housing expense, etc. are examples)
He should adsd together ALL his CURRENT income, which he can document, and present that as his current annual income. It does not matter what his 2009 tax return says if he can document his current income.

"probable cause"
The reason he is "suspected" is that when he was arrested and told he "was in a lot of trouble" he said "Nothing will happen to me man, I will be sent back to my country...Mexico"
ONLY when we use our tax code to penalize employers for exploiting illegal aliens will we end the problem. When our government wants people to buy cars, buy homes, caulk their windows or go to college, they know EXACTLY how to do it. When the Feds want the states to comply with sihes the Feds cannot impose (drinking age, seat belt laws) they know exactly how to do it.
IF they want to stop the flood of illegal aliens, they know exactly how to do it. They do not need to checj anyone's ID and it doesn;t matter what color their skin is. Simply impose a HUGE, ruinous TAX for not complying with labor laws by exploiting illegal aliens for profit.
And please Jen, stop referring to them as "illegal immigrants" Immigrants are not illegal as you well know. I do not think you rrefer to drug dealers as "undocumented pharmacists"

If it is killing you to wait...you will die before it is over.
Attorneys CAN NOT speed the process and can only slow the process. There is no way they can complete forms faster than you can do the same thing yourself.
Unless you have been notified by USCIS that you have some sort of problem, an attorney is a waste of money and time. Even then, there is very little to nothing an attorney can do. Generally they pay a clerk $12 an hour to fill out forms on a computer, the same forms you can download here for free, with information and documents YOU provide. Then they call you back to sign it and stuff it in an envelope and mail it. After that it is in the service centers hands. The process time will depend on the backlog of work at the service center and nothing else. Your attorney cannot even call the service center, they do not even have incoming phone lines open to the public and certainly not to attorneys. If he says otherwise, he is a liar.
Read the pinned topic at the top of the K-1 forum regarding my interview with a director at the VSC, he addresses lawyers in that interview.
The ONLY people that can get through to the service centers are congressional representatives, each service center has a congressional liason that works only with congressional people. They wil not call unless something is out of the ordinary or outside normal processing times. Usually 6 months for a K-1.
Calling the 1-800 number is completely worthless for you or an attorney. That line is answered by contracted phone operators. You will never get a viable or worhtwhile information from that info line. USCIS does not do business by phone, they do not have a tracking system like Fedex, there is really very little you can do or information you can get. You will be notified if they need something and when you are approved. In your case, your attorney will be notified.
Before your interfview, you will realize the attorney was a waste of money. They do not go to the interview with your fiancee. Aks him NOW for a copy of everything he sent to USCIS, you need that.

Decriminalizing is not the same as "legal" Marijuana should be legal like alcohol so our kids would have as hard a time getting it as they have getting alcohol. Other drugs should be decriminalized. People using them and possesing them should be hospitalized, not imprisoned. We need room for real criminals not someone poisoning their own body. People selling drugs (which will go down in number when they are legal and/or decriminalized) should be imprisoned for long periods of time. 200-300 years would be a good start. We have spent 1 trillion dollars on the war on drugs and drugs are easier for our kids to buy than cigarettes. Stupid. It is cheaper to CURE the problem than punish it.
No government regulation is needed. People will regulate it themselves by informing themselves and investing/buying/acting wisely. Those that do not inform themselves and invest/act/buy foolishly will lose money...as they should. People should be rewarded for educating themselves and acting wisely. Fools will reap the reward of being fools. Trying to protect people from being fools only dumbs down the population. My family should not be held back because someone else is too stupid to move ahead. I do not wish to lower the standards to a common level, I want to raise them. The only way the government can make things "equal" is to hold back the people who excell. They CAN force failure on clever, enterprising people, they CANNOT force success on stupid, lazy people. I strongly support each person's inalienable right to be stupid at their own expense. Leave ME out of it.
It is simple. When boiled down, we "need" the government for very little, almost nothing. Where they are cost or work effective, such as picking up my trash every Monday or plowing the streets, we should use them by mutual consent of the people.
The government does not employ people to push pencils. The government employs people to control the lives of other people by force. We need to control the government, not the other way around. The government should exist ONLY to serve us and protect us and for no other reason. EVERY law is a restriction on your life (laws never say what you CAN do, they say what you CAN'T do) and we need to be cognizant of that.

This.
I am not arguing your statistics because they are meaningless. OK, hispancis are 18 times more likely to commit crime than whites. OK, I will concede the point. If we remove illegals we reduce crime disproportionately to the number removed (compared to whites). True. But ONLY if they don't come back.
The person at the subject matter of this topic WAS removed FOUR times. But he came back and committed a rape. What part of "removing illegals" does not prevent crime do you not understand? Trapping raccoons in your backyard and taking them out into the forest does not prevent them from raiding your trash can tonight. Putting the trash can out of their reach eliminates any desire for them to climb your fence and get to your trash can. There is nothing there for them.
Why would you be against severely punishing employers that exploit illegals by hiring them and ending the economic incentive for the "removed illegals" to come back?

The majority of people, ALL people, are not criminals and do not commit rape or other crimes. Thank goodness for that fact. Even in the worst ghettos and highest crime areas...even in Juarez Mexico, most people are not criminals. By far, most are not criminals.
Removing criminals from our society will reduce crime. Nothing else will. Removing lettuce pickers and roofers will not reduce crime. Removing grass cutters and nannies will not reduce crime.
Eliminating economic incentive will eliminate illegals, eliminate abuse and exploitation of PEOPLE in violation of our labor laws. It will eliminate the "rape trees" where illegal alien women are raped by the Coyotes bringing them into the US to work for US employers so the US employers can avoid our labor laws and put more cash in their pocket.
For every case of a crime committed by an illegal aline I can name 10, 50 or 100 crimes committed by citizens. So what? Illegal entry into our country is not about crime. Trying to make it such is just smoke and mirrors.
There is NO DEBATE that US employers are the engine of the problem. Shut down the engine by cutting off its fuel and the problem stops. And WHO can debate the enforcement of our wage and hour laws? Will Madame Cleo say Mexicans should not get minimum wage? Will Obama try to eliminate minimum wage for everyone? Will Nancy Pelosi try to eliminate workman's comp laws? Will Harry Reid propose eliminating laws against sexual abuse and harassment?
Why would anyone insust on debating a worthless point when the obvious answer is undebateable?
The obvious answer to that is that only people that want illegal aliens to continue as they are now would propose and debate stupid laws as a form of diversion so they can continue to benefit from exploitation, racism and abuse of a race of people.

1. Close and tear down ALL government housing. Replace it with vouchers for renatlas that allow people to get out and choose their own place to live and schools for kids. If the ghetto housing unit costs the government $50,000 per year, and most of them cost MORE than that per unit, then give that money for housing. You thik they could get something better for $4000 per month?
2. Cut off federal sunds to ANY state that issues drivers licenses to persons under 21 years old that do not have a high school education or are not enrolled in school. No high school, no drivers license before age 21.
3. Government fundsing of education through a bachelors degree for anyone that wants it. Cheaper than welfare
4. REQUIRE people receiving welfare to WORK. Crazy? Why? Unless they are adjudged physically or mentally disabled, set it up so they can receive SUPPLEMENTAL income FOR working. Stop REQUIRING people to be poor. Stop REQUIRING people to be unemployed.
5. DO NOT fund additional babies for unwed mothers. Cohesive pamily units are beneficial to our country. DO give assiastance to FAMILIES with children. DO NOT continue to pay additional money for unwed mothers. DO NOT penalize mothers who get married.
6. REQUIRE education for persons receiving public benefits. NO public benefits unless you have at least a high school education. If you do not, then you must enroll in a school and remain enrolled while receiving benefits. EDUCATION, more than anything, reduces the likihood of needing public aid. The vast majority of people on public aid have no high school education. Almost none have college educations. NONE who are on public aid for any length of time have college educations. College is cheaper than welfare, period.
The sad fact is that the total benefits offered FAR exceed in value what that person could be expected to earn in the free market. That is the plan of dependence. Most people on welfare cannot afford to get off welfare and have no chance EVER of doing so. It is completely NOT to their advantage or their children's. It is such a perfect trap, such a perfect tool for enslaving people and controlling where they live.
The average welfare recepient lacks the skills and education to even hope to make more than minimum wage, yet they are being offered 10 times that amount in benefits, free housing, food, medical care, spending money. They MUST stay poor, they MUST stay uneducated, they MUST stay uneducated. They MUST stay dependent.
We need to make it advantageous NOT to stay on welfare, we need to make it POSSIBLE not to stay on welfare. We need to offer people a better hope than welfare for all their life.
This is not a problem that will go away overnight, it was designed to be permanent and debilitating to a certain part of the population, it works very well in that regard, just as designed.
The first step would be FREE paid education through 4 years of college for ALL citizens and legal residents, the return would far exceed the cost.
Anyone knows I am NOT one to promote government programs, which is exactly why I support this one. It will eventually eliminate the need for the others.

Crazy?
You want to know the REAL reason New Orleans was not evacuated? Really? The storm hit on the 29th day of a 31 day month. Two more days until "pay day". THAT is why they didn't leave. THAT is "depedence" THAT is control. The government absolutely positively has total and absolute control over where ALL those people will live, eat, go to school. They had MORE freedom as slaves, property of plantation owners.
Had the government, who knew the storm waws coming for 5 days, gone down there and handed out the welfare checks they would be sending about that time anyway, they city would have self-evacuated. The government would have saved billions, the Super-dome would not have been destroyed and George Bush would not look like such a dumb@ss.
BUT, they did not WANT to. Mayor Ray Nagan would have been afraid that if people can self evacuate, they may not return. People that are INdependent can do what they want and they may not come back to vote for him. His job was dependent on the people he enslaved to vote for him. So he wanted to control how they left, so he could control how they come back.
Black people who are INdependent of government are every bit as successful as white people. White people DEpendent on government are every bit as unsuccessful as black people who are DEpendent on the government. That was the whole premise of "the Beverly Hillbillies" in case you missed that part. Black people living in Cambridge, MA are NOT dependent on government. White people living in trailers in Podunk, KY ARE dependent. The common denominator is NOT skin color, it is government DEpendence.

Simple. Because blacks, despite the fact they are equal to whites in every way (and BETTER at sports) and have exactly the same opportunity, have been convinced in larger numbers they "need" to depend on the government.
Government programs to "help" people, particularly minorities, are simply programs designed by racists to limit the possibilities for people that use them. When the black people in larger numbers say..."Thanks, but no thanks, I can do this myself" they will be far more successful as a whole.
How can a race get ahead when they are being held back in much higher proportion by government programs? Do blacks in government paid ghettos expect to do better than Indians on government paid reservations? When they relaize that they have been "put there" and lured there with promisies of payment, only to be locked up and held there in dead end programs DESIGNED to make them dependent and keep them where the racists want them....will they have any chance to succeed.
When they realize that these "advocates" are racists who have discovered a politically correct way to enslave them, they will get ahead. when they realize a "free program" guarantees only dependence on free prgrams and no possibility of wealth, they will get ahead.
When they realize these programs actually BAN wealth and prevent them from anything of their own BY LAW, will they get ahead. Only when they realize that accepting increased government money for each child they can produce but ONLY if they do not get married and have a "family" is NOT the way to prosperity and wealth...will they get ahead.
After all, we DO have a black President and last I looked, THAT is not an affirmative action job.

More immigration stupidity. Obviously many blacks are stupid also, why should they be different.
Sharpton wants illegals here to increase the dependent class. In creasing the dependent class will increase benefits for the dependent class...ALL members of the dependent class.
While it may seem counter-productive for a black leader to be defending illegals that "take jobs" from black people, you are not follwoing the money as it applies to Sharpton. Sharpton does not care about working, independent blacks. They are the enemy. They disagree with him and they can pound sand up their @ss for all Sharpton cares. They don't need him and he doesn't need them. There is no competition in the welfare market. Welfare is equal opportunity. More people on welfare means more welfare benefits and the welfare benefits benefit the dependent blacks that need Al Sharpton to do whatever it is al Sharpton does.
so Al Sharpton is one of the politicians (if we can call him that) that benefits from illegals by using them to increase the dependent class as opposed to the politicians that benefit by providing cheap labor to provide profits for business.
They ALL exploit illegals and ALL because we will not enforce the labor laws in this country.