Trump is going after people LEGALLY in the U.S. just as much (if not more) than he has gone after the undocumented--UPDATED!

Periodically I have gotten into arguments with Trump supporters about his racist attacks on foreigners. The Trump supporters often claim that the Trump Administration is only targeting the undocumented, not people here legally. ("It's just about the illegals! Obey the law and there won't be a problem!"). It you pay any attention, that is complete horseshit. Here is my list of Trump's immigration proposals or actions that target people legally in the country:

The "Muslim ban" in all its various forms barred or attempted to bar legal immigrants to the U.S.

The proposal to eliminate the diversity visa (i.e. "the visa lottery") is a proposal to end a form of legal immigration.

The reduction of the number of refugees allowed to be admitted to the U.S. is a restriction on legal immigration. [9/18/18: Adding better link when final cap was decided]

The end of the program allowing children fleeing violence in Central America to settle in the U.S. is a restriction on legal immigration.

The end of temporary protected status for Hondurans, Nepalis, Salvadorans, and Haitians were all restrictions on people who had been legally admitted into the U.S.

The proposal to restrict visas for family reunification (what Trump calls "chain migration") is a restriction on legal immigration.

The directive that fleeing gang violence or domestic violence are no longer grounds for asylum is a restriction on legal immigration.

The policy of refusing entry to people trying to claim asylum at the border, which is a legal avenue for entry to the U.S., is a restriction on legal immigration.

The policy of charging people who present themselves to immigration authorities with the misdemeanor of crossing at a place that is not an official border crossing and then deporting them (often after stealing their children) targets people using a process to enter the U.S. legally.

The reduction in the number of H1-B visas is a restriction on legal immigration.

Trump's Denaturalization Task Force, which seeks to take citizenship away from U.S. citizens and then to deport them is a restriction on legal immigration (and targets not just legal aliens, but U.S. Citizens)

The decision to deny U.S. passports to people with Hispanic surnames who live near the border is a restriction on people lawfully in the U.S. (and again, targets U.S. citizens)

I didn't list DACA because people argue over its legality. But if you believe (as I do) that DACA was a lawful use of executive authority, add the phasing out of DACA to the list as well.

Did I miss anything else?

ADDING (9/12/2018): Giving U.S. Immigration officials the authority to deny a visa for minor errors or omissions, without allowing the applicant the chance to correct the problem, is a restriction on people trying to lawfully enter the U.S.

ADDING (9/23/2018): Restricting the award of green cards to people who have used public assistance program is a restriction on legal immigrants.

ADDING (10/2/2018): Denying visas to same-sex partners of diplomats and UN employees is a restriction on legal immigration.

ADDING (11/9/2018): Refusing to process asylum petitions for people who did not cross at an official border crossing is a restriction on a legal form of immigration.

ADDING (12/12/2018): Seeking to deport Vietnamese who arrived as refugees in the U.S. before the U.S. established diplomatic relations with reunified Vietnam is a restriction on legal immigration.

ADDING (12/13/2018): Increasing the deportation of Cambodians who were lawfully admitted as refugees is a penalty imposed on legal immigrants.

ADDING (3/12/2019): Proposing to hike fees for legal immigrants is a proposed restriction on legal immigration.

ADDING (3/12/2019): Closing 20 overseas offices whose purpose is to assist people applying to immigrate to the U.S. is a restriction on legal immigration.

ADDING (4/17/2019): Withholding bail from asylum seekers (i.e. forcing the imprisonment of people who pursue a legal avenue to emigrate to the U.S.) is a restriction on legal immigration.

ADDING (4/30/2019): Imposing new fees on asylum applications and imposing an 180-day limit on adjudicating asylum applications is a restriction on legal immigration.

ADDING (8/29/2019): Ending automatic citizenship for the children of members of the military or other people working for the federal government abroad is a restriction on legal U.S. Citizens.

ADDING (10/5/2019): Denying visa applications for immigrants who lack health insurance is a restriction on legal immigration.

ADDING (10/26/2019): Restricting the waiver of fees for citizenship applications for immigrants to have been on public assistance is a restriction on legal immigration.

ADDING (11/11/2019): Increasing the fees on citizenship applications and imposing, for the first time, fees on asylum applications is a restriction on legal immigration.

ADDING (1/27/2020): Vastly expanding the definition of "public charge" to prevent immigrants from receiving visas or green cards is a restriction on legal immigration.

ADDING (2/2/2020): Extending the travel ban to six more countries is a restriction only on legal immigration.

ADDING (2/27/20): Creating an office to take away the citizenship of people who have naturalized is an effort to remove legal immigrants from the U.S.

ADDING (4/21/2020): Suspending the issuance of permanent residency (green cards) is a restriction on legal immigration.

ADDING (5/8/2020): Suspending protection and expelling asylum-seeking children is a restriction on legal immigration (asylum is a legal path to immigrate to the U.S.)

ADDING (5/15/2020): Suspending OTP is suspension of a form of legal immigration.

ADDING (6/23/2020): Suspending H-1B, seasonal workers visas, and hospitality industry visas, ending permission of foreign students to participate in work study programs, not issuing certain au pair visas, barring the transfer of foreign executives to the U.S., blocking the admission of spouses of foreigners who are working in the U.S., and extending the processing of green card applications are several different restrictions on legal immigration to the U.S.

ADDING (6/30/2020): Furloughing 13,400 federal employees who process immigration paperwork which "will effectively bring the U.S. immigration system grinding to a halt" is a move to stop legal immigration.

ADDING (7/6/2020): Requiring foreign students to leave the country (even if they have a valid student visa) if their college has online classes is a restriction on people legally in the country (technically legal non-immigrants)

ADDING (9/25/2020): Proposing a rule that would prohibit students from 59 countries from getting a student visa for a four-year college is a restriction on people legally in the country (again, technically non-immigrants, but they would be legal non-immigrants).

ADDING (10/1/2020): Slashing the cap on the number of refugees admitted in the US in 2021 is a restriction on legal immigration.

ADDING (10/6/2020): Adding narrowing the range of jobs eligible for H-1B visas and expanding the definition of the "real offer" requirement for H-1B Visas are restrictions on legal immigration.

ADDING (12/10/2020): Making the citizenship test more difficult is a restriction on legal immigration.

Bullets fly in the Americas

Given all the wars there currently are in the "old world" (e.g. Syria, Afghanistan, Libya, Yemen, Northern Nigeria, Eastern Congo, Iraq) it is pretty surprising that all six of these countries are all in the Americas.

It is not surprising that the U.S. is in the top six though.

John McCain was an enormous asshole

And I say that not completely in its negative sense. McCain's instinct to thumb his nose and antagonize people for its own sake was part of his charm, even from beyond the grave.

Your moment of Al

Weird Al has one request: "Please don't pickaxe my star. I know it's all the rage these days, but that's not cool. Unless at some point in the future, I do something unfathomably monstrous and evil in which case, sure, fine, okay, go ahead" pic.twitter.com/anFQn6lFla

— Variety (@Variety) August 27, 2018

Pushing that Tire-Swing into the Afterlife

So I guess we are going to have a full-on state funeral with wall-to-wall coverage for Senator McCain? What an odd thing for a Senator and failed presidential candidate.

I guess the closest analogue on the other side would be Ted Kennedy. But he was buried in a private ceremony.

Those were the days

Remember when Republicans were so gung-ho about ferreting out any possible instance of presidential misconduct they investigated the president's cat?

ketchup

I'm back from the great Northwest and (predictably) I am completely underwater with virtually everything I need to deal with back here. I'm sure it will get better relatively soon, but things might remain a little slow here, unless they aren't (sometime when I am very busy posting increases just because so does the urge to procrastinate).

And that's on the heels of a solid 9 days of blog-neglect. Luckily nothing happened while I was in a series of places that sometimes lacked wifi and often lacked a cellular signal. At least I wasn't around for all the McCain hagiography... wait, it's still going on! I'm guessing it will for the rest of the week. Anyway, the best thing I read about the legacy of McCain is this post by Erik Loomis. Read the whole thing. I don't think that anyone else did quite as good a job of honestly assessing McCain's legacy without a lazy reliance on his barely-ever deserved "maverick" reputation. I think the two reasons that McCain is so loved by people who would have hated anyone else with the same voting record are: (1) the somewhat inexplicable almost two-decades long love affair between the American political media establishment and John McCain, and (2) because he was only 98% awful and the current crop of Republican politicians has set an unbelievably low bar for admirable behavior.

See? That proves I did not miss my chance to comment on the McCain nonsense.

why DID Alice want to see attle?

Remember when I used to mention vaguely the stuff I did on this site? I guess I don't do that anymore. This summer I have been in Michigan, Minnesota, and Ohio, but I never brought it up on this blog. In fact, right now I'm in Washington not-DC. I probably won't bring that up either.

Not afraid of Trump's whining

I don't think social media companies discriminate against conservatives. This is just another example of the President being a whining snowflake. But if they did, that decision would be protected under the First Amendment. And if Trump tried to do anything about it, then that would violate the First Amendment.

So many defunct blogs

Sometimes I think of a blog from ye olden days of blogging (circa 2005), google to see if the site still exists, and if it does, click down its blogroll to see how many of the cites it linked to are still around. Today's old site: Demosthenes

If we just keep saying "blockchain" all of Venezuela's problems will go away

I still do not get the concept of a state managed crypto-currency. How is it a crypto-currency if it is created by and run by a state?

Just because it is an electronic currency, that does not make it a crypto-currency. The U.S. Dollar is both a physical and electronic currency (I can transfer dollars and make payments in dollars electronically). But it is definitely not a crypto-currency because it is sponsored by the government of the United States and managed by the US Federal Reserve.

If he can do this, what can't he do against anyone who criticizes the president?

I wonder if Brennan (and the other Trump enemies who are soon going to have their security clearances stripped) could sue. The executive branch has complete discretion over who gets a security clearance. But the executive branch (like every other branch of government) is not allowed to retaliate against people just for exercising their First Amendment right to criticize the president.

This is way outside my area of the law, but Brennan should sue just to clarify the law and to maybe get the President to pause before he strips the next critic of his or her clearance.

How terrified would I be if I found out someone recorded me without my knowledge?

I guess I would be a little scared--or maybe preemptively embarrassed is a better description. We all say stupid shit sometimes. I am sure if someone followed me around and recorded everything I said there would be plenty I would later be embarrassed about.

But no racial slurs. I'm positive my tapes wouldn't have them.

Even Stephen's family hates him

Can someone invite Omarosa to the Miller family Thanksgiving? I want to hear those tapes!

Upyernoz: trend setter

It took 15 years, but I guess Moynoq is now a hot destination.

I was there before the graveyard of ships got all commercial.

Guyana isn’t part of Latin America

Guyana is an English-speaking country and so my geography pedantry flared up at this:

Ninety-seven percent of Latin American women live in countries that ban abortion or allow it only in rare instances. Only Uruguay, Cuba, Guyana and Mexico City allow any woman to have an early-term abortion.

I know, who cares? I do. Not sure why but this stuff bugs me.

U.S. to remain neutral as MBS continues his anti-Canada hissy-fit

I know I know, we are already 1.5 years into the Trump administration, but part of me still can't believe that the U.S. is "taking a neutral stance" as Saudi Arabia, a country with one of the worst human rights records in the world, shits all over the U.S.'s closest ally just because it pointed out one small example of how the Saudis have one of the worst human rights records in the world.

KSA is a really shitty country

I don't think it is as broadly appreciated as it should be, but Saudi Arabia is a particularly awful nation.

Seriously, I think the people running the kingdom are worse than any other country in the Middle East. Iran has terrible leadership and a bad system of government, but it pales in comparison to MbS and his absolute kleptocracy.

Brexit

As Dylan Matthews said, I'm an American in the age of Trump, I'm in no position to judge the insanity emanating from other countries' political leaders, but:

The most bizarre thing about watching this from afar is the sense that it’s inevitable, that there’s no turning back. You can turn back! May could decide to hold a vote on just canceling the whole thing, and if a majority of Parliament goes along with it, it would be over. Would it end her political career? Probably. Would a majority of Parliament vote for it? Likely not — but again, that’s exactly what’s bizarre and upsetting about all this. It’s like watching a guy slowly demolishing all the houses on his block with a sledgehammer because he lost a Twitter poll, and all his neighbors are like, “Yep, that seems appropriate.”

We don't currently have a president of the United States

The unelected people around Trump apparently get to decide which of his pronouncements are real policy decisions and which ones they can just pretend never happened.

If we had a mentally competent person in the oval office, he would follow up and make sure his original instructions are carried out. But we don't. Trump doesn't follow up and I wonder if he even remembers half the shit he says.