Trump, the man with a dream of a Wall

[Forty Two]

Maybe sometimes 'chain migration' is OK, if you know the right people. Otherwise it's 'NOT ACCEPTABLE!'

"Questions surround how Melania Trump's parents received US green cards, as President rails against 'chain migration'"

The parents of First Lady Melania Trump have been granted permanent status in the US, a lawyer for the couple has confirmed, although questions remain about how and when they received their green cards.

Donald Trump has railed against so-called chain migration since he launched his bid for the presidency in 2016.

Immigration experts have suggested it is the likeliest way Viktor and Amalija Knavs obtained their residencies.

“I can confirm that Mrs Trump’s parents are both lawfully admitted to the United States as permanent residents,” Michael Wildes, the First Lady’s lawyer, told The Washington Post. “The family, as they are not part of the administration, has asked that their privacy be respected, so I will not comment further on this matter.”

Under family-based immigration rules, adult American citizens can apply for parents, adult married children and siblings to gain residency in the US. In the Knavs’ case, Melania would have been their sponsor.

Alternatively, they could have won the right to live in the US through sponsorship by an employer.

However, they would have to have proved that no US worker could have done their designated job.

Perhaps they're in the US on student visas?

It's possible they went the family based route. But the Knavs had money - they operated some sort of auto dealerships in Europe, and Melania had money, as did Donald Trump. So, it's quite possible they got in via the E visa category. https://it.usembassy.gov/visas/niv/e/ All it takes is some money, and a good immigration lawyer to set up the paperwork. When done properly, the E visa investor program can be used to transition to a green card.

It's possible they won the green card lottery, too. That's done every year, so they could have won that one. Who knows?

If the Knavs are being advanced as an example of why it's a problem for immigrants to be able to sponser family members, then doesn't that help make Trump's case for limiting the length of the "chain?"

[Brian Peacock]

Seabass,

Despite general entreaties to avoid overly personalised contributions to the discussion you have continued to personally slight and disparage other members, including referring to them as arseholds, deluded sacks of shit, and sick bastards. This goes against our directives on playing nice and avoiding personal attacks. I would strongly encourage you to avoid similar posting in future if you are do not wished to be placed on increasingly lengthy posting holiday band wagon.

Brain

[Seabass]

[Tero]

No trickle down

When Republicans put together their tax bill last year, it was not much of a surprise to see that its centerpiece was a gigantic corporate tax cut, lowering the statutory corporate rate from 35 percent down to 21 percent. This cut accounted for about $1 trillion of the bill’s total $1.5 trillion cost, but Republicans said it really wasn’t about helping corporations at all.

No, the real target was the workers: Corporations would take the money and use it to create new jobs and raise the wages of those working for them, as trickle-down economics did its magical work.

Democrats, on the other hand, said it was a scam. They charged that workers would see only a fraction of the benefits, and instead corporations would use most of their windfall for things like stock buybacks, which increase share prices and benefit the wealthy people who own the vast majority of stocks.

Almost 100 American corporations have trumpeted such plans in the past month. American companies have announced more than $178 billion in planned buybacks — the largest amount unveiled in a single quarter, according to Birinyi Associates, a market research firm.

Such purchases reduce a company’s total number of outstanding shares, giving each remaining share a slightly bigger piece of the profit pie.

Cisco said this month that in response to the tax package, it would bring back to the United States $67 billion of overseas cash, using $25 billion to finance additional share repurchases. Alphabet, the parent company of Google, authorized up to $8.6 billion in stock purchases. PepsiCo announced a fresh $15 billion in planned buybacks. Chip gear maker Applied Materials disclosed plans for a $6 billion program to buy shares. Late last month, home improvement retailer Lowe’s unveiled plans for $5 billion in purchases.
And as ThinkProgress noted, the total value of Walmart’s bonuses was $400 million, which seems like a lot until you learn that over 10 years the value of the tax cut to the corporation will be $18 billion. In other words, about 2 percent of its tax cut is going to workers, at least in the short run.

How many times do we have to play this game? When a new policy debate emerges, Democrats try to make an argument that has some connection to reality, while Republicans make absurd claims in the knowledge that even if they get debunked in the occasional “news analysis” piece, on the whole they’ll be treated with complete seriousness, no matter how ridiculous they are.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/pl ... 51c66f03b2

[L'Emmerdeur]

There has been some trickle down. Sure, the corporations are gorging on the tax cuts, but they've thrown some crumbs to the workers. The number $178 billion is mentioned, but S&P 500 companies have devoted $5.6 billion to wage hikes, bonuses, and worker benefits. So roughly $1 to workers for every $32 to stock buybacks and dividends. That seems about right. After all, the wealth producers and job makers are the important part of the economy, m'kay?

[pErvinalia]

The rest will be trickling down any day now..

[Brian Peacock]

The trickle's in the post...

[Seabass]

"This administration is running like a fine-tuned machine." —Donald J. Trump

Yates
Bharara
Comey
Dahl
Higgins
Harvey
Scaramucci
Flynn
Walsh
McFarland
Short
Priebus
Cohen-Watnick
Bannon
Gorka
Bradford
Price
Johnson
Higbie
Manigault
Weyeneth
Porter
Dubke
Shaub
Corallo
Spicer
Southerland
Icahn
Sifakis
Beams
Shackelford
Winfree
Powell
Katz
Shannon
Hope HIcks

[Seabass]

"This administration is running like a fine-tuned machine." —Donald J. Trump

More Than 30 Trump Aides Lose Top Secret Clearance, Sources Say

More than 30 aides to President Donald Trump have been stripped of access to top secret intelligence, two people familiar with the move said.

The officials have been notified that they will be downgraded to lower-level “secret” interim security clearances, said the two people. None of the officials have been asked to leave the administration and their portfolios on top secret matters will be distributed to other staff members, they said.

Jared Kushner, Trump’s son-in-law and senior adviser, also has had his security clearance downgraded as result of the same new policy on interim clearances set by White House Chief of Staff John Kelly, said another person familiar with the material.

All of the officials whose clearances were downgraded held the top secret designation on an interim basis. Kelly set a new policy that took effect last week that permits interim clearances only at the secret level and not permitting temporary clearances at higher levels.

...

[Brian Peacock]

Anonymous Sauces === #FAKENEWS.

[Seabass]

[Seabass]

Yes, let's emulate the Philippines instead of Portugal. Ignorant fucking moron.

[Seabass]

"Fine-tuned machine!"

[Tero]

Trump, who built all his hotels with Chinese steel, now to punish China?
Trump's 'Smart' Tariffs Don't Make Economic Sense:
https://www.theatlantic.com/business/ar ... fs/554660/

The flimsiness of Trump’s justification raises the risk of retaliation by the United States’ trading partners, many of whom have lobbied against the tariffs since the earliest days of the Trump presidency and are expressing their frustration with the tariffs now. Trade experts expect tit-for-tat actions, meaning lower sales for American businesses abroad. “If the United States goes down this path for steel and aluminum, there is little to prevent other countries from arguing that they too are justified to use similar exceptions to halt U.S. exports of completely different products,” argues Chad P. Bown of the Peterson Institute for International Economics, a Washington-based think tank broadly supportive of free trade. “Because this leads to a downward spiral and erodes meaningful obligations under international trade rules, justifying import restrictions based on national security is really the ‘nuclear option.’”

[pErvinalia]

He's the most liberal president ever.