Donald J. Trump as US. President and what it means for you & your waiver! ( I-194)

RSposted 3 years ago


Once Trump is in office in 2017, regardless how people's waivers are going new laws will be introduced.

If you have a waiver pending, your chances are good to get the 3-5 years unless it was your first time applying then expect a 1 year waiver, but wait times are between the 9-18 month zone if not longer or less for first time (1) year waiver.

Trump does not like criminals, or people from colored race.... THAT IS A FACT!

His slogan make "America Great Again" is basically saying make "AMERICA WHITE AGAIN"

He will add more headache to an already volatile situation @ DHS, which was so over-burdened with waiver applications, they just started with giving out 5 year ones if it was a renewal. This is the first time it was ever done cause of the back log, and now with Trump it looks like the wait times will even be greater so to speak.

Changes to the forms have already begun which are getting more complex and sophisticated, and with greater fear the prices "WILL" go up also... it will go even higher just have to wait for it.

This is a great forum for accessing knowledge, but even that's not going to be enough in the coming next "four" years as only sources close if not reliable to DHS will slowly trickle out information, making immigration lawyers wealthy.

I don't believe in this, but people who help on waivers need to make a living also, so for those who rely on this site...get ready for the people who will ask both your arms and legs for help for "FREE" ... it won't be free cause no one will freely share there opinions... it will cost every one because well the majority of racists voted for Trump and his allowance of GHBTP!

No one ever gives away trade secrets...especially if you have to gain from one!

Replies (recent first):

@52, Thanks for posting Adelaide. I think these stats are probably right, but not because of the way the media is portraying, as always, the media does not cover the entire story.

I think that there are more people who are applying to work and live in the USA for various reasons. Therefore, the number of people being denied or given bans has increased. And of course there is more media awareness of this, then in the past.

The guy says he has no criminal record, but that does not mean he has not been in trouble with the law, or has a Pardon. He also may not have been truthful on his documentation.

Maybe he previously tried to enter the USA ..there is a reason he was given a 5 year ban. As much as USA Customs is unpredictable, if you dig deep enough there are reasons for why they do these things.

Sometimes I don't like the outcome of their decisions and think that they could be more flexible, however, they are always able to show what law, policy or guideline they are using to make their decision.

Michelle replied 1 month ago   #50

Might be of interest to some people here. Not sure if it’s a foreboding of a foreseeable future with Trump in office.

Adelaide replied 1 month ago   #49

@Jazzsax1 well to be fair everyone is painting everyone is the worst light possible. I certainly did not see Scheer pull any punches, and I think as much as everyone hates "mud" being flung back and forth, these attacks work. On Facebook and social media every Conservative/Liberal debate would be "blackface!" retorted by "go ask your American leader for some insurance advice!" lol It was pretty ugly. Even now you see the WEXIT Facebook page popping up. When it was Progressive Conservative, it was a different type of Liberal/Conservative divide. The Canadian Alliance/Conservatives are a different breed of Conservative and I think they have taken a lot of lessons from watching the Republicans.

The problem I see with Conservatives is exactly what you saw in this election. The Conservative base is motivated but the tent is never getting bigger. They can only win with a split vote. That means the election comes down to how organized the left is in strategically stopping you. If the Conservatives want to change this they have to ditch the social stuff (anti abortion/anti-gay anti immigrant) and keep it to a different economic approach. Nothing wrong with feeling like being fiscally conservative is a better way to govern. But when you let social issues become a dog whistle people feel righteous in opposing you. They suddenly aren't deciding Trudeau or Singh, they are voting to stop someone who is anti abortion for example.

Peter McKay would probably be a good start. Of course my clients would prefer this scenario anyways. Pardons have a better chance to be changed with a Liberal/NDP coalition.

John Rogers replied 2 months ago   #48

@John Scheer could have said he wasn't anti LGBTQ and trudeau would have painted him that way regardless. Liberals fear monger when they don't have a real platform.

jazzsax1 replied 2 months ago   #47


They may have done better BUT Ontario really hates Doug Ford. And a lot of the Ontario vote was a backlash vote against the Conservatives aimed at him. That being said, Andrew Scheer being openly anti LBGQ is crazy in 2019. That does not fly in Ontario at all.

John Rogers replied 2 months ago   #46

You mean Fortress AlberSaskatcheRuralToba.

Wrong leader to lead the conservatives. They should have had Rona Ambrose who was well respected on both sides of the aisle, a woman, and she would have slaughtered Trudeau this time around.

jazzsax1 replied 2 months ago   #45


I will put this here.

For those of you NOT in Ontario and "surprised" at the result of the election, I will tell you what I have been telling everyone who predicted the Conservatives would win. Ontario 905 is where the Conservatives had to turn the tide and Doug Ford ensured that would never happen. Ontario DESPISES Doug Ford on a level I have rarely seen. Which is why Trudeau mentioned him constantly, and why Scheer would not campaign with him in Ontario, even campaigning with Jason Kenney in Ontario instead.

Perfect example. I coach basketball (house league). Because of Fords education cutbacks, we went from practicing once a week, to once every two weeks. That's a league in Brampton with about 800 boys and girls. Now multiply that by 2 parents, and even grandparents etc. Every Monday I send out a reminder that "this is practice week" or "no practice this week" and that basically reminds these voters that their kid is going to be sitting on the couch tonight, NOT playing a sport that I PAID FOR.

Quebec basically signaled they will not accept Jagmeet Singh (which is sad because I thought he performed well) and we have fortress Alberta.

I have a lot of friends in Alberta who were sure the Conservatives would sweep to victory and puzzled how I thought it would turn out like this. This tells me the media is literally parroting this position in Alberta, it is like they had no clue what was happening in Quebec or Ontario. The fact that so much of the media out there is owned by Postmedia tells me why this has happened.

One commentator said it best last night on CTV. Conservatives cannot grow their base. They could in the past when they were 'progressive' but not in the way the party is now. The only way they govern is when the NDP splits the vote. But that's not a government that tries to represent all Canadians. I hope the party returns to its roots one day. "Conservative fiscally" but not this radical social conservatism that took root with the rise of the Republican right in the US.

A minority government COULD be good for the Pardon process, we have to wait and see.

Lets keep the political comments in this space, so it doesn't interfere with anyone asking waiver questions.

John Rogers replied 2 months ago   #44



#41 is not me. It's the hebetudinous muppet on here who has too much time on their hands. At any rate ... I guess you gave the person the answer they wanted or they're just messing with you. (I suspect the latter).

Adelaide replied 4 months ago   #43

@Adelaide @JohnRogers

I must have missed that. It is a handle of mine from 20+ years ago... yes I am a professionally trained saxophone player (along with another instrument). Let's just say "jazzsax" as a handle back in the early internet days sounded way better than "jazzflute".

No flubbing in front of dignitaries, but ironically yes I've played in Zurich (along with in 7 other european countries)....


Don't believe he has changed his login name other than when he showed up recently.

jazzsax1 replied 4 months ago   #42


Jazzsax1 will discuss many issues, like how much he admires Justin Trudeau, but has been tight lipped about his 'Sax' expertise. I have asked in the past because my daughter plays the sax.

I am guessing he was a covert special ops musician, flubbed a solo in front of dignitaries at a secret mission in Zurich, and has never talked of it since.

@Jazzsax1 did you ask Ken if he changed his log in name? And is that him posting recently? He did not contact me on Wattsapp.

John Rogers replied 4 months ago   #41


You like playing the Sax?

Adelaide . replied 4 months ago   #40

@John Rogers

Look John, I don't know who this person is and why he referred to me. I do know that you did mention me so whoever it, they must of found it a little amusing. Furthermore, I apologized if this person caused you any psychological distress even though I have no idea what happened or who this individual seems to be.

I do come often to read but I don't posts anymore because I find it useless. We have already discussed that in the past. You have quite the attitude and ego. I don't talk to bullies. I have a feeling that it was you that staged this along, kinda like an attention seeker of some sorts.

Let's be thankful that the "hijacker" didn't bring down the website because I don't know how you would kill your time.

Anyways, have a great long weekend.

HatsBootsHatsBoots replied 4 months ago   #39

(inside joke about the brown brotha.... )

jazzsax1 replied 4 months ago   #38

Hey John - I am in contact with Ken. My brown brotha and I chat every so often --- he has just been away from the board until now.

jazzsax1 replied 4 months ago   #37

@ John Rogers

Did you see my posting under Waiver Inadmissibility #50?
I addressed it to you and Michelle and was just wondering if you had any response to it.


And it seems the "hijacker" here has momentarily calmed down although the phraseology used in some of the postings sounds suspiciously similar to another person on here from before.

Adelaide replied 4 months ago   #36

Interesting story on CBC about Muslims being denied entry into the United States.

Immigration Lawyers are saying Muslims who are Canadian Citizens are arbitrarily being denied entry.

The second link is in case the first one does not work.

John Rogers replied 4 months ago   #35

@HatsBootsHatsBoots this is the same log in name you used, so I assume this is you. The idiot in question that we are all ignoring not only says that he is close friends with you and your girlfriend, but he seems to know a lot about you. He has never criticized you, but touted you. He has attacked myself, Michelle, Adelaide and Jazzsax1, mainly because we are the ones posting on a regular or semi-regular basis.

His musings are exactly like yours. I even commented before he got out of hand that he sounded exactly like you.

Just wondering why you commented on him by saying "i must have pissed someone off". Yes anyone who says stupidity or gives bad advice gets pissed off when I tell everyone they are wrong.

I am not saying this is you, but its a bit coincidental and that is the easiest explanation. Why else would anyone else suddenly defend you when you haven't even posted in a long time?

John Rogers replied 4 months ago   #34

Has anyone actually heard from Ken Scott outside of here?

I ask because this is NOT the log-in he used to use. The posts sound a bit like him, but that's easy to fake.

He posted with K SCOTT and now it is KSCOTT. If he is denying changing his log-in then this is not him. I also asked him to contact me on Wattsapp (he has done so a few times in the past) and he hasn't.


John Rogers replied 4 months ago   #33

Btw #30 what was the conviction(s) for your friend? Why did he specifically get denied? What do you mean refused at the border? Do you mean refused entry?

KSCOTT replied 4 months ago   #32

#30 I will say that I do not believe that John Rogers would rip someone off. He is not the kind of guy that will do this kind of thing. I have a lot of trouble believing that this is the case. I have been away from this forum for a long time and have now returned. We have been way too busy with cases and such for me to have the time to dedicate here but I am back now.

Again, John is not the kind of guy that would rip someone off. I will say that he has a different personality than me but he is not a thief. I would also argue against doing your own waiver since some of these cases are complicated and people need professional assistance.

I get way too many people coming to us after that have used Discount Waiver Companies in Toronto and have been ripped off or provided a very poor service. It is a lot of major work getting them an approval and undoing the damage from these Toronto DWCs.

I do not recommend that people do their own cases unless they have something simple as have a conviction for stealing a car in 1972 and now want to enter the USA.

These cases are going to become more complex with all the changes coming down the chain.

KSCOTT replied 4 months ago   #31

Reply to this thread

There is no need to “register”, just enter the same name + password of your choice every time.

Pro tip: Use to add links, quotes and more.