ILW.COM - the immigration portal Immigration Daily

Home Page

Immigration Daily


Processing times

Immigration forms

Discussion board



Twitter feed

Immigrant Nation


CLE Workshops

Immigration books

Advertise on ILW

VIP Network




Connect to us

Make us Homepage



The leading
immigration law
publisher - over
50000 pages of
free information!
Immigration LLC.

View RSS Feed


Letters of the Week: May 31 - June 3

Rate this Entry
Please email your letters to or post them directly as a comment below.

Submit "Letters of the Week: May 31 - June 3" to Facebook Submit "Letters of the Week: May 31 - June 3" to Twitter Submit "Letters of the Week: May 31 - June 3" to Google Submit "Letters of the Week: May 31 - June 3" to StumbleUpon Submit "Letters of the Week: May 31 - June 3" to Reddit Submit "Letters of the Week: May 31 - June 3" to Digg Submit "Letters of the Week: May 31 - June 3" to

Tags: None Add / Edit Tags


  1. ImmigrationLawBlogs's Avatar
    Huffington Post reports on May 31 that the Congressional Asian Pacific Caucus Leadership PAC (CAPAC) has endorsed Hillary Clinton in next week's California Democratic primary. This group includes several senators and representatives from California.

    The group's chair, Rep. Judy Chu (D-Calif). stated:

    "There is so much at stake in this election, and we cannot tolerate any presidential candidate who promotes fear tactics, hateful rhetoric against immigrants and bullying...

    We must support the candidate who will bring us together, and make our nation more equal and just for everyone - and that person is Hillary Clinton."

    Whether of not one happens to be a Hillary Clinton admirer, this statement is a timely reminder of what this year's election is really about. Will the US elect a president who will move this country further into the 21st century of American diversity and equality, without regard to race, color or religion, or will it elect someone who wants to move backward into an era in which whites were considered superior and immigrants were banned on the basis of race or religion, as in with the Chinese exclusion laws or the refusal to admit Jewish refugees during the Holocaust, to mention only two out of many other examples?

    Whereas most of the press has been very easy on Donald Trump, focusing on trivia such as his campaign style rather than his actual inflammatory and bigoted statements, or trying to excuse his extreme immigration proposals and vicious attacks on minorities in general as merely a reflection of voter "anger" and "dissatisfaction" with the "establishment".

    In contrast, Hillary has had a very bad press, especially since Trump clinched the GOP nomination. While fawning over Trump, to whom many of the media have apparently assigned the role of "winner" the media are evidently giving Hillary the role of "loser".

    Even North Korea has jumped into the act, urging Americans to chose Trump, who will allegedly bring about "change" (i.e. Korean reunification with Kim Jong Un in charge of the whole peninsula), while "boring" Hillary should be rejected.

    In the US, the media have run endless stories about Hillary's email "scandal" despite a lengthy government report showing that she inherited a faulty State Department security system and that she was by no means the first Secretary of State to use a private email server.

    Admittedly, Hillary's email use may amount to more than Benghazi or Vince Foster. That would not be saying very much.

    Hillary is also being attacked endlessly over her campaign style. She is not the most exciting or dynamic speaker. Neither does she threaten judges, political opponents or reporters who oppose her or reporters whom she doesn't like, or incite her supporters to violence.

    Hillary, admittedly, has ties to big money and powerful special interests. What politician does not in this corrupt era of Citizens United?

    Is Donald Trump. with his billions, his Atlantic City casinos, bankruptcies and allegedly fraudulent Trump University over which he is now being sued, a white knight on horseback who is really going to reform America's political system in order to make it serve the Ameircan people better? Or would he turn it into an even more corrupt dictatorship, as many other racist and authoritarian demagogues have done in other countries?

    Regardless of who wins the California primary or the Democratic nomination (and I happen to be a Sanders supporter personally), the CAPAC statement is a reminder of what this year's election is really about.

    After the Democratic nomination battle is over, supporters of both candidates must unite behind the winner, whoever she or he may be, in order to protect this country from the specter of a white supremacist dictatorship under someone who should be recognized for what he really is: "Dangerous Donald" Trump.

    The Huffington Post link is:

    Roger Algase
    Attorney at Law

    Updated 06-01-2016 at 01:00 PM by ImmigrationLawBlogs
Put Free Immigration Law Headlines On Your Website

Immigration Daily: the news source for legal professionals. Free! Join 35000+ readers Enter your email address here: