Special Agent Dr. Aidnos, PhD
banner
aidnos.bsky.social
Special Agent Dr. Aidnos, PhD
@aidnos.bsky.social
89 followers 230 following 62 posts
ἀϊδνός = unseen. I am usually shy on the internet. Trans. i'm in ur Deep State undermining ur gender binary.
Posts Media Videos Starter Packs
Reposted by Special Agent Dr. Aidnos, PhD
The thing to understand about the wave of transphobia plaguing our politics right now is that it does not nourish itself on the hatreds of ordinary voters. It nourishes on their indifference.
LOLing at the "without complaint." I can guarantee there are complaints, even if she's not hearing them.
Reposted by Special Agent Dr. Aidnos, PhD
As a biologist, It really is a great analogy. Also trees. It's like saying, "There are trees and grass, you have to be one or the other." Ok... where is the line that defines "is a tree?" what about bush-like grasses? Palm trees? NON-tree palms? What about horsetails and their tree-like ancestors?
Yes. Sermon at the local Episcopal church a few weeks ago stated something along the lines of since people are made in God's image, those who deny other people's humanity are denying the face of God.
This exactly! I'm trans and old enough to remember when the discriminatory laws of DADT and separate but "equal" civil unions were considered LGBTQ victories because the other side wanted to ban queer people from participating in civil life *entirely* and not just partially.
Candidates didn't used to run on anti-trans policies because basically most of society was transphobic so no one needed to run on it. Instead, they ran on anti-gay policies. Like, trans rights are being attacked *now* because we didn't used to have many rights to attack!
Add to this that "prior criminal record" could include e.g. smoking a joint, minor in possession of alcohol for drinking a beer when 19 years old, a single poor-judgement DUI from 20 years ago, etc. "Prior criminal record" does not mean "violent criminal."
Reposted by Special Agent Dr. Aidnos, PhD
It’s not just that they don’t have to turn off SNAP benefits — they’re not legally allowed to. They legally must use the contingency fund.

The admin is pretending they can’t use it even though their own guidance from a month ago (that they’ve since deleted) contradicts that.
Yes, they’re using the shutdown to turn off SNAP benefits.

No, they don’t have to.
I now have a lot of updated systems that suck a lot more than the old ones did (which is quite an accomplishment because the old systems sucked rather a lot). In one of them, they took away the search function making the updated system practically unusable for its purpose.
I can't speak to what HR in every agency does with USAJobs postings, but I've seen it before. And citizenship status gets asked on the OF306 and SF85/85P/86 and it's been an employment requirement for half a century. There's plenty of bizarre things about this posting but that bit isn't one of them.
Aside from it being horrible, this is also a weird-ass way of advertising a position that is the most deskiest of desk jobs.
As far as I'm aware, I-130 petition is still a path. That's always been the most common immigration pathway (but can take an outrageously long time depending on the petitioner's relationship to the petitionee, and the country of origin).
Possible explanation is that ICE and CBP positions likely require a higher level background investigation (T3 or T5). Those often take a long time. They're probably hoping DoD civs who already have T3/T5s can fill the ICE/CBP positions for the 6-12 months while the BIs are carried out.
I'm nominating a dark horse: Black Sails. Bit of a rocky start but starts to hits its stride in mid-season 1 and just gets better from there, stays strong, and lands the series finale beautifully in a way that Game of Thrones utterly failed to do.
Guatemala has immigration laws. Like, if Guatemala didn't admit him, he can't just stay and also bring his wife there without that potentially becoming a problem.
Long time since my USCIS days, but I remember people coming to the office to get a document (I-94?) stamped when they had a pending I-90 and needed temporary documentation. And an ISA could have looked him up in CIS in literally 30 seconds and seen he was an LPR. ICE *must* have known.
16 years old, in my high school office making photocopies, and Ted Danson walks in. An adult offers to introduce me to him, but I was culturally illiterate at the time and had no idea who he was so I shrugged indifferently and returned to my photocopying. Teenagers, man.
Nonsense, we'd tie babies to eight-lane freeways. (trying to dark humor my way through the horrors here...)
(Disclosing that I'm very much not an immigration lawyer. I worked with immigration records for a brief time a very long time ago, so I picked up a little knowledge but definitely not an expert. Learned just enough to learn that US immigration law is a labyrinthian hellscape.)
The CRBA is filed by the US citizen parent with the State Department and not by the doctor. And also can be filed at any point before the child is 18. (Eligibility for CBRA vs N-600K has to do with the parent's physical presence in the US prior to living abroad.)
Seems like, but not necessarily N-600K paperwork. That's typically filed by expat Americans. Children born on military bases usually get a Consular Report of Birth Abroad (CRBA). The CRBA makes a person a citizen at birth, the N-600K does not. (e.g. John McCain situation vs Ted Cruz situation)
Not choose at 18 exactly, but children born abroad to US citizens have to file for US citizenship (N-600K form) before their 18th birthday in order to claim that citizenship. (And they can still keep citizenship of their birth country, becoming dual citizens.)
Yes, but that's because most Federal law enforcement have security clearances and part of having a security clearance is signing an NDA (technically an SF-312).