Get educated by scrolling through the fact feed below:

Array ( [post_type] => post [exclude_post_format] => [offset] => [posts] => [suppress_filters] => 1 [orderby] => date [order] => DESC [taxonomy_name] => [term_slug] => [author_name] => [year] => 2017 [monthnum] => 04 [m] => [second] => [minute] => [hour] => [w] => [day] => [tag] => [count] => 10 [cat] => )
Array ( [wp_query] => WP_Query Object ( [query] => Array ( [post_type] => post [posts_per_page] => 10 [suppress_filters] => 0 [orderby] => date [order] => DESC [year] => 2017 [monthnum] => 04 [paged] => 1 ) [query_vars] => Array ( [post_type] => post [posts_per_page] => 10 [suppress_filters] => 0 [orderby] => date [order] => DESC [year] => 2017 [monthnum] => 4 [paged] => 1 [error] => [m] => [p] => 0 [post_parent] => [subpost] => [subpost_id] => [attachment] => [attachment_id] => 0 [name] => [static] => [pagename] => [page_id] => 0 [second] => [minute] => [hour] => [day] => 0 [w] => 0 [category_name] => [tag] => [cat] => [tag_id] => [author] => [author_name] => [feed] => [tb] => [meta_key] => [meta_value] => [preview] => [s] => [sentence] => [title] => [fields] => [menu_order] => [embed] => [category__in] => Array ( ) [category__not_in] => Array ( ) [category__and] => Array ( ) [post__in] => Array ( ) [post__not_in] => Array ( ) [post_name__in] => Array ( ) [tag__in] => Array ( ) [tag__not_in] => Array ( ) [tag__and] => Array ( ) [tag_slug__in] => Array ( ) [tag_slug__and] => Array ( ) [post_parent__in] => Array ( ) [post_parent__not_in] => Array ( ) [author__in] => Array ( ) [author__not_in] => Array ( ) [ignore_sticky_posts] => [cache_results] => 1 [update_post_term_cache] => 1 [lazy_load_term_meta] => 1 [update_post_meta_cache] => 1 [nopaging] => [comments_per_page] => 50 [no_found_rows] => ) [tax_query] => WP_Tax_Query Object ( [queries] => Array ( ) [relation] => AND [table_aliases:protected] => Array ( ) [queried_terms] => Array ( ) [primary_table] => wp_posts [primary_id_column] => ID ) [meta_query] => WP_Meta_Query Object ( [queries] => Array ( ) [relation] => [meta_table] => [meta_id_column] => [primary_table] => [primary_id_column] => [table_aliases:protected] => Array ( ) [clauses:protected] => Array ( ) [has_or_relation:protected] => ) [date_query] => [request] => SELECT SQL_CALC_FOUND_ROWS wp_posts.ID FROM wp_posts WHERE 1=1 AND ( ( YEAR( wp_posts.post_date ) = 2017 AND MONTH( wp_posts.post_date ) = 4 ) ) AND wp_posts.post_type = 'post' AND (wp_posts.post_status = 'publish' OR wp_posts.post_status = 'acf-disabled') ORDER BY wp_posts.post_date DESC LIMIT 0, 10 [posts] => Array ( [0] => WP_Post Object ( [ID] => 1913 [post_author] => 1 [post_date] => 2017-04-30 20:49:42 [post_date_gmt] => 2017-04-30 20:49:42 [post_content] => Travel site Hopper.com released a report describing the rapidly decreasing interest in traveling to the U.S. from foreign countries:

Weekly international U.S.-bound flight searches decreased 17% after the travel ban was announced. The number of flight searches dropped from 61.5 million per week during Obama's final days in office, down to 56 million during Trump's inauguration week, before falling to 50.9 million after the travel ban was ordered.

While there is normally a slight decrease in this type of search during this time of year, it usually isn’t so significant.  Last year the same data captured by Hopper.com showed a decrease of 1.8%. Swedish travel site flygresor.se noted a 47% decrease in U.S. bound flight searches after the travel ban compared to the prior year. Cheapflights.com saw a 16% decrease in U.S. bound flight searches between the average rate in January and the period from February 10-14.   The President of Tourism Economics, a company that forecasts travel trends, told the New York Times that they expect approximately 6.3 million less foreign visitors from 2016 to 2018 because of Trump’s policies.  New York City also expects 300,000 less foreign tourists (which will reduce foreign tourism spending by around $600 million) and also blames Trump’s policies. The Global Business Travelers Association polled its members in March 2017 to assess the impact of Trump’s policies:

47% of European travel professionals polled said they expected some reduction in their companies’ business travel, with 17% of them reporting they had already canceled business travel to the U.S. because of the Trump orders. Thirty-eight percent said their companies would be less willing to send business travelers to the U.S. in the future and 45% said they would be less willing to plan future meetings and events in the U.S.

   
Tuttle, Brad. "Trump Immigration Ban Decreases Flight Searches to U.S. | Money." Time. Time, 7 Feb. 2017. Web. 15 Apr. 2017.
Vora, Shivani. "After Travel Ban, Interest in Trips to U.S. Declines." The New York Times. The New York Times, 20 Feb. 2017. Web. 15 Apr. 2017.
Mcgeehan, Patrick. "New York Expects Fewer Foreign Tourists, Saying Trump Is to Blame."The New York Times. The New York Times, 28 Feb. 2017. Web. 15 Apr. 2017. Wall, Robert, and Susan Carey. "Trump Travel Ban, Strong Dollar Take Edge Off Tourism to U.S." The Wall Street Journal. Dow Jones & Company, 20 Mar. 2017. Web. 15 Apr. 2017.
[post_title] => Foreign Tourism And Other U.S. Bound Travel Estimated To Decrease Due To Trump’s Travel Ban And The Strong U.S. Dollar [post_excerpt] => [post_status] => publish [comment_status] => closed [ping_status] => closed [post_password] => [post_name] => data-indicates-foreign-tourists-u-s-bound-travel-will-decrease-significantly-partially-trumps-immigration-policies-also-strong-u-s-dollar [to_ping] => [pinged] => [post_modified] => 2017-08-02 02:12:35 [post_modified_gmt] => 2017-08-02 02:12:35 [post_content_filtered] => [post_parent] => 0 [guid] => http://factualuprising.com/?p=1913 [menu_order] => 0 [post_type] => post [post_mime_type] => [comment_count] => 0 [filter] => raw ) [1] => WP_Post Object ( [ID] => 1912 [post_author] => 1 [post_date] => 2017-04-30 20:47:08 [post_date_gmt] => 2017-04-30 20:47:08 [post_content] => Secretary Of Education Betsy DeVos issued a memorandum that formally withdraws two Obama administration memorandums (and one addendum to one of those memorandums) in an effort to change the student loan borrowing process with respect to how loans are serviced.  The Obama memos aimed to guide loan servicers towards helping students rather than making money:

Student loan contracts aren't serviced in-house by the Federal Student Aid Office. Instead, they are managed by third-party companies, which are awarded contracts by the government. Before the Obama memos, those contracts went to companies that were best at collecting debts. Rather than rewarding companies that cashed in on debts, the now-rescinded Obama guidance incentivized a good track record and sought to award contracts to companies with a history of helping borrowers.

DeVos notes in her memorandum “We must create a student loan servicing environment that provides the highest quality customer service and increases accountability and transparency for all borrowers, while also limiting the cost to taxpayers”.   DeVos also said “the previous administration’s approach was inconsistent and full of shortcomings”.  It is currently unclear how, what, and when significant changes will be made.      
Nasiripour, Shahien. "DeVos Undoes Obama Student Loan Protections." Bloomberg.com. Bloomberg, 11 Apr. 2017. Web. 15 Apr. 2017.
Rosenblatt, Kalhan. "Will Betsy DeVos' Rollback of Two Obama Memos Impact You?"NBCNews.com. NBCUniversal News Group, 12 Apr. 2017. Web. 15 Apr. 2017.
DeVos, Betsy. "Student Loan Servicer Recompete." (n.d.): n. pag. Department of Education, 11 Apr. 2017. Web. 15 Apr. 2017.
[post_title] => Education Secretary Betsy DeVos Rescinds Obama Guidance That Prioritized Student Loan Lenders Focusing On Helping Students Rather Than Those Best At Collecting Debts [post_excerpt] => [post_status] => publish [comment_status] => closed [ping_status] => closed [post_password] => [post_name] => education-secretary-betsy-devos-rescinds-obama-guidance-lenders-focus-helping-borrowers-instead-making-money [to_ping] => [pinged] => [post_modified] => 2017-08-02 02:18:52 [post_modified_gmt] => 2017-08-02 02:18:52 [post_content_filtered] => [post_parent] => 0 [guid] => http://factualuprising.com/?p=1912 [menu_order] => 0 [post_type] => post [post_mime_type] => [comment_count] => 0 [filter] => raw ) [2] => WP_Post Object ( [ID] => 1911 [post_author] => 1 [post_date] => 2017-04-30 20:43:43 [post_date_gmt] => 2017-04-30 20:43:43 [post_content] => The FBI obtained authorization to monitor Carter Page, a former Trump campaign advisor and investment banker in Moscow:

The FBI and the Justice Department obtained the warrant targeting Carter Page’s communications after convincing a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court judge that there was probable cause to believe Page was acting as an agent of a foreign power, in this case Russia, according to the officials.

The FBI is currently investigating Russia’s involvement in the 2016 Presidential campaign as a whole. When George Stephanopoulos asked Carter Page if he ever discussed the possibility of Trump easing sanctions on Russia during an interivew on Good Morning America on April 13 2017.  Page Responded by saying “absolutely not.  I never offered that, nothing along those lines.”  He then added, "I don’t recall every single word that I ever said...something may have come up in a conversation, I have no recollection and there is nothing specifically that I would have done that would have given people that impression.”
Nakashima, Ellen, Devlin Barrett, and Adam Entous. "FBI Obtained FISA Warrant to Monitor Trump Adviser Carter Page." The Washington Post. WP Company, 11 Apr. 2017. Web. 14 Apr. 2017.
Winsor, Morgan. "Carter Page: 'Something May Have Come up in a Conversation' with Russians about US Sanctions." ABC News. American Broadcasting Company, 13 Apr. 2017. Web. 14 Apr. 2017.
[post_title] => Former Trump Aide Carter Page Under FBI Surveillance Because Of Possible Collaboration With Russian Government [post_excerpt] => [post_status] => publish [comment_status] => closed [ping_status] => closed [post_password] => [post_name] => former-trump-aide-carter-page-surveillance-fbi-possible-collaboration-russian-government [to_ping] => [pinged] => [post_modified] => 2017-08-02 02:21:49 [post_modified_gmt] => 2017-08-02 02:21:49 [post_content_filtered] => [post_parent] => 0 [guid] => http://factualuprising.com/?p=1911 [menu_order] => 0 [post_type] => post [post_mime_type] => [comment_count] => 0 [filter] => raw ) [3] => WP_Post Object ( [ID] => 1910 [post_author] => 1 [post_date] => 2017-04-30 20:40:10 [post_date_gmt] => 2017-04-30 20:40:10 [post_content] => Members of Trump’s inner circle were recorded having conversations with Russian intelligence assets during routine British surveillance of the Russian assets:

GCHQ first became aware in late 2015 of suspicious “interactions” between figures connected to Trump and known or suspected Russian agents, a source close to UK intelligence said. This intelligence was passed to the US as part of a routine exchange of information, they added. Over the next six months, until summer 2016, a number of western agencies shared further information on contacts between Trump’s inner circle and Russians, sources said….The alleged conversations were picked up by chance as part of routine surveillance of Russian intelligence assets. Over several months, different agencies targeting the same people began to see a pattern of connections that were flagged to intelligence officials in the US.

     
Harding, Luke, Stephanie Kirchgaessner, and Nick Hopkins. "British Spies Were First to Spot Trump Team's Links with Russia." The Guardian. Guardian News and Media, 13 Apr. 2017. Web. 14 Apr. 2017.
[post_title] => British Intelligence Agency GCHQ Picked Up Conversations Including Trump’s Inner Circle Through Routine Surveillance Of Russian Intelligence Assets [post_excerpt] => [post_status] => publish [comment_status] => closed [ping_status] => closed [post_password] => [post_name] => british-intelligence-agency-gchq-picked-conversations-including-trumps-inner-circle-routine-surveillance-russian-intelligence-assets [to_ping] => [pinged] => [post_modified] => 2017-08-02 02:24:06 [post_modified_gmt] => 2017-08-02 02:24:06 [post_content_filtered] => [post_parent] => 0 [guid] => http://factualuprising.com/?p=1910 [menu_order] => 0 [post_type] => post [post_mime_type] => [comment_count] => 0 [filter] => raw ) [4] => WP_Post Object ( [ID] => 1908 [post_author] => 1 [post_date] => 2017-04-30 20:37:42 [post_date_gmt] => 2017-04-30 20:37:42 [post_content] => President Trump was accused of profiting from an airstrike in Syria on April 6 2017 because he once owned stock in Raytheon, the company the manufactures the Tomahawk missles used in the air strike (59 missiles were used, each with a cost of $60 million).  However the only evidence to support this claim are old FEC filings that show Trump once owned $15,000 or less of Raytheon stock.   It is unclear if Trump still owns any stock in Raytheon (he has not released his tax returns and has not made any more recent FEC filings).  In addition, Trump spokesman Jason Miller stated in December 2016 that Trump sold all of his stocks in June of 2016.       
LaCapria, Kim. "Did President Trump Profit from the U.S. Missile Strike Against Syria?"Snopes.com. N.p., 10 Apr. 2017. Web. 14 Apr. 2017.
Harwell, Drew, and Rosalind S. Helderman. “Trump Sold All Shares in Companies in June, Spokesman Says.” The Washington Post, WP Company, 6 Dec. 2016.  Web.  12 Feb. 2017.
[post_title] => Claims That Trump Profited From Airstrike In Syria Are Unsubstantiated [post_excerpt] => [post_status] => publish [comment_status] => closed [ping_status] => closed [post_password] => [post_name] => claims-trump-profited-airstrike-syria-unsubstantiated [to_ping] => [pinged] => [post_modified] => 2017-08-02 02:28:36 [post_modified_gmt] => 2017-08-02 02:28:36 [post_content_filtered] => [post_parent] => 0 [guid] => http://factualuprising.com/?p=1908 [menu_order] => 0 [post_type] => post [post_mime_type] => [comment_count] => 0 [filter] => raw ) [5] => WP_Post Object ( [ID] => 1907 [post_author] => 1 [post_date] => 2017-04-30 20:36:55 [post_date_gmt] => 2017-04-30 20:36:55 [post_content] => The U.S. military utilized the largest non-nuclear bomb ever used in combat in an attack on the Islamic State in Afghanistan on Thursday April 13, 2017.  “The bomb, known officially as a GBU-43B, or massive ordnance air blast (MOAB) weapon, unleashes 11 tons of explosives. Its nickname, based on the acronym, is the ‘mother of all bombs”.   According to Afghan officials, 36 Islamic State fighters were killed with no civilian casualties. In 2007 Russia claimed to have developed and tested a bomb that is 4 times as powerful as the MOAB and nicknamed it the Father of all Bombs.  This bomb has not been used in combat.      
"Afghanistan Says 36 Militants Killed after U.S. Drops 'mother of All Bombs' against Islamic State." Los Angeles Times. Los Angeles Times, 14 Apr. 2017. Web. 14 Apr. 2017.
Harding, Luke. "Russia Unveils the 'father of All Bombs'." The Guardian. Guardian News and Media, 11 Sept. 2007. Web. 14 Apr. 2017.
[post_title] => U.S. Military Strike On Islamic State In Afghanistan Utilizes Largest Non-Nuclear Bomb Ever Used In Combat [post_excerpt] => [post_status] => publish [comment_status] => closed [ping_status] => closed [post_password] => [post_name] => u-s-military-strike-islamic-state-afghanistan-utilizes-largest-non-nuclear-bomb-ever-used-combat [to_ping] => [pinged] => [post_modified] => 2017-08-02 02:30:13 [post_modified_gmt] => 2017-08-02 02:30:13 [post_content_filtered] => [post_parent] => 0 [guid] => http://factualuprising.com/?p=1907 [menu_order] => 0 [post_type] => post [post_mime_type] => [comment_count] => 0 [filter] => raw ) [6] => WP_Post Object ( [ID] => 1905 [post_author] => 1 [post_date] => 2017-04-30 20:34:04 [post_date_gmt] => 2017-04-30 20:34:04 [post_content] => Federal officials must rely on local police to help enforce federal immigration laws, but the law doesn't require local authorities to detain illegal immigrants just because their federal counterparts make a request. In fact, federal courts across the country have found complying with the requests is voluntary. Each person arrested by local law enforcement is fingerprinted, and information about the arrestee is shared with federal agencies such as Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), which is the primary federal agency for managing immigration laws.  If ICE identifies an undocumented immigrant, it submits a request to detain that person for an additional period of time (at the expense of local law enforcement) until ICE can then take custody of that person.   Although there is no standard legal definition of sanctuary city, these types of policies typically make it clear they will not comply with these or other requests related to using local law enforcement to capture and detain immigrants of any status.   Many cities across the country have enacted some sort of sanctuary city policy. A new anti-sanctuary city law in Texas "threatens police chiefs and elected officials with jail time and removal from office if they don't comply with federal immigration requests to detain immigrants in the country illegally.  The four largest cities in Texas — San Antonio, Austin, Houston and Dallas— are suing to block the measure." Lansing, MI had a sanctuary city policy but “city council members voted 5-2 to rescind the policy because business owners worried the term “sanctuary” would draw unwelcome attention to the city.”    
Cameron, Darla. "How Sanctuary Cities Work, and How Trump's Executive Order Might Affect Them." The Washington Post. WP Company, 25 Jan. 2017. Web. 13 Apr. 2017.
Kopan, Tal. "What Are Sanctuary Cities, and Can They Be Defunded?" CNN. Cable News Network, 25 Jan. 2017. Web. 13 Apr. 2017.
Griffith, Bryan, and Jessica Vaughan. "Map: Sanctuary Cities, Counties, and States." Center for Immigration Studies. N.p., 07 July 2015. Web. 13 Apr. 2017.
Weber, Paul. "No Immediate Ruling on Fate of Texas' 'sanctuary Cities' Law." ABC News. ABC News Network, 26 June 2017. Web. 09 July 2017. Gonzales, Sara. "One Michigan City Is Rescinding Its ‘sanctuary City’ Policy – Here’s Why."TheBlaze. TheBlaze, 13 Apr. 2017. Web. 13 Apr. 2017.
[post_title] => Sanctuary Cities Prohibit Federal Government From Forcing States And Cities To Use Local Resources To Capture And Detain Immigrants [post_excerpt] => [post_status] => publish [comment_status] => closed [ping_status] => closed [post_password] => [post_name] => sanctuary-cities-prohibit-federal-government-forcing-states-cities-use-local-resources-capture-detain-immigrants [to_ping] => [pinged] => [post_modified] => 2017-08-02 02:36:14 [post_modified_gmt] => 2017-08-02 02:36:14 [post_content_filtered] => [post_parent] => 0 [guid] => http://factualuprising.com/?p=1905 [menu_order] => 0 [post_type] => post [post_mime_type] => [comment_count] => 0 [filter] => raw ) [7] => WP_Post Object ( [ID] => 1904 [post_author] => 1 [post_date] => 2017-04-30 20:31:15 [post_date_gmt] => 2017-04-30 20:31:15 [post_content] => In an interview with the Wall Street Journal on Wednesday April 12 2017, Trump threatened to end certain subsidies and healthcare cost sharing mechanisms for lower income patients in an effort to continue negotiations on healthcare reform. These subsidies amount to approximately $7 billion annually and cover approximately 7 million people. This issue is not new, as the Republican controlled congress under President Obama sued to halt these subsidy payments:

Many Republicans believe Mr. Obama lacked the authority to green-light billions of dollars of funding for the payments, which they say Congress never specifically appropriated. The GOP-controlled House of Representatives instigated a lawsuit against Mr. Obama’s administration over the question under former House Speaker John Boehner of Ohio. A federal judge in 2016 ruled the government payments were improper but let them continue while Mr. Obama’s administration pursued an appeal. After Mr. Trump’s election, Republicans requested and received an initial delay in the case.

“House Speaker, Paul Ryan (R., Wis.) has said he would prefer to see the administration continue to fund the payments.” In addition, if these payments were stopped it “could trigger an insurance meltdown that causes the collapse of the 2010 health law, forcing lawmakers to return to a bruising debate over its future.”      
Pettypiece, Shannon, and Zachary Tracer. "Trump Threatens Health Subsidies to Poor to Force Talks." Bloomberg.com. Bloomberg, 12 Apr. 2017. Web. 12 Apr. 2017.
Abutaleb, Yasmeen. "Trump May Halt Insurer Payments to Force Democrats to Table on Healthcare." Reuters. Thomson Reuters, 12 Apr. 2017. Web. 12 Apr. 2017.
Bender, Michael C., Louise Radnofsky, and Peter Nicholas. "Trump Threatens to Withhold Payments to Insurers to Press Democrats on Health Bill." The Wall Street Journal. Dow Jones & Company, 12 Apr. 2017. Web. 12 Apr. 2017.
[post_title] => Trump Threatened To End Healthcare Subsidies For Lower Income Patients In An Effort To Force Negotiations On Healthcare Plan [post_excerpt] => [post_status] => publish [comment_status] => closed [ping_status] => closed [post_password] => [post_name] => trump-threatened-end-healthcare-subsidies-poor-patients-effort-force-negotiations-healthcare-plan [to_ping] => [pinged] => [post_modified] => 2017-07-30 20:21:07 [post_modified_gmt] => 2017-07-30 20:21:07 [post_content_filtered] => [post_parent] => 0 [guid] => http://factualuprising.com/?p=1904 [menu_order] => 0 [post_type] => post [post_mime_type] => [comment_count] => 0 [filter] => raw ) [8] => WP_Post Object ( [ID] => 1902 [post_author] => 1 [post_date] => 2017-04-30 20:24:56 [post_date_gmt] => 2017-04-30 20:24:56 [post_content] => On February 10 2017 Trump’s Trust documents were modified to allow Trump to access funds in his trust at any time.  The added clause in the document states:

The trustees shall distribute net income or principal to Donald J. Trump at his request, as the Trustees deem necessary for his maintenance, support or uninsured medical expenses, or as the Trustees otherwise deem appropriate.

In addition, nothing in this document requires Trump to publicly disclose any such access of trust funds.   Trump originally transferred all remaining ownership of his businesses to the Donald J. Trump revokable trust on January 19, 2017, but it did not fully restrict information sharing about his businesses, creating opportunities for conflicts of interest.      
Shaw, Derek Kravitz Al. "Trump Lawyer Confirms President Can Pull Money From His Businesses Whenever He Wants." ProPublica. N.p., 06 Apr. 2017. Web. 12 Apr. 2017.
[post_title] => Trump Trust Modified Allowing Trump Access To Funds At Any Time [post_excerpt] => [post_status] => publish [comment_status] => closed [ping_status] => closed [post_password] => [post_name] => trump-trust-modified-allow-trump-access-funds-time [to_ping] => [pinged] => [post_modified] => 2017-07-30 20:16:13 [post_modified_gmt] => 2017-07-30 20:16:13 [post_content_filtered] => [post_parent] => 0 [guid] => http://factualuprising.com/?p=1902 [menu_order] => 0 [post_type] => post [post_mime_type] => [comment_count] => 0 [filter] => raw ) [9] => WP_Post Object ( [ID] => 1901 [post_author] => 1 [post_date] => 2017-04-30 20:21:23 [post_date_gmt] => 2017-04-30 20:21:23 [post_content] => "There were 10.7 million unauthorized immigrants living in the U.S. in 2016, down from a peak of 12.2 million in 2007."  2016 levels are the lowest since 2004, and this downward trend has been driven by a decline of 1.5 million less unauthorized immigrants from Mexico from 2007 to 2016. Half of all unauthorized immigrants living in the U.S. are from Mexico. In addition, “the U.S. civilian workforce included 8 million unauthorized immigrants in 2014, accounting for 5% of those who were working or were unemployed and looking for work”. Approximately 66% of all unauthorized immigrants have lived in the United States for 10 or more years. [caption id="attachment_2701" align="aligncenter" width="309"] SOURCE: Pew Research Center (See Below Citations)[/caption]    
Krogstad, Jens Manuel, Jeffrey S. Passel, and D’Vera Cohn. "5 Facts about Illegal Immigration in the U.S." Pew Research Center. N.p., 03 Nov. 2016. Web. 11 Apr. 2017.
[post_title] => 10.7 Million Unauthorized Immigrants Living In The U.S. In 2016, Down From A Peak Of 12.2 Million In 2007; Half Of Unauthorized Immigrants In U.S. Are From Mexico [post_excerpt] => [post_status] => publish [comment_status] => closed [ping_status] => closed [post_password] => [post_name] => 11-1-million-unauthorized-immigrants-living-u-s-2014-total-largely-unchanged-since-2009-66-group-living-u-s-10-years [to_ping] => [pinged] => [post_modified] => 2018-12-01 18:52:07 [post_modified_gmt] => 2018-12-01 18:52:07 [post_content_filtered] => [post_parent] => 0 [guid] => http://factualuprising.com/?p=1901 [menu_order] => 0 [post_type] => post [post_mime_type] => [comment_count] => 0 [filter] => raw ) ) [post_count] => 10 [current_post] => -1 [in_the_loop] => [post] => WP_Post Object ( [ID] => 1913 [post_author] => 1 [post_date] => 2017-04-30 20:49:42 [post_date_gmt] => 2017-04-30 20:49:42 [post_content] => Travel site Hopper.com released a report describing the rapidly decreasing interest in traveling to the U.S. from foreign countries:

Weekly international U.S.-bound flight searches decreased 17% after the travel ban was announced. The number of flight searches dropped from 61.5 million per week during Obama's final days in office, down to 56 million during Trump's inauguration week, before falling to 50.9 million after the travel ban was ordered.

While there is normally a slight decrease in this type of search during this time of year, it usually isn’t so significant.  Last year the same data captured by Hopper.com showed a decrease of 1.8%. Swedish travel site flygresor.se noted a 47% decrease in U.S. bound flight searches after the travel ban compared to the prior year. Cheapflights.com saw a 16% decrease in U.S. bound flight searches between the average rate in January and the period from February 10-14.   The President of Tourism Economics, a company that forecasts travel trends, told the New York Times that they expect approximately 6.3 million less foreign visitors from 2016 to 2018 because of Trump’s policies.  New York City also expects 300,000 less foreign tourists (which will reduce foreign tourism spending by around $600 million) and also blames Trump’s policies. The Global Business Travelers Association polled its members in March 2017 to assess the impact of Trump’s policies:

47% of European travel professionals polled said they expected some reduction in their companies’ business travel, with 17% of them reporting they had already canceled business travel to the U.S. because of the Trump orders. Thirty-eight percent said their companies would be less willing to send business travelers to the U.S. in the future and 45% said they would be less willing to plan future meetings and events in the U.S.

   
Tuttle, Brad. "Trump Immigration Ban Decreases Flight Searches to U.S. | Money." Time. Time, 7 Feb. 2017. Web. 15 Apr. 2017.
Vora, Shivani. "After Travel Ban, Interest in Trips to U.S. Declines." The New York Times. The New York Times, 20 Feb. 2017. Web. 15 Apr. 2017.
Mcgeehan, Patrick. "New York Expects Fewer Foreign Tourists, Saying Trump Is to Blame."The New York Times. The New York Times, 28 Feb. 2017. Web. 15 Apr. 2017. Wall, Robert, and Susan Carey. "Trump Travel Ban, Strong Dollar Take Edge Off Tourism to U.S." The Wall Street Journal. Dow Jones & Company, 20 Mar. 2017. Web. 15 Apr. 2017.
[post_title] => Foreign Tourism And Other U.S. Bound Travel Estimated To Decrease Due To Trump’s Travel Ban And The Strong U.S. Dollar [post_excerpt] => [post_status] => publish [comment_status] => closed [ping_status] => closed [post_password] => [post_name] => data-indicates-foreign-tourists-u-s-bound-travel-will-decrease-significantly-partially-trumps-immigration-policies-also-strong-u-s-dollar [to_ping] => [pinged] => [post_modified] => 2017-08-02 02:12:35 [post_modified_gmt] => 2017-08-02 02:12:35 [post_content_filtered] => [post_parent] => 0 [guid] => http://factualuprising.com/?p=1913 [menu_order] => 0 [post_type] => post [post_mime_type] => [comment_count] => 0 [filter] => raw ) [comment_count] => 0 [current_comment] => -1 [found_posts] => 21 [max_num_pages] => 3 [max_num_comment_pages] => 0 [is_single] => [is_preview] => [is_page] => [is_archive] => 1 [is_date] => 1 [is_year] => [is_month] => 1 [is_day] => [is_time] => [is_author] => [is_category] => [is_tag] => [is_tax] => [is_search] => [is_feed] => [is_comment_feed] => [is_trackback] => [is_home] => [is_404] => [is_embed] => [is_paged] => [is_admin] => [is_attachment] => [is_singular] => [is_robots] => [is_posts_page] => [is_post_type_archive] => [query_vars_hash:WP_Query:private] => 8dad487858fae00803a4947ecc18ea0a [query_vars_changed:WP_Query:private] => [thumbnails_cached] => [stopwords:WP_Query:private] => [compat_fields:WP_Query:private] => Array ( [0] => query_vars_hash [1] => query_vars_changed ) [compat_methods:WP_Query:private] => Array ( [0] => init_query_flags [1] => parse_tax_query ) ) [paged] => 1 )
page 1 of 3