We were never sure where that 14 December date came from in whichever publication that appeared (Observador, I think). Our lawyers always thought it was 15 December. And so it will be.
2 Likes
Big surprise there. Every time I read one of her articles (and have no idea why I still do) I feel like smashing my phone! 
2 Likes
From the discussion, they don’t seem to have good information regarding the nationality law, GV, and the letter to TC. Really surprised she can talk like that being a news editor without doing a very good research on the topic. Amicus Curiae brief is not an American thing, is a GV Nomadgate members thing. We voted for it one week ago and need about 20 members (500€ each) to raise 10,000 euros to fund the letter through the laywers. Unfortunately, I don’t have the fund although I voted yes. Some members paid and I believe they are not only Americas, although good numbers might be. I don’t understand what that lady is talking about on that podcast. In Nomadgate we have Chinese, Brazilians, Africans, Americans, Europeans and Asias so Amicus Curiae is not an only American thing as I understand except I’m wrong as I’m not part of the whatapp group created for this purpose. Maybe only Amerucan paid for the €500 to raise the fund.
2 Likes
100% agree. @piquant_bugs.07 has shared a possible reason for The Resident’s slanted reporting: “They’ve had a lot of sponsored content from fund managers lately.”
At the same time, @watsonhal2016 has taken the brilliant initiative of writing to their fund managers and asking for more content that shows the benefits of GV investments for Portugal - with positive effects.
If our individual fund managers are advertising here, it would be worth flagging to them that they are advertising in a forum whose content is inaccurate and counterproductive to the aims of their own clients.
I have looked at the back issues and only see Blevins Franks advertised - however I don’t have the print edition. If anyone is aware of other GV fund managers who support this publication, please advise.
1 Like
It’s worth acknowledging though that if the 10-year timeline is upheld, it would represent an existential threat to the funds (and the premise of the ARI program) unless they can pivot to promoting residency only. I don’t blame the funds at all for trying to preserve their business if things go badly tomorrow, but I do wish they would devote more energy to heading off the issue in the first place.
Are the funds doing this? Which funds? Trying to establish if any funds are actually doing this and if so, who.
1 Like
A lot of them are actively involved in the “it was never about citizenship” gaslight campaign. Optimize most recently.
7 Likes
Okay, I thought this was spit-up funny. I’m going to file that away for future use!
1 Like
The Constitutional Court will read its ruling on the Nationality Law at 4:30 PM.
Updated story this morning:
12 Likes
anyone know of a live stream for this?
1 Like
What a clueless idiot she is…
4 Likes
What a frivolous, unserious, and incredibly stupid excuse for a journalist. Just goes to show that Portugal has been a home for grifters since long before the current influx of immigrants.
1 Like
2 Likes
Honestly, the hilarity is real.
Then there is the stark message coming out from the United States of America: that Europe faces “civilizational erasure” and that if things are allowed to continue in the way they have been, in 20 years or less Europe will not look like Europe anymore – and may not even be a valid partner for NATO membership.
So much seems to be ‘up in the air’ – and adding to the workload of AIMA (the agency for integration, migrations and asylum), the 1000-plus proposals to remove residency will now have to be duly analysed for a final decision.
From the article on Portugal Resident about PSP asking for residencies to be canceled. 
Natasha Donn strikes again!
Who are PSP and why they asking to remove 1000 residences?
According to her it’s an effort to save Portuguese society.
Another half-cooked spaghetti-logic take on a topic she clearly doesn’t understand (and can’t be bothered to put any effort into understanding). Does anyone actually read this stuff? It’s embarrassingly bad.
2 Likes
Apparently we do
2 Likes
Anybody know the ruling yet?
I await it with bated breath