I'm not a fan of this part:
The author seems to be saying that the victims were less deserving of being attacked than other immigrants because they were successful and legally present in the US.
I'm half-Indian, and I've seen similar attitudes in some Indians, as well as other highly educated immigrants: the idea that they are here legally because they worked hard, and that undocumented immigrants didn't work hard enough and are freeloaders. I actually had a conversation a few weeks ago with an Iranian daughter of an immigrant who thought Trump's travel ban was fine.
I think the writer is trying to draw parallels between good immigrants and how even being a good little immigrant doesn't mean anything to Trump, who will exclusively focus on the bad immigrants.
I think part of Trump's deal is "Immigrants who work hard and are good people are great...but let me tell you about all these evil immigrants, all these lowlifes who we good people have to support"
So when that kind of immigrant gets done in by a lowlife white person, you'd think Trump would uphold this ideal immigrant citizen, and lump the white terrorist with the rest of the bad folk.
Trump doesn't uphold the immigrant at all. If this was an innocent white person, he would do just that. This immigrant says "hey look, Im just like you white people, Im a good citizen who works hard. Im good for America"
But none of that is mourned over by the President because it would promote immigrants, and put down white people.
Yes, it does come off as "he was a good one", but it also comes off as "he was a good one, but good ones dont matter either because it doesn't help the anti-immigration stance"
