Politico: Melania may have committed visa fraud, illegally immigrated to US

[Redban]

She's really been hurting his campaign, which was already experiencing turbulence before her exploits (i.e plagiarism, nude pictures, lesbianism).

I can't recall the last time a candidate's wife gave the candidate so much trouble. Michelle Obama, Laura Bush, Ann Romney, Cindy McCain --- none of them aroused so much negative attention. In fact, most of them helped the candidate, especially Michelle Obama and Cindy McCain.

[Redban]

She put out a statement on Twitter:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Where's her long-form immigration papers? Hillary needs to send her investigative team to Slovenia.

Her statement doesn't address the main suspicion --- why did she, in her words, have to travel back to Europe to renew her papers? The only explanation for such visits is that she was on a tourist visa, and a tourist visa does not permit employment (such as her modelling on U.S. soil in 1995).

Did she make a mistake when she said that she had to return to Europe to renew her papers? Did she not know that she couldn't do a modelling shoot in America with a tourist Visa? Was the modelling agency headquartered outside of the United States? Did she perform the modeling shoot as an audition, not as an employee?

[Redban]

This story will never catch on.  It can't be encapsulated in an easily-understandable form and the details of different immigration visas or was it 1995 or 1996 or was it auditioning or working are too nitpicky and confusing for voters to care about.

In other words --- voters are dumb?

[Redban]

Source says she had a work visa. She also didn't get paid for the nude photos from 1995.

https://www.yahoo.com/amphtml/news/former-modeling-agent-says-got-melania-trumps-visa-185839718--election.html

[Redban]

She also didn't get paid for the nude photos from 1995.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

https://de.usembassy.gov/unpaid-work-is-work-make-sure-you-have-the-correct-visa/

Not really sure how much clearer the US government can make that.

From the yahoo link:

"U.S. law allows a person to use a visitor visa to conduct temporary business for a foreign company or explore a future career opportunities such as visiting modeling agencies or meeting with potential clients.

Zampolli, who didn't book the shoot, said the photos, which appeared in the French magazine Max, were likely a "free shoot to build the book of the model. She needed to get her tear sheets."

[Redban]

She also didn't get paid for the nude photos from 1995.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

https://de.usembassy.gov/unpaid-work-is-work-make-sure-you-have-the-correct-visa/

Not really sure how much clearer the US government can make that.

From the yahoo link:

"U.S. law allows a person to use a visitor visa to conduct temporary business for a foreign company or explore a future career opportunities such as visiting modeling agencies or meeting with potential clients.

Zampolli, who didn't book the shoot, said the photos, which appeared in the French magazine Max, were likely a "free shoot to build the book of the model. She needed to get her tear sheets."

So basically you just quoted someone who has no knowledge of the situation and is speculating.  And taking nude pictures is not "visiting a modeling agency or meeting with potential clients".  You must have some interesting career days at your school if you think that is the way people meet potential clients.  You go to a person's place of business and you participate in the production of something of economic value... bad news son... You just did work.

US government again...

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Oh yes -- the man who sponsored her for a work Visa and has extensive experience with professional modeling has "no knowledge of the situation."

She went there to take pictures that she could add to her portfolio, with no exchange of money. If you visit a country and have someone take your pictures as you stand in front of a landmark, then are you committing immigration fraud?

[Redban]

Oh yes -- the man who sponsored her for a work Visa and has extensive experience with professional modeling has "no knowledge of the situation."

She went there to take pictures that she could add to her portfolio, with no exchange of money. If you visit a country and have someone take your pictures as you stand in front of a landmark, then are you committing immigration fraud?

That's a very good point. So, by the same line of thinking, if a foreign photographer took pictures of say Yosemite and then sold them when they got back home, would that also be visa fraud? Seems a bit ridiculous if it would be classified as visa fraud.

No. What is prohibited is US employment. You can work in the US on B1 visa: for your foreign boss (there is an interesting extension: if you are a maid of a foreign boss who takes you with him to the US, you can work for him even while he is in the US on B1, but that has to be stated when you apply for the visa). What is not allowed is working for a US employer. So, if she was working for a foreign modelling agency, which sent her to NY to take some shoots with NYC views, she was fine. But if she was being paid by Americans, she was not.

The photographer who shot the 1995 pics already said that Melania received no compensation.

(See the last sentence in the link below)

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/former-modeling-agent-reveals-details-about-melania-trumps-visa/

[Redban]

Oh yes -- the man who sponsored her for a work Visa and has extensive experience with professional modeling has "no knowledge of the situation."

She went there to take pictures that she could add to her portfolio, with no exchange of money. If you visit a country and have someone take your pictures as you stand in front of a landmark, then are you committing immigration fraud?

That's a very good point. So, by the same line of thinking, if a foreign photographer took pictures of say Yosemite and then sold them when they got back home, would that also be visa fraud? Seems a bit ridiculous if it would be classified as visa fraud.

No. What is prohibited is US employment. You can work in the US on B1 visa: for your foreign boss (there is an interesting extension: if you are a maid of a foreign boss who takes you with him to the US, you can work for him even while he is in the US on B1, but that has to be stated when you apply for the visa). What is not allowed is working for a US employer. So, if she was working for a foreign modelling agency, which sent her to NY to take some shoots with NYC views, she was fine. But if she was being paid by Americans, she was not.

The photographer who shot the 1995 pics already said that Melania received no compensation.

(See the last sentence in the link below)

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/former-modeling-agent-reveals-details-about-melania-trumps-visa/

If it  were only one shoot, perhaps, it would be enough But she lived in the US in an unclear status for quite a while. What was she living on? Was she selling something in Slovenia?

This is the rub: figuring out whether she was legally in the US requires figuring out what was the source of her income. She was, almost certainly, not allowed to earn money in the US. Where was she earning it and how?

BTW, US visa form also asks applicants to specify if they are coming in the US to practice prostitution (I am pretty certain a visa would not be granted if the answer is "yes"). I am not claiming anything about Mrs. Trump, but certain obvious things would, likewise, constitute visa fraud.

Firstly:

From 1996-onwards, she had a work visa (confirmed by the agency); so she was getting paid by the agency at that time. Indeed, one article says, "Zampolli's agency paid Melania's share of the rent as part of their contract." If they paid for her rent, then they likely helped cover food and other necessities too.

http://www.gq.com/story/melania-trump-gq-interview

Secondly:

You say, "she lived in the US in an unclear status for quite a while." But that statement (esp. the bolded) is speculative. Again, she had a work Visa from 1996-onwards, and all we have before that time are the nude photos from 1995 -- just one year prior. Is one year "quite a while"?

She was a model in Europe before coming here. She likely had money to support herself for a few months before she acquired the work visa in 1996. If not, then she might have had loved ones willing to help her.

Thirdly:

I have no idea what point you are trying to convey with the 3rd paragraph. Are you suggesting that she worked as a prostitute?

[Redban]

Ah, and, BTW, at the time there existed no provision in the US law allowing foreign brides to join their US grooms (or vice versa) before actual marriage (after marriage the spouse could be sponsored for a visa). Having a US boyfriend would have been considered relevant evidence of potential immigrant intent and would have likely, if revealed, resulted in visa denial. While this has been since changed, at the time there were thousands and thousands of such mixed couples living all along the US-Mexico border, because one of the partners was not allowed to enter the US, while the other was a US citizen working in the US. So, saying that she had a boyfriend who paid for her, if she did not reveal that in the consulate, would not absolve her of visa fraud. Let us hope that a rich foreign boyfriend (with a foreign source of income) can be found in this case

OK? Are you suggesting that she, in 1995, had a boyfriend in America who paid for her livelihood? On what basis do you conjure this supposition? Where is your evidence?