Melania Trump Broke the Law

Establishment said:
Derrick Zoolander.
Click to expand...

1454572385449.jpg
 

The photographer who took the shots says she wasn't paid for her work, so unless there's proof that she didn't work for free or didn't fly back to Slovenia periodically, this is a non-starter.
 
Seahawk said:
What American model did not get a job because of Melania?
Click to expand...

Who knows? Probably the one that the agency passed over when choosing Melania. But, you mistake me for someone who gives a shit about minor technical immigration law violations. I think she is an asset to this country, and any possible displacement of an American model for one silly photoshoot is inconsequential. What I do care about is the actions of the Donald's model agency with respect to breaking the laws that he is now clamoring to strengthen. I bet if he met his fourth wife right now, he would be directing traffic to Melania's deportation.
 
I really don't care, but think it is rather funny concerning Trump's birtherism and his immigration stance, but this won't result in anything but picking on Melania.
 
Legion Troll said:
The photographer who took the shots says she wasn't paid for her work, so unless there's proof that she didn't work for free or didn't fly back to Slovenia periodically, this is a non-starter.
Click to expand...

Have you read a single post on this thread? The fact that she flew back to Slovenia can only be explained by the fact her visa was temporary, and employment was strictly forbidden to that type of visa holder. It is a given that she flew back to Slovenia. She has said so, repeatedly. Her roommate has said so, also. This is not a non-starter.

I will make it simple. She claims both that her visa was H-1B, which can't be renewed by flying to Slovenia periodically, and that she flew back to Slovenia periodically to have it stamped. That does not compute. You tell me how that works, and I'll send you some snap shots of Michelle's bare arms. (Yes, she does have the right.)
 
mogur said:
Have you read a single post on this thread? The fact that she flew back to Slovenia can only be explained by the fact her visa was temporary, and employment was strictly forbidden to that type of visa holder. It is a given that she flew back to Slovenia. She has said so, repeatedly. Her roommate has said so, also. This is not a non-starter.

I will make it simple. She claims both that her visa was H-1B, which can't be renewed by flying to Slovenia periodically, and that she flew back to Slovenia periodically to have it stamped. That does not compute. You tell me how that works, and I'll send you some snap shots of Michelle's bare arms. (Yes, she does have the right.)
Click to expand...

And if she wasn't paid for modeling, what law did she violate?
 
Legion Troll said:
And if she wasn't paid for modeling, what law did she violate?
Click to expand...

Ok, I will break it down further. Let's assume 1995 is legal because she wasn't compensated for that work.

From 1996 until 2001, she flew back to Slovenia to stamp her visa (actually, it is a renewal). For five years she was here on a temporary visa. For five years she worked here and got paid. That is illegal. That is breaking immigration law.

I am not trying to hold her feet to the fire, I am trying to roast the Donald's nuts.
 
mogur said:
Ok, I will break it down further. Let's assume 1995 is legal because she wasn't compensated for that work.

From 1996 until 2001, she flew back to Slovenia to stamp her visa (actually, it is a renewal). For five years she was here on a temporary visa. For five years she worked here and got paid. That is illegal. That is breaking immigration law.

I am not trying to hold her feet to the fire, I am trying to roast the Donald's nuts.
Click to expand...


You have proof that she was paid in violation of immigration law?
 
Legion Troll said:
You have proof that she was paid in violation of immigration law?
Click to expand...

Come on, Legion. She worked for five years here for modeling agencies, including the Don's modeling agency. And you are seriously asking me for proof that she got paid? What the fuck?
 
mogur said:
Come on, Legion. She worked for five years here for modeling agencies, including the Don's modeling agency. And you are seriously asking me for proof that she got paid? What the fuck?
Click to expand...

She denies being paid for the 1995 shoot for Max, and the photographer says she wasn't paid.

Do you have any evidence that she was paid?
 
Legion Troll said:
She denies being paid for the 1995 shoot for Max, and the photographer says she wasn't paid.

Do you have any evidence that she was paid?
Click to expand...

Do you have any evidence that you can read? I said-
Let's assume 1995 is legal because she wasn't compensated for that work.
Click to expand...
Why are you being so obtuse? I am an old, crusty, forum poster with no ability to prove or disprove her income, either in 1995, nor for that matter 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, nor 2001. But I have the ability to assume that frequent flights to Slovenia over a five year period and the costs of living in New York would almost guarantee some form of income.

Quit picking on me, you turd. Repeating a point that I have already granted you (with reservations), does not make a discussion. Are you expecting a different answer every time you ask the same question?
 
mogur said:
Do you have any evidence that you can read? I said-
Why are you being so obtuse? I am an old, crusty, forum poster with no ability to prove or disprove her income, either in 1995, nor for that matter 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, nor 2001. But I have the ability to assume that frequent flights to Slovenia over a five year period and the costs of living in New York would almost guarantee some form of income.

Quit picking on me, you turd. Repeating a point that I have already granted you (with reservations), does not make a discussion. Are you expecting a different answer every time you ask the same question?
Click to expand...
You do know he is just a troll, right?

Sent from my LG-D631 using Tapatalk
 
mogur said:
Do you have any evidence that you can read? I said-
Why are you being so obtuse? I am an old, crusty, forum poster with no ability to prove or disprove her income, either in 1995, nor for that matter 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, nor 2001. But I have the ability to assume that frequent flights to Slovenia over a five year period and the costs of living in New York would almost guarantee some form of income.

Quit picking on me, you turd. Repeating a point that I have already granted you (with reservations), does not make a discussion. Are you expecting a different answer every time you ask the same question?
Click to expand...

So you have no evidence of illegal work performed for pay.
 
cawacko said:
Absolutely nothing and I just stated so.

I'm trying to understand how a First Lady and a private citizen are comparable in their actions
Click to expand...

You and I are coming at this from different positions. For you it's "First Lady v. private citizen." For me it's about body-shaming one woman who only posed in a sleeveless dress v. another woman who posed nude.

Further, Melania came here when she was 25, a fully-grown adult. Nobody forced her to pose nude or do girl-on-girl photos for the Italian version of Playboy. She put her lady parts out there for everyone to see and she did it for money. Because she did this, she's in the public domain. So I find it hypocritical to say we should give her a pass because she's a private citizen. She put herself in the public eye and if the Donald doesn't like it her past being brought up, tough.
 
christiefan915 said:
You and I are coming at this from different positions. For you it's "First Lady v. private citizen." For me it's about body-shaming one woman who only posed in a sleeveless dress v. another woman who posed nude.

Further, Melania came here when she was 25, a fully-grown adult. Nobody forced her to pose nude or do girl-on-girl photos for the Italian version of Playboy. She put her lady parts out there for everyone to see and she did it for money. Because she did this, she's in the public domain. So I find it hypocritical to say we should give her a pass because she's a private citizen. She put herself in the public eye and if the Donald doesn't like it her past being brought up, tough.
Click to expand...


I thought her girl/girl porn was for a French magazine called Max. BTW, didn't she deny being paid?



 
christiefan915 said:
You and I are coming at this from different positions. For you it's "First Lady v. private citizen." For me it's about body-shaming one woman who only posed in a sleeveless dress v. another woman who posed nude.

Further, Melania came here when she was 25, a fully-grown adult. Nobody forced her to pose nude or do girl-on-girl photos for the Italian version of Playboy. She put her lady parts out there for everyone to see and she did it for money. Because she did this, she's in the public domain. So I find it hypocritical to say we should give her a pass because she's a private citizen. She put herself in the public eye and if the Donald doesn't like it her past being brought up, tough.
Click to expand...

I don't care at all that she posed the way she did. Nor do I care that Michelle Obama wore a sleeveless dress. And the First Lady is always going to be held to different standards just as the President is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top