#50- @WaiveMein

Thanks for your input. :)

#51 - @John Rogers

I am not already married. I have a 10 year ban for an overstay... (no criminal record whatsoever)

If I file an I-601 this year (I'm currently 4 1/2 years into my ban) how is that different from a "regular" waiver or are they the same thing?

Is filing an I-601 a better option for me and do I have to wait the ENTIRE 10 years before they would even consider processing a green card application?

I have done K-1 visas with a long ban in place, but never a visa where you are already married. No matter what you are filing, if you are inadmissible, you will be asked to file an I-601 at some point to "waiver" your inadmissibility.

The K-1 visa is the "Fiance visa" and in a real relationship, a fairly easy visa to get. I have no done one since Trump was in power though, so I cannot give definitive advice as to whether it would work with an existing ban.

If it's an overstay ban, then I believe you can file I-601 then apply for a green card. If it's a criminal record, then it would depend on what kind of crime was it. I believe some crimes would make you ineligible for green card forever and cannot be waived. Maybe experts can comment?

Question for the anyone with any knowledge of this:

Is it possible to get a green card if you marry an American but you still are banned or do you have to wait until the ban is COMPLETELY over before you can get a green card?

For example - if you have a ten year ban for an overstay and you're 4-5 years into the ban and you marry an American citizen how does that affect the possibility of getting a waiver and a green card?

My Colleague from Montreal, Manni Jason and I were once both questioned about our jobs years ago, but mostly out of curiosity.

I have traveled maybe 5 or 6 times to the United States, especially when I was competing in tournaments or fights in Ohio. It never really came up. They see the cauliflower ears and fighting seems to become the main topic.

I would chat here and there with Homeland Security at Pearson Airport when it was open, and they would even send people back out to see me when they were too exasperated to explain what the people needed to apply.

Since your crossing at a smaller border, maybe they are more friendly and have the time to chat? That's probably a bigger factor than anything else.

Revision to my comment "we might have to take a little vacation - I mean my husband and I ...LOL..

John and Ken, a question for you both...have either of you crossed into the USA for travel or work and stopped or questioned about your company? I ask, because different clients have advised me when they drop off paperwork, a Custom Officer will comment about FPS saying yes, we are familiar with this company and its owner and they have are in good standing with us..I find this interesting.. I have not crossed into the USA since starting the company. I know when I was with Police my passport had my police identification attached to it in the computer and I never had any problems. Even when I tried boarding with a wine corkscrew in my purse..(but that is another story..LOL..)....I think we might have to take a little vacation and see what happens...

When I was growing up Alberta was Joe Clark Conservative and we had no problem with them. We were all focused on Quebec. The referendum ect. Mulroney, Clark, these were Conservative minded politicians who I did not support, but I also didn't fear.

Harper I knew would be a different animal, and I was completely right.

When the Conservatives followed the Republican Party is where the division happened. I would say when the "University Of Calgary" group realized the politics of division and hatred worked, and started to implement it, the real division happened.

I didn't suggest they are nothing but good. Ever seen how banks operate? LOL!

You view the world with a Liberal eye which says "Alberta is Evil". Started with Poppa Trudeau and his son has carried the torch....

I understand how the world works. I live in Brampton, not Toronto.

You view the world with a Conservative eye where corporations are nothing but good.

But that doesn't mean I am right and you are wrong. Agree to disagree.

Oh John, you're living in the GTA bubble of "we're always right and the rest of you are wrong"

When Alberta is prosperous, the nation prospers. End of story. The amount of tax outflows via transfers is enormous, both on the corporate side and the personal side. What do you think allows provinces like Quebec to fund all their special programs that everyone else would die to have? Equalization.

Alberta has 11.6% of the population of Canada, but contributes far more to GDP than every other province except Ontario. And even per Capita, we crush all other provinces, even in a DOWN year. 2017 we had $78K per person GDP contribution, Ontario was 55K. You may have 3.5x more people in Ontario, but your GDP contribution is only 2x Alberta. Lag much?

You can brag about tech, you can brag about banking, you can brag about Auto and other industries (hydro, LOL), but reality is we fund the bulk of the country.

We argue for pipelines primarily to assist in the disparity. Quebec causes more pollution allowing tankers to come in to the seaway and buying oil from Saudi Arabia than it would with a pipeline. BC causes far more pollution with cruiseliner traffic in a single day than the increase of tanker traffic would cause in a year.

Equalisation is simply a political program, not an economic one. If the numbers were revised *fairly*, transfers would not be the same. Quebec would not have $5 a day day care, the lowest university tuition in canada, etc, etc.

Oil companies just like every other company out there (all the big banks, lenders, and everyone else) operate to make a profit. They haven't raped shit, they've run businesses that employ people and feed the desperate need of canadian consumerism. Money is leaving the province because of stupid decisions made by the present government to discourage investment. You know how money works, it moves to where it sees the potential for the best return. Create a climate for investment, money comes in. Make it difficult, money moves out.

If ontarians actually took the time to read monetary reports, study economics, learn how the world really works you would understand why Albertans (and to an extend those from Saskatchewan) get so upset. We work hard, but we play hard. Our wealth isn't fake created from rising housing prices (caused partially by poor liberal monetary policy decisions with inflation in the 90's), it's created from a functioning economy that fuels so many subsectors it's not even funny.

I've lived in both provinces. I've seen people from all sides, I'm not going to spout that I'm an expert but I think I have a far better pulse to the ground than someone living in a bubble in Toronto. :)

(More politics everyone)

Alberta was lucky enough to live on a lake of oil. Now that oil prices are in the toilet, we are realizing that oil companies raped that province and the Conservative governments helped.

This is the sad reality that has Albertans upset. It had nothing to do with some "work ethic" or some philosophy. Oil prices up...we are rich. We are a have. Oil prices down...we are a have not. And now Alberta realizes the reality of not being rich. The reality of what the Conservatives DID to them. And now they are blaming the NDP. It literally like blaming the new boyfriend for the beating the old one gave you.

But no lesson was learned. They think a pipeline will solve all their problems, but in reality when OPEC closes the tap enough and prices rise, they will be rich again and Conservatives will spread the provinces legs again and.....see you here again in a few years.

The one thing I never realized is how whiny Albertans truly are. Quebec has a different issue because remember the rich anglo minority always had power there. The franco majority always felt that they were left out. This led to a lot of the disputes.

Alberta has no such excuse.

And that's where we disagree.

Alberta should have a bigger say than it does given how much it funds towards social services and equilisation. Unfortunately that will never be the case.

Will be interesting to watch the next year, particularly how our provincial and federal election goes. There is alot more discontent here than people realize and I wouldn't be shocked if there was a push to change the formulas and/or a push to seperate similar to the stunts quebec pulled. AB has nothing to lose if it does.... just needs to grow the balls to do it.

No doubt the Liberals would never get a majority, and I am sure the external people who "fund" the party did not want that. But Liberals would have a Prime Minister, with the NDP help. Canada would take a shift politically left, with the Liberals being elected to the most seats and the NDP wielding a lot of influence. The Conservatives would at first be a far right powerless fringe. Then it would split, and the more moderate Joe Clark types would be a part of the political landscape. The Alberta Republicans would be stuck.

I was looking forward to it. The University Of Calgary crowd should never run a country.

@JohnRogers

ALERT, debate continued.

- Deficits, if you govern depending on the economy then you actually look at the economy and spend accordingly. The massive deficits run the last few years were when the economy was STRONG pretty much country wide except for Alberta. There was no need, it was purely idealogic and against the election promises made. At least in 2008 Harper had a reason to do a massive spend which was historically ABNORMALLY for tories (they are not prone to spending) but was neccessary.

- He didn't scrap it due to fear of the unknown, he scrapped it once he realized that it would open the door to difficulty for the Liberals. The cons would never hold an outright majority, but the liberals would likely have been in the same boat. NDP and Greens would suddenly become King Makers, both with wildly differing platforms and ones that would take the liberals far more left of centre than their "natural governing" position. That in itself was their sole reason. They also don't like negotiating or having to work with other parties unless absolutely neccessary

- Pardons - well we'd all like to see that one change. No debate there.

Both sides can look after the little guy, it honestly comes down to how people like to see that happen.

@jazzsax1 (just to continue the debate)

**ALERT** this is all politics, ignore if your looking for waiver advice.

-I think with deficits you govern depending on the economy. I have never liked an ideological response, I want a measured one that helps the economy. That goes for both sides.

-Electoral reform. I liked electoral reform, and I think its a mistake to back off of it. It would have ensured Conservatives NEVER formed a majority government again. I think Trudeau actually realized that if he did it, it would change the way politics operate in Canada forever and I think fear of the unknown made him scrap it. Conservatives don't harp of this too much because they will never win Federally ever again if its implemented

-Pardons (I have to choose 1) I liked the first consultation but they were actually SMART to have a second one that asked more questions. If they don't implement the changes, I will agree with you 100%. But they did put up the results of the consultation and I expect them to follow through in February or March.

All I want is a government that protects the vulnerable and does whats best for the most people. There is still something noble in protecting, not exploiting the weak.

Yes I'm pretty good at weeding out which way people lean politically. My poli-radar is usually smack on.

Good to see you have been advocating for the little guy. It's obvious Hats has something to grind with you but whatever, brush it off.

The current government is one that's a huge example though of broken promises, so if I were you I wouldn't shut down your site and activism if you are hoping for the pardons to be improved. This government solely functions on wedge issues for them. Pardons aren't a pretty one.

If I need to remind you:

- campaigned on 3 modest deficits only, with that being front and centre. Blew that one up pretty quick
- campaigned on electoral reform (which was HUGE for the youth vote)...
- the list goes on (at least 43 documented broken promises from their last campaign)...

Not saying they are the worst, or the best, simply suggesting if you are waiting with anticipation for them to follow through on the pardon changes, you could be waiting a while.

@HatsBootHatsBoots

Politically. I once started a Union at Famous Players Theatres with IATSE. I have campaigned on the left my entire life. Started the UNION. Spent weeks fighting for certification at the Labor Board. Lost.

I actually did a fax and letter campaign AGAINST Stephen Harper twice. I was the go to Pardon provider for social services in Toronto, Peel, Durham, York and even Oxford County from 2002-2012 and still do many, although they do not like to pay for it anymore. It was a great eye opener to the effects of poverty of people and the struggles to gain employment. We are talking about a period where I was probably sent 2-4 people a DAY.

I had a campaign and website www.bringbackfairness.com and encouraged EVERYONE to sign my petition and spent hundreds on literature. It was the first thing you saw when you came to my office. I ran it for 2 years and stopped after the public consultations in 2016, since it was clear changes were coming.

I used to spend one night a month at the Don Jail before they closed it, and I have spoken at 3 other institutions about pardons. I used to go once every 2 weeks to some location, whether it was a social services office, or a workers meeting to talk about pardons and why they should be paid for by social services. Community involvement is very important to me.

I have NEVER voted Conservative. Look at my Facebook writings. They are wide open and the opposite of anything remotely right wing. I am all over any causes that support the rights of the individual, eliminating poverty, and stopping racism.

I know research isn't your strong suit, but your barking up the wrong tree if you think I am "law and order" minded. Not even close. Before you write, maybe RESEARCH.

I think Jazzsax1 can spot a political leaning easily, and can verify I am no Conservative. My Facebook page is not hidden. Anyone can look.

I am transparent and accountable. Always.

@HatsBootsHatsBoots

Canada has a similar system to the United States. (Waivers/Rehabilitations ) Its not a gun thing, its a criminal record thing. Canada, like the US, wants to know how serious the criminal record is before they enter and want to "VET" them. Although restrictive, its a better compromise that no control.

I think people with minor criminal records are right to be frustrated with Waivers, but at the same time, I think everyone would be upset if "dangerous" people were allowed to cross the border at will. There has to be a compromise.

You said this: "Offenders don't re-offend in those countries that you mentioned. They are rehabilitated and crime is non existant."

Since I debunked your "Northern European Countries don't make you a criminal when you drink and drive easily, and your only reply was "You fail to see through my perspective once again", please provide ANY proof for the above statement. Don't forget, Pardons and light sentences means Canada is a world leader in this regard already. Show me what you said is true or I call bullshit. Again.

HATS, I adjust to the system that exists, it wasn't created for me. Pardons, Waivers, Fingerprints, even Passport Photos. I am not dependent on any one service, although I try and personally keep my focus on the Waiver business. That's why I am an expert.

@KenScott are you working for NO DUMMY like he claims? Why has your name been removed from everything, and why is your name NOT mentioned on any sites for the these investor visas? I know Facebook was simply you blocking me, I am more curious why you went from unable to NOT stopping promoting yourself, to not being mentioned at all?

Are you currently residing in Canada? And before you get offended, I only ask because some people may care if they are thinking of using you for waiver services. You have promised refunds to some, (if their application is unsuccessful) and that becomes less attainable from the UK.

@Jazzsax1

John Rogers, a liberal and kind? I highly doubt it.

If the USA could fix its gun laws, Canada would agree to having more open borders with our neighbors. They have some pretty bad individuals over there, why should we allow them to visit us if they don't equally allow Canadians to visit them. Mind you, we did have a pretty lenient system before 9/11. There were waivers back then but at some point, you would receive somewhat of a pardon from US immigration, a so called "permanent waiver " after several waivers. Also, passports were not required. Why can't both politicians from either country go back to the old system before 9/11? I will tell you, waivers and temporary entry permits (somewhat canadian "US waiver" equivalents) are a lucrative business. John Rogers would lose big time.

Remember, Canada never closed its borders to Americans. They systematically blocked out a bunch of Canadians by imposing new rules after 9/11. They just recently started attacking NAFTA again which had provisions for establishing open borders somewhat near the future, signed I remind you from Republicans, the same individuals who came out criticizing the deal 25 years later. Last year, they made our government bend backwards and concede to more ridiculous demands. Canada was also forced to step up security after 9/11. Many Americans became inadmissible from entering our country as a result. They have themselves to blame. However, politicians will never tell you this stuff.