Replies

It's really not necessary for you to interpret what sinkspur wrote. He was quite clear, as were you. You both know you hired illegals and have promoted doing that to others. What is idiotic is to say that doesn't meet the threshold of "knowingly" or "reasonably should have known" standards in "enabling/harboring/hiring of an illegal." The exchange of money is not a requirement of guilt for one to have committed the crimes previously posted. You are intentionally being obtuse on that point.

Another point that you just don't seem to get, the law does not distinguish between persons when it is applied. The commission of a felony occurs when, irrespective of the person, a person or group "knowingly" or "reasonable should have known" that they were disobeying a particular law. For as many years as you two have been posting on these threads, neither of you can claim ignorance of what the laws state.

Yet another point on yet another argument: it appears from some people's logic that because people break these laws, the law is invalid simply because some justification is given, such as a magic threshold has been reached, or because a friend did it, or because it benefits someone personally, or because someone in Congress may have done it, or whatever other reason is proffered.

And finally, stating any of those kinds of justifications to a judge, about any crime committed, would get you laughed out of court.

Look Einstein, it is a 90% probability that if you hire a contractor in the South or Southwest he is going to be using illegals. I know it, Sinkspur knows it and that paragon of Conservative values Tom Tancredo knows. He didn't ask, I didn't ask and I am sure Sinkspur didn't ask since it was not our legal responsibility to do so.