Would that be more, or less Clintonian than the parsing needed by the Bush Administration to try and pass off Section 245(i) as anything other than an extension of Clinton's targeted Amnesty for Illegals?
If you ask as Tancredo formulated the question, it's a violation of rights. If you merely inquire as to the legal status of the employees, you're bulletproof, and his failure to do so boils down to "don't ask, don't tell," and his presentation of why he didn't ask ("It would be a violation of their rights") is Clintonian word-parsing at best.
BTW, it is ridiculously easy to find out who's using legal and illegal labor in the construction biz--just look at how much they bid.
This retard Tancredo couldn't wait until AFTER the election to call the INS on the family of illegals in the newspaper?.
Why is he so OBSESSED with illegal Mexicans, and not illegals from terrorist countries?.
Would that be more, or less Clintonian than the parsing needed by the Bush Administration to try and pass off Section 245(i) as anything other than an extension of Clinton's targeted Amnesty for Illegals?