Oh, I get it now. You’re just throwing out wild speculations.
I wasn't talking about Whitman when I said that. That you have problems comprehending what you read is not my problem. But, are you trying to say that everything you claim is the absolute facts? You know exactly what Whitman was thinking and what she said, because you have a mind reader and a tape recorder of everything she has said?
It seems like that’s all you have, no? You’re basically saying “Some employers pay their maids under the table and don’t pay taxes. Even though some small evidence that Meg didn’t engage in this and zero evidence that she did, she still might have”. Very logical indeed.
The IRS hasn't confirmed anything. What is being said outside of court is irrelevant. You don't know what Whitman has done or hasn't done, just because you don't want her to be guilty doesn't mean she isn't.
Whitman's husband in essence is calling Whitman a liar - so if she lied about one thing, what makes you think she didn't lie about other things? And, Whitman didn't sign the I-9, failing to admit that she knew Diaz was authorized to work in the US.
So much for your evidence!
Update (MM): Whitman’s husband responds — and contradicts his wife’s plain defense that they never received the letter — by admitting that why yes, the handwriting on the letter could be his, but it’s the maid’s fault for not following up.
Michelle Malkin » Whitman’s illegal alien maid-gate update
And, I guess you are going to offer up some lame excuse as to why Whitman might not have signed the I-9 form like she was supposed to?
According to the I-9 form, Diaz-Santillan presented her California driver's license and Social Security number to the employer for review (Section 2 of the I-9 form, List A and B).
The employer did not sign the I-9 form made available to the public. The employer, therefore, failed to certify, under penalty of perjury, that to the best of her knowledge that Diaz-Santillan was authorized to work in the United States. If the employer did not sign the form, that is a violation of law.
Whitman's Illegal-Immigrant Maid
It sounds like that could be kind of fun. Here let me try it out: “Many people that think Meg is guilty, pay for their addictions by being whores (thank you Jerry Brown). You think Meg is guilty, so you do the math.”
Are you calling me a whore? Why don't you man up and come out and say it instead of playing your stupid games? Yes, I think Meg is guilty, so why does that make me a whore? Why are you resorting to insults? Is it because you realize you don't have much to go with other than your gut feeling for another conservative? A lame debater usually resorts to insults, I'm sorry that you have so little that you have to do that.
She did. She used an agency to hire the individual and confirm the legality of the maid. They obtained an I9, social security card, and a driver’s license. They actually followed all of the requirements of the law. Meg paid her a more than fair salary and paid taxes as per the maid’s two attorneys. Why would Meg do these two things if she had knowingly hired an illegal immigrant?
Because it was cheaper than hiring an American to do the work, and the American would not take her abuse and not do as good a job. She's not the only one that has done it, why do they all do it?
Yes, I apologize. I typed the response quickly in between searching for information on a new engine for my “for fun car”. Misread that entirely.
Oh, but the rest of your information is accurate?
Again, fast reply is my excuse. I try not to make blanket statements and will normally couch them in “almost all”. This time I screwed it up. So, allow me to restate. Almost all countries do not allow citizenship to children of non-citizens born in their country. I think this is good policy and we should follow them. The time when birth-right citizenship was a necessary policy, has long passed.
It doesn't matter what other countries do or don't do. Most conservatives claim to be supporters of the Constitution, but all of a sudden they seem to want to change it.
It also doesn't matter what you think is a good policy or not. It will take an Amendment to change the 14th Amendment, and I don't think those of us that are happy with the way the Constitution reads "all persons born in the United States" are going to roll over and let those who are so afraid that they will lose control, dictate what it should be.