Atty: California gov candidate Meg Whitman knew housekeeper was in US illegally

[ducknwork]

And you are bitching about Obama spending money and increasing the national debt. Where would the money come from to hire the people to patrol the borders?

Just another right winger flapping his gums with no real solutions to the problems.

Just like the Republicans that want to restructure the health care bill but have not come up with any solid solutions. Just like the Republicans want to reduce spending but do not know where to make the cuts. Just like the Republicans that want the tax cuts for the wealthy to continue but bitch about the national debt. They just flap their mouths but bring no viable answers to the problems and how to fix them.

I believe that if we got the illegals out of the country (and kept them out), we would have more than enough money to pay people to protect our border, don't you? Employing all those people would also increase tax revenue, which would help a myriad of problems. Hmmm...more people would have health insurance also and wouldn't have to receive Obamacare courtesy of the rest of us. They'd probably stop receiving unemplyment and food stamps and whatever else comes with not having a job. Jails in border towns wouldn't have so many illegals in them if they couldn't get in the country. How much does it cost taxpayers to house all the illegals in jail/prison? I bet that amount could pay more than a few people to stand on the border! Man, there are savings all around and I am sure that I have missed a few!

Besides, Roger, there is a difference in wasting money like Obama has done so well, and spending it on worthwhile causes, like keeping criminals out of our country! Don't you realize that?

As far as your last paragraph and you smart aleck comment about 'flapping my gums', the difference between me and a lot of people and especially me and YOU is that when I say something, I mean it and I can back it up. There is substance behind these flapping gums. Maybe you ought to look into getting some, troll.

[BrianW]

We could pose "What if.. " future development all day long but what about sticking to things we know? Jerry Brown had his "time in the sun" as governor and was part of the problems that California faces now, doing nothing to address the illegals situation and now he wants a 2nd shot? If I still lived in CA (thank God I don't) I could not vote for Brown and all his other wacked policies, they were a major part of the reasons we left. With him as Atty General, things have gone even more into the sewer.
The issue as I see it is for knowingly hiring an illegal and Whitman does not appear to have done that at this point in time. She, and the employment agency, were presented with documents from someone that was knowingly committing a crime. As others have stated previously here, you have to take the documents at face value. She was then sent a letter from SSA saying the name & number didn't match, but that is not a definitive statement of illegality. Compare that with with Powell's initial statement of knowingly using illegals and it's not even close in my book.

Whitman's position on the real issue (imo) is to "secure the border", Brown's (current) position is to "support the pathway to legalization" & to deport "if they break the law" after they're already here 'if" they get caught and as AG he's rarely done that, helping put CA further in the budget toilet. Here is my "if" though - If Brown had done the right thing when he had the chance, this housekeeper might not even be here now and we wouldn't even be having this debate.

[road kill]

We could pose "What if.. " future development all day long but what about sticking to things we know? Jerry Brown had his "time in the sun" as governor and was part of the problems that California faces now, doing nothing to address the illegals situation and now he wants a 2nd shot? If I still lived in CA (thank God I don't) I could not vote for Brown and all his other wacked policies, they were a major part of the reasons we left. With him as Atty General, things have gone even more into the sewer.
The issue as I see it is for knowingly hiring an illegal and Whitman does not appear to have done that at this point in time. She, and the employment agency, were presented with documents from someone that was knowingly committing a crime. As others have stated previously here, you have to take the documents at face value. She was then sent a letter from SSA saying the name & number didn't match, but that is not a definitive statement of illegality. Compare that with with Powell's initial statement of knowingly using illegals and it's not even close in my book.

Whitman's position on the real issue (imo) is to "secure the border", Brown's (current) position is to "support the pathway to legalization" & to deport "if they break the law" after they're already here 'if" they get caught and as AG he's rarely done that, helping put CA further in the budget toilet. Here is my "if" though - If Brown had done the right thing when he had the chance, this housekeeper might not even be here now and we wouldn't even be having this debate.

The leftys know they cant beat her on issues.
So they do the one thing they know how to do.
You see it here every day!


RK

[Roger Perry]

The leftys know they cant beat her on issues.
So they do the one thing they know how to do.
You see it here every day!


RK

The issue as I see it is for knowingly hiring an illegal and Whitman does not appear to have done that at this point in time. She, and the employment agency, were presented with documents from someone that was knowingly committing a crime. Per Brian W

Yesterday on GMA Whitman stated she knew nothing about a letter from SSA that the maids SS# did not match up. Today I see there is an addmition that the letter was received. WTF?

On Thursday, Whitman disclosed that her husband might have seen the 2003 letter and jotted a note on it telling the housekeeper to "please check this."
For two days, Whitman forcefully denied receiving any such letter and said she fired the $23-an-hour housekeeper last year immediately after learning she was illegal.
But Whitman's husband changed course Thursday after a letter surfaced with what appeared to be his handwriting, forcing him to say he may have been aware of the correspondence back in 2003.

Whitman has called for tougher sanctions against employers who hire illegal workers, and the fact that she employed an illegal immigrant maid from Mexico for nine years could undermine her credibility. She has also spent millions courting Latino voters, who could play a key role in determining the outcome of the race.
After Whitman's denials, the housekeeper and lawyer Gloria Allred produced a copy of the letter Thursday that they say shows Whitman's husband, Dr. Griffith Harsh III, partially filled it out.
Allred said the housekeeper recognized the writing as belonging to Whitman's husband, and a handwriting specialist may be brought in to analyze her husband's penmanship. She claims it could prove that Whitman and her husband knew years earlier that Diaz Santillan was not a U.S. citizen.

[ducknwork]

Roger, if that's the case, then she should suffer whatever consequences result from hiring illegals.

That is the difference between us and you. When 'our side' does something wrong, we still expect them to be held accountable. When 'your side' does something wrong, it was just a simple mistake and they should be allowed to slide.

[luvmylabs23139]

Actually by law back then, such a letter from ss could not be used in any manner to terminate an employee under penalty of law! Those letters lcearly state that they are in no way a reflection of possible immigratation status. The maid and her attorney have already made a few fatal false claims. Only for tax year 2002, letters sent in 2003 were they sent to every employer regardless of # employees for 1 mismatch. The maid claims she saw letters thrown in the trash for subsquent years. That is a flat out lie because after that year Whittman would not have recieved a letter because she had less than 1o employees. Also, a ss mismatch letter to an employer is not uncommon for female employees who fail to keep their name changes current with ss. I like the claim that it meant that they would know she was not a us citizen from the letter. What does that have to do with anything? The maid never claimed to be a US citizen. She filled out an I-9 claiming to be a premenant resident.

[Gerry Clinchy]

http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/394420...-entertainment

Whitman says the woman provided what appeared to be a valid Social Security card and driver's license when she was hired through an employment agency in 2000. At issue is whether Whitman knew about a 2003 letter from the Social Security Administration that raised discrepancies about her housekeeper's documents — a possible tip-off that she could be in the U.S. illegally.

Allred, who is well-known for orchestrating media stunts, has not permitted Diaz Santillan to answer a single question from reporters over two days of news conferences. The former housekeeper read a brief, prepared statement Wednesday that alleged brusque treatment during her nine-year tenure. Whitman said it was "not the Nicky I know."

Whitman's husband contends he referred the letter to the housekeeper to follow up. If that was the only notice received by Whitman, did they believe the housekeeper had straightened the problem out? Did they receive any other follow-up from the SS? Did they continue to make the required SS contributions & not receive any further notice of the incorrect SS # ... until June 2009 when the housekeeper was fired?

Evidently, the law says it is illegal for an employer to knowingly hire or employ and illegal alien. The hiring process does not seem to indict Whitman. The documents required were apparently valid. (Later, it says that the housekeeper apparently used the documents of her legally resident sister).

The question would then be when it was confirmed that the housekeeper was illegally resident. The 2003 letter did not confirm that fact ... what happened after that letter would be a key element in making that determination.

If the evidence to support the allegation is presented, then Whitman should be treated like any other employer in such a situation.

Based on the illegal activities of politicians that come to light almost daily, and even when proven, the electorate sees fit to continue the tenure of those thieves, criminal behavior does not seem to be a determining factor in holding public office. I do NOT agree with that!

At $23/hour for housekeeping ... I begin to wonder what my BS degree is worth!

[Roger Perry]

Roger, if that's the case, then she should suffer whatever consequences result from hiring illegals.

That is the difference between us and you. When 'our side' does something wrong, we still expect them to be held accountable. When 'your side' does something wrong, it was just a simple mistake and they should be allowed to slide.

Looks like you are the only one stating Whitman should be held accountable. The others on "your side" don't appear to believe she should be held accountable.

[luvmylabs23139]

Looks like you are the only one stating Whitman should be held accountable. The others on "your side" don't appear to believe she should be held accountable.

Roger,
When I see any proof that Whittman KNOWINGLY hired an illegal I will state an opinion. To date I have only seen proof that Whittman followed the letter of the law.
At his point I would like your opinion about the numerous laws the maid has broken and what whould be done with her. THere is plenty of legal proof of the maid's illegal activities.

[Roger Perry]

Roger,
When I see any proof that Whittman KNOWINGLY hired an illegal I will state an opinion. To date I have only seen proof that Whittman followed the letter of the law.
At his point I would like your opinion about the numerous laws the maid has broken and what whould be done with her. THere is plenty of legal proof of the maid's illegal activities.

Whatever the law dictates.