- Joined
- Jan 12, 2010
- Messages
- 35,181
- Reaction score
- 44,143
- Location
- Somewhere in Babylon...
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
Meg's employee is the one who wasn't loyal.
Meg Whitman should have reported her, that would have been upholding the law.
Did Whitman report her when she found out that she was illegal? NO.
So much for Whitman not being at fault.
I think you misunderstood the statement. SSA only sends the letter if the employer has had more than 10 people whose SSNs and names did not match. It is possible that Whitman has had other illegals working for her.
And, it appears that the liar is not Nicky but Whitman and her husband.
Having a strong spanish accent is not the same as not being able to speak English fluently. But if you are suspicious and you are an advocate of deporting all illegals, I'm surprised you haven't done it already.
If you are being paid under the table, the IRS has no way of knowing you are working and not paying taxes. Your statement sound as if you were sure that the IRS had verified that taxes were paid.
http://www.ssa.gov/legislation/nomatch2.htmSSA began sending no-match letters to workers in 1979 and to employers in 1994.
After reading some of the posts from conservatives who hate illegals and want to deport them, call them names and accuse them of taking their benefits and jobs, and want to deny their children born here their US citizenship all of a sudden turn nice and wouldn't report her. What a crock.
duh huh uh wow eh eh guess you really told her duh uh guffaw ha ha duh huh uh yuhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh huh:lamo where? :lamo her argument was blown out of the water 12 pages ago....:lamo
j-mac
I think you misunderstood the statement. SSA only sends the letter if the employer has had more than 10 people whose SSNs and names did not match. It is possible that Whitman has had other illegals working for her.
Agency spokesman Mark Lassiter said that from 2003-2006 an employer had to have more than 10 employees whose Social Security numbers and names did not match to receive a warning letter. It was not immediately clear how many domestic employees Whitman had during that time.
"An employer with one or two employees in 2003 to 2006 would not have gotten an employer ... letter," Lassiter said.
And, it appears that the liar is not Nicky but Whitman and her husband. The letter that they claim they never saw, apparently was partially filled out and it appears to be Whitman's husband's handwriting.
How come Tough on Immigration Whitman didn't check this womans immigration status? I wonder if this would matter if it was a (D) Betcha it would
The one hour debate at Dominican University in San Rafael also touched on Whitman’s opposition to new greenhouse gas regulations. She argued they’d kill jobs and should be suspended.
“It’s not fair to the employees in manufacturing, trucking, packaging – all the other industries – to drive those jobs out of state.”
Brown said Whitman's firing of Nicandra Diaz Santillan was "kind of a sorry tale," noting that "after nine years, she didn't even get her a lawyer."
Whitman called for an "e-verify system" to make sure the documents presented by immigrants are valid.
Let me very clear on what I’ve said here. What I’ve said is that E-Verify is in existence many companies use it, but it does have a false negative and a false positive rate. Before we hold employers accountable, we have to make sure that the system will work,
I haven’t made my final decision. In all likelihood, I will vote no on Prop 23, because I think the right thing to do is to have a one year moratorium.
:lamo where? :lamo her argument was blown out of the water 12 pages ago....:lamo
j-mac
Why do you hate Nicky?
You are as bad as alred and may get her in more trouble if she received tax refunds for the last 9 yrs. I'd think she might have to pay those back.
Meg's employee is the one who wasn't loyal.
She was not required by law to report her. She was trying to give her a break even though she had been lied to for 9 yrs.
If she had reported her, all we'd be hearing would be what a heartless bitch, Whitman was. Some have already called her those things for refusing to help her more.
There is no way to prove it, but SSA did say they only send that type of letter to someone who has submitted at least 10 SSNs that were assigned to a name other than the one submitted. You do the math.Possible. But there have been zero accusations of this, except by you and others on the left.
We know that Nicky is a liar. She is here illegally - my statement was not worded accurately. I should have said Nicky is not the only liar here. There are no degrees of liars, you are either a liar or you are not. Whitman and her husband are lying. Nicky has commited a crime for being here illegally, Whitman for hiring her.Did you really just say Nikki is not a liar? Do you want to correct that, or do you plan on sticking with it? Individual "A" who saw a letter nearly 10 years ago and, allegedly forgot. Individual "B" who indicated she was here legally, provided stolen identity and falsified documents. I think most people would call "B" the bigger liar out of the two.
As much as Whitman claims that she will get tough on illegals and that those who hire them should be held accountable, I would think she would have taken all the necessary precautions to make sure she didn't hire an illegal. All your suggestions are just excuses for someone that clearly broke the law, but like typical cons, you give them a pass.I've heard the maid speak - she speaks fine, but with a heavy accent. Which is similar to my neighbor. I wasn't suspicious at all of my neighbor, until you told me I should be. You apparently have this position that all accented individuals are suspicious and should be referred to INS. At least this is what you support when it comes to Meg and her maid.
I was just pointing out that many employers do that to keep from being found out that they hire illegals. If that were to be the case with Whitman, it will be even harder for Whitman's story to be believed.She wasn't being paid under the table. Again, no one is accusing her of this, including the maid or either of the maid's attorneys. That would be a real scandal and would provide evidence to bolster Nikki's claim that Whitman knew of her status.
Well, then I guess Meg Whitman is lying about that also.Lastly, the SSA just began sending not match letters to employers in 2004 (per the SSA website). Prior to that, they only sent them to the employees. How did the letter allegedly go out to the employer (whitman) in April 2003, before they were even sending them to employers?
Employers should stop hiring them - and they should face criminal charges if they hire them. The gov has provided a method for them to check them out that would get the employer of the hook if the employee turns out to be illegal. It is free and Whitman should have used it.I think that illegals should be deported and it should be much harder for illegals to obtain jobs.
That is not a correct statement. Every other country does not deny citizenship to children born of non-citizens. Where do you get your info?I think children of non-citizens born in this country should not automatically be granted citizenship, just as it is done in every other coutnry.
Perhaps that is what many do - the reason we have the problem.But, no. If I suspected someone of being illegal, I wouldn't turn that person in.
Umm, she did. She had the word of the employment agency, a social security number, a driver's license, and a signed document saying she was legal. What else should she have done?
There is no way to prove it, but SSA did say they only send that type of letter to someone who has submitted at least 10 SSNs that were assigned to a name other than the one submitted. You do the math.
I was just pointing out that many employers do that to keep from being found out that they hire illegals. If that were to be the case with Whitman, it will be even harder for Whitman's story to be believed.
As much as Whitman claims that she will get tough on illegals and that those who hire them should be held accountable, I would think she would have taken all the necessary precautions to make sure she didn't hire an illegal. All your suggestions are just excuses for someone that clearly broke the law, but like typical cons, you give them a pass.
SSA began sending no-match letters to workers in 1979 and to employers in 1994.
That is not a correct statement. Every other country does not deny citizenship to children born of non-citizens. Where do you get your info?
His posts don't show any dislike for Nicky. How would she receive tax refunds - the SSA claimed that her SSN was registered to someone else. If she paid taxes, the other person must have gotten credited with them. We really don't know that Whitman paid any taxes, all the righties can do on this thread is assume that she did because the IRS isn't coming after her. That is rich!:lol:
Wasn't loyal - how do you figure that. 9 years working for someone that is cheating you?
Meg Whitman is a farce. She claims one thing, does another. She's all talk and no action. Like the rest of the cons, she talks tough on illegals and then goes and hires them behind everyone's back.
Whitman kept saying she wanted those who hire illegals to be held accountable - I guess she didn't mean herself.
She could have used the program provided by the government that checks out people to see if they are legal. It is called E-Verify. It is free and it gets the employer off the hook if the employee turns out to be illegal. It is for their own protection, if they are serious about not wanting to hire illegals. I guess Whitman didn't want to know, if it is true that she didn't. But, I think Whitman knew all along, played dumb.
Why should she have to if she already has the word of the employment agency, a driver's license, a social security number, and a signed document?
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?Oh, I get it now. You’re just throwing out wild speculations.
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.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.
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.”
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?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?
Oh, but the rest of your information is accurate?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.
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.
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
Documents released by Republican California gubernatorial candidate Meg Whitman reveal that her former maid, Nicandra (Nicky) Diaz Santillan, made liberal use of fraudulent documents in order to obtain employment.
There is no indication that the Social Security Administration followed up or required any corrective action to be taken even though the maid was using a Social Security number that belonged to someone else. Likewise, the Internal Revenue Service continued collecting taxes while turning a blind eye to the fact that a felony was being committed.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?