• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Meg Whitman Refutes Allegations by Former Housekeeper

Barbbtx

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 7, 2010
Messages
8,467
Reaction score
1,993
Location
W'Ford TX
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
It looks like Whitman was hoping the former housekeeper would keep her mouth shut.

I watched her whole press conference. I believe her and I believe she thought of Nicki as part of the family. She was not required by law to turn her in. Nicki has children and a husband here. However, she absolutely had to fire her. She did everything right in my opinion. By opening her mouth, and lying (according to Whitman) she has opened herself up to prosecution. Aldred must have offered her something really good.
 

j-mac

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 11, 2009
Messages
40,296
Reaction score
11,692
Location
South Carolina
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
I watched her whole press conference. I believe her and I believe she thought of Nicki as part of the family. She was not required by law to turn her in. Nicki has children and a husband here. However, she absolutely had to fire her. She did everything right in my opinion. By opening her mouth, and lying (according to Whitman) she has opened herself up to prosecution. Aldred must have offered her something really good.


Yeah, protection from prosecution should Brown win.


j-mac
 

jamesrage

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
36,160
Reaction score
17,559
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
I watched her whole press conference. I believe her and I believe she thought of Nicki as part of the family. She was not required by law to turn her in. Nicki has children and a husband here. However, she absolutely had to fire her. She did everything right in my opinion.

Politicians lie,deceive, scam and cheat all the time. Yeah its possible She may have not known her employee was an illegal and was torn, its also possible that she did not care her employee was an illegal and did an Obama by throwing her under the bus when it became politically inconvenient to keep employing her.


By opening her mouth, and lying (according to Whitman) she has opened herself up to prosecution. Aldred must have offered her something really good.

If it was in a state that did not tolerate illegal immigration then yes Aldred would have royally screwed her client, she would have been the equivalent of a defense lawyer handing the prosecutor a confession tape, some videos and other evidence implicating her client. California loves illegals so they will not do anything and I seriously doubt the feds will do anything.
 
Last edited:

buck

DP Veteran
Joined
May 29, 2009
Messages
13,000
Reaction score
5,123
Location
USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Politicians lie,deceive, scam and cheat all the time. Yeah its possible She may have not known her employee was an illegal and was torn, its also possible that she did not care her employee was an illegal and did an Obama by throwing her under the bus when it became politically inconvenient to keep employing her.

Considering Whitman was paying an above average wage for the services and was paying social security taxes, what do you think was the benefit for Meg to knowingly hire an illegal? It just doesn't make any sense. If I were going to hire an illegal, I would certainly not be paying Social Security, and would never pay a wage equivalent to what I would pay for a legitimate worker.
 

goldengirl

New member
Joined
Aug 27, 2010
Messages
25
Reaction score
6
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Considering Whitman was paying an above average wage for the services and was paying social security taxes, what do you think was the benefit for Meg to knowingly hire an illegal? It just doesn't make any sense. If I were going to hire an illegal, I would certainly not be paying Social Security, and would never pay a wage equivalent to what I would pay for a legitimate worker.

Exactly...it doesn't make sense. Meg did nothing wrong and some want to make her the scape goat. It is the maid who forged documents and lied about her status.

Why haven't we heard all this about Colin Powell who openly admitted to hiring illegals...In my book he should be prosecuted.
 

Glinda

You kids get off my lawn!
DP Veteran
Joined
May 8, 2009
Messages
1,716
Reaction score
790
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
get out the Nutella. This chick's toast.

The problem is, of course, that one of Ms. Whitman's big rah-rah rallying cries is her determination that EMPLOYERS SHOULD BE PUNISHED/MADE LIABLE for hiring illegal immigrants.

From her website:
Meg will oppose any attempt by the Legislature to weaken employer verification requirements.

From a speech at UC Davis:
We do have to hold employers accountable for hiring only documented workers, and we do have to enforce that law.

From her campaign brochure:
[To] institute a system where state and local law enforcement agencies conduct inspections of workplaces suspected of employing undocumented workers.

At the Cal State Fresno debate:
If we don't hold employers accountable, we will never get our arms around this [illegal immigration] problem.

Of course, when challenged by Jerry Brown to own up to her own massive personal hypocrisy of being the employer of an illegal immigrant for NINE YEARS.... suddenly, her "As your governor I promise to go after people who employ illegals!" battle cry turns into:

"Jerry, you should be ashamed [putting] her deportation at risk."


As if, you know, she actually gave a **** about this woman. :roll:
 

The Prof

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 26, 2009
Messages
12,828
Reaction score
1,808
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Re: get out the Nutella. This chick's toast.

and we can all see how much moonbeam and his all red surrogates care about naughty nicky who's been exposed as lying to her employers
 

Bastinda

New member
Joined
Sep 30, 2010
Messages
16
Reaction score
8
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
I don't think it's very possible that she didn't know, or at least suspect.
 

The Prof

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 26, 2009
Messages
12,828
Reaction score
1,808
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
sure, that's why meg paid social security and payroll taxes for 9 years
 

j-mac

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 11, 2009
Messages
40,296
Reaction score
11,692
Location
South Carolina
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Re: get out the Nutella. This chick's toast.

The problem is, of course, that one of Ms. Whitman's big rah-rah rallying cries is her determination that EMPLOYERS SHOULD BE PUNISHED/MADE LIABLE for hiring illegal immigrants.

From her website:


From a speech at UC Davis:


From her campaign brochure:


At the Cal State Fresno debate:


Ok, so what has changed that you libs see so damning that Whitman is such a hypocrite that she just shouldn't go on? hmmmm?

The woman was hired through an employment service that is supposed to have all that in order when they refer her to the prospective employer.

The woman had fake id, ssn, and documentation that was convincing enough to have the federal government not question it for some 9 years. Then as soon as she gets into a race for Gov. against the states AG it get's uncovered...Yeah, no coincidence there....:roll:


Of course, when challenged by Jerry Brown to own up to her own massive personal hypocrisy of being the employer of an illegal immigrant for NINE YEARS.... suddenly, her "As your governor I promise to go after people who employ illegals!" battle cry turns into:

"Jerry, you should be ashamed [putting] her deportation at risk."


As if, you know, she actually gave a **** about this woman.

How pathetic is this, you want to paint Whitman as some kind of monster, when it is your own party, and the Brown campaign that will use this woman, then cast her aside to fend off the Federal charges she will face now that Brown's friend, Gloria Allred has botched this case for her client. Nice going libs, this is just another example of how libs could really care less about the people that they claim to have in best interest.

j-mac
 

Glinda

You kids get off my lawn!
DP Veteran
Joined
May 8, 2009
Messages
1,716
Reaction score
790
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Re: get out the Nutella. This chick's toast.

Ok, so what has changed that you libs* see so damning that Whitman is such a hypocrite that she just shouldn't go on?

Nothing's changed. Being an unapologetic hypocrite is worthy of criticism regardless of political leaning.

The woman was hired through an employment service that is supposed to have all that in order when they refer her to the prospective employer.

The woman had fake id, ssn, and documentation that was convincing enough to have the federal government not question it for some 9 years.

This is all true. What's your point?

Here's Meg's:

We do have to hold employers accountable for hiring only documented workers, and we do have to enforce that law.

Meg Whitman was the woman's employer. Notice how she's not taking responsibility OR holding herself accountable?

:doh




* You can drop the "you libs" whitewash crap; it rarely works and not at all in my case. You should know by now that I lean as far right as I do left, depending on the issue. How many liberals have you met who think we don't use the death penalty nearly enough? :roll:
 

Manc Skipper

Wrinkly member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 25, 2008
Messages
38,822
Reaction score
27,923
Location
Southern England
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
Re: get out the Nutella. This chick's toast.

Could the thread title be edited for accuracy? Mrs Whitman may have denied the accusations but she certainly has not refuted them. Perhaps the OP meant "refudiate", which can mean anything you want it to.
 

j-mac

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 11, 2009
Messages
40,296
Reaction score
11,692
Location
South Carolina
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Re: get out the Nutella. This chick's toast.

Nothing's changed. Being an unapologetic hypocrite is worthy of criticism regardless of political leaning.



This is all true. What's your point?

Here's Meg's:



Meg Whitman was the woman's employer. Notice how she's not taking responsibility OR holding herself accountable?

:doh

Whitman when confronted with the situation acted in the appropriate manner. now you will continue to pillory her for it instead of getting mad at the person doing the real damage to this illegal, and that is Brown.

* You can drop the "you libs" whitewash crap; it rarely works and not at all in my case. You should know by now that I lean as far right as I do left, depending on the issue. How many liberals have you met who think we don't use the death penalty nearly enough? :roll:

Ok, so you're not crazy, bat**** , far left communist....so?


j-mac
 

Glinda

You kids get off my lawn!
DP Veteran
Joined
May 8, 2009
Messages
1,716
Reaction score
790
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Re: get out the Nutella. This chick's toast.

Whitman when confronted with the situation acted in the appropriate manner.

Really? How do you figure? Why didn't she turn her housekeeper over to immigration authorities for deportation as soon as she "found out" the woman was here illegally? Isn't that what she should have done if she believes so strongly that illegal immigrants don't belong in the country and that employers have an obligation to help enforce that law?

Further, did she man up and say:

You know, I've been going on and on about how I want to punish employers for hiring illegal immigrants (whether the employee lies about their true legal status or not), but now I see that my solution to the problem is entirely lacking, because there are many employers - JUST LIKE ME - who did everything right by going through a professional agency that did carefully check the employee's documents and believed them to be legitimate.

But I was wrong. Through no fault of my own. The agency was wrong, too. Through no fault of their own. And my desire to simply prosecute any employer of an illegal immigrant is wrong, as well, because - as we've seen in my case - in spite of trying to do all the right things, I ended up doing the wrong thing, anyway.

So, we're left with the question of how to prevent prosecuting those who actually HAVE done all they could to avoid employing illegals. My solution to the problem of developing immigration documentation that cannot be faked or forged is... blah blah blah


Anything less is unapologetic hypocrisy. Additionally, the above is the ONLY way she'll wiggle out of this politically, and she's not budging.

now you will continue to pillory her for it

Well, her and her PR people. They must be complete idiots. :doh
 
Last edited:

j-mac

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 11, 2009
Messages
40,296
Reaction score
11,692
Location
South Carolina
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Re: get out the Nutella. This chick's toast.

Really? How do you figure?

Did she man up and say:

No, see what you look for are words meant to fuel your attacks against her, what her actions were are what matters, and her actions were absolutely correct.

Anything less is unapologetic hypocrisy. Additionally, the above is the ONLY way she'll wiggle out of this politically, and she's not budging.

so Brown has no responsibility in this trash eh? Beautiful. Talk about hypocritical thinking.

Well, her and her PR people. They must be complete idiots.

We'll see, so you're voting Brown then?


j-mac
 

Barbbtx

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 7, 2010
Messages
8,467
Reaction score
1,993
Location
W'Ford TX
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
Considering Whitman was paying an above average wage for the services and was paying social security taxes, what do you think was the benefit for Meg to knowingly hire an illegal? It just doesn't make any sense. If I were going to hire an illegal, I would certainly not be paying Social Security, and would never pay a wage equivalent to what I would pay for a legitimate worker.

You also wouldn't be out their talking about getting tough on those who employ illegal aliens if you knew you were doing that yourself.
I don't think Whitman or the agency did anything wrong. Nicky had all the documents including a Ca. drivers license.
 

Barbbtx

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 7, 2010
Messages
8,467
Reaction score
1,993
Location
W'Ford TX
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
Re: get out the Nutella. This chick's toast.

Nothing's changed. Being an unapologetic hypocrite is worthy of criticism regardless of political leaning.



This is all true. What's your point?

Here's Meg's:



Meg Whitman was the woman's employer. Notice how she's not taking responsibility OR holding herself accountable?

:doh



]

I don't think employers should be held accountable for hiring illegals who have all the required documents. Do you?
If so, that may cause employers to be very leary of hiring anyone with brown skin or who didn't speak perfect english, no matter what proof of citizanship they had.
 

Glinda

You kids get off my lawn!
DP Veteran
Joined
May 8, 2009
Messages
1,716
Reaction score
790
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Re: get out the Nutella. This chick's toast.

No, see what you look for are words meant to fuel your attacks against her, what her actions were are what matters

I've already said as much. She didn't turn the woman in, as she insists other employers must do or risk prosecution, did she? Furthermore, she refuses to accept her own responsibility in the matter.

Oh, her actions speak VOLUMES. :roll:

and her actions were absolutely correct.

Pre-hire, yeah. I've already said as much.

The problem is that her "solution" is to prosecute the employer - whether or not the employer legitimately did everything possible to avoid hiring an illegal. She/the agency apparently DID do everything they could to avoid it, but they still failed. This shows that the problem goes FAR deeper than simply prosecuting those who hire illegals, because sometimes there's just no way to KNOW; there is a much larger problem with legitimate documentation.

And she's ignoring it at her own peril. To refuse to address this aspect of the problem, she's essentially saying "Well, I did everything I could and they TRICKED ME!!! Those OTHER people who hire illegals should be prosecuted, but not me." The height of hypocrisy.

so Brown has no responsibility in this trash eh? Beautiful. Talk about hypocritical thinking.

I'm afraid this isn't a thread about Jerry Brown. It's about Meg Whitman's employing an illegal immigrant for nine years and not taking ANY kind of responsibility for her actions. The fact that she's running on a platform of "BUST ILLEGAL EMPLOYERS" is simply the icing on the hypocrisy cake.
 

Glinda

You kids get off my lawn!
DP Veteran
Joined
May 8, 2009
Messages
1,716
Reaction score
790
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Re: get out the Nutella. This chick's toast.

I don't think employers should be held accountable for hiring illegals who have all the required documents. Do you?
If so, that may cause employers to be very leary of hiring anyone with brown skin or who didn't speak perfect english, no matter what proof of citizanship they had.

DING! DING! DING! We have a winner!

You actually figured this out on your own!? :doh
 

Barbbtx

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 7, 2010
Messages
8,467
Reaction score
1,993
Location
W'Ford TX
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
Re: get out the Nutella. This chick's toast.

DING! DING! DING! We have a winner!

You actually figured this out on your own!? :doh

So Whitman did nothing wrong.

Employers who knowingly hire illegals should be prosecuted.
 

Glinda

You kids get off my lawn!
DP Veteran
Joined
May 8, 2009
Messages
1,716
Reaction score
790
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Re: get out the Nutella. This chick's toast.

So Whitman did nothing wrong.

Employers who knowingly hire illegals should be prosecuted.

Gee, and I thought there might be some hope for you...

Here, I'll spell it out nice and simple for you:

Meg Whitman isn't campaigning to prosecute only those who KNOWINGLY hiring illegals.

She wants to prosecute ANYONE that hires an illegal for ANY reason; whether they knew the person was illegal or not. You know, JUST LIKE HER.
:doh

NOW do you get it? She's a hypocrite, and an ignorant one, at that.
 

j-mac

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 11, 2009
Messages
40,296
Reaction score
11,692
Location
South Carolina
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Re: get out the Nutella. This chick's toast.

Pre-hire, yeah. I've already said as much.

The problem is that her "solution" is to prosecute the employer - whether or not the employer legitimately did everything possible to avoid hiring an illegal. She/the agency apparently DID do everything they could to avoid it, but they still failed. This shows that the problem goes FAR deeper than simply prosecuting those who hire illegals, because sometimes there's just no way to KNOW; there is a much larger problem with legitimate documentation.

Sure there is, a national ID.

I'm afraid this isn't a thread about Jerry Brown. It's about Meg Whitman's employing an illegal immigrant for nine years and not taking ANY kind of responsibility for her actions. The fact that she's running on a platform of "BUST ILLEGAL EMPLOYERS" is simply the icing on the hypocrisy cake.


But Jerry Brown is exactly who this should be about. Unless you consider lying to the hispanic community to garner votes, and his utter hypocrisy to by ok? He, and his campaign including Gloria Allred opened this woman and her family up to a mess legally just so he could launch this negative attack for political gain....You condone that?


j-mac
 

j-mac

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 11, 2009
Messages
40,296
Reaction score
11,692
Location
South Carolina
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Re: get out the Nutella. This chick's toast.

Gee, and I thought there might be some hope for you...

Here, I'll spell it out nice and simple for you:

Meg Whitman isn't campaigning to prosecute only those who KNOWINGLY hiring illegals.

She wants to prosecute ANYONE that hires an illegal for ANY reason; whether they knew the person was illegal or not. You know, JUST LIKE HER.
:doh

NOW do you get it? She's a hypocrite, and an ignorant one, at that.

Nothing I can see that you posted so far has Whitman saying anything close to that, only your own misrepresentation of her position.


j-mac
 

Barbbtx

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 7, 2010
Messages
8,467
Reaction score
1,993
Location
W'Ford TX
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
Re: get out the Nutella. This chick's toast.

Gee, and I thought there might be some hope for you...

Here, I'll spell it out nice and simple for you:

Meg Whitman isn't campaigning to prosecute only those who KNOWINGLY hiring illegals.

She wants to prosecute ANYONE that hires an illegal for ANY reason; whether they knew the person was illegal or not. You know, JUST LIKE HER.
:doh

NOW do you get it? She's a hypocrite, and an ignorant one, at that.

I can't find any law that says employers can be prosecuted or fined if they were supplied with all the proper documents.
Are you saying Whitman wants them pay even if they did everything according to the law?
Seems to me any employer who had all the documents but was lied to by the employee could sue somebody over it if they got fined.
I believe the ones we want to prosecute are those who intentionally hire illegals for cheap labor.
Otherwise, hispanics would have a very difficult time finding any kind of work.
 
Top Bottom