Should Meg Whitman be thrown in jail?

As always, Epic, right on & brava! (see my letter here) Maggiepie "If you destroy a free market you create a black market." ~ Benjamin Franklin

Maggie, Thanks much for your continued and unwavering stance for truth and justice and for your support.

Exactly!

An employment agency is not an employer the way a temp agency is. A temp agency pays the employee's wages but an employment agency is simply a middleman. An employment agency collects a fee from the employer for referring suitable applicants. Whitman was her employer. The IRS would not send any letter for the employer to the agency.

Ah, well I hadn't heard all of the details that's why I was asking the question. Since you seem to know, why would it be the IRS and not INS (or whatever it's called now)?

Man, I wish I could be financially abused like that. In my entire life I've only had ONE job that financially abused me with that much money.

They aren't filing a lawsuit. OF course, that's because Allred knows she has no evidence of any abuse or anything actionable at law. She has filed a "claim" for the "mileage" the housekeeper is owed for allegedly being forced to use her own car for errands. Then we hear the housekeeper on television, tearfully describing how she was mistreated and she must speak up so others won't be so badly mistreated. The only one who is mistreating Nicky Diaz is her attorney. She's allowed her to come forward and publicly admit to being illegal and to a felony, the fraudulent use of a social security number belonging to another. No attorney who is actually interested in the welfare of his or her client would place that client in such jeopardy. Nicky Diaz could be deported, or spend five years in prison. That alone is enough for me to acknowledge that whatever Whitman did or didn't know, this whole claim is a political hit. And the biggest victim could be Nicky Diaz, unless she has some guarantees that we are not aware of. Let's wait and see if anything happens to her. If not, I would say the fix is in.

So when her husband was notified that the housekeeper was in the country illegally Meg had no knowledge. Wow can I hook you up with some land?

The letter said absolutely NOTHING about her immigration status. Come on gewcew, if you have to lie to win an argument, you're in pretty sad shape.

Perhaps you should buy some land from Gloria Allred. She will give you a good deal then screw you over if it is for a political reason. The letter merely mentioned a discrepancy. You really think that the social security administration doesn't make mistakes. The original letter can be found posted on TMZ.

Well maybe the party doesn't want to make it a crime but I have run into a few conservatives here on mylot that would. Yet when give the chance to stand by their principles they have just made excuses. I was unaware about this part of the Arizona immigration bill so I wont be able to explain it to you like you are a four year old.

I agree, but why bother voting for either one. Vote: None of the above!!! As I am!! Jerry Brown is nothing more than a curruppted has been politian. Do you, for one moment, beleive that Jerry Brown had nothing to do with this maid scandel? It seems to me,It's the same old politics as usual. Jerry Brown would sell his own mother to buy votes to get in the Governers mantion one last time. Both Jerry and his Father Pat Brown crooks. If I were you, I would do a little bit more research.

I really don't understand why ANYONE would want to be governor of California. The state is a mess, and the way the state is set up, you can't do anything about it. I am sure that Jerry Brown had something to do with this, but he didn't make Meg hire her. He just put it out there in the public, and let people know about it. I am sure that Meg would have done the same thing if Brown was doing this. That is politics.

That's it, Bestboy! Bite 'em on their patoots! Keep'm outta our yard! Good boy! Maggiepie "If you destroy a free market you create a black market." ~ Benjamin Franklin

bestboy, good post!

Nzinky you would throw everyone who didn't break a law into jail while electing someone who did?

"......Jerry Brown had the state of california in so much debt he should te tried for impersonating a human being.." It's amazing how ignorant so many people are about Jerry Brown. Instead of me arguing from my memory, here's a short excerpt from Wiki: "Upon taking office, Brown gained a reputation as a fiscal conservative.[7][8] The American Conservative noted he was "much more of a fiscal conservative than Governor Reagan."[8] His fiscal restraint resulted in one of the biggest budget surpluses in state history.[8] He was both in favor of a Balanced Budget Amendment and opposed to Proposition 13, the latter of which would decrease property taxes and greatly reduce revenue to cities and counties. When Proposition 13 passed, he heavily cut state spending and used much of the surplus his government had built up, roughly $5 billion, to meet the proposition's requirements and help offset the revenue losses.[9][8] His actions in response to the proposition earned him praise from Proposition 13 author Howard Jarvis who went as far to campaign for Brown's successful reelection bid in 1978." And the root cause of the California State deficit should be mentioned here, since clearly you need someone to blame, nzinky. "California’s inflation-adjusted per-capita spending has been nearly flat for more than 30 years. The state’s deficits come not from a spending binge, but from tax reductions adopted without cutting spending. Neocons promoted this “Starve the Beast” strategy as a way to cut otherwise too-popular programs (eventually), and sometimes even scared Democrats into going along (Jerry Brown reacting to Proposition 13). Tax reductions began in 1978 when Proposition 13 reduced local governments’ revenues by 57% and further limited property tax increases. The State back-filled this shortfall, and its budgets have been in trouble ever since. But why were property taxes such a focus of voter dissatisfaction? * Revenue distribution changed: In 1976 the California Supreme Court mandated sharing local school revenues with poorer districts. Property owners in affluent districts no longer had the exclusive benefit of taxes they paid for their local schools. * Budget surpluses: California government maintained surpluses resented by fixed-income voters who suffered during the housing bubble described below. Oddly, Republicans still say they want to collect a surplus even as the electorate suffers from the “Great Recession.” * Inflation/housing bubble: The inflation of the 1970’s was the principal reason for Prop 13’s passage. Fixed-income homeowners received shockingly large (and growing) property tax bills because inflation increased their homes’ taxable values dramatically. “Save Grandma’s home” was an important part of the campaign for Prop 13. Proposition 13 also limited real estate taxes on commercial property, like homes, raising tax rates only when they changed hands. But since businesses often own property through subsidiaries, no reassessment, and no tax increase, occurs if they sell not the property but the subsidiary, in pieces, over several years. Property transfers could take longer, but no change in the tax bill would occur even if the property value doubled. The impact is not trivial. The California Tax Reform Association reports: “in virtually every county in the state, the share of the property tax borne by [residences] has increased since the passage of Proposition 13 in 1978, while the share of the property tax borne by non-residential property has decreased. Some examples: in Contra Costa County, the residential share of the property tax went from 48% to 73%. In Santa Clara, the residential share went from 50% to 64%, despite massive industrial/commercial growth. In Los Angeles, it went from 53% to 69%. In Orange, it went from 59% to 72%.” The 1970s inflation that led to higher real estate prices and taxes came from energy price inflation that began in 1973, just two years after a peak in domestic oil production insured we would not be able to produce our way out of even a small shortfall in worldwide petroleum supply. Unhappy with U.S. support for Israel during the Yom Kippur War, Arabs decreased oil production and prices went up fivefold almost overnight, peaking in 1982 at $42/bbl (roughly double that price in current dollars). In 1971, oil cost less than $2/bbl. Home prices in the 1970s increased along with gas prices because, besides of petroleum’s importance in producing other goods, people bought homes as an inflation hedge. Because mortgages magnify the effect of inflation (and as we’ve recently discovered, deflation), homes were a smart investment, until they became unsalable because of high mortgage rates (16 – 18% in 1982). So the origin of California’s tax reductions, and even its current budget deficit, is arguably oil price inflation. If we want a stable economy, and government without deficits, we need to stop kidding ourselves that spending is at the root of our budget problems, and attend to our energy addiction." Adam Eran" So there you have it - the neocons (conservatives, right wingers, Republicans) started this mess in California. And so he11bent on destroying this states budget they even managed to wipe out the surplus that Jerry Brown Jr., a Democrat, had built up during his governorship. And you want to put another Republican in Sacramento.

Nzinky, Meg was told about this situation in 2003, and ignored it. Now the irony of this is if Meg lived in Arizona then you are correct that all three could be thrown in jail, but Meg would NEVER be charged with anything. Make sense to anyone here? If you are going to try Alred for that, than you would have to try Meg for it as well seeing how she harbored her for 7 years after she was told by the IRS that there were issues with her citizenship.

Once again what about the letter that Meg husband got that told them that their housekeeper was using an S.S# of some one else?

The letter didn't say that. It said that some of the information didn't match their records. That could be as simple as a typo on a date of birth or a different address. No where in the letter did it mention any type of fraud or that the SS# belonged to someone else. The letter is online and available to read.

Well at least someone is willing to stick to their convection here.