A pox on both their houses. Stick a fork in California, it's done. Brown, the activist and Whitman the opportunist. Typical California choices. Mirrors the National scene.

This attempt to discredit Whitman is pathetic. The person who defrauded her and the state is now saying Meg should have known, or should have suspected and turned her in?

The criminal cowardly woman who benefited from working for Meg for 9 years, taking her money, while lying and putting Meg's household at risk is trying to now take the high road?

Are democrats really this stupid? Do they think any thinking person will not see through this pathetic attempt by the scummiest attorney in the land?

poor, poor Meg...the misunderstood billionaire was duped. Now, how did this duped, guiless, poor, giving woman make a billion dollars? Because she was on ruthless SOB..that's how! what a joke Meg is...I am such a nice, caring, giving person and this is how I am rewarded? Poor Meg.....

All that $$$ and the Whitman's could not hire an attorney to facilitate the maid's legalization?

Is that "fiscally responsible"...or prudent?

Meg's plan for California if she wins: 1. Cut taxes on the wealthy. 2. Slash wages for the middle class. 3. Cut social programs.

that's every republicans plan!

Dems better watch out, Whitman is in danger of gaining all of their votes... she gave an illegal a job, she did not attempt to have the illegal deported, and now she is blaming her opponent for her problems.... she is like Obama reincarnated.

How can the Dems support Obama yet be against her?

Meg really did not have to do much to make a Billion or more. Just had to hire the right people of which there were thousands to choose from to keep ebay up and running. We the sellers did the rest. Hell I started "Buy it now" a year before ebay put it up. Listed an item in the auction format and said "first bid wins" as I will close the auction after first bid. those were the best days on ebay. Neg was doing nothing.

Scar, I don't agree after reading about Bill Gates and Ross Perot; J. Paul Getty and J.P. Morgan. You got to understand that everyone at Google is making money. They don't have any slave labor. Everybody there is happy to be there. But Paul, You don't think that Whitman knew that her maid was illegal? You got to be heavy on Kool-aid. The woman is a genius and she didn't know? Get real.

I have to admit, this story made me smile. Not because I'm a liberal; I just love seeing a politician get caught in their own sanctimonious BS.

Mj,

Yep, she was in the right place at the right time.

I could really give two figs if she had an illegal housekeeper. Hello...she's not the first nor will she be the last politician to be caught in that scandal. What I have a problem with is the hypocrisy of a woman running on a platform against illegal immigration then employing one herself. I think most mom's know that before any person puts their trust in another human being who is caring for their child, they do the most thorough background check that they can afford. I am not a millionaire but I do not depend on some agency telling me someone has been cleared. I at least run them through the check on the nanny background check website. There are several just like it and they range 100 to 300 bucks. Small price to pay for your child's safety. Now, if I was a millionaire. you can bet I would have bought the best money could buy. I'm sorry. An intelligent, wealthy businesswoman would have more information on the person she entrusting her most prized position to. Not to mention giving access to her home. Either she is very flippant with who cares for her children or she knew all along. Either way, it doesn't seem like the behavior of a detail orientated person. Not to mention that it seems pretty clear that her and husband both knew and instead of just coming clean, they are covering it up. I bet if she just copped to it, it would help her in the long run.

Sorry @parkerjoe, reports are that she also peformed duties as a nanny.

I guess the big thing is the little matter that she is so against illegal immigrants, yet had one working for her for nine years. Let's assume she is not lying and only found out right before firing her; she is anti-immigrant but did not turn her in - and she is (paraphrasing) "like a member of the family" but would not help her out. This tells me that she did not turn her in and did not help her out because she was hoping nobody would find out...lying or not. Then she is surprised because the woman calls he "Ms. Whitman"? She probably calls her something else in private...and it ain't "Meg".

As for you knotheads that find this an opportunity to find fault with President Obama, what is wrong with you? Why is it every time a Republican is found to be lying, stupid, ignorant, et al, you point your finger at Obama? Deflecting much?

Well of course the whole thing is Jerry Brown's fault. Let's see here, even if Ms. Whitman had proof that Brown was behind exposing her illegal activity, does it occur to her that Mr. Brown IS the state's Attorney General? It is his job to expose crime.

Is this going to become a criminal's defense? It's the cop's fault for catching me.

The position she is trying to buy - Governor - is supposed to be the Big Dog. You take the blame when things go wrong.

This woman is simply not fit to govern.

'

Are you kidding me! This state is going to hell in a handbasket ,because of career politicians like Brown,he screwed up as governor the first time and this state is still to this day paying for somwe of his outrageous liberal ideas 25 years ago.This guy wants to bring up the fact about a maid she hired,I think there are a lot more problems that need to be discussed other than this,especially browns former governancy and his real lioberal agenda!

Yeah, @brock661, Brown brought it up. It's all his fault that Whitman got caught in a lie. You expose yourself when you use terms like "liberal" or the new one, "lioberal". Sorry if Brown does not follow your political leanings...I'm sure it would be far better to have an irresponsible person like Whitman ("I know I did it but it's somebody else's fault because I got caught!") than a "career politician".

We need more people in charge that think they can buy elections... Far better than those career politicians!

This guy wants to bring up the fact about a maid she hired,I think there are a lot more problems that need to be discussed other than this,especially browns former governancy and his real lioberal agenda!

Oh sure, lots of issues that need to be discussed, like when the GOP brought up Monica Lewinski? Payback is hell - ain't it?

"The real tragedy here is Nicky. After Nov. 2, no one's going to be watching out for Nicky Diaz," Whitman said.

That has to be the most hypocritical, disgusting statement I have heard come out of Meg Whitman's lying mouth. It proves that the "little people" are just pawns to scum like Whitman and her husband.

The GOP and it's candidates are pathetic.

The maid has children born here in the US. Turning her in wouldn't get her deported. As an employer Whitman stopped employing her when she knew for a fact that the maid was working illegally.

What would be the acceptable resolution that the Dems are proposing to the situation?

Endless self flagellation?

There's a big difference between being lied to by an employee who commits identity theft in order to get employed (and feed her kids) and Bill Clinton lying about having sex with women who worked for him in order to cover up for his sexual harassment history. One is unintentionally committing a crime and the other is intentionally committing multiple offenses.

Unless you really believe that Bill Clinton really wasn't smart enough to know that oral sex is considerred sexual contact.

I find it hard to understand why Liberals try to tell everyone that Republicans only care about the rich. I could reverse that and say the Liberals only care about the poor. Its a novel concept. But if you want to refer to the constitution, like you always do, where does it say the government is in charge of feeding, clothing and sheltering the country's poor?? The government really has no business doing those things with tax dollars. Thats what charities are for and what churches do well. Rich people are amongst the biggest donors to charities. Its voluntarily donating your hard earned cash to charity is what America is all about.

It is not a good idea for government to take away from the successful and people who worked hard to earn their money and spread the wealth out to the poor and illegals. Why do the Liberals want to bring down the successful in order to elevate the poor? Like the unions that protect the weak at the expense of the hard worker, what is the incentive to make money under a Liberal/Progressive regime who's utopian society consists of everyone on a level playing field, hard worker or not? I do not believe in the Democrats and their policies. I have a better use for my hard earned money for my family than a liberal government does, who panders to illegals and the lazy.

Case in point, look no further than California, which used to be a leader in innovation and prosperity. 20 years ago Democrats were voted in and kept their power. The result is a fiscal mess, lots of social programs, sanctuary cities where illegals bleed the budgets dry, and now $19billion in debt. Yet they continue to vote the same inept politicians and party in. Arnold may be Republican but he sure isn't conservative. This RINO is not indicative of the direction of the new Republican Party.

Whitman knew her maids status. And the Dems knew how to seek it out. The maid didn't tell that story without getting something in return. Course we may never hear what that may be but I highly doubt she has to worry about deportation.

All this has done is throw one issue out in the open. In the meantime the rest of the issues, many of them as large as the illegal issue breaking the bank in the state of CA, will be lost in the mudslinging.

That's politics now. Throw the mud to avoid telling the citizens how they plan to fix the issues. The losers are the citizens.

What the hell is it with people who know nothing about economics,Who does the middle class work for,either the government or some kind of company whether it be large or small,now this is where liberals get really confused,most of the people that own these companies or run them woul be considered entrepeneurs or people who had the desire to take a chance and start there own business,these so called rich people that make over $250,000 a year,these are the people that create jobs and already have to pay taxes on employeees as well as business taxes if they make a profit(which is not guaranteed,unlike govt work or welfare)SO what happens if a business all of a sudden has to pay for more health care and has there income taxes raised at the same time,and this happens during as recession,where business is either not growing or shrinking,Well gfor all you idiots here is thwe answer,They cut costs,either laying people off orfinding other corners to cut,but you start at your biggest expense as well as one of your biggest liabilities,employees,because businesses are not started to pay taxes or hire as many employyees as possible,they are started to make money for the owner,This is called capitalism and its what helps the middle class from going to the lower class ,NOT THE GOVT!!!

You liberals are just not very intelligent. If she knew the person was illegal, why the hell would she pay $23 an hour? As well, if she is such a corporate thief/thug and doesn't give a rats a$$ about anyone then she'd pay below minimum wage for a criminal employee that shouldn't be in the country. This is simply a liberal smear of the worst kind. Brown is a flat out liar and liberals are so busy suckling off the California teet, they are perfectly willing to accept it in hopes that the gravy train continues. Pathetic!

Why can't she just take responsibility for her crime?

Conservatives are always haranguing the rest of us about "personal responsibility," but then do the opposite with their Republicon "family values" and "Compassionate Conservatism."

The trolls are out in force to whitewash Good 'Ole Outsourcing Meg's hiring problem. And as a "member of her extended family" she wasted no time in throwing a family member under her election bus.

After seeing this tearless performance a number of time on TV, I realized that this Nicky Diaz thing is simply a political ploy at the expense of an illegal alien. Meg Whitman paid her $23 an hour for goodness sake. Nicky Diaz was definitely not picked on!

And one has to ask why Nicky Diaz chose to be illegal? At any time she could have applied for a work permit. I understand that nearly every post office has the forms available and in some industries there are unlimited numbers of permits available.

Please, someone in California show this woman how to fill out a work permit form so she can be legal! And someone please stop her from being used to her disadvantage.

"....some industries there are unlimited numbers of permits available."

Get a life you obviously have no idea what you are talking about.

What a smarmy, lying, slime you are Meg.

Dear god. Sure Gloria Allred is who she is, but the facts remain facts.

More Family Values from the GOP!

If you want to see a billionaire cry, vote Dem!!!! All that wasted money she used to buy the elections GONE!!!

Everybody has skeltons in the closet, but this woman must have a whole cemetery if it was so easy to catch her in this, the most damaging "sin" for a Republican't!

This attempt to discredit Whitman is pathetic. The person who defrauded her and the state is now saying Meg should have known, or should have suspected and turned her in?

This is no attempt when Whitman discredited herself when she lied about not knowing the housekeeper is an illegal, when a government document was provided, that Whitman claimed she didn't receive, although her husband wrote a note on the document requesting that the information be checked out. Whitman is a liar and should have known and to assume otherwise is definitely pathetic. And then you ask:

Are democrats really this stupid?

Well, back at you, Are Republicans stupid?

The criminal cowardly woman who benefited from working for Meg for 9 years, taking her money, while lying and putting Meg's household at risk is trying to now take the high road?

I don't understand why your attacking the illegal immigrant and not Whitman, who in fact benefited more so than her housekeeper? Whitman is a criminal who benefited from employing this woman illegally for 9 years, had her working slave hours for slave pay, while lying and participating in putting our borders at risk and is now trying to take the easy road out, which is lying with a straight face to save her face rather than admitting the truth that she is dead wrong.

To AnnForTruth01---Your handle implies that you are aware of the truth. I find this whole situation absolutely laughable, especially posts from people who have not bothered to look for the truth. The letter as provided by Allred actually EXONERATES Whitman of all criminality (under her own policy ideas) as immigration lawyers have also done. Let's review the truth.

First...The letter from SSA in no way claims that Nicandra Diaz was an actual illegal immigrant. It merely stated that there were questions in the information provided to the agency. Any number of explanations can be found through clerical errors, bloated bureaucracy, you name it.

Second...and most damning is the paragraph directly after the issue of discrepancies. I will quote it for those that follow only liberal news sites..."This letter does not imply that you or your employee intentionally provided incorrect information about the employees name or SSN. It is not a basis, in and of itself, for you to take any adverse action against the employee, such as laying off, suspending, firing, or discriminating against the individual. Any employer that uses the information in this letter to justify taking adverse action against an employee may violate state or federal law and be subject to legal consequences. Moreover, this letter makes no statement about your employee's immigration status." Tell me where Whitman was to believe she had hired an illegal immigrant (one who had provided a driver's license and SS card, and a sworn letter affirming citizenship)? What should Whitman have done here? Just in case you might believe that the truth cannot be found, I have included the link to the document Allred provided.

http://tmz.vo.llnwd.net/o28/newsdesk/tmz_documents/0930_gloria_3.pdf

Isn't it hypocritical to denigrate Whitman for not acting on a letter that specifically states that no action should be taken on a clarification issue? Had Mrs. Whitman acted on this letter in 2003 and decided to run for Governor in 2009, Allred would be coming out filing a lawsuit against her for wrongful termination and discrimination. This is the problem with politics of destruction versus politics of issues. Personal destruction is a distraction from the reality that Democrats cannot stand on the issues. The problem with politics today is that politicians who cannot stand on their positions need an edge against those who can. With all the problems that are in dire need of addressing in California, isn't it comical that the news has been dominated by Whitman's nanny. Distraction versus reality, you gotta love it.

This is the problem with news agencies that the President says are doing "a great service for the country." They are distorting more facts and acting as a political arm without doing their job, as advertised to the nation, being journalists.

The Truth is that this incident shows which party is more worried about immigrants and their concerns. Mrs. Whitman could have easily had this woman deported upon termination, but out of respect did not report her. Ms. Allred has exposed this woman (who has children here I might add) to criminal charges, prison time and deportation. Hardly, a representative of a client. Sounds more like a political operative than a bona fide attorney. Allred should be ashamed of herself, as well as Jerry Brown who believes someone should admit a mistake, when the evidence proves none.

Finally...as to the slave wages and labor...I defy you to find anyone working part time as a housekeeper and nanny who makes more than $10.00 an hour. Ms. Diaz was making $23.00 an hour for 15-20 hours a week. Before I got my college education I was lucky to be making minimum wage in any part time job I held. That was California in the 90s making $7.00 or less an hour. No pity there.

Has Whitman been asleep for the last thirty years or so? Has she been unaware of the extent of illegal immigration? Has she never heard of identity theft? Has she never read a news article documenting the trafficing of Social Security numbers? Does she know how far the Social Security Administration goes, attempting to keep personal information secret? (despite their failures) They won't even admit to you that someone else is using your SS# when they are fully aware of it. (You're not likely to be earning $80K as a paralegal in NYC at the same time you're earning $12/Hr. as a fry cook in Utah.) When informed that an immigrant employee has a problem with Social Security, I would expect any competent citizen to recognize that it is probably more than a mere discrepancy. I've seen the hoops honest employers jump through to hire necessary foreign talent to work in the United States. It's not really that hard.

So, by that rationale, you are saying that a person with brown skin, speaking with an accent should just be assumed to be illegal if any discrepancy is noted? Letters, from a bureaucracy like SSA, cannot happen by mistake? There are never any clerical errors or issues within the agency itself? As I said earlier, Whitman assumes that (even though the letter specifically states not to), what would your argument against her be now? You would be calling her a xenophobic, racist, nationalist, tea-bagger. If you cannot honestly say you would not I would urge to step out of the argument, observe the facts realistically and ask yourself what action you would want her to have taken. She assumed this woman was an honest person from the moment she hired her, until she claims she found out the truth. Without a letter that says this woman was 100% illegal, we have to accept her at her word that she found out in 2009. Show me proof she knew definitively and I will side with your argument. Otherwise, the facts are the facts.

Have you noticed a jingoistic slant to my posts? Would you please direct my attention to where or when I have used derogatory appellations?

And: Yes, I would have requested the official documents, photocopied the documents and filed the copies of the documents, just as every employer I've had for the last thirty-five years has done. And: Yes, I did have to present my social security card and birth certificate for even my first job at fifteen in nineteen seventy. A variance in the quantity of melanin in the skin, physical differences due to ancestry or vocal patterns should also not excuse individuals from standard verification requirements.

Am I to expect that, by being Lilly white, I am somehow excused from a few legal obligations? I haven't actually seen that in practice. No matter how angelic my smile, the art of twisting my toe in the floor, my best eager to please look; they still want proof.

You implied that Mrs. Whitman should have been more aware of illegal immigration. I was NOT claiming that you were being derogatory, I was merely asking a question of your rationale. As I stated earlier, there are a few facts that are being overlooked. Whitman hired this woman through a service, specifically requesting a person of legal status within the U.S. Upon recommendation by the service, Ms. Diaz was hired by Whitman. Whitman took a copy of her drivers license (which in 2000 she should not have been issued in the state of CA if she was illegal), her Social Security card (again, which she should not have had), and an I-9 (employment eligibility status form) which is signed under penalty of perjury. These documents should have been completed through the placement agency and were not the responsibility of Whitman. Yet, she took them anyway. After nearly three years of service to the Whitman home, a letter is delivered stating there are clerical discrepancies. Again, I ask, what should Whitman have done? Whether she saw the letter or not means nothing. The letter specifically states to not take any action because it makes no statement of immigration status. I am submitting a link to the documents provided by Whitman...

http://blogs.sacbee.com/capitolalertlatest/Diaz%20Forms.pdf

Whitman did everything right, she went above and beyond her responsibility. Isn't it funny, and answer this honestly, that by coming forward this woman now faces charges of defrauding the government, defrauding the state of California, identity theft, and she faces deportation. All with kids who are citizens of the United States. What was the reason for her to come forward? To expose Whitman? Expose her to what...hiring a criminal, who was here illegally, had stolen a Social Security number and was living off public assistance? What is the benefit going to be? Maybe Jerry Brown can hire her to clean the governors mansion, oh, and pardon her of state crimes. Unfortunately, she will still be subject to federal violations. This was a real win for Allred. She should be brought up on ethics charges by the state bar, and should lose her license to practice law. Free her up to wheel people out in smear campaigns without the conflict of interest, when she is practicing politics.

@vt0976

Here's the interesting bit:

Dear Meg used a 1099 to pay Nicky, not a W-2. And you don't need those documents for a 1099. If you don't think something smells wrong here, you need to take a step back.

I know there is a desperate attempt to railroad Whitman with some phony trumped up appearance of impropriety, but, please explain to me the problem. A 1099 is used to pay contractors or "freelancers" for business. As Ms. Diaz was working at no more than 20 hours a week, this benefited her in that taxes were not required to be deducted by the employer.

The most ridiculous point of this whole argument is that Diaz was contracted from a private service. That service was required to do all due diligence in obtaining immigration status. Not Whitman. Whitman hired this woman through a service and still did the due diligence of verifying employment eligibility. I have reviewed facts, not speculation and innuendo. My step back.

The most ridiculous point of this whole argument is that Diaz was contracted from a private service.

That's the sentence that should give everyone pause.

Either the maid was an employee of a service, or she was indeed an independent contractor. If she was an employee of a service, then the service would have paid her with a W-2 and Meg would never seen her paperwork. In fact, Meg's going beyond that would have been illegal, I believe. A company that hires a temp deals with the agency in matters of employment, and cannot demand to see the employee's personal information, because it is on file with the agency.

If the maid was as an independent contractor with a 1099, then the service really didn't provide a service except as a locator. In addition, the maid would have simply provided Meg with a W-9. Meg would have filed a 1099 providing the IRS with the amount she had paid the maid, and that would have been the end of any government dealings. The idea of Meg's going above and beyond in doing "extra due diligence" is, um, stretching the truth, if anything. She either didn't know (which is likely, or she chose to ignore. If she didn't know, that's fine -- just own up to it and be a leader.

So are you suggesting we have no governor? One will win & one will lose.

I'd rather elect a very successful CEO than a career liar / liberal / two-faced public-trough swilling clown like moonbeam.

Paul successful CEO's must be career lairs, two -faced , and power mad leeches on the backs of their employees.

Anyone willing to spend $119M of their own money to win an election has to be a greedy crooked person just looking to find other ways to line his/her pockets. I have yet to hear any single detailed plan of how she intends to create jobs in CA, improve education without expanding the state budget, or solve any of CA's other numerous problems. Maybe she should have put that $119M to work helping to reduce CA's deficit instead. But neither has any other politician of any party for any of the offices (legislature or governor.) And the same goes for the national level. It is well past time for the voters to get involved in changing our electoral/campaign financing system and bring about federal term limits for Congress, just as we have for the President and for many states' elected offices. Go to www.faircampaignreform.us to join the movement to call for a Constitutional Convention to pass two Popular Amendments listed on that site. And let that webmaster know what you are doing so that updates can be posted on the site. The more people who become involved and report back their efforts, the more the webmaster can inform the rest of us about the progress.

Maybe those with that much money can't be bought out by someone else? Maybe that wealth gives them the freedom to be authentic.

Or the freedom to be a megalomaniac to buy a political seat. Who needs power that badly?

Agreed, Karen. And the "Governor" job doesn't pay particularly well, so why would a multi-millionaire want this job? I have a difficult time accepting that Meg's motives are altruistic.

Because she knows she could do a hell of a lot better than jerry brown,who is a carreer politician and depends solely onkeeping some sort of government job,because he could not ever make it outside of politics,Just like Obama!!!! I find it funny how democrats try to villify Whitman because she is so successful.Obviously this lady is smart,hard working and took care of business and did very well for herself ,Isnt that what most Americans want for themselves??The fact she is successful and rich wasnt an accident or done by just being lucky,they have something that most people dont,I dont know what it is,but I know it isnt a bad thing!!!!!!!!

I agree JT. Why would someone put so much of their own money into such a campaign? Must be she will benefit far more down the line than the rest of us. Um... makes you think. And to hear she supports all the lame republican talking points. Wow, I wonder why anyone would vote for her. And Brock, success in this country takes a lot of luck and yes, hard work, but wow she has that much money to throw into this campaign? Incredible. Just like the WWE republican. Just makes you wonder why these two are republicans and not dems? Um...

Because to Whitman, California is just a stepping stone to the White House.

Hey antitrust go to Meg Whitman.com and READ what she has planned. Brown has no plan at all. Just the same old rhetoric of saying I won't raise taxes, unless the people want them raised. Hello, who would want more taxes?

Izzy-2309388

Maybe those with that much money can't be bought out by someone else? Maybe that wealth gives them the freedom to be authentic.

LOL, we elected Bill Frist, worth $100 million from HCA Hospital. He turned out to be the biggest prostitute for tobacco and the drug industry the Senate ever had.

@IMWatching

You took the words right out of my mouth! I believe that Meg Whitman is being "polished" for VP or Pres. of the US. The GOP may have figured out that Sarah Palin is both an air-head AND a crackpot. There is no way the GOP will support Palin after she backed Tea Party candidates. Whitman is smart, and God knows she has the bucks, but Hillary Clinton is really, really smart, and about the right things.

Smoke some more crack wh don't you. the posts on this thread are just more indication of the dumbing down of America. If you think Jerry Brown is even going to attempt to reform a state that is bankrupt - then just pass the joint.

I have no idea why these people are so paranoid about the fact she spent her own money,its hers ,she earned it,she should be able to do whatever she wants with it,as far as her being governor and somehow benefitting from it finacially after she gets out of office and somehow implying she is doing this to benefit herself and have some secret hidden agenda are ridiculous,Why would she have to???she has obviously enough money to do whatever she wants to,but you liberals think she is spending all this money to make it back later ,after she passes (so called favors for the rich).It would be a bad descision finacially to spend all that money hoping she could get it back by becoming governor,maybe she sees what really is going on andwants to try and stop this state from becoming more meaningless than it is already

I like the fact that she is spending her money and not money gained from labor unions or special interests.

As taught today in BUSN101, motivation is plotted as a pyramid, with the raw needs of life as the lowest common denominator. Money is only about half way up the pyramid. Authority, respect and self satisfaction all rate higher. She and all the other politicians are motivated by more than mere money, and that is not necessarily "the good of all mankind."

FYI..your sitting Governor is a Republican't, so we doubt Meg will do anything differently than the "movie star" gov.

The only thing she's concerned about is the Capital Gains tax. That's why she's running. To her, $100 million plus is a small price to pay.

That would be ok if she weren't campaigning on the illegal aliens issue.

If they got rid of the Captial Gains Tax, and the illegals, they would still come out ahead in revenue due to the drain of the illegals on the state budget.

It's not the illegals using the drugs. It is the American citizens who are, and they are the ones creating the demand for the Mexican (and other foreign) cartels to supply. It is time we Americans accept the responsibility for the drug problems in this country. WE are the ones using them (or at least some of us apparently.) Alcohol, tobacco, soft and hard drugs, prescription drugs.....they are all a problem in this country. And none of them are something that can be eliminated by passing a law. The only way to handle the problem is to tax the hell out of the purchase/use of those drugs (alcohol and tobacco are drugs in their own right) and then use part of that tax money to treat the addicted. When the tax on the drug becomes higher than the actual cost of the drug, people either cut back or they resort to crime to support the habit. When they resort to crime, then we can use other existing laws to prosecute them. Of course, that is still a tax burden on the rest of us, isn't it? We need to find a way to make them pay their way while in prison too.

This is not about how smart or educated she is,democrats or repuplicans,black,white or brown. This is about the haves and havenots and greed on Meg Whitmans part. plus she's lying.

WOW!you have discovered that politicians lie,good for you,go ahead vote for Brown I will take a dishonest Whitman over a liberal carreer politician any day!!So what she isnt even a government official yet,but are you giving a pass to Obama and Pelosi for all the lies they told!!!!!

Truman, you are right about Arnold, a naturalized citizen with the morals of a movie star. Meg is not Arnold and our state has been undermined by democrats. Lets get some real ideas for CA to come back into being a healthy state. We got your back Meg.

See ya Meg, don't let the door hit ya where the maid bit ya.

She was a major player in building one of the most successful enterprises in CA and online. Doing what she does best? What kind of hyper-partisan garbage is that?

The career liar is Jerry / moonbeam. His history of failure is well documented. The clown campaigns against Prop 13 and then takes credit for it? Even Clinton called this career-liar out on that one. Sorry Truman, Meg is CA's best hope, and at the least she has more sense than the entire CA legislature.

Truman - Whitman hired the maid through an agency, had her sign an I-9 form, paid income taxes and SS taxes on her employee, paid $23 per hour for her services, etc. So, your statment that "illegal help is cheaper" does not apply. Where is the incentive for the Whitman's to hire illegals, if they are paying taxes on them, and paying a high wage for a minimum wage job?

The maid lied about her legal status & about her eligibility to work in the US, used a phony SS card & driver's license, and committed fraud by signing the I-9 form. She is at best being manipulated, at worse, a con artist.

This is a purely political ploy by Brown and that bottom feeder Allred. They are the ones who are disgusting and disingenuous.

So sorry, but Meggo hired her as an "independent contractor". Leaving all the taxes up to the maid.

And no benefits nor worker's comp, nor FICA.

How very Republican of her.

@Michelle, what about the little matter of the letter from the IRS? I guess little warning flags wouldn't go up for such a "capable" CEO when they are told that somebody they have hired may have a bogus SSN, right? Con artist? Manipulative? Are you talking about the housekeeper or Ms. Whitman?

Either this woman is a liar or she is far from the genius CEO she is reported to be. In either case, I would not think she would be a good choice to run a small town, much less a state.

Molly, catch up. If she was hired as an "independant contractor" then Social Security never would have sent a letter telling the Whitmans that they couldn't apply the withholdings due to a mix up with the SSN.

Ms. Wit-less said she 1099'd Ms Diaz rather than W-2 and withholdings.

And yes, they would have sent a letter to the "employers" if the "independent contractor" listed on the 1099 wasn't the rightful SS number holder.

I know...it's crazy that those lazy public union workers actually figured out that there was something wrong with Smeg's paperwork. :)

The Brown campaign & Allred, the media whore, have exploited this woman far worse than Meg ever could.

If it's not politically motivated, why would Allred put her client in danger of investigation by ICE for a lost wages claim?

Does that really make sense to anyone?

God people, you don't seem to understand, Meg was paying taxes on this lying, law breaking woman that is now on the take from the Brown headquarters. And Truman, Meg wants the border secured, she does not show any disgust for these people. You are way off base there.

Why is this house keeper still in the US ? There is nothing criminal proven on the employer's part, all those saying Whitman got caught is simply stating an opinion, an opinion that absolutely won't stand in court. However, it is a fact that the maid is here illegally and she used other people's identification which is a CRIME. She should be locked up and be ready for deportation. It doesn't matter if you are democrat or republican, just look at the facts and read the laws...

Look at how much money Meg took from your last paycheck. Look at how much Carly took from your last paycheck.

Now compare that to what the government took - and you call these two greedy?

Either of them likely paid more taxes in 1 year than you will in your lifetime. Your perspective is very bent if not simply dishonest.

Ummmm....we have a capitalist system - people are paid what they earn based on what people are willing to pay them. So YES, she has a right to get rich and that's just fine.

I like how someone refers to all CEO's as corporate criminals. Have then been bad CEOs? Of course. There are also bad plumbers, and bad auto mechanics and bad contractors. Of course, if you look around, you'll see a great deal of philanthropy from those bad CEOs. I bet most recognizable colleges have received a donation from one.

But that's ok, just because they earned the money, doesn't mean we can't vote to take it away from them, right? Maybe once we've raided "the rich" we can raid the next class down, and so on.

Muhamed:

The old "greedy, corporate, CEO thug" crap is really worn out; why don't you libs find another ingredient to mix up in your next batch of koolaid? Libs don't like CEOs because they don't like anybody who is more wealthy, successful, or famous than they are (except, of course, for the Hollywood types whose butts you're always kissing). Face it, these people are either more talented or more ambitious you, and so you just have to deal with being hopelessly second best.

spider-737231, thanks for your paid GOP post. Actually, greedy, corporate, CEO thugs never go out of fashion. That's the problem.

Well Muhamed, we seem to appreciate Bill Gates, Ross Perot, and this kid that started Facebook. I think that the difference is class and honor. Hiring illegal immigrants is considered smart by modern people with little self esteam today but it is really dishonest. Lying about it is crass. She should withdraw and let the GOP replace her with an honerable candidate. I don't think much of Brown but, in politics, you have to chose the lesser of two weeviles.

Umm..small point but very important. Ms. Whitman acknowledged that she used a 1099 for Ms Diaz instead of a w-2. Which means that she treated this "employee" like an independent contractor and thereby ILLEGALLY AVOIDING TAXES.

Typical lying, corporate pig....always crying about being "overtaxed!" while skipping out from under the taxes they owe.

Kevin
What "next class down" Do you mean? The one that's being systematicly eleminated by the Republicans or the "hopelessly second best" refered to by spider?

Mohamed, You are a true nut case. Our country was found on freedom.

Paranoid,dillusional,sad,when someone relly believes thatcorporations want to enslave us,thus wiping out there customer base and any expectation of future profits,having a majority of the population living below the poverty line would be bad for big corporations and small business,there no money in it,So that shot down your idiotic theory of big corporations tenslaving america ,This of course is using that logic of Muhammed goldstein(up the page a little)and this has nothing to do with his race either!!!!

You can't be serious. The woman was a maid, not a rocket scientist. She used an agency. Professional people use legitimate businesses to handle this kind of thing all the time.

But you think a CEO of a multi-billion dollar corp should drill down, not trust this Mexican woman, and scrutinize work done by a company specializing in vetting and placing help like this woman?

You're ridiculous.

Using your logic - Obama is the biggest idiot on the planet and the most full of s#$%.

Obama chose multiple tax cheats in his CABINET - you criticize Meg for her choice of housekeeper, but give the President a pass for people he selected for some of the most important jobs in the White House?

Pathetic.

Pathetic? No whats pathetic are Political Zombies like yourself.

Can you even converse without bringing up Obama? I'm not an Obama fan but I mean really Paul? Think for yourself and stop listening to the Fat@ss on talk radio..

What planet are you from Paul. We read every week about labor contractors that only dispatch illegal aliens. That is what they do. I't all they do, and half the help that does the dispatching is illegal. You need to get out more. They call me every month and I tell them that I am going to use E-Verify and they decide not to bother with me. Standard practice in hiring illegals is the 1099. That way they don't get outed until about March of the following year.

Bottom line 9 years later she discovers? No her campaign advisers said "uh Meg this is bad, lets sweep it under the rug".

Just like Obama with his that Bill Ayers association.

Parties like to make their candidates past disappear. None of these politicians own up to anything. they are all perfect.

By the way Meg what about those lay offs when Ebay was making record profits and had a billion dollars in cash? Jobs? Whatever, just another Wall Street Slave. The second CA elects this women she will sell them out to Wall Street. Wait and see..

And if Brown wins he will sell out to the unions, so what is the difference ? By the way, many successful companies are run by wealthy CEO's, and many unsuccessful companies are ruined by wealthy union heads, go figure.

The fact she was ceo and had to lay people off is what many people who run companies have to do all the time,and to villify without knowing all the facts is completely ignorant,Maybe she layed people off because of some govt tax hike on employees(calledpayroll tax for you liberals who know nothing about business)or they had to lay people off because the economy was gonna go bad(dot com bubble,housing market crash,election of obama)certain things that she has no control over but must anticipate to be a successful business operative.

the big deal is how she is handling it now. she says one thing on employers being held responsible and she acts as if this isn't her fault for 9 years. she had the responsibility to ask the agency to check on the employee. she is now blaming them for the problem. funny that no letters were sent to the agency but to her? At what point then was she taking the control and not the agency? How will this happen when she is gov?

The letter was sent to her because she was the one paying the wages, not the agency. Why should she have the responsibility to ask the agency to check on the employee's status? If the agency placed the employee, they were responsible for checking on status.

This is absurd. The maid was paid $23 per hour - excellent wages that plenty of Americans would be delighted to receive. When Whitman found out she was illegal, she fired her. Some have said she should have helped her to become legal, but if someone you had pretty much lived with for nine years suddenly admits she has deceived you, you don't feel much like helping her.

The maid is guilty of illegal entry and fraud. Why is nobody questioning where she got her fraudulent documents?

Bronwen, you must never have worked for an agency. The consumer pays the agency. The agency pays the employee. If she received any letter from Social Security she must have been directly employing the maid, even if it was described as self employed or contract work. The agency was out of the picture at that time and it was her responsibility to ensure the supporting documentation, at least, appeared authentic. Mrs. Whitman abdicated her responsibility for the operation of her own household. What performance would any logically thinking person expect from a person with that record?

Depends on the agency. Some take a fee from the employee. Obviously, Whitman was the one paying the illegal - which is why the letter was sent to Whitman from the Social Security Administration. If the agency had been paying the employee, they would have received the letter.

No, I have never worked for an agency, but I have used them in the past.

I agree. The party system has become the centrifuge that divides this country into extreme polar opposites, neither of which represents what this country really stands for. If parties were abolished, I suspect that, for a time, certain catchphrases like "family values" and "social justice" would simply become shibboleths to identify to voters (wink, wink) which 'side' a candidate was on. But with time, I would hope that maybe the lines would blur, and we could find a way to a less contentious, less divisive brand of issues-based American politics.

Of course, this could never happen until religion were divorced, once and for all, from the process, including, but not limited to, the immediate revocation of tax-exempt status for any religious organization that espouses a change in public policy. So basically things will stay as they are forever.

Read post #2.4 for the solution. The proposed Constitutional Amendment for election/campaign financing reform puts all kinds of restrictions on financing of campaigns.

She didn't pay taxes and didn't issue a w-2.

She used a 1099 -making Ms Diaz an "independent contractor"- so Whitman a)avoided the lawfully owed taxes and b) didn't have to contribute to Social Security because Whitman knew she was illegal all along.

I get issued 1099's because I am an independent contractor, not an illegal. I am responsible for paying my own taxes and Social Security.

How did Whitman avoid paying "lawfully owed taxes"? If she knew the maid was illegal, she would have paid her in cash, and could pay much less than minimum wage.

Paying a maid $23 an hour hardly sounds like exploitation.

From IRS website.-

1. Behavioral: Does the company control or have the right to control what the worker does and how the worker does his or her job?
2. Financial: Are the business aspects of the worker’s job controlled by the payer? (these include things like how worker is paid, whether expenses are reimbursed, who provides tools/supplies, etc.)
3. Type of Relationship: Are there written contracts or employee type benefits (i.e. pension plan, insurance, vacation pay, etc.)? Will the relationship continue and is the work performed a key aspect of the business?

Businesses must weigh all these factors when determining whether a worker is an employee or independent contractor. Some factors may indicate that the worker is an employee, while other factors indicate that the worker is an independent contractor. There is no “magic” or set number of factors that “makes” the worker an employee or an independent contractor, and no one factor stands alone in making this determination. Also, factors which are relevant in one situation may not be relevant in another.

The keys are to look at the entire relationship, consider the degree or extent of the right to direct and control, and finally, to document each of the factors used in coming up with the determination."

So you tell me...do you think Ms. Diaz was an employee or an independent contractor?

I say she should have been considered an employee and her employer (the Harsh Whitmans) should have been paying the appropriate withholdings, taxes, worker's comp, etc.

PS- I get 1099'd too but I'm not some rich pig's housekeeper.....(I'm a glazier)

You still didn't explain the "legally owed taxes." The taxes are still expected to be paid, just not by the "employer." As an independent glazier, you realize there are some advantages to being 1099'd instead of being classified as an employee.

PS - I'm not some rich pig's housekeeper either, but I'm sure the housekeepers out there are happy there are rich pigs around to keep them employed. I don't know too many poor people who are hiring housekeepers these days.

O'R, allow me to explain...the maid should have been classified as an employee, not a subcontractor, due to the nature of her job. A maid does not control the nature of her work , the hours she work, and any tools/supplies she may use to do her job. The employer controls all aspects of the job. As such, the maid is an employee and should have been classified as a W-2 employee, per IRS rules. As a W-2 employee, the employer is responsible for taking out the approriate taxes and paying the IRS. I should know, I reported an employer to the IRS, who should not have classified me as an independent contractor. The IRS agreed with me and reclassified my status, and went after my employer for my taxes and I was refunded what I originally had to pay out. That is why Ca businessman is correct that Ms. Whitman did not pay legally owed taxes.

A maid can control the hours she works, and unless there is a contract stating she cannot work as a maid for anyone else, she is not an employee. She is free to accept work from other people. You do not know the hours she worked or if she was expected to be at the house for certain hours. If she was working for an agency, she is not an employee. There are maids who have different clients on different days.

As a W-2 employee, if there are expenses to paid by the employer, the expenses are usually passed on to the employee in the form of lower wages. The taxes may be taken out by the employer, but they are deducted from the wages, they are not paid by the employer. If you are talking about Social Security, a portion is paid by the employer. As an independent contractor, half the SS you pay is a tax deduction.

Seems like 6 of one, half a dozen of the other.

Another conspiracy theory from the right.

Makes as much sense as Barack Obama's mother pretending to give birth to him in Hawaii, putting a birth announcement in the local newspaper back in 1961 knowing that her newborn would run for president and win someday. Oh, and the state of Hawaii issues him a "fake" birth certificate. Riiiight.

Actually the conspiracy theories are far more frightening than even the alleged conspiracies themselves.

You don't use special care hiring someone who will be working in your house??longterm?? often un-supervised??? And worked there how long???

If you think she didn't know she was illegal.... then you believe in the tooth fairy as well.

Frankly, In my state household cleaners without papers get 12 - 15 per hour in the simply well to do areas. Not the CEO type customer.

The rich have been using the illegals for decades. Republican, Democrat , It doesn't matter. They ship their factories to China or India, and hire the illegals for domestic slots. All for the same reason. Absolute greed!

Frankly, she paid her maid $23 per hour. Oh, the greediness!!!!

Bob, the maid only worked 15 hours a week. That is less than $17,000 per year. Try to keep up with the facts. And $23.00 per week is about average for a wealthy household. I made $10.00 an hour as a maid in a rich household plus room and board, first class airplane tickets, back in the 70's, during summer vacations while attending college.

You mean,like how California's elected officials sold every single one of us citizens and legal residents out to accommodate the millions of illegals?

The eBay "French gentleman" you refer to was quoted as saying she was an excellent executive, but because he disagreed with her politics, he would not vote for her.

He is a liberal, she is not.

Find another half-truth to expand upon.

LOL! Tony, you should work for CNN or MSNBC. No need to elucidate...

jesus,

Does the DNC write your posts?

jesus-1918891

Your comment just made my day. Yours is the first I've seen which so thoroughly and hilariously encapsulates the Tea Party. "Tea Klux Klan" is near-perfect. I'll be using it regularly in the future. Thanks.

It was widely reported that she paid her $23 an hour. You guys just can't tell the truth can you.

Hey Paul, your paying someone $23 an hour, no benefits. Wouldn't you check their legality if your paying that much??? And where was the social security contribution? No wonder it's going broke.

If she was paid as an independent contractor, she is responsible for the Social Security. But expecting someone who used a false SS # to pay her taxes is laughable.

I am an independent contractor. I book jobs through an agency. The agency is responsible for making sure I have a current license. The clients I am sent out to depend on the agency.

If after being vouched for by an agency, someone questioned a Hispanic again, "Are you sure you're legal?" we'd be hearing cries of profiling.

She was hired through an agency. That is why Whitman paid $23/hr. The agency was responsible for validating her residency, and providing Whitman with a copy of the application and ID's. The illegal used a fake SS card and D/L. That should be enough reason for ICE to pick her up and ship her back home. Atty. Gloria Allred is a friend of the DNC. She is a snake and a media whore. I've lived in California long enough to know a campaign smear if I see one.It is common from both sides. Mostly from liberals though, but not exclusive.

True, it does not matter which party they are from. If one of them hired an illegal, the other would be making political hay out of it.

But unlike the democrats, she does not want to make every illegal a citizen.

I know people in California and they say that it sucks there and that there are too many illegals. But no one in California is willing to do anything. It has gotten so bad that there are so many friends and family members of illegals that are citizens, that they would never vote for someone that would clean up the mess. Why would they vote for someone that wants to deport their parents, aunts, cousins, neighbors, girlfriend,... They have pretty much passed the point of no return. Need to just put up a wall around California and push it off into the ocean to become its own island.

Yes, it does suck here in California. Brown seem to have insinuated that he is FOR legalizing the 11 million undocumented immigrants. Even if only half of that are adults, that means legal residents would be competing for jobs against 5.5 million newly documented immigrants. And what about welfare and housing? It's bad enough we're paying for their children's education, free lunches and programs geared specifically to them (ESL, etc.).

I don't like Whitman either, but at least she's not willing to just hand 11 million people free passes - like Brown and all the CA liberals, just to buy the large Hispanic votes.

We seem to forget (it's very convenient of course) that throughout history and in many parts of the world, when one country invades another country (or in the case of Mexico) when one country out-right steals the land from it's citizens, the citizens will never really leave... Or, put another way, the citizens will always come back to their land.... that's a fact jack - It never ceases to amaze me that American citizens are for the most part very proud of this terribly sad and dismal track record the US has all over the world!

peace

Actually , would you trust someone cleaning the inside of your house at $5.50 pay??? I think not.

Maybe she never got a letter from SS? Last story I saw said that if she did not have more than like 10 employees, she would not have been sent a letter.

So you do not support her. You do not like what she did. So you agree that she should have reported her housekeeper as being an illegal immigrant and had her deported. If only California had a few million more like you, they could clean up the budget busting illegal immigrant problem.

Hey Cynic - my bet is that she created more jobs and more wealth for more families than Obama, Jerry, Reid and Pelosi.

Those damned rich people.

If you don't think Jerry Brown is responsible for bringing this accusation out into the public eye for the purpose of getting better results on Nov. 2, then you will not believe any thing that has transpired before Gloria got the media into this travesty.

Whaaaaaaaaaaa! Jerry Brown told on me. Whaaaaaaaaaaa!

Hey, Paul F. I bet President Obama, Harry Reid, and Nancy Pelosi created more jobs than W, Cheney, and crew! Besides this isn't about job creation, it's about a repug breaking the law and hiring and hiring an illegal alien at the same time repugs, cons, and tea baggers are running around peeing in their pants over the big, bad boogie man coming to our nation illegally. Meg Whitman is a liar and a hypocrite, and now that she is caught in her hypocrisy she won't even admit is and take her lumps. Instead she tries to convince the public that somehow Jerry Brown forced her to hire this illegal alien. She isn't sorry that she BROKE THE LAW and hired an illegal alien. She is made because her political rival brought the matter to the public's attention, something she would not have hesitated to do had the shoe been on the other foot!

Best question of the day!!!

Just steal a hell of a lot more than $119 Million if she is elected.