Thread: Illegal alien causing trouble for GOP candidate

Chad Groening - OneNewsNow - 10/4/2010 3:40:00 AM

A pro-enforcement immigration activist is calling on federal authorities to investigate California GOP gubernatorial candidate Meg Whitman for employing an illegal alien housekeeper for nine years.



The former eBay chief executive admits that she employed Nicky Diaz Santillan, but insists the hiring had been through an employment agency and that she did not know the woman was an illegal alien until much later. Whitman's statement claims that she promptly terminated the maid's employment when she confessed her illegal status in June 2009.

Santillan is now represented by attorney Gloria Allred, a staunch supporter of Whitman's Democratic opponent, Jerry Brown, who has filed a complaint on her behalf with the Labor Commission, seeking back wages and mileage.

But William Gheen of Americans for Legal Immigration (ALIPAC) thinks federal authorities need to do their job, regardless of politics.

William Gheen (ALIPAC)"If Whitman and [Santillan] are not charged, and the authorities and the courts do not step in to handle this matter -- as is appropriate for them to do -- then the signal and the message becomes 'if you're a powerful, wealthy person like Whitman or her illegal alien housekeeper like Diaz, neither of you has any reason to be concerned about immigration laws,'" Gheen suggests.

But he adds that while Brown has it wrong when it comes to the amnesty issue, Whitman is not right either.

"Meg Whitman may be a Republican, and some people may think she's better than Jerry Brown, [but] if Meg Whitman or Jerry Brown brings 12 million illegal aliens out of the shadows and into the ballot box, it's over," the pro-enforcement immigration activist contends.

He believes supporting the rule of law is more important than making sure a certain person wins the governor's race.

http://www.onenewsnow.com/Politics/Defa ... id=1192272

Something just occurred to me, so odd this comes out now, hmm? Is it possible that the illegal made a deal with someone to cash in on this, in advance? Was she approached or did she approach someone? She wasn't paid a low wage and taxes were being paid on her salary; so was it a Dem tactic at work here? I don't think the illegal has the smarts to set this up.

She is married and has 3 US citizen jackpot children.

The taxes that were paid on her weren't being reported to the correct social security number so those monies are not reported to her or her family.

Did she receive welfare and health "benefits" for her children under yet another name?

Did she and her husband file taxes and claim unearned income credit?

Is her husband a legal resident?

Originally Posted by Newmexican

She is married and has 3 US citizen jackpot children.

The taxes that were paid on her weren't being reported to the correct social security number so those monies are not reported to her or her family.

Did she receive welfare and health "benefits" for her children under yet another name?

Did she and her husband file taxes and claim unearned income credit?

Is her husband a legal resident?

Current policy disallows such questions even be considered.

Here in NYC policy dictates that collecting any such information regarding recipients of social/medical/educational programs never happens!

William, I agree with you one hundred percent. If I didn't, I might as well just hang it up and stop fighting the fight.

Pro-comprehensive immigration (aka amnesty) candidate Meg Whitman will not get my vote. If I support her, how in the world could I hold any other illegal alien employer responsible, especially after they had reason to wonder why the papers they were given by them were not matching up properly.

We are talking California here. Stolen identity is the name of the game in this state of course. Every employer should have enough brain power to wonder what is going on if they receive notice that something is not matching up with an employees papers. Duh!

Poizner/Whitman Debate: Who Are You, Meg?Poizner/Whitman Debate: Who Are You, Meg?

Meg Whitman and Steve Poizner clearly felt the “sense of occasionâ€

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/nov ... y_id=69375

Poizner Slams Meg Whitman for Agreeing with President of Mexico California insurance commissioner Steve Poizner continues to pound Meg Whitman, his opponent in the GOP primary for California's gubernatorial race, for being too soft on immigration. In a new ad, Poizner makes the argument that Whitman, the former CEO of eBay, is the wrong choice for the governor's office because she takes the same position as the president of Mexico on Arizona's controversial new immigration law.


"Do you want a governor who has the same position on illegal immigration as the President of Mexico?" a narrator asks in one of Poizner's latest campaign ads. "Meg Whitman does."


The ad shows Whitman saying, "But as I have said, if that law were to come before me, I would oppose it."


She is speaking in reference to the recently-passed Arizona law that makes it a crime to be in the state illegally. It also requires police officers to question a person about his or her immigration status during a "lawful stop" if there is "reasonable suspicion" that person may be in the country illegally. Opponents of the law say it is likely to result in racial profiling.


Poizner's ad shows Mexican President Felipe Calderon saying to a joint session of the U.S. Congress last week, "I strongly disagree with your recently adopted law in Arizona."


Poizner is aiming to make inroads against Whitman by contrasting their positions on immigration. The latest poll shows Whitman with a 9-point lead over Poizner, though Whitman's lead has shrunk dramatically.


"I support what's going on in Arizona," Poizner says in the ad. "Amnesty is a huge magnet and it's a mistake. As governor, I'm going to take steps to address the problems of illegal immigration once and for all."


While Poizner suggests California's governor should not have the same position on the Arizona law as the president of Mexico, numerous politicians would disagree. President Obama last week said he agreed with Calderon that the law could be applied inappropriately. When Calderon told Congress he disagrees with Arizona's law, numerous congressmen gave him a standing ovation in support. Meanwhile, a number of city officials throughout California are working to cut their economic ties with Arizona in protest of the law.


Update: Whitman earlier this month released her own ad taking a hard stance against "amnesty," but a more recent Whitman ad features former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and focuses on her credentials as a fiscal conservative. http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162- ... 03544.html

Originally Posted by topsecret10

[u]Poizner Slams Meg Whitman for Agreeing with President of Mexico [...]

As my husband would say, Meg Whitman 'is a piece of work.'

Geez, Whitman probably does not even know how to use the voting machines, since it appears that she has never been interested in doing her duty as a citizen....until she decided she wants the title of Governor Whitman.

Poizner is a social liberal...
In 2004 Poizner supported abortion rights. Poizner earned a 100 percent rating from Planned Parenthood. He received this score partly because of his support of government-funded abortion services and the efforts he made to expand the use of the “morning-afterâ€

The question really is did Meg turn her maid in once she admitted she was here illegaly. We know she fired her. But how do we know whether Meg turned her in or not? Exactly what is the law and requirements of a employer once they find an employee is illegal. If an employer turns an employee in for being illegal is it kept confidential. How does ICE handle it?

I am not a huge fan of Meg's, but I have questions on this whole story. I have seen how ICE has handled complaints against illegal immigrants in California. The brush off the non response.

Our ideal candidate would have made sure the employee was arrested and charged for all crimes then deported. Our candidate would have been very vocal about the situation and cared less about the hispanic vote.

The question we have to answer is where do we find this perfect candidate and would a candidate running on this platform get elected?

It is easy for some to say I will not vote for the lesser of the two evils, I just won't vote. In the past I have chosen that road and lived to regret it. How many of us have said why vote, my vote doesn't count anyway. How many of us have voted along party lines not for the person? And recently here in California we have a group of people voting for ethnic groups.

The one thing I do feel is that if I don't vote then I have no right to complain about the results. Not voting is voting for the other side. So I am going to take responsibility for my vote and sit down and make a list of pros and cons for all candidates I will be voting for/against. It's won't be perfect or a perfect candidate, but it will be the best choice I can do.