California gubernatorial candidate Whitman and her maid

[SivaGanesha 2]

So it seems the Whitman campaign has provided documents that allege her maid Nicky Diaz lied about her status in the USA:

Meg Whitman - Nicky Diaz employment docs

Now, a five minute search on the Internet shows that the social security number used by Nicky Diaz (or whatever her name is)--572 49 xxxx--was issued in California in 1978. Yet she claims to have lived in Mexico until 1990 on the forms.

Ie it's not exactly rocket science to figure out that something about this paperwork doesn't add up. And Whitman is a former Silicon Valley CEO--ie she is someone who should know her way around the Web. If I could figure out that something isn't right in "Diaz"' background in 5 minutes, it shouldn't have taken Whitman 9 years.

And another thing--why is "Diaz" still rattling around California more than a year after she was busted? Why hasn't she been sent back from whence she came yet?

"It's hard to have fun at 4-way unless your whole team gets down to the ground safely to do it again!"--Northern California Skydiving League re USPA Safety Day, March 8, 2014

[turtlespeed 226]

Quote

So it seems the Whitman campaign has provided documents that allege her maid Nicky Diaz lied about her status in the USA:

Meg Whitman - Nicky Diaz employment docs

Now, a five minute search on the Internet shows that the social security number used by Nicky Diaz (or whatever her name is)--572 49 xxxx--was issued in California in 1978. Yet she claims to have lived in Mexico until 1990 on the forms.

Ie it's not exactly rocket science to figure out that something about this paperwork doesn't add up. And Whitman is a former Silicon Valley CEO--ie she is someone who should know her way around the Web. If I could figure out that something isn't right in "Diaz"' background in 5 minutes, it shouldn't have taken Whitman 9 years.

And another thing--why is "Diaz" still rattling around California more than a year after she was busted? Why hasn't she been sent back from whence she came yet?

Because illegal isn't illegal even when it's illegal.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[funjumper101 15]

Quote

Because illegal isn't illegal even when it's illegal.

Today's challenge to ignorant right wing conservatives is -

What criminal law has been broken when a person enters the USA and establishes residence without the proper documentation?

Note - this is a trick question as it requires one to know the difference between civil and criminal law. A larger hint towards the correct answer cannot be provided.

It will be interesting to see how many of the BRILLIANT RWCs come up with the correct answer to the question.

[BIGUN 1,488]

There are situations that occur:

You hire an Contractor/Agency (which one can assume from the form) and give them the skillset criteria and they narrow the field of applicants to interview, you short-list a couple to interview again to narrow it down to one.

You engage the contractor to have the subcontractor perform the duties and the Contractor is supposed to do the E-verify, Background Check, Drug & Alcohol tests, etc.

Contractor gets greedy and just takes whomever off the street with whatever documentation they bring and then verbally or in writing affirms to the Customer that the proper background checks were performed - when they were not.

While we "may" banter about Oklahoma and Arizona "Anti-Immigration Laws," one thing they have done is change contractual clauses with subcontractors to include documentation of E-verify, Background Checks, Drug & Alcohol Test clinic written affirmations ( A Panel X was performed on so and so)... along with clauses for "Costs of Defense," and other penalty clauses.

PS... Not too many illegal questions on the original application, huh? I'm thinking this personnel agency was a POS.

Nobody has time to listen; because they're desperately chasing the need of being heard.

[BIGUN 1,488]

Under Title 8 Section 1325 of the U.S. Code, "Improper Entry by Alien," any citizen of any country other than the United States who:

* Enters or attempts to enter the United States at any time or place other than as designated by immigration officers; or
* Eludes examination or inspection by immigration officers; or
* Attempts to enter or obtains entry to the United States by a willfully false or misleading representation or the willful concealment of a material fact;

has committed a federal crime.

Violations are punishable by criminal fines and imprisonment for up to six months. Repeat offenses can bring up to two years in prison. Additional civil fines may be imposed at the discretion of immigration judges, but civil fines do not negate the criminal sanctions or nature of the offense.

Nobody has time to listen; because they're desperately chasing the need of being heard.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Because illegal isn't illegal even when it's illegal.

Today's challenge to ignorant right wing conservatives is -

What criminal law has been broken when a person enters the USA and establishes residence without the proper documentation?

Note - this is a trick question as it requires one to know the difference between civil and criminal law. A larger hint towards the correct answer cannot be provided.

It will be interesting to see how many of the BRILLIANT RWCs come up with the correct answer to the question.

Illegal entry is, by definition, illegal whether it's a criminal law or civil law (such as 8 USC 1325) being broken.

Nice attempt at a misdirect, though.j

Today's challenge to ignorant left wing liberals is -

Realizing that illegality isn't solely a matter of breaking criminal law.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[billvon 3,120]

>And another thing--why is "Diaz" still rattling around California more than a
>year after she was busted?

From Meg Whitman: "I considered Nicky a friend and a part of our extended family."

It's easy to call the INS on _other_ people's friends and family.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

>And another thing--why is "Diaz" still rattling around California more than a
>year after she was busted?

From Meg Whitman: "I considered Nicky a friend and a part of our extended family."

It's easy to call the INS on _other_ people's friends and family.

Cali is one of the 'sanctuary states' as well, aren't they?

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[SivaGanesha 2]

Quote

What criminal law has been broken when a person enters the USA and establishes residence without the proper documentation?

If she entered without inspection the appropriate crime is:

Improper entry: 8 U.S.C. § 1325(a)

However, I don't think we know for sure if she entered without inspection. She could have had a valid visa at one time and overstayed, which is a civil but not a criminal matter.

In a criminal improper entry case, the burden would be on the government to prove beyond a reasonable doubt she entered illegally, not on her to prove that she did enter legally. I doubt if the government has sufficiently thorough records dating back 20 years to make such a case convincingly, although databases have become a lot more accurate since 9/11.

There is also the issue of perjury if she lied on her I-9 form, which is also criminal.

With regard to her claimed entry in 1990 or her employment in 2000, the statute of limitations has probably expired on any criminal liability--so I think such a discussion is beating a dead horse. However, if she has been hired illegally elsewhere more recently, and committed new perjury, then she could still be liable. We don't know what she was doing between June 2009 and now, so it is hard to know whether she should face perjury charges for recent criminal acts.

The real issue here, though, is that having admitted being in the country illegally, she should face civil removal (deportation) proceedings. It is possible that, under the law, she might qualify to stay because she has US citizen children and has been here a long time--however she would need to demonstrate extreme hardship to her family to be able to stay, and the bar is hard to meet.

Had she been prosecuted for her crimes before the statute of limitations expired, and before she qualified for cancellation of removal, she would have had no leg to stand on in terms of being able to stay. We have to enforce immigration law soon after illegal aliens enter or overstay--so that they don't get a chance to get a toehold in the country.

"It's hard to have fun at 4-way unless your whole team gets down to the ground safely to do it again!"--Northern California Skydiving League re USPA Safety Day, March 8, 2014

[SivaGanesha 2]

Quote

From Meg Whitman: "I considered Nicky a friend and a part of our extended family."

Then the question is why Whitman didn't retain an immigration attorney to sponsor Nicky for a green card when approached to do so, based on her employment.

"It's hard to have fun at 4-way unless your whole team gets down to the ground safely to do it again!"--Northern California Skydiving League re USPA Safety Day, March 8, 2014

[funjumper101 15]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Because illegal isn't illegal even when it's illegal.

Today's challenge to ignorant right wing conservatives is -

What criminal law has been broken when a person enters the USA and establishes residence without the proper documentation?

Note - this is a trick question as it requires one to know the difference between civil and criminal law. A larger hint towards the correct answer cannot be provided.

It will be interesting to see how many of the BRILLIANT RWCs come up with the correct answer to the question.

Illegal entry is, by definition, illegal whether it's a criminal law or civil law (such as 8 USC 1325) being broken.

Nice attempt at a misdirect, though.j

Today's challenge to ignorant left wing liberals is -

Realizing that illegality isn't solely a matter of breaking criminal law.

Ignorant RWCs can't tell the difference betwen right and wrong, and the difference between facts and falsehoods, much less civil and criminal offenses.

Facts matter. The facts are that illegal immigrants have committed civil violations, not criminal violations. To anyone with a remote understanding of the law, that is a huge distinction.

RWCs claim to belive in law and order, when it comes to issues important to radio entertainers and Faux News. RWCs have ZERO concern when it comes to the crimes of GWB, Cheney, Woo, and the whole criminal conspiracy that was ShrubCo.

In other words, RWCs have NO standing when it comes to complaints about illegal activities. You actively engage in them, and support and defend the most egregious criminals of this century.

I don't understand why RWCs HATE this country so much. If you actually cared you would try to do something about the crimes, like quit voting for the scumbags.

[SivaGanesha 2]

Quote

Facts matter. The facts are that illegal immigrants have committed civil violations, not criminal violations. To anyone with a remote understanding of the law, that is a huge distinction.

Improper Entry and Perjury are definitely criminal, not civil, matters.

Removal (deportation) proceedings are, OTOH, civil matters.

It is true that illegal immigrants are usually not charged criminally unless they've committed some crime not directly related to their illegal status. But the government definitely has the option to charge most illegals criminally if the need arises.

"It's hard to have fun at 4-way unless your whole team gets down to the ground safely to do it again!"--Northern California Skydiving League re USPA Safety Day, March 8, 2014

[billvon 3,120]

>Then the question is why Whitman didn't retain an immigration attorney to
>sponsor Nicky for a green card when approached to do so, based on her
>employment.

Per Diaz, when Whitman found out, she told her "Don't say anything to my children, I will tell them you already have a new job and that you want to go to school. And from now on, you don't know me and I don't know you. You have never seen me and I have never seen you. Do you understand me?"

If she had political aspirations at that point, she might have seen this as a potential liability, and wanted the problem to "go away."

[SivaGanesha 2]

Quote

Per Diaz, when Whitman found out, she told her "Don't say anything to my children, I will tell them you already have a new job and that you want to go to school. And from now on, you don't know me and I don't know you. You have never seen me and I have never seen you. Do you understand me?"

If she had political aspirations at that point, she might have seen this as a potential liability, and wanted the problem to "go away."

Wow. With friends like that, who needs enemies?

"It's hard to have fun at 4-way unless your whole team gets down to the ground safely to do it again!"--Northern California Skydiving League re USPA Safety Day, March 8, 2014

[skipbelt 0]

an enemy would have done everything possible to assure deportation !
libs are big women's liberation advocates , for liberal women , the conservatives are torn down by any means necessary !

[BIGUN 1,488]

Quote

Ignorant RWCs can't tell the difference betwen right and wrong, and the difference between facts and falsehoods, much less civil and criminal offenses.

Facts matter. The facts are that illegal immigrants have committed civil violations, not criminal violations. To anyone with a remote understanding of the law, that is a huge distinction.

RWCs claim to belive in law and order, when it comes to issues important to radio entertainers and Faux News. RWCs have ZERO concern when it comes to the crimes of GWB, Cheney, Woo, and the whole criminal conspiracy that was ShrubCo.

In other words, RWCs have NO standing when it comes to complaints about illegal activities. You actively engage in them, and support and defend the most egregious criminals of this century.

I don't understand why RWCs HATE this country so much. If you actually cared you would try to do something about the crimes, like quit voting for the scumbags.

Wow. Somebody needs a hug. I think its fairly safe to say that both sides have their share of scumbags.

Nobody has time to listen; because they're desperately chasing the need of being heard.

[masterrig 1]

I think, she knew when she hired the woman she was 'illegal'. If the truth be known, she's not the only politician who hires or has hired illegals. I think too, Whitman should be charged and fined severely for hiring an illegal. As far as I know, there is no statute of limitations on illegal aliens. Diaz should be sent-back to Mexico and Whitman should face charges. She figured, because she's a big-shot billionaire, she could get away with it.


Chuck

[turtlespeed 226]

Quote

I think, she knew when she hired the woman she was 'illegal'. If the truth be known, she's not the only politician who hires or has hired illegals. I think too, Whitman should be charged and fined severely for hiring an illegal. As far as I know, there is no statute of limitations on illegal aliens. Diaz should be sent-back to Mexico and Whitman should face charges. She figured, because she's a big-shot billionaire, she could get away with it.


Chuck

100% agree.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[Amazon 7]

Quote

I think, she knew when she hired the woman she was 'illegal'. If the truth be known, she's not the only politician who hires or has hired illegals. I think too, Whitman should be charged and fined severely for hiring an illegal. As far as I know, there is no statute of limitations on illegal aliens. Diaz should be sent-back to Mexico and Whitman should face charges. She figured, because she's a big-shot billionaire, she could get away with it.


Chuck

But Chuck... they are the special people. In our capitalist system... they are the ones who matter. Its what everyone is supposed to be aspiring to be. People like Whitman are what America is all about. The laws and justice system is for sale, and they can buy all the justice they want or need.

[skipbelt 0]

if whitman paid her 23$ / hour , she wouldn't need an illegal , alot of cfi's don't make that !

[Amazon 7]

Quote

if whitman paid her 23$ / hour , she wouldn't need an illegal , alot of cfi's don't make that !

People need to pay what the market will bear. People need to work for what the market will pay!!!! If you can find someone for $10 an hour willing to do the work.. great.

If it costs more... then you need to pony up..

This goes across the board.

REMOVE those who are illegal.. PERIOD

THere are a LOT of people in this country who are illegal and are certainly taking jobs that are NOT minimum wage and are not farm labor.

American jobs need to be done by Americans first and formost.

People who hire illegal workers need to be penalized for breaking FEDERAL LAWS.
I consider this a National Security issue for this country.

[masterrig 1]

Quote

Quote

I think, she knew when she hired the woman she was 'illegal'. If the truth be known, she's not the only politician who hires or has hired illegals. I think too, Whitman should be charged and fined severely for hiring an illegal. As far as I know, there is no statute of limitations on illegal aliens. Diaz should be sent-back to Mexico and Whitman should face charges. She figured, because she's a big-shot billionaire, she could get away with it.


Chuck

But Chuck... they are the special people. In our capitalist system... they are the ones who matter. Its what everyone is supposed to be aspiring to be. People like Whitman are what America is all about. The laws and justice system is for sale, and they can buy all the justice they want or need.

I'd be willing to bet the farm, that more politicians have illegals in their employ as we speak. Of course, none of them are aware they are illegal... yeah, right!
I agree 100%, if you have the money, any politician or anyone else in power can be bought. As for Whitman, it wouldn't surprise me one bit if she wound-up the next governor of California. After all, she's helping some poor unfortunate by hiring her. We cater so much to illegals in this country and us tax payers foot the bill. B.S.!!!


Chuck

[skipbelt 0]

to paraphrase seinfeld,
that sounds about right ,
amazon being amazin' , again !

[skipbelt 0]

maybe meg and/or nicky aren't the problem !
http://legalinsurrection.blogspot.com/2010/09/why-isnt-left-screaming-at-gloria.html

[masterrig 1]

They are part of the problem. Some folks think, because they have a lot of money, they are above the law and everyone else. They knew what they were doing and are now, trying to weasel out. Typical for anyone who gets caught doing wrong.


Chuck