Duh! Janet Napolitano can’t figure out what to do with Meg Whitman’s illegal housekeeper

View Comments (52)

• When I saw that I couldn't beleive it. It is obvious that as an illegal citizen who stole a social she needs to be deported. On one hand she is supposedly doing more than Bush ever did in deporting people, on the other hand she cannot seem to have the authority to deal with just ONE individual? What?

  Later Miller compared her to Frank Luntz (sp?) because they share a similar haircut I loled.

  • Hey, at least she is consistent. Consistently clueless.

• wow pericat! that's quite a passionate and lengthy response! not sure how you can surmise i'm "twisted" and the myriad of other assertions you've put forth from one statement, but... ok. personally, i don't want the secretary of homeland security spending time on an illegal housekeeper to meg whitman when we have far greater threats to our country. makes sense to me. hopefully to you as well.

  to address meg whitman... she knew. she knew because she was approached by her housekeeper who asked for help becoming legal. the whitmans actually knew as early as 2003 when they were directly contacted by the SS Administration.
  i never said i was liberal. you seem to think so. i'm just tired of the hypocrites and meg whitman is exactly that! research her comments on van jones... she loved him till he became unpopular. there are many examples of meg whitman talking out of both sides of her mouth.

• classic! we want the secretary of homeland security to spend her time on someone who poses zero threat to homeland security. are you kidding me? oddly no one on this thread seems to be focusing on meg whitman, the candidate for california governor, who has employed this woman, while knowing she was illegal... yet speaks firmly against those who employ illegal aliens.

  • Excuse me... all points that at the time she was hired the Whitmans did not know. It could be argued that at some point they knew and then fired her before she decided to run or because she asked for help. The Whitmas didnt have to help her because she had put them in a very difficult position. SO FAR all evidence shows that she at least didn't know right before any disclosure. Overall if her husband knew he either sheltered her of it or chooses to shelter her of it now, so unless something else pops up or changes NO ONE can say with certainty based on the FACTUAL evidence that Meg Whitman knew at any point that she was illegal before, during and right after that lady's disclosure. Being lied to for 9 years she is lucky that the Whitmans didn't call ICE. Which is exactly what I would have done without blinking an eye. The focus then should be on the lady, because SHE was the one that broke every single law the moment she step foot into this country THEN had the gall to complain of mistreatment after being paid 23 bucks an hour and getting benefits from the Whitman's... shoot my first job I didnt even see half of that. Her first job she gets paid 23 bucks with benefits for 9 FREAKING years?! Enough money to send home to family and friends and create a nice little nest egg for herself and then Allred finds her at the commission of who knows who and uses her to minimize Whitman. Whitman is right whatever Diaz is getting now it will end by November 2nd. I don't thin it will be worth it. In any case she deserves to be deported. She pretty much stole 23 dollars and hour with benefits for 9 freaking years from a legal citizen to this country.

    • hey kimmyqueen... without revealing to much info, i live close to the whitmans... and to add, i've had the same housekeeper for nearly 20 years... we, as a family love and respect her. if she came to us and said she was illegal, i would do anything i could to make her legal. when you have heart, the person who enters your home everyday and helps run your life becomes part of your life and family. if they don't... well then you're just indifferent... that said, i could not imagine firing someone whose been part of our life for years because of paper work... our relationship has been about respect, human decency and friendship.

      • First of all... people like you who claim greatness and do not put up any facts I say put up or shut up. If indeed you live near the Whitmans and all of that put up an address and a name. Information that can be verified. Without it such assertions reads of lies trying to legitimize your point of view which is desperate.
        In any case, after 9 or 20 years if a person didn't take the time to legitimize their situation without incuring fees or problems for their employers then I have to wonder if their "friendship" and "respect" for their employers is real. Once Mr. Whitman gave her the paperwork years ago, that was the point where she had to do one of three things: Tell them truth and ask for help ... then it is up to them to do so or not. In the end, if they do not want to help her and send her packing that is their prerogative AFTER ALL an ILLEGAL person who lied their way into their home, whose background they can no longer trust is in their midst it can cause them problems that they UNFORSAW because they NEVER PLANNED TO HAVE AN ILLEGAL PERSON in the house in the first place. It doesn't make them unfeeling it makes them practical and again it goes back to trust. How is it possible to trust a person that lies to you twice... once after coming into the hosue and again when a paper that presented an incongruency was left in her care... and it proves it by her vengeful attitude now that they were right in not helping her. If she was truly a friend and really cared for them she would have not put them in that situation. She would have left the moment the paper came.

        The second thing that she could have done is simply leave and not put her employer in any peril if she was a decent human being.

        The third thing that she could have done is hire an attorney (without telling the employers or not) and fix the situation the best way she could. Many illegals do that. They try to make a bad situation better by hiring an immigration attorney and fixing the situation if it means leaving the employer since she lied and manipulated her way into a home, then fine.

        The thing here is that you are putting the burden on the Whitmans when they did EVERYTHING right. They specifically wanted someone legal, they trusted the company they used to get her, they didnt hire her off the streets, they trusted that what she said was true, they paid her HANDSOMELY well, they trusted her with their home and children, they gave her benefits, they gave her a home. The lies were on Diaz's part, the misconduct was on her part. Did she really expect to receive "respect" from the family that harbor her all this time trusting her with their lives while all the time she was lying?

        So you think that the reward of lying and putting them in an uncompromised position is getting a free residency? Ridiculous.

  • You really are twisted, aren't you.

    What exactly was she supposed to do? The woman had a driver's license. She had a social security card. This is legal identification, and the I9 form specifically says so, and that you cannot discriminate if they supply these. The employment agency also accepted her documentation. In fact, why isn't Whitman able to sue them? Because they were in compliance with the law, too. When the letter that the moron Allred waves around came, it said that there was a discrepancy with the number, Nicky was to take care of it, and THE WHITMAN'S WERE NOT TO TAKE ANY KIND OF EMPLOYMENT ACTION BECAUSE OF THE LETTER. That there was your entire stupid case -- that she was supposed to break the law and fire her for that.

    Weren't you paying attention? Or were you maybe hoping to obfuscate the issue with a classist attack on Whitman? Or are you just stupid? Maybe you just want it so bad that you'll believe anything that serves your purpose?

    Having been taken advantage of by illegal aliens before*, I have proof that as long as our government will not enforce their immigration/fraud laws, there is no way anyone can avoid inadvertently hiring illegals doing illegal things like supplying false identification. They can't even simply refuse to hire spanish-speakers (openly).

    So your sorry-assed attempt at dirty politics, and your subsequent attempt at trying her in the press in order to get Moonbeam in office simply is fail through and through. Every single illegal alien with an IQ over 40 (and their voting relatives) knows that Nicky is doing exactly the same thing as they do/have done, and if any prosecutions against Whitman succeed, they are all going to get thrown out of the country via employment discrimination. Even/especially the spanish speaking people here legally will be hurting because of it.

    The way future hiring will go is that if the person has a spanish accent, problems will be found with their application until they go away. Employers will go without rather than hire a potential illegal. In a sense, you idiot libs are providing the only effective method (albeit blatantly discriminatory) of dealing with illegal immigration in the absence of federal enforcement -- eliminate the jobs for spanish speakers. Way to go, ace. Your answer to your political problem with your basically unelectable candidate is to mandate subtle workplace discrimination and eliminate the spanish language from the US culture. I thought you were courting hispanics for your electorate?

    *false identification/false insurance papers. If ever I get hit by a vanload of hispanics in the future, I will call the cops and hold them until the insurance claim is submitted and accepted, or a cash payment happens.

    • wow pericat! that’s quite a passionate and lengthy response! not sure how you can surmise i’m “twisted” and the myriad of other assertions you’ve put forth from one statement, but… ok. personally, i don’t want the secretary of homeland security spending time on an illegal housekeeper to meg whitman when we have far greater threats to our country. makes sense to me. hopefully to you as well.

      to address meg whitman… she knew. she knew because she was approached by her housekeeper who asked for help becoming legal. the whitmans actually knew as early as 2003 when they were directly contacted by the SS Administration.
      i never said i was liberal. you seem to think so. i’m just tired of the hypocrites and meg whitman is exactly that! research her comments on van jones… she loved him till he became unpopular. there are many examples of meg whitman talking out of both sides of her mouth.

      • You know, you have said that you are conservative before. I do not believe that is the case.

        If you were conservative, the salient point with Whitman is how the primary system failed, and we have two unqualified candidates, Whitman being demonstrably less unqualified than Brown, but Whitman is coming under hypocrisy attacks, while Brown gets away with his proven hypocrisy, incompetence, malfeasance, and outright stupidity..

        However, I do believe you are in marketing, and you are sophisticated enough to play the "reasonable guy" bit, while derailing discussions to off-topic points. As you well know, an 'on message' point would not resurrect negative bits from Whitman's campaign, but instead be actively seeking better solutions. If you are not a paid shill for democrats, you are acting as their operative, and actively so. I've seen your posts.

        I know full well that Meg Whitman does not represent Conservative or Republican interests as well as I would like. However, it is kind of like the classic Beavis & Butthead conundrum -- the question is not which one is smarter, but instead, which one is less stupid. That would be Whitman, hands down.

        The downside to you personally in this discussion is that the points raised offend you enough that you break character far too soon to be an effective troll. That is why I do not believe your "reasonable guy" bit. You must learn patience, young sithling. Since this ID is burned, you should go build a new one. As far as being able to affect opinion before an election, you're done, so might as well get started on '12 -- Barack will need all the help he can get..

        If I needed a somewhat sleazy but *very* good marketer, I do know where to find one now, though.

        • you have me all wrong pericat. i deal in truth. i am no brown fan either. however i find meg whitman to be the lesser. granted it's hard to find a honest politician, but i find it interesting that a person would spend $160ML to be our governor. if she was genuinely concerned about the well being of california, she'd donate the money to our education instead of using it to advance her agenda. what i think everyone is missing is that if she's able to be governor, she's able to be president and that's her ambition. this is just a stepping stone. i a governor who's interested in fixing california, not being president. all your other crap about who i am is just that... crap. thanks for the psycho analysis though.

      • She fired the housekeeper as soon as she asked for help in becoming legal. That's what she should have done.

        The Whitmans also did exactly what they should have done legally when they were notified by Social Security. Mr. Whitman instructed the housekeeper to take care of it. What more did you want him to do? He was under the assumption she was legal because she (and the employment agency) both said she was legal.

        Of course, you know these things to be true, but you don't want to admit it because it screws up your liberal worldview.

    • donavan having already been slapped across the face rather handily, may I submit an answer to first part of the comment; No, she shouldn't spend time on such trivial things. The law should be upheld without much extraneous consideration as having to go to the top of the department. She should have her ass tossed forthwith across the border whence she came. In fact homeland security has at its helm a sycophant of the first order. She serves as a tool of the administration to publicize the 'plight' of the poor abused and misunderstood ILLEGAL aliens. So the only kidding here is of yourself.

      • thanks dean for the submission... may i also submit that the our illegal immigration laws have seen an increase in enforcement since janet nopalitano has been in office. far greater than under the bush administrations tom ridge and micheal chertoff. so... not sure why you have all this anger toward our current secretary of homeland security, but i hope this anger was just as forceful toward the 2 preceding her...

        • Anger? Hardly. The department should not have been created in the first place. My displeasure with the government has increased with every administration since Reagan. That Napolitano is merely a figurehead for a dysfunctional bureau, one that has done nothing to actually secure the homeland, and only serves the current president's desire to keep the illegals flowing into the country while being able to state that the deportations are at an all time high is sadly comical. So it is not anger you mistakenly sense. It sadness caused by the rapid decline of this nation at the hands of an increasingly destructive government, one whose primary tool is the media which it deftly utilizes to keep people misinformed and distracted.

          Remember when she suggested that the system works when the Dutch person subdued the underwear bomber? Did she design that into the system, or was that one of her underlings?

        • since reagan? are you including reagan? because i have a lot to say about reagon.

          just to educate you: illegal immigration has seen a decline not increase. so.. we have an increase in deportation and a decrease in illegal immigration since obama has been in office... not sure what the underwear bomber has to do with immigration... but ok.

        • Illegal immigration (excuse me, but isn't the left supposed to call it "undocumented" immigration) is in decline for two reasons: (1) the economy sucks and there are fewer jobs for illegal immigrants, and (2) Arizona's illegal alien law scared the hell out of the illegals and they've headed back to Mexico.

          Of course, Point #1 above is as a result of Obama's economic policies, so I guess we can give him partial credit for the decline.

        • i'm able to connect dots dean... thanks. let's try and stay focused. the premise of this entire post was to address why the secretary of homeland security isn't taking time to assure that meg whitmans housekeeper is deported. how the underwear bomber is connected to all this is beyond me

        • I guess you could say that in every pile of shit, there is a bright side, and we call that a liberal.

        • Sorry if you're unable to connect the dots there pal. Janet Napolitano commented on her magnificent system and its glorious success in keeping the people of America safe by her employing foreign travelers to safeguard airliners. so this tidbit is about her and DHS, not about the other lies you wish to spew regarding immigration.

          You have a lot to say about everything. The rest of your inability displayed here serves to render anything you might suggest as educational is merely an insult. Take your complaints to the proper department.

• secure the border. make e-verify the law and deport this woman at all cost. she is rubbing our noses in it.

• In her own words: "When it comes to immigration, I took an oath as Secretary of Homeland Security to secure the nation by enforcing the law and managing legal flows across the border." from 'Prepared Remarks by Secretary Napolitano on Immigration Reform at the Center for American Progress'

  What part of ' enforcing the law' is she now so ambivalent about - it seems pretty clear to me.

  http://www.dhs.gov/ynews/speeches/sp_1258123461050.shtm

  • [nessman]"Enforce. An act or instance of enforcement. Something enforced."[/nessman]

    The blood of the rutabaga is on your hands, pal.

• When speaking about Janet you are talking about a women who needs to use flash cards to tell the difference between her ass and her elbow.

  The absolute worst part of this administration and it's collection of clowns is that they have the audacity to brag about what a great job they are doing.

  • No, the worst part is that the average libtard on the street *believes* it. Even when the story changes.

• pardon me if I've said this before but I think Janet Napolitano and Janet Reno were separated at birth -- incompetent, clueless and waaaaay over their head.

  • and a penis. Don't forget the penis!

  • After reading one of Judge Napolitano's book about her, I'd say Janet Reno is more pure misanthropic evil. So far, Janet Napolitano is an incompetent buffoon, but I haven't seen the miscarriage of justice that Reno pulled. Like the joke goes, though, give it time.

• Okay, wait, did I miss something here???
  She says "we do not have an answer to that question yet." Then goes on to say that they have deported more illegal aliens over the last 17 months then ever before. Notice how she specifies those with criminal records or have done something illegal.
  I thought entering the USA covertly and working for nine years with a fake Social Security number was a crime and illegal so why the himmming and hawwing. Perhaps they know that if they deport this illegal then it will take all the heat off of Meg Whitman who is a republican. They are going to try to imply, as they already have, that Meg Whitman was complicit in the crime to score political points.
  What a bunch of bull!

  • You know, in terms of the social security fraud, false social security numbers are pathetically easy to detect.

    If the illegal has what passes for a valid number, then it either matches another person, and needs to be investigated based upon a 99.999% chance that the wages paid are coming from entirely different areas of the country, or if the number is unassigned, needs to be investigated. I mean, come on -- I get the letters from the SSA saying how much I've paid in. Surely even if the SSA were unable to track by zip code, income 'piggybacked' onto another's would be obvious.

    Further, they have the social security number owner's date of birth -- so if the number from someone either retired or underage has full time income, it must be investigated.

    Based upon that, the only people in the country illegally who can get work would have to be either business owners or day laborers.

    So, in point of fact, if the Social Security Administration was truly doing their job, we'd have no immigration problem. Nine years of having money paid to the SSA from an invalid source is gross dereliction of duty, and should have REAL employment consequences for the people at the SSA.

• Diaz should get a Soap Opera award and Allred a Producer's award - their 'Press conference' was classic theatre with the tears and sobbing, it was beautiful. Then deport them both.

• Big Sis is a joke, Diaz needs to get in the back of the white van with green letters and head south.

  • On a more serious note, No, she needs to do time first.

    She committed perjury and her lawyer admitted it, which is basically the same as her confessing it, unless she wants to press charges against Allred for it, claiming incompetence/malfeasance on the part of Allred. I think she has a case there, and possibly something actionable for damages, too. We are all guaranteed a fair trial (that is, until the statists like Obama get an end put to that -- pretty sure that he doesn't want conservatives to have fair trials going by his track record), and her lawyer prejudicing her fair trial for political gain unrelated to her client's needs caused real damage to her client.

    With a little due diligence and appropriate legal action/time served, the *next* illegal with a bright idea on how they can tamper with an US election will think twice. If the CIS will not enforce the law in an open and shut case like this, then their decision makers need to go to prison, too. (Since this happened in the context of meddling with an election, the offense is particularly egregious -- even if you could believe for a minute that Moonbeam had nothing to do with it, the timing provides the appearance of impropriety.)

    If they do not, they have opened up an entirely new chapter in lawfare, and that kind of negligence has to be dealt with, too. It's bad enough that the incompetent judge in the Arizona law case allowed the amicus brief from Mexico -- that should have been put down with extreme force. We do not enforce Mexican law here, and Mexico is most assuredly NOT a 'friend of the court' in the US. We enforce US law. Now, the ACLU has standing (though that is debateable -- they'd have to prove harm could happen, and that would be very hard, given the way the law was written), and they have the right to file amicus briefs. If it were me as the judge, I'd probably do something brown to it and hand it back to the ACLU.

    Allowing Mexico to meddle in our laws was a violation of our sovereignty, and the judge should have been removed promptly after allowing an amicus brief from a foreign nation to become part of the case. The accountability for this should have gone all the way up to Obama. Heads should have rolled for that. Even if they had the 'right' to file such a brief, the judge should have considered the implications of bias.

    That there was no accountability speaks volumes regarding the incompetence of this administration and the ignorance/sheer bias in our press for not bringing it to light. It just gets sleazier in this case.

    • It's not incompetence. All of it is deliberately planned.

      Viva La Raza, and all that tripe.

    • This illegal alien also committed fraud and lied , when getting a California drivers licence . Committed fraud and lied , when getting a Social Security number . committed fraud and lied , when applying for employment to the employment agency , that Meg Whitman utilized . If I was Meg Whitman , I would hold the employment agency accountable

      • Yeah, but the way the law's written, an employer can't do that. They are supposed to make a best effort, and you'll find that the agency complied with the law. The entire onus for enforcing the law is upon Obama and his merry gang of idiots, and we all *know* exactly how far he will go in enforcing the laws that are inconvenient to his agenda.

        After all, if he can ignore the entire f*cking Constitution, what's a few laws (especially administrative law)?