This entry was posted on October 1, 2010 at 7:06 am and is filed under Free For All. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
Gloria Allred was on the Last Word last night and said she has more documents to prove her clients case but is not going to release them; unless Whitman lies again. It puts Whitman in a very tough spot.
Meg Whitman has screwed up this issue about as bad a a politician can. She had a pretty good case until she lied and tried to cover it up. Now whatever she says is suspect. And trying to blame it on the Brown campaign, without any evidence, just makes it worse.
She needs to come clean and just take her lumps which is what she should have done in the first place.
So I finally looked at the O’Keefe story on Mediaite, after seeing Abby Boudreax(?) on CNN. My main thought was ”He thought that woman would seduce him?” In what delusional-male-universe? Dude has watched too-damn-many movies where the nerd/fat-guy gets the hot chick. Too. Damn many.
When Brent Bozell calls you sick and disgusting, it’s time to go home.
Anyone want to guess how many people show for Ed’s ‘One Nation’ march tomorrow.
Lets assume a count of around 300,000 for Beck’s rally; as that seemed to be the number most non-partisan observers arrived at. Everyone is going to give different counts for Ed’s event so I think the only fare way to judge it will be comparing the aeriel photos of each rally and judging the size by that rational as well as an average of non-partisan numbers estimates.
The actual number won’t matter much to we partisans, left & right, as Ed said he could match Beck so that will be the standard that matters.If the photos show the crowd about the same size or larger Ed win’s; if it’s smaller Beck takes bragging rights.
The weather looks great so that can’t be used as an excuse for low turnout.
Now Ed said he could get 300,000, to match Becks march but I just don’t think that’s possible. I can see a legitimate number of 150,000-200,000 showing up because the unions are behind this and DC is a liberal city so there will be lots of locals.
Fritz… I’m unaware… how did Whitman “screw up” the story? In everything I’ve seen, she’s seemed pretty convincing. What’s different?
And isn’t that political blackmail? Allred says, “IF she does XYZ, then I’ll release all this stuff I’ve got.” It makes the audience believe something that may or may not be true (that there is more evidence), and (if there is) threatens Whitman to do the bidding of Allred. No part of that sounds like a good thing.
Whitmam originally denied there was a letter; then said the maid must have stolen it. When Allred produced the letter with a hand written note signed by her husband they blamed the whole thing on the Brown campaign; without any evidence. Today she admitted she got the letter.
She should have said we got the letter and passed it on tho the maid to deal with. This is not believable of course, but it at least is defensible enough to satisfy some.
Allred was very smart in that she said she would only release the letter if Whitman lied which she did. Now Whitman can legitimately called a liar as well as a hypocrite.
If Whitman would have come completely clean at the first hint of this story she would have taken a hit for a few days but it would be history by now. Now this could sink her campaign.
MSNBC’s new dayside format starts Monday. They just revealed the name of the two hour block with Chris Jansing and Richard Lui. It’s called…hold on to your hats…”Jansing and Company”. No I’m not kidding. Sounds like a syndicated morning show name to me. And CNN Observations noted that Robin Meade’s old show was called Robin and Company, so not only do I think the name is weak but not very original.
Ed’s rally: depends on how well the unions organize. How much are they willing to spend to send people to the rally? Will they hire outsiders to attend like they hire people to protest?
“Ed’s rally: depends on how well the unions organize. How much are they willing to spend to send people to the rally? Will they hire outsiders to attend like they hire people to protest?”
I agree it depends a lot on the union organizational skills and they will help provide transportation to the rally although not to the scale the Tea Parties did for Beck.
As to paying the attendees that sounds like pure spin to cover your butt in case Ed has a huge rally. That (paying attendees) is not going to happen because it doesn’t make any sense ( very poor use of scarce union funds).
BTW, I didn’t see a number in your comment which tells me you think he’ll get a big crowd on Saturday.
I agree with Fritz that Whitman should have just dealt with the reality of her situation. A billionaire calling a maid a liar, then blaming the whole thing on her opponent, is lame. Gloria Allred is not the most sympathetic figure in the world; Whitman still would have been damaged, but she could have marginalized Allred.
I have no idea how many he’ll get & I don’t really care. I imagine it will be a lot because unions have a lot of members. Also, the hatred for Beck should bring out people who don’t want Ed to be embarrassed. Beck’s rally was non-political and it’s amazing he could get that many people to show up. As for paying people I was referring to this: http://www.breitbart.tv/daily-show-exposes-non-union-protesters-on-picket-line/
More on poor Ricky Sanchez over on Mediate. Looks like Ricky Ticky has said some Tacky things about CNN. Guessin he will now have more time to have a beer or 12.
Steve Do you know something we don’t or are you just showing your displeasure for RS?
On Jansing & Company: Isn’t that a bit of a putdown of Richard Lui who they just picked up from CNN. He can’t be very happy about his name not being in the title alongside Jansing’s. Not a good way to start a team effort.
Looks like ‘The Last Word’ will only be on Mon.-Thur. with the regular Doc Block on Friday. I asked ‘tongue in cheek’ awhile back if this might occur so color me shocked that it actually is happening. It doesn’t show a lot of confidence in O’Donnell’s show by the network.
I just listened to the audio of Sanchez’s radio interview – it sounds like he is trying to explain getting taunted for being a general goofball by claiming that race is behind it. Nothing could be further from the truth – Stewart spends far more time on other cable personalities. I don’t know if he is correct re: discrimination in the workplace, but I don’t see how he is being held down.
And the “CNN is run by Jews” thing will be his undoing.
First two new doomed-to-fail primetime shows are announced, then Jon Klein is out, then Cooper gets a daytime show, and now Rick Sanchez goes off the reservation? CNN=Politics? No, CNN=Screwed.
Man, I’m not a fan of Mr. Bullying Isn’t Real, but he was one of the few success stories at CNN recently, and he just deep-sixed it. This is going to be hard to watch.
I saw Major Garrett on Morning Joe this morning. For a guy who said he was leaving Fox because he didn’t want to be on TV anymore, he sure is on TV a lot. Appearing on MSNBC is obviously a thumb in the eye to Fox. I don’t think he will say anything negative about Fox, however, because his wife still works there. It’s really jolting, though, to hear his voice and see his face on anything other than Fox.
I think you’re timeline presents somewhat of a confusing (and micro) view of it.
From what I understand… Allred accused Whitman of employing an illegal alien. Whitman said she had no idea she did that, did the appropriate checks (there’s only so much she can do legally), and when it was shown otherwise, fired her.
As for the letter, Whitman denied she got the letter… but Allred later showed that her husband (allegedly) wrote a note at the bottom of the letter. Whitman’s husband then said, “It looks like my handwriting, but I don’t remember ever getting the note.” Which to me, seems plausible. I don’t remember everything I’ve ever gotten in the mail, and his note at the bottom said something like, “Nikki, you need to look into this.”
And really, if the knew that there was the letter, what would have been the political gain in lying about it? There is none! I guess you could make the argument that she lied for the sake of lying, but that seems overly cynical. I just don’t see any good strategy behind knowingly lying about the letter… which makes me believe that they probably didn’t remember, or realize what the letter said when they received it.
Now, an interesting fact is that the letter itself says the recipient (Whitman) isn’t allowed to do anything as a result of the letter (if they had fired her then, they could have been sued)… which to me, makes the claim that they got and forgot about the letter even more plausible (a letter that says XYZ, that you can’t do anything about… what’s the point?).
Yes, Whitman has claimed that Allred (and Brown) are in cahoots and manufacturing this as a controversy. The SEIU (which has been doing Spanish-language ads for Brown) already is talking about this in commercial form… and Allred is known for being a liberal-Democrat… so the idea of a political conspiracy, or (at the very least) a political attack isn’t too hard to believe.
Furthermore, when you examine the case itself… the housekeeper is claiming “financial mistreatment,” but made over $20 an hour! That’s a tough sell, if you ask me. However, I’m sure that the SEIU ads against Whitman fail to mention the salary, only the “financial mistreatment” claim.
The whole thing smells fishy… and the, “Just wait, we have more” claim almost always means, “We’ve got nothing.” I don’t care who makes that claim (Allred, Breitbart, whatever), it’s almost always a bluff.
Anyway, this appears to be politics as usual. I don’t expect the story to last much longer, or to have too much of a dent in the outcome. I guess dirty tricks and alleged lies are just part of “the game.”
I saw Major Garrett on Morning Joe this morning. For a guy who said he was leaving Fox because he didn’t want to be on TV anymore, he sure is on TV a lot.
He didn’t say he didn’t want to be on TV anymore… only that he wanted to go back to writing, and he wouldn’t appear on TV simply to appear on TV. He’d be there to give a report about a specific story, not just a “hey, here’s my opinion” situation.
Levin made a fool of himself restating the obvious: Diaz is an undocumented worker. Duh.
The rest of you are making fools of yourselves dwelling on Diaz’ hourly wage, including Megyn Kelly and Bill O’Reilly, who both spoke as if the woman made $23/hr for a 40-hour work week. READ people. She was paid for 15 hours a week. She filed a claim for being worked extra hours without pay, and for not receiving proper mileage recompense for driving her car. Y’all can whine about dirty politics all you want, but get your facts straight.
Blue you may be right about the story I don’t know. I’m just saying it was badly handled politically and saying she wants to take a lie detector test is never what you want to hear your candidate saying.
As for being an alleged liar she already admitted she lied, it’s not alleged anymore.
So? At what point in any minimum wage law does it say you HAVE to work 40-hours?!
Also… a little quick math here: $23 x 15 hrs = $345 / 40hrs = $8.62
That means she was making $0.62 more an hour than minimum wage for a 40-hour work week. Of course, since she only had to work 15-hours, that means she could have had another job and extra money and so on.
She filed a claim for being worked extra hours without pay,
After she was fired.
and for not receiving proper mileage recompense for driving her car.
Was that part of the contract? I don’t get paid at all for transportation. Was she supposed to… or is this something she’s making up post-firing?
fritz3 Says:
October 1, 2010 at 10:51 am
As for being an alleged liar she already admitted she lied, it’s not alleged anymore.
False. She is an “alleged” liar because it hasn’t been proven. I hate to get too semantic here, but the fact of the matter is that unless it can be shown that she KNEW what she was saying was false, it’s not a lie. So saying, “alleged liar” or “alleged lie” is accurate, unless you know something we don’t.
1. What would Meg Whitman’s motive be in hiring this illegal? Whitman went through an employment agency, and being a billionaire, I imagine she could afford to hire a city full of people, at any hourly rate, to clean her home!
When she found out the woman was an illegal, she should have called ICE ASAP and had her escorted “outta here”. So is she in trouble for being compassionate?
2. Why is tomorrow’s event the “Ed Schultz” rally? Gazillions of communists, Marxists and members of labor unions will be there, and I doubt whether most of them have even heard of Big Ed. Further, I know for a fact that many UAW members left Monday (paid time off, of course, and probably transportation lodging costs as well) to journey to the rally. So yes, it’s another “rent a mob”.
Blue, one more time. The allegation is that she was worked more than 15 hours, but only paid for 15. You guys keep going on about her hourly wage as if she’s complaining about being fairly paid that. A contract is a contract. If she worked 15 hours and got paid well for it, fine. If she worked 30 or 40 and only got paid for 15, she got screwed. It’s all a matter of who’s story you believe. Her story fits a plausible narrative for me. People who weren’t forced to work for free tend not to claim otherwise.
Mileage: I run a home for the developmentally disabled. Everyone there uses their car, which takes gas and racks up maintenance bills on their autos; oil, pads, tires, etc. Everybody gets paid for that. She’s not talking abut going to work. She’s talking about driving for work.
Btw, when you work in a home like my crew does, it’s easy to end up there longer than you were scheduled for. Nobody there stays longer on their own time. Except me, of course. The manager always eats it on that score. Completely different. Not complaining.
“He didn’t say he didn’t want to be on TV anymore… only that he wanted to go back to writing, and he wouldn’t appear on TV simply to appear on TV. He’d be there to give a report about a specific story, not just a “hey, here’s my opinion” situation.
What was he talking about?” – imnotblue
If I remember correctly (it was early) he wasn’t talking about anything specific. He was just talking about the upcoming November elections and whether or not the Dems should be running on healthcare, etc.
“False. She is an “alleged” liar because it hasn’t been proven. I hate to get too semantic here, but the fact of the matter is that unless it can be shown that she KNEW what she was saying was false, it’s not a lie. So saying, “alleged liar” or “alleged lie” is accurate, unless you know something we don’t.”
The biggest sissue regarding the Meg Whitman/maid issue is that the employee was hired through an employment agency. I’m “assuming” (god I hate that word) Whitman had a contract with the agency & not with the maid directly.
Validating the employees status, payments, social security taxes, etc… should have been handled by the agency. If Whitman is paying the agency directly then Allred has no beef with Whitman but with the agency itself.
Blue, one more time. The allegation is that she was worked more than 15 hours, but only paid for 15.
No I get it… but how much more are we talking? Are we talking that occasionally she put in an extra half hour, and missed a payment? Are we talking about hours upon hours of work?
This strikes me as a lawyer trick… all Allred needs to do is say, “She worked more than she got paid for,” and is set. Who hasn’t, at one time or another, worked a little longer than they got paid for for one reason or another? Allred doesn’t have to make the case that it happened a lot, or that it was malicious, or anything like that… only that it happened once, and even that doesn’t really have to be proved. I’m just not buying it.
She’s not talking abut going to work. She’s talking about driving for work.
Okay, but again… this seems somewhat unprovable. Afterall, why would a multi-millionaire try to stiff someone of a few bucks for gas money? Seems unrealistically petty to me.
carolmr Says:
October 1, 2010 at 12:02 pm
Hmmm… now that WOULD be strange.
fritz3 Says:
October 1, 2010 at 12:54 pm
If I ask you right now how many miles your car has, and you tell me 22 thousand… and it turns out it has 25 thousand, are you a liar, or did you just not know? There’s a difference.
If you know what your saying is untrue, but say it anyway, you’re lying. If you say something untrue, but at the time believed it was true, you’re just wrong.
I just watched the premiere of “S#*! My Dad Says.” Two instances so far have been jokes at the expense of Wolf Blitzer. Including “If it looks like manure and smells like manure, It’s either Wolf Blitzer or manure.”
“If you know what your saying is untrue, but say it anyway, you’re lying. If you say something untrue, but at the time believed it was true, you’re just wrong.”
If Ms. Whitman had said ‘I don’t recall receiving the letter’ or some such thing you would be correct.
She said I DIDN’T receive the letter. And she was absolute in her denial. There is no way her husband would not have told her about it; if not at the time then certainly after this whole mess arose. She lied.
“Appearing on MSNBC is obviously a thumb in the eye to Fox.”
johnnydollar, I didn’t realize Major had appeared numerous times on Fox Business News and I have seen him several times on MSNBC. I still think he said when he quit that he never wanted to be on TV again, but I guess I was wrong.
Postscript, Whitman: I think she beat it. The only political win Allred had was to harden what meager support Meg had left from minorities, plus take a few Independents out of her column. The wind was blowing that direction when Whitman was crying “I never saw the papers, the maid’s a liar.” Producing the papers backfired on Allred. Now it looks like ‘mean billionaire’ kept her employed instead of busting her. Allred’s numerous and annoying interviews didn’t help.
Whitman is still going to lose, but not over this.
The papers that Ms. Whitman’s husband says he may have received and written a note on allege that Nicky had a problem with her Social Security number. He wrote a note to Nicky to take care of it. So…did Nicky use a false (someone else’s) Social Security number? Is she guilty of identity theft besides coming into the country illegally?
Inside Cable News 
October 1, 2010 at 7:25 am
Gloria Allred was on the Last Word last night and said she has more documents to prove her clients case but is not going to release them; unless Whitman lies again. It puts Whitman in a very tough spot.
Meg Whitman has screwed up this issue about as bad a a politician can. She had a pretty good case until she lied and tried to cover it up. Now whatever she says is suspect. And trying to blame it on the Brown campaign, without any evidence, just makes it worse.
She needs to come clean and just take her lumps which is what she should have done in the first place.
October 1, 2010 at 7:29 am
So I finally looked at the O’Keefe story on Mediaite, after seeing Abby Boudreax(?) on CNN. My main thought was ”He thought that woman would seduce him?” In what delusional-male-universe? Dude has watched too-damn-many movies where the nerd/fat-guy gets the hot chick. Too. Damn many.
When Brent Bozell calls you sick and disgusting, it’s time to go home.
October 1, 2010 at 7:58 am
Anyone want to guess how many people show for Ed’s ‘One Nation’ march tomorrow.
Lets assume a count of around 300,000 for Beck’s rally; as that seemed to be the number most non-partisan observers arrived at. Everyone is going to give different counts for Ed’s event so I think the only fare way to judge it will be comparing the aeriel photos of each rally and judging the size by that rational as well as an average of non-partisan numbers estimates.
The actual number won’t matter much to we partisans, left & right, as Ed said he could match Beck so that will be the standard that matters.If the photos show the crowd about the same size or larger Ed win’s; if it’s smaller Beck takes bragging rights.
The weather looks great so that can’t be used as an excuse for low turnout.
Now Ed said he could get 300,000, to match Becks march but I just don’t think that’s possible. I can see a legitimate number of 150,000-200,000 showing up because the unions are behind this and DC is a liberal city so there will be lots of locals.
Anyone interested?
October 1, 2010 at 8:01 am
Fritz… I’m unaware… how did Whitman “screw up” the story? In everything I’ve seen, she’s seemed pretty convincing. What’s different?
And isn’t that political blackmail? Allred says, “IF she does XYZ, then I’ll release all this stuff I’ve got.” It makes the audience believe something that may or may not be true (that there is more evidence), and (if there is) threatens Whitman to do the bidding of Allred. No part of that sounds like a good thing.
October 1, 2010 at 8:25 am
Whitmam originally denied there was a letter; then said the maid must have stolen it. When Allred produced the letter with a hand written note signed by her husband they blamed the whole thing on the Brown campaign; without any evidence. Today she admitted she got the letter.
She should have said we got the letter and passed it on tho the maid to deal with. This is not believable of course, but it at least is defensible enough to satisfy some.
Allred was very smart in that she said she would only release the letter if Whitman lied which she did. Now Whitman can legitimately called a liar as well as a hypocrite.
If Whitman would have come completely clean at the first hint of this story she would have taken a hit for a few days but it would be history by now. Now this could sink her campaign.
It’s always the cover-up.
October 1, 2010 at 8:31 am
MSNBC’s new dayside format starts Monday. They just revealed the name of the two hour block with Chris Jansing and Richard Lui. It’s called…hold on to your hats…”Jansing and Company”. No I’m not kidding. Sounds like a syndicated morning show name to me. And CNN Observations noted that Robin Meade’s old show was called Robin and Company, so not only do I think the name is weak but not very original.
October 1, 2010 at 8:38 am
Ed’s rally: depends on how well the unions organize. How much are they willing to spend to send people to the rally? Will they hire outsiders to attend like they hire people to protest?
October 1, 2010 at 8:50 am
“Ed’s rally: depends on how well the unions organize. How much are they willing to spend to send people to the rally? Will they hire outsiders to attend like they hire people to protest?”
I agree it depends a lot on the union organizational skills and they will help provide transportation to the rally although not to the scale the Tea Parties did for Beck.
As to paying the attendees that sounds like pure spin to cover your butt in case Ed has a huge rally. That (paying attendees) is not going to happen because it doesn’t make any sense ( very poor use of scarce union funds).
BTW, I didn’t see a number in your comment which tells me you think he’ll get a big crowd on Saturday.
October 1, 2010 at 9:09 am
I agree with Fritz that Whitman should have just dealt with the reality of her situation. A billionaire calling a maid a liar, then blaming the whole thing on her opponent, is lame. Gloria Allred is not the most sympathetic figure in the world; Whitman still would have been damaged, but she could have marginalized Allred.
October 1, 2010 at 9:37 am
It looks like the next host of “Sabado Gigante” just might be Rick Sanchez. If not that show, I’m sure Univision can find something for him to do.
Because that CNN gig is just about up.
October 1, 2010 at 9:49 am
More information on Rick Sanchez…
http://www.politico.com/blogs/onmedia/1010/Sanchez_Stewart_a_bigot_CNN_run_by_Jews.html
What is the over/under that Sanchez gets fired before Monday @ 8pm? 😉
October 1, 2010 at 9:50 am
I have no idea how many he’ll get & I don’t really care. I imagine it will be a lot because unions have a lot of members. Also, the hatred for Beck should bring out people who don’t want Ed to be embarrassed. Beck’s rally was non-political and it’s amazing he could get that many people to show up. As for paying people I was referring to this: http://www.breitbart.tv/daily-show-exposes-non-union-protesters-on-picket-line/
October 1, 2010 at 9:52 am
More on poor Ricky Sanchez over on Mediate. Looks like Ricky Ticky has said some Tacky things about CNN. Guessin he will now have more time to have a beer or 12.
http://www.mediaite.com/online/rick-sanchez-calls-jon-stewart-a-bigot-says-cnn-is-run-by-jews/
October 1, 2010 at 9:58 am
“Because that CNN gig is just about up.”
Steve Do you know something we don’t or are you just showing your displeasure for RS?
On Jansing & Company: Isn’t that a bit of a putdown of Richard Lui who they just picked up from CNN. He can’t be very happy about his name not being in the title alongside Jansing’s. Not a good way to start a team effort.
Looks like ‘The Last Word’ will only be on Mon.-Thur. with the regular Doc Block on Friday. I asked ‘tongue in cheek’ awhile back if this might occur so color me shocked that it actually is happening. It doesn’t show a lot of confidence in O’Donnell’s show by the network.
October 1, 2010 at 10:00 am
Fritz, read the link. That idiot said CNN is run by Jews!
October 1, 2010 at 10:05 am
Yeah I saw it but the comment didn’t appear on my computer until after I posted mine. I’d say he’s toast. Maybe a job opportunity for Shuster? 🙂
October 1, 2010 at 10:20 am
I just listened to the audio of Sanchez’s radio interview – it sounds like he is trying to explain getting taunted for being a general goofball by claiming that race is behind it. Nothing could be further from the truth – Stewart spends far more time on other cable personalities. I don’t know if he is correct re: discrimination in the workplace, but I don’t see how he is being held down.
And the “CNN is run by Jews” thing will be his undoing.
October 1, 2010 at 10:20 am
First two new doomed-to-fail primetime shows are announced, then Jon Klein is out, then Cooper gets a daytime show, and now Rick Sanchez goes off the reservation? CNN=Politics? No, CNN=Screwed.
October 1, 2010 at 10:21 am
Man, I’m not a fan of Mr. Bullying Isn’t Real, but he was one of the few success stories at CNN recently, and he just deep-sixed it. This is going to be hard to watch.
October 1, 2010 at 10:23 am
How about “MSNBC Sucks with Jansing and Lui”? At least it’s original.
October 1, 2010 at 10:30 am
I saw Major Garrett on Morning Joe this morning. For a guy who said he was leaving Fox because he didn’t want to be on TV anymore, he sure is on TV a lot. Appearing on MSNBC is obviously a thumb in the eye to Fox. I don’t think he will say anything negative about Fox, however, because his wife still works there. It’s really jolting, though, to hear his voice and see his face on anything other than Fox.
October 1, 2010 at 10:31 am
Gloria Alred is just lying. Mark Levin just took her apart:
http://www.marklevinshow.com/Article.asp?id=1970739&spid=32364
October 1, 2010 at 10:35 am
fritz3 Says:
October 1, 2010 at 8:25 am
I think you’re timeline presents somewhat of a confusing (and micro) view of it.
From what I understand… Allred accused Whitman of employing an illegal alien. Whitman said she had no idea she did that, did the appropriate checks (there’s only so much she can do legally), and when it was shown otherwise, fired her.
As for the letter, Whitman denied she got the letter… but Allred later showed that her husband (allegedly) wrote a note at the bottom of the letter. Whitman’s husband then said, “It looks like my handwriting, but I don’t remember ever getting the note.” Which to me, seems plausible. I don’t remember everything I’ve ever gotten in the mail, and his note at the bottom said something like, “Nikki, you need to look into this.”
And really, if the knew that there was the letter, what would have been the political gain in lying about it? There is none! I guess you could make the argument that she lied for the sake of lying, but that seems overly cynical. I just don’t see any good strategy behind knowingly lying about the letter… which makes me believe that they probably didn’t remember, or realize what the letter said when they received it.
Now, an interesting fact is that the letter itself says the recipient (Whitman) isn’t allowed to do anything as a result of the letter (if they had fired her then, they could have been sued)… which to me, makes the claim that they got and forgot about the letter even more plausible (a letter that says XYZ, that you can’t do anything about… what’s the point?).
Yes, Whitman has claimed that Allred (and Brown) are in cahoots and manufacturing this as a controversy. The SEIU (which has been doing Spanish-language ads for Brown) already is talking about this in commercial form… and Allred is known for being a liberal-Democrat… so the idea of a political conspiracy, or (at the very least) a political attack isn’t too hard to believe.
Furthermore, when you examine the case itself… the housekeeper is claiming “financial mistreatment,” but made over $20 an hour! That’s a tough sell, if you ask me. However, I’m sure that the SEIU ads against Whitman fail to mention the salary, only the “financial mistreatment” claim.
The whole thing smells fishy… and the, “Just wait, we have more” claim almost always means, “We’ve got nothing.” I don’t care who makes that claim (Allred, Breitbart, whatever), it’s almost always a bluff.
Anyway, this appears to be politics as usual. I don’t expect the story to last much longer, or to have too much of a dent in the outcome. I guess dirty tricks and alleged lies are just part of “the game.”
October 1, 2010 at 10:37 am
carolmr Says:
October 1, 2010 at 10:30 am
I saw Major Garrett on Morning Joe this morning. For a guy who said he was leaving Fox because he didn’t want to be on TV anymore, he sure is on TV a lot.
He didn’t say he didn’t want to be on TV anymore… only that he wanted to go back to writing, and he wouldn’t appear on TV simply to appear on TV. He’d be there to give a report about a specific story, not just a “hey, here’s my opinion” situation.
What was he talking about?
October 1, 2010 at 10:49 am
Levin made a fool of himself restating the obvious: Diaz is an undocumented worker. Duh.
The rest of you are making fools of yourselves dwelling on Diaz’ hourly wage, including Megyn Kelly and Bill O’Reilly, who both spoke as if the woman made $23/hr for a 40-hour work week. READ people. She was paid for 15 hours a week. She filed a claim for being worked extra hours without pay, and for not receiving proper mileage recompense for driving her car. Y’all can whine about dirty politics all you want, but get your facts straight.
October 1, 2010 at 10:51 am
Blue you may be right about the story I don’t know. I’m just saying it was badly handled politically and saying she wants to take a lie detector test is never what you want to hear your candidate saying.
As for being an alleged liar she already admitted she lied, it’s not alleged anymore.
October 1, 2010 at 10:59 am
Spud: Just noticed you added the twitter feed to the page. it may have been there for awhile but I just noticed its arrival. Thanks.
October 1, 2010 at 11:13 am
joeremi Says:
October 1, 2010 at 10:49 am
She was paid for 15 hours a week.
So? At what point in any minimum wage law does it say you HAVE to work 40-hours?!
Also… a little quick math here: $23 x 15 hrs = $345 / 40hrs = $8.62
That means she was making $0.62 more an hour than minimum wage for a 40-hour work week. Of course, since she only had to work 15-hours, that means she could have had another job and extra money and so on.
She filed a claim for being worked extra hours without pay,
After she was fired.
and for not receiving proper mileage recompense for driving her car.
Was that part of the contract? I don’t get paid at all for transportation. Was she supposed to… or is this something she’s making up post-firing?
fritz3 Says:
October 1, 2010 at 10:51 am
As for being an alleged liar she already admitted she lied, it’s not alleged anymore.
False. She is an “alleged” liar because it hasn’t been proven. I hate to get too semantic here, but the fact of the matter is that unless it can be shown that she KNEW what she was saying was false, it’s not a lie. So saying, “alleged liar” or “alleged lie” is accurate, unless you know something we don’t.
October 1, 2010 at 11:29 am
1. What would Meg Whitman’s motive be in hiring this illegal? Whitman went through an employment agency, and being a billionaire, I imagine she could afford to hire a city full of people, at any hourly rate, to clean her home!
When she found out the woman was an illegal, she should have called ICE ASAP and had her escorted “outta here”. So is she in trouble for being compassionate?
2. Why is tomorrow’s event the “Ed Schultz” rally? Gazillions of communists, Marxists and members of labor unions will be there, and I doubt whether most of them have even heard of Big Ed. Further, I know for a fact that many UAW members left Monday (paid time off, of course, and probably transportation lodging costs as well) to journey to the rally. So yes, it’s another “rent a mob”.
October 1, 2010 at 11:32 am
Blue, one more time. The allegation is that she was worked more than 15 hours, but only paid for 15. You guys keep going on about her hourly wage as if she’s complaining about being fairly paid that. A contract is a contract. If she worked 15 hours and got paid well for it, fine. If she worked 30 or 40 and only got paid for 15, she got screwed. It’s all a matter of who’s story you believe. Her story fits a plausible narrative for me. People who weren’t forced to work for free tend not to claim otherwise.
Mileage: I run a home for the developmentally disabled. Everyone there uses their car, which takes gas and racks up maintenance bills on their autos; oil, pads, tires, etc. Everybody gets paid for that. She’s not talking abut going to work. She’s talking about driving for work.
Btw, when you work in a home like my crew does, it’s easy to end up there longer than you were scheduled for. Nobody there stays longer on their own time. Except me, of course. The manager always eats it on that score. Completely different. Not complaining.
October 1, 2010 at 12:02 pm
“He didn’t say he didn’t want to be on TV anymore… only that he wanted to go back to writing, and he wouldn’t appear on TV simply to appear on TV. He’d be there to give a report about a specific story, not just a “hey, here’s my opinion” situation.
What was he talking about?” – imnotblue
If I remember correctly (it was early) he wasn’t talking about anything specific. He was just talking about the upcoming November elections and whether or not the Dems should be running on healthcare, etc.
October 1, 2010 at 12:54 pm
“False. She is an “alleged” liar because it hasn’t been proven. I hate to get too semantic here, but the fact of the matter is that unless it can be shown that she KNEW what she was saying was false, it’s not a lie. So saying, “alleged liar” or “alleged lie” is accurate, unless you know something we don’t.”
Ooookay
October 1, 2010 at 1:43 pm
The biggest sissue regarding the Meg Whitman/maid issue is that the employee was hired through an employment agency. I’m “assuming” (god I hate that word) Whitman had a contract with the agency & not with the maid directly.
Validating the employees status, payments, social security taxes, etc… should have been handled by the agency. If Whitman is paying the agency directly then Allred has no beef with Whitman but with the agency itself.
October 1, 2010 at 2:12 pm
joeremi Says:
October 1, 2010 at 11:32 am
Blue, one more time. The allegation is that she was worked more than 15 hours, but only paid for 15.
No I get it… but how much more are we talking? Are we talking that occasionally she put in an extra half hour, and missed a payment? Are we talking about hours upon hours of work?
This strikes me as a lawyer trick… all Allred needs to do is say, “She worked more than she got paid for,” and is set. Who hasn’t, at one time or another, worked a little longer than they got paid for for one reason or another? Allred doesn’t have to make the case that it happened a lot, or that it was malicious, or anything like that… only that it happened once, and even that doesn’t really have to be proved. I’m just not buying it.
She’s not talking abut going to work. She’s talking about driving for work.
Okay, but again… this seems somewhat unprovable. Afterall, why would a multi-millionaire try to stiff someone of a few bucks for gas money? Seems unrealistically petty to me.
carolmr Says:
October 1, 2010 at 12:02 pm
Hmmm… now that WOULD be strange.
fritz3 Says:
October 1, 2010 at 12:54 pm
If I ask you right now how many miles your car has, and you tell me 22 thousand… and it turns out it has 25 thousand, are you a liar, or did you just not know? There’s a difference.
If you know what your saying is untrue, but say it anyway, you’re lying. If you say something untrue, but at the time believed it was true, you’re just wrong.
October 1, 2010 at 2:32 pm
“Appearing on MSNBC is obviously a thumb in the eye to Fox.”
Obviously?!? What about the multiple times he’s been on Fox Business? Were those the days he decided NOT to stick a thumb in the eye of Fox?
October 1, 2010 at 3:02 pm
Totally unrelated to any other comments:
I just watched the premiere of “S#*! My Dad Says.” Two instances so far have been jokes at the expense of Wolf Blitzer. Including “If it looks like manure and smells like manure, It’s either Wolf Blitzer or manure.”
October 1, 2010 at 3:08 pm
“If you know what your saying is untrue, but say it anyway, you’re lying. If you say something untrue, but at the time believed it was true, you’re just wrong.”
If Ms. Whitman had said ‘I don’t recall receiving the letter’ or some such thing you would be correct.
She said I DIDN’T receive the letter. And she was absolute in her denial. There is no way her husband would not have told her about it; if not at the time then certainly after this whole mess arose. She lied.
October 1, 2010 at 3:17 pm
RICK SANCHEZ FIRED FROM CNN!!!
Do the happy dance!
Huffington Post reported it.
October 1, 2010 at 5:09 pm
“Appearing on MSNBC is obviously a thumb in the eye to Fox.”
johnnydollar, I didn’t realize Major had appeared numerous times on Fox Business News and I have seen him several times on MSNBC. I still think he said when he quit that he never wanted to be on TV again, but I guess I was wrong.
October 1, 2010 at 5:33 pm
“I still think he said when he quit that he never wanted to be on TV again,”
I think he said I don’t want to appear on Fox News TV again. 🙂
Sorry Carol Just kidding , I couldn’t resist.
October 1, 2010 at 5:42 pm
I still think he said when he quit that he never wanted to be on TV again, but I guess I was wrong.
That’s not accurate. His comment was more along the lines that he didn’t want to be on TV on a daily basis as part of his job again.
October 1, 2010 at 9:18 pm
Postscript, Whitman: I think she beat it. The only political win Allred had was to harden what meager support Meg had left from minorities, plus take a few Independents out of her column. The wind was blowing that direction when Whitman was crying “I never saw the papers, the maid’s a liar.” Producing the papers backfired on Allred. Now it looks like ‘mean billionaire’ kept her employed instead of busting her. Allred’s numerous and annoying interviews didn’t help.
Whitman is still going to lose, but not over this.
October 2, 2010 at 7:09 pm
The papers that Ms. Whitman’s husband says he may have received and written a note on allege that Nicky had a problem with her Social Security number. He wrote a note to Nicky to take care of it. So…did Nicky use a false (someone else’s) Social Security number? Is she guilty of identity theft besides coming into the country illegally?
October 2, 2010 at 9:03 pm
Greta v. Gloria
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=utL6L_ByCgs&feature=player_embedded#!
October 2, 2010 at 9:08 pm
This is the complete version.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_TU4nlw825U&NR=1
October 2, 2010 at 9:20 pm
That is why Greta is closing-in on Hannity. Praise be.
October 3, 2010 at 8:52 am
Interesting angle on yesterdays rally.
http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2010/10/03/ed_schultz_one_america/index.html