Archive for Gloria Allred – Page 2

Second Meg Whitman nanny "had to threaten to take her to the IRS"


eMeg, eMeg, eMeg, what are we gonna do with you?

Oh I know! Elect Jerry Brown!

Enter Nanny #2, Jill Armstrong, stage... left:

"I totally believe" Diaz, Armstrong, 59, of Mountain View, said in an interview with The Chronicle. "I know the family. I know what it was like."
Oh, and in case anyone is rolling their eyes, Nanny Jill can prove she worked for  eMeg and Griff Harsh during the summer of '98.  She's got the W-2 form.

Nanny Jill said she quit her job after a couple of months because it was demanding and difficult.

eMeg? Difficult? Surely Nanny Jill jests. (Say that three times really fast, I dare you.)

"I had enough," she said in an interview, describing trouble getting paid what she believed she was owed, and challenges in dealing with household chores and in supervising Whitman's two young sons. [...]

Armstrong said she came forward because she believed Whitman viewed domestic help as "disposable."
Why, what a coinkydink! I believe Whitman views her income the same way.

Nanny Jill called eMeg "cheap".

She also seemed surprised to hear eMeg say that Husband Harsh had trouble remembering that he got a letter from the Social Security Administration.

"Harsh would not forget something like that," Armstrong said. "He had his thumb on everything."

He must have had some big thumb.

After a couple of months, Nanny Jill told eMeg she was pulling a Palin and quitting, that she couldn't "handle it anymore."

But her biggest gripe was after she left, months after, when she realized she hadn't received a tax form from eMeg. She let her know she needed a W-2.

So of course eMeg, being the efficient businesswoman she is, got right on it.


Or not.

So Nanny Jill "had to threaten to take her to the IRS". But eMeg's accountant said he needed "the numbers" and "the hours".

"That's Meg's responsibility," Armstrong said she replied. "Isn't she supposed to have all that written down?"

Gee, if eMeg can't keep track of her own domestic paperwork, how in the world will she be able to handle being governor of a state the size of California?


Donations to Whitman undercut her no-special-interests claim


Once again, eMeg is shown to be a big ol' corporate hypocrite:

Donors with business before the state and corporate leaders poured millions of dollars into Meg Whitman's campaign in the last three months, potentially undercutting her claim that her personal fortune makes her uniquely free of special-interest entanglements, campaign disclosure reports filed Tuesday show.

Whitman, the billionaire former chief executive of online auction house EBay, raised more money from outside donors than her Democratic rival, Jerry Brown, whom she has criticized heavily for his dependence on support from the state's public employee unions. Whitman pulled in more than $10.7 million from individuals, businesses and other groups to Brown's $9.5 million. [...]

Donors giving the maximum allowable $25,900 donation to Whitman while lobbying state government include Philip Morris, AT&T, the Western States Growers and Golden State Water Co.

I guess a record $140 million of her own money just hasn't cut it. Brown is still ahead.


VIDEO- Ex-housekeeper fires back at Meg Whitman: "Housekeepers are human beings, too."


eMeg gets an earful:

Meg Whitman was wrong when she said somebody put a gun to my head. Nobody did. I spoke out because I want people to know who Meg Whitman really is and I am glad that I did. I want to be heard,” said Nicandra Diaz Santillan, Whitman’s former housekeeper, speaking at a news  conference in the office of her attorney Gloria Allred. [...]

“I knew the risk of speaking out and I was afraid for my family. Despite my fear, I decided to come out from the shadows, the shadows in which millions of people live every day,” she said. “It's not fair that we work hard and then get thrown away like garbage. We have families to support like you do. We are here. We need you just like you need us. Meg Whitman, don't say I was part of your family because you never treated me like I was."

I'm sure Megalomaniac McGotrocks will come up with yet another gyration to deal with this one.


"Should it depend on how well [undocumented workers] know Whitman personally?"


eMeg Harsh has a problem. And what is ironic about her problem is that an undocumented immigrant, her own housekeeper, may prove to be her undoing. One can only hope.

In the L.A. Times today, there is a good editorial that points out that this is less about whether or not she employed Diaz Santillan for nine years, and more about her subsequent gyrations.

The conclusion? She's a hypocrite:

To court the Latino vote, she trumpets her opposition to Proposition 187, a 1994 law that would have prohibited illegal immigrants from accessing most public services, but when called on to take a moral stand on it 16 years ago, she didn't vote. She supports the now infamous SB 1070 in Arizona — but only for Arizona.

This is political expediency, not leadership. If Diaz Santillan deserves to stay in the country, does that mean other illegal immigrants do too? Should it depend on how well they know Whitman personally? That the one illegal immigrant Whitman cares about is worthy of exceptional treatment, but the millions of others who are beloved by their extended and actual families are not, not only illustrates her disturbing tendency to avoid tough policy stands, but makes her a bit of a hypocrite.

A bit?