It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

One of the Secret Tapes made by Omarosa

page: 9
25
<< 6  7  8    10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 13 2018 @ 02:01 PM
link   
a reply to: SailorJerry

i was not asking you about your job history.

I was highlighting your lack of forethought on issues.

Some doors can be locked from both sides with electronic locks.

Likely what they would have in the room they were in but even then it takes time to open many locks so that would still be considered a deterant from leaving.

I am actually proud of you for finally coming up with a possible valid point about the locks. It took you over 20 post to have a valid post but you may have finally done it.





posted on Aug, 13 2018 @ 02:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: SailorJerry
a reply to: howtonhawky

Again except the problem is its not false imprisonment when you lock a door from the side you're sitting on lol

She's also made tons of other claims that aren't true, much like she did years ago.

I want you to go to the nearest door, push the lock, can you get out?

I find it hard to believe someone is mentally incapable of understanding how doors work


you must have missed the expose on matt lauers doors....

www.washingtonpost.com... 770d9a3e_story.html

Many insurance companies want these special locks as do many security firms. They are electronic and lock the door from being opened either way. trapping folks in a room is illegal

as i said nice try though....



posted on Aug, 13 2018 @ 02:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: howtonhawky

originally posted by: SailorJerry
a reply to: howtonhawky

Again except the problem is its not false imprisonment when you lock a door from the side you're sitting on lol

She's also made tons of other claims that aren't true, much like she did years ago.

I want you to go to the nearest door, push the lock, can you get out?

I find it hard to believe someone is mentally incapable of understanding how doors work


you must have missed the expose on matt lauers doors....

www.washingtonpost.com... 770d9a3e_story.html

Many insurance companies want these special locks as do many security firms. They are electronic and lock the door from being opened either way. trapping folks in a room is illegal

as i said nice try though....


What the hell does Matt laurs door have to do w the actual facts in this case????

combining two totally different instances doesn't prove anything

Still waiting for the proof she was falsley imprisoned "like an animal" as you stated

Care to actually stay focused on this case instead of Matt laur



posted on Aug, 13 2018 @ 02:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: howtonhawky
a reply to: SailorJerry

i was not asking you about your job history.

I was highlighting your lack of forethought on issues.

Some doors can be locked from both sides with electronic locks.

Likely what they would have in the room they were in but even then it takes time to open many locks so that would still be considered a deterant from leaving.

I am actually proud of you for finally coming up with a possible valid point about the locks. It took you over 20 post to have a valid post but you may have finally done it.



Lmao I love when an arrogant kid probably barely fresh out of high school tries to patronize a 60 something year old man whose forgotten more life experiences many times over than this persons been alive

Holy hell your parents did you a discervice by allowing you to treat people w such arrogance



posted on Aug, 13 2018 @ 02:15 PM
link   
a reply to: SailorJerry




Lmao I love when an arrogant kid probably barely fresh out of high school tries to patronize a 60 something year old man whose forgotten more life experiences many times over than this persons been alive Holy hell your parents did you a discervice by allowing you to treat people w such arrogance


This is what triggered looks like!

You should quit following me into every thread if you do not like tha burn.




posted on Aug, 13 2018 @ 03:59 PM
link   
a reply to: howtonhawky

Yeah.......

Trust me there's no burn lol

But it is amusing to watch someone repeatedly make themselves look comoleltely foolish and then think they are coming out on top.

You do it everywhere you post, regardless of who you're talking to and the whole forum knows it



posted on Aug, 13 2018 @ 04:08 PM
link   
a reply to: SailorJerry

Gotcha!

It is not standard operating procedure to lock the doors when an employee is in your office being fired.

If the office had doors that lock both ways then it is a huge problem and if not it is still against the law.



posted on Aug, 13 2018 @ 04:11 PM
link   
Anyhoo... back to Omarosa 😉.

Apparently she walked off from the Today set today, because she was frustrated with the host, Savannah. She really feels she was hard done by, and criminally treated, by being locked in a room for two hours. ( she may have grounds there, but if she violated some serious laws, she should be treated like a criminal under interrogation)

Anyhoo, she is playing the bleeding heart victim to the max, and still has no regrets about taping MANY conversations.

Here is avid of the interview for anyone interested. She sounds very confident that she did nothing wrong.

Darn it... won’t imbed properly 😕. Let me try and just post the link.
m.youtube.com...

edit on 13-8-2018 by Sheye because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 13 2018 @ 04:31 PM
link   
a reply to: Sheye


She should be ashamed of herself. For taking so much money and doing basically nothing but become Benedict Omarosa once it suited her.

What a fool!



posted on Aug, 13 2018 @ 04:52 PM
link   
a reply to: Sheye

For sure, I don't think she can be trusted w anything she says

I'm also disturbed that Trump even had her in the white house in the first place



posted on Aug, 13 2018 @ 04:56 PM
link   
a reply to: SailorJerry

I have no proof on anything I am about to say...and what I am about to say requires people to accept that trump is smarter than a box of rocks.

My WAG is that he brought people in that would be conniving little sob's and a couple of solid people so the rats would snitch on each other allowing him and the solid people to get a tight grip on things in the WH.

Obviously it didn't work out so good to start, and I don't particularly agree with the method but that's my theory.



posted on Aug, 13 2018 @ 05:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: SailorJerry
a reply to: Sheye

For sure, I don't think she can be trusted w anything she says

I'm also disturbed that Trump even had her in the white house in the first place


Yeah.. I wondered as well when I first heard she was working in the WH. Trump had good history with Omarosa though, despite the drama on tv reality shows. I read somewhere she begged him for the job, and he seems to be about giving people chances, sometimes more than they deserve. I also think Omarosa is very good at manipulating the weaknesses in others. Trump has his character flaws, like everyone, and she played him like a fiddle.

I hope she goes down like Nero in Rome as he played his fiddle. Or at least her career does. She’s made many selfish choices.. and now she has to live with the consequences. We’ll have to wait and see what those are.


edit on 13-8-2018 by Sheye because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 13 2018 @ 05:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: Irishhaf
a reply to: SailorJerry

I have no proof on anything I am about to say...and what I am about to say requires people to accept that trump is smarter than a box of rocks.

My WAG is that he brought people in that would be conniving little sob's and a couple of solid people so the rats would snitch on each other allowing him and the solid people to get a tight grip on things in the WH.

Obviously it didn't work out so good to start, and I don't particularly agree with the method but that's my theory.



I think it's more simple than that. Trump trusts people until they show they can't be trusted. Whether that is a weakness or a strength depends on one's perspective.
edit on 13/8/2018 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 13 2018 @ 05:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: olaru12
Omarosa isn't the only one with secret recordings. The Russians have some as do the Israelis. Thanks Jared....


www.rawstory.com...
I love the fact that you eat your own crap you source.

From your link...

"which would be a major breach of proper security protocol if true." Et al.

The rest is heresay and speculations fit for leftist feed.

You got nothing 😏

Old bones can't keep up, highspeed? Lol



posted on Aug, 13 2018 @ 07:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Asktheanimals

Every conversation in the Whitehouse is recorded. It's required. Not illegal. It may not have been on ethical for her to tape it but not illegal. Not by a long shot.


I suspect it depends on who's recording. I have a hard time believing that if I were to be welcomed to the White House that I could just break out a tape recorder, start recording and it would hold up in court, while in the regular world in which we live...it's illegal unless the party knows about it and authorizes it.



posted on Aug, 13 2018 @ 07:38 PM
link   
a reply to: IlluminatiTechnician

Dc does have an one party consent law. Omarosa obviously would be the consenting party who is being recorded in the conversation. Now, if she was not party to the conversation being recorded, it would be illegally eavesdropping and punishable. Even if she was in the same room with others...if she is not part of the conversation it would be illegal. Apparently, this is not the case with this recording. She can legally record her conversation with Kelly.

Unfortunately, for her, it actually does not help her appear to be a victim.



posted on Aug, 13 2018 @ 08:07 PM
link   
a reply to: CynConcepts

Makes me wonder if the will be investigating to determine is she recorded any conversations that she was not part of.



posted on Aug, 14 2018 @ 12:08 AM
link   
I think everyone is missing the point here. Regardless of your political leaning there are 3 elements that speak volumes;

You have a president that has just acknowledged he employs people based on how much they flatter him.

You have a former equality advisor who says she ignored racist language when in post and didn’t have the conviction of principle to resign, but was fired.

You have an administration where people distrust each other so much they appear to be recording each other all over the place.

I think the message this sends about the integrity, honesty and suitability of all of them speaks for itself. If only people would look past the tweets and showbiz, but of course no one looks past the surface anymore!

If you ask the wrong questions, you wont get the answer your looking for.



posted on Aug, 14 2018 @ 09:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: BlueJacket

The law in DC is as long as someone in the conversation knows it's being recorded and is part of the conversation not just recording it it's perfectly legal. That's the law in most states.


I don't think there's been a day of my life since the inception of YouTube where I didn't see someone claiming it's illegal to tap or record someone. I don't believe there is any law applicable to the every day person. It's simply that taping people without their knowledge is generally not admissable evidence in the us courts system.



posted on Aug, 14 2018 @ 09:25 AM
link   
a reply to: AlexandrosTheGreat

I didn't say anything about submitting any recordings as evidence. I just started the law for recording conversations in DC. I would think that if a recording was legally obtained that there wouldn't be an issue but I cannot claim that for sure because I simply do not know.



new topics

top topics



 
25
<< 6  7  8    10 >>

log in

join