Omarosa may have secretly taped White House conversations: report

It's honestly more complicated, but if she has good counsel and LISTENS to them, she can mitigate the damage.

Bottom line: It's very rarely smart to record people without telling them up front you're doing so. (One reason smart reporters ask "Is it okay if I record this?")

 

Agreed. Eight pages of discussion on laws that probably do not apply to the White House.

 

AND she must have signed non-disclosures too.

The woman is an attention seeking idiot; toxic.

 

There is no law in DC or federal law which makes recording your own conversations, or making those conversations public illegal. It would be hard to nail her on anything as long as she only recorded ones she was part of.

And white house staffers have came out and said that they KNEW she recorded her conversations. It's not like it was a secret.

 

Wondering if this is why there is now a ban on people bringing their phones to work in rhe White House.

 

There are lots of laws, civil and criminal, out there. She needs to proceed with EXTREME caution or she'll be in court for the rest of her life.

 

Did she actually have a job description?

 

Read section b.

 

You can't plant recording devices...but if you are a party to the conversation it is legal

 

I must admit, I looked into this as well. There are about a dozen or so states where 'one party consent' isn't good enough - DC isn't one of them. I also looked into this from a media / journalism standpoint and it was very interesting. For example, remember when the "Mooch" (I miss him dearly, LOL) got all out of sorts because Ryan Lizza recorded their phone interview last summer - and the Mooch thought he shouldn't have been recorded and he thought he was off the record? He was wrong on both counts, Lizza didn't have to tell the Mooch he was being recorded and neither party specifically said "off the record" or "on background" or "on deep background". On the record is considered to be the default situation unless "off the record" etc. is clearly stated. Further, "off the record" status cannot be granted retroactively. The Mooch, as Communications Director, should have made sure he knew the rules. Interesting.....

 

Trump hired a lot of people who were unqualified and of poor character.

 

LOL, yes he did, and they are still doing it.....it's shocking actually.

 

You bet. And it puzzles the hell out of me as the rationale behind this law, in those states where it is the law. Yet the right of privacy, has been totally destroyed, IMO, so this is in line with that. It seems rights are very inconvenient and intolerable for particular types of gov't. Including ours now. My opinion.

 

You don't understand what you've quoted. The key word is "interception." In the case of Amorosa, she didn't "intercept" anything, as she is a party to the conversation. Is somebody else not in the room was snooping, then that is illegal.

 

Yep, and I have never had any problem admitting when I was wrong. To some this is a flip flopper, but to me it is simple honesty from a guy who isn't stupid, or so my college GPA evidenced long ago, but not the brightest bulb on the Xmas tree either. I have personally known brilliant minds in my long life, and I ain't one of 'em. Makes one feel like a candle in the sun when in the presence of such minds.

 

LOL what?? please kindly provide a link to back up your claim.

 

lots of fail in this thread.

 

Agree. One wonders what Trump saw in her. He ain't good at hire qualified people, that's for sure.

 

Even the FBI needs a warrant to spy. So it seems to be a non negotiable given that appaloosa goes to prison for secretly taping a conversation without consent. And the conversation, however damning or not, gets discarded because it violates the law and the constitutional right to privacy. Y/N?

 

So, I will ask you. If the FBI wants to snoop on you, say your phone, or a bug, are you saying they do not need to see a judge to get the proper permission? Were all of those FBI movies I have watched....wrong? lol

And what are Fisa judges for, if one was needed to spy on trump? Or has the law now changed where all of that is out the window? Well, we do live in an America of 2018. Where constitutional rights hardly exist if the governing authority wants to get around it.

 

Like most people, Trump is always a work in progress.

 

Again...read the statute. You cannot surveil someone. You cannot plant a bug.

But you CAN tape a conversation that you are THERE for.

That's what Wolfe did as well... and I'm sure the FBI wants to hear those conversations as well

 

He's a piece of work alright.

Also a piece of shyte

 

Already resolved; Ocean gets it now.

 

I guess I misundertood your post? We are talking about recording between parties that are involved in the conversation in this thread. Not some third party snoop.