Omarosa does have tapes......

[Blankity Blank]

Wow. Just watched her interview with Savanah Gutherie in The Today Show.

Whatever else she may or may not be, Omarosa is a Bruce Lee level kung fu master in an interview.

She says she’s got the goods, and tRump and company might just have something to worry about this time. And I say that as someone who is as astonished as anyone else at how tRump has survived not as a teflon President, but as a walking trash pile that just won’t topple over.

[NewtonMP2100]

....she played the tape of Trump playing dumb and acting like he didn't know she was fired.......

[samintx]

BUT what are the legal reasons she was fired? I heard the complete Kelly tape this a.m. and lawyers were in the 2 hr meeting and Kelly went into her sins would almost be court martial level if she was in the army.

So......I don't hear anyone asking the question. ......

[hal]

There is no need for a 'legal reason'. The prez wants her gone, she's gone - end of story.

[decay]

hal wrote:
There is no need for a 'legal reason'. The prez wants her gone, she's gone - end of story.

AKA "right to work"

[max]

decay wrote:
[quote=hal]
There is no need for a 'legal reason'. The prez wants her gone, she's gone - end of story.

AKA "right to work" Wrong, there is no right to work here at all, as hal mentioned,

a political appointee working at the "pleasure of the President"...

[JoeH]

Well, given that what "right to work" really means in the context of those state laws, yeah AKA the "pleasure of the president". No practical difference between the two.

[max]

JoeH wrote:
Well, given that what "right to work" really means in the context of those state laws,

...well, given that your interpretation is not the same as what it really means it is not the same....

[JoeH]

No, given the history of these "right to work" laws, I stand by my interpretation. They don't provide any "right" at all.

[Sarcany]

JoeH wrote:
No, given the history of these "right to work" laws, I stand by my interpretation. They don't provide any "right" at all.

Whether there are "rights" implicated or not may be debated.

What is not subject to debate: So-called "right to work" laws strip workers of the benefits from collective bargaining.

They are immoral union-busting cash-grabs put in place by immoral legislators operating to the detriment of the people of this nation that they purport to represent.

It's as shameful that people who advocate such laws exist in this age as it is that the Klan and Nazis persist. They are cut from the same cloth and ultimately their goals are much the same: Subjugation of those they consider to be lesser classes.