Omaorosa's Book Tour Vs. 40 more Murdered Yemeni Children

[Bham1982]

Provide the link that backs up # 2 ,bet you cannot,and yet you stand firm on accusations as facts.

https://nypost.com/2018/08/14/omaros...g-n-word-tape/

Provide the link where it was illegal for the president to request a NDA?

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/13/u...s-omarosa.html

You write that the president personally tried to buy off her silence,when it was his daughter who is her friend and if you think he is unaware of what is going in the whitehouse then I have a non Canadian funded bridge for sale,you interested?

You're either unable to understand what I wrote, or unable to understand what you wrote, because you're agreeing with me here. The tape does indeed indicate that Trump is buying her silence through his kids, as Omarosa previously claimed.

This is all very funny because Omarosa is basically a black female Trump. She's a well-known insane moron, Trump hired her because he thought she would be a good lying sycophant, now she's turning on him and all his cultists are attacking her, when the dude they're defending is exactly the same.

[Richard]

https://nypost.com/2018/08/14/omaros...g-n-word-tape/


https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/13/u...s-omarosa.html



You're either unable to understand what I wrote, or unable to understand what you wrote, because you're agreeing with me here. The tape does indeed indicate that Trump is buying her silence through his kids, as Omarosa previously claimed.

This is all very funny because Omarosa is basically a black female Trump. She's a well-known insane moron, Trump hired her because he thought she would be a good lying sycophant, now she's turning on him and all his cultists are attacking her, when the dude they're defending is exactly the same.

Yet here you are still provided links of things that she claims,it is in bold print as the header,Omarosa claims.

Provide the actual link that plays the tape in regards to the use of the N word,as she claims.

She also did provide a tape that was made up from multiple phone conversations and used sections of the conversations in order to compile something that she wanted people to hear.

How come she edited out her own words? You do realize that compilation of words from multiple phone conversations can be edited to create what you want people to hear?

Your favorite news sites that you are posting links from have actually poked holes in her stories and accusations.

You write that Trump is trying to buy her silence through his kids,but yet the woman offering the job is not his kid,so why do you insist on twisting things around in your mind to justify something that is not there?

You remind me of what is happening in India where somebody posts on social media that somebody tried to kidnap a child and a mob of 2000 finds somebody and beats them to death only to find out that they had nothing to do with the accusations.

[oladub]

No, that's your desperate whataboutism. You claimed she worked for the Clintons [[lie) and you claimed that Hillary slurred African Americans [[lie).

You cultists are so deep into bizarre nonlogic you have no idea what you're even saying.

Your wacky claims, if they were true, would mean that Trump is as awful as Hillary Clinton, who you think belongs in federal prison. Why would you support anyone in the Oval Office who belongs in federal prison?

As to your question, "Why would you support anyone in the Oval Office who belongs in federal prison?" Here is a partial answer: As Hillary had never been convicted of anything, she was ineligible for prison. As a candidate, Hillary had threatened to shoot down Russian planes over Syria. As Senator, she voted to empower Bush to go to war in Iraq. As SOS, her policies contributed to hundreds of thousands of needless Arab deaths and millions of refugees. Hillary has always been a war monger; almost as bad as McCain. She spewed disdain for American workers; a "basket of deplorables". She represented the status quo and put a sleazy squeeze on Bernie's campaign. She advocated identity politics. There is, in my mind, evidence suggesting that she was a crook and a liar [[Clinton Foundation, Russian uranium deal, etc,). To my knowledge, no federal Democrat supports the 10th. Amendment and most Democrats pretty much leave the rest of the Constitution up for "interpretation" based on trendy politically correct revelations. On the emotional, non-rational side, I loathed the thought of seeing Hillary on TV for four years. Since losing, Hillary has been disgusting in blaming everyone but herself. I voted for Bernie to keep Hillary out. When that didn't work, I voted for Trump for the same reason as he scored better in all those counts I mentioned above. My preference would have been Rand Paul for smaller government, less spending, balancing the budget, and less interventionism but the choice was Hillary or Trump. Your question was off topic but thank you for asking.

No, I did not claim Omarosa "worked for the Clintons". I copied a link saying Omarosa "Also made quite a few enemies in the White House, where she was banished from four jobs in two years with the Clinton administration. ” The Clinton administration is different from "the Clintons". You later tried to claim that she worked for Al Gore and not Clinton as if Al Gore was not part of the Clinton administration.

I didn't just claim Omarosa "Hillary slurred African Americans", I provided a link from Politifact saying that was "mostly true". You responded by claiming that Hillary was referring to AA youth, not blacks as if AA youth were not a subset of black Americans. If you missed it on my two last post, here it is again:

Our ruling
Priebus said Hillary Clinton is "the the one that labeled African-American youth as superpredators."
Clinton — in the midst of championing her husband’s 1994 crime legislation — did use the term "superpredator" when referring to "gangs of kids." She did not specifically label superpredators as African-American, but the context of her speech and her subsequent apology decades later suggests it was a reasonable inference.
Priebus’ claim is accurate -POLITIFACT