WWTBAM Bored

https://www.cnn.com/2020/08/22/politics ... index.html

No matter how else you feel about Trump, this isn't right. A 78-year-old family member should be able to talk to her niece without fear of being recorded. The credibility of Mary Trump's outrage over her uncle's lack of fitness for office now seems suspect--she acknowledges the taping was due to a decades-old dispute about her inheritance. Money.

Mary may be spot on in her assessment of her uncle, but to me this is shameful. The sooner this family recedes from public view will be the better for them and the better for us.

Buffacuse wrote: ↑

Sun Aug 23, 2020 6:34 am

The credibility of Mary Trump's outrage over her uncle's lack of fitness for office now seems suspect--she acknowledges the taping was due to a decades-old dispute about her inheritance. Money.

That's one way to frame the issue. The other is that she alleges that she was defrauded by her uncle. Betrayed by family, the people she should be able to rely on the most.

For money.

Buffacuse wrote: ↑

Sun Aug 23, 2020 6:34 am

https://www.cnn.com/2020/08/22/politics ... index.html

No matter how else you feel about Trump, this isn't right. A 78-year-old family member should be able to talk to her niece without fear of being recorded. The credibility of Mary Trump's outrage over her uncle's lack of fitness for office now seems suspect--she acknowledges the taping was due to a decades-old dispute about her inheritance. Money.

Mary may be spot on in her assessment of her uncle, but to me this is shameful. The sooner this family recedes from public view will be the better for them and the better for us.

I know you were making a moral point rather than a legal point, but for those who may be wondering, the taping occurred in New York, which is a one-party consent state. --Bob

Okay, this is a question I wanted to ask and here is better than EFB.

I didn't think it was legal to record someone without their knowledge. And then the legal question of whether you can then release that recording to the public. I guess that lands in the area if both moral and legal.

christie1111 wrote: ↑

Sun Aug 23, 2020 2:19 pm

Okay, this is a question I wanted to ask and here is better than EFB.

I didn't think it was legal to record someone without their knowledge. And then the legal question of whether you can then release that recording to the public. I guess that lands in the area if both moral and legal.

As Bob said, the laws vary from state to state. In some states, only one party needs to consent to the recording. Apparently, New York is one of those states.

MarleysGh0st wrote: ↑

Sun Aug 23, 2020 8:34 am

Buffacuse wrote: ↑

Sun Aug 23, 2020 6:34 am

The credibility of Mary Trump's outrage over her uncle's lack of fitness for office now seems suspect--she acknowledges the taping was due to a decades-old dispute about her inheritance. Money.

That's one way to frame the issue. The other is that she alleges that she was defrauded by her uncle. Betrayed by family, the people she should be able to rely on the most.

For money.

Sadly, in far, far, too many 'families,' nothing tears it apart like money, whether it's the love of it or lack of it (or failed expectation of it). And there is not much that gets uglier, faster. Especially among relatives who didn't actually earn it, work to grow it, or inherit it directly.