Angel0925 wrote: ↑Wed May 04, 2022 4:40 pm
lulugirl765 wrote: ↑Mon May 02, 2022 4:04 pm
I’m guessing "stolen" has a wide latitude of interpretation and Tati picks whatever makes her look like a victim. That palette could be in any stage of production from "planned" to "on order" to "order waiting to be picked up" and may not have even been paid for, just the order stopped. I wouldn’t put it past her either to invent the notion somebody is selling her palette "idea" right now. What does it cost her to "hint" the palette could be for sale someplace, she doesn’t say where and nobody can ever track what she is saying to prove her lying?
It’s not that hard to get a palette like that made. Here is a similar one:
https://www.etsy.com/listing/901960279/ ... ch_click=1
Here's what I don't understand.. Tati says that the palette wasn't finished and specifically says that the formula wasn't approved. Then, she goes on to say that a bunch of palettes were "stolen" from the company. My question, if the formula hadn't been finalized, why did so many get made?? Yeeaaahhh ok
... something ain't jiving with her story. Also, considering that she said her legal team was gonna watch the video about the "stolen" palette before she put it out, I'm surprised no one caught that. Doesn't instill a lot of faith in the competency of her legal team, if you ask me.
I certainly caught it, but it’s a page back up on the chat.
Tati is using "stolen" like a mafia boss when she really means she got "cheated" of her opportunity to sell it herself. She couldn’t sell it in any way, shape or form under a court financial assessment order. She thinks everything that’s happened is a crime against her instead of the real world of business where your investors have to right to sue you for breach of contract and pull their financing.
A narcissist and gaslighter blames everyone but themselves when things don’t go their way. They refuse to look at their own mistakes. They insist everyone else is at fault and they are the victim.
She will never publicly say that her Halo contract with Clark included her delivering new products and celebrity endorsements that she overreached and failed to deliver. Then she tried to torpedo those celebrities with homophobia because she was angry for their disloyalty to her. All that did was wreck her social profile and drive away her support, including her investor who saw her reputation and his money circling the drain.
... something ain't jiving with her story. Also, considering that she said her legal team was gonna watch the video about the "stolen" palette before she put it out, I'm surprised no one caught that. Doesn't instill a lot of faith in the competency of her legal team, if you ask me.
