The Kane Show (Part 4)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If I were her I would be worried about outing him or whatever because she literally has NO source of income besides him.

I'm not sure she should let that deter her. She's going to have to get a career. I'm sure there are people following her story that would give her a job. She was in marketing before she left the workforce. She may not live get to live in a million dollar home, but she will survive. If he was to lose his job, she and the girls will survive, the same way any woman does who gets divorced.

+1000 Agreed. Why should she have to fear that? She can pick herself up, get a job, and a place. She's an intelligent woman. She does not need handouts from Kane. He will still have to pay child support so the girls will be taken care of.

+100000 Agree! Shes mentioned several times that her mother was a single mother raising her so I'm sure she knows she can do it too. Men walk out on women and their families everyday (although usually not on a nationally syndicated radio program; bonus points for having thick enough skin to get through that!) and they get in there and do what they need to for their family. Shes a strong mama bear just like many of us on here. Screw withering up & dying b/c the 'man' isn't in the picture anymore.

Ok, not at all defending Kane here, just making sure facts are straight, but you can't act as if he abandoned his girls. Just because he left his wife doesn't mean he isn't doing his part with his daughters. I'm sure he is paying child support, because if not there would literally be no way for Natasha to support them when she has them, she doesn't have a paying job yet. Kane is still very much "in the picture". I don't know what their custody arrangement is but he just had the girls at Disney for the week, you can't say that's not "in the picture". I'm all for acknowledging Kane for the douche that he is, but I feel like the one and only aspect in his life he doesn't fail at is being a good dad to his girls.

Agreed. It's a pet peeve of mine when divorced women whose ex husbands are in the picture call themselves single moms. From my perspective a single mom is a mom doing it all on her own, not just a woman whose marital status is single. Natasha is a divorced (or soon to be) mom. There's no discounting that Kane pays for everything (for her and the girls) and is an active father.

[Anonymous]

I'll have a lot more respect for Natasha if she gets a job. I feel like she'll just blog and make videos and act as if that's a career, even if it only nets her $100 a month. That's not good enough when you've got kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If I were her I would be worried about outing him or whatever because she literally has NO source of income besides him.

I'm not sure she should let that deter her. She's going to have to get a career. I'm sure there are people following her story that would give her a job. She was in marketing before she left the workforce. She may not live get to live in a million dollar home, but she will survive. If he was to lose his job, she and the girls will survive, the same way any woman does who gets divorced.

+1000 Agreed. Why should she have to fear that? She can pick herself up, get a job, and a place. She's an intelligent woman. She does not need handouts from Kane. He will still have to pay child support so the girls will be taken care of.

+100000 Agree! Shes mentioned several times that her mother was a single mother raising her so I'm sure she knows she can do it too. Men walk out on women and their families everyday (although usually not on a nationally syndicated radio program; bonus points for having thick enough skin to get through that!) and they get in there and do what they need to for their family. Shes a strong mama bear just like many of us on here. Screw withering up & dying b/c the 'man' isn't in the picture anymore.

Ok, not at all defending Kane here, just making sure facts are straight, but you can't act as if he abandoned his girls. Just because he left his wife doesn't mean he isn't doing his part with his daughters. I'm sure he is paying child support, because if not there would literally be no way for Natasha to support them when she has them, she doesn't have a paying job yet. Kane is still very much "in the picture". I don't know what their custody arrangement is but he just had the girls at Disney for the week, you can't say that's not "in the picture". I'm all for acknowledging Kane for the douche that he is, but I feel like the one and only aspect in his life he doesn't fail at is being a good dad to his girls.

Agreed. It's a pet peeve of mine when divorced women whose ex husbands are in the picture call themselves single moms. From my perspective a single mom is a mom doing it all on her own, not just a woman whose marital status is single. Natasha is a divorced (or soon to be) mom. There's no discounting that Kane pays for everything (for her and the girls) and is an active father.

It's not even really that "he left his wife". Yes, he may have filed for divorce, but SHE is the one who left. I'm sure he would have rather reconciled.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If I were her I would be worried about outing him or whatever because she literally has NO source of income besides him.

I'm not sure she should let that deter her. She's going to have to get a career. I'm sure there are people following her story that would give her a job. She was in marketing before she left the workforce. She may not live get to live in a million dollar home, but she will survive. If he was to lose his job, she and the girls will survive, the same way any woman does who gets divorced.

+1000 Agreed. Why should she have to fear that? She can pick herself up, get a job, and a place. She's an intelligent woman. She does not need handouts from Kane. He will still have to pay child support so the girls will be taken care of.

+100000 Agree! Shes mentioned several times that her mother was a single mother raising her so I'm sure she knows she can do it too. Men walk out on women and their families everyday (although usually not on a nationally syndicated radio program; bonus points for having thick enough skin to get through that!) and they get in there and do what they need to for their family. Shes a strong mama bear just like many of us on here. Screw withering up & dying b/c the 'man' isn't in the picture anymore.

Ok, not at all defending Kane here, just making sure facts are straight, but you can't act as if he abandoned his girls. Just because he left his wife doesn't mean he isn't doing his part with his daughters. I'm sure he is paying child support, because if not there would literally be no way for Natasha to support them when she has them, she doesn't have a paying job yet. Kane is still very much "in the picture". I don't know what their custody arrangement is but he just had the girls at Disney for the week, you can't say that's not "in the picture". I'm all for acknowledging Kane for the douche that he is, but I feel like the one and only aspect in his life he doesn't fail at is being a good dad to his girls.

No one ever said Kane didn't take care of his kids or wasn't in the picture. All the comments address her getting a job and making a life for her and the girls. Some people are commenting that she shouldn't bite the hand that feeds her. My point is she shouldn't have to fear that hand. If he doesn't "feed" her anymore, she can take care of herself. He will still have to do his part and provide for the girls, so Natasha really just needs to work on finding a career.

I think it was the fact that in your post you say things like, "men walk out on women and their families every day and then said that it doesn't usually happen on the radio, and then said, screw withering up and dying because the man isn't in the picture anymore. I took that to mean you were referring to Kane doing that. I am in agreement that she shouldn't rely on Kane, all it does it give him power over her, which is terrible. Sorry I mistook your comment for saying that Kane was in the group of men you were talking about, that's just how it came off to me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:On Sarah's podcast this week she said the reason why she left TKS was because Kane secretly recorded audio of her and hid it for 7 months. When she discovered it he said it was accidental. She then left bc she didn't trust him. Very shady. Think he was waiting to blackmail her when an opportune moment came up?

This is entirely creepy and inappropriate.

DC is a "one party consent" law, which means so long as one person in the conversation (Kane) consents, he can record. I don't know how that applies if he was recording her in a conversation with someone else, but the whole thing stinks.

Kane has serious issues with women.

I don't know if it matters (don't know what MD's laws are), but the recording was probably happening at their studios in MD, not DC proper.

ETA: looks like MD is a two-party consent state.. http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/recording-phone-calls-and-conversations

So Sarah busted Kane and he claims it was an "accident." Sure it was. She can't prove it otherwise, I'd guess. He's a creep.

Reminds me of a PP's argument that anyone could've registered the domain of Mel's name with Kane's info. Yeah, I'm sure that's what happened. His need for control is alarming.

It makes you wonder what he has on Nat. If he was doing it at work, he was doing it at home.

Kane has said before that he had a comprehensive video surveillance system at his house. You can even see some of the screen grabs on his social media (one time IJ mooned one of the cameras). He said it was for security, but he probably looked at the cameras to check up on Natasha, too. He said in his divorce announcement that he pulled the camera footage and saw Natasha's friend come over to help her leave.

Didn't he say at some point that she had covered the cameras? I think it was when the alarm went off and she wasn't answering his calls.

if that's the case, it sounds like she knew he watched the cameras.

She knew, he's a controlling narcissist. I'm a friend of the family and I know that she found out he was watching her constantly during the times HE had the kids. He was obsessed with watching her even though she wasn't dating anyone. (while he brags on Tinder about the twenty something strippers he's swiping on) So yeah, she covered them because she's trying to be free. Trying to start her own life apart from him.

That's beyond creepy. She should have had those cameras ripped out the second he moved out. So he filed but also wants to watch her every move? That's like some movie of the week ish right there.

Oh, please. How would Natasha even know that he was "watching her EVERY move - while he had the kids." I don't really care for Kane but if I remember correctly he mentioned the cameras were for safety reasons (which makes sense because of his "status"). However, if she isn't GUILTY of anything or has nothing to hide she wouldn't even think to cover up the cameras....sounds like she's paranoid to me

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:On Sarah's podcast this week she said the reason why she left TKS was because Kane secretly recorded audio of her and hid it for 7 months. When she discovered it he said it was accidental. She then left bc she didn't trust him. Very shady. Think he was waiting to blackmail her when an opportune moment came up?

This is entirely creepy and inappropriate.

DC is a "one party consent" law, which means so long as one person in the conversation (Kane) consents, he can record. I don't know how that applies if he was recording her in a conversation with someone else, but the whole thing stinks.

Kane has serious issues with women.

I don't know if it matters (don't know what MD's laws are), but the recording was probably happening at their studios in MD, not DC proper.

ETA: looks like MD is a two-party consent state.. http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/recording-phone-calls-and-conversations

So Sarah busted Kane and he claims it was an "accident." Sure it was. She can't prove it otherwise, I'd guess. He's a creep.

Reminds me of a PP's argument that anyone could've registered the domain of Mel's name with Kane's info. Yeah, I'm sure that's what happened. His need for control is alarming.

It makes you wonder what he has on Nat. If he was doing it at work, he was doing it at home.

Kane has said before that he had a comprehensive video surveillance system at his house. You can even see some of the screen grabs on his social media (one time IJ mooned one of the cameras). He said it was for security, but he probably looked at the cameras to check up on Natasha, too. He said in his divorce announcement that he pulled the camera footage and saw Natasha's friend come over to help her leave.

Didn't he say at some point that she had covered the cameras? I think it was when the alarm went off and she wasn't answering his calls.

if that's the case, it sounds like she knew he watched the cameras.

She knew, he's a controlling narcissist. I'm a friend of the family and I know that she found out he was watching her constantly during the times HE had the kids. He was obsessed with watching her even though she wasn't dating anyone. (while he brags on Tinder about the twenty something strippers he's swiping on) So yeah, she covered them because she's trying to be free. Trying to start her own life apart from him.

That's beyond creepy. She should have had those cameras ripped out the second he moved out. So he filed but also wants to watch her every move? That's like some movie of the week ish right there.

Oh, please. How would Natasha even know that he was "watching her EVERY move - while he had the kids." I don't really care for Kane but if I remember correctly he mentioned the cameras were for safety reasons (which makes sense because of his "status"). However, if she isn't GUILTY of anything or has nothing to hide she wouldn't even think to cover up the cameras....sounds like she's paranoid to me

Um...It's not paranoid. Kane watching her is creepy AF. I wouldn't want my own husband watching me on cameras all over the house, let alone my ex-husband who said the worst shit ever about me on nationally syndicated radio.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:On Sarah's podcast this week she said the reason why she left TKS was because Kane secretly recorded audio of her and hid it for 7 months. When she discovered it he said it was accidental. She then left bc she didn't trust him. Very shady. Think he was waiting to blackmail her when an opportune moment came up?

This is entirely creepy and inappropriate.

DC is a "one party consent" law, which means so long as one person in the conversation (Kane) consents, he can record. I don't know how that applies if he was recording her in a conversation with someone else, but the whole thing stinks.

Kane has serious issues with women.

I don't know if it matters (don't know what MD's laws are), but the recording was probably happening at their studios in MD, not DC proper.

ETA: looks like MD is a two-party consent state.. http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/recording-phone-calls-and-conversations

So Sarah busted Kane and he claims it was an "accident." Sure it was. She can't prove it otherwise, I'd guess. He's a creep.

Reminds me of a PP's argument that anyone could've registered the domain of Mel's name with Kane's info. Yeah, I'm sure that's what happened. His need for control is alarming.

It makes you wonder what he has on Nat. If he was doing it at work, he was doing it at home.

Kane has said before that he had a comprehensive video surveillance system at his house. You can even see some of the screen grabs on his social media (one time IJ mooned one of the cameras). He said it was for security, but he probably looked at the cameras to check up on Natasha, too. He said in his divorce announcement that he pulled the camera footage and saw Natasha's friend come over to help her leave.

Didn't he say at some point that she had covered the cameras? I think it was when the alarm went off and she wasn't answering his calls.

if that's the case, it sounds like she knew he watched the cameras.

She knew, he's a controlling narcissist. I'm a friend of the family and I know that she found out he was watching her constantly during the times HE had the kids. He was obsessed with watching her even though she wasn't dating anyone. (while he brags on Tinder about the twenty something strippers he's swiping on) So yeah, she covered them because she's trying to be free. Trying to start her own life apart from him.

That's beyond creepy. She should have had those cameras ripped out the second he moved out. So he filed but also wants to watch her every move? That's like some movie of the week ish right there.

Oh, please. How would Natasha even know that he was "watching her EVERY move - while he had the kids." I don't really care for Kane but if I remember correctly he mentioned the cameras were for safety reasons (which makes sense because of his "status"). However, if she isn't GUILTY of anything or has nothing to hide she wouldn't even think to cover up the cameras....sounds like she's paranoid to me

Um...It's not paranoid. Kane watching her is creepy AF. I wouldn't want my own husband watching me on cameras all over the house, let alone my ex-husband who said the worst shit ever about me on nationally syndicated radio.

[phone]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:On Sarah's podcast this week she said the reason why she left TKS was because Kane secretly recorded audio of her and hid it for 7 months. When she discovered it he said it was accidental. She then left bc she didn't trust him. Very shady. Think he was waiting to blackmail her when an opportune moment came up?

This is entirely creepy and inappropriate.

DC is a "one party consent" law, which means so long as one person in the conversation (Kane) consents, he can record. I don't know how that applies if he was recording her in a conversation with someone else, but the whole thing stinks.

Kane has serious issues with women.

I don't know if it matters (don't know what MD's laws are), but the recording was probably happening at their studios in MD, not DC proper.

ETA: looks like MD is a two-party consent state.. http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/recording-phone-calls-and-conversations

So Sarah busted Kane and he claims it was an "accident." Sure it was. She can't prove it otherwise, I'd guess. He's a creep.

Reminds me of a PP's argument that anyone could've registered the domain of Mel's name with Kane's info. Yeah, I'm sure that's what happened. His need for control is alarming.

It makes you wonder what he has on Nat. If he was doing it at work, he was doing it at home.

Kane has said before that he had a comprehensive video surveillance system at his house. You can even see some of the screen grabs on his social media (one time IJ mooned one of the cameras). He said it was for security, but he probably looked at the cameras to check up on Natasha, too. He said in his divorce announcement that he pulled the camera footage and saw Natasha's friend come over to help her leave.

Didn't he say at some point that she had covered the cameras? I think it was when the alarm went off and she wasn't answering his calls.

if that's the case, it sounds like she knew he watched the cameras.

She knew, he's a controlling narcissist. I'm a friend of the family and I know that she found out he was watching her constantly during the times HE had the kids. He was obsessed with watching her even though she wasn't dating anyone. (while he brags on Tinder about the twenty something strippers he's swiping on) So yeah, she covered them because she's trying to be free. Trying to start her own life apart from him.

That's beyond creepy. She should have had those cameras ripped out the second he moved out. So he filed but also wants to watch her every move? That's like some movie of the week ish right there.

Oh, please. How would Natasha even know that he was "watching her EVERY move - while he had the kids." I don't really care for Kane but if I remember correctly he mentioned the cameras were for safety reasons (which makes sense because of his "status"). However, if she isn't GUILTY of anything or has nothing to hide she wouldn't even think to cover up the cameras....sounds like she's paranoid to me

Yeah I don't buy it either. I mean anyone in their right mind would just rip the cameras out or unplug them if they thought they were being watched after living with a control freak. They wouldn't just wait around **allegedly** being filmed for weeks and then cover the cameras. Natasha annoys the sh*t out of me because everything that comes out of hers or her friends' mouths about the situation is "woe is me, she's suuuuch a victim and there was noooothing she could do about it until HE filed for divorce!" Please. She just sounds whiny and lazy at this point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ok, but the pp was actually inquiring about the accident she had where she put a piece of the car in the trunk and hid it from him or whatever. They also asked you about the possibility of him having an addiction.

youre probably right, so i'm going to shut up now but those around her (friends and her 'passionate' family) cant stand just sitting by and watching her be defamed. its so wrong.

im not going to say anything about him b/c i dont want his hate radar zerored in on me or to make things worse for her. i think theyre actually tring to amicalbly co-parent together now.

i will clear up that there was no other accident, it was completely made up. the things that were said about her werent just exaggerations or miscontrued, that were totally made up.

First off, it would be IMMENSELY ignorant for him to lie on air over something that could potentially cause him to lose his kids - especially when everyone knows they both have attorneys watching every move they make. Secondly, why would she admit to something that would effect her alimony and possibly the custody of her children. Lets be real, Natasha doesn't want to work - she can't even blog once a month as a SAHM, she NEEDS his money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:On Sarah's podcast this week she said the reason why she left TKS was because Kane secretly recorded audio of her and hid it for 7 months. When she discovered it he said it was accidental. She then left bc she didn't trust him. Very shady. Think he was waiting to blackmail her when an opportune moment came up?

This is entirely creepy and inappropriate.

DC is a "one party consent" law, which means so long as one person in the conversation (Kane) consents, he can record. I don't know how that applies if he was recording her in a conversation with someone else, but the whole thing stinks.

Kane has serious issues with women.

I don't know if it matters (don't know what MD's laws are), but the recording was probably happening at their studios in MD, not DC proper.

ETA: looks like MD is a two-party consent state.. http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/recording-phone-calls-and-conversations

So Sarah busted Kane and he claims it was an "accident." Sure it was. She can't prove it otherwise, I'd guess. He's a creep.

Reminds me of a PP's argument that anyone could've registered the domain of Mel's name with Kane's info. Yeah, I'm sure that's what happened. His need for control is alarming.

It makes you wonder what he has on Nat. If he was doing it at work, he was doing it at home.

Kane has said before that he had a comprehensive video surveillance system at his house. You can even see some of the screen grabs on his social media (one time IJ mooned one of the cameras). He said it was for security, but he probably looked at the cameras to check up on Natasha, too. He said in his divorce announcement that he pulled the camera footage and saw Natasha's friend come over to help her leave.

Didn't he say at some point that she had covered the cameras? I think it was when the alarm went off and she wasn't answering his calls.

if that's the case, it sounds like she knew he watched the cameras.

She knew, he's a controlling narcissist. I'm a friend of the family and I know that she found out he was watching her constantly during the times HE had the kids. He was obsessed with watching her even though she wasn't dating anyone. (while he brags on Tinder about the twenty something strippers he's swiping on) So yeah, she covered them because she's trying to be free. Trying to start her own life apart from him.

That's beyond creepy. She should have had those cameras ripped out the second he moved out. So he filed but also wants to watch her every move? That's like some movie of the week ish right there.

Oh, please. How would Natasha even know that he was "watching her EVERY move - while he had the kids." I don't really care for Kane but if I remember correctly he mentioned the cameras were for safety reasons (which makes sense because of his "status"). However, if she isn't GUILTY of anything or has nothing to hide she wouldn't even think to cover up the cameras....sounds like she's paranoid to me

Yeah I don't buy it either. I mean anyone in their right mind would just rip the cameras out or unplug them if they thought they were being watched after living with a control freak. They wouldn't just wait around **allegedly** being filmed for weeks and then cover the cameras. Natasha annoys the sh*t out of me because everything that comes out of hers or her friends' mouths about the situation is "woe is me, she's suuuuch a victim and there was noooothing she could do about it until HE filed for divorce!" Please. She just sounds whiny and lazy at this point.

And, to be clear, I do not think Kane is not at fault here too. But all we've gotten from Natasha over the course of the last year is:

- He's lying! (But I won't say what about and I won't tell you the truth.)
- He was so mean to me when I fell and smashed my head open (even though a doctor and my friend didn't notice I had smashed my head open either).
- I don't know what to do with myself when my kids are gone.
- Maybe buying this _____ (necklaces, shoes, boots, flowers) will make me feel better about the fact that I don't know what to do with myself when my kids are gone.
- He's so mean to me.
- He took my blog away (even though he registered it and pays for it).
- He took my Audi away.

I'm trying to feel some sympathy for her, but she makes it awfully hard when it doesn't seem like she's doing anything to move herself forward.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:IMO the divorce between Kane/Natasha has no one who is right or wrong. I 100% buy that Kane is a vindictive control freak. I also 100% buy that Natasha was hoarding household money for a long time and that she has (or had) some sort of substance abuse problem, most likely abused prescription meds that she was too oblivious to realize she was abusing. Or she is the world's worst driver.

WOW. Who the hell are you? Seriously, those are some MAJOR accusations you're making about two people which I feel quite certain you have never met. Were you there when they were in marriage counseling? The secretary perhaps listening in with a cup on the wall?

Natasha is a real person. She is also a person who has found herself in what will probably be one of the hardest periods of her life. And she is having to go through it all, by his choice, publicly. She has been diagnosed by many doctors and even spent a week at the Mayo Clinic with a diagnosis of a serious autoimmune disease: Sjogrens Syndrome, look it up if you're not to busy kicking a stranger when theyre down, it causes arthritis, liver damage, fevers, want more? How about Fibromyalgia? (which I can personally say is a brutal disease to have, it causes pain, every day, every fucking day, and fatigue, headaches & nerve damamge... As if that were enough she said she was recently also diagnosed with a small fiber neuropathy while she was at Mayo. Let me tell you what that is since you seem to be so filled judgement & hate that its hard for you to focus on also educating yourself. It's when the nerve endings in your hands & feet burn like your nails have been pulled off & even a cool breeze feels like its holding a lighter up to your missing nail toe.

She's been remarkably honest about what medications she takes (not that she should have to answer to us) , Lyrica, Plaquinil, Elavil, she has said that she made the decision to find a pain management doctor to help her find alternative treatments that are non-opiod. Who the fuck are you to make such a judgement that she's a pill popping addict? This woman is a mother to two little girls that she loves fiercely. What a horrible thing to not just imply but say straight out that their mom is an addict?!

Please, I'm dying to know what goes on in that brain of yours that you feel its ok to make such accusatory judgements about someone YOU HAVE NEVER MET. But someone you know is a real person, a mother, a daughter...& you think its ok to publicly label her as an addict. Wow.

I want to know how you sleep at night, how does the hate not keep you awake, knowing that you should be ashamed of yourself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:On Sarah's podcast this week she said the reason why she left TKS was because Kane secretly recorded audio of her and hid it for 7 months. When she discovered it he said it was accidental. She then left bc she didn't trust him. Very shady. Think he was waiting to blackmail her when an opportune moment came up?

This is entirely creepy and inappropriate.

DC is a "one party consent" law, which means so long as one person in the conversation (Kane) consents, he can record. I don't know how that applies if he was recording her in a conversation with someone else, but the whole thing stinks.

Kane has serious issues with women.

I don't know if it matters (don't know what MD's laws are), but the recording was probably happening at their studios in MD, not DC proper.

ETA: looks like MD is a two-party consent state.. http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/recording-phone-calls-and-conversations

So Sarah busted Kane and he claims it was an "accident." Sure it was. She can't prove it otherwise, I'd guess. He's a creep.

Reminds me of a PP's argument that anyone could've registered the domain of Mel's name with Kane's info. Yeah, I'm sure that's what happened. His need for control is alarming.

It makes you wonder what he has on Nat. If he was doing it at work, he was doing it at home.

Kane has said before that he had a comprehensive video surveillance system at his house. You can even see some of the screen grabs on his social media (one time IJ mooned one of the cameras). He said it was for security, but he probably looked at the cameras to check up on Natasha, too. He said in his divorce announcement that he pulled the camera footage and saw Natasha's friend come over to help her leave.

Didn't he say at some point that she had covered the cameras? I think it was when the alarm went off and she wasn't answering his calls.

if that's the case, it sounds like she knew he watched the cameras.

She knew, he's a controlling narcissist. I'm a friend of the family and I know that she found out he was watching her constantly during the times HE had the kids. He was obsessed with watching her even though she wasn't dating anyone. (while he brags on Tinder about the twenty something strippers he's swiping on) So yeah, she covered them because she's trying to be free. Trying to start her own life apart from him.

That's beyond creepy. She should have had those cameras ripped out the second he moved out. So he filed but also wants to watch her every move? That's like some movie of the week ish right there.

Oh, please. How would Natasha even know that he was "watching her EVERY move - while he had the kids." I don't really care for Kane but if I remember correctly he mentioned the cameras were for safety reasons (which makes sense because of his "status"). However, if she isn't GUILTY of anything or has nothing to hide she wouldn't even think to cover up the cameras....sounds like she's paranoid to me

Obviously you dont have an alarm system with cameras. Take ADT for instance, thats what I have, you can log in to your account at any time from any device & watch the cameras. They're usually motion activated and then it starts recording the video. The thing is you can click on the 'history' button and it logs EVERYTHING that has happened, who logged in, at what time, what videos they watched and for how long. She could see on the history log that he was logging in & if that's during his weekends...pretty controlling if you ask me. He was probably watching to see if she was going out or even more, having someone come in...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:On Sarah's podcast this week she said the reason why she left TKS was because Kane secretly recorded audio of her and hid it for 7 months. When she discovered it he said it was accidental. She then left bc she didn't trust him. Very shady. Think he was waiting to blackmail her when an opportune moment came up?

This is entirely creepy and inappropriate.

DC is a "one party consent" law, which means so long as one person in the conversation (Kane) consents, he can record. I don't know how that applies if he was recording her in a conversation with someone else, but the whole thing stinks.

Kane has serious issues with women.

I don't know if it matters (don't know what MD's laws are), but the recording was probably happening at their studios in MD, not DC proper.

ETA: looks like MD is a two-party consent state.. http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/recording-phone-calls-and-conversations

So Sarah busted Kane and he claims it was an "accident." Sure it was. She can't prove it otherwise, I'd guess. He's a creep.

Reminds me of a PP's argument that anyone could've registered the domain of Mel's name with Kane's info. Yeah, I'm sure that's what happened. His need for control is alarming.

It makes you wonder what he has on Nat. If he was doing it at work, he was doing it at home.

Kane has said before that he had a comprehensive video surveillance system at his house. You can even see some of the screen grabs on his social media (one time IJ mooned one of the cameras). He said it was for security, but he probably looked at the cameras to check up on Natasha, too. He said in his divorce announcement that he pulled the camera footage and saw Natasha's friend come over to help her leave.

Didn't he say at some point that she had covered the cameras? I think it was when the alarm went off and she wasn't answering his calls.

if that's the case, it sounds like she knew he watched the cameras.

She knew, he's a controlling narcissist. I'm a friend of the family and I know that she found out he was watching her constantly during the times HE had the kids. He was obsessed with watching her even though she wasn't dating anyone. (while he brags on Tinder about the twenty something strippers he's swiping on) So yeah, she covered them because she's trying to be free. Trying to start her own life apart from him.

That's beyond creepy. She should have had those cameras ripped out the second he moved out. So he filed but also wants to watch her every move? That's like some movie of the week ish right there.

Oh, please. How would Natasha even know that he was "watching her EVERY move - while he had the kids." I don't really care for Kane but if I remember correctly he mentioned the cameras were for safety reasons (which makes sense because of his "status"). However, if she isn't GUILTY of anything or has nothing to hide she wouldn't even think to cover up the cameras....sounds like she's paranoid to me

Um...It's not paranoid. Kane watching her is creepy AF. I wouldn't want my own husband watching me on cameras all over the house, let alone my ex-husband who said the worst shit ever about me on nationally syndicated radio.

Oh okay, you're right. It's SO "creepy" for him to take extra precaution for the safety of his family. If the alarm is going off, the camera's are covered and she's not answering her phone - he has every right to freak the F out and be pissed off about it. Again, if she really is getting all these "death threats" WHO IN THEIR RIGHT MIND would cover up the cameras?! And most importantly, the safety of her children should come FIRST. Who cares if he can see what goes on outside of THIER home - especially if she has nothing to hide. I don't buy that he's just sitting on his ass watching when she leaves and comes home - what could he possibly gain from that?... Go ahead and call me Kane, even though it's pretty evident this so called "family friend's" story doesn't add up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:IMO the divorce between Kane/Natasha has no one who is right or wrong. I 100% buy that Kane is a vindictive control freak. I also 100% buy that Natasha was hoarding household money for a long time and that she has (or had) some sort of substance abuse problem, most likely abused prescription meds that she was too oblivious to realize she was abusing. Or she is the world's worst driver.

WOW. Who the hell are you? Seriously, those are some MAJOR accusations you're making about two people which I feel quite certain you have never met. Were you there when they were in marriage counseling? The secretary perhaps listening in with a cup on the wall?

Natasha is a real person. She is also a person who has found herself in what will probably be one of the hardest periods of her life. And she is having to go through it all, by his choice, publicly. She has been diagnosed by many doctors and even spent a week at the Mayo Clinic with a diagnosis of a serious autoimmune disease: Sjogrens Syndrome, look it up if you're not to busy kicking a stranger when theyre down, it causes arthritis, liver damage, fevers, want more? How about Fibromyalgia? (which I can personally say is a brutal disease to have, it causes pain, every day, every fucking day, and fatigue, headaches & nerve damamge... As if that were enough she said she was recently also diagnosed with a small fiber neuropathy while she was at Mayo. Let me tell you what that is since you seem to be so filled judgement & hate that its hard for you to focus on also educating yourself. It's when the nerve endings in your hands & feet burn like your nails have been pulled off & even a cool breeze feels like its holding a lighter up to your missing nail toe.

She's been remarkably honest about what medications she takes (not that she should have to answer to us) , Lyrica, Plaquinil, Elavil, she has said that she made the decision to find a pain management doctor to help her find alternative treatments that are non-opiod. Who the fuck are you to make such a judgement that she's a pill popping addict? This woman is a mother to two little girls that she loves fiercely. What a horrible thing to not just imply but say straight out that their mom is an addict?!

Please, I'm dying to know what goes on in that brain of yours that you feel its ok to make such accusatory judgements about someone YOU HAVE NEVER MET. But someone you know is a real person, a mother, a daughter...& you think its ok to publicly label her as an addict. Wow.

I want to know how you sleep at night, how does the hate not keep you awake, knowing that you should be ashamed of yourself.

So... You're saying she's just the world's worst driver then? Lol. Unless you're Natasha (or a friend?) I don't see why this post got you so frisky! And unless you are her or know her, you know just as much as I do about Natasha/Kane/their marriage. I happen to think it's not normal for an adult to get into multiple wrecks/fender benders/knock her mirrors and parts of her car off repeatedly. Untwist those panties!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:IMO the divorce between Kane/Natasha has no one who is right or wrong. I 100% buy that Kane is a vindictive control freak. I also 100% buy that Natasha was hoarding household money for a long time and that she has (or had) some sort of substance abuse problem, most likely abused prescription meds that she was too oblivious to realize she was abusing. Or she is the world's worst driver.

WOW. Who the hell are you? Seriously, those are some MAJOR accusations you're making about two people which I feel quite certain you have never met. Were you there when they were in marriage counseling? The secretary perhaps listening in with a cup on the wall?

Natasha is a real person. She is also a person who has found herself in what will probably be one of the hardest periods of her life. And she is having to go through it all, by his choice, publicly. She has been diagnosed by many doctors and even spent a week at the Mayo Clinic with a diagnosis of a serious autoimmune disease: Sjogrens Syndrome, look it up if you're not to busy kicking a stranger when theyre down, it causes arthritis, liver damage, fevers, want more? How about Fibromyalgia? (which I can personally say is a brutal disease to have, it causes pain, every day, every fucking day, and fatigue, headaches & nerve damamge... As if that were enough she said she was recently also diagnosed with a small fiber neuropathy while she was at Mayo. Let me tell you what that is since you seem to be so filled judgement & hate that its hard for you to focus on also educating yourself. It's when the nerve endings in your hands & feet burn like your nails have been pulled off & even a cool breeze feels like its holding a lighter up to your missing nail toe.

She's been remarkably honest about what medications she takes (not that she should have to answer to us) , Lyrica, Plaquinil, Elavil, she has said that she made the decision to find a pain management doctor to help her find alternative treatments that are non-opiod. Who the fuck are you to make such a judgement that she's a pill popping addict? This woman is a mother to two little girls that she loves fiercely. What a horrible thing to not just imply but say straight out that their mom is an addict?!

Please, I'm dying to know what goes on in that brain of yours that you feel its ok to make such accusatory judgements about someone YOU HAVE NEVER MET. But someone you know is a real person, a mother, a daughter...& you think its ok to publicly label her as an addict. Wow.

I want to know how you sleep at night, how does the hate not keep you awake, knowing that you should be ashamed of yourself.

Oh geez. Nat, get a job.