amarante

Ripley didn't get fired because he was in a fight. He got fired for treating the patient as he should have not participated in any treatment once he recognized the guy - let alone vetoing what should have been the treatment for the guy based on his "guilt" rather than medical judgment.

Because at this point they don't have the kind of wealth in which your children have trust funds so it is pretentious. She probably has set up 529 funds for their education The kind of trust funds she is intimating that she has require multi-million dollars for the parents to have. Five million in net assets or even ten million doesn't merit the kind of estate planning where you set up irrevocable trust funds with bonuses. At most what they have set up are so-called Revocable Trusts in which instead of a will you put all your assets in a Trust to avoid probate (not taxes). Most middle and upper middle class people have these kinds of Revocable Trusts because it avoids probate. However during the life of the parents they are free to use all of the money in the "Trusts" for their own benefit so they are generally used to fund people's retirements. On the death of both parents, what is left (if any) is distributed according to a document that is equivalent to a will and typically the children would get equal shares of what is left. When there are minor children who are the beneficiaries you set up a Trust if they inherit while they are minors and generally these Trusts can be set up so that the kids don't get all the money at 18 but at certain ages. The Trustees control the funds for the kids but have the ability to use the money for the kids and often they can invade the corpus of the Trusts for education or medical needs. ETA These "trusts" for minor children when both children die are in conjunction with the Revocable Inter Vivos Trusts but the corpus of the Trust isn't distributed to minors but used for their benefit by the Trustees appointed by the dead parents. But these kinds of "Trusts" are for when both parents die and not the kind of Trusts that people think of when discussing "Trust Fund Kids" My good friend has very significant wealth - probably $100 million or so and her kids have all kinds of Trusts. Some were set up by the grandparents to avoid taxation if their children inherited as the corpus wouldn't be taxed twice for example. These kinds of Trusts are irrevocable and can't be used by the person setting up the Trust - unlike Revocable Trusts. That is why only the extremely wealthy have these kinds of Trusts because even relatively wealthy people don't have millions of dollars to give away until they die.

Why wouldn't she buy it - or really any other rational person since it was being sold at a discount. In California you have to disclose any death and so she would have known someone died but the police report said it was a suicide. Scratches on white tile wouldn't have been noticed by many prospective buyers as they were a very slight cosmetic defect. The point was that the over-critical mother noticed them but most "normal" people wouldn't have.

Wendy is friendly with April Ryan and my understanding is that she helped broker it. Wendy has appeared on CNN and other networks as a talking head. She isn't much in demand but she does have some what of a legitimate media presence The Press Secretary isn't an enormous "get" in terms of an interview and so it was a chance to have a low stakes interview with a "friendly" media presence I don't think it was the Dr. Wendy podcast that was what they wanted but a broader audience that watches BRAVO shows that might not watch legitimate news media

Yes of course The problem is that this is what she should have done immediately Been incredibly contrite and accepted some kind of plea deal which included rehab. This is what both Shannon and Gina did on OC. Shannon was shown learning how to use the breathalyzer on her car last season. Gina discussed how difficult it was to not be able to use her car to run even errands. They accepted their fate and by and large most of the viewers accepted them as having done something wrong but not attempting to minimize their behavior as Karen has done all season. I can't begin to imagine what kind of thinking would enable someone to think that they would be completely vindicated in terms of it being a misunderstanding. She and her attorney would have viewed the cam recordings well before the trial and that should have motivated an immediate request for a plea deal of some kind She might shave off some jail time based on rehab but typically if you make it go to trial you are going to receive a harsher sentence than if you do a plea deal. The government needs an incentive to make plea bargains attractive and "deal" is the operative word - if you plead guilty and avoid having the DA spend valuable legal time plus money plus the money for the actual court room trial when trials are generally backed up - you are going to have to face repercussions for that decision

My god but that shot of Karen calling into the reunion was ridiculous. She must have deliberately made herself look as "sick" as possible because these women glam themselves up when they wake up and call someone on the phone. I assume she is still being delusional about garnering some kind of sympathy. I have never liked her although I found her delusions to be amusing through the years. Therefore I can't help but experience strong feeling of schadenfreude as the other women she has tyrannized throughout the years must also feel. She really seriously opted for the wrong approach by going on television and acting as if this was some minor misunderstanding which would be cleared up at the trial - knowing what was contained on the tapes. And knowing that most of the women know that the act she has done is a complete sham - she was well known to them to be a drunk as well as having affairs - all the while putting on much more of a facade than any of the other women. Ashley came close but she was only lying about Michael in terms of defending him but always presented herself and her marriage as not being "traditional"

It also infuriated me in terms of her disclosure being treated as some kind of exercise in feminist moral courage. Just an example of rich privilege as even in the bad old days she would have gone to Puerto Rico.

I meant value to Balenciaga as they can't really sell it in their store as a new garment. It isn't "worth" $1500 to Balenciaga as it has limited value to them at this point. Wholesale was no more than 50% and actual cost of materials - I am assuming this was Terry cloth and not cashmere would have been relatively low and certainly this didn't require exquisite tailoring by artisans.

It was definitely a shmatta - no other word would describe it accurately as in Brynn wore a feathered glittery shmatta to the reunion - and one would know exactly how ridiculous it was. I think that Balenciaga lent it to her because they knew it would become a statement and the brands lend clothing in order to get a write up all the time - that's the point. And lending a $1500 bathrobe to Jenna for the reunion where the clothing is widely discussed would definitely be a real "get" for the brand's PR person. Balenciaga will no doubt give it to Andy to be hung in the Clubhouse because it is more than worth it for that kind of enduring PR. And who is in the market for a used bathrobe - however high the price tag might be?

The problem with being as much of a liar as Brynn has been shown to be is that she simply can't be believed for anything she says. I do believe in data rape as being a major issue but I also am having a hard time not being cynical about Brynn conveniently revealing it AND weaponizing it at a critical moment. ETA And I think most of the women share my skepticism regarding her allegations. However they are too canny to actually go on record as not believing her. And how in hell does Erin come off as some feminist heroine for justifying an abortion for herself but supporting policies denying them to other women. Brynn dodges questions - puts on fake tears whenever confronted by any "inconvenient" question or truth. And she managed to dodge Sai's asking exactly how she did earn her living with a non-answer. Her "stated" occupation is a "marketing and communications consultant" which is word salad for a "non-job". The arena is small enough so that these women would know exactly what companies or events she has worked on

I don’t understand drag kings as a culture. Women have always had the ability to wear men’s clothing and since Marlene Dietrich has been viewed as extremely sexually attractive. There are whole categories of mainstream female clothing that are intended to mimic boys or men’s clothing and aesthetics Men dressing as women was never mainstream🤷‍♀️ As to economics, the women monetize social media which can bring in quite a lot of money. Almost every post can being n either money or result in a freebie in exchange for the mention.

The ride or die for Karen is not aging well. While Mia is so much of a liar that anything she said can’t be trusted, in some ways she actually is much more revealing of herself than Karen has ever been because Mia reveals the essential core of her being. Mia is an ex stripper who married an older man for his money and had affairs throughout marriage. She displays herself as a complete mess and doesn’t hide it or put up any pretense that she is anything but trashy 🤷‍♀️ Karen is a drunk who also married an older man for money and has affairs yet presents an image on the show of being high society well bred while her cast mates evidently knew about the real Karen and for whatever reason chose to let her present this false narrative.

My understanding is that a pool house is a separate structure that is generally on the side away from the "house" - e.g. on the other side of the pool. It theoretically would enable people to avoid users of the pool coming into the main house for the bathroom and shower. Her structure is essentially a three sided shed that you can sit on which is more equivalent to having a covered porch although not quite the same. However all of the work Bullard was "donating" was superficial - i.e. furniture, paint and wallpaper and I assume was free in exchange for the promotional exposure. My next door neighbor used him for her remodel and it must have cost millions. It was Morrocan inspired which is very typical of his stuff if you google but it was a fantastic place when he was finished. Not at all cookie cutter with "gray" bathrooms but fantastic Moorish tiles

Erika hasn't bought a house yet as she is still living in the rental she moved into when she moved out of Pasadena home She doesn't live in the pool house. Based on my knowledge of homes in this neighborhood that was originally a tiny garage and they turned it into a "pool" house when they added a pool. She isn't remodeling anything. She struck a deal with Bullard for some free furniture in exchange for featuring him on the show as a "celebrity" designer. In real life he wouldn't be taking on this kind of job because he wouldn't be making any money on it. He does multi-million dollar projects and doesn't "advise" people on what paint to use or sofa to buy.

Brian Moylan does really excellent recaps on vulture.com His book on the housewives' franchises is also interesting for some of the inside operations. As he writes this "fight" is a proxy fight for positioning on the show - it isn't about the text per se - it is about a power struggle which translates into "money" to some extent as well as cast position. Kyle has been a power for many years and the women are trying to take over her alpha dog position to ensure their hierarchy in the cast. FWIW I really am not a "fan" of any them as between Kyle and Dorit I couldn't care less who has power. There are some like Garcelle and Sutton who are less obviously predatory in terms of their machinations. Boz is no innocent as she is stirring the pot. And I am completely not buying the Erika redemption arc.