suomi

Sounds like RHOBH is off the table. https://www.etonline.com/tori-spelling-and-dean-mcdermott-have-started-counseling-in-hopes-of-turning-marriage-around-108491

I'm glad that True's pinafore is too big and isn't touching her skin everywhere it's meant to because obviously that woven fabric is stiff and scratchy; knit fabric is much, much better for littles. It looks like it wasn't laundered to remove the sizing, which would make it a tad softer. And hopefully she was changed into something else after the photo was taken. I would cut a bitch who made me wear something stiff like that.

Per Janelle's chapter in their book, it was 3+ years. After Gabe was born she and her kids moved in with her mom "for a few months" and then she found (bought?) a house. After being in that house for 2 years Kody told her he was moving the family to Utah and wanted her to join them. She held out against doing that for "almost another year."

As the "reunion" unfolded, I concluded that Alison never would have been approached by her father for any reason if he had successfully located a donor elsewhere, and it appeared to me that Alison came to the same conclusion. She didn't need to read between the lines because James and his wife specifically did ask her to donate. They said that his kids from his first marriage have incompatible blood types and his kids from the current marriage are too young to donate. Then they offered to pay Alison for donating a kidney. Their intentions in reuniting with/approaching Alison could not have been more clear.

Saw this yesterday and thought WTF, now I see that it ties in with green Kanye at the wedding ... https://pagesix.com/2018/08/17/kim-kardashian-gets-neon-green-lamborghini-to-match-her-hair/

I have the Showtime app via Amazon Fire TV and I always get the latest ep sometime Saturday evening. I didn't keep track but I wanna say maybe 6pm, 8pm, somewhere along in there.

That's what I thought and then I decided it was just me. But it sure as shit looks that way. Unfortunate choice of shorts and unfortunate cropping of the photo. Sheesh.

Any thoughts here regarding how the names of jurors came up? There were issues with specific jurors for that to be the case, right?

I wish we had a LMAO button. We would put it to good use.

John Brennan will be on with Rach tomorrow evening for his first live TV interview.

Right, for sure they will have surgery, but my question is about hiding the scars from doing that. They don't believe in horizontal ass creases and where else is there to hide a scar? Will that mean no more ass photos? (No more doggy style? LOL)

Khloe and Kim have the biggest asses and Kylie is well on her way to giving them a run for their money. I truly do not comprehend how they could lie on their backs comfortably for longer than it takes to snap a photo. I mean, try it for yourself. Lie down on your back with bed pillows/throw pillows (or a soccer ball) under your butt and see how it feels and how long you can tolerate the major back and neck kinks. I am so looking forward to knowing that they will have to deal with elephant-wrinkle asses when their phony curves get suctioned out. Where oh where will they hide the scars from removing all the excess skin that will Droop And Hang after the suctioning? Be still, my heart (dry washing my hands with glee in anticipation).

I think the posters here of a certain age, LOL, recognized the homage to Emily's (1975) vocabulary and cadence the first time we heard Rachel use them. How nice to know the joy that was Gilda Radner lives on and to see that, once again, Rachel "gets it."

Then again, the detective's conclusions were conveyed to us only via another character's POV and therein lies the rub if we are supposed to accept the unreliable narrator device. The writers have manipulated us to the point where, for example, a character presents us with A, B, C, D and E, and we are persuaded by the device to discount B and E but to decide that A, C and D are valid. This is like the jury instruction which declares that jurors can disregard all of a witness' testimony if part of that testimony is false. I think most of us think that same way IRL: "if you lie to me about this (and that), what else are you lying to me about?" The device was novel and intriguing in the beginning but has now evolved to a point which practically requires using a spread sheet to decide whether or not a character was stalked and/or stabbed. In the beginning, the device was thought-provoking: who instigated the affair with unrelenting provocation, Alison or Noah? Did Noah assume the entire care of his mother during the extremes of her illness while his father was physically and emotionally absent? Did Noah witness marital rape or merely the consensual dynamic of a couple's sex life? Was Alison like a fish out of water during a business dinner or did she blow off attending the dinner? Truthful answers to those questions would inform us as to who the characters are and what their motivations are. If Noah has a history of being self-sacrificing, tell us that. If Noah has a history of perceiving himself as being self-sacrificing (when that is not actually the case), then tell us that. Don't deliver the detective's observations/conclusions within the demonstrably unreliable narratives of other characters. The sensible move of shutting down the drug dealing was delivered to us in a basket of mumbo jumbo. In that character's POV we got logic re the drug dealing and unreliable perception re other events? Gah! I think it begs credulity that this entire group of people has this much difficulty recognizing and relating what they see, what they hear, and what they do. In this show, to both lesser and greater degrees, reality is absolutely no one's constant (or even sorta familiar) companion. That's why I wish we were shown "truth" segments (or episodes). Because then the writers would have the satisfaction of utilizing their device along the way and the viewers would have the ultimate satisfaction of "aha!" moments.

The band-aid angle makes sense, especially since it was presented to us for a reason (?), until I stop to consider that I can barely keep a band-aid on during a shower or during a few minutes of swimming. That it stayed on for days in the ocean seems a bit of a stretch. Yet it must be significant, because it was presented to us. I've chased my tail more with this show than any other show I've watched ...

I noticed that the window treatments were different. Roman shades in one version and rods with tiers in the other. Alison IMO presented as someone whose interior life was impoverished ... yet her fantasies were richly inventive. I've never been clear about what the attention to details like that signified.

Ooooh, let's see if he interrupts Her continuously. She'll hand him his ass.

I was thinking "Please please please mumble something about trash pickup, keep listening and grab a trash bag, go to the fridge, throw a couple things in the bag and then mosey toward the door/the porch, open the door and run like fucking hell." My Heart Was Pounding!

First words out of his wife's mouth were "We're so grateful you came." After some getting-to-know-you, when the real conversation was beginning she said "We're so glad we found you," and Alison had a look on her face like WTH after both of those comments. But the comments made sense after they shared the news that he is ill and needs a transplant, his kids from his first marriage are the wrong blood type, their kids are too young to be viable donors and they hope that Alison, if compatible, will donate. They straight out asked for her kidney and offered to compensate her financially for donating it.

I totally agree, that was my point (and I wasn't singling out your post in particular). We have very little information about anything/anyone. I have no clue as to which scenes/conversations during three seasons are valid factors and which are not. Cole said that Gabriel's death did not change Alison, that she "has always been this way." Is that true or is it merely his perception? We don't know, we can only guess. Surely some events are logical/valid, shutting down the drug dealing being a good example of that But WTF with so much of the rest of it? I have to rely on quotes from interviews with the writer(s) to learn that James did not necessarily ask for a kidney? I think this guessing game style of writing and presenting a story is lazy, and a cop-out. This show is like Build-A-Bear.

Now I can't remember who said this on Friday's show, maybe it was Chuck Rosenberg. They were talking about the 5-hour delay in court. This guest touched upon something I didn't hear on other programs, that the delay possibly was related to an issue with the jury. The usual reasons were mentioned: discussing the case among themselves or listening to or reading news reports, etc (whether self-reported or reported by others). I immediately wondered if the judge's words and actions which appear to be prejudiced against the prosecution triggered a perception that was reported, prompting the lengthy delay/discussion. Most likely, the transcript will be released in the future but until then we can only wonder.

We don't know if any of that is true. It was presented to us but we don't know if it was accurate or that it happened.

I'm halfway through my second viewing. It's hard waiting for everyone to see it tomorrow night. Beating a dead horse: episodes like this one illustrate why knowing what actually happened matters immensely. (Although Ben is dead to me after both versions).

Looking at a few different photos, the bottoms of her feet aren't black, it's the lighting. And most likely, she was transported face down because she was vomiting. She's another one with a huge ass.

I know, right? Face down - I've not seen or heard of that before. And bruises, and black feet?