S11.E15: The Dinner Party from Hell: Part Two

[kristen111]

15 hours ago, Straycat80 said:

How romantic, Kyle, Mauricio and the Bravo TV crew. 

Don’t we all have husbands like Mauricio?  Fuck NO !  Is Mauricio for real or was he always a kiss ass?

Edited September 2, 2021 by kristen111

[pasdetrois]

Hooting at Dorit's "I'm in my element." In your dreams, you broke-ass, tax-owing, collections-avoiding poseur.

Also, part of Erika's rage is that she knows the entire lot would happily stand on the shore, watching her drown, if they could. Their declarations of support are transparent fabrications. Her rage is at them leveraging her downfall for their own camera time. She sees through them all, including Garcelle.

"I can't be the only one who thinks Kathy knew exactly what was going to happen at the dinner party."

Of course she did. She's Bravo's patsy just like the rest of them. Bravo probably picked up the tab.

ETA: I think whoever speculated that Kathy and Kyle are positioning themselves for a different opportunity are right. They are seasoned Hollywood veterans. With the housewives shows' future in debate, they may be collaborating on a long-range strategy.

Edited September 2, 2021 by pasdetrois

[kristen111]

14 hours ago, Julyolo said:

The best way for Erica to get people to shut up about her life would be for her to shut up about it herself.

Why is Erikastill on if this conversation happens every episode?

[pasdetrois]

18 minutes ago, Castina said:

IMO Kathy is taking a page out of Paris's playbook, play dumb and quirky and don't get yourself tangled up in the drama.

At least one entertainment critic has pointed this out - they both employ the same fake daffy persona.

Edited September 2, 2021 by pasdetrois

[CatMomma]

6 minutes ago, eleanorofaquitaine said:

So I get why people give the side-eye to the age difference in their relationship but I think saying it was "predatory" is going a bit too far.  If he made a habit of only going after someone that young, then yes, I'd say he was predatory.  And we don't know if their first date was anything more than just seeing a movie together.  

Sometimes age differences do happen, and it's not because the older person is a predator - they just happen to meet someone much younger that they are compatible with. It's totally possible that Rob IS predatory - we haven't seen much evidence of it but I'm open to the possibility - I just don't know that the fact that an age difference exists between them is an example of it.

(I will say that I bring my own experience into this - there is a two decade age difference between me and my significant other, though I was in my early 30s when we got involved, and I recognize there is a difference there. But I think people often start making some pretty broad generalizations when it comes to age differences in relationships that often don't apply to specific relationships).

Anyway, I don't think either party should get the side-eye if there is no evidence of anything beyond they happened to meet when she was 17 and started dating. If he had a pattern of it (which obviously some men do) or she indicated that he was pressuring her into sex or something, then I think it would be absolutely justified. But that isn't the story that she's telling, at least not right now. 

Nope. 17 and 38 isn't ok. 

My husband is 17 years younger than me, so I get the age difference argument. Difference? He was an adult when we met. 

At 17, the brain is not fully developed. There was also a power imbalance. 

Not getting into it, but 38 and 17 is predatory. 

[pasdetrois]

17 and 38 is creepy. Still, some young women are baby gold diggers at that age, knowing what they want and going after it. I suspect this is the case with Crystal.

[kristen111]

3 minutes ago, pasdetrois said:

17 and 38 is creepy. Still, some young women are baby gold diggers at that age, knowing what they want and going after it. I suspect this is the case with Crystal.

Lots of women will do everything for a buck.  Ask Erika.

[njbchlover]

1 hour ago, Thumper said:

I’m thinking back … didn’t Rinna, despite Kathy’s request, start the whole Sutton/Ericka drama at dinner?  She had the bell and said something like, “let’s play a game — when I ring the bell someone has to discuss a conflict they have with another.  <ding!>.  Sutton?”  
Of course, Sutton could have said “now is not the time.”  

Does anyone else recall this?

Yes - it was exactly that.  Rinna is always a shit stirrer, and has done this kind of crap many times before, with her stupid dinner party "games", which is really just another way to create more conflict and drama.  

Patrick never should have given her that bell back....but, I also think that the whole scenario was pre-planned.  Why would there be a bell next to a guest's table setting?  If anything, there should only be a bell next to the hostess' setting, so that SHE can summon the butler or servers.  Yet again, we fall prey to some kind of production shennanigans.  

[kristen111]

12 hours ago, swankie said:

Erika, you told everybody that Tom broke his foot in the accident and that's all.  Now you're saying he suffered a severe head injury.  One of those two statements isn't true.  So guess what?  That makes you a liar bitch!  So you STFU!  

So, he had a broken foot and a head injury.  Did she fix him up or did he go to the hospital incognito?  Her story keeps hanging.  What happened to the car?  How did he climb up the hill?  I meant story changing.

[chlban]

1 hour ago, Talented Tenth said:

I'm not sure what story you're referring to but when it comes to condemning Erika, the only thing that matters is whether she was complicit or not.  None of those women have any proof Erika was complicit.  When Erika asked Sutton what she was lying about, Sutton had zero answers.  If she's going to call someone a liar she should be able to back it up.  Speculations, feelings and assumptions aren't evidence or facts.  Sutton can be suspicious all day but to publicly call Erika a liar is wrong to me unless there is indisputable evidence.

Erika is a liar and it can easily proven by watching the show. She has changed her story repeatedly. Most viewers already believe she is a liar so I hardly see the harm in Sutton saying it out loud.

[Ms Blue Jay]

19 minutes ago, pasdetrois said:

17 and 38 is creepy. Still, some young women are baby gold diggers at that age, knowing what they want and going after it. I suspect this is the case with Crystal.

LOL.  17 is a child still, not even an adult.  

[kristen111]

2 hours ago, pasdetrois said:

Anyone else notice that the Haughty Erika character comes complete with pretentious pronunciation? "Your opinion does not matt-tter to me."

We rolled around on the couch, laughing, each time Erika trotted that out.

When threatened, Sutton could have responded "What are you gonna do? Roll me down a hill? Make me watch one of your cringey videos? Ask me for a loan?"

I'm disappointed in Garcelle. I was hoping she would speak up rather than save her best remarks for her talking heads. I'd pay good cash money to watch her tell the obnoxious Crystal "I never heard of you."

Crystal needs to practice her mean girl. She looks constipated when she mutters her nasty remarks about Sutton.

Rinna seems to veer between a drugged stupor and cackling mania.

Mauricio has figured it out. Wealth, beautiful home, luxurious travel, good health...and a 24/7 high in order to tolerate his craven, stupid wife until he can make his escape.

 

I heard he cheats.  Is it true?

[Pop Tart]

42 minutes ago, RoseAllDay said:

And Erika’s snarl to Garcelle really pissed me off. She’s always crying about wanting sympathy and compasssion, and when anyone tries to make an effort, she tells them to fuck off. Same to you, Erika. 

I really think she didn't want Garcelle wiping the tears off her face as they were part of her performance piece "the agony of Erika". 

[CatMomma]

2 minutes ago, Ms Blue Jay said:

LOL.  17 is a child still, not even an adult.  

I had several replies I deleted to that post. 

[kristen111]

5 minutes ago, chlban said:

Erika is a liar and it can easily proven by watching the show. She has changed her story repeatedly. Most viewers already believe she is a liar so I hardly see the harm in Sutton saying it out loud.

Erika’s monotone voice and constantly looking down spells guilty.  She finds it hard to look in the face.

[Lassus]

39 minutes ago, CatMomma said:

She was born in June 1985. By my math, that's 17.

I saw online June 1983, so if that's wrong, then I certainly am.

EDIT: And it was, and I am.  Stupid internet.  Correcting.

Edited September 2, 2021 by Lassus

[RoseAllDay]

35 minutes ago, kristen111 said:

Why is Erikastill on if this conversation happens every episode?

I think we’re all wondering that. 

[sistermagpie]

1 hour ago, Talented Tenth said:

It is super scary to me that anyone's character can be so easily assassinated with no concrete proof.  Erika did not work at Tom's firm and there is no proof that she was complicit.  Until there is indisputable proof that she knowingly benefited from embezzled funds I will withhold bashing or condemning her.  Being innocent until proven guilty is not only a legal concept to me, but also a matter of human decency.

I'm not sure what story you're referring to but when it comes to condemning Erika, the only thing that matters is whether she was complicit or not.  None of those women have any proof Erika was complicit.  When Erika asked Sutton what she was lying about, Sutton had zero answers.  If she's going to call someone a liar she should be able to back it up.  Speculations, feelings and assumptions aren't evidence or facts.  Sutton can be suspicious all day but to publicly call Erika a liar is wrong to me unless there is indisputable evidence.

It's not like this is a trial where all that matters is what she knew. It's a TV show where everybody parades around hoping the audience/other cast members will root for them or at least find them entertaining. So it's completely on point for people to look at her this way.

But still, nobody including Sutton is accusing her of being the brains behind the actual fraud--even Sutton said she figured she wasn't. But she has been living high off the profits of that fraud, money stolen from people who really need it, and she is pretty obviously now making up stories that totally contradict what she said before and in some cases make no sense at all. Sure Erika doesn't want anybody to say things like, "So I notice you've suddenly changed your story to be more in line with the one Tom's lawyers are telling" or "I notice that a lot of this money went to you not only in the form of expensive gifts, but loans to your company, and the forensic accounts are going to be all over that."

But it's certainly something people would say--if not to her face, then when talking about the thing in general, which is what the show is supposed to be showing.

1 hour ago, Talented Tenth said:

Sutton is also a flip flopper and I'm glad Kyle called her out.  Don't say at Kathy's dinner that you're there to support Erika but behind her back call her a liar and say things aren't adding up.  I don't blame Erika from recoiling from Garcelle.  Erika was being ambushed.  I think her only true friends on the show are Kyle and Lisa.  If I had a friend/co-worker in Erika's situation, I would continue to be a friend until there was indisputable evidence that the friend did something wrong.  I would then assess whether or not their character was in alignment with mine.  

She's probably in trouble if those two are her true friends. They're publicly taking her side, but I doubt that's any less about the diamond than it is for Sutton. They've just decided that it will be better for their storyline if they play the role of supporting Erika all the way, assuming that Erika's going to come across like the beleaguered heroine. Rinna even said, iirc, that she didn't like how the audience reacted to her wrt Denise.

It is literally Erika's job to be grilled this way--that's what she's being paid to do on the show, even if she hoped to be just rolling out her defense of herself with no pushback. That she's lied isn't in question--she herself is now making it her story that she's been lying all these years when she said her marriage was great. That's not necessarily so bad--it could be totally sympathetic, except that doesn't really seem true either. Maybe if she played the part better it would have worked better, but it's too out of her comfort zone, it seems, for her to sell it.

[heatherchandler]

13 hours ago, BusyOctober said:

 

Dorit’s braids were stupid, and her wedding dresses were nothing new.  PK giving each one a name was so pathetic.  Plain to see he doesn’t have a degree in marketing or branding.  “The Woman”?? “ The Pearl”??  Love Dorit claiming she was “in her element” at Kathy’s…you wish, you social climbing poser!! She better be taking notes from Erika’s situation because PK a and her financial BS will come home to roost some day.

 

 I want to shake Kyle, Rinna and Dorit  and yell in their faces, a la Andy Dufresne:“How can you be so obtuse? Is it deliberate?”  

 

I am waiting for that day, it cannot come soon enough...  Lucky for Dorit that Pique is just a degenerate gambler, and not stealing from traumatized widows and orphans.

 

If you did that they would put you in the HOLE!

 

13 hours ago, blixie said:

I legit can not believe that Crystal who rightfully told Sutton  not to be that person who doesn't see race just bragged about her husband hiring/working with someone who had a Me Too issue and said it was no reflection on him. YES IT IS SWEETIE. And that no one in Hollywood gives a fuck about such things is entirely the fucking problem. CHRIST.

 

Srsly Bravo get the woman currently withholding ill gotten gains via thieving from the orphans off the tv. For good. Forever. She can go back to patting the puss in Jersey it was way more honest and morally sound.

 

 

I cannot believe she said that, I mean yeah, we knew that Hollywood (you) benefit off the backs of sexually harassed/assaulted/exploited women, but sure go ahead and say it.

 

They can't keep her on the show after all of this... never mind, this is Bravo, of course they will.

 

[Persnickety1]

So apparently there are at least 3 different versions of crying from Erika:

1.  The "I can't squeeze out a real tear, so let me squeeze the bridge of my nose to make it look like I'm crying" as seen at La Quinta.

2.  The "Oh shit, this time I'll wear non-waterproof mascara so everyone can see that I've managed to eek out a few random teardrops even though I'll look like a deranged clown in the process" as seen in her meeting with Kyle at the park.

3.  The "tears falling down my perfectly made up face, that I shant wipe away so people can see my silent suffering" as seen at the dinner table last night.  

I still say this twat lost a golden opportunity to redeem herself by not immediately offering up assets to auction so the proceeds could go to the victims.  

We all know by now she has not a single fuck to give about these victims.  The only reason for her tears is for her own loss of a lifestyle.  

If I owed $25M and had all those assets laying around and was as soulless as she is, you bet your ass I'd be picking and choosing what to relinquish to fulfill that debt.  Hell, that single necklace was worth $2M or something along those lines.  Add in a few pieces of that ugly assed but outrageously expensive art work and a few other diamond trinkets, and she could easily pay off that debt with quite a bit left over...and, if played right, come out smelling like a rose and as another "victim" of Tom's bullshit.  At least PRETEND to care. 

But not this twat.  She's going to white knuckle every single asset she has until those assets are forcibly removed from her gold digging hands.  

She's not only a soulless twat, she's a fucking idiot as well.  

Edited September 2, 2021 by Persnickety1

[Keywestclubkid]

4 minutes ago, heatherchandler said:

 

 

 

They can't keep her on the show after all of this... never mind, this is Bravo, of course they will.

 

4 words: Jen Shah Salt lake

[eleanorofaquitaine]

2 hours ago, CatMomma said:

Nope. 17 and 38 isn't ok. 

My husband is 17 years younger than me, so I get the age difference argument. Difference? He was an adult when we met. 

At 17, the brain is not fully developed. There was also a power imbalance. 

Not getting into it, but 38 and 17 is predatory. 

To be clear, I didn't say it was "okay," I just said that it wasn't proof to me that he is predatory.  (Plus, as has been noted, I am not sure it is even clear that their first date was when she was 17 despite what wiki says). If he were my friend and asked me, "hey, should I go out on a date with someone who is 17," I would tell him no, that was probably not a good idea. But absent a pattern and absent any evidence that he did anything predatory towards her (like coerce her, lie to her about his own age, or, most importantly, have sex with her), I don't think that it is evidence that he is predatory. 

Obviously, your mileage varies. I just don't think Rob rises to the level of predatory based on the info we have. I also think he should have waited a few years before dating her if, indeed, it is true that their first date was when she was 17.  Just want to make myself perfectly clear. 

 

Edited September 2, 2021 by eleanorofaquitaine

[CatMomma]

Everything I've seen online says her birthdate is 1985. Even the poster who originally said 1983 admitted it was wrong. 

What more evidence do you need? She was 17, he was 38. That's the evidence. He was an adult. She was a teenager. That's the evidence.

 

[OdinO.]

12 hours ago, swankie said:

I don't blame Garcelle for going mute at that dinner.  They would have all ganged up on her and that's not a good position to be in.  

She is the smartest by far. I like her.

11 hours ago, emmawoodhouse said:

That takes talent! 😂

I cry at the drop of a hat unless I need to. Erika must be using something chemical. She's sucks at acting.

9 hours ago, hoodooznoodooz said:

I think Big Kathy must have done a number on Kathy, Kim and Kyle. I think she encouraged them to gang up on or exclude one sister. This is how she controlled them. So that’s all that Kyle knows which is why she tries to create conflict and drive wedges between friends.

Maybe we have big Kathy wrong.

5 hours ago, RoseAllDay said:

Garcelle is a very good listener. I’m sure she’s filed a lot of that conversation away for possible future use. In her talking head, she already called them out on their snobbish bullshit about nobody being that important and then in the next breath running down Sutton. 

That’s not the first time passive-aggressive Crystal has made a comment about not knowing who someone is as a way to pass judgment on them. Garcelle’s right — if it weren’t for Rob Minkoff (who I really didn’t know before this season) would anyone know or care about Crystal? Highly doubt it.

People have been wondering why they’re so hard on Sutton. That scene explains it. According to them, she doesn’t belong — with them, or in Beverly Hills. And that is especially rich, coming from that grifting, social fraud Erika.

(Oh, and Erika? The country club called — they revoked your membership. You aren’t their kind.)

 

 

They are jealous because Sutton is really, really rich and free.

[Raiderred]

10 hours ago, gingerella said:

And I'm calling bullshit on Patrick, le butler. "Who is Kyle" "I am, I'm Kathy's sister" like, if Kyle and Kathy are so good, why doesn't Kathy's butler know her sister FFS? Unless Patrick is a 'butler/actor'...

I was coming here to say the exact same thing.  Something does not add up here. LMAO

[eleanorofaquitaine]

4 minutes ago, CatMomma said:

Everything I've seen online says her birthdate is 1985. Even the poster who originally said 1983 admitted it was wrong. 

What more evidence do you need? She was 17, he was 38. That's the evidence. He was an adult. She was a teenager. That's the evidence.

 

I read that after I posted. Also, I thought there was some question about whether or not that was actually their first date.  Anyway, we both agree that it was not a good idea for them to start dating when she was 17 and he was 38. The only thing I disagree with is whether or not it is proof that he was predatory. I don't agree, based on the caveats I posted.  I also allowed for the possibility that he is predatory. We disagree on this point. And we'll continue to disagree. Not sure there is any point in belaboring it. 

[CSunshine76]

I’m really annoyed these bitches had this argument during dinner and we missed out on all of the food porn. I want to know what the four courses were. This is what the show is missing…I want to see how people like the Hiltons decorate and throw parties! But no, we gotta have the tired stupid drama.

[Kiss my mutt]

8 hours ago, ladyscorpio said:

I don't like her at all. She keeps acting like if she never heard of someone before that means they're a nobody. I want to say to her -Bitch I never heard of you before!! She's snobby and a bitch. She's trying to fit in with the coven and act like those two faced bitches.

Well, she’s doing a good job, I’ll give her that! 

[Ms Blue Jay]

1 hour ago, CatMomma said:

Everything I've seen online says her birthdate is 1985. Even the poster who originally said 1983 admitted it was wrong. 

What more evidence do you need? She was 17, he was 38. That's the evidence. He was an adult. She was a teenager. That's the evidence.

Her own Twitter says she's 38 which would put her birthdate at 1983.  Would she lie to say she's older than she is so that her marriage looks less creepy?  Even though she's on television? I don't know . 

Edited September 2, 2021 by Ms Blue Jay

[BluBrd47]

Exactly what country club does Miss Pat The Puss belong to? I realize the same country club as Sutton but I think Sutton actually IS a member. I think Tom is probably a member of this club but Erika, probably not much longer.

[sistermagpie]

1 minute ago, BluBrd47 said:

Exactly what country club does Miss Pat The Puss belong to? I realize the same country club as Sutton but I think Sutton actually IS a member. I think Tom is probably a member of this club but Erika, probably not much longer.

Whatever club it was, her dues were being paid by money stolen from burn victims, so she shouldn't still be a member now!

[LemonSoda]

Regarding the Butler/Staff there’s a chance her regular staff didn’t want to be filmed. Or like many she could simply hire for events not to be fake in any way but because she doesn’t need them full time. There has been a lot of fakery on this show over the years Kathy is not on that level. She’s rich. 

[amarante]

I wouldn't be surprised if Robb had no issues with working with sexual predators because he himself was one - albeit not on Weinstein levels.

I worked in the industry and it was rampant because the reality is that even the behind the scenes jobs are sought after so people - woman and also gay men - will have to put up with it because if they don't like it, 100 other people will be in line to take the job.

There is no way that a 38 year old men who doesn't have issues has a *normal* relationship with a 17 year old. My best friend was a guy who was an incredible playboy and I remember his telling me that he dated an 18 year old when he was in his 30's and he felt like he was dealing with Bambi. That was a bridge too far for him.

I think the whole issue of power and control is really what drives it since you can have arm candy with a 25 year old and by that age, the woman might still be younger but they have formed into a more or less adult brain. It's the same reason why a lot of powerful and rich men hire escorts because it simplifies the relationship - the escort is paid her $2000 per night or whatever and she is subservient. 

[gingerella]

10 hours ago, stcroix said:

I've always liked Kyle for some reason.  Maybe because she legitimately had great houses, money, took trips for us to see, had a great family she cared for, etc.  Something to see compared to Dorits fake life.  Many of you have called her Vile and I just didn't get it.  But now I do. She IS vile.  That innocent questioning act she put on at Kathy's dinner asking Sutton questions like SHE was the criminal was vile and sickening.  I wouldn't care if she left. 

Welcome to Team Vile. We'd like to welcome you with a shot of whisky and vintage Coach handbag, because we're not poseurs and we don't collect Hermes bags...

3 hours ago, CatMomma said:

4 hours ago, Keywestclubkid said:

But what these ladies don't understand is that Yes it still can blow back on them ... they can be subpoenaed for information that Erika talked to them about .... they can be questioned about things she said and did ...... they can be dragged into court filings .... it can still be messy for them .. esp with lawyers combing through all the shit that Tom and Erika have done money wise and her being on this show talking about him and their situation ... Sutton was and is still correct in her assertion of being pulled into this mess.

 

I think Erika thought she could go into this and no one would question her or her answers and it be a cake walk ... but when Sutton started digging and questions were raised and inconsistencys brought up Erika realized she was fucked

Expand  

I think it's important, too, that Sutton offered Erika a loan. Once that LA Times article came out, Sutton had a very valid reason to speak to an attorney and be concerned. 

^THIS^ This is likely why Sutton was so worried. She thought it would come out that she offered Erika a big loan and that would somehow implicate her in this shitshow. I'd be worried too. It's interesting that Erika never acknowledges that it was Sutton who came to her aid offering a monetary life line. Then again, Erika probably doesn't see it that way since it was couched a a load, ergo she'd have to pay it back, which is something Erika doesn't know about...

Edited September 2, 2021 by gingerella

[Marley GMA]

17 hours ago, FlyingEgret said:

Not sure why, but I don't like any of Dorit's wedding dresses

Oh, I know why, they are fugly

[chlban]

2 hours ago, kristen111 said:

Don’t we all have husbands like Mauricio?  Fuck NO !  Is Mauricio for real or was he always a kiss ass?

I always think he is acting. Mauricio is not stupid and he is playing the devoted hubby. Mario did the same on NY, right up until the time his long term affair was revealed and Ramona dumped his ass. 

Edited September 2, 2021 by chlban

[Keywestclubkid]

What the hell does a almost 40yo have in common with a teenager? What life experience did they share? Like could you imagine their conversations? 

[90sfan]

If they want to "annoy" or "get to" Erika, the best thing they can do is just not talk about her anymore. They should stop asking her how she's doing and coddling her. This will bother her more than anything and then she'll likely bring things up in conversation. She was loving the attention earlier in the season and having the floor to tell the stories she wanted out there. She doesn't want to be questioned, but I think it would be worse to her to not be a conversation at all.

I too was a bit disappointed that Garcelle didn't say anything at the dinner at Crystal's to defend Sutton, but I also understand it a bit. Sometimes in the moment I can't think of the right thing to say, which could be the case. I also would be intimidated to be the only dissenting voice in the conversation. I know Garcelle looks like she's not easily intimidated and speaks her mind, but who knows. Obviously, it can also just mean she's not being a good friend to Sutton...just giving her the benefit of the doubt here.

[RoseAllDay]

46 minutes ago, Raiderred said:

I was coming here to say the exact same thing.  Something does not add up here. LMAO

Rewatching the DPFH Part Deux now…

I think there was more than one butler there? Maybe the man has never worked at a dinner Kyle was at? Dunno. But the man had a very Michael-from-Southern Charm vibe going — maybe make him a Friend Of?  😀 Sounds like a nice (and patient) man.

Dorit….I’m going to date myself here but when I saw her hairdo I flashed on Boy George on the cover of Culture Club’s first album. I’m glad the ambience met with her high standards, but was the champagne served in the right glasses? Pretentious AF.

Kathy’s face when Rinna rang the bell: “Well, shit, this night is over, and we barely made it past the appetizers.” Rinna chewing her food as she watches what she started with that damn bell. And the snicker at the end of the episode. Ugh.

Erika gets the “shit kicked out of her”? When she comes in to every room, chews up the scenery, and sucks out all the oxygen? By herself?? 

Kyle…how in the holy hell is Sutton being two-faced? All of the flashbacks back her up. Almost everything Erika has said has been shady to some extent. Her changing story about Tom, and how that seems to be their defense now, is definitely a huge, waving red flag. Kyle just wants to stay on Erika’s good side…the bully’s sidekick.

[HeddaGabler]

4 hours ago, eleanorofaquitaine said:

And Dorit made one of the most important points - Erika can say, "oh, this has nothing to do with you guys" but the fact is that every time an article is written about this mess, their names are brought into it because of the show.  So yes, they are impacted by the mere fact that they are associated with her. Granted, they should not be thought of as "guilty by association" because they are basically just coworkers, but it is disingenuous in the extreme for Erika to pretend that their reputations can't potentially be hurt by their association with her.  Obviously Dorit was careful not to break the fourth wall there but that's clearly what she was saying and it was a valid point, IMO. 

I think you are touching on the most important point -- the 4th wall is in the way here. They can be thought of as complicit, maybe not legally, but if they were on shopping sprees and holidays with Erika while she spent money that was never hers, then they are associated with it. Also, I'll bet money that Dorit did get actual legal advice where they told her to keep her distance so that she isn't pulled into additional legal drama. If Sutton did offer money as a loan at some point, and then talked to a lawyer about it, they likely gave her very strong and strict advice about who she might be dealing with.

[TexasGal]

Please move any further discussion about the age difference between Crystal and her husband to Crystal's thread.  This is not an issue that came up in the episode.  

[HeddaGabler]

I also meant to add that Erika is displaying textbook characteristics of a narcissist:

• Lacks empathy: unwilling to recognize or identify with the feelings and needs of others.
• Has a grandiose sense of self-importance. Exaggerates achievements and talents, expects to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements.
• Preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love
• Requires excessive admiration
• Believes that he or she is unique or special, and can only be understood by, or should associate with, other special or high-status people (or institutions).
• Has a sense of entitlement; unreasonable expectations and favorable treatment or automatic compliance with his or her expectations
• Interpersonally exploitative – takes advantage of others to achieve his or her own needs
• Shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes
• Often envious of others or believes that others are envious of him or her

https://enough-foundation.com/9-narcissistic-personality-traits-checklist-common-missed-signs/?gclid=Cj0KCQjw7MGJBhD-ARIsAMZ0eesm27j1XyupDHt6UzTkAW04hvsLy6P3QgnP_Pcs7QUYTiQFsyxUkEsaApwFEALw_wcB

Her whole dramatic performance, and pushing people away as punishment, is all part of the manipulation cycle of love/abuse

[gwen747]

At first glance, did anyone else think that Kathy Hilton had a picture of Fremont Street  in Downtown Las Vegas in her dining room???

[Baltimore Betty]

1 minute ago, gwen747 said:

At first glance, did anyone else think that Kathy Hilton had a picture of Fremont Street  in Downtown Las Vegas in her dining room???

I could not tell exactly what it was but it caught my eye, I wonder what it was because it so unexpected.

[eleanorofaquitaine]

26 minutes ago, HeddaGabler said:

I think you are touching on the most important point -- the 4th wall is in the way here. They can be thought of as complicit, maybe not legally, but if they were on shopping sprees and holidays with Erika while she spent money that was never hers, then they are associated with it. Also, I'll bet money that Dorit did get actual legal advice where they told her to keep her distance so that she isn't pulled into additional legal drama. If Sutton did offer money as a loan at some point, and then talked to a lawyer about it, they likely gave her very strong and strict advice about who she might be dealing with.

Yeah, the loan thing is absolutely a legitimate concern for Sutton to have - as evidenced by this question about whether or not Erika invested in Rinna's kids' endeavor.  If money is being exchanged between any of these women or even if loans are being offered, it makes sense that Sutton, Dorit, or anyone would consult a lawyer to see what their exposure is. 

Erika claims to be smart, you'd think she'd understand that. But what bothers her is her understanding that the fact that they consulted attorneys shows the rest of the world that this is something serious that she can't snarl her way out of. If the other women are downplaying it, then she can continue to try to play the victim. But once they actually put their own concerns ahead of hers, well, then, all bets are off. 

It's a very self-centered take on the world. 

Edited September 2, 2021 by eleanorofaquitaine

[TattleTeeny]

16 hours ago, Keywestclubkid said:

They don’t change their stories… there’s one thing they don’t really do 

Not that it's the case here, but yes they do (ask Amanda Knox and Jesse Misskelley, just to name two obvious examples).

Quote

What the hell does a almost 40yo have in common with a teenager? What life experience did they share? Like could you imagine their conversations? 

Right?! Oy, no.

Edited September 2, 2021 by TattleTeeny

[oakville]

19 hours ago, Straycat80 said:

Sutton is right that the car crash was fishy. Was it ever reported to the police? Was there an insurance claim for the wrecked car?

Shallow note: I want Sutton’s sandals. 

It’s odd that Toms car crash wasn’t reported on TMZ or any other gossip sites. He is a very prominent attorney.

[TheCouchPotato]

Sutton saying as an accomplishment, that she was able to quickly get to the finish line after a divorce had me chuckling. Of course it’s easy when you have millions. 

“Fresh bar of soap”? Kathy has millions and can splurge for a soap dispenser. 

Duran Duran called and wants Lisa Rhinna. 

Ugh, Erika and the fake tears again! 

Edited September 2, 2021 by TheCouchPotato

[sistermagpie]

50 minutes ago, eleanorofaquitaine said:

Yeah, the loan thing is absolutely a legitimate concern for Sutton to have - as evidenced by this question about whether or not Erika invested in Rinna's kids' endeavor.  If money is being exchanged between any of these women or even if loans are being offered, it makes sense that Sutton, Dorit, or anyone would consult a lawyer to see what their exposure is. 

Erika claims to be smart, you'd think she'd understand that. But what bothers her is her understanding that the fact that they consulted attorneys shows the rest of the world that this is something serious that she can't snarl her way out of. If the other women are downplaying it, then she can continue to try to play the victim. But once they actually put their own concerns ahead of hers, well, then, all bets are off. 

It's a very self-centered take on the world. 

It reminds me of something on the show The Deuce where a porn star gets offended at someone wanting to use a condom in the 1980s as if this is a judgement on her and not just common sense for sex with anyone.

3 minutes ago, oakville said:

It’s odd that Toms car crash wasn’t reported on TMZ or any other gossip sites. He is a very prominent attorney.

I feel like somebody was even looking into it and there's no record of it anywhere, like meaning even at any hospital.

[blixie]

I found it well rich that Crystal/Kathy/Erik all who came from middle and lower class families, who married into wealth, and 2/3 were wealth via New Money, are judging Sutton who comes from Old Money but married someone with very little to none. Their own insecurities and resentment really showed there.