Last week, ESPN announced that Prince Harry will receive the Pat Tillman Award for Service, specifically because he’s a combat veteran who founded the Invictus Games. The “backlash” to Harry receiving the award has a throughline: the biggest critics are taking pains to avoid mentioning Harry’s military service and the Invictus Games. Pat Tillman’s mother Mary Tillman gave exclusive comments to the Mail on Sunday, saying that she was “surprised” that someone so “controversial and divisive” would receive the award and that the award should go to unsung heroes. Like Marcus Rashford, a famous British footballer who received the award in 2021, I guess. I knew the British media’s outrage would be loud, but even I wasn’t expecting the turn it’s taken over the past week, with people outright lying about Harry’s service and ignoring Invictus. Currently, the anti-Sussex people are arguing that Harry should “turn down” the award, for reasons.

What’s also been curious about all of this is that there’s been some interesting pushback on the critics and the lunatics. TMZ ran a story yesterday about previous Pat Tillman Award recipients backing Harry. One of the recipients is Jake Wood, a former college football player and US Marine who served in Afghanistan. Wood received the Pat Tillman Award in 2018. He appeared on TMZ Live yesterday and defended Harry receiving the award:

I’m really glad that veterans like Jake Wood are coming out to simply tell the truth, because it’s gotten really f–king wacky to try to sift through the lies and the performative outrage. All of the critics’ arguments fall apart upon closer examination. ESPN is standing by their decision, as is the Pat Tillman Foundation. There’s going to be national, if not international, coverage of the ESPYs giving a platform to Harry and the Invictus Games.

From Jake’s IG Stories:

Photos courtesy of Jake Wood’s IG, Cover Images, screencap from TMZ.

King Charles, Queen Camilla, Prince Edward and the Duchess of Edinburgh were in Scotland on Tuesday to officially kick off Holyrood Week. This year’s Holyrood Week is abbreviated because of the UK’s general election tomorrow, the Fourth of July. The Windsors are using the election as an excuse to not do much, even though there have been plenty of events in recent weeks where they looked especially cozy with the Tories. I hope British people get out to vote! I’ve already seen some Tory scare tactics in the British tabloids, lots of screaming about how Labour will raise your taxes. Is that all they’ve got?

Holyrood Week is supposed to be a week where the king is based in Edinburgh and living in Holyrood Palace. King Charles started the “week” with a ceremony in which he was symbolically “given the key” to the city of Edinburgh (there is a physical key, but Charles only touched the key rather than put the key on his key chain). According to the BBC, Charles also did an inspection of the guard of honour at the palace, then he did an investiture ceremony. Queen Camilla held a reception for Scottish literacy.

After all of that, Camilla and Charles hosted a garden party at Holyrood Palace, and they were joined by Sophie and Edward. The papers are making a big deal about how Camilla and Sophie “coordinated” in shades of blue, but this is just lowkey flag-dressing (the Scottish flag is blue and white). Plus, Sophie’s whole look was AWFUL. I actually think she was trying to look frumpy so she wouldn’t outshine She Who Neighs. Speaking of, Camilla wore a Fiona Clare coatdress and a special brooch from the Royal Collection. This is a diamond thistle brooch which once belonged to Queen Mary (wife of King George V). A minor peeve of mine is that Camilla wears gloves too often when the occasion really doesn’t call for it. This is a garden party in July – ditch the gloves.

Last thing: Prince William will be in Edinburgh today and he’ll join the rest of this crew at St. Giles’ Cathedral. He’ll watch as Charles appoints Prince Edward and Queen Camilla to the Order of the Thistle, a special Scottish chivalry order. William is already part of the Thistle cult. The only thing I really know about the Order of the Thistle is that they have the prettiest velvet capes in a lovely, rich shade of hunter green. William’s wife is not expected to join him in Scotland.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.

TW: SA, SI

The last time we discussed Robert F. Kennedy Jr’s presidential campaign is when the New York Times suddenly revealed that RFK Jr. admitted, in a deposition, that a worm ate part of his brain and died in his skull, and the worm’s carcass is still in there, somewhere. It really does explain a lot. Recently, I read some stuff about how RFK Jr. treated his second wife Mary Richardson, how he screwed around on her, dumped her and then cut her off financially, and she died by suicide. Basically, there is a lot of anecdotal evidence that RFK Jr’s past deserves more examination, especially given that there’s such a concerted effort to make his ratf–king campaign “happen.”

Well, now Vanity Fair has tried to do a deeper dive, but their framing is infuriating – VF’s main argument is “why hasn’t the Kennedy family exposed Robert publicly?” Because they’re the Kennedys and they don’t want family scandals to become THE story, especially when the rest of the family is loudly supporting Joe Biden. Very few Kennedys spoke to VF, but VF spoke to a lot of people who have been in RFK Jr’s orbit over the years, and there are some shocking stories. He’s a crass meathead (wormhead) who ate a dog and sexually assaulted his kids’ babysitter, among many other stories. You can read the full Vanity Fair piece here. Some highlights:

Kerry Kennedy on trying to convince Robert to drop out: “I’ve spoken to Bobby about this race, about what’s at stake, about the importance of supporting Joe Biden, of the impact of the Trump presidency on our country and on the world… and I was clearly unpersuasive.” Asked to share insight into her brother’s motives and psychology, she begs off: “Well, you need to have a degree, which I don’t have.”

The barbecued dog: Last year Robert Kennedy Jr. texted a photograph to a friend. In the photo RFK Jr. was posing, alongside an unidentified woman, with the barbecued remains of what appears to be a dog. Kennedy told the person, who was traveling to Asia, that he might enjoy a restaurant in Korea that served dog on the menu, suggesting Kennedy had sampled dog. The photo was taken in 2010, according to the digital file’s metadata—the same year he was diagnosed with a dead tapeworm in his brain. The picture’s intent seems to have been comedic—Kennedy and his companion are pantomiming—but for the recipient it was disturbing evidence of Kennedy’s poor judgment and thoughtlessness, simultaneously mocking Korean culture, reveling in animal cruelty, and needlessly risking his reputation and that of his family.

He used to text photos of his mistresses/conquests to friends: When Kennedy was married to his second wife, Mary Richardson, he was known to text other damning images to friends as well—of nude women. Those friends assumed Kennedy himself had taken the pictures, but they didn’t know whether the subjects had consented to having their genitalia photographed, let alone shared with other people.

His brain fog isn’t just about the brain-eating worm: But more often his family points to Kennedy’s 14 years as a heroin user, which began when Kennedy was 15 and didn’t end until he was 29. Kennedy has made his history of addiction part of his campaign narrative, arguing that he is more equipped to fix America’s addiction problem. Critics in his family feel otherwise. One Kennedy has circulated a report from the National Institutes of Health on the impact of long-term heroin abuse, which surmises that the damage can alter the physiology of the brain, “creating long-term imbalances in neuronal and hormonal systems that are not easily reversed” and “which may affect decision-making abilities, the ability to regulate behavior, and responses to stressful situations.”

He sexually assaulted a babysitter: In the fall of 1998, the Kennedys hired a 23-year-old woman, Eliza Cooney, as their part-time babysitter….One night Cooney attended a meeting in the family kitchen with Kennedy and another young Riverkeeper volunteer named Murray Fisher to discuss business when she felt Kennedy’s hand moving up and down her leg under the table. A few months later, Cooney says, she was rifling through the kitchen pantry for lunch after a yoga class, still in her sports bra and leggings, when Kennedy came up behind her, blocked her inside the room, and began groping her, putting his hands on her hips and sliding them up along her rib cage and breasts. “My back was to the door of the pantry, and he came up behind me,” she says, describing the alleged sexual assault. “I was frozen. Shocked.”

[From Vanity Fair]

Kennedy was asked about Cooney’s accusation of sexual assault this week, and I’m including his response below, which is sickening. Basically, VF is accusing the Kennedy family of not doing enough to fully expose the extent of what they know about RFK Jr and how absolutely awful he is. It really isn’t just the dead worm which ate part of his brain. It’s also the more than a decade of heroin and cocaine abuse, plus a lifetime of pathological lying, decades of infidelity and predatory behavior and yeah, the dog thing. My god.

BREAKING: When asked about the allegations that RFK Jr. sexually assualted his then 23 year old babysitter, his answer?

“I am not a church boy … I said [there are] skeletons in my closet.”

He then refused to comment. https://t.co/gpBUU52T7j pic.twitter.com/W9O6szExIb

— Keith Edwards (@keithedwards) July 2, 2024

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.

Flavor Flav is sponsoring Team USA’s men’s and women’s water polo teams for the next five years. The sponsorship involves Flavor Flav hyping the teams & bringing more attention to water polo! [JustJared]
David Beckham turned out for Wimbledon Day 1. [Socialite Life]
Wicked & Gladiator 2 are being released on the same day. Now the studios are trying to create another Barbenheimer. [Hollywood Life]
Jamie Foxx reveals details about his mysterious hospitalization. [Buzzfeed]
I haven’t written anything about Robert Zemeckis’s Here because I’m afraid to watch the trailer, just the stills look so awful. [LaineyGossip]
Paul Mescal is having a Brat Girl Summer. [Jezebel]
America’s Sweethearts – a documentary about the Dallas Cowboy cheerleaders – is possibly an accidental feminist masterpiece. [Pajiba]
I did not recognize Ryan Seacrest as a kid. [Seriously OMG]
Photos from the Dolce & Gabbana Alta Moda event. [RCFA]

Minor spoilers for the TV series Lost.
We have to go back, Kate! As of Monday, July 1, all six seasons of Lost are back on Netflix after leaving the platform in 2018. I was a big fan of Lost when it first aired, as were a lot of my friends. When the news was first announced a few months ago, all of the Losties on my social media feeds were super pumped about this. (Lost is already available for streaming on Hulu, but apparently no one really does Hulu on the regular anymore?) The series, which reinvented the “Watercooler TV” genre and spawned a million wannabe shows, will be on Netflix for 18 months, so subscribers have until January 1, 2026 to get their “Man of Science vs. Man of Faith” on. If you’ve never watched Lost and are curious to check it out, here’s a brief explainer and case as to why you should:

What is ‘Lost’ about?
The original “Watercooler TV”, and a precursor to our current binge-watch culture, “Lost” is a television titan that continues to influence the industry even now. The sci-fi drama opens with an intense plane crash as Oceanic Flight 815 spins 1,000 miles off course and lands in the blue waters below. The survivors of the crash wash up on a lush tropical island, but this is no deserted paradise. This island is home to numerous threats including a mysterious, shadowy smoke monster, and a group of violent inhabitants known as “The Others”, and even a polar bear (spoiler alert: that last mystery is never fully explained).

Survivors of the crash include Jack Shepard (Matthew Fox), a troubled surgeon, Kate Austen (Evangeline Lilly), a fugitive on the run, James “Sawyer” Ford (Josh Holloway), a brash con man, and John Locke (Terry O’Quinn); a survivalist with a big secret. And those are just the big four, “Lost” is crammed to bursting with more memorable characters than I can name, including one of the best villains in television history.

Another critical element of “Lost” is its clever use of flashbacks. Each episode is interspersed with flashback segments that explore what a particular character was doing before the crash. This technique was groundbreaking at the time, and it allowed viewers to get a stronger insight into each of the main cast. Plus, these backstories often add to the bigger puzzle.

‘Lost’ is binge-watching perfection
If you want a TV show that will have you clicking the “play next episode” button as soon as the credits start to roll then you can’t get much better than “Lost”. The show’s ability to craft mystery, suspense and intrigue is second to none, and there are so many stunning cliffhangers in just the first season alone, that you’ll consume it all in mere weeks. Speaking of its early days, I have to give a special mention to seasons 1-3. I would strongly argue that “Lost”’s first half is the most consistently excellent run of television ever made (with only HBO’s “Succession” challenging it). And while some viewers felt the back half of the show stumbled — and I’d acknowledge a few too many mysteries go unanswered — even the weaker episodes of “Lost” trump the best of many modern series (apart from season 3 episode 9, “Stranger in a Strange Land”, which is infamous for being complete filler, and I’ll admit it’s a real stinker).

However, what sets “Lost” apart from its peers is its incredibly compelling characters. Yes, cliffhangers and twists are exciting, but they can only hold your interest for so long without an emotional core driving the momentum forward, and “Lost” has that in spades. You will come to love its massive ensemble cast with the likes of Charlie (Dominic Monaghan), Jin (Daniel Dae Kim), Sun (Yunjin Kim) and Hurley (Jorge Garcia) worming their way into your hearts. And I dare anybody to not get misty-eyed during that scene in season 4’s critically acclaimed fourth episode, The Constant, or get chills during the third season’s gut-punch of a finale.

As noted, I experienced “Lost” as it aired live. Discussing fan theories with my friends and family enriched my enjoyment tenfold. And while that aspect of the show is sadly not possible to replicate in the streaming era, the upside is you can consume all 121 episodes at your own pace. This is a serious boon because having to wait a whole week between episodes and months between seasons was pure torture. “Lost” has such a persistent reputation that I’m potentially preaching to the converted with this article. But if you happen to have missed this show up till now, I cannot implore you more to get started now that it’s returned to Netflix U.S. this week. I’ve watched, and rewatched, “Lost” several times already, but writing about it now has me itching to go back once again.

[From Tom’s Guide]

Like I said above, I was a huge Lost fan during its original run, which started when I was in college. And just like the Tom’s Guide mentions, a huge part for me was experiencing it with other people. My friends and I would have watch-parties and discuss theories, which was fun. I loved finding the different easter eggs in those early seasons, too. I went online to websites that would point them out, got into message boards, and listened to different podcasts to enhance my experience. And while I didn’t love the whole “flash sideways” thing in the final season, I loved the finale. I went to a finale watch-party and we had a blast cheering and crying together.

I know a lot of people who are planning to spend their summer doing a Lost rewatch ahead of the 20th anniversary of it premiering on September 22, which will be marked by a new documentary about the series that interviews most of the cast and crew. Is anyone planning on watching it? You know how you revisit something that you read or watched when you were younger and suddenly, you “get” it differently? If I can find the time to rewatch six seasons of television, I’d love to do a rewatch of the entire series to see if I view it any differently now that 20 years have passed.

RODEO DRIVE PRESS / Avalon, ABC / Avalon, Reisig and Taylor (C) ABC / Avalon

When King Charles evicted the Sussex family from Frogmore Cottage last year, we were told that Charles thought it was wrong for such prime real estate to be sitting there, unoccupied for months at a time, when it could be rented out for profit. It was prime real estate rather suddenly, because before the Sussexes spent millions rehabbing the property, it had been little more than a dilapidated shack in desperate need of extensive repairs. But of course, that whole explanation was a lie – Frogmore is uniquely positioned in a certain security zone on the Windsor estate, which means that it can’t just be rented out to a peasant. Since the Sussexes’ eviction, Frogmore has just been sitting there empty anyway. Charles’s big scheme is somehow convincing Andrew to vacate Royal Lodge and move into Frogmore. So what will happen if and when Andrew does leave Royal Lodge? Everyone has long suspected that Prince William would move into the much grander property. But now palace sources tell the Sun that Charles actually wants to rent out Royal Lodge.

King Charles wants to rent out disgraced brother Prince Andrew’s Royal Lodge home for £1million a year when he finally leaves, we can reveal. The monarch is keen to generate commercial revenue from the mansion when he ousts the Duke of York who is refusing to budge, it is understood. Andrew has rejected other homes offered and is relying on his “cast-iron lease”, which includes a proviso the dilapidated £30million lodge in Windsor Great Park is kept in good order. But sources believe Charles will get Andy to leave. He could even cut off the £4million a year he pays to keep him afloat.

An insider said: “It makes sense for Royal Lodge to be handed back to Crown Estates, which can pay for the much-needed repairs and renovations. It could then be rented to earn money for them, the King’s coffers and the country rather than being a drain on everyone’s resources.”

A property expert said: “Rental of £1million a year is not far-fetched for a house of that size with incredible royal connections.”

A spokesman for the King declined to comment.

[From The Sun]

Just so we’re clear, the plan is now: get Andrew out of Royal Lodge by hook or by crook, shove him into Frogmore (where he can live free and clear), then have the Crown Estates extensively renovate Royal Lodge, after which – magically! – Prince William will decide that, actually, he wants to live there. The other theory/conspiracy I have is that William is already sort of living in Windsor Castle and that he feels like it will become his permanent home soon enough.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.

David Beckham has always tried to cozy up to British royalty. He was on good terms with Prince William and Prince Harry for many years, and he and his wife received invitations, here and there, to royal events. David has always wanted a knighthood and the Windsors have withheld it for years. Something went sideways last year – suddenly, Prince William had a bug up his ass about David staying friendly with Harry. A months-long campaign was done in the British press, basically telling David to cut his ties with Harry or else he would never get a knighthood. The Beckham name was also used by Tom Bower to create a complete bonkers fan-fic in which the Duchess of Sussex “ordered” Harry to snub David. Well, the campaign worked – it appears as if the Beckhams and Sussexes are now estranged, and David is the new ambassador for King Charles’s foundation. That didn’t stop Bower from writing an exceptionally stupid book called The House of Beckham: Money, Sex and Power, with a big section devoted to the Sussexes:

David Beckham ‘got revenge’ on Prince Harry after Meghan Markle “ordered” him to snub him after he flew 22 hours to Sydney at the royal’s request, according to a new biography. Tom Bower claims in House of Beckham that Prince Harry didn’t meet with the footballing legend at the Invictus Games, despite inviting him to attend. The explosive new book claims David was left “perplexed” at the snub in 2018, particularly as he’d been friends with the Duke of Sussex for years.

Tom claimed: “Beckham found himself alone at the Invictus Games stadium,” Mr Bower wrote about the Sydney-based event. “Arriving on the agreed day to meet Prince Harry he was perplexed why officials were playing a dance to keep him happy, but away from Harry.”

David is said to have questioned the whereabouts of Harry and was oblivious that “the prince had ordered that under no circumstances was the footballer to be allowed near him. Photographs of the two together were forbidden. The royal snub was brutal. David Beckham was puzzled. Why did the prince refuse to meet him? The exclusion order, it later transpired, was issued by Meghan. She did not want any competition in the media from Beckham, and especially not from his wife Victoria.”

Also in his bombshell biography, Tom claimed Meghan was “irritated” that Victoria had “considerably more wealth” than her. The book alleged Meghan “put on airs” around Victoria when they first met, due to her status within the royal family and also as the Californian actress felt she had “little in common” with the former Spice Girl.

The biography claims: “In Meghan’s celebrity world, ranking depended on wealth and fame. As a seasoned operator, Meghan deluded herself that her status in the Royal family placed her above Victoria in the social pecking order. She was irritated to discover that the Beckhams had considerably more wealth than herself. They owned five homes, had constant access to private jets, invitations to sail on yachts and much more money. And she was soon to be a duchess.”

[From The Sun]

As I said, Bower is creating anti-Sussex fanfic and what’s worse is that his completely ridiculous claims are not even new. He was saying this exact sh-t last year, and now he’s just putting it in a book for sh-ts and giggles. No, Meghan wasn’t jealous of Victoria’s wealth or fame, and Harry did not pull away from his friendship with David because Meghan ordered him to. If anything, this feels like one big cover story from the Beckhams to explain why they jettisoned the Sussexes in their quest for acceptance in British high-society. David clearly got the message that he would have dump Harry to ever receive a knighthood.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.

Princess Anne was kicked in the head by a horse two weekends ago and she spent five nights in the hospital, and there’s no talk of when she will be ready to come back to royal work. King Charles still has cancer and he’s still receiving treatments, and he’s curtailed his schedule somewhat. The Princess of Wales has only attended one public event in six months and, in her own words, she’s still receiving chemotherapy and has “bad days.” Queen Camilla is 76 years old and she hates traveling or interacting with people of color. There are other “working royals” who mostly toil away, doing a couple of events a week, with little attention. And then there’s Prince William, one of the laziest and most immature men to ever come out of that family. This is the state of the Windsors’ “working royals.” Out of spite and racism, they’ve organized everything around a slimmed down monarchy which provides little “bang for the buck.” Royal biographer Christopher Andersen sounds pretty disgusted by the turn of events:

Prince William and Kate have become the “pillars on which the future of the monarchy rests,” royal biographer Christopher Andersen told OK!. William reportedly has his own “slimmed-down” vision for the monarchy, however, Anderson notes that this could put a lot of pressure on William and Middleton, who are “far and away the most beloved members of the royal family.”

“If either of them starts to wobble, the whole thing can come crashing down,” Anderson said. “At the moment, Kate is at her most vulnerable. The ground beneath Kate is shifting in major ways. Only time can tell if she can stand strong.”

“The simple truth is that the royal family cannot be whittled down to a precious few without the risk of having it grind to a halt altogether,” Anderson explained. “For over 70 years, the Windsors had longevity on their side—almost to a ridiculous extent. Queen Elizabeth lived to be 96, and her husband Prince Philip was 99, the longest-living royal male in history [when he died]. The Queen Mother was downing her favorite gin and Dubonnets right up until the end at the astounding age of 101. There seemed to be no need for redundancy, with senior royals seeming practically immortal, and three generations of future monarchs waiting in the wings.”

But the recent happenings are proving that the family is not as invincible as they seem. “It’s hard to blame palace officials for not having a plan in place to cope with the simultaneous cancer diagnoses of King Charles and Princess Kate, much less the sidelining of such a valuable supporting player as the princess royal,” the expert continued. “The home team is running out of options.”

[From InStyle]

“If either of them starts to wobble, the whole thing can come crashing down.” Here’s the thing though… Kensington Palace just proved that Kate can disappear for six months and the monarchy won’t come crashing down. Of course the monarchy suffered some bad newscycles, mostly because of the palace’s screw-ups and William’s unsteadiness. But coming out of this whole six-month shambles, the message is actually “they would survive without Kate.” They would need a good explanation for it, they would have to manage the story to a ridiculous degree, but if Kate is gone, the monarchy wouldn’t come crashing down. But I agree with the larger point that the slimmed-down monarchy is looking skeletal these days. If they’re so stupid, selfish and petty to expand the working-royal list, what’s to be done, though?

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.

In late May, Donald Trump was convicted of 34 counts of falsifying business records in New York state. His conviction was about his actions in 2015-16 to cover up his sexual encounter with Stormy Daniels and his affair with Karen McDougal, all of which occurred when he was married to Melania. It was a complicated case, but Trump’s crimes, in this case, happened before he was “president.” Well, guess who is now claiming presidential immunity for his crimes committed before his presidency? That’s right, Donald Trump’s lawyers are already seeking to overturn the verdict, citing the Supreme Court’s decision on presidential immunity.

Donald J. Trump began an effort on Monday to throw out his recent criminal conviction in Manhattan and postpone his upcoming sentencing, citing a new Supreme Court ruling that granted him broad immunity from prosecution for official actions he took as president, according to a person with knowledge of the matter.

In a letter to the judge overseeing the case, Mr. Trump’s lawyers sought permission to file a motion to set aside the verdict, doing so just hours after the Supreme Court issued its landmark ruling involving one of Mr. Trump’s other criminal cases. The letter will not be public until Tuesday at the earliest, after which prosecutors will have a chance to respond.

The move from Mr. Trump’s lawyers came 10 days before the judge was set to sentence the former president for his crimes in Manhattan, where a jury convicted him on 34 felony counts related to his cover-up of a sex scandal in the run-up to the 2016 election. Mr. Trump’s lawyers asked the judge, Juan M. Merchan, to postpone the July 11 sentencing while the judge weighs whether the Supreme Court ruling affects the conviction.

The effort to set aside the conviction might be a long shot. The Manhattan case centers on acts Mr. Trump took as a candidate, not a president. Yet his lawyers are likely to argue that prosecutors built their case partly on evidence from his time in the White House. And under the Supreme Court’s new ruling, prosecutors not only may not charge a president for any official acts, but also cannot cite evidence involving official acts to bolster other accusations.

[From The NY Times]

I’m just left flabbergasted by how utterly f–ked we are because of this christofascist Supreme Court. While I don’t think this Trump motion to overturn the verdict will go anywhere, the fact remains that Trump will largely walk away from all of the crimes he committed as president, up to and including inciting an insurrection, trying to have his vice president murdered and stoking violent acts against elected officials. He literally tried to overthrow the government and the Supreme Court is like “yep, that’s an official act!”

Photos courtesy of Backgrid.

The Mail on Sunday somehow got exclusive comments from Pat Tillman’s mother Mary Tillman over the weekend. The Mail got Mary to respond to the announcement that Prince Harry would receive the Pat Tillman Award for Service at next week’s ESPYs. Mary Tillman’s comments were odd, in that she didn’t mention the Invictus Games or Harry’s military service, and instead expressed her “shock” that ESPN and the Tillman Foundation would “select such a controversial and divisive individual to receive the award. There are recipients that are far more fitting. There are individuals working in the veteran community that are doing tremendous things to assist veterans.” ESPN quietly pushed back on Monday, basically saying that Harry will receive the award because of the Invictus Games and everything he’s done to support veterans for over a decade. Someone (probably at ESPN) also pointed out that Mary Tillman has never had a say in who receives the Pat Tillman Award for Service. Well, now Page Six has a weird response to that:

The backlash kicked off by ESPN giving Prince Harry the esteemed Pat Tillman Award has turned into a behind-the-scenes clash, sources say. Over the weekend, Mary Tillman — the mother of NFL player turned army vet Pat Tillman — hit out at Prince Harry being honored.

Network insiders told Page Six that Mary is not associated with the Pat Tillman Foundation, which helps ESPN determine the honorees, and has never been informed during the selection of past recipients.

But other sources say that Mary and her family members were kept abreast of previous honorees, including last year’s winners — members of the Buffalo Bills training staff who revived player Damar Hamlin after he suffered cardiac arrest in the middle of a January 2023 game.

[From Page Six]

“But other sources say that Mary and her family members were kept abreast of previous honorees.” Meaning what exactly? Mary Tillman was usually informed via ESPN press release or an email from the Tillman Foundation? What are we really fighting about here? I really hope that we get some clarity on exactly what is going on behind-the-scenes, because it feels like this is a beef between Pat Tillman’s mother and his widow, and it also feels like Mary Tillman is completely uninformed or misinformed about why Harry is receiving this award. Meanwhile, TMZ has a piece in which other Pat Tillman Award winners are defending Harry being named the recipient of the award.

Prince Harry has key figures in his corner amid the outrage over ESPN’s decision to honor him with the Pat Tillman Award for Service — at least 2 former winners say Harry is definitely deserving.

Jake Wood, a U.S. Marine and former college football player who won the award in 2018, tells TMZ … the Duke of Sussex is a natural fit for the Tillman honor because of Harry’s military service and his dedication to veterans. Jake feels Prince Harry is a good choice because he’s dedicated his life to serving and supporting the military and veterans — Harry served 2 tours in Afghanistan — and that should be commended because there are hundreds of different ways a British royal could live his life.

Another previous winner, U.S. Air Force Master Sgt. Israel Del Toro Jr., received the Tillman award in 2017, and totally disagrees with [Pat] McAfee and Mary Tillman. He says Harry’s work with wounded and injured veterans makes him a worthy recipient, and for what it’s worth … he’s looking forward to watching Harry follow in his footsteps.

That’s ESPN’s take too, as it insists Harry was chosen specifically because of his work as the founder of The Invictus Games for wounded and injured vets. Harry’s foundation is celebrating 10 years of service. The notion ESPN selected Harry purely for publicity doesn’t make sense to Jake, who points out … the ESPYs and ESPN aren’t hurting for celebs and the ceremony is always chock-full of famous athletes.

Of course, Harry’s the first celeb to win the Pat Tillman Award for Service — in the past, it’s been reserved for unsung heroes, but Jake says Harry’s military background makes him unlike most celebs. While Jake’s defending Harry here, don’t get it twisted … he says Pat’s mother has every right to defend her son’s legacy however she sees fit, and, obviously, he does not speak for the Tillman family. Likewise, Israel has sympathy for Mary, but says the award boils down to service … and, for him at least, Prince Harry more than checks that box.

[From TMZ]

Yeah, I agree with these men. This whole “controversy” driven by Mary Tillman and Pat McAfee has been so bizarre. But hey, someone succeeded at turning a huge honor for Harry into a negative storyline. It’s almost as if that’s been someone’s agenda for eight years.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.