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.

Everyone knew that the Spring 2024 session of the Supreme Court’s docket was going to yield some truly god-awful decisions, but it feel like we’re being inundated every single day with some new SCOTUS travesty. Last week, SCOTUS basically overturned the Chevron doctrine, a 40-year legal principle which effectively allowed government agencies to regulate businesses in good faith within ambiguous laws and statutes. Last week, SCOTUS also gave a wide berth to local authorities who want to arrest homeless people for sleeping on the streets. On the same day, the Court basically questioned whether insurrectionists could be or should be charged with obstruction. On Monday, SCOTUS released their decision on presidential immunity. This is Donald Trump’s case, where Trump is basically arguing that as president, he has criminal immunity across the board and he can commit criminal acts in an official capacity. The court agreed with Trump, in that they also believe he is immune from prosecution for all of the crimes he committed during his presidency, up to and including inciting an insurrection.

The U.S. Supreme Court, in a 6-3 decision along ideological lines, ruled that a former president has absolute immunity for his core constitutional powers — and is entitled to a presumption of immunity for his official acts, but lacks immunity for unofficial acts. But at the same time, the court sent the case back to the trial judge to determine which, if any of former President Donald Trump’s actions, were part of his official duties and thus were protected from prosecution.

That part of the court’s decision likely ensures that the case against Trump won’t be tried before the election, and then only if he is not reelected. If he is reelected, Trump could order the Justice Department to drop the charges against him, or he might try to pardon himself in the two pending federal cases.

Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the court’s decision, joined by his fellow conservatives. Dissenting were the three liberals, Justices Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson. Roberts acknowledged that the case was unprecedented.

“No court has thus far considered how to distinguish between official and unofficial acts,” he wrote, while chiding the lower courts for rendering “their decisions on a highly expedited basis.” He said the lower courts “did not analyze the conduct alleged in the indictment to decide which of it should be categorized as official and which unofficial.” Roberts wrote that “Trump asserts a far broader immunity than the limited one we have recognized,” but the opinion also undermined some of the key charges against the former president.

“Certain allegations — such as those involving Trump’s discussions with the Acting Attorney General — are readily categorized in light of the nature of the President’s official relationship to the office held by that individual,” he wrote. In other words, “Trump is … absolutely immune from prosecution for the alleged conduct involving his discussions with Justice Department officials.”

Monday’s decision to send the case back to trial Judge Tanya Chutkan all but guarantees that there will be no Trump trial on the election interference charges for months. Even before the immunity case, Judge Chutkan indicated that trial preparations would likely take three months. Now, she will also have to decide which of the charges in the Trump indictment should remain and which involve official acts that under the Supreme Court ruling are protected from prosecution.

In her dissent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote that the majority “in effect, completely insulate[s] Presidents from criminal liability.”

“Today’s decision to grant former Presidents criminal immunity reshapes the institution of the Presidency. It makes a mockery of the principle, foundational to our Constitution and system of Government, that no man is above the law,” she wrote. “Relying on little more than its own misguided wisdom about the need for “bold and unhesitating action” by the President, … the Court gives former President Trump all the immunity he asked for and more.”

[From NPR]

While the entire decision is a sh-tshow, this is especially galling: “Trump is … absolutely immune from prosecution for the alleged conduct involving his discussions with Justice Department officials.” As in, Trump – or any president?? – can order the Attorney General to drop prosecutions of his cronies, Trump and the AG can collude on criminal acts and the AG can basically act as Trump’s in-house mob lawyer. That’s not how any of this is supposed to work. As many have said, the right-wing justices have left such a broad interpretation for presidential immunity, it would be funny if President Biden tried to test out the ruling. I mean, SCOTUS just said that the president can commit all manner of crimes if he cloaks them as “official, presidential acts.” President Biden could dismantle the Supreme Court, imprison those six justices without due process and say that it’s an official act – it’s his duty as president to save the republic from a fascist reactionary court.

joe biden now has the opportunity to create several scotus vacancies in the funniest ways possible

— Andrew Lawrence (@ndrew_lawrence) July 1, 2024

Photos courtesy of Cover Images, Avalon Red.

Over the weekend, Pat Tillman’s mother Mary Tillman spoke exclusively to the Mail on Sunday about Prince Harry receiving the Pat Tillman Award for Service at this year’s ESPYs. As I said, Mary Tillman is a Gold Star mother, she has every right to say whatever the hell she wants. But I find her statement incredibly curious, and it’s suspicious to me that she made the comments to the Mail. I kept waiting for something else to come out about it, like the family issuing a statement like “Mary Tillman doesn’t speak for the Tillman Foundation” or “Mary Tillman’s words were taken out of context by the Mail.” It absolutely feels like the Mail played fast and loose with the whole story, especially given Mary Tillman’s lack of knowledge about the Invictus Games. Well, the Tillman Foundation hasn’t said anything but ESPN sort of pushed back gently on Mary Tillman’s comments:

Pat’s mother, Mary Tillman, told the Daily Mail that she was “shocked” by the choice.

“I am shocked as to why they would select such a controversial and divisive individual to receive the award,” she said, according to the outlet. “There are recipients that are far more fitting. There are individuals working in the veteran community that are doing tremendous things to assist veterans. These individuals do not have the money, resources, connections or privilege that Prince Harry has. I feel that those types of individuals should be recognized.”

ESPN said in a statement: “ESPN, with the support of the Tillman Foundation, is honoring Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex, specifically for the work of The Invictus Games Foundation as it celebrates its 10th year promoting healing through the power of sport for military service members and veterans around the world. While we understand not everyone will agree with all honorees selected for any award, the Invictus Games Foundation does incredible work, and ESPN believes this is a cause worth celebrating.”

While Mary said she was not consulted about the award winner, she has also not previously been involved with the selection of recipients for the award named for her son.

[From People]

It’s not like ESPN made it some big secret why they decided to honor Harry with the award. In the network’s announcement/press release of their special awards, they cited the Invictus Games front and center. Invictus is fully the reason why Harry is being recognized with this award. And yet ESPN’s resident dumbf–k Pat McAfee did a segment in which he failed to mention Invictus and instead, pretended that Harry would receive the award for being a famous sports fan. Some really strange sh-t is happening and we really aren’t getting the whole story. That being said, I like that ESPN pushed back and this is important: “While Mary said she was not consulted about the award winner, she has also not previously been involved with the selection of recipients for the award named for her son.” Kind of suggesting that she’s clout-chasing off Harry’s name, right?

Photos courtesy of Instar.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Vanity Fair (@vanityfair)

While I knew that Ridley Scott was making a Gladiator sequel, I guess I just stopped paying attention to any details about it. I loved – and perhaps still love? – the first Gladiator movie. I was around when it originally came out and I remember how basically every film lover was blown away by it. The cinematography, the story, the performances, the CGI “Rome.” The score is great too, btw. It will be a really difficult film to top and I had no idea how Ridley would even attempt it. As it turns out, he built a story in the same general universe, and Connie Nielsen has come back as Lucilla, the daughter of Marcus Aurelius. Paul Mescal plays her son Lucius all grown up, only Lucilla has sent him away to be raised far outside of Rome for his own protection. Pedro Pascal plays a general who served under Maximus in what would have the timeline of the first movie. Here’s something else I didn’t know: Denzel Washington is in it as a very wealthy “arms dealer” who keeps a stable of young gladiators for sport. Anyway, Vanity Fair has an exclusive photos (see above) and exclusive interviews with the cast and with Ridley. This comes out in November!

Paul Mescal on his Roman nose: “My nose just is kind of Roman. So it’s useful in this context. The nose that I absolutely hated when I was in secondary school—and used to get ribbed for—became very, very useful when Ridley needed somebody to be in Gladiator II.”

Connie Nielsen on Lucilla sending her son away: “There’s a lot of Sophie’s Choice going on here, where these are impossible situations that we are being forced to reckon with. There is an authoritarian power that is parading as if it were still somehow the vestiges of a Republican government. Inside of this travesty are human beings who are caught in this gamesmanship and power. That is what I find always so interesting in Ridley’s stories. He’s really showing the effect of power on people and what happens in a place where power is unrestrained.”

Pedro Pascal’s general, Marcus Acacius: “This movie has an identity that is shaped by [Maximus’s] legacy. It wouldn’t make sense for it not to,” says Pascal. He describes Acacius as a fighter who “learned from the best, so of course this code of honor is ingrained into his training and into his existence. But at the end of the day, he’s a different person. And that can’t change who he is. Maximus is Maximus, and that can’t be replicated. That just makes Acacius capable of different things.”

Ridley Scott on Denzel Washington’s dashing powerbroker Macrinus. “Denzel is an arms dealer who supplies food for the armies in Europe, supplies wine and oil, makes steel, makes spears, weapons, cannons, and catapults. So he is a very wealthy man. Instead of having a stable of racehorses, he has a stable of gladiators. He’s beautiful. He drives a golden Ferrari. I got him a gold-plated chariot.”

[From Vanity Fair]

This whole piece and the photos made me really excited for the sequel. Nothing will ever really compare to how bonkers it was to see Gladiator in the theater the first time, but I actually trust Ridley Scott, I think? It’s clearly something he’s wanted to make for a while and it took him some time to figure out the story and the right actors. It’s cool that Connie has come back too!

Denzel Washington in ‘GLADIATOR 2’https://t.co/OI2mTFd581 pic.twitter.com/flummpEPnN

— Film Updates (@FilmUpdates) July 1, 2024

Instagram courtesy of Vanity Fair.

NBC News put out this reporting last week that Covid cases are on the rise again this summer, only I couldn’t cover it until now because **checks notes** oh yeah, I’ve been holed up in bed with Covid! And it’s not only me (however much it feels like it). Cases are up in 39 states in the US, with California in particular showing a bump in positive Covid tests from 3% to 7.5% in the last month (and those stats are just for documented cases). One bit of good news? Though there’s a new crop of variants that disease experts are tracking, the data suggests that overall the cases are milder than we’ve seen from Covids past. Here are the important bits on the trends and variants popping up this summer, and the best ways to prepare:

Summer wave: The CDC no longer tracks Covid cases, but it estimates transmission based on emergency department visits. Both Covid deaths and ED visits have risen in the last week. Hospitalizations also climbed 25% from May 26 to June 1, the latest data available. … “It looks like the summer wave is starting to begin,” said Dr. Thomas Russo, chief of infectious diseases at the University at Buffalo Jacobs School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences. Covid infections have historically spiked over the summer, in part because of an increase in travel and people congregating indoors, where it’s cooler. This year appears to be no exception, though disease experts expect this season’s wave to be milder in terms of severe disease.

Flirting with disaster: Several variants are likely to be contributing to the nationwide trend, said Dr. Dan Barouch, director of the Center for Virology and Vaccine Research at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston. “We’re seeing the start of an uptick of infections that is coincident with new variants that are developing: KP.2 and KP.3 and LB.1. It does appear that those variants do have an advantage over the prior ones,” he said. … KP.2 became the dominant variant in the U.S. last month, and then KP.3 took over in early June. Along with a third variant that shares the same key mutations, KP.1.1, the group accounts for around 63% of Covid infections in the U.S. Some scientists collectively refer to the variants as “FLiRT” — a reference to their amino acid changes.

New kid on the block: LB.1 accounts for another 17.5% of Covid infections. Experts said its rapid growth indicates that it’s likely to become dominant soon, though scientists still want to study it more closely. “It’s sort of the newest kid on the block,” Barouch said. “There’s not much known about it.” A preprint paper released this month, which hasn’t been peer-reviewed, suggests that LB.1 is more infectious than the “FLiRT: variants and could be better at evading protection from vaccines or previous infections. “Assuming that preliminary data is true, that it’s more immune-evasive and that it’s more infectious than KP.2 and KP.3, that’s a winning formula to infect more people,” Russo said.

What you can do: Russo recommended that people who are the most vulnerable to infection — those who are older or immunocompromised or engage in riskier activities, such as attending large parties or gatherings — consider getting the latest Covid vaccine now if they haven’t already. He added that a monoclonal antibody drug called Pemgarda has been available since April for immunocompromised people. The antiviral medication Paxlovid should also help reduce the likelihood of hospitalization or death. But most young, healthy people can hold out for the updated Covid vaccines expected to arrive this fall, experts said. The Food and Drug Administration advised vaccine manufacturers this month to target the KP.2 variant.

[From NBC News]

Get vaccinated, y’all! I usually double up and get my flu shot and Covid booster at the same appointment shortly after they roll them out in the fall. And this was my first dance with ‘rona, so I credit that to staying on top of my boosters and consider myself very lucky. Main symptoms have been a deep, persistent cough, and the hugely distracting and unpleasant metallic taste in my mouth from taking Paxlovid. It’s definitely been worse than the colds I typically get, but at no point did I feel things were so severe that I should go to the hospital. So again, thank you to the scientific community for giving us vaccines and medicines to save our lives. (And bless their hearts for being dorks; the explanation for the “FLiRT” nickname cracked me up.)

As for avoiding large parties and gatherings… excuse me, but I’m a pro. I was livin’ the social distancing life long before it was being preached, thankyouverymuch. I will have to go back to the office though, as my boss did not hesitate to remind me that the CDC dropped the five-day isolation requirement. The guidelines stipulate that you just need to be 24 hours free of fever without having taken fever-reducing medication. Of course, fever was never one of my symptoms, but I’m used to being an outlier.

Photos credit: Marcus Aurelius, Mediocre Memories and Wendy Wei on Pexels

The beef between Kendrick Lamar and Drake ended in a clear victory for Kendrick. Kendrick absolutely had the better bars, Kendrick’s “Not Like Us” is (arguably) the song of the summer, and Kendrick organized The Pop Out concert on Juneteenth, which was a massive success and a huge cultural moment for the West Coast and LA music scene. Drake has been largely licking his wounds and playing stupid games on social media ever since. Kendrick’s evisceration of BBL Drizzy sort of overshadowed the fact that Rick Ross and Drake were also beefing within the same timeline. Drake dissed Rick Ross on “Push Ups,” which was Drake’s response to Future & Kendrick’s “Like That.” Ross responded with “Champagne Moments,” in which he called Drake a “white boy” who uses ghostwriters and claimed that Drake got a nose job, among other accusations. Ross was and is Team Kendrick, so much so that when Ross performed in Vancouver on Sunday, he finished his set by playing “Not Like Us.” Some white boys jumped Rick Ross and his crew as they left the stage.

Rozay had a rough weekend — but he’s not letting it show. Footage shared on social media reveals that Rick Ross, 48, was attacked in Vancouver on Sunday night, following his performance at the Ignite Music Festival.

Video of the incident see Ross leaving the stage when he and his crew become engaged in an argument with several others that quickly breaks out into a full-on brawl when one man throws the first punch, hitting Ross in the face. Several videos of the incident, taken from different angles, indicate that the fight went on for several minutes.

TMZ reports that the altercation was caused by a negative reaction to Ross’ choice in music: the rapper ended his set by playing Kendrick Lamar’s Drake diss track, “Not Like Us,” which was created amid their ongoing rap beef.

Representatives for Ross did not immediately respond to Entertainment Weekly’s request for comment. Ross has yet to address the confrontation on social media but uploaded several Instagram Story updates in the aftermath, where he appears unfazed by the assault. One video sees the rapper laughing heartily while sipping champagne and a Monday photo sees him standing in front of a jet. “Vancouver, it was fun, till next time,” he captioned the post.

However, the incident earned a quiet response from Drake, who liked a video of the fight shared on Instagram.

[From EW]

It is pretty flagrant to play “Not Like Us” in Canada, but the optics of a bunch of white Canadians jumping Rick Ross and his crew are probably not what Drake wanted either. Or maybe he did, who knows. Some people called the Canadians “OVO goons,” meaning part of Drake’s crew. But I think the guys who attacked Ross were not affiliated with Drake whatsoever? I also kind of think Drake is trying to latch onto anything he can find for some kind of “win.” When really, he just needs to go away for a while and stop posting to Instagram constantly like an influencer.

Drake liked an Instagram post of Rick Ross and his crew getting attacked in Vancouver, Canada while Kendrick Lamar’s “Not Like Us” played in the background. pic.twitter.com/bz61EsacT8

— XXL Magazine (@XXL) July 1, 2024

Drake posts a story on Instagram wishing Canadians a ‘Happy Canada Day’

He also has a little chuckle, and it is safe to say he’s laughing at Rick Ross pic.twitter.com/dxt6ADZ9Np

— keep6ixsolid (@keep6ixsolid) July 1, 2024

Photos courtesy of Cover Images.

It’s hard to believe this, but The Price is Right has been around for 52 years. I honestly thought it had been much longer than that! But I guess since for Gen X and Millennials, it was the ultimate “stay home sick from school” show, so to us, it feels like it’s been around forever. I’ll never forget when OG host Bob Barker died (RIP) at age 99, and it just felt like one of the biggest winks from the Universe ever. Drew Carey has been hosting the game show since Barker’s retirement in June 2007, which is also something that is bonkers for me to wrap my head around. Over the years, there have been some memorable contestants and some great moments. In a recent interview with TV Insider, Drew shared that over the course of his 17 years as host, he’s noticed that many contestants, um, self-lubricate prior to taping. In fact, He says having a contestant appear while drunk or high is “not unusual.”

“That happens here all the time,” Carey said. “They’ll have a gummy, or I’ll smell alcohol on their breath. Not unusual. There was a guy here that was tripping on mushrooms. He came with a bunch of friends. He was a sketch [comedy] guy. I found out later when I went to UCB [sketch improv theater, Upright Citizens Brigade] to hang out and they were like, ‘Did you see that guy who claimed to be a skateboarding rabbi?’ I asked him what he did for a living. And he goes, ‘I’m a skateboarding rabbi.’ He didn’t think he was going to get picked, and he totally tripped.”

[From Deadline via Pajiba]

Well, I’m certainly never going to watch The Price is Right the same way again! I wonder if that’s been happening with contestants ever since the show began. If so, my 5th grade mind is blown. I bet what Drew shared is on the low-hanging-fruit end of the stories he could tell about Price is Right contestants. This isn’t the first time someone has shared behind-the-scenes gossip from the show, either. 10 years ago, former Barker’s Beauties Kathleen Bradley wrote a book, titled Backstage at The Price Is Right: Memoirs of A Barker Beauty which spilled a lot of crazy stuff that happened off-camera. I remember hearing about it when it came out, but never thought to follow up on it until now. Anyway, does anyone have any guesses as to which contestants since 2007 have been memorable enough to have been inebriated during their appearance? I don’t watch the show as frequently as I did during the Barker days, but now I kinda want to start up again so I can play my own personal game of “Guess which contestant isn’t sober” bingo.

Embed from Getty Images

Embed from Getty Images

photos credit Getty and the top image is a screenshot from YouTube/The Price is Right

Taraji P. Henson hosted the 2024 BET Awards and wore Balmain on the red carpet. She also performed a crazy spoof of Kendrick Lamar’s “Not Like Us.” BBL Drizzy was not in the room (he was making an ass out of himself on social media). [RCFA]
Megan Thee Stallion performed a medley of new songs (including “Hiss,” which is mostly about Drake) at last night’s BET Awards. [Just Jared]
Taylor Swift is thrilled that Simone Biles uses “Ready For It” for her floor routine. Taylor even posted on social media about it. [Socialite Life]
People in Poland are LARPing as Americans?? This is so weird. [OMG Blog]
Mindy Kaling is really “bouncing back” after her third child. [Hollywood Life]
Review of A Quiet Place: Day One. [LaineyGossip]
Oh, the 30th anniversary of Speed! [Pajiba]
Viktor & Rolf is doing too much. [Go Fug Yourself]
Jannie Moos retires from CNN. [Seriously OMG]
Kim Plath filed for divorce from Barry Plath. [Starcasm]
The disappearance of phone booths is still wild to me. [Buzzfeed]

Embed from Getty Images

Prince Andrew still has his York ducal title, he still lives in a 30-room mansion with a sweetheart lease, he still gets millions of pounds in “private” funding from his brother for security, he still rides around Windsor Great Park on his horses, he still gets invited to state events (the coronation) and private events (Christmas at Sandringham). Andrew’s “punishment” is basically a retirement from work. He’s no longer representing any patronages and he’s not doing any charitable work. That’s it. He still lives the life of a pampered prince, even though he paid off his rape victim and he was best friends with two human trafficking degenerates, Ghislaine Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein. But some royal reporters wonder aloud if Andrew has been punished too much!

King Charles’ “punishment” of Prince Andrew raises the question of when it will ever end, according to a royal expert. Disgraced Andrew was stripped of his roles and patronages after forking out millions to settle Virginia Giuffre’s case against him.

Hello Magazine’s Royal Editor Emily Nash spoke on the Royal Exclusive Show. She told The Sun’s Royal Editor, Matt Wilkinson: “I think what we’ve seen from the King, is he has kept the Duke of York as part of the family, and the family events. If he’s taking part in things behind closed doors it doesn’t particularly bother me. This is a family, this is his brother.”

Royal Editor Matt Wilkinson added: “And he has been punished in quite a few ways, he’s stripped him of all his roles, patronages, and he can never be a working royal. And, he will probably end up getting kicked out of Royal Lodge.”

“Yes exactly, so at one point do you say that’s enough,” said Ms Nash.

Meanwhile, former BBC royal correspondent Jennie Bond previously said on the Royal Exclusive Show that Andrew is “too pompous for his own good”, and will never return.

She said: “I don’t think there would be jeers from the crowd – but he’s not going to come back to any kind of public role. And I think that’s entirely correct. He’s always been a very arrogant man in my view. I’ve met him a few times over the years and he was pompous – he said he was too honourable for his own good. Well, I think he was too pompous for his own good actually. There is no place for him now among the working royals.”

[From The Sun]

“So at one point do you say that’s enough?” Counterpoint: at what point do you say that Andrew should be taken to the woodshed? At what point do you say that Andrew should be interviewed by the FBI in their long-running investigations into Epstein and Maxwell? At what point do you say that Andrew isn’t entitled to any security? These people love to compare Andrew and Prince Harry except when it comes to “which prince has been treated better by the institution.” Hint: it’s the credibly accused rapist and nonce.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.