I’ve been slightly surprised to see all of the interest in the Tom Cruise-Suri Cruise story because there really isn’t any new information. Tom hasn’t seen his 16-year-old daughter in a decade. Suri has been pretty much raised solely by Katie Holmes all this time. Many believe that Katie got sole custody of Suri when TomKat negotiated their divorce. I do not believe that, I never did. I think Tom completely “gave up” on seeing Suri because the Church of Scientology convinced him to. Suri is obviously getting older and she’ll be heading off to college soon (probably next year), which means Tom’s child-support payments will come to an end. Trust that Katie has a nest egg though – she walked out of the marriage with a tidy sum, she owns her New York apartment (and some additional pieces of real estate) and she’ll be fine financially.

So why are we suddenly hearing more about Suri and Tom? Lainey theorized that this stuff is coming from the British media because Tom lives in England now and he’s cozying up to the British media. Could be, although if we want to get even more into the vintage tea, Rupert Murdoch (who owns several British papers and tabloids) has never been on Team Tom Cruise or Team Scientology. That’s how Nicole Kidman was able to escape CoS’s grasp back in the day – she cozied up to the Murdoch press and they took “her side” during her divorce from Tom. I bring up Murdoch and his media outlets because Page Six (part of the Murdoch-owned NY Post) also had a story about Tom Cruise and Suri this week.

Tom Cruise continues to be estranged from his daughter, Suri Cruise, Page Six can confirm. A source tells us exclusively that the “Mission: Impossible” star, 60, has not seen the 16-year-old in a very long time and is not a part of her life.

Reps for Tom did not immediately return Page Six’s request for comment. The movie star welcomed Suri with his then-girlfriend, Katie Holmes, in April 2006, but after the former couple split in 2011, the father-daughter duo drifted further and further apart.

Tom admitted in transcripts from his 2012 defamation lawsuit against Bauer Media that he had not seen Suri for three months right after he and Holmes, now 44, called it quits.

“Listen, when there is a divorce … things change,” he told lawyers in 2013. “It’s not an ideal scene. It’s not an ideal situation.” During a deposition for that same $50 million suit — which was ultimately settled — the “Top Gun” star confessed that his ties to Scientology had played a pivotal role in why he was separated from his kid. When asked whether Holmes had left him “in part to protect Suri from Scientology,” Tom responded at the time, “That was one of the assertions, yes.”

In 2016, the controversial church was once again blamed for keeping Tom and Suri apart because, according to its rules, members are forbidden from associating with nonbelievers. Since neither Suri nor Holmes were Scientologists, Tom reportedly could not have a relationship with either one.

“This is his loss, his issue, his problem,” a source told Page Six at the time. “He must be really brainwashed.”

Former Scientologist Leah Remini told The Post in 2020 that Scientology considers Holmes a “suppressive person,” which is an “enemy,” and therefore Tom believes he “can’t be connected to Suri.” The “King of Queens” alum, who has been fighting to publicly expose the alleged misdeeds of the Church of Scientology, speculated of Tom, “I’m sure his master plan is to wait until Suri gets older so that he can lure her into Scientology and away from her mother.”

[From Page Six]

A very different tone than the more sympathetic energy of the Daily Mail’s Suri Cruise story. So… what is this about? Tom wanted some sympathetic press and the Murdoch media empire is slapping him down? See, the thing is, I don’t even believe that Tom is cozying up to, like, the Daily Mail? Tom’s whole deal these days is flying under the radar when he’s not promoting a film. He doesn’t want anyone talking about Suri or Bella or Connor. He doesn’t want any focus on his personal life right now. All of that to say, I have no idea what’s going on.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Backgrid.

Chris Rock thinks Donald Trump’s arrest will make him more powerful. [Dlisted]
Keanu Reeves at yet another John Wick premiere! [Go Fug Yourself]
Florence Pugh talks about Zach Braff & Andrew Garfield. [LaineyGossip]
Jerry O’Connell tried that ranch-flavored ice cream, blech. [Seriously OMG]
Should we watch Netflix’s Agent Elvis? [Pajiba]
What was Angela Bassett’s best look of the awards season? [RCFA]
Casper Ruud & other tennis stars played with puppies. [Just Jared]
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson was the lone dissenter on an abortion-rights case before the Supreme Court. [Jezebel]
Josie Canseco denies being a nepo baby. [Egotastic]
Stormy Daniels is so funny. [Buzzfeed]
A Return to Amish star might not have been Amish?? [Starcasm]
Howard Stern wants Jon Stewart to run for president. [Towleroad]

In recent years, Prince William and Kate have shown a willingness – if not an eagerness – to put their three children front-and-center at all times. They made Prince George wear a little banker’s suit on a hot day at Wimbledon. They were fine with Prince Louis having a tantrum in the middle of the Jubbly parade. They were fine with Princess Charlotte’s visible discomfort during the Commonwealth games. And on and on – we’ve seen so much of the kids in the past two years, especially since Will and Kate like to use the kids as human buffers. In any case, I wouldn’t think that William and Kate would be in any kind of disagreement over the kids’ roles during the coronation, but some people think they’re arguing about it:

Prince William and Kate Middleton are proud parents to three children, but the couple is reportedly arguing over their eldest son, Prince George. George — like his father — is the heir to the British monarchy, but his role in King Charles’ coronation might be too much for a 9-year-old to handle.

Royals expert Tom Quinn analyzed the possible concerns both William and Kate have surrounding Charles’ big day. “I’ve heard from my contacts that there is a bit of an argument going on about whether George should play a more formal role,” the author shared in an interview. “I’ve heard that Kate and William are worried that it will be too much for him. It’s almost an echo of the way William and Harry were sometimes made to attend formal occasions that they shouldn’t have been made to attend — most famously, the funeral of their mother, and walking behind her coffin at their age,” Quinn added.

While Quinn shared his thoughts on the possibility of George attending Charles’ crowning, the writer discussed the judgment His Majesty received following Princess Diana’s death. “A lot of people criticized that and said that it was a horrible thing to make two boys that young, and especially Harry, do,” Quinn explained of Prince Harry and Prince William. “So I think people are remembering this and thinking, ‘Well hang on a minute, if George is some sort of a pageboy, or has a similar role at the Coronation, is that going back too far towards the traditional roles?’”

Considering William and Kate’s focus on providing a sense of normalcy for their kids, Quinn doesn’t believe George will have a major role at the event.

“So I’ve heard that there is a debate going on quite fiercely at the moment about how to do that. And, as far as I’ve heard, it hasn’t been decided yet,” Quinn said while noting that the youngster’s responsibilities “won’t be too prominent.”

[From MSN]

Whatever argument between Will and Kate, I bet it was mitigated when they learned that the coronation was going to be all about Queen Camilla and HER family. I believe that when the Waleses heard about Camilla’s insistence that her grandchildren have significant roles in the Chubbly, that’s when the Waleses decided that all three of their kids MUST be included and that George MUST be front and center. That being said, I agree that a big, dumb coronation is not the place for three kids. I doubt Charles even wants George front-and-center?

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Backgrid, Instar and Cover Images.

Embed from Getty Images

The Indian government made it perfectly clear to King Charles that they will have a huge problem if the Koh-i-noor diamond is worn by Queen Camilla (or anyone else) during the coronation. The Koh-i-noor’s history is one of bloodshed, kidnapping, theft and colonialism, and India has made it abundantly clear that the diamond should be returned to them. It took months for Buckingham Palace to work out a solution to the dilemma of which crown Camilla would wear during the coronation, and they eventually decided that Camilla would wear the traditional queen’s consort crown, but would simply remove the Koh-i-noor and replace it with a replica or another diamond. So what will happen to the Koh-i-noor? Will it be sent to India? Of course not. The Tower of London is going to display the blood-soaked diamond in a special coronation exhibition.

The Tower of London will display the controversial Koh-i-Noor diamond in greater historical context for the first time ever in a new coronation exhibition. Through a reworked presentation of the Crown Jewels, Historic Royal Palaces aims to explain the diamond’s complex history by referencing it as a “symbol of conquest” which has passed through the hands of many empires.

The diamond, which usually sits on display with the rest of the Crown Jewels, has been mired in controversy after it was slated for the crowning of the Queen Consort at the King’s Coronation on May 6. Growing upset threatened to come to a head after there were renewed calls for its return, with India as the most diplomatically-critical country that made a claim to it.

However, it was announced last month that the diamond would not be used in the ceremony, as Camilla opted to wear Queen Mary’s crown instead, meaning it has remained on display in the Tower of London.

The new exhibition, beginning on May 26, has been the result of a four-year project for Historic Royal Palaces to delve deeper into the history of the collection in the Jewel House. The Telegraph understands that the origins of the Koh-i-Noor diamond have never been explored in this level of detail in an exhibition, and that its history before it passed to the British monarchy will be explained.

It was said to have been “given” to Britain in 1849, and is currently set in the crown worn by the Queen Mother in her 1937 coronation, but before that it was owned by Mughal Emperors, Shahs of Iran, Emirs of Afghanistan, and Sikh Maharajas. The historical context of the Koh-i-Noor and its many previous owners will be explained through a combination of objects and visual projections. Meanwhile, the origins of the Cullinan diamond, the largest ever found, and the medieval Coronation Regalia will also be explored in the exhibition for the first time.

[From The Telegraph]

You can’t make this stuff up. India has made their position perfectly clear, and I would imagine that they’ve been even more direct in private, through official and unofficial channels: do not exhibit the Koh-i-noor in any way, we consider it stolen property, don’t flaunt your stolen, colonialist treasure, return the f–king diamond. And Britain’s entire response is to wait around for months, declare the problem solved by announcing that Camilla wouldn’t wear the diamond, and then put the diamond in an exhibition to drive tourism. Completely asinine.

Embed from Getty Images

Photos courtesy of Getty.

About thirteen months ago, Prince Andrew settled with Virginia Giuffre after an American court said that Virginia’s lawsuit could proceed. Andrew settled with Virginia for anywhere between $7-20 million, reports vary. There were plenty of reasons why he settled with Virginia at that particular moment – his pre-trial defense was a mess, Andrew was just days away from a deposition, and it was his mother’s Jubilee year and the palace leaned on him to settle the issue. Now that QEII has passed away and Virginia is reportedly writing a memoir, Andrew keeps leaking all of this sh-t to the British media about how he wants his settlement reversed and how he’ll “sue” Virginia (his rape victim) for $100 million if she “defames” him. Well, Virginia’s lawyer David Boies has made some new comments about what happened during the settlement negotiations and how Andrew is full of sh-t.

David Boies commented on reports that Andrew wants to overturn the settlement, saying: “If they want to get out of the settlement all they have to do is call me and let me take Andrew’s deposition and go to trial.” The case was settled just a week before Andrew was due to be deposed.

Boies told the Mail: “From our side we said there had to be a substantial amount of money and there had to be an acceptable statement from Prince Andrew. Those were really the two initial stumbling blocks and they were resolved within a few hours of each other….Prince Andrew just wanted out. He was realistic enough not to have any demands. He just wanted to pay not very much money and didn’t want to acknowledge Virginia or what he’d done… his position was that Virginia had made all this up and wasn’t really a victim.”

Boies told the Mail that Andrew “claimed he didn’t know anything about Epstein’s sex trafficking and had nothing to apologize for.”

The lawyer said of Andrew’s dramatic decision to settle with Giuffre: “I can’t think of a turnaround that changed as dramatically in such a short a time as this one did. I have a sense that Andrew probably had mixed emotions. I suspect there was a substantial amount of relief but also a substantial amount of discomfort as to what he had to acknowledge and the amount of money he had to pay.” Boies declined to comment on the financial terms of the settlement.

Boies said a memoir by Andrew might “help his reputation, depending on what it said….I believe both as a matter of religious faith and human compassion in the possibility of redemption. I would not put Prince Andrew or any other child of God beyond the possibility of redemption but redemption has to begin with the admission of sin and thus far he has been disinclined to do that.”

[From The Daily Beast]

“If they want to get out of the settlement all they have to do is call me and let me take Andrew’s deposition and go to trial.” That’s it. That’s all there is to it. For all of Andrew’s bluster, all of his huffing and puffing about how he’ll seek redemption by suing Virginia Giuffre, that path always leads straight to a deposition and a trial. Andrew has spent months crying about how he needs to get justice – well, come to America, be deposed by David Boies, sit for an interview with the FBI and let’s do this. Let Virginia have her day in court too. As for the “substantial” amount of money he paid Virginia in the settlement – there’s been a stupid amount of backtracking there as well. I believe the initial reporting, which made it seem like Andrew had to borrow something like £12 million from his mother to settle with Virginia.

Photos courtesy of Backgrid, Avalon Red.

Remember in 2021, when President Biden and Dr. Jill Biden visited the UK, and Dr. Biden did an event with the then-Duchess of Cambridge? It was supposed to be this simple event about early childhood education, Kate’s “specialty.” Except that being put beside Dr. Biden completely exposed Kate’s incompetence, her inability to form complete sentences, her lack of expertise and all of her embarrassing hand-flapping and fake-accent work. It was especially bad because the palace couldn’t control it – Dr. Biden was there, and as such, the American media scrum had followed her to the event. It was a slow-motion trainwreck with international coverage.

Ever since that moment with Dr. Biden, Kensington Palace has taken pains to tightly control all of Kate’s busy-work projects. Shaping Us is just another in a long line of lightweight, do-nothing busy-work setpieces given to Kate. She’s told to go somewhere, make a speech and the palace controls the optics and the videos. So it was on Tuesday, when Kate debuted her Business Taskforce on Early Childhood. There is no plan, no fundraising campaign, no project to invest in. This was Kate in her keenest Meghan cosplay, making a big-girl business speech in front of big businessmen!

I ask again: are you not embarrassed? Because this is embarrassing. Kate is the personification of “this could have been an email.” The coverage really emphasized the entire keen endeavor too, that it was style over substance, that the important thing was that Kate got her big-girl business photo-op with business buildings in the background, looking businessy. That unhinged nutjob Daniela Elser even made this whole mess about Prince Harry, as in – look what Kate is able to accomplish as a royal, eat your heart out, Prince Harry. Meanwhile, absolutely no one has said what Kate’s Keen Business Taskforce will actually DO.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.

In 2016, Gwyneth Paltrow allegedly got into a ski accident in Park City, Utah. The accident, which happened on the slopes, either involved Paltrow crashing into a retired, senior optometrist named Terry Sanderson, or Sanderson crashing into Paltrow (which is her version of events). Both sides admit that a crash happened, but there’s a disagreement about who caused the crash and whether Paltrow checked on Sanderson as he was lying in the snow with broken bones. In 2019, Sanderson filed a lawsuit against Paltrow. This week, the case has finally come to trial. I guess she didn’t feel like settling out of court? I thought that was what happened because we hadn’t heard about this case in years. But no, it’s happening now. These are photos from Tuesday, the first day of what will be an eight-day civil trial.

Terry Sanderson, a 76-year-old retired optometrist, sued Paltrow, alleging that the lifestyle influencer crashed into him while skiing on the beginner’s slopes in Park City, Utah, in February 2016. (Park City is a resort town that hosts the annual, celebrity-studded Sundance Film Festival.)

He claimed that Paltrow, 50, was recklessly heading down the slopes, resulting in a violent collision that left him injured and sprawled on the ground. Paltrow skied away, while he went to the emergency room for a concussion and broken ribs, he alleged, according to the Associated Press. Sanderson initially sued for $3 million, then dropped it to $300,000.

Sanderson’s attorneys argued Tuesday that the incident caused him physical injuries and emotional distress and were a result of negligence on the ski slopes, AP reported.

Sanderson’s friend and ski companion Craig Ramon testified Tuesday, stating that he was nearby at the time of the accident seven years ago when he saw Paltrow hit Sanderson, causing Sanderson to fall face down, AP reported.

Paltrow agrees that the pair collided on a ski run seven years ago. But her attorneys argued that the accident was Sanderson’s fault, that it was Sanderson who crashed into Paltrow. Members of Paltrow’s group then checked on Sanderson, who said he was fine, her attorneys argued. Sanderson stated he has no recollection, AP reported.

Paltrow filed a counterclaim, seeking attorneys fees and $1 in damages. She alleged that Sanderson caused the collision, overstated his injuries from the incident and is attempting to exploit her fame and wealth, AP reported.

[From WaPo]

When Sanderson sued in 2019, he alleged that a Park City ski instructor helped Paltrow “cover up” the incident and that the instructor filed some kind of false report about it to the guy’s bosses or something. I wonder if that will be part of the trial, just as I wonder if Paltrow really did get people to cover up the accident and who crashed into whom. I have no wild take on this – as I’ve said many times, I’m primed to believe the worst of Paltrow, and she absolutely seems like the kind of person who would crash into a senior citizen on a ski slope and then lie about it.

Superficial comment: I’ve worn glasses and contacts for years and Gwyneth does not have the face for these aviator frames. I’ve seen her wear a pair of oversized, square, black frames and that’s the style which looks so much better on her.

Note by CB: Sign up for our mailing list and get the top 8 most obnoxious things Gwyneth Paltrow has said! I only send one email a day on weekdays that I personally write.

Lawyers for Gwyneth Paltrow are introduced as her trial begins.

A retired eye doctor is suing Paltrow for $300,000, claiming she crashed into him while skiing in Utah in 2016. pic.twitter.com/upUBOuBbl0

— The Recount (@therecount) March 21, 2023

Photos courtesy of Backgrid.

Paris is burning. French President Emmannuel Macron barely survived a vote of no confidence after he – cavalierly? – attempted to ram through a bill which would raise France’s retirement age from 62 to 64. When the bill was first announced, French people went bonkers. Riots, arson, vandalism, parts of the country were at a virtual stand-still. But still, Macron had the narrow margin to survive and it appears that the retirement age will be raised, much to everyone’s dismay. That all went down last weekend. Guess what’s happening this coming weekend? A very royal visit from King Charles and Queen Camilla. Charles and Camilla have not left Britain since before Queen Elizabeth II’s passing last September. There was some talk that Charles would wait until after the coronation, but then he decided to “shore up” Britain’s EU allies, France and Germany, and give him the ol’ horsey razzle-dazzle with a whirlwind state visit. The problem is that France is in no state to host a royal visit. The French tram drivers have announced a general strike for the king’s visit. Vive la révolution!

French tram drivers will refuse to take King Charles III on a tour through Bordeaux during his state visit, striking workers have warned amid violent protests rocking the country.

“Charles III, we are going to welcome him with a good old general strike,” warned Olivier Besancenot of the far-Left new anti-capitalist party in an interview with France Info.

The King and Queen Consort are expected to arrive in Paris on Sunday for the start of their first official state visit in France, which takes place against a backdrop of angry anti-Macron protests. On Tuesday, they travel to Bordeaux by train, where they will inaugurate the new local British Consulate, meet members of the British community and tour an organic vineyard.

The original Bordeaux itinerary also includes a tram ride into the city centre, before a quick stroll through town and a visit to a canalé pastry shop. But one local union leader warned that demonstrators are likely to descend on the tracks and block the tram as part of their continued protests against the government’s contentious pension reforms which were passed on Monday night when the opposition failed to shore up enough votes in no-confidence motions.

“It is almost certain that the King will not be able to take the tram,” warned Pascal Mesgueni, a representative of the CFTC union in an interview with Sud Ouest. “No driver will want to transport the King.”

Since President Emmanuel Macron forced through his pension reform bill without a vote on Thursday, demonstrators have also taken to the streets of Bordeaux every day. Under the bill, the age of retirement will rise from 62 to 64.

In a separate interview with daily 20 Minutes, another union rep said protesters plan to take advantage of the royal visit to hold “big demonstrations and big blockages” on the day of the couple’s arrival, which is March 28. According to French news channel BFM TV, French authorities have advised the King to avoid the possibility of large crowds.

[From The Telegraph]

The Telegraph also points out that Charles and Camilla originally planned for some big, public staged events in Paris, like a wreath-laying at the Arc de Triomphe and a visit to at least one of the bigger museums, plus a dinner at Versailles. The problem? There’s trash everywhere and – I would imagine – parts of the city will still be on fire. The garbage-collection union is on strike until March 27. So… the optics of Charles and Camilla’s state visit will be amazing, you guys. Charles wanted to go to France because he believed the French people would treat him gently, that they would be interested in a very English king. Charles is going to be lucky if he avoids being pelted with a flaming baguette.

Photos courtesy of Cover Images, Instar, Avalon Red.

In 2020, Prince Harry and Meghan got a mortgage on their Montecito home and they began to build their life in America. Soon after, the Deranger faction became obsessed with the idea that Harry wouldn’t be allowed to “stay” in America, that he would somehow be deported or forced to return back to the UK. They were openly fantasizing about ICE agents ripping Harry away from his American wife and American child. As I pointed out at the time, Harry is a white, Christian, British man who is legally married to an American citizen, and he currently has two lovely, ginger, American anchor babies (once again, not a pejorative – I am an anchor baby myself). He has money, access to the best immigration lawyers and ample connections in the American government and American business community. The American immigration system is f–ked up, but it’s not so f–ked to the point where ICE will deport a white prince for smoking weed. Speaking of, that’s the new deranger fantasy: that Harry’s admissions about his drug use will somehow invalidate his visa. The Deranger contingent has roped the American neo-con think tank, the Heritage Foundation, into their collective delusion.

Prince Harry faces a fight to keep his US visa application secret today as campaigners demanded its release to see if he admitted his drug use before emigrating to California with Meghan Markle in 2020, MailOnline can reveal.

A conservative think tank is in the middle of a battle with Washington DC officials who are staunchly refusing to publish any details – including any texts or emails – citing the Duke of Sussex’s ‘privacy’.

In Spare and the TV blitz that followed, Harry admitted taking cocaine, cannabis and magic mushrooms. He said marijuana and psychedelics ‘really helped’ with his ‘trauma’ while cocaine was more a ‘social thing’.

The Heritage Foundation says his visa application must now be released so the American taxpayer can understand whether Harry declared his drug use. US immigration law has harsh penalties for lying to immigration officials, including deportation and being barred from applying for citizenship.

Mike Howell, director of the Heritage Foundation’s Oversight Project, said: ‘This request is in the public interest in light of the potential revocation of Prince Harry’s visa for illicit substance use and further questions regarding the Prince’s drug use and whether he was properly vetted before entering the United States’.

Experts have insisted US visa applications would usually be thrown out if there is any history of drug use. The Heritage Foundation says if border officials did know, Harry’s case raises questions over whether he was given special treatment because he is a prince and his wife is a TV star, which they insist would be illegal.

A US State Department spokesman said: ‘Visa records are confidential under Section 222(f) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA); therefore, we cannot discuss the details of individual visa cases’.

[From The Daily Mail]

The thing is, there is some history of famous British nationals having trouble getting visas or green cards because of their history of drug use. For example, John Lennon. Lennon had a hell of a time immigrating to the US because… he was actually arrested for possession in London. Harry has never been arrested, nor does he have a documented history of drug ABUSE. The US Citizen and Immigration Service website had some helpful language about this, and from what I gather, writing about occasional drug USE in one’s memoir is not the same thing as having a documented history of drug abuse or drug arrests. Plus, again, Harry is married to an American, he’s rich and he has access to the best immigration lawyers in the country. He will be fine. The Derangers trying to convince ICE to arrest, detain and deport Harry on the other hand…

Photos courtesy of Cover Images.

You know what’s exhausting? The media and the Democratic Party twisting themselves in knots about Donald Trump’s impending arrest and how the arrest will be some kind of “win” for Republicans. From where I sit, optimistically in Dark Brandon’s America, Trump’s re-election bid is falling flat. His attempts to agitate supporters and incite another January 6th have fallen flat. While I don’t doubt that there are still millions of dumbasses who would still vote for Diaper Don, let’s also be clear: he must be arrested, he must pay for his many crimes, he must be held accountable. Not everything has to be a political move, most of the time it’s just good to arrest a guy who does lots of crime. Anyway, Trump will probably be indicted today? But no one knows if they’ll put in cuffs today:

Donald Trump may be indicted on Wednesday in one of the ongoing criminal investigations involving him, outlets including NewsNation and The Guardian report. Citing sources, NewsNation reports that a Manhattan grand jury is expected to vote Wednesday whether to indict the former president over an alleged hush money payment he made to adult film star Stormy Daniels in 2016.

The former president previously posted on social media that he expected to be arrested on Tuesday.

The New York Times reports that senior officials from the district attorney’s office and the New York agency that runs the state courts “had preliminary discussions to plan for a possible indictment and arraignment” of Trump last week. The Times adds that officials from the New York Police Department — which handles security where an arraignment would take place — also met to prepare for potential security threats.

[From People]

Sure… the rumors of Trump’s “Tuesday arrest” came from Trump himself, not the DA’s office. Most people believed that the indictment would simply happen this week, and again, who knows when we’ll get an orange prep walk. Speaking of, Trump is ready, at least according to Maggie Haberman at the NYT:

Donald J. Trump claims he is ready for his perp walk. Behind closed doors at Mar-a-Lago, the former president has told friends and associates that he welcomes the idea of being paraded by the authorities before a throng of reporters and news cameras. He has even mused openly about whether he should smile for the assembled media, and he has pondered how the public would react and is said to have described the potential spectacle as a fun experience. No one is quite sure whether his remarks are bravado or genuine resignation about what lies ahead.

If he is truly looking forward to it, he might be disappointed. There is no indication, even if Mr. Trump is charged, that the authorities would have him take part in that storied New York City law-enforcement tradition known by detectives and crime reporters alike — walking the newly arrested past a cluster of journalists. If Mr. Trump is indicted and surrenders voluntarily, arrangements are likely to be made between the Secret Service and law enforcement to avoid a media circus.

Another person who has spoken with Mr. Trump, who was not authorized to speak publicly, said the former president was less concerned with the particulars of where he would be seen than with being assured of the opportunity to show the public he is not slinking away in shame.

As he waits for a likely criminal indictment — making him the first current or former American president to face criminal charges — Mr. Trump has often appeared significantly disconnected from the severity of his potential legal woes, according to people who have spent time with him in recent days. He has been spotted zipping around his Palm Beach resort in his golf cart and on one recent evening acted as D.J. at a party with his personally curated Spotify playlists, which often include music from the Rolling Stones to “The Phantom of the Opera.”

[From The NY Times]

I had to leave that last part in for some extra spice: “He has been spotted zipping around his Palm Beach resort in his golf cart and on one recent evening acted as D.J. at a party with his personally curated Spotify playlists, which often include music from the Rolling Stones to ‘The Phantom of the Opera.’” I wonder if he still plays Adele all the time – he used to be a big Adele fan. He’s also a fan of the Village People. Anyway, impound the golf cart and handcuff him.

Trump also made a video yesterday for his supporters. It looks like HE is the Phantom of Mar-a-Lago, recording missives from his poorly-lit bunker. This short video is 16 seconds of unhinged nutjob:

classy and normal pic.twitter.com/nGiYnvDY4A

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) March 21, 2023

Photos courtesy of Backgrid, Cover Images.