Khan

Yep. I remain suspicious of this person's true motives in writing the article (and withholding his/her name), as well as of the timing in giving it to the NYT. Here we are, smack dab in the middle of Brett Kavanaugh's confirmation hearings, when THIS bomb drops; and because we don't know who the author is, it's taking some attention away from the fact that Kavanaugh is a lying sack of [!@#$%^&*] who doesn't belong on "The People's Court" let alone the Supreme Court. Ergo, maybe that's why he/she wrote the article: to distract everyone from Kavanaugh. (Yes, I know the NYT had been in contact with Anon. since before this week. However, it's no secret that half this country's been on guard about Kavanaugh since his nomination and Kennedy's resignation.) And if that's why they wrote it, then what do you want to bet that, after the GOP confirms Kavanaugh, this person will finally, quietly come forward, their real mission having been accomplished?

I think we saw a little bit of that happening with Cory Booker's "BRING IT!". And I think we saw a little bit MORE of it with Kamala Harris' questioning of Brett Kavanaugh. I think that, slowly but surely, Democrats are simply tired of being nice. I'm glad, too! It's as if this person wants a freaking medal for bravery! You want me to think of you as being brave and patriotic? How about coming forward and revealing your name -- and then, how about demanding the Cabinet invoke the 25th Amendment? Do those two things, and then maybe, I'll nominate you for the Bronze Star!

Well, at least he got one thing right from Reagan. The [New York] Times reported yesterday that the White House has a list of around 12 potential suspects. What is this? "Dallas"? I realize this is not how it's going to turn out...but wouldn't it be hilarious if the writer was Javanka, and that the two have engineered the whole thing to have John Kelly ousted? Okay, maybe not "hilarious"...but it would definitely be something to behold.

No doubt, she's beginning to think the same.

What do you want to bet, though, that Julie will be conspicuously absent that afternoon?

I wonder what Jacquie Courtney did to make Irna want to kill her off, and in such a grisly fashion, too. For some reason, Irna believed she could control every aspect of her actors' lives; and if you did even the slightest thing to displease her, you were forever on her [!@#$%^&*] list. She was a wonderful storyteller, but she also had serious emotional issues. So could have Bill Bell. David Kimble's death via trash compactor gives me chills to this day.

Yep. The more I think about Julie Chen, the harder it is for me to see how she can remain at either show w/o engendering controversy. Not that I'm saying I think CBS will show her the door, but I think the network will have a VERY tough time justifying her continued presence to its audiences in light of all these events. Meanwhile, I'm sure Les' ex-wife is looking at the two right now and thinking, "KARMA!".

I agree. And I, too, felt it was unfair how Janet was vilified for the "nip slip" while Justin was basically sent to his bedroom for one night without his supper. Reading the article and those tweets helps explain (to me, anyway) why Janet's career basically cooled in the years since that incident. (Gosh, has it really been FOURTEEN YEARS?) It's easy to say, "Well, it was because Janet (and Mariah, Madonna, etc.) were edged out by the new, younger generation of artists"; and who knows, maybe that's part of it. But I always wondered whether there was more to the story. To think: if Les hadn't been so vindictive, Janet might have been spared the twin indignities of starring in "Why Did I Get Married?" and "Why Did I Get Married Too?". (...or not, lol.)

I don't think their relationship worked -- but, then again, I don't think any of Hayley's romantic relationships worked (outside of maybe Brian Bodine). Kelly Ripa's cute and all, but.... I, too, would love to know why Cecily's return flopped. Agnes Nixon, Lorraine Broderick and Megan McTavish were all working on the show during Rosa Nevin's first stint, so it isn't as if they didn't know who Cecily was. (I used to suspect it was because Maurice Benard sabotaged things BTS, making sure Cecily didn't shine without Nico. But why the [!@#$%^&*] would he care about what was happening on AMC, when he had made a much bigger splash on GH?)

My question is, how will it affect her more lucrative gig at "Big Brother"? Will the network keep her there (and at "The Talk") out of some misguided sense of loyalty to Les? Or....?

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/lodestar-mike-pence-anonymous-new-york-times_us_5b905dd5e4b0511db3dec1e1 For God's sake, Bubbles, GET A THESAURUS.

Three kids in five years? No, he didn't work after OLTL, he was just (gettin') busy. I'm kidding.

Well, I've read the RS article...and maybe, once again, I'm reading too much into stuff...but it does seem awfully suspicious how Cornyn felt the need to take everyone to task after Harris and Booker. Would Cornyn have responded the same way to two WHITE senators who chose to "cross-examine" Kavanaugh in the same fashion?

"I was born at night but not last night," lol!!!

Let's hope so!

Yup. Oh, I agree, Vee. It IS the right thing for Booker and his ride-or-dies to do. I'm just saying that if Cornyn goes through with invoking Senate Rule 29 and we end up losing (IMO) a great Senator because he tried to serve in the best interests of the American people, then it's gonna be sad as hell. Meanwhile, I'm loving Booker's "Bring it!". He forgot the word "bitch," but the sentiment remains.

And like that, the hell mouth breaks open.

"Welp. I guess SHE got told." Damn, I wish I could see (or hear) more of Marland's GH. His work never ceases to thrill me.

I'll admit that I thought he was all wrong for Charlie. He was too old and, frankly, too sophisticated for that role. Nevertheless, it is a shame that he died so suddenly and so relatively wrong. Like I said in the other thread specifically about his death, what IS it with the Kennedys? Do they really live under some sort of curse, or what?

IIRC, the plan was for Liz's wedding gown to catch fire after brushing against some candles, thereby burning her alive. Talk about "dark."

And you know she will, lol. (Not that I'm empathizing w/ Julie, because I'm not. Even if, IMO, it would serve him right to be hauled into divorce court. But she hitched her wagon to his for a reason; and chances are, she, like Melania (and Ivana and Marla) and Camille Cosby and Georgina Chapman before her, knew what kind of man he was long before now.) IKR? And folks wanna burn their Nike merchandise because the company chose Colin to be its' spokesman? Lord, where is thy light?

Hell. Yeah.

"Odd" doesn't even BEGIN to describe this, Carl. I'm not surprised he gets to leave with a "golden parachute" for being such a repugnant bastard...but that doesn't mean I'm not outraged by it all. I mean, he got to remain as CEO while the investigations were underway, which was bad enough. But, even now, with the heat still turned on, he'll get to leave -- not in handcuffs, not in total disgrace, as it should be -- but with a $100 million payout? And they're actually debating whether that number should be HIGHER? Are these people [!@#$%^&*] kidding? If you are truly remorseful for your inappropriate behaviors toward these women, Les, and for the effects they have had on their careers and lives, then, at the VERY least, you should opt to step down, with NO payouts. Better yet, take the money and give it all away to charitable organization that benefit women's causes. It's not like you NEED the cash anyway.

Yup.

You must be new to the Internet (let alone SON). It's the most curious case of road rage I've ever seen.