Jump to content

Bravo's The Real Housewives of....


Cheap21

Recommended Posts

  • Members

If there was nothing to what Brandi is saying, an attorney would have told her she has nothing to worry about. As it stands, Brandi spent about $20k prepping to defend herself against Adrienne legally. The only reason she didn't have to is because no lies were told and Adrienne used a surrogate to have her twins. Brandi should have known that, but I don't blame her for retaining counsel when someone as rich as Adrienne is coming after her. That would not work on Lisa or Yolanda because they are sophisticated and have their own millions. But Brandi? She's trailer park compared to the others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 40.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Cheap21

    4961

  • Taoboi

    4020

  • Cat

    4011

  • NothinButAttitude

    3972

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

  • Members

Adrienne obviously sent Brandi or her lawyer a letter telling her to watch it or she's going to get sued. That IS threatening to sue somebody. That is the same thing the group was alienating Taylor for last year. As somebody above said, Taylor does make everything about herself but she has a valid point here. Adrienne and her group of evil step-sisters is trying to invalidate the facts by repeating "I'm not suing you" ...

Lisa: You sent a letter to her lawyer thr...

Adrienne: I'm not suing her. She's lying.

Brandi: You sent a letter thr...

Kyle: She's not suing her. Brandi's lying.

Brandi: If there was no letter threatening why would my broke behind hire a lawyer to deal with it?

Camille: Adrienne's not suing her. Brandi's lying.

Taylor: What about me? I wasn't literally suing anybody and you all treated me like I had the plague for a letter.

Adrienne, Kyle, Camille: Adrienne is not suing anybody.

... and ignoring the fact that she sent a letter threatening to sue Brandi that remains a valid threat. It remains valid enough that BRAVO can't even mention what Brandi said.

If anybody's ignorant it's the evil step-sisters.

Sigh. I love the RHOBH.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
its a technicality but the fact is Brandi isn't being sued. Adrienne didnt lie about that and she had her evil little cronies to reiterate that. A threat to be sued is not the same thing as being sued. The cease and desist order was a warning

oh I know bc I want her to respond as well! We should threaten to post that pic every day until she says something... LOL Edited by Cheap21
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

That doesn't make them answering ALL valid question or observations about the situation with "Adrienne is not suing her, Brandi is misinformed or lying" any less ignorant or ridiculous. They're ignoring valid questions and observations to try to bully Brandi. They're being hypocrites. Taylor and her husband sent a threatening letter - which is what Adrienne and her husband did to Brandi - a few seasons ago and they were alienated her from the group and called out on "friends don't sue friends" by Adrienne and Kyle. When it's rich Adrienne, suddenly the logistics of phrasing is all that matters. If they use "being sued" fine if Brandi does it proves her bad character.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

http://www.realitytea.com/2013/02/11/kyle-richards-lisa-vanderpump-struggle-to-define-friendship-plus-photos-real-housewives-of-beverly-hills-stars-at-the-grammys/

Oy vey, Adrienne.

Adrienne is sponsoring an alcohol, which Chris "Ike Turner" Brown is the spokesperson for, however, she just accused her husband of beating her and your children. Most domestic violent victims become associated with another offender regardless the pay out. Hypocrite much. . .

Girl exit stage left and don't look back.. . .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I hope it does happen. I love the morally corrupt Faye! I guess they figure Kyle will need an ally and friend if Adrienne leaves this season, which I suspect she will. I love this image

tumblr_mi4on1v0OJ1rkya1do1_r1_1280.jpg

Adrienne and Kim are the only full housewives on Kyle's side and this will probably be their last. To keep things from being too lopsided, I can definetly see Faye getting bumped up. Possibly Camille as well if she wants her spot back

Edited by Cheap21
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • Or Megan is shot by mobsters as retaliation for Dave's unpaid gambling debts.
    • Finland seemed such an odd choice for a location shoot. ATWT went to Greece and later Spain while GL had Tenerife and there were others in that timeframe. But Finland not being a known tourist destination or offering the tropical/sunny atmosphere usually associated with location shoots seems off brand. Maybe they were negotiating a deal with a tourist association and it fell through.
    • I was talking about 1986, but the glimpses of 1982 are about the same. 
    • I skimmed some of the 1982 synopses; Steve was planning on an opening an office in Finland, and I think Jim went there as part of the preparation. That probably was a big issue; AW had already gone to San Diego that year, with Rachel/Steve/Mitch. And to upstate NY with Pete and Diana. I wonder if upstate was as expensive lol  AW in 1982 has always fascinated me, because of how messy it was 
    • That makes sense. What a messy time for the show. And any changes they made were mostly for the worse.
    • The transition from Neal to Adam was very abrupt, and to be honest my theory is that the character of Neal was designed so that we think he is super shady but then it turns out that he was on the side of good all along so Neal could have seamlessly become a hero of the BCPD with no need for Adam. I don't know whether Robert Lupone was hired on a short contract or if he was fired from a longer-term contract because they decided they wanted someone who was more of a leading man type, but I can imagine a scenario where Charles Grant did both the undercover Egyptian treasure/flirt with Victoria and the straighter-arrow day to day police investigation. But in my imagined scenario the MJ prostitution plotline probably doesn't exist and instead he probably continues a relationship with Victoria. The story seems very odd to me. I assume that David Canary would have been included only because a plotline where Steve is going to Finland in which only Rachel is seen in actual Finland seems unlikely. The synopses explicitly mention that Alice can't go with Steve but would whoever was playing Alice at that time have had the kind of clout to get the remote cancelled? It also strikes me as unlikely that production would have approved the expensive location shoot and *then* cancelled it only because of jealousy. It seems more likely that they rejected it because of the expense but then the jealousy part got added to the gossip speculatively, possibly because while it was being worked out they justified not including more castmembers because of the expense. 
    • My comment has nothing to do with cast resentment, but does relate to the Finland location shoot: It may be a coincidence, but Jim Matthews died in Finland in 1982.  Hugh Marlowe's final episode was in April 1982, but the character probably didn't die untll May or June. (I'm unable to find the character's date of death, only the date of Marlowe's final episode). SInce Jim and Rachel had very little interaction after around 1975, it is unlikely Jim's death in Finland had any connection to Rachel's potential visit, but the choice to have Jim die in that location at that time is a head-scratcher.  I'm sure the writers sent Jim on an extended trip (and off-screen) because of Marlowe's illness.  But Finland seems like a strange choice considering the (then) recently cancelled location shoot.  
    • I totally understand your sloths concern about it and I agree with you. Let’s hope the show plays it’s cards right.    Further comments about the last few episodes: - I liked that one of the attendees was filming the scene. That’s realistic. I wonder if the writers will follow up with that.  - Martin and Smitty trying to drag Leslie out was very heteronormative, so perfectly in line with them two as characters lol.    As for the future: it’s obvious the Duprees will come to accept Eva one way or another, but the rivalry with Kay should be here for the long term   On the topic of acting: the only bad actors I’m seeing are Ted and Derek. Tomas hasn’t proven to be either good or bad, so far, but he’s certainly mediocre and uncharismatic. He sucks the energy out of the scenes and I don’t see any couple of women ever vying for him. 
    • I’m trying to think which actors VW were working with at the time, and none of them had been there for a while. Even like Mac and Ada didn’t have that big of a part in Rachel’s storyline.  And Jamie was involved with all that movie stuff.
    • Brooke did ads before ATWT too. That probably helped get her the job. After ATWT she seemed to branch more into hosting, along with ads.  I think I saw Kelley in an ad or two, but you're right she wasn't on as much. 
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy