| | |  | Celebrity News & Gossip
|
|
| | Angelina Jolie wore a simple, elegant white dress to the NYFF 'Maria' premiere | | Added 353 days ago | Source: CeleBitchy |
|
|
|
|
|
Here are photos of Angelina Jolie at the New York Film Festival premiere of Maria, the Pablo Larrain film where she plays Maria Callas. Angelina arrived with her three oldest kids (all of them adults): Maddox, Zahara and Pax. It?s great to see Pax out and about he recently crashed his motorbike in LA traffic and was hospitalized for several days with ?complex trauma.? It looks like there are faint scars on his face, and his wrist is still in a brace. Zahara must have flown up to New York from Spelman College in Atlanta. I don?t know if Maddox has finished college yet. I love that they all came out to support their mom. As a survivor of the Brangeloonie Wars, I remember so many anti-Jolie people predicting that her kids would grow up to hate her. Looks like the kids have grown up to be well-adjusted and thoughtful, and they adore their mom.
I don?t see an ID on Angelina Jolie?s dress it looks vintage-y to me, but it might be something custom-made from Atelier Jolie, you never know. People are saying that Zahara is wearing one of Angelina?s old dresses, which is possible. Zahara and Shiloh have both done the same thing for other red carpets. I think those are Angelina?s two fashionista daughters, while Vivienne is all about normcore and little-old-lady dressing. Maddox and Pax were both suited up and both of them looked really nice. After the premiere, I think Angelina hosted a party at Atelier Jolie. She did the same after the Tonys too.
Last week, Angelina reportedly ?dropped? her FOIA request into the FBI records of the 2016 plane incident. As many of you pointed out in yesterday?s comments, it?s more than likely that Angelina ?dropped? the request because she got what she needed from the FBI, and/or she got enough documentation to use in her divorce case AND her countersuit against Brad over Miraval.
Photos courtesy of Backgrid.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | Angelina Jolie dropped her FOIA request into the FBI's records of the 2016 incident | | Added 354 days ago | Source: CeleBitchy |
|
|
|
|
|
In April 2022, Politico and TMZ reported that Angelina Jolie had filed (as a Jane Doe) for the FBI?s records on their investigation into the 2016 plane incident. The 2016 incident was the game-changer for Angelina. That was where a likely blackout-drunk Brad Pitt terrorized and assaulted Angelina and their children for hours on and off the plane. In 2022, Angelina was technically getting a Freedom of Information Act request, but really, she was trying to piece together what exactly happened with the FBI investigation and why the FBI didn?t file any charges against Pitt. Angelina did manage to get her hands on some of the partially-redacted records, including the FBI?s records of Jolie?s own statements to them about what Brad did to her and the children. Many of those records were then FOIA-requested by media outlets who then published their own coverage, much to Team Pitt?s chagrin. Well, long story short, after two years of trying to figure out why the FBI didn?t charge Pitt with any crime, Jolie is now dropping it.
Angelina Jolie is ending her legal battle against the Department of Justice and FBI over documents connected to the alleged 2016 plane incident involving her then-husband Brad Pitt.
Under the anonymous Jane Doe,? Jolie, 49, had requested in a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) in 2021 that FBI documents about the incident be released to her. Court documents obtained by PEOPLE indicate the Maria star dropped the case on Wednesday, Sept. 25.
The highly redacted documents Jolie had been pursuing detailed an allegedly drunken altercation on Sept. 14, 2016, between Pitt, 60, and his then-wife ? which came days before Jolie filed for divorce, ending a relationship that began in 2005.
Their children were reportedly present for the alleged conflict on a private plane that had caused the Los Angeles Department of Child and Family Services and FBI to investigate Pitt. A source said at the time that Pitt became verbally abusive and physical with one of their kids, which he denied. Later in 2016, the FBI closed its investigation with no charges against Pitt and DCFS also concluded its investigation, concluding no findings of abuse.
Amid the ongoing legal battle over their French vineyard Chteau Miraval and wine company, Jolie responded to a 2022 lawsuit from her ex with details of the alleged incident, including that Pitt had choked one of the children and struck another in the face. A source close to Pitt told PEOPLE at the time, Its incredibly sad that she continues to rehash, revise and reimagine her description of an event that happened 6 years ago, adding in completely untrue information.?
[From People]
I don?t know why she dropped this, other than she was tired of being stonewalled by the FBI and she likely achieved some of her goals anyway. It?s also worth noting that back in 2022, Jolie/Jane Doe?s lawyer told Politico that Jolie had been trying to get the FBI records for years without having to file a FOIA action, and the FBI stonewalled her that entire time too. It feels like Angelina has her suspicions that something went down between the FBI and Pitt and both parties are doing the most to cover it up.
Photos courtesy of Cover Images, Backgrid.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | Naomi Campbell was given a five-year ban for her insane 'Fashion for Relief' grift | | Added 355 days ago | Source: CeleBitchy |
|
|
|
|
|
For many years, Naomi Campbell organized Fashion for Relief, a charity fashion show attached to London Fashion Week. There hasn?t been a Fashion for Relief event in years since 2019, from what I can see. Fashion for Relief supposedly raised money to support charities working in Africa. Well, Britain?s Charity Commission did some digging and they discovered that nothing was as it seemed. Now Naomi Campbell has been banned from ?being a charity trustee? for five years, following the Charity Commissions investigation.
Naomi Campbell has been banned from being a charity trustee after a watchdog investigation uncovered widespread evidence of financial misconduct at the poverty relief charity she founded. The supermodel was disqualified for five years after a Charity Commission inquiry found that Fashion for Relief passed on only a small fraction of the millions of pounds it raised from star-studded celebrity fashion events to good causes.
The charity inappropriately spent tens of thousands of pounds on luxury hotel rooms, flights, spa treatments, personal security and cigarettes for Campbell, while unauthorised consultancy payments running into hundreds of thousands of pounds were made to one of Campbell?s fellow trustees, the commission said.
It found that over a five-year period from 2016, Fashion for Relief raised just under 4.8m from a series of fashion shows but paid out only 389,000 in grants to partner charities once the cost of events and other expenses were accounted for.
Nearly 350,000 was later recovered from the charity by interim managers appointed by the commission and paid to the charities Save the Children and the Mayor?s Fund for London, which reported Fashion for Relief to the regulators four years ago after failing to receive promised payments from fundraising agreements..
Campbell?s fellow trustee Bianka Hellmich, who the inquiry found received 290,000 in unauthorised consultancy fees and 26,000 a year in travel expenses from the charity over a two-year period, was disqualified from being a charity trustee for nine years. Hellmich proposed to the commission to repay the fees and expenses in February 2022 and a repayment plan was agreed with the commission. The full amount was repaid in April 2023. A third trustee, Veronica Chou, was banned for four years.
Fashion for Relief has previously argued that it was not solely a fundraising charity but also a platform that, through its high-profile fundraising events, encouraged donors to give directly to its partner charities and good causes. The commission report, however, reveals that it did not immediately pay Save the Children ?450,000 (375,000) raised at a 2017 fundraising event. Fashion for Relief paid some of the funds, and the remaining money it owed ? 147,000 ? was eventually paid by Fashion for Relief?s interim managers in January 2023.
[From The Guardian]
The commission?s investigation also had details like Naomi using Fashion for Relief funds to stay at a ??3,000-a-night hotel room? in Cannes. She also used the charity?s funds for ?just under ?8,000 on spa treatments, room service, purchases of cigarettes and hotel products.? Sounds like she was using her charity as her own personal piggy bank. 4.8 million raised from Fashion for Relief events and only 389,000 in charitable grants? And Naomi was only suspended for five years? She should have been given a lifetime ban for this insane grift.
Photos courtesy of Cover Images.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | George Clooney & a Versace-clad Amal Clooney attended their Albie Awards | | Added 355 days ago | Source: CeleBitchy |
|
|
|
|
|
For several years now, George and Amal Clooney have been throwing a party ?for justice? in New York. They call the party the Albie Awards, and it?s supposed to be a fundraiser/awards something or other associated with the Clooney Foundation for Justice. Last night was the annual awards show. Amal wore a slinky black gown by Versace (Donatella attended) and she had a fresh blowout. They both spoke to People Magazine about their marriage today is their tenth wedding anniversary, and while there are persistent rumors about the state of their marriage, they put on a big show last night.
George told People: ?I would support anything my wife is involved in. She?s always on the right side of history, and I?m always so proud to be in the same room with her no matter what and this is an event where we get to focus all the attention on the people who don?t get enough attention.?
Amal adds, ?He?s an amazing advocate, and it just means so much to me to be able to do this work together and for him to help bring to life some of the stories that we?re telling tonight.?
Responding to the sweet comments from his wife, the actor jokingly tells PEOPLE, ?I?m giving her money right now, you can?t see, right behind her back.?
The couple, whose 10th wedding anniversary is on Friday, Sept. 27, also shared their plans.
?I?m taking her somewhere tonight, but she doesn?t know where,? George tells PEOPLE.
[From People]
Ah, jokes about paying his wife, how charming. Obviously, I?m still not over George?s skullduggery in recent months, starting with his NYT op-ed which, much like George, has aged like milk. He?s still being asked about it too in Venice, he said that no one will remember what he did. Meanwhile, his sad little bro-movie with a credibly accused child abuser comes out today on streaming, after Apple pulled it from a wide theatrical release. Perhaps now would be the time for George to pass the torch to someone younger. We can have a mini-primary to find a replacement movie star who is younger and cooler.
Celebrity guests at the Albies event included: Leslie Bibb, Jimmy Fallon, Emily Blunt, Cate Blanchett, John Krasinski, Donatella Versace, Mark Ronson, John Oliver, Melinda Gates, Busy Philipps, Ariana Debose, Shailene Woodley and more.
Photos courtesy of Cover Images.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | Melania Trump received six-figure paychecks for her rare campaign appearances | | Added 359 days ago | Source: CeleBitchy |
|
|
|
|
|
One of the many underreported stories this year is the relative disappearance of Melania Trump. She?s barely left Mar-a-Lago all year, and she?s flatly refused to travel with her husband to any campaign events. Her sole ?campaign appearance? by her husband?s side this year was at the Republican National Convention. She did not make a speech, but she was on stage with him on the final night of the RNC. Apparently, she has made a handful of quiet speeches and appearances at fundraisers, always solo. And now we know how Donald Trump got Melania out of MAL the Trump campaign likely paid Melania six figures per appearance, although no one is actually sure where the money came from. They just know that money has been funneled to Melania personally for her rare public outings.
Melania Trump has barely been seen on the campaign trail this year. One of the few times she has appeared at a political event, she?s received a six-figure paycheck ? a highly unusual move for the spouse of a candidate.
The former first lady spoke at two political fundraisers for the Log Cabin Republicans this year, and she was paid $237,500 for an April event, according to former President Donald Trump?s latest financial disclosure form. The payment was listed as a ?speaking engagement.?
Trump?s latest disclosure form said Melania Trump was paid by the Log Cabin Republicans for the April fundraiser. But it?s a mystery who actually cut the check: Charles Moran, president of the Log Cabin Republicans, told CNN earlier this month the group did not put up the money for her to speak, and the disclosure form did not give any more information about the source of the payment.
Ahead of the other fundraiser in July for the conservative LGBTQ group, a person familiar said at least one request was made to a donor about a similar payment. It?s unclear whether Melania Trump was ultimately paid. The campaign has not put out the financial disclosure for that period. The source told CNN that Ric Grenell, former ambassador to Germany and a Trump ally, was the one who made the request on behalf of Melania Trump. Sources said Grenell has also helped the former first lady with other business ventures.
Campaign finance and government ethics experts say a payment to a presidential candidate?s spouse to appear at political fundraisers in an election is unusual, ethically questionable and should, at the very least, be properly noted in the disclosure forms. ?It seems pretty self-serving. From my own general observation, I?m not used to seeing that,? said Virginia?Canter, the chief ethics counsel at Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics.
Sources supportive of Melania Trump who attended the Log Cabin Republican events and didn?t know she got paid for at least one of them defended her, saying it?s her right to decide how to spend her time and to get paid for her time. One person close to Melania Trump said she has decided ?my best and highest use is where I am,? adding that ?she?s a priceless, timeless asset? for Donald Trump.
Records show Melania Trump was also paid $250,000 for a Log Cabin Republican event in December 2022, one of three payments for $250,000 or more that she received for speaking that month, just after the former president announced he was running for reelection, according to Donald Trump?s prior year financial disclosure form. One of the events took place in Florida, and the other was for a California group, Fix California, which was founded by Grenell. Grenell did not respond to multiple requests for comment.
[From CNN]
It may seem unimportant in the grander scheme of things, but from my conversations with female voters, they are actually paying attention to the personal lives of the candidates, and they care about the fact that Melania is not supporting her husband on the campaign trail, just like they care that Doug Emhoff is his wife?s biggest and most vocal supporter. Like, voters fking love Doug. Voters think Melania despises her husband. Anyway, this is a drop in the bucket when it comes to the FEC violations of the Trump campaign. All of those MAGA cult members sending their money to Trump, just know that you?re paying Melania to speak to gay Republicans and pretend to tolerate her husband for one night a year. Melania didn?t even go to the debate! She?s so over it and shes just grifting, like everyone else in MAGAland.
Photos courtesy of Cover Images, Avalon Red.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | Janet Jackson on Kamala Harris: 'she's not black. That's what I heard. That she's Indian' | | Added 360 days ago | Source: CeleBitchy |
|
|
|
|
|
I will always want to give Janet Jackson the benefit of the doubt. Her musical impact is major and majorly underrated. I still believe Rhythm Nation is one of the best albums of all time. Her career was undermined and almost destroyed by very powerful people. My point is that there?s every reason to give Janet the benefit of the doubt. But we can also call bullsh-t on her, because she just said some really fked up sh-t to the Guardian. The bulk of the Guardian?s interview/profile is about her life as a divorced mom living in London and her career. She apparently has to live in London because her son?s father Wissam Al Mana is London-based, and I would assume that those were the terms of her divorce from Wissam. Janet ?crinkled her nose? when asked if she enjoys living in London. That?s backstory for what everyone?s talking about, which is that Janet is extremely misinformed on the American election. I have no idea what media she?s consuming in England, but it?s bad. Here?s the relevant portion, with everything in context:
We move on to talk about the state of the nation. Jackson brought politics directly to the pop consciousness with Rhythm Nation, which addressed racism, poverty and inequality ? all issues just as urgent today as they were 35 years ago. She is a prolific social media user, and has used her profile to support Black Lives Matter, to bring awareness to police brutality. Does she feel despondent about how slow change is in coming or is she hopeful about the future?
?Well, there?s all this child trafficking crap that?s going on and sex trafficking crap, you know what I mean, that wasn?t so prevalent then?? It?s a strange about-turn, not least because of the many allegations of child sexual abuse made against Michael. But it is also the most forceful she has been since we sat down. ?At least, we didn?t know about it back then. I don?t think we did, did we? Not really. I think it?s really now out in the open, because it?s like a billion-dollar business and all that crap.?
I wonder what internet rabbit holes she?s been going down, but, before I can ask, she?s moved on. ?On [the Rhythm Nation album], for us, it was about making a difference in a kid?s life, a teenager?s life, from them taking this path with drugs and going down the wrong street to trying to make something of themself.?
On that record she sang about ?joining voices in protest to social injustice? and ?pushing toward a world rid of colour lines?. I wonder where she stands on the forthcoming election. After all, I say, America could be on the verge of voting in its first black female president, Kamala Harris.
?Well, you know what they supposedly said?? she asks me. ?She?s not black. That?s what I heard. That she?s Indian.?
She looks at me expectantly, perhaps assuming that I have Indian heritage. ?Well, she?s both,? I offer.
?Her father?s white. That?s what I was told. I mean, I haven?t watched the news in a few days,? she coughs. ?I was told that they discovered her father was white.?
I?m floored at this point. It?s well known that Harris?s father is a Jamaican economist, a Stanford professor who split from her Indian mother when she was five. ?My mother understood very well that she was raising two black daughters,? Harris wrote in her book The Truths We Hold.
The people who are most vocal in questioning the facts of Harris?s identity tend to be hardcore QAnon-adjacent, Trump-loving conspiracy theorists. I don?t think Jackson falls into that camp, but I do wonder what the algorithms are serving her. I start again. Harris has dual heritage, I say, and, given this moment, does Jackson think America is ready for her ? if we agree she?s black? Or, OK, a woman of colour?
?I don?t know,? Jackson stage whispers. ?Honestly, I don?t want to answer that because I really, truthfully, don?t know. I think either way it goes is going to be mayhem.?
She doesn?t think there will be a peaceful transition of power?
?I think there might be mayhem,? she falters. ?Either way it goes, but we?ll have to see.?
[From The Guardian]
I chuckled at the Guardian writer basically writing ?what in the QAnon bullsh-t am I hearing now??? And that?s what it is, this has all of the hallmarks of Janet falling down a particularly batsh-t QAnon rabbit hole the trafficking comments, the eagerness to spin/amplify conspiracies around a Black woman?s race, the ambivalence when suggesting that there will be a bloody insurrection again. And since people are dumb (including Janet, apparently), let?s say it again for the record: Kamala Harris is Black and Indian. She?s both. Her father is a Black man from Jamaica. Her mother was an Indian immigrant. Janet needs to stop falling down QAnon rabbit holes.
Throughout Sunday, this story got even more bonkers when a man claiming to be Janet?s manager apologized for Janet?s comments, saying in part: ?Janet Jackson would like to clarify her recent comments. She recognizes that her statements regarding Vice President Kamala Harris? racial identity were based on misinformation. Janet respects Harris? dual heritage as both Black and Indian and apologizes for any confusion caused.? Then a few hours later, Janet?s actual manager (her brother Randy) said this guy does not represent Janet and that the apology is not real or authorized. So? even days/weeks after the interview went down, Janet apparently feels no need to backtrack or clarify. Very strange.
Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | Jennifer Lopez & Ben Affleck reunited at a school event in LA this week | | Added 362 days ago | Source: CeleBitchy |
|
|
|
|
|
Jennifer Lopez filed for divorce from Ben Affleck one month ago exactly. Following that divorce filing, she spent one full week getting her side out there, with ?sources? telling People Magazine what actually happened behind the scenes in the past year. There were stories about Ben?s mood swings, and how Ben basically ghosted her in April and began moving his sh-t out of their house while she was working in New York. Ben was also the one behind their documentary, The Greatest Love Story Never Told, and on and on. Basically, Jennifer was washing her hands of Ben and ensuring that she didn?t get the blame for everything that went down. I also believe Jen was behind the Kick Kennedy rumors too Ben was seeing or is seeing Kick Kennedy, which likely started over the summer.
Anyway, all of that worked. Jennifer has, from where I sit, positioned herself pretty well. She?s hurt and sad, but she?s also making her peace with the fact that Ben sucks. Then there was a disruption in this ?onwards? energy last weekend, when Ben and J.Lo pap-strolled at the Beverly Hills Hotel with their kids. Reportedly, Ben was handsy with her and they were kissing and being affectionate. Ben gets turned on when a woman publicly puts him on blast, apparently. Well, Bennifer reunited once again this week:
Jennifer Lopez and Ben Affleck are doing their best when it comes to their kids TMZ has learned they walked into a school together despite their divorce in full swing.
Sources with direct knowledge tell TMZ the exes were seen making their way to the back-to-school night Tuesday at an L.A. area school where they each have kids that attend. Our sources tell us the exes were totally cool with each other and very cordial.
But don?t get it twisted our sources are adamant they?re not rekindling anything theyre still getting divorced.
Were told theyre a couple who still care for each other theyre wrapped up in a years-long love affair.
But their kids are the real focus. Just last week, the two, along with their respective children, were spotted at The Beverly Hills Hotel, where witnesses saw them kissing and holding hands during the lunch.
[From TMZ]
As I said in the hotel photos from last weekend Ben?s kids seem to get along really well with Jennifer, and Jennifer?s kids were giving Ben the ?he ain?t sh-t? stinkeye. I don?t think Max and Emme want any part of this, but Ben?s kids are so disappointed that their dad fked up another marriage. Anyway, I absolutely hope that Jennifer has given up on Ben and that none of these outings lead to reconciliation. That being said, I feel like J.Lo is exactly the kind of woman who will keep making this same mistake, over and over.
One nice thing J.Lo appeared at Kamala Harriss Michigan town hall, hosted by Oprah. Jennifer appeared virtually! Shes a big Dem and she hates Trump.
Jennifer Lopez endorses Kamala Harris for President at the Unite for America event hosted by Oprah Winfrey. pic.twitter.com/SRWEqDUhag
Jennifer Lopez Updates (@JLopezUpdate) September 20, 2024
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | Brad Pitt is 'very committed' to Ines de Ramon & committed to 'their future' | | Added 362 days ago | Source: CeleBitchy |
|
|
|
|
|
Wednesday night was the big Wolfs premiere in LA. If actors are capable of ?phoning it in? in person, that?s what Brad Pitt and George Clooney did. They didn?t bring their significant others, they posed with their costars and they tried to not look too grumpy about the way everything went down. I found it most remarkable that Amal Clooney didn?t turn up, by the way Amal loves to attend all of George?s red carpets. It feels especially notable that even she didn?t bother.
After the premiere, George and Brad left separately and Brad met up with Ines de Ramon, his girlfriend of about two years. They?ve only recently begun to do public outings with each other, and this was part of Brad?s ?promotional work? too. Letting the paparazzi get photos of Ines when they went out to dinner at? Mother Wolf. Get it, because the movie is called Wolfs? Some Apple PR person thinks they?re a genius. Anyway, it?s definitely interesting to watch Pitt push this romance to promote his dumb movie. Speaking of:
Brad Pitt and Ines de Ramon?s connection is stronger than ever after making their red carpet debut earlier this month.
?They?re super in love,? a source exclusively shares in the newest issue of Us Weekly, adding that the duo?s decision to go public as a couple was a ?big deal.?
Pitt, 60, and de Ramon, 31, went red carpet official after nearly two years of dating at the Venice International Film Festival premiere of Pitt?s new film Wolfs on September 1. The couple posed for red carpet pics alongside Pitt?s costar George Clooney and his wife, Amal Clooney. In contrast to Pitt?s all-black attire, de Ramon sported a white one-shoulder gown and silver jewelry.
The premiere made for a perfect date night for the couple, as a second source tells Us they are both ?hippies at heart? and have bonded over their love of art and music. ?Brad loves introducing Ines to his friends because she?s such a joy to be around,? the insider adds. ?She brings out the best in Brad.?
The second source went on to note that things are ?serious between Brad and Ines,? adding, ?He?s very committed to her and their future.?
?Her support has shown Brad who she really is as a partner,? the first source tells Us of de Ramon. The second source adds: ?It?s meant so much to him and brought them close together. Brad has a lot of up and down days, and [Ines] has been his rock through it all. She has a really good heart.?
[From Us Weekly]
?He?s very committed to her and their future.? Another tabloid (Closer) claims that Brad wants a ?seventh child? now that he?s so loved up with Ines. If that happens? well? it will be chaotic. Especially given all of the conversations about why his first six kids hate him and why he doesn?t even acknowledge that he has six kids? Like, he?s indicated for years now that he doesn?t give a fk about his adopted kids. As for Ines? I don?t have a read on her but the vibe I?m getting is that she is in it to ?win? it. Win what, though?
Photos courtesy of Backgrid.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | Princess Kate 'held an Early Years meeting at Windsor' on Tuesday | | Added 365 days ago | Source: CeleBitchy |
|
|
|
|
|
Since that cringefest ?cancer free? video and subsequent backlash, the Princess of Wales has been trying out different talking points. In the immediate wake of the video and statement, the talking point was: fk the haters, fk the media, I?m going to do what I want. Then it was: of course I?ll eventually be back, I just need more time to rest and recover, but don?t hold your breath. There was an undercurrent to the backlash too, something about ?Kate can grope ferns in the woods but she can?t do some Zooms for charity?? Well, Kate heard the criticism and she organized a ?private meeting? at Windsor Castle, something about the fakakta Early Years.
Kate Middleton has officially returned to work, just a week after announcing she was cancer-free and had finished chemotherapy in an unprecedentedly personal video. Wednesday?s Court Circular, a bulletin published by Buckingham Palace every day detailing the official activities of the royals, said that the princess convened a meeting for her signature ?Early Years? project on Tuesday. She has previously described the cause, which focuses on raising awareness about the importance the first five years of life for children?s development, as her life?s work.
The statement read simply: ?The Princess of Wales, Joint Patron, The Royal Foundation of The Prince and Princess of Wales, this afternoon held an Early Years Meeting at Windsor.? It marked Kate?s first appearance in the Court Circular since December last year and will be seen as a huge milestone on her path to recovery.
The meeting was conducted behind closed doors and no images have been released.
Kate is only expected to make two public, official appearances this year, with attendance at the national Remembrance Day service in November pencilled into her diary, along with an appearance at an annual carol service which she sponsors in December.
[From The Daily Beast]
Im glad shes well enough to do this. What?s slightly funny to me is that ?sources? have previously insisted that Kate was doing some work from home, that she was reading emails or briefing papers or what have you. But I guess none of that counted it only counts when it?s on the Court Circular, right? The Daily Beast also referred to this meeting as a ?special project.? Meaning what, exactly? Is she going to commission another ridiculous claymation video? Another survey? Another relaunch of ?Kate is keen about Early Years, no follow-up questions needed.?
The photos in this post are from January 2023, when Kate wore a McQueen tuxedo jacket to a big Early Years meeting at Windsor Castle. She met with her ?Early Years advisors? and carried a small notebook, to doodle pie charts.
Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | Ben Affleck 'could not keep his hands off' Jennifer Lopez at lunch on Saturday | | Added 365 days ago | Source: CeleBitchy |
|
|
|
|
|
As we discussed, Jennifer Lopez and Ben Affleck were out in Beverly Hills on Saturday with their children. They went to the Polo Lounge at the Beverly Hills Hotel for lunch, and they got pap?d going into and out of the hotel. In front of the cameras, their body language seemed weird, not loved up. At one point, it looked like Ben was getting in Jennifer?s face about something. Jennifer also seems close to his kids one of them gave Jen a big hug as they said goodbye, while Max and Emme were seemingly giving Ben the stinkeye. Having watched the way everything has gone down in the past four weeks, I?m getting the vibe that people in Ben?s life are actually disappointed in him and sad that he sabotaged this marriage. Those people include his kids.
While the photos have a weird energy, Page Six was the only outlet claiming that Jennifer and Ben were actually kissing and affectionate while having lunch at the Polo Lounge. Now a new Page Six story claims that Ben couldn?t keep his hands off of Jen, and it was also his idea to do the pap stroll outside the hotel.
Ben Affleck ?could not keep his hands off? Jennifer Lopez at their brunch on Saturday, a source exclusively told Page Six. The ?Argo? director wanted to meet his estranged wife at the Beverly Hills Hotel to show that they?re ?friends,? and get their pics taken. But he wound up not being able to keep his hands off his ex, sources exclusively told us.
The estranged couple was having brunch with their children at the famed Polo Lounge in Beverly Hills, Calif., on Saturday ? and the stars were seen ?holding hands and kissing.?
A source tells us it was the ?Justice League? star?s idea for the former pair to meet at the high-profile spot in hopes of getting their pic snapped. But Affleck apparently wasn?t counting on finding the ?On The Floor? singer so irresistible in person, says our source.
?Once they were together, he could not keep his hands off,? our source said.
The insider added, ?They have always had a lot of sexual chemistry. That was not planned. They are still attracted to one another.?
?It was Ben Affleck?s idea to meet there,? the insider said. ?He wanted to show that they are friendly exes. He wanted those photos. You go there when you want to be seen. Paparazzi hang out there.?
[From Page Six]
For what it?s worth, Jennifer?s team clearly went to People Magazine to dampen the speculation that the Bennifer Reunification is back on. Sources close to J.Lo maintain that this whole thing was just a ?fun lunch so the kids could hang out? and that Jen is ?trying to be friendly with Ben. They are still moving forward with the divorce though. They are working out financial details amicably. The same source said: A divorce is never easy, but Jennifer doesnt want to be selfish about it. The kids always got along and have fun together. It makes her happy seeing the kids happy together. Happy kids are her priority.
So what the hell is going on? My theory is that Jennifer actually believed that she was done with Ben and she made sure that she fought back and let everyone know that she?s not the reason why they?re divorcing, that Ben is moody and he shut down and ghosted her. But Ben loves nothing more than when she?s suddenly unavailable to him. All I know is that his side is suddenly very eager to make it sound like Ben is open to giving it another go. If that happens, it will break me, ISTG.
Photos courtesy of Cover Images, Backgrid.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| | | 6.034.990
Photos Online+ 3.761 past week
2.170
Users Online | | |
| | | | | | | | Coming Up Soon
Dafne Keen
Isabela Merced
Keke Palmer
Nikki Glaser
Penny Lane
Sabrina Carpenter
Sadie Sink
Sommer Ray
| | |
| | | | | We Salute
Lauren Cohan
Photos of Lauren Cohan will not count in your daily view limit, if you are a registered member
Tribute ends in
1 hours | | |
| | |
|
