Which is worse, Jon lying about spending Thanksgiving with his grandma and going snowboarding instead, or Kate having her bodyguard and rumored lover over for the holiday???Gobble-gobble.
http://www.okmagazine.com/2009/11/where-did-jon-gosselin-spend-thanksgiving/
30 sediments (sic) from readers:
You call yourself a lawyer, why don't you get your facts correct before posting information from unreliable sources.
Uh-oh. So what are the facts? Anyone know?
Multiple sources are reporting that Kate spent Thanksgiving with her bodyguard and the kids. OK Magazine is hardly an unreliable source.
If anyone knows something different they are welcome to post it!
Yeah, there are pictures of the Neilds at the G's house at Radaronline and I read Hailey's tweets myself. What's the problem?
Anonymous said...
You call yourself a lawyer, why don't you get your facts correct before posting information from unreliable sources.
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
Anonymous 7:38 am - Me thinks you should check the facts BEFORE posting a rude comment. Makes you look really, really stoopid.. Bahwahahahahhah!
Well, personally, They are both just bad bad people and parents. Liars & thieves they will always be.
It's kinda a sad testimony to Kate's people skills that she doesn't know the difference between REAL FRIENDS and THE PAID HELP. I don't feel sorry for her because Kate "doesn't do relationships." I guess maybe that's why she is such a money grubber because she can just buy friendships and not have to work at them.
What sucks even more is they have relatives that they did not spend the holiday with FAMILY.....
It is sad. I saw this a lot when I worked in a wealthy neighborhood. People would go to the movies with the nanny or assistant, or take them shopping, or go out to lunch. Sure it's fine to socialize with your employees occasionally, but I think they need to ask themselves the question if they weren't rich, famous, and paying these people to stick around, would they stick around? If the answer is no, it's not a real friend.
I think it's more concerning that Kate goes through best friends faster than a kindergartner. First Beth is her best friend, then Carla, then some gal from Michigan, now Steve and his wife. A best friend sort of implies lifelong, not, whenever you get a whim for someone else.
And I agree it's sad the kids don't have grandparents or aunt and uncles over on Thanksgiving. They have some high profile bodyguard who is only there because of their show.
Good points, Admin! I have often wondered what Kate says to the kids when they ask about Beth, Aunt Jodi, etc.
As for Jon... Well... He could have made more of an effort to spend the day near his kids. Most parents have shared custody for that day and it would have been nice if they would have been able to see at least SOME family.
Anon@7:38am: There are pics the othe Neilds arriving at Kate's house on Thanksgiving Day.
No pics of Jon yet.... Then again, interest in the Gosselins is dwindling.....
I don't care what Jon was doing on Thanksgiving--if Kate had custody that day, she probably wasn't going to let Jon have any time with the kids anyway. That being said, why are neither of these two idiots spending time with extended family? Jon has two brothers, a mom, a grandmother--I'm sure at least one family memeber would have welcomed him on the holiday?
And Kate--well, we know she "can't trust anyone"--except her paid bodyguard. It's just kind of sad, really--not only for the children, but for Jon and Kate (yes, Kate) as well.
Friends come and go but family is forever. It's kind of funny for all of Kate's talk about making memories, she is really missing the boat on building a tradition. She is not establishing that this is a holiday for your family to come together through thick and thin to be together on a special day. It's more just, whoever happens to like me this year we'll have over.
Have you ever been alone on Thanksgiving? I have, when I was in college 3,000 miles away. Of course I ended up going to my roommate's mother's and it was wonderful and I saw my family a month later on Christmas. But when you're away from family for the holidays you start to notice how much this really is a family holiday. Sure you may go to a friend's house occasionally, but most people disappear for the long weekend to their roots--their siblings, parents, grandparents, extended family. If you want to go snowboarding with your best friend or shopping with a roommate, they can't because they promised Mom to be home that weekend for pumpkin pie.
When it comes down to it, if you don't make it a habit and tradition of being a family holiday, your kids aren't going to be in the habit of coming home to see you when they are grown and have families of their own. They'll think, well Mom will just invite her best friend of the moment and she won't care we're not home.
I'm afraid Kate's choices may come back to bite her severely in the future.
I believe the ironic thing is that had Kate's parents been involved in her and her family's life then she would not have originally come under the scrutney that she did. It was the obvious exclusion of the Krieder's that sent most people (myself included) to the internet with the question, "how come the grandparents are not involved in the Gosselin life"? Many peole found it strange that Kate's parents and to a certian extent, Jon's mother, were not involved with the kids. When the question came up in interviews and Kate blew it off by saying they didn't know how to help, that is what started many people taking a closer look at what kind of a person Kate was. So, it seems that Kate had family in her life she might not have ended up in the situation she is now. Just my opinion.
OK magazine a reliable source REALLY! Your a lawyer come on now!
Administrator, I have to disagree with your assessment that Kate didn't spend Thaksgiving with her family. She was directly related to eight people at her table, and made room for more. I think that's a nice recipe for a great Thanksgiving.
I take issue with the idea that these children don't count, as if they aren't full human beings or something.
My husband and my children, that's who I ate with. So you think there's something sad about that?
I don't need a law degree to see how narrow-minded that is.
Anon,
Are you the pot, or the kettle? Both your comment and the Admin's comment can be taken as being narrowminded. The interpretation is left up to the reader.
Kate spent the holiday with her children and THE PAID HELP. Does that sound better? :-)
It SUCKS for the kids that they have oodles of cousins nearby within a decent amount of driving distance and don't get to spend ANY time with them, much less holidays.
The kids absolutely are full human begins, and they count. I don't think people would think twice about this situation but for the fact that Kate is rarely if NEVER seen with any extended family. She's admitted they aren't in her lives, she's cut people out, or people don't want to be around her. I think it's fair to say she has a lot of dysfunctional relationships in her family that can't all be the fault of everybody else.
It's one thing to spend Thanksgiving with the kids and then see your extended family later in the week or over Christmas. It's quite another to never allow your children to see them at all.
We don't know everything about the situation, but the way I've always thought about it, if one family member is estranged, you don't blink. If two are, maybe you raise an eyebrow. But if someone's entire family is estranged from a person, you really have to start looking toward that person.
We don't know everything about the situation, but the way I've always thought about it, if one family member is estranged, you don't blink. If two are, maybe you raise an eyebrow. But if someone's entire family is estranged from a person, you really have to start looking toward that person.
Well said and I agree!
(I would bold this if I knew how) "Both your comment and the Admin's comment can be taken as being narrowminded." (done bolding)
I agree with you about the Administrator's comment. It's narrowminded. I made no pronouncement's about anyone else's guest list and mentioned mine mirrored Kate's (except we had no friends over and my husband wasn't skiing with his grandma, lol.)
The Administrator defends her position very well without resorting to all the drama from the mamas on the 'I hate Kate' blogs. Read and learn how it's done, No Drama Mama. Lose the anger.
(More bold)"We don't know everything about the situation..." (done bolding)
Well said and I agree!
(more bold)"She's admitted they aren't in her lives, she's cut people out, or people don't want to be around her." (done bolding)
She did not admit that she cut people out. She did not admit people don't want to be around her. She admitted that her parents aren't in their lives, which she recently amended since she is in email contact with her mother. In other words, progress. She mentioned how hurt she was when she was asked about Kevin and Jodi's accusations and said he did it for money. She has recently been photographed with her sister, visited with her, and I saw a photo of them together by following a link from one of these anti-Kate blogs. She has said more than once that the fame drives friends into hiding. We're back to your good comment that we don't know everything.
I agree there are dysfunctional relationships, just look at what Kevin did in May. When your own brother accuses you of cheating without any proof, and takes money for it, that's a toxic relationship. It does suck that oodles of cousins are within driving distance but they aren't together unless Jon (or Kevin?) needs cash. Kate partly to blame for that, so is Kevin. I think Kate did something hurtful, but I know Kevin did. I saw it. So did everyone else. Who supports that?
You are right and I worded that in a confusing way. I meant Kate has admitted she doesn't talk to a lot of people. Then I meant that I believe the evidence points to her cutting people out of her life, multiple people, with very little explanation or reason. Did every single family member abuse her and kids? Is every single family member toxic? Or is Kate toxic? I think the math is not on her side.
I think Kevin and Jodi couldn't take all the lies and madness anymore. So they exploded. They said some things that needed to be said, but they also said some things that might have been better worked out in private. They were estranged well before that interview, so they weren't estranged in retaliation for the interview. Allegedly they were estranged because Kate refused to pay them, even though they were working hard on their show too. If you were making a lot of money and someone in your family was helping you do that, would you refuse to pay them?
We also don't know whether they did their interview for money. Lots of interviews are given for free. Lots of media outlets do not pay their subjects. We just don't know. But they have been on many episodes and until that point they haven't done anything that would make me question their motivies. And I don't see them buying a mansion of their own, or going on trips, with all this money they got. Actually Kate is the one doing that stuff.
It's funny Kate gets all upset that people would dare try to make money off her kids. And yet what does she do every day for the past five years? That's right, makes money off the kids. How is it okay for Kate, but not for everyone else? It's either okay, or not okay. And I fall on the side of NOT OKAY.
It's as safe to say that Kevin did that May interview for money as it is to say Kate's relationship with her parents is mostly Kate's fault. We'll never know unless someone admits it.
Kevin said they got paid for being on Jon & Kate Plus 8. $3000 per episode. It's on part of that May interview. I was surprised, because I read the sister's blog about them not being paid. Some say it was for the use of their home, but Kate could just say the same thing. Money is money. They probably wanted more per episode, or a guarantee of being in more episodes and Kate didn't want that. I really don't believe Kate said that "no one makes money off my kids." Jodi's sister Julie said that and I think she just makes up some of her facts or slants them in Jodi's favor, like saying they weren't paid. Why lie about it? To make Kate look worse. I take everything she says with a grain of salt. Anyway, she said that Kevin's parents had awful relationships with all their kids, so we're back to your point that we don't know everything.
Administrator: Once again I agree with you. Kate has cut so many people out of her life that it can not be the fault of everyone else. From what I saw on TV Kate could be a very difficult person to please. Look at the way she has treated people on the show, from the conductor of the little train, the basement organizers, solar people and on and on show after show, no respect, no gratitude and snide coments and that was on film, imagine how she is when the cameras are off. You don't have to know everything about a person to judge what you see on film, and what I see on film shows a very self centered, mean spirted person. Sorry that is just how I see her.
Although I do agree we can't know for sure, what we can do is make reasonable inferences from the facts and observations we do have. I'm a trial attorney, and almost every week I try a case in front of a judge in which no one knows what really happened, including me. But from that the judge has to make a reasonable decision....does she have enough evidence to sustain the allegations or must she dismiss? Judges certainly sustain things on a daily basis when no one really knows what happened, by making reasonable and logical inferences.
I take what Kate says with a grain of salt actually. She has been caught lying or misleading us so many times. Or she will state things without any facts to back it up, such as the kids love filming and it's not harming them. That is not a fact as Kate would like us to believe, it is an opinion, with no supporting evidence.
What I have infered and come to a reasonable conclusion about is that Kate has a fixed pie mentality. She sees this business and this money as a big piece of pie and she has to work as hard as she can to get every slice for herself. Her book, her TV show, her speaking engagements. When really, most businesses don't work that way. Dave Ramsey explained it best on his show, it's counter intuitive. If you wanted to build a clothing shop, would you do it in the fashion district of New York around 200 other clothes shops, or would you do it somewhere in Middle America where there aren't any clothing shops around and no one to compete with? The choice seems to be, go where there's no competition. But the counter-intuitive reality is that you should build in the fashion district. Because business is not a fixed pie and the more people work together, the more money everyone makes.
The point is a lot of people stood to benefit from Kate and her show, including Jodi and Kevin, friends and relatives. Lots of people could have been included in trips, outings, and yes, even the paycheck. Why not consider starting a family business together, using the benefit of the show's publicity? Or a host of other money-making ideas. But because there was this fixed-pie mentality, Jodi and Kevin got crucified for wanting money for their work. Jodi and Kevin were cut out. It's not as if the money is deducted from Kate's own paycheck.
It's like how the bigger a business is, the more people you pay and employ. It doesn't mean you lose money because you have more people on board. It just means more people aboard the gravy train benefiting.
Long story short, I don't think anyone should have made money off the kids. But Kate's whole outlook on how she was going to make money from this was very amateur, selfish, and unsophisiticated. The fact that they were only paid mediocre amounts of money, at least for a great deal of time, speaks to just how unsophisticated they were not to be brokering a much better deal for the millions they were giving TLC in return.
Well said, however I disagree with your comment about Jodi and Kevin. I do not believe Jodi or Kevin asked to be paid. From what I understand Kevin heard that TLC had wanted to pay them but Kate nixed it so he confronted Kate about it. I do believe that Kate was upset because Jodi was a kind and loving influnce on the children and it made her look bad. I also believe that Kevin and Jodi went public with their concerns about filming the children only as a last resort. I don't think they did it for money. It would have been very difficult to put them selfs out there and take a strong stand but they did it for love.
I do suspect jealousy could have played a role. The funny thing is, a lot of the appeal of the show for many people was to see what terrible thing Kate would do next. Having Jodi around, who was always so sweet and kind and calm, juxtiposed nicely with Kate. It created a really interesting dynamic--Kate the crazed mom, Jodi the sweet mom. It has all the makings of good drama. Even in reality TV you have to tell a story. Eliminating Jodi eliminated a protaganist, and thus eliminated a lot of the story. Even though the show did fine without her, it might have done even better with her. Kate tried to cut her out to save money, but she might have made even more money with her. Karma comes around again.
I have my suspicions one scenerio that could have happened was sort of as you said, Debbie. TLC threw out the idea of paying Jodi, maybe even making her more regular since she was getting good viewer response. Kate was jealous of that and didn't want anyone else to be paid. Maybe she didn't want to set a precedent of paying supporting "actors" on her show. And she was jealous. She nipped it in the bud without telling Jodi. Later, Jodi and Kevin found out what had happened. They might have been more upset that Kate hadn't consulted them about this than they were about the money. In this scenerio, it's really about trust and being open with your family and not scheming behind their back. And making decisions together instead of not even consulting them.
Had Kate sat down with them and told them TLC is throwing out this idea of paying you but this is why I don't think it's a good idea, because then everyone will want to get paid, then you'll feel obligated to film and it will distrupt your lives, you'll have to sign a contract and that has drawbacks, it will make your role less pure and natural, money comes between people, etc.--then who knows the whole thing might have blown over. But it appears Jodi and Kevin were left out of the decision period, and that caused resentment and hurt feelings to say the least. When you're an adult and another adult makes a decision for you because they think they know better than you, it's very irritating. Been there.
The show wasn't bad for your kids, Kate? It certainly did a number on their relationship with their beloved aunt and uncle.
Wow, Administrator, we are very close to agreement about the Kevin and Jodi thing! I think your suspicions are like mine. I think TLC liked the protagonist/antagonist story, too. TLC liked having Jodi as the sweet soft-spoken mom to Kate's dominant bossy personality. I believe TLC would have contracted Jodi to be a "regular" on the show. I am pretty sure Kate didn't want that.
Let me clarify about the payment thing. Kevin already said that Jodi and he WERE paid ($3000 per episode.) I don't know why we're ignoring that. He said it as if it wasn't a lot of money. Jon's statements regarding his countersuit tell us that Kate and Jon were making $20,000 per episode at that point. Maybe that's why Kevin didn't think $3K was a big deal. Personally, I think it's a lot of money, especially when there are only one of you, not ten of you. Jodi was paid more than Kate if you do the math! Ha Ha! $20K/10 Gosselins = $2K/Gosselin. $3K/1 Kreider= $3K/Kreider.
So I ask myself, if Jodi is good for the show, and Kate wants the show to grow, what happened? Reading around the Internet, I find the answer in Julie (Jodi's sister's) behavior and something Kate has always insisted.
Also, you mentioned that a lot of people could have made money from the show, gone on trips, etc. A lot of people DID take trips (including Jodi) and make money off the show. Could you clarify what you mean by this?
Not to nit pic, really - but how do we know that it worked out to be $3K/1 Kreider. Frequently, both Jodi AND Kevin (as well as the kids) appeared in episodes together. If you split that using the same theory, then the Kreider money per person was much less than the Gosselin per person pay. But all in all, it really doesn't matter now.
I also fail to see how Jodi/Kevin being PAID for their Radar on Line interview has anything to do with their credibility. Radar is posting interviews about the Gosselins frequently. In the heat of the whole thing, multiple posts per day, and most posts were Jon-bashing. The Kate fans believe every single word of those interviews as if they were written in stone by Kate's own hand. But Jodi/Kevin cannot be believed, b/c they were PAID for their interview (just like all the others). Double standards, anyone?
Annoymous you raise such good points. Specifically with people getting paid for interviews. Let's just assume for argument's sake that Jodi and Kevin were paid for their interview, which I'm not sure they were. For some reason there is this prevailing view that if you are paid, you must be lying. But what evidence do we have they are lying? And wouldn't they be worried Jon and Kate would sue them for libel and slander if it weren't true? But Jon and Kate can't win a suit against them if it's true....think about it, if all that they said were such horrible lies, why isn't there a lawsuit? Because it's true.
For some reason, few people consider the fact that maybe Jodi and Kevin had to be heavily persuaded to tell their story because for a number of reasons they didn't want to. After all, where were they the two years prior to that? Maybe the knowledge that they were paid just speaks to how much they wanted to keep all the information they knew private. To me that just tells me how much this couple really struggled with whether to talk badly about Jon and Kate knowing the kids, whom they adore, might find out.
And once again I go back to the paradox here. Jon and Kate made their millions off the backs of their children. But Jodi and Kevin aren't allowed to make money off them....why? What's different? They're all close relatives of the children.
It's become quite prevelant, that those who support Kate believe any and all "good" things they read about her, regardless of the source or lack of any evidence to support that story. Any negative Kate information is obviously lies. The "source" can't be trusted, the interviewee was paid so obviously they lied, and/or there is no "evidence" that proves the negative information. They twist the circumstances to support what they WANT the truth to be. Same goes for Jon, only it's the bad stuff they choose to believe, bending the facts to support their theories. It's a sad sad state of affairs when the truth can't be accepted as the truth, and the lies twisted into their own version of the truth.
I think it's a double standard and I don't really know how this happened. When someone with such little credibility as Michael Lohan says that Jon is a back stabbing terrible man and that he will lose his lawsuit, it's all over the news. But excuse me, how much credibility does Michael Lohan really have? Not to mention he's not a lawyer, how can he possibly begin to make predicitions about a lawsuit as complex as this and who will win?
If he said anything about Kate, I doubt we would hear about it. Because after all, it's MICHAEL LOHAN. But somehow he is credible when he's talking about Jon???
It kind of reminds me of the way Kate's stealing of money was only reported by a few sources and quickly excused away, while Jon's stealing was splashed all over CNN.
I just think they've both made poor choices and that they both should get equal airtime for those choices.
I think society in general tends to support women by default in divorce. Society is biased towards a poor woman and her poor kids. But the truth is, the woman is not always the victim.
New comments are not allowed.