Kate Gosselin - Mother of the Year

[NotALoserLikeYou]

She also said shes made it her mission to nurture the kids relationship with their dad and she would never try to alienate them lolol

[Curious]

She also said shes made it her mission to nurture the kids relationship with their dad and she would never try to alienate them lolol

LOL As I said, lies as easy as she takes in air :)

On an unrelated note, her "good bra" seems to have gotten a little "gooder." I can't believe she still denies a boob job. She is apparently the only person that loses weight to anorexic levels, yet her boobs get bigger rather than smaller.

Here are the original pictures I used to make that composite (Just like Kate, I had to erase Jon from the one picture):

Here is one more pic of Kate, pre "good bra"

[formergothardite]

That is a damn good bra. :lol: She needs to advertise for it.

[NotALoserLikeYou]

I watched bethenny and Kate said Jon sees the kids every other weekend and one dinner visit a week. To be fair that's not joint custody, that's the standard 80/20. But we don't know the specifics.

Bethenny asked why do people hate her and she said she had no idea, only that they believe what they read but everything they read is a lie.

Bethenny tried to get her to admit she made a lot of money and where did it go. She said she didn't make as much as people think but it was a huge blessing and she personally (not Jon) put most of it away for college.

Then more of the same, bethenny asked if Jon has snapped because of that gun incident, she said she didn't know what was going on with him but didn't defend him at all, she also said they divorced because the person she married literally stopped being that person.

And not only does she cultivate the kids relationship with their dad, she said what I think was the most telling thing so far: if the kids gets little older and no longer want to see him she won't force them. This is interesting because who says that unless she thinks it's not only going to happen, but that the person deserves it. Very narcissistic.

[tropaka]

wow, that inside edition interview...her eye movements and speech....looks like she's trying not to fall asleep, on anti anxiety meds, or a few shots of vodka.

[Curious]

I watched bethenny and Kate said Jon sees the kids every other weekend and one dinner visit a week. To be fair that's not joint custody, that's the standard 80/20. But we don't know the specifics.

Bethenny asked why do people hate her and she said she had no idea, only that they believe what they read but everything they read is a lie.

Bethenny tried to get her to admit she made a lot of money and where did it go. She said she didn't make as much as people think but it was a huge blessing and she personally (not Jon) put most of it away for college.

Then more of the same, bethenny asked if Jon has snapped because of that gun incident, she said she didn't know what was going on with him but didn't defend him at all, she also said they divorced because the person she married literally stopped being that person.

And not only does she cultivate the kids relationship with their dad, she said what I think was the most telling thing so far: if the kids gets little older and no longer want to see him she won't force them. This is interesting because who says that unless she thinks it's not only going to happen, but that the person deserves it. Very narcissistic.

To bold #1: Yes, we should not believe what we've all seen with our lying eyes. We have seen her bad behavior on film for years. We've read her lies out of her own mouth (fingers) for years. She is famous for saying EVERYTHING is a lie, but *everything* can't be a lie. Something has to be the truth. She can't have it both ways. You can't edit in bad behavior on film.

To the 2nd bold: I think she says that because she cut out her parents so she thinks others may do the same. She should be careful what she wishes for though because Jon may not be the parent that gets cut out of the kids lives. No sane person would say something like that on a nationally televised show that will live for eternity on the internet, though.

[Arete]

If Jon has a written custody agreement, the kids do in fact have to see him whether Kate thinks they want to or not up to a certain age. They can't just decide they don't want to see their dad. I believe in a lot of states they may be able to petition the court at 16 for a change of agreement if they do not want to see EITHER parent, but that could just as easily work against Kate as it could against Jon.

After 18, they can tell either parent to go away without having to go back to court.

[bluelady]

If Jon has a written custody agreement, the kids do in fact have to see him whether Kate thinks they want to or not up to a certain age. They can't just decide they don't want to see their dad. I believe in a lot of states they may be able to petition the court at 16 for a change of agreement if they do not want to see EITHER parent, but that could just as easily work against Kate as it could against Jon.

After 18, they can tell either parent to go away without having to go back to court.

I was always under the impression that a judge will take an older child's (teenager's) wishes into consideration when determining custody and visitation. When my mom left and my parents divorced when I was nine, I lived with my dad. My maternal grandmother was sure to tell me at every opportunity that, as a teenager, I could ask a judge to let me live with my mom.

I'm in Canada, though. It may be different in the US.

[TeaNCrackers]

Depends on the state. In Nevada, this is not true. Children do not get to pick until they are 18.

[treemom]

Of course judges can always ask kids and consider that.

[silverspoons]

What Kate didn't say is that while she has been gone for almost 2 weeks from the kids on her "book tour", Jon has the right to have the kids so they don't sit home with a nanny. He won this right about a year ago, after complaining that the kids were being left frequently with a nanny and he wanted to spend time with them while Kate traveled. He also said that there were many times the school would call him because Kate wouldn't answer of want to drive in for "just one kid", so he was handling sick kids or issues at school. So this month Jon will have the kids more then 50% of the month. Last night Kate was a casino in PA with the bodyguard and Jon had the kids, even though she had been gone for 2 weeks and it is the twins birthday week, she wasn't in a rush to go see them.

[2xx1xy1JD]

I was always under the impression that a judge will take an older child's (teenager's) wishes into consideration when determining custody and visitation. When my mom left and my parents divorced when I was nine, I lived with my dad. My maternal grandmother was sure to tell me at every opportunity that, as a teenager, I could ask a judge to let me live with my mom.

I'm in Canada, though. It may be different in the US.

[Disclaimer]

Each state and province has its own laws on custody and access, and they can vary quite a lot.

In Ontario, Canada, the views of the child are a factor to be considered by the courts - but they are only one factor. Courts will also consider if the views of the child are reasonable, if they are truly in the child's best interests, if the child does not know or appreciate all of the facts (in one of my cases, the boy wanted to live with his father but had not been told that his father had a major drug problem), and if the child is likely being manipulated/alienated by the other parent.

If a parent keeps telling a child "just wait until you are 12, then you can tell the judge you don't want to see the other parent", I'd consider that to be alienating.

[formergothardite]

I think Kate has created this vision in her mind where all the kids will choose her and then go on national television to bash Jon and the world knows her as the best mother ever. I also think she does everything in her power to poison the children against Jon and try to make this happen.

[Nothing2CHere]

Then more of the same, bethenny asked if Jon has snapped because of that gun incident, she said she didn't know what was going on with him but didn't defend him at all, she also said they divorced because the person she married literally stopped being that person.

Well, yeah, from what I had seen of them on TV, Jon stopped being someone who Kate could step all over and began asserting himself.

[laura oz]

Disclaimer: I haven't done a book report in about 20 years and my kids are trying to help me, so if this is disjointed and herky-jerky please forgive me. I should have taken notes & am relying on what stands out most in my memory. There will probably be run on's and many other goof ups. I'll probably forget to address a few things, so if you have a question that isn't covered here, but may have been covered in the book, please feel free to ask & I'll do my best to answer.

I got my friends' Kindle over the weekend, and my family only saw the top portion of my head while I was reading and my butt as it trotted in and out of the kitchen for snacks. Kauffman NEEDS an editor. My God, I must have read the same thing at least 6 or 7 times and I thought at first there was something wrong with the Kindle to keep sticking or possibly jumping back to parts I'd already read. But I digress. All I can say is WOW. When I was reading the journal entries about what Kate had done to her children and how desperately she was praying, back when she seemed to espouse a belief if God, that He would make her a better and slow to anger mommy because she loved her babies so very much, I was just so incredibly saddened for her and especially them. She said something rather telling when she wrote she saw her father come out in her when she was afraid she would actually hurt her kids. Makes you wonder what all went on in the Kreider household & what she and her siblings had to endure & what shaped Kate into what she is today. Kate seems remarkably like her father, and that seems to be why her parents were cut out of their lives. In addition to the clothes and cribs that have been mentioned donated, Kate knew her father was holding out on her with the $$$ that was donated to her family from his congregation. Seems Mr Preacher wasn't and isn't the most honest guy & like Katie seems to think he's above the laws that apply to the rest of us. Guess he couldn't con a con because she knew him too well. When she wrote about pulling poor Colin up by the hair and spanking him to his crib, and all the corporal punishment babies in diapers were doled out, my stomach twisted. She learned that behavior somewhere & it seems her teacher was dear old dad. My heart went out to the little girl that Kate was. Remember when in an interview with Natalie Morales, Kate said her brother Kevin would say he did something to keep Kate from getting in trouble? Now I know what he was trying to protect her from: their father's fury.

The book touched on Kate's relationships with other men, an aborted pregnancy at 17 that was urged on her by her dear old pastor dad, and her motives from the beginning of her trying to become pregnant with high number multiples. Notice I said trying. Why would a woman who became easily pregnant in her teens need fertility treatments for PCOS? Easy answer is that nurse Kate had done her research and knew what to tell her doctors. She was dead set on having as many babies as possible so she could be like Bobbie McCaughie (sp??) & get oodles of attention and free stuff. Only Kate decided that since the companies she was interested in weren't coming top her, she'd go to them & began writing and soliciting very early in the pregnancy and she kicked it up a notch when the babies arrived. She made her kids a marketable commodity from the time they were in her belly, and once they were born they became her cash cow. In Kate's words: how lovely.

I know we all have speculated on her mental status, and the book mentioned that she had been diagnosed as bipolar & not medicated through her own choice. Naturally, there can be nothing wrong with her & the doctor didn't know what he was talking about. What narcissist is going to admit anything is wrong with them?

The book also discussed Uncle Kevin and Aunt Jodi. On the show Jodi was the anti Kate. She was sweet, loving, caring, and warm to her nieces and nephews. There was a kerfuffle about Jodi and Kevin being paid, and them BOOM, no more Aunt Jodi or Uncle Kevin. We all know the story. What I found intriguing is an email Kate sent explaining hers and Jon's side of all this. Kevin wanted money for his and Jodi's babysitting and a what seems to be hefty sum for appearing in the show. Kate didn't want to mix family and money because "they're the only family we have left" and wanted to pay them out of hers and Jon's $, but Kevin wanted her to hold up production for them to receive a bigger portion of the pie from TLC and to go on the Hawaii trip. I'm probably a fool, but the way Kate wrote about it made me think she was telling mostly the truth. Even a broken clock is right twice a day, and let's not forget they were both raised in the same household and learned the same lessons. I'm sure the truth lies somewhere in the middle and neither of them are without fault for the falling out, but I still think Kevin got dollar signs in his eyes and his actions and reactions were affected by that. Whatever the case, I hate the kids lost a relationship with the only people it seems really loved them for them, and let them be kids.

All during the time the series was going while Jon was involved, they continued to speak at churches and receive "love offerings" while having almost 2 million dollars. Kate seemed to have a pathological need for more money, more freebies ("fringe benefits" to Kate)....just MORE. When Jon told her that he felt it was wrong to keep taking the love offerings and he wouldn't be doing any more speaking engagements, Kate told him the marriage was over. He asked for counseling which she said no to because the problem was his & he needed to fix it. That's a definite switch in the TLC approved script that Kate was spewing on any show that would interview her. Then while filming was going on, she told him that an open marriage was fine with her as long as he was discreet. Knowing all this, they still renewed their vows in front of the viewing audience and lied to them, but more importantly, they lied to their children and told them they would be together always. I find that disgusting and reprehensible. TLC & F8F decided who they were going to back in the divorce, and that was Kate because she wanted the filming to go on after Jon wanted it stopped. I don't know if he had an attack of conscience, or was just pissed that he would be cut out of any more $$$$. Kauffman backs Jon, but I'm still not so sure his motives were as pure as Kauffman suggests. The children are sick of being filmed, but Kate demands the show go on in some way, shape, or form. She tweets every. single. thing. about them trying to keep them in the public eye and relevant, and still is looking and still finding more freebies by tweeting about this company and that company.

I've read that Kauffman warned Kate that if she fought his book, he's write everything he knew about her and not hold back. For her sake, I'm glad it was TLC that had this pulled. I can't imagine what he held back.....maybe she's the antichrist is all I can guess cause the material he released was incredibly damming.

PS Kate and Steve are probably sleeping together, but I'm sure you already knew that. Also, a sure way to tell if Kate is lying is if her mouth is moving or if her fingers are tweeting.

[Feberin]

Thanks for giving a description of the book.

[NotALoserLikeYou]

Thanks for the synopsis! What did it say about her and Steve?

[Mela99]

mrfmfhjsf....

Now that you provided the synposis, not sure I could get through the whole book without vomiting with rage.

effin Khate.

[laura oz]

Thanks for the synopsis! What did it say about her and Steve?

Kauffman said that he didn't have proof of the affair, but the two vacation together, he has stayed over at her house, they talk on the phone & she smiles the whole time and acts like a giddy teenager, the kids have asked her if he was going to be their new daddy, and on at least two separate trips they have shared a room together. What convinced me of the affair was that greedy Kate actually paid him with her and the kids' money when TLC wouldn't.

BTW I forgot to add in my earlier post about the book that TLC, F8F, and Steve should be ashamed of themselves for doing nothing to stop Kate when she beats or is cruel to her children because stepping in or showing what really happens on "the most real reality show" might hurt the brand. They all saw and knew what was going on and did nothing to help those kids. They've earned a special place in hell for that.

[formergothardite]

Thanks for the recap of the book. It is pretty horrible that both Jon and Kate went through the whole second wedding thing knowing that their marriage was over.

I can't imagine what else he has on her that could be worse than this. She murders kittens for fun?

[lizziesmom]

Jon is not without fault but he seems to actually care about his children as individuals and not as extensions of him. I hope they spend lots of time with him because IMO they will have a better chance the less they are around Kate.

[Curious]

So there has been some movement in the worst conceived lawsuit ever to be filed ;)

Apparently rather than respond to Jon's Motion to Dismiss, Kate filed an Amended Complaint (which isn't that unusual). You can find the Amended Complaint here: http://www.realitytvkids.com/2013/10/ka ... laint.html It looks like they dropped about 1/2 the charges they had in the first complaint.

Jon's attorney has filed a second Motion to Dismiss based on the new Amended Complaint and it's just as much fun to read as the first one was, IMO. You can find it here: http://www.realitytvkids.com/2013/10/jo ... smiss.html

Once again, Jon's attorney dance rings around Kate's. He makes a good argument for several of her of her claims to be dismissed (with prejudice) based on her own complaint (lol)

This is one of my favorite parts:

D. Plaintiff Refuses To—But Must—Plead That The Information In Hoffman’s Book Kate Gosselin: How She Fooled The World Is True To State A Claim For Publicity Given to Private Life (Count II).

Oh what a sticky wicket, Kate. To prove her claim for invasion of privacy she has to admit that all those horrible things that Robert Hoffman said in his book, are TRUE. All those things about beating her kids and abusing her dogs and not caring one whit about her fans...all have to be true if she wants to win her lawsuit. However, she's already claimed the "book contained defamatory and untrue information about Kate Gosselin, along with information that painted Kate in a false and negative light". That makes one wonder why she didn't file for defamation instead.

[plaidninja]

:clap: That is amazing. I didn't think that "legalize" could be snarky, but I just read all of that hearing the most scathing and sarcastic voice.

He is making Kate's attorney look like he got his degree out of a Cracker Jack box. I don't know what I hope for-- a dismissal, or Kate withdrawing her charges, would mean she stopped spending the kids' money on a frivolous lawsuit and the book can be published. On the other hand, she's had this slap coming for a long, long time. It's hard not to sit back and enjoy it.

[Palimpsest]

Thanks Laura Oz for the book report! I read the book, or rather skimmed it, when it first came out, and agree that Hoffman REALLY needs an editor! The information in it, if real and I believe most of it is real, is horrible.

So there has been some movement in the worst conceived lawsuit ever to be filed ;)

[snipped for brevity]

This is one of my favorite parts:

Oh what a sticky wicket, Kate. To prove her claim for invasion of privacy she has to admit that all those horrible things that Robert Hoffman said in his book, are TRUE. All those things about beating her kids and abusing her dogs and not caring one whit about her fans...all have to be true if she wants to win her lawsuit. However, she's already claimed the "book contained defamatory and untrue information about Kate Gosselin, along with information that painted Kate in a false and negative light". That makes one wonder why she didn't file for defamation instead.

Thanks for the links, Curious. It really is the stupidest lawsuit ever filed. What on earth does Kate expect to get from this, other than a temporary delay on the republication of Hoffman's book? And all it does is draw more attention to the book, which probably have garnered very little attention if she hadn't filed a civil suit. It also makes her look incredibly nasty for suing the father of her children on such flimsy grounds.

The second Motion to Dismiss does make for some weirdly amusing reading! I'm not a lawyer, but I'd think the relevant Statutes of Limitations should knock out all the remaining charges anyway. No? Not only that, there is an Occam's razor here. Jon's explanation for the "stolen" disks seems rational -- Kate threw them out (probably in a tantrum) and Hoffman found them in the trash. Much more likely than all this elaborate unauthorized illegal computer hacking crap involving multiple John Does. :?

A couple of questions for those who follow this a lot more closely than I . . .

Does Federal Court have the option to "dismiss with prejudice" and make the plaintiff (Kate G) pay all the court costs for the defendants and forbid her to file these sort of allegations ever again? That would seem to be quite richly deserved given the vagueness of her allegations. :)

Secondly, I have a slight quibble with the bolded above. Does she really have to admit that all the stuff in the book is true to get the Invasion of Privacy claim? It's been a while since I skimmed through the book but Laura Oz's book report jogged my memory. A couple of examples: She could be forced to admit that only "some" of the less damaging journal entries are genuinely hers, and that the really horrible abusive stuff about picking babies up by their hair and beating them are faked. She could also say that some of the other statements made by Hoffman (supposedly from info gleaned from unidentified family members) are untrue and defamatory, like the supposed abortion when she was a teenager?

I suppose I'm not seeing it as a clear cut issue because I thought Hoffman put way too much speculation, and jumped to conclusions that made Kate look truly evil, into the book without enough supporting evidence. To clarify, the journal entries and emails sort of sounded convincingly Kate-like, and I'm sure he has the disks, documents, etc. to prove them genuine. However, it's the things like the bi-polar diagnosis, the abortion, and the deliberately taking extra meds (clomid?) to increase her chances of having HOM that make me wonder if he is making some "defamatory" things up. I'm cynical that way and, although I know he has his fans, Hoffman strikes me as rather sleazy so I suspect his motives for writing the book aren't quite as nice and high-minded as he says.

ETA: The 15 Minutes site also says that Hoffman is considering a TV move offer on the book. Hmmm. Not sure how I feel about that on several levels. Mostly I'm concerned for the kids.

Hoffman originally said that any proceeds from the book would go to a charity, IIRC, which is why I did not have a problem buying it. What about a TV movie deal? Does he need the $$ on that for his defense on the civil suit? Will he donate any extra $$ to charity? Or will he walk away with the $$ from both the book and movie deal (if it ever happens) himself? Seems as though he could be yet another person in the long line of people who have exploited the Gosselin Eight for cold hard cash. I don't know.

[Curious]

A couple of questions for those who follow this a lot more closely than I . . .

Does Federal Court have the option to "dismiss with prejudice" and make the plaintiff (Kate G) pay all the court costs for the defendants and forbid her to file these sort of allegations ever again? That would seem to be quite richly deserved given the vagueness of her allegations. :)

Secondly, I have a slight quibble with the bolded above. Does she really have to admit that all the stuff in the book is true to get the Invasion of Privacy claim? It's been a while since I skimmed through the book but Laura Oz's book report jogged my memory. A couple of examples: She could be forced to admit that only "some" of the less damaging journal entries are genuinely hers, and that the really horrible abusive stuff about picking babies up by their hair and beating them are faked. She could also say that some of the other statements made by Hoffman (supposedly from info gleaned from unidentified family members) are untrue and defamatory, like the supposed abortion when she was a teenager?

I am not sure if they are asking for court costs or not. If they are, then I'd think that is a possibility, yes.

I don't think anything in the book made Kate look very good. To prove her claim for invasion of privacy, whatever she is claiming is an invasion of privacy she has to admit that part is true. So I don't think it matters, it's still a bad situation for her. Does she say that abortion, for example, is an invasion of privacy? Then she has to admit she had one. She's stuck no matter what she tries to claim because whatever it is, she has to say it's true and nothing in that book paints her in a good light.

FTR, I don't care if she's had an abortion or not, but it does make her PCOS even more suspect and her whole refusal to reduce the multiple pregnancy a little more suspicious (in the fame whorey sense) and also that whole Christian "we left it up to God" thing.