Katie Holmes’ night out with her mom was en pointe.
Indeed, the Dawson’s Creek alum and her mom Kathleen Holmes stepped out for a rare mother-daughter appearance at the American Ballet Theatre’s…
E! Online (US) – Top Stories
Category: Entertainment
Reading Time: 3 minutes
We’re just hours away from Stephen Colbert’s final episode of The Late Show, and fans and friends are eagerly paying tribute to the beloved comic.
As we previously reported, CBS decided to cancel Colbert’s show in a surprise move that many believe to be politically motivated.
No stranger to political controversy himself, Colbert’s longtime friend and fellow late night host Jimmy Kimmel used his platform to address the situation last night.
During his monologue, Kimmel delivered an emotional tribute to his colleague while also taking a very public shot at CBS.
And, in true Kimmel fashion, he managed to sneak in a joke that was only half-joking.
The ABC host began by announcing his show would not air opposite Colbert’s final broadcast out of respect for his friend and the staff behind The Late Show.
“We will be off tomorrow night out of respect for our colleague and friend Stephen Colbert, and the writers, producers, and staff and crew at The Late Show, whose final show on CBS airs opposite ours,” Kimmel said.
But while the gesture was gracious, Kimmel also made it abundantly clear that he is still not over CBS pulling the plug on Colbert’s program.
“I think you know how I feel about the fact that they’re being pushed out,” Kimmel said.
“I hope the people who did the pushing feel ashamed of themselves tonight — although I know they probably won’t.”
Kimmel went on to praise Colbert and the Late Show writers and producers, celebrating what they accomplished over the past 11 years while emphasizing that there was never any real bad blood between the two shows.
“I think it is most important to congratulate Stephen and the team at The Late Show for all the great work over the last 11 years — and all the great work they will continue to do in other venues, I have no doubt,” he said.
“Everyone at that show has always been very gracious to us. We never felt like we were competing against them. It was nothing like the old days of late-night. I always loved being on Stephen’s show. I loved having him on ours. I hope we’re able to do that again. I hope he comes to visit as many times as possible.”
Then came Jimmy’s digs at the Trump-friendly bigwigs at CBS’ parent company, Paramount.
“On behalf of everyone at our show, we want to say to everyone at your show: It has been a pleasure to work alongside you,” Kimmel concluded.
“I will be watching tomorrow night. I hope that those of you who watch our show will also tune in to CBS for the last time. Don’t ever watch it again. But watch tomorrow night to wish Stephen a fond farewell.”
CBS recently announced that The Late Show would be replaced by Comics Unleashed, the long-running stand-up clip series created by Byron Allen.
Earlier this month, Kimmel also mocked the decision during his annual roast at the broadcast upfronts.
“As you know, CBS is turning 11:35 p.m. into a time slot least likely to offend the President with a rerun of Comics Unleashed from 2007 featuring Paula Poundstone and Andy Dick,” Kimmel joked.
“Poor Stephen. It’s bad enough to lose your job. Imagine getting replaced by the owner of the Weather Channel.”
As for Colbert, the longtime host appears to be trying to keep things in perspective — at least publicly.
In an exit interview with The Hollywood Reporter, Colbert reflected on the end of his late-night run.
“We’re all big boys. I got to do this for 21 years. What is there to complain about, really?” he said. “I knew that the show had to end at some time. I did not expect it to end this way. But my staff are the only people I’m worried about.”
After more than a decade behind The Late Show desk, Colbert’s final guest lineup remains under wraps.
But one thing seems certain: Kimmel — and millions of other fans — will be watching.
Ahead of Stephen Colbert’s Final Show, Jimmy Kimmel Tells Viewers: … was originally published on The Hollywood Gossip.
The Hollywood Gossip
Reading Time: 2 minutes
Earlier this year, fans were more than a little surprised when Nicki Minaj declared herself Donald Trump’s biggest fan.
Prior to coming out as a MAGA diehard, Nicki had made very few overtly political remarks over the course of her long career.
And she expressed her support for Trump at a time when his approval numbers were in freefall, so she couldn’t have thought it would be a savvy career move.
Not surprisingly, lots of people jumped to the conclusion that Nicki was hoping to curry favor with the Trump administration.
After all, Trump has a history of offering presidential pardons to his rich and famous supporters.
And Nicki has quite a few people in her life who could use pardons.
Her husband, Kenneth Petty, is a convicted rapist who is forced to register as a sex offender. In 2022, he was sentenced to a year of house arrest for failing to do so.
Then there’s Nicki’s brother, Jelani Maraj, who is serving a life sentence after being convicted of raping his 11-year-old stepdaughter.
Needless to say, Nicki’s inner circle could benefit from a few pardons.
The situation came to a head earlier this week when famed songwriter Linda Petty tweeted that Minaj must “want something from The Office” (via Radar Online).
The tweet prompted Trump media and campaign strategist Alex Bruesewitz to lash out on X (formerly Twitter).
“This is a disgusting and disgraceful smear that every Democrat and Trump critic is spreading about Nicki Minaj,” Bruesewitz ranted on X after Perry’s comments gained traction online.
“Nicki has never once asked the President for anything. She has only offered assistance and support,” he continued:
“The insinuation that she’s looking for anything in return is total garbage.”
Nicki is not an American citizen and therefore cannot vote in US elections, but she’s aligned herself with Republican causes in recent months.
Minaj has boasted about receiving a Trump “gold card” and inching closer to citizenship, but it doesn’t seem that that’s happened for her yet.
These days, lots of folks are watching the situation closely and wondering if Nicki will receive any favors from the White House. It wouldn’t be a good look, but that hasn’t stopped Trump in the past.
Trump Administration Responds to Claim That Nicki Minaj Is Seeking Pardons For Husband, … was originally published on The Hollywood Gossip.
The Hollywood Gossip
Reading Time: 3 minutes
Rumor has it that Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce are ironing out a prenup ahead of their summer wedding.
Naturally, fans are eager for details. But who pays for what is boring when people have this much money.
Is it true that Taylor could be barred from badmouthing him in song after a divorce?
Here’s everything that we know so far.
Is there a prenup?
According to reports, Taylor and Travis will be getting a prenup.
Many of their fellow Millennials — even those without so much as 1% of Travis’ net worth, let alone Taylor’s — opt to get prenups because it gives them power over their own property, rather than subjecting them to the whims of how property division is handled under divorce laws wherever they happen to live.
In this case, we’re talking about a guy with a solid 8-figure (and growing) net worth and a billionaire musician.
Taylor and Travis are, obviously, not making their prenup details public — and have not officially confirmed that it exists.
However, online speculation as to what the document may include and preclude has taken off on social media like wildfire.
As of this time, the prenup has not leaked.
Given that the only people who likely have access to such a document would be Taylor, Travis, and their extremely well-paid attorneys, we do not expect for that to change.
Speaking of attorneys, Page Six spoke to Sarah Luetto. She doesn’t represent either party, but her law firm deals extensively in marriage and family.
“Swift and Kelce may wish to include terms fostering confidentiality and privacy,” Leutto noted.
“This may include non-disparagement or non-disclosure terms related to their relationship,” she added.
Clauses that enjoin her from singing about him sound like a non-starter
Most of the time, we think as prenuptial agreements as being something that concerns money, property, and perhaps custody of children or pets.
Rumors have suggested that Travis’ attorney, negotiating on his behalf, might include a clause barring Taylor from singing about their relationship in the event of a breakup.
Luetto cautions that there are “some exceptions” to how enforceable certain provisions may be — even if both partners, at the time, agree to sign.
“In Taylor’s case, she would likely not want to include provisions limiting her from singing about her relationship in songs,” she reasoned.
Luetto explained: “Particularly since there is always so much speculation about the subjects of her songwriting.”
For years, prenups were used as a plot device on television — most often, as a way for a rich husband’s evil family to ensure that a protagonist doesn’t steal their fortune despite stealing their son’s heart.
In reality, they are a solid way to make sure that both parties agree to who gets, say, an heirloom piece of jewelry or an expensive passion project in the event of a divorce. If the prenup is carried out the right way, that is.
The right way for a prenup to come about involves attorneys for both parties. In the case of wealth disparity, the monied party pays for both. The attorneys work out the arrangement based upon their clients’ wishes, ensuring that divorce doesn’t mean either party getting robbed — or impoverished.
Most places have laws that would more or less allow for fair division for most couples. But why take that chance?
As Taylor and Travis iron out the final details before their nuptials, the prenup is probably not their main concern. And, in the absence of concrete evidence, it probably shouldn’t worry Swifties, either.
Taylor Swift & Travis Kelce Prenup: Will She Really Be Barred from Singing About Him … was originally published on The Hollywood Gossip.
The Hollywood Gossip
Father’s Day is coming up, and dad deserves to be treated well. Whomever the father figure is in your life, consider gifting one of these many Costco finds.
Mashed – Fast Food, Celebrity Chefs, Grocery, Reviews
Reading Time: 2 minutes
Charlie Kirk prided himself on being a free speech absolutist.
But in the months since Kirk was shot and killed, many of his most ardent supporters have lashed out at and demanded consequences for those who dared to criticize the slain podcast host and activist.
Larry Bushart, a 61-year-old retired police officer from Tennessee, even suffered legal ramifications, spending 37 days behind bars due to a Facebook post about Kirk.
Now, Bushart has received an $835,000 settlement after filing a lawsuit against the county officials who locked him up.
The case quickly became national news — and not just because of the unexpectedly high payout.
Bushart was arrested in September 2025 after posting Facebook memes referencing Kirk’s death, including one that reused a quote from President Donald Trump following a 2024 Iowa school shooting that read: “We have to get over it.”
Authorities claimed one of the posts alarmed local residents, who feared it referenced a nearby school in Tennessee with a similar name.
According to local media reports, Perry County Sheriff Nick Weems later acknowledged he understood the meme referred to an Iowa school — not a local Tennessee one — but officials still moved forward with Bushart’s arrest after claiming the posts created fear in the community.
Bushart was charged with threatening mass violence and initially hit with a staggering $2 million bond.
He ultimately spent more than a month in jail before prosecutors dropped the felony charge in October.
During that time, Bushart says he lost his post-retirement job and missed major family moments, including his wedding anniversary and the birth of his granddaughter.
Those claims later became part of the federal lawsuit he filed against Perry County, the sheriff, and the investigator who secured the arrest warrant.
“I am pleased my First Amendment rights have been vindicated,” Bushart said in a statement after news of the settlement broke.
“The people’s freedom to participate in civil discourse is crucial to a healthy democracy. I am looking forward to moving on and spending time with my family.”
His legal team framed the case as a major constitutional issue.
“It’s in times of turmoil and heightened tensions that our national commitment to free speech is tested the most,” attorney Cary Davis said, arguing that public officials crossed a dangerous line by treating protected speech like a criminal threat.
While many people faced backlash or even job losses over comments related to Kirk’s death, Bushart’s situation stood out because it escalated into an actual criminal prosecution.
Now, after more than a month in jail and a lengthy legal battle, he is receiving an $835,000 reminder that social media posts.
And across social today, Bushart is being celebrated as a true free speech warrior.
Retired Police Officer Jailed For Posting Charlie Kirk Meme Receives 6-Figure Settlement was originally published on The Hollywood Gossip.
The Hollywood Gossip
Joey Chestnut may be the champion of Coney Island, but he was less victorious in court. How will his criminal charge affect this year’s hot dog eating contest?
Mashed – Fast Food, Celebrity Chefs, Grocery, Reviews
Reading Time: 3 minutes
In early March, Britney Spears was arrested after allegedly driving under the influence.
Since that time, she has had the charges reduced and voluntarily entered rehab, not to mention spent some healing time with her sons.
But a new report details what police recorded on the evening of her arrest.
Some of this is worrisome. But it seems that some elements don’t fully match the narrative. Take a look:
PHOTO ONE
On Thursday, May 21, Us Weekly obtained and detailed the March 2026 police report on Britney’s DUI arrest.
Police wrote that on March 4, a little after 9 PM, police responded after an anonymous caller reported a vehicle “traveling at high speeds and swerving.”
An officer observed a vehicle crossing into a neighboring lane before sounding the siren to pull over Britney’s car.
“[The subject] continued to drive in the #2 lane and did not immediately react to my emergency lights,” the officer recorded. “I activated the [police car’s] siren to get the driver’s attention.”
In the vehicle, the police officer found Britney wearing a green striped dress and purple sandals … and a “distinct odor of an alcoholic beverage.”
During the stop, Britney reportedly told the officer that she’d had one champagne mimosa seven hours earlier.
“I could probably drink four bottles of wine and take care of you. I’m an angel,” she allegedly assured the officer.
According to the police report, Britney had taken prescription medications that day. This apparently included 200mg of Lamictal, 40mg of Prozac, and 2.5 mg of Adderall.
Those medications are a mood stabilizer, an antidepressant, and an ADHD med. Pretty normal medications found in the homes of millions of Americans. One container of Adderall in the vehicle was allegedly not her prescription.
She did admit that she had not eaten in about six hours. Her most recent meal had been ice cream, eaten at around 3 PM that day.
PHOTO THREE
[The officer] also observed an empty wine glass in the cup holder between the front driver seat and passenger seat,” the police report included.
According to the same report, a physical check determined that Britney had “red and watery” eyes and dilated pupils.
Britney would go on to pass two chemical breath tests once she arrived at a local precinct.
“I instructed Spears to exit the [car], but she initially refused,” the officer recorded. “Spears related she had been pranked and harassed in the past and did not want to exit.”
According to the officer, Britney “wanted to speak to her lawyer and had the right as a woman not to exit her vehicle.” After about ten minutes of coaxing, however, she did step out.
“I detected the distinct odor of an alcoholic beverage emitting from her breath and person,” the officer reported. “Her speech was rapid and slurred, her gait was unsteady, and she was fidgeting with her fingers.”
The officer claimed that Britney had “drastic mood swings” during the stop, oscillating between “confrontational and agitated to flamboyant.”
She was allegedly uncooperative during attempts at a field sobriety test, complaining that lights hurt her eyes.
Police transported Britney to the CHP Moorpark Office for a Drug Recognition Evaluation. They then transported her to Los Robles Medical Center to have blood drawn.
When she needed to use the restroom, an officer theorized that it was a ploy “to delay the blood draw,” accusing her of becoming “belligerent” in the restroom.
The report announced: “I placed Spears in handcuffs and placed her in the right front seat of the [police vehicle].” It sounds like Britney had a truly terrible evening.
Britney Spears’ DUI Arrest Police Report Revealed! What Really Happened? was originally published on The Hollywood Gossip.
The Hollywood Gossip
Buffalo Trace makes a variety of bourbons, but this one particular bottom-shelf spirit not only belongs on the bottom but should also stay there.
Mashed – Fast Food, Celebrity Chefs, Grocery, Reviews
Reading Time: 2 minutes
Earlier this week, a local radio station in Essex, England announced that King Charles had passed away.
Charles has been battling cancer, of course, and he’s 77 years old, so listeners to the live broadcast likely didn’t question what they were hearing.
Thankfully, the report was erroneous, and two days later, we can confirm that Charles is still very much alive.
So what gives? How did this happen?
Well, like so many baffling blunders in 2026, it sounds like AI may have been at the root of this problem.
“Due to a computer error at our main studio, the Death of a Monarch procedure, which all UK stations hold in readiness while hoping not to require, was accidentally activated on Tuesday afternoon (19 May), mistakenly announcing that HM the King had passed away,” the station said in a statement issued on Wednesday.
“Radio Caroline then fell silent as would be required, which alerted us to restore programming and issue an on-air apology,” the statement continued.
“Caroline has been pleased to broadcast Her Majesty the Queen’s, and now the king’s, Christmas message and we hope to do so for many years to come.
“We apologise to HM the king and to our listeners for any distress caused.”
Needless to say, that’s a pretty big whoopsie.
And while it was clearly an honest mistake, the situation has sparked some interesting conversations about the role of monarchs in the modern world.
Last month, Queen Elizabeth II would have turned 100, and the occasion inspired numerous think pieces about how the world seemed to move on rather quickly following her death.
Elizabeth reigned for over 70 years and was one of the most beloved figures on earth. Charles became king when he was 73 and does not enjoy so sterling a reputation.
While the news of his death may have been greatly exaggerated, the reaction online served as a reminder of his complex legacy and the weakening cultural power of the royal family in the 21st century.
UK Radio Station Reports King Charles’ Death, Promptly Apologizes: What’s … was originally published on The Hollywood Gossip.
The Hollywood Gossip