Won't you post an open thread on the massive XOXO pwnage for the weekend? It looks like someone tried to hack the site right before the bar and got caught red-handed. A friend of yours nonetheless.

Why talk about XO on ATL? Why not just talk about it on XO? Wouldn't that make more sense?

Until XO gets its ass sued again in federal court, don't expect Lat to write about it.

Wow, anonymous - prolific and now quoted!

Mark my words, the president will cede power for good. This was the plan all along by Dickie C

Is there a lawyers athletic league in Los Angeles.

I kick ass at dodge ball. And that is the only sport I could actually compete in...

/last picked...always

This is the best video I have ever seen in my life. It's sort of law related, right? I mean the judicial system prosecuted these fabulous dancers, right?

http://dlisted.com/node/12891

In the longer version of the article re: Bush's colon blow, it says that Dick took over for "2 hours" during the 2002 presidential probing. Yeah if by "2 hours" you mean 6 years.

The NY Times writes the wedding items. You just provide information. They could easily have made the mistake. Jossip could have at least called the NY Times before they called her a liar on the WORLD WIDE internet.

Wow. Ordinary lawyers as the objects of made up tabloid gossip. I love it. Too bad their pics didn't feature an underwearless couple.

white girls with asian guys, man. wgwag

I agree that the jossip thing was a low blow.

I mean, if you read the piece with a finetooth comb, you can see that there's absolutely no reason to believe that it's anything but the Times' making a typo. Jesus, the BRIDE could have told them it was a mistake.

But all the shitty innuendo on the part of Jossip makes it look like there's a story!

It's just kind of a nasty move.

Jossip's editors should retract that piece. There is simply no basis to accuse this woman of lying or hyping her resume. First, she doesn't need to. Her resume speaks for itself, regardless of whether she finished magna at HLS. Second, NY Times took blame for the mistake. NY Times would not haven taken blame for the mistake if it believed that it had been lied to. It would have simply retracted the erroneous statement and said it wasn't true.

I think this was almost certainly an editing error. Chances are, the bride submitted something to the Times that indicated she graduated "magna cum laude from Harvard College and from Harvard Law School." The bride intended it to mean that her honors applied only to the first degree, but the editor at the Times interpreted it as applying to both.

I actually have the identical degrees and honors as the bride, and remember struggling to make sure my own wedding announcement (not in the Times, alas) was acurrate. I would not be surprised if the bride herself asked for the correction.

Jossip should retract and apologize.

I think this was almost certainly an editing error. Chances are, the bride submitted something to the Times that indicated she graduated "magna cum laude from Harvard College and from Harvard Law School." The bride intended it to mean that her honors applied only to the first degree, but the editor at the Times interpreted it as applying to both.

I actually have the identical degrees and honors as the bride, and remember struggling to make sure my own wedding announcement (not in the Times, alas) was accurate. I would not be surprised if the bride herself asked for the correction.

Jossip should retract and apologize.

You expect high-quality journalism, not to mention a retraction, from a blog called "Jossip"? Heh.

I love how Jossip says that "all we know for sure" is PRECISELY what we don't know for sure. You don't need to read the piece with a fine-toothed comb to see that there's no basis to suspect foul play.

Lat, if you'd like a better example of an NY Times wedding announcement spoiled by meddling kids, peep the correction attached your beloved Tisch wedding from many months back...