So who here went to the ballet coronavirus party?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Isn’t she the woman who got all the press way, way long ago (during the LNS/ Smith Point days) for getting Set up by her own grandmother to some old millionaire and then getting engaged on his yacht, all in again, off again. It was a regular item in the Reliable Source back in the day. The entire situation was so gross. Set up by your own grandmother to one of her friends?!!!!

Yes, his name was Joe Robert and he was a financier and philanthropist famous for the "Fight Night" fundraisers. He died of cancer in 2011. She just wanted to married a millionaire. He was 30 years older than her. https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/joe-robert-and-ashley-taylor-during-capitol-files-2006-news-photo/111535577

um he’s quite handsome!

Yes, he wasn't a bad looking guy.
I wonder how Joe Robert got off the hook. He was, according to his obituary, divorced -- and available, at the time.

[Anonymous]

24 pages of slams against this women - some of which are legitimately questioning the wisdom of hosting a party in violation of quarantine BUT nothing about the catering company that agreed to this gig? They had a contract to serve 22 for a party in violation of the health restrictions. I know they were probably desperate for business but that’s highly unprofessional of them.

Did they supply party rounds? Buffet table items? A bar? Nome of that would be wise set up in current times.

She should take full responsibility as party planner, but I’d like to see similar self-accountability from the caterer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's easy to bag on this woman but there are a LOT of people acting irresponsibly. The party host is among the worst of them for sure but the schadenfreude is strong here because she's a 1%er.

Is she though? 5%er, I can see. The in-laws, probably. But I’m not sure about them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's easy to bag on this woman but there are a LOT of people acting irresponsibly. The party host is among the worst of them for sure but the schadenfreude is strong here because she's a 1%er.

Is she though? 5%er, I can see. The in-laws, probably. But I’m not sure about them.

They’re rich. Not wealthy.

[Anonymous]

Wasn't DC under a stay at home order for memorial day weekend? She broke the rules over and over and over! SO selfish. And she is a fool to have those photos up on her instagram.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wow, the cost of the River School is 38K. My DC's Upper School is 39K.

Is it that good?

I thought it was a special needs school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow, the cost of the River School is 38K. My DC's Upper School is 39K.

Is it that good?

I thought it was a special needs school.

You're confusing it with the Lab school nearby, maybe?

[Anonymous]

River is a little school for kids with hearing issues but all the kids benefit from the extra stuff they do. So it’s a bit pricey because of that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's easy to bag on this woman but there are a LOT of people acting irresponsibly. The party host is among the worst of them for sure but the schadenfreude is strong here because she's a 1%er.

Except that she is a properly educated person who should be able to fully understand the directives and she has the means to follow the directives with almost no discomfort. Add to that the fact that she has chosen to position herself as a philanthropist which would generally indicate a person who is concerned about the well being of others. So not only was she and her friends behaving in an entitled, selfish manner but she is clearly not the person she purported to be publicly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's easy to bag on this woman but there are a LOT of people acting irresponsibly. The party host is among the worst of them for sure but the schadenfreude is strong here because she's a 1%er.

Except that she is a properly educated person who should be able to fully understand the directives and she has the means to follow the directives with almost no discomfort. Add to that the fact that she has chosen to position herself as a philanthropist which would generally indicate a person who is concerned about the well being of others. So not only was she and her friends behaving in an entitled, selfish manner but she is clearly not the person she purported to be publicly.

+
Even her apology doesn't fully acknowledge the potential damage she may have caused to the catering company and its employees, to the families and businesses of the guests she sickened, to our city, by seeding a cluster. It's all this vague canned "hurt my friends and family," which actually isn't so relevant here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am always amazed at the attempts of DC women to be “socialites.” This doesn’t exist here.

+100000000000000000000

[Anonymous]

I meant to add, i thought she'd be more attractive as a "socialite" *shrug*

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree. I know many people have hosted socially distanced outdoor cocktails (with no masks),

With 2 hosts, 24 guests, 1 photographer, and catering staff? That sounds a little large for a pandemic.

So 26 (13 couples?) plus staff in the backyard in those photos? Based on some of her silliness posted by others she seems easy to pile on but that doesn’t seem like that many people for the space in the photos. Not sure why they would have all crowded around 3 tables (if it was 8-10 per table)

[Anonymous]

8 people supposedly tested positive after her party! What an epic fail!

[Anonymous]

"I urge you to please, please wear masks when going out and socially distance whenever possible . . . "

Do as I say, not as I do.


https://people.com/human-interest/socialite-ashley-bronczek-apologizes-outdoor-party-covid-19/