Controversial S#!T

Reesa Teesa's ex is telling his side of a viral TikTok saga that's taken the internet by storm -- and while he's been painted one way, he's got a different story ... which might end in court.

Jerome McCoy -- who goes by "Legion" on Reesa's now-infamous 'Who TF Did I Marry?' video series, which is at least 50 parts deep at this point -- tells TMZ ... everything Reesa, whose real name is Teresa Johnson, declared about him in her lengthy video series is false.

While Reesa made many allegations against Legion -- including claims that he fibbed about his career, family and wealth, etc. -- he's hitting back with accusations of his own.

Legion claims he and Reesa were having trust issues at one point -- and goes on to claim she attempted to reconcile with him while allegedly threatening to "expose" him if he did not comply ... and he suggests him not budging is why this is all coming out.

It goes without saying ... Reesa's ex is feeling the backlash of the TikToks going viral and claims it's hurting his job in PR -- which he says he does for a hospital. Amid all this attention, Legion tells us he met with attorneys Monday at work to discuss taking legal action against Reesa -- on its face, it seems his company believes they mighta been damaged by her storytelling. Legion says he's supportive of any moves they might make.

Unclear if he's considering private counsel for himself at this point ... but he's certainly mulling his options right now. Bottom line ... Legion tells us the way he's been portrayed by Reesa is NOT who he is at all -- and he feels he's been wronged by the tale she's told.

There's no denying that Reesa's videos have been a huge hit online ... with one video garnering over 11 million views on TikTok. Reesa's account also boasts nearly 32M likes.

Actress Danielle Pinnock -- from the TV show 'Ghosts' -- has already pitched herself to play Reesa if the viral saga ever gets a small screen adaptation ... and something tells us this thing might just get made into a movie or show down the line. Indeed, it's that wild.

2/27 -- 8:10 AM PT -- Stevie J tells TMZ ... "These allegations are false and my lawyer will be handling this going forward."

7:23 PM PT -- A rep for Justin Combs tells TMZ ... "Justin Combs categorically denies these absurd allegations. They are all lies! This is a a clear example of a desperate person taking desperate measures in hopes of a pay day. There will be legal consequences for ALL defamatory statements made about the Combs family."

4:40 PM PT -- Diddy's attorney, Shawn Holley, tells TMZ ... "Lil Rod is nothing more than a liar who filed a $30 million lawsuit shamelessly looking for an undeserved payday. His reckless name-dropping about events that are pure fiction and simply did not happen is nothing more than a transparent attempt to garner headlines."

She adds, "We have overwhelming, indisputable proof that his claims are complete lies. Our attempts to share this proof with Mr. Jones’ attorney, Tyrone Blackburn, have been ignored, as Mr. Blackburn refuses to return our calls. We will address these outlandish allegations in court and take all appropriate action against those who make them."

Diddy has just been sued by a man claiming the mogul sexually assaulted him.

In legal docs, obtained by TMZ, Rodney Jones, a former producer and videographer for the mogul, claims he was repeatedly sexually assaulted by Diddy and subjected to unwanted advances by associates of Diddy at his direction.

Jones claims Diddy, among other thing, would grope Jones' genitals and touch his anus. Jones goes on to allege Diddy would parade around naked in front of Jones.

Jones believes Diddy was trying to groom him into having sex. He says Diddy would downplay the alleged assaults as "horseplay." Jones goes on to allege Diddy forced him to watch a video involving Stevie J having sex with another man. Jones included a screen grab of the video.

There are more allegations ... he says a female cousin of Diddy's girlfriend, Yung Miami, also sexually assaulted him, allegedly attempting to have sex with him in front of Diddy and members of his staff.

And there's more ... Jones says Diddy brought prostitutes to his house in Miami and on one occasion, Jones says he was present at the house and was drugged and possibly raped.

He also alleges, at several parties, Diddy intentionally served women bottles of his tequila and vodka brands laced with drugs.

There are more tawdry allegations, including bringing underage girls to Diddy's home and providing them with alcohol.

Jones claims Diddy directed Stevie J and his son Justin Combs to recruit prostitutes -- and in Justin's case, he was instructed to find underaged girls to attend the parties.

Jones claims Diddy introduced him to Cuba Gooding Jr. on Diddy's yacht and Cuba allegedly began "touching, groping, and fondling Mr. Jones's legs, his upper inner thighs near his groin, the small of his back near his buttocks and his shoulders."

There are also allegations of a shooting, where Jones says Diddy and his son Justin got into a heated argument at an L.A. recording studio. Jones says gunfire erupted and a man named G was hit and bleeding profusely from his stomach.

Jones says Diddy told him to lie to cops and say G was shot in a drive-by.

It's worth noting, LAPD investigated the shooting and reportedly found the victim had been shot outside the studio during a robbery, and merely ran into the studio while still bleeding.

In addition to Diddy, Jones is suing Justin, other employees as well as various record execs, and according to the docs ... he's seeking at least $30 million in damages.

We reached out to Diddy's rep, as well as reps for Cuba and Stevie J ... so far, no word back. NBC News first reported the lawsuit.

Chris Burke, who has Down Syndrome, is defending Shane Gillis over the comedian's polarizing monologue on "Saturday Night Live" ... he's got no issues with Shane making Down Syndrome jokes.

The "Life Goes On" star tells TMZ ... people with Down Syndrome are just like everybody else and shouldn't be excluded from being joked about by comedians.

Chris, the first actor with Down Syndrome to star in a TV series, says it would actually be more offensive for comedians to exclude people with Down Syndrome from being the subjects of jokes.

Shane spent the majority of his 8-minute monologue poking fun at his family ... including a niece who has Down Syndrome ... and he mostly glossed over the 2019 scandal that got him fired from 'SNL.'

Chris says folks shouldn't pass judgment on Shane here because no one knows how he dealt and coped with having a niece with Down Syndrome. As a result, Chris feels Shane isn't making these jokes out of ignorance.

In fact, Shane's jokes kinda jibe with what Chris is saying.

While some people were naturally turned off by Shane, Chris sees some positives.

The Kelly Rowland dust is just now settling -- but now, Joe Manganiello's girlfriend posted a shot from behind the scenes at 'Today,' including what may be one of the rooms Kelly got pissed about.

Here's a look inside one of the backstage rooms on the set of "Today" ... which Caitlin O'Connor posted on her social media account Monday showing support at Joe's appearance-- this as Joe was plugging his new "Deal or No Deal Island" show, on which he's the host.

Anyway ... here's a glimpse of what 'Today' looks like behind the scenes for talent and friends of talent. We're told this is a makeup room there -- so, not necessarily a dressing room, it seems, but probably pretty close. That jibes with what we've heard about these rooms ... namely, they kinda suck -- which is proven here in the bare-bones environment COC's in.

Worth noting ... we're told Joe was in a different room than the one Caitlin posted from -- so, unclear if it was worse or better than this. Based on what we've heard about Kelly's walk-out, it probably ain't much better ... and that's saying something based on what we see here.

Based on Caitlin's photos, the makeup room doesn't look all that glamorous ... and it comes off as cramped. There's a chair, bulletin board, and some storage units and that seems to be it, at least going off what's in the frame.

As you know, the 'Today' makeup and dressing rooms are under the microscope because Kelly stormed off the set earlier this month, a result of what her team says were issues and complaints with her dressing room.

Kelly has pretty much refused to talk about the incident, which is why folks are still interested in what went down.

Bethenny Frankel's already ripped Kelly for being a drama queen ... she says it's no secret the dressing rooms at 'Today' aren't super glamorous, and she showed them off in an earlier video. According to Bethenny -- this is something that comes with working on 'Today.'

Now, we're getting a different angle from Joe's GF ... and it doesn't look all that better, TBH.

Jussie Smollett doesn't understand the law, and he's barking up the wrong tree with the Illinois Supreme Court ... at least that's how the special prosecutor views the actor's appeal.

Special prosecutor Dan Webb -- who convicted Jussie for lying to cops about the hate crime hoax -- is responding to Jussie's motion to have the IL Supreme Court review his case and overturn the conviction ... and says JS's claim he had an agreement in place to avoid prosecution simply doesn't hold water.

As we reported, Jussie claims he struck a deal with the Cook County State's Attorney's Office -- he would do volunteer community service and forfeit his bond, and in return, prosecutors would drop the charges.

However, Webb says that "agreement" was "imaginary" on Smollett's part, and it did not insulate him from facing charges at a later date. Webb also shoots down Jussie's claim he's a victim of double jeopardy -- pointing out the legal term doesn't apply in this case.

In docs, obtained by TMZ, the special prosecutor says protection from double jeopardy is "triggered only after the accused has been subjected to the hazards of trial and possible conviction."

Webb says the initial charges were dropped a mere 12 days after Jussie was arraigned ... so, long before there was a jury impaneled, any witnesses sworn in or evidence produced.

Brandi Glanville is laying into Andy Cohen for his apology over her sexual harassment claims -- saying he hasn't really made it right with the one person who matters ... her!

The ex-'Real Housewives' star hopped on X Monday to slam the Bravo honcho -- who oversees all things 'Housewives -- over his tweet last week that addressed her allegations of once sending her an inappropriate video ... which he characterized as just a joke.

She wrote ... "I have not received a personal apology from anyone. I saw an apology that Andy posted TO HIS FANS for his mistreatment of me and inappropriateness."

You'll recall ... last week we revealed Brandi's lawyers had sent a demand letter to NBC Universal threatening a lawsuit on her behalf after claiming they mistreated her. In the doc, Brandi made some serious claims against Andy ... saying he was straight-up boasting about plans to hook up with another Bravo star in 2022 while inviting her to watch the whole thing via FaceTime.

Andy promptly responded to Brandi's claims ... writing on X it was a joke that she'd blown out of proportion. He even stated Brandi's initial response seemed like she was in on the joke, but he still went on to say sorry for the whole thing being inappropriate.

Meanwhile, sources with direct knowledge tell TMZ that Brandi's attacks against Andy seem to be coming out of the blue -- as she hadn't said anything for 2 whole years. We're told that it was only when she found herself caught up in harassment accusations from Caroline Manzo that she seems to have flipped the script on Andy ... almost out of nowhere.

We're told there are many in the Bravo world who feel like Brandi's whole case against Andy is a personal vendetta ... especially since not too long ago she was singing his praises in public interviews. That's the feeling by some, anyway.

Of course, the drama all goes back to the infamous "Girls Trip: Morocco" debacle ... which was the primary basis of Brandi's demand letter written up by Mark Geragos and Bryan Freedman -- some of Hollywood's biggest hotshot lawyers.

Brandi's lawyers didn't hold back ... spelling out exactly why she was considering taking legal action -- saying she's been nothing but loyal to NBCU, but in return, claiming all she's received in return is mistreatment.

El drama de Kanye West con Adidas está lejos de terminar, a pesar de que recientemente publicó una foto con su CEO Bjorn Gulden haciendo parecer que la "guerra fría" se había acabado, pero no es así, y ahora acusa a la compañía de "violación creativa".

El lunes, en lugar de celebrar que su álbum "Vultures 1" se mantuvo en el número 1 por segunda semana consecutiva, Ye criticó a Adidas por vender colores de sus populares zapatillas Yeezy que él nunca aprobó, y afirmó que estaba usando cláusulas contractuales por haber "violado a un artista... a uno de los artistas favoritos de todos ustedes", refiriéndose claramente a sí mismo.

Adidas está promocionando agresivamente las Yeezy Boosts en un nuevo tono "gris acero" y Ye dice que es tan falso como un billete de 3 dólares.

Ye dice que Adidas está utilizando lagunas legales y un lenguaje confuso para hacer una jugarreta sin su consentimiento, además de demandarle por 250 millones de dólares.

Y Ye le pide a sus verdaderos fans que le den la espalda a la marca.

Kanye West's beef with Adidas is far from finished, despite the fact he recently posted a shot with its CEO Bjorn Gulden -- making it seem like the cold war had thawed, but now he's accusing the company of creative "rape."

On Monday, instead of celebrating his "Vultures 1" album staying at No. 1 for the 2nd straight week, Ye called out Adidas for selling colors of his popular Yeezy sneakers that he never approved, and claiming it was using contract clauses to "rape an artist, one of y'all's favorite artists" -- clearly referring to himself.

Adidas is aggressively promoting the Yeezy Boosts in a new "steel grey" shade which Ye says is as fake as a $3 dollar bill.

Ye says Adidas is using legal loopholes and muddled language to pull a fast one without his consent, in addition to suing him for $250 million.

And Ye is calling for his true fans to turn their back on the brand.

"Mary Poppins" tendrá una nueva mirada en 2024 al otro lado del charco. Su clasificación por edades ha sido aumentada porque contiene lenguaje discriminatorio que no es apropiado para todos los públicos.

Si bien es probable que nunca hayas notado el término ofensivo en la película... la Junta Británica de Clasificación Cinematográfica -comúnmente conocida como la BBFC- está llamando la atención sobre el uso de la frase "hotentotes", ya que se dice que es inadecuado para los jóvenes.

Puede que aquí en Estados Unidos nos suene extraño, pero ese término tiene su historia en Gran Bretaña. Se trata de una frase antigua que se ha considerado muy ofensiva desde el punto de vista racial y que fue utilizada en su día por los colonizadores europeos en África, concretamente en relación con los khoikhoi, un grupo indígena del suroeste de África.

Se cree que el término "hotentotes" surgió como imitación su lengua y hoy es una palabra antigua con carga racial que ya no se utiliza y sin embargo, está en "Mary Poppins".

En cuanto a cuándo se utiliza la frase insensible en la querida película de Disney... ocurre durante uno de los momentos más icónicos de la película, el número "Step in Time", protagonizado por Dick Van Dyke, el deshollinador (Bert), cuando todos los chicos tienen hollín negro cubriendo sus caras.

Esto ocurre cuando Bert y su banda de deshollinadores irrumpen en un baile en la azotea. El excéntrico vecino de la familia Banks, el almirante Boom (Reginald Owen) -que cree que todavía está al mando de un barco de la marina- declara: "Estamos siendo atacados por hotentotes".

El Almirante Bloom de Owen también dice el término al principio de la película, cuando pregunta a los niños Banks... si van a "luchar contra los Hotentotes". Recuerde, esta película salió en la década de 1960, era una época diferente.

El cambio en la clasificación por edades es de esperar que ayude a los padres preocupados de exponer a sus hijos a "lenguaje o comportamiento discriminatorio", que podría repetirse involuntariamente.

"Mary Poppins" is getting a fresh look in 2024 across the pond -- its age rating has been raised because it features discriminatory language ... which ain't appropriate for all audiences.

While you probably may have never noticed the offensive term in the live-action flick ... the British Board of Film Classification -- commonly referred to as the BBFC -- is calling out the film's use of the phrase "Hottentots," as it's said to be unsuitable for youngsters.

It may sound like gibberish to us here in the States -- but that term has history there in Britain. It's a dated phrase that's been deemed too racially offensive ... and was used way back in the day by European colonizers in Africa -- specifically as it pertains to the Khoikhoi, an indigenous group from Southwestern Africa.

It's believed the term "Hottentots" came about as an imitation of the group's language, which featured clicks ... and these days, it's an old-timey racially charged word that isn't really used anymore. And yet, it's in "Mary Poppins."

As for when the insensitive phrase is used in the beloved Disney movie ... it occurs during one of the film's more iconic moments -- the "Step in Time" number led by Dick Van Dyke's Bert, the chimney sweep ... when all the guys have black soot covering their faces.

Specifically, when Bert and his band of chimney sweeps break into a rooftop dance ... the Banks family's eccentric neighbor, Admiral Boom (Reginald Owen) -- who thinks he's still commanding a naval ship -- declares, "We're being attacked by Hottentots."

Owen's Admiral Bloom also says the term at the start of the film, when he asks the Banks children ... if they're "going to fight the Hottentots." Remember, this flick came out in the 1960s ... so even then, it was a different time.

The shift in age rating will hopefully help concerned parents from exposing their children to "discriminatory language or behavior," which could be unintentionally repeated.

It went from being rated U (their version of rated-G) to PG ... so, there ya go!

Donald Trump dice que no le lanzaría un salvavidas de inmigración al Príncipe Harry si fuera elegido Presidente de nuevo, sugiriendo que sería abandonado a su suerte y tal vez deportado.

El polémico candidato habló con el Daily Express -un medio del Reino Unido- el fin de semana en el evento CPAC en Maryland y aclaró que no le gusta el duque de Sussex, y muy claramente dijo que el estatus migratorio de Harry podría estar bajo escrutinio.

Trump dice: "Yo no lo protegería. Ha traicionado a la Reina y eso es imperdonable. Estaría solo si dependiera de mí".

Terminó criticando a la administración de Biden por lo que él caracteriza como blanda en general -más sobre eso en breve- añadiendo: "Creo que han sido demasiado permisivos con él después de lo que ha hecho".

Ahora, lo que Trump parece estar aludiendo aquí es esta batalla del Departamento de Seguridad Nacional en la que el Príncipe está involucrado indirectamente. Un grupo de vigilancia ha demandado al gobierno federal en un intento de obtener documentos de los papeles de inmigración de Harry y solicitud de su visado.

Como usted probablemente sabe, el hombre todavía no es un ciudadano de EE.UU. y el año pasado, confesó en sus memorias que había consumido una serie de drogas antes de venir al país.

El grupo de vigilancia dice que esto es una clara admisión de que viola el protocolo de entrada de DHS y le están exigiendo la agencia que posee esos papeles que lo demuestre, pero la Seguridad Nacional está poniendo resistencia, argumentando que Harry tiene derecho a la privacidad. También dicen que podría haber sido mentira y esta "confesión" en el libro no equivale a una declaración bajo juramento.

Lo que Trump está dando a entender, al parecer, es que el DHS bajo su vigilancia sería mucho más firme, lo que podría -en teoría- terminar con el príncipe siendo expulsado de los EE.UU.

The Air Force member who set himself on fire outside the Israeli Embassy in D.C. in protest against Israel has died ... and video of the horrific incident has now surfaced.

Aaron Bushnell, a 25-year-old from San Antonio, was identified by the Metropolitan Police Department as the man who set himself ablaze Sunday ... and he actually live streamed the whole thing himself on Twitch just before 1 PM ET, which you can watch here -- but brace yourself, it's harrowing, to say the least.

It's a chilling image ... you can see Bushnell casually walking up to the gates of the Israeli Embassy, talking straight to the camera, saying he won't be complicit in genocide anymore. He adds how whatever protest he's about to engage in is nothing compared to what Palestinians have been going through at the hands of their colonizers.

He then positions his camera on the ground, douses himself in accelerant, and ignites the flames ... all while yelling, "Free Palestine!!"

Bushnell was extinguished by the United States Secret Service and was rushed to the hospital with his life-threatening injuries -- and we all now know he didn't make it.

The Air Force said in a statement Monday: "The individual involved in yesterday's incident succumbed to his injuries and passed away last night."

On top of everything else, the Metropolitan Police Department's bomb squad got called in to check out a suspicious vehicle in the area. Thankfully, they determined that the vehicle didn't contain any hazardous material.

The massive protest against the conflict between Israel and Hamas kicked off when Hamas agents attacked a music festival -- killing hundreds and taking more hostage on October 7, 2023.

Jerry Seinfeld abandonó el discurso anual sobre el Estado de la Judería Mundial el domingo por la noche en Nueva York ante manifestantes antiisraelíes que le acusaban de apoyar el genocidio... pero no pareció inmutarse.

Échale un vistazo al video, un coro de personas cantan, "partidario del genocidio, que apoya el genocidio", al ver al comediante fuera de la sede de Manhattan después del evento que contó con el columnista Bari Weiss, fundador de The Free Press.

Como se puede ver, Jerry está muy tranquilo, incluso expuesto a toda la rabia. Esboza una sonrisa y saluda con la mano antes de meterse despreocupadamente en la parte trasera de un todoterreno negro rodeado de agentes de la policía de Nueva York.

Incluso después de que Jerry se fue, los manifestantes seguían gritando: "Jódanse, apoyan el genocidio".

Parece que todo el alboroto contra Jerry se debió a su apoyo a la oradora principal del evento, Weiss, conocida por su firme apoyo a Israel.

Weiss ha sido muy criticada por criticar a Refaat Alareer, un profesor y poeta palestino que perdió la vida trágicamente en un ataque aéreo israelí en diciembre.

Pero, volviendo a la manifestación ante el 92Y, en el Upper East Side de Nueva York... no tuvo precisamente mucha convocatoria. La policía se presentó y terminó arrestando a dos manifestantes.

Donald Trump says he wouldn't throw Prince Harry an immigration lifeline if he was elected President again -- suggesting he'd be left to fend for himself ... and maybe get deported.

The ex-Pres spoke with the Daily Express -- a UK publication -- over the weekend at the CPAC event in Maryland ... and he made no bones about the fact that he doesn't like the Duke of Sussex, and very clearly said Harry's immigration status might come under scrutiny.

Don says, "I wouldn’t protect him. He betrayed the Queen. That’s unforgivable. He would be on his own if it was down to me."

He finished that sentiment by slamming the Biden administration for what he characterizes as going easy on Harry as it pertains to DHS controversy -- more on that in a bit -- by adding, "I think they have been too gracious to him after what he has done."

Now, what Trump seems to be alluding to here is this Dept. of Homeland Security battle that the Prince is involved in indirectly -- namely, a watchdog group suing the federal government in an attempt to obtain docs from Harry's immigration papers/application for his visa.

As you're probably well aware, the guy ain't a U.S. citizen yet -- and last year, he confessed in his memoir that he'd done a number of drugs before coming on over to the States.

The watchdog group says this is a clear admission that violates DHS entry protocol and they're demanding the agency fork those papers over to prove it -- but Homeland Security is putting up a fight, arguing Harry has a right to privacy. They also say he might've been BS'ing ... and this "confession" in the book doesn't amount to a statement under oath.

What Trump's implying here, it seems, is that the DHS under his watch would let the chips fall where they may ... which could, theoretically, end with PH getting kicked outta the U.S.

La política sobre bolsos de Taylor Swift en Australia es bastante notable en comparación con la de Estados Unidos: sus fans pueden entrar sin tener que mostrar visiblemente lo que llevan dentro... y el motivo son leyes sobre armas más firmes.

La gente ha estado reaccionando al hecho de que todos los australianos que van a los conciertos de Taylor en el último par de semanas han estado paseando en los estadios con bolsos regulares colgando de sus hombros, y la razón por la que esto llama la atención es porque Estados Unidos es muy diferente.

Echa un vistazo por ti mismo, estas fotos han despertado una conversación sobre el contraste entre las leyes de armas de Australia y los EE.UU.

El hecho es que estos jóvenes son capaces de entrar con bolsas regulares porque sus leyes nacionales en torno a las armas de fuego son muy diferentes en comparación a EE.UU. Puedes tener un arma en Australia, pero tienes que pasar por un montón de pruebas para obtener una, y el porte oculto no existe. Las armas semiautomáticas también están completamente prohibidas.

Compara eso con las fotos de las Swifties americanas que asistieron a sus conciertos de "Eras" el año pasado y verás, tenían que llevar bolsas transparentes que dejaban al descubierto todo lo que llevaban dentro.

Casi nadie piensa que un fan de Taylor Swift pueda llevar algo peligroso a uno de sus conciertos, pero la verdad es que en Estados Unidos nunca se sabe. Esa es la realidad hoy en día.

Australia adoptó leyes de control de armas más estrictas a mediados de los 90, tras un terrible tiroteo masivo que se cobró más de 35 vidas e hirió a muchas otras. Desde entonces, no ha habido muchos tiroteos.

Hay otras cosas en Australia que se han vuelto más estrictas, lo cual ha llevado a algunos pensar que el país se está volviendo un poco rígido, pero al final del día, están sufriendo menos tiroteos que nosotros.

Jerry Seinfeld exited the annual State of the World Jewry address Sunday evening in NYC to anti-Israel protesters accusing him of supporting genocide ... but he didn't seem too fazed.

Check out the video ... a chorus of people chant, "Genocide supporter, you support genocide," upon seeing the comedian outside the Manhattan venue following the event that featured NYT columnist Bari Weiss, founder of The Free Press.

As you can see, Jerry's as cool as a cucumber, even in the face of all that rage. He flashes a smile and gives a little wave before casually hopping into the back of a black SUV surrounded by NYPD officers.

Even after Jerry was long gone, those protesters were still going strong, chanting, "F*** you, you support genocide."

It looks like the whole uproar against Jerry was due to his support for the event's main speaker, Weiss, who's known for her staunch support of Israel.

Weiss has caught some serious heat for criticizing Refaat Alareer, a Palestinian professor and poet before he tragically lost his life in an Israeli airstrike in December.

But, back to the rally outside the 92Y on NYC's Upper East Side ... it didn't exactly have staying power. The cops showed up and ended up arresting 2 protesters.