11.22.2018

Richie: "I'm praying for Heather and don't know when I would see her but not right now."

https://i.postimg.cc/R9zdT35F/gdsgsfg.png

He's looking more and more like The Crowman from Worzel Gummidge.

Sent from my CLT-L09 using Tapatalk

Well... Sambora was in pretty good mood as usual at that airport in LA I think it's called LAX or whatever
https://i.postimg.cc/J8fcjWpR/csafdfdfs.png

Hmm.. he looks like he's lost weight.

Yes, it's LAX.

He looks like an idiot

Sent from my HTC6525LVW using Tapatalk

Richie looking like a middle-aged housewife and Jon like a 70-year old grandmother. They've both come a long way [emoji38]

Gesendet von meinem Nexus 5X mit Tapatalk

well, I already read they looked like 'old lesbians' years ago but being an old woman isn't an insult at all... unless you're a man :3

I think Richie does look a little like an idiot on those 3 last pictures and JBJ looks really old but he doesn’t look like a woman, you’re over exaggerating.

Taking screen grabs of someone talking can make anyone look like an idiot.

Are you sayin' that we all can be idiots?
https://s14.postimg.cc/5ap6h9x8h/pucca_enojada.gif

those are pictures, no screen grabs

Basically they all are sayin' the same, that it was "His... you know, habits"
and after that there's not recently version of Richie about it

From the DB podcast thread
 

DJ, I've understood the "message" from day one. I'm the resident conspiracy theorist, remember? I put things together and figure them out all day long. I just don't think we should have to. And if you'll reread the excerpt you quoted from my post, you may see another key point it seems you overlooked, in your rush to imply that I’m too dense to get the point David is making (badly). Hint: It’s in bold print.

The question on the table, that has been on the table since April 2, 2013, isn’t "You think he'll ever be back?" or "Is he still partying?” The question is “Why didn’t Richie show up in Calgary?” or phrased another way, “Why did Richie bail (walk out, jump ship) in the middle of a tour?” That’s the question David didn’t touch on; and the one that nobody is answering explicitly. If Jon and David know, for a fact, that what they’re insinuating is true, then why don't they just say it - in a way that can’t be construed to mean something different (e.g., habits, issues, demons), and that doesn’t require “figuring out” or reading between the lines, or connecting abstract statements like the ones David made? That's my point; and it has nothing to do with not being able to figure out what they mean or being in denial about it.

But hey, if you still want to play that game, let's do it. I'll go first. Did you happen to notice that there was more to David's response when he "answered" the partying question? Because you didn't quote what he said after “addicts don’t get better on their own..."

Listen to what he’s saying after Delray interjects, “Right… right…”

https://youtu.be/1RJ5Ak17TY4?t=4027 (at 1:07:09)

The full quote would actually read like this:

Delray: Is he still partying?
David: Addicts don’t get better on their own. I don’t really… We haven’t really talked in years.

Now, if I wanted to put things together or read between the lines, I could make a reasonable argument that the word David cut off there was “know”; as in “I don’t really know [if Richie is still partying]. We haven’t really talked in years.”

You probably don’t like that interpretation because it doesn't fit as well with your conclusions. It also might indicate that Richie wasn't as drunk as some people think he was at the HoF, since surely David would have noticed that and could have answered in the affirmative. It might make one question if David and Jon have been talking out of their asses about what’s been going on with Richie and about why he didn’t show up in Calgary. I'm not saying they are; but it's still a valid question since, up until the HoF, they have both repeatedly said, in some form or another, “We haven’t talked with him since Calgary.” So how do they know? Capt Jovi has a theory that maybe they heard it from someone who's still in touch with both the band and Richie. But that still wouldn't be first-hand knowledge, would it? It's pushing a point, I admit; but it shows that there are pieces of the puzzle that just don't fit when you try to "put things together".

That’s the problem when people have to fill in the blanks; everybody reaches his or her own conclusions. Of course, the US legal system recognizes that risk, and that’s why you don’t need to worry if I'm called for jury duty. A juror would never have the chance to “put this together and figure it out.” The questions you quoted would be disallowed as immaterial and irrelevant, or calling for speculation. The answers would be stricken from the record as non-responsive; and if the witness continued to respond with abstract statements to avoid answering the question, he or she could eventually be held in contempt of court.

My job, as juror, would be a cakewalk.;)

Yeah they tend to go in phases. It's almost like they decide at the beginning of each new round of interviews. ("Okay, everybody, this time we're gonna call it _____.") The first round of promos it was "issues", the 2nd it was "demons", this last round was "habits". Can't wait to see what they come up for the EU promotions. ;)

I just thought it was strange how everybody seemed to think David clarified so much more in the podcast, when he didn't really say anything about Richie that hadn't already been said. Other than, as I said, to tell some of the ways he "stepped up" in the studio.

(Still trying to figure out how he managed to get in between Shanks and Jon, y'know, joined at the hip as they were. Had to be a tight squeeze!) :roll: :)

FFS Jackie. I'm not reading that wall of words.

Ha, that the case or not, I have to admit it is entertaining, lol.


I'm already sick of their instagrams (let alone Phil X one), in the meantime JBJ doesn't post a thing... jajaj


Jajajajaj, my posible answers -_-:
I don’t really: talked with him in years = I don’t know
I don’t really: wanna talk about it = I can’t talk
JBJ probably would go like, I don't really: have the time!!! = lol

jeez...It's hardly a mammoth post. I don't get people that post their side of the story and then refuse to read the responding post. Just goes to show that they are only interested in one side of the story...their own....

In the past Richies problems with alcohol and drugs didn't hinder him of performing.
In my point of view at his last show he was in perfect form. ().

Maybe he had some problems at this time but he wouldn't have a problem performing those songs under some influence.
So this talking that his habits hindered him from coming to work are completely false when you know that he performed a whole tour under painkillers and was drunk the whole time and Jon didn't seem to have a problem with it.

Readers' Digest Version: Okay. :)
 

I'm not surprised. But that's the beauty of the written word; you can respond, or ignore, at will. No worries. :)

(Hey, maybe in my next life, I'll be able to "figure out" how to write more concisely.)

Compared to a lot of my posts, it's actually pretty short! :)

The one she responded to, initiallly, was almost twice as long.

But I figured out a long time ago that, usually, if people don't want to read a post, they just don't. Nobody will ever know anyway. If they have to post, just to tell me they aren't going to read it because it's too long, chances are they already have; and it's more about what I said in the 'long' post that they'd rather not deal with. But that's okay, too; it's a personal choice.

As you say, it could be they're just interested in one side of the story. Or it could be that their minds are made up, and they don't want to be confused by facts. ;)

Those work, too. "Know" was just where my mind went first. :)

Oh JackieBlue, you’re telling us now that We don’t know if he is still partying
then I guess I will go again with that "Time judges everything."
-_-

Not me, lady. I don't know what "we" know. I can only speak for myself; and all I got is theories. You'll have to check with DJ and David to find out what we know and don't know. They're the ones connecting sound bites to come up with answers. (Correction: with the answer.) ;)

Why I would trust in a DJ???
https://omny.fm/shows/triple-m-rock-...australian-tou

No way... I don't trust in anybody lol



and just in case, I know you meant DestinationJovi = DJ
but you know how I am with my posts...
I can't help it sometimes, okay I will shut up now

Interesting comments by Jon saying Richie couldn't get "it" together for the 80 shows after his departure..

Interestingly, I stumbled across an interview from JBJ with the German Spiegel Online magazine from 2016 the other day and he responded to that topic in a more direct way than he usually did:

Q: This is the first Bon Jovi album without guitarist Richie Sambora. Did you really fire your longtime partner?
JBJ: That's a great misconception. And I had become the fans' bogeyman because of that. Nobody fired Richie. He just didn't show up for work anymore. He had to make a drug withdrawal - and never returned to the band again. I haven't heard from Richie in three and a half years and finally replaced him because we need to continue with Bon Jovi. I hope that Richie will be able to get away from drugs and alcohol someday.

http://www.spiegel.de/einestages/jon...a-1119514.html

Wow. Spiegel is a 100% reliable source; it is a quality newspaper, so it is extremely unlikely that the quote was just made up. Didn't he also say something to that effect in another interview? Like gesturing that he drank or did drugs? I remember it also being a very well regarded publication, but NOT the American version.

Jon, Tico and David..... where is phil?

What would he have to say about Richie's departure?

Also... if this IS true, I had to think about Richie's "maybe in a couple of months I'll re-join the tour" statement. What was the plan? To spend a couple of weeks in Vegas (so to speak) and then clean up, except he never cleaned up (not in time at least)?

Richie was in perfect form in 2013 and was looking and playing great. Everyone was saying how good he is in opposite to Jon who stood by the mic the whole time.
To promote THINFS Jon came up with a story that changed every time.
Fact is that Richie was in great shape in the first leg and he wasn't in Calgary. When i remember correctly Richie even tweeted a few days before the show that now his holiday is going to end or so and he is going back to the tour.
There is nothing that indicates that he had some sort of substance abuse problem where he wasn't able to perform. It must be something else between Jon and Richie.

You really have no idea how drugs work, do you? Billy Idol was a heavy drug addict for YEARS, and he always was in top shape.

What I mean is that he was able to perform. Jon didn't care 2005/2006 and in 2010 about Richies drug problem as long as he was performing.
Whatever problem Richie had he would have been able to perform in Calgary. So in my opinion a drug problem is not an explanation.

The point is that, even if Richie was using or drinking or whatever he was still performing well, better than well in fact! If he'd been using for years and functioning perfectly well, how come he suddenly stopped being able to do that, pretty much over night.

He was on holiday with his daughter having a great time and then suddenly he is unable to perform!? Did he completely **** himself up on his way back from the holiday!? Seems unlikely. I also think there is more to it, and while the substance abuse was there, Jon is using that as an excuse, a deflection if you like...

As I've said a million times, Bon Jovi are a band that have never aired their dirty laundry in public. Why do people suddenly think that they are telling us the whole story here....

the fact that it's always Jon, David and Tico at these things pretty much confirms to me that the whole "band" thing is still bull. It's those 3 guys and the rest are just hired hands, no matter what the promo pics show....

Also, it really doesn't sound as if Jon has any intention of writing with Phil, and certainly still hasn't at this point, which is disappointing. Phil's input would have really made the next record more interesting to me...instead it will just be more of the same...

Or his drug use worsened and he missed a flight or whatever else.

Bon Jovi are REALLY far from the sleazy rock & roll band that would appreciate the image boost a made up drug story would bring. Jon's story makes way more sense than Richie's "I wanted to see my daughter" angle, which ammounted to a whole lot of nothing even early on. Like Thinny said - they were NOT a fan of having their dirty laundry out in the public. Why would they MAKE this up?

It's not made up, we all know that Richie has had issues with that, and his various stints in rehab are public knowledge, so they are not telling us anything that we don't already know. Mark my words, there is much more to this story....

Not saying this is the full truth because I think it definitely isn't. But while in 2007 it was obvious to everyone that Richie had fallen off the wagon, in 2011 he played the first US leg without anyone here noticing anything being wrong with him. About a month later it was all of a sudden announced he was going back into rehab. So it's hard to tell that from the shows before sometimes.

I agree with richiefan95 and Thinny: it wasn't about performing. Richie was super productive and looked healthy for almost 2 years right up to Calgary, and again right afterwards, well into 2014. IF substance abuse was the reason, then Richie getting too ****ed up to get on a plane is only way that would make sense.

Why do people insist on ignoring Richie's initial statements (which had nothing to do with Ava); and totally disregard the fact that immediately after Jon first hinted at rehab, both he and Richie denied that alcohol and/or drugs had anything to do with Richie's departure?

For the umpteenth time, the first reason Richie gave was that he and Jon weren't "happening"; and when he was asked what the obstacles were, he replied that it wasn't his place to say, that band business should stay in the band, so that's all he was going to say. That's about as close as you can get to saying there was friction between him and Jon, without airing the band's dirty laundry.

Ava wasn't given as a reason until November 2013, iirc; about the same time that Richie said there was no longer any malice between him and Jon. Even then, it was clear that Ava was a smokescreen, a convenient explanation that would keep people from looking too hard for any other explanations that might involve Jon/BJ.

IMO, Jon and David are doing the same thing. Knowing that Richie's history is common knowledge, his addiction is a good smokescreen, a convenient explanation people can readily accept, to keep them from looking for any other reasons that might lead to Jon or the band.

I agree with you that Jon wouldn't make up something to give the band a grittier image; but I don't think he'd balk at muddying the waters with innuendo, true or false, if he believes it would protect the brand. They don't air the band's dirty laundry, but Jon has never had a problem airing anybody's personal laundry as long as he comes across as the good guy.

For example?

I mean, the whole Burning Bridges and This House is Not For Sale era is dirty laundry being aired in public. Football team, record deal and all that.

That's not the band's dirty laundry between members though. The point was the brotherhood between them, if we're including record labels and outside issues then they've been doing that for years.