We all know Tameka Raymond is not the type to back down so it should come as no surprise that the ex-wife of Usher is planning to file an appeal to the custody ruling handed down Friday in which Usher was granted primary custody of the former couple’s two sons, Usher V and Naviyd. What may be a little surprising though is the justification for the appeal. When Tameka started tweeting about how “money can buy many things” after the ruling, many assumed she was talking about Usher’s money, but Tameka seems to think Usher’s lawyer’s cash may have played a part in the custody outcome as well. As our favorite gossip site tells it:

“[S]ources close to Tameka tell TMZ, she feels the ruling was unfair. We’re told Tameka recently found out that Usher’s lawyer’s law firm threw an election fundraiser back in 2008 for the judge who presided over the trial … and she feels that connection may have influenced the ruling.

“According to the campaign contribution report for Judge Lane, the law firm that represented Usher raised $1,278 for Lane in March 2008.

“Sources tell us … Tameka is baffled by the decision because she argued in court that Usher is constantly on the road, where as she has the more stable schedule … thus it makes no sense to give him primary custody.

Being real, $1,200 isn’t a whole lot of money but it does show the law firm that represented Usher supports Judge Lane, meaning the ruling could be proof of a little “you scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours” agreement between the parties. It’s not as though the judge didn’t have plenty of other things to base her ruling on though, considering some of the petty allegations thrown at Usher and questions regarding Tameka’s mental state. At this point, Usher’s ex-wife may just be grasping for $1,200 straws, but she could have a case if the connection between Ursh’s lawyer and the judge turns out to be as suspect as it looks on the surface. What do you think?

Do you think the contribution Usher’s law firm made to Judge Lane presents a conflict of interest?

More on Madame Noire!

• CASTING CALL! TV Shows That Should Come Back With A New Cast!
• Are You A Nice Girl or A Pushover?
• Things Women Think Are Hot But Men Don’t
• Free Drinks Are Never Free: The Price Of Being Thirsty
• You Should Take Things Slow, But How Slow Is Too Slow? 7 Signs You’ve Been Put In The Dreaded “Gray Zone”
• Bison For Life: 10 Famous Ladies Who Went To Howard University
• How I Learned To Stop Expecting My Vagina To Smell Like Roses And Just Loved It For What It Is

Times are a-changing and so is television, folks. And if you leave it up to television station bosses, whatever makes money will stay on and play itself out no matter how lame the shows get, how many people voice concerns, complaints, or basically say they’re bored. But the following shows truly need to wrap it up. They’ve lost their spark, what made them funny, interesting, and even informative. Check out the following choices and see if you agree. And of course, a majority of the shows are reality TV. But what else do you expect, that’s all we’re getting on our televisions! Special shout out to Viacom for airing most of these programs on their array of stations (and not a good shout out…).

Source: karencivil.com

106 & Park

No disrespect, but let’s keep it real: TV shows that cater to music video countdowns and showcasing minimally talented celebrities answering the most basic of questions are out of style. Don’t believe it? Where the hell is “TRL”? Exactly. While this show had its golden years with A.J. and Free and was what everyone was running home to watch, it has become a corny shell of itself. The chemistry between Rocsi and Terrence just wasn’t like what we got from A.J. and Free (who couldn’t see that A.J. had a thing for his co-host?). And seriously, they don’t even really play the videos for more than a minute anymore anyway. Instead of looking for new hosts and forcing these young’ns to have to adjust to new faces, just give it a rest already.

It’s the end of the week and a perfect time to not only evaluate how the week has gone for you, but what fashions were a hit and a miss as well. The ladies were doing it big this week in sequins and sweeping gowns, and we’re going to check it out and figure what is worth stealing, and what ish needs to be stopped. This is the weekly wrap-up!

J.LO had some fun in the sun in Acapulco at the beginning of the week while shooting a new video called “Follow the Leader.” Coincidentally, her new boy toy boo Casper got to try his hand at directing the video. While on the set, Jenny from the block shined on ‘em in uber-tight black pants and a long-sleeved top covered in  what looked like skeleton bone based designs. The mother of two was looking pretty fierce and small in her shiny ensemble, which she topped off with open-toe booties, some ring bling and bangle action, and a very interesting hairdo. For the purposes of video making, it’s cute, but for every day, I’d wear these pieces separately. A reluctant steal for me.

The word fat has been getting WORN out these days. Am I right?

While checking out some of the fashions from last night’s American Music Awards, I noticed that all the buzz was surrounding singer Christina Aguilera’s silver Herve Leger dress that was worn during a performance of the song, “Moves Like Jagger” with Maroon 5 (MY JAM). Okay, so homegirl didn’t look all that, and she possibly could have thrown on some SPANX with this skintight look. We get that. But what I’m sick of people saying about this girl and many women in general who dress like her form time to time is that she is FAT.

At this point, with folks still trying their damndest to starve themselves into a size 0 and others saying a size 16 is the new average, who the hell really knows what’s considered, big, small and unhealthy anymore? But when I look at Aguilera in this outfit, I don’t think saying she is fat is fair, and it’s pretty incorrect. If anything, like many women who just want to throw on a freak’em dress and…well…”freak’em,” Aguilera should have worn this dress in a larger size. And with most of her clothing choices these days, which have had to have been too close for comfort for her, she needs to do a better job of dressing for her size and not for the size she wishes she was.

Times are hard for everyone, and I understand that folks would rather try and struggle into jeans they’ve outgrown rather than spend a grip on a new pair of pants, but when I see a lot of women on the street with muffin tops poking out or jeans so tight I can’t breathe, I don’t think, “Damn, she’s SOOOO fat.” Instead, I think, “Wow, that does NOT fit,” and go about my business. I could be alone in thinking that a few style missteps with your size that cause some unsightly lumps, bumps and tires doesn’t make someone a “fatty.”