Are George Clooney and Stacy Keibler living together?

Does anyone know if they are living together; if she moved into George's house?

No blow from me, your opinion is just as important than anyones!
Lakin460 don't think so, just sleepovers.

Sure they are living together - GTC has all but said so............

party animal - not! wrote:Sure they are living together - GTC has all but said so............

What did he say to give you that idea? (Not picking a fight here, just looking for details, that's all)

I've never heard that they are living together and don't remember George even saying anything about their living arrangements. Maybe I missed something

No, I don't think they're living together. I'm sure she gets to stay overnight often enough when he's in town but I can't imagine they're that close as to be actuallyliving together. I think George likes his space!

Okay.

So when GTC comments that a bunch of cars and people (i e stylists) turn up and fill the place pre whichever function they're attending, do we think she just turns up there then?

Or when he refers to leaving her with 'The Descendants' dvd to watch endlessly and tell him what he thinks when he comes home?

Or when he talks about them sitting on the sofa in their team kit watching his Bengals get defeated (Person-to-Person) he's not referring to her?

Or..........etc, etc

I think he is, but whatever their arrangement, it seems to be working. Good for them

party animal....."I think he is, but whatever their arrangement, it seems to be working. Good for them"


Yes it does seem that way.

If you can afford it, I think it's sometimes a good idea to keep your own space and keep separate homes, especially as
one matures in years !
It lessons the little annoyances of sharing a home and allows the individuals to retain a sense of self.
It also lowers the expectations which often cause problems in relationships.

These are just my own opinions, I've read no research
on the matter

party animal - not! wrote:So when GTC comments that a bunch of cars and people (i e stylists) turn up and fill the place pre whichever function they're attending, do we think she just turns up there then?

Kind of, but maybe not the way you mean here.

My feeling, and it is just a feeling, is that she stays over at his fairly regularly. That's not the same as living together. When there are big events, such as the Oscars, she stays over and obviously gets ready at his place. It would be weird IMO for her to do the whole dress and hair thing, then get in a car and drive over to his so that they can leave for the Oscars together.

I definitely think they're living together and have been for awhile. I've also picked up on his comments - the most telling one to me was when he stated he gives her DVDs to watch and has her tell him what she thinks when HE GETS HOME. I've also seen his security drive her to/from the airport and other places which to me is indicative of their sharing a residence. This is not something new for him. Haven't most of his GFs lived with him? I just hope she kept her own place.

Actually, he has to be careful if she totally moves in, because California recognizes common law marriage and one of my husband's partner who practiced divorce in California ,for awhile, says it doesn't take much for the common law spouse to get assets and settlement money for living with someone. If he was smart she has a draw and a small part of closet and goes to her place like once or twice a week.

I think they are living together but Stacy still has her own place.

lovelylois wrote:Actually, he has to be careful if she totally moves in, because California recognizes common law marriage and one of my husband's partner who practiced divorce in California ,for awhile, says it doesn't take much for the common law spouse to get assets and settlement money for living with someone. If he was smart she has a draw and a small part of closet and goes to her place like once or twice a week.

I didn't think California recognized common law marriages. However, in most states (even if common law marriage is not recognized) if someone holds themselves out as being married or walks/talks/acts/implies, etc. that they are marriage, an argument can be made by one of the parties that they are in fact married. This has to be more than living together though. George has repeatedly said publicly that he will never get married. This would help his case in such a matter. Anyway, I'm sure he and his people have him well protected from ANY type of liability.

California law would prohibit him from letting anyone "live in" long term without some sort of written agreement or it would open him up to a "palimony suit", not common law and he definitely doesn't want that. He's not going to hand half of his wealth which he's worked very hard for, over to "a girlfriend of" not even on the BEST day of her life!

I think she probably spends a good amount of time there - or as much as he'll let her. But, imo, I don't think she's full-on living with him. We'd have twitpics of Einstein, pooping All the time, drinking, them laying together in bed, by the pool....yep, that little dog would have even more coverage than he already gets!

The real question is where is her mail sent, I bet it is sent to her home. I also bet her address on her drivers lic. is not George's address. So living in the normal sense that one would think of, I say no. Staying with him yes.

I think he has previously had girlfriends move in because they did not have a residence in CA. Stacy has her own place and lives not far from him so she doesn't need to live there. She is still seen in her own neighborhood. The whole DVD thing doesn't mean anything. It's like saying to someone lets talk when I get home, doesn't mean that you are going to be at the same place, you could be talking over the phone, or it could be one of the nights she visits. He made that comment once at one of the awards. It seemed weird at the time given that she had seen the movie multiple times at the premieres. Really don't think they are living together.

The DVD comment was one of his jokes, I thought anyway.

PartyAnimal,
Your posts lead me to ask if you are SK's close friend. If G&SK WERE living together, then she would be staying there when he is out-of-town. Otherwise it's convenient sleep-overs. I know I've stayed a week at an ex's, and he was working so much that we barely saw each other outside of bed. (The most important way to "get to know each other, IMHO") And I know for a fact that G has an iron-clad contract with all girls; remember the legal issues with Celine?

Hasn't she tweeted remarks about no sleep over tonight? I seem to remember (CRS) reading that here. IMO they aren't living together in the all her worldly belongings are now at Casa Clooney.

Davida is that like a cohabitation agreement? In case they break up everything is spelled out.

Lakin460 wrote:Does anyone know if they are living together; if she moved into George's house?

NO

it's me wrote:

Lakin460 wrote:Does anyone know if they are living together; if she moved into George's house?

NO

LOLOLOL!!! Yes, I'd have to agree with you I M.....no one KNOWS! LOLOLOL
good one!


BUT I do appreciate the inputs - several valid, thoughtful points made in favor and against.

I know you can understand both ways
but it was a no,
I don't think so

(and obviously bec I don't know)

Annemarie,
Way before G gets involved with any girl, she gets a thorough background check to reveal anything potentially damaging. This is for the ladies' benefit as well, since association with G will make her much more visible. An iron-clad contract when G starts dating is also imperative. Can you imagine how G would feel if a greedy girl went to the paps to sell a sexual expose? I remember when a fling of one of the Jersey Shore "men" degraded him sexually in print. Some people are only out to hurt others, and G has to be very, very careful of users. That's why he puts all girls under contract immediately; it does NOT indicate that they are living together at all.

Thanks I didn't know that.

hu!
tough

but lot of it is real, I think

I'd like to see some evidence of all that, would anyone
have some please ?
Thanks

So basically it's a confidentiality agreement they can't talk about the relationship or George in a negative way when it ends.

Certainly sounds like that doesn't it?

Understandable, and the price you pay for the goldfish bowl way of life, I guess.

So would you have the meeting with the lawyers before, or after, the romantic dinner?

I am sorry I was wrong. My husbands law partner said common law marriage is not recognized by California, but it doesn't stop the live-ins after they split from trying to gain money or assets from the more successful partner. The claim is usually there were promises made between the couple, a verbal contract. It usually is he said, she said thing.

I just went back to try to find the interview where he was specifically asked about a contract with the GFs and he said, "no, there is no contract, nothing, blah, blah, blah..." I thought it was the Rolling Stones interview, but in quickly perusing it, I couldn't find it. As I've stated before, I don't believe anything he says publicly. IMO, he would lie to protect his privacy in the areas of his choosing.

IMO, there is absolutely a contract. George isn't stupid. The proof is that if there wasn't a contract, we would know everything about George from whether he uses a manual or battery-operated toothbrush to the precise dimensions of his junk. Ladies, we would also have us some nude pictures and possibly sex tapes (you know they're out there unless that too is part of the contract). I can promise you that if George was asleep and naked, my Blackberry would be capturing as much as possible. I'm sure EC got paid a lot of money for the interview she gave wherein she referred to him as a father figure. Do you have any idea how much she would be paid for an interview giving intimate details of every aspect of their relationship? I'd pay money to see/hear that myself.

Personally, I don't think George and Stacy are living together. Stacy probably has her own place and keeps some of her stuff at George's house. She probably housesits from time to time. If George does not want to get married, he should just have his woman keep some of her possessions at his house, and leave it at that.

They probably sign after they decide to date. But before anything intimate takes place.

EEOsandy wrote:I just went back to try to find the interview where he was specifically asked about a contract with the GFs and he said, "no, there is no contract, nothing, blah, blah, blah..." I thought it was the Rolling Stones interview, but in quickly perusing it, I couldn't find it. As I've stated before, I don't believe anything he says publicly. IMO, he would lie to protect his privacy in the areas of his choosing.

IMO, there is absolutely a contract. George isn't stupid. The proof is that if there wasn't a contract, we would know everything about George from whether he uses a manual or battery-operated toothbrush to the precise dimensions of his junk. Ladies, we would also have us some nude pictures and possibly sex tapes (you know they're out there unless that too is part of the contract). I can promise you that if George was asleep and naked, my Blackberry would be capturing as much as possible. I'm sure EC got paid a lot of money for the interview she gave wherein she referred to him as a father figure. Do you have any idea how much she would be paid for an interview giving intimate details of every aspect of their relationship? I'd pay money to see/hear that myself.

I don't think it would be at all fair to interfere and have access to any really private intimate information about George, that was obtained in a clandestine manner.
After all, he's very generous to his fans by allowing many glimpses into his live, both in the written word and pictures.
I'd like him to be treated in the same way that I'd like to be treated with respect to my privacy.

Does anybody remember the rumours that were running around in early 2009 about GTC dating (well, they were seen twice!), Paris Hilton.

Is it at all possible that could actually have been SK (blonde hair, huge sun glasses)?

Joanna wrote:

EEOsandy wrote:I just went back to try to find the interview where he was specifically asked about a contract with the GFs and he said, "no, there is no contract, nothing, blah, blah, blah..." I thought it was the Rolling Stones interview, but in quickly perusing it, I couldn't find it. As I've stated before, I don't believe anything he says publicly. IMO, he would lie to protect his privacy in the areas of his choosing.

IMO, there is absolutely a contract. George isn't stupid. The proof is that if there wasn't a contract, we would know everything about George from whether he uses a manual or battery-operated toothbrush to the precise dimensions of his junk. Ladies, we would also have us some nude pictures and possibly sex tapes (you know they're out there unless that too is part of the contract). I can promise you that if George was asleep and naked, my Blackberry would be capturing as much as possible. I'm sure EC got paid a lot of money for the interview she gave wherein she referred to him as a father figure. Do you have any idea how much she would be paid for an interview giving intimate details of every aspect of their relationship? I'd pay money to see/hear that myself.

I don't think it would be at all fair to interfere and have access to any really private intimate information about George, that was obtained in a clandestine manner.
After all, he's very generous to his fans by allowing many glimpses into his live, both in the written word and pictures.
I'd like him to be treated in the same way that I'd like to be treated with respect to my privacy.

I totally agree with that and am offended if you think I was saying that it would be OKAY for someone to profit from information they obtained in confidence. I'm only saying that if there was nothing legally precluding someone from selling intimate information they have about George or anyone else famous, there are many people who would sell it, including some of his former GFs.

Oh sorry EEOs....I must have misunderstood your saying that you'd take pictures of George naked & asleep and that you'd pay to see or hear interviews by EC ?

BTW, I never mentioned anything about payments.
I'm just talking about betrayal of trust I suppose, as that happened to a friend of mine & he was gutted.

Joanna wrote:Oh sorry EEOs....I must have misunderstood your saying that you'd take pictures of George naked & asleep and that you'd pay to see or hear interviews by EC ?

BTW, I never mentioned anything about payments.
I'm just talking about betrayal of trust I suppose, as that happened to a friend of mine & he was gutted.

I probably would take pictures of him but I wouldn't sell them or profit in any other way from them. No, I would not pay to hear EC talk in an interview - never said that, but I just might pay to see pictures of George in the buff as would most everyone else on here. I don't think I said anything offensive - I was just trying to make a point about how someone in George's position needs to protect himself and why he should have a contract. This will be my last post though because I'm sick of you dissecting and criticizing everything that I say. By the way, why are you so protective of Stacy and personally offended by everything said about her? I just don't get that or maybe I do.

EEOsandy,
I hope you continue to post, as we usually are in agreement. Great minds think alike, you know. In any forum people will always have different opinions and interpretations, depending in part on their previous experiences. I would like to know if it's because of our style of writing or our direct personalities that I sometimes feel there is a lack of consideration for diverse views. And I know that I don't have time or computer skill to resource information to prove what I say. Would everyone believe me anyway?

There mail is not delivered to there homes for privacy reasons... There are contracts signed....Just imagine how that goes down....HMMM I'll show you mine if you show me yours....BUT SIGN THIS CONTRACT FIRST..
EEOsandy your going to leave Davida and me Don't you dare! There is strength in numbers!

party animal - not! wrote:Does anybody remember the rumours that were running around in early 2009 about GTC dating (well, they were seen twice!), Paris Hilton.

Is it at all possible that could actually have been SK (blonde hair, huge sun glasses)?

It was paris Hilton and it was a business meeting. Paris' assistant was there and spoke to the paps afterwards.

No don't go EEOsandy, not on my account anyway,
cos you'll miss all the future fun.
I'm not important

EEOsandy wrote:

Joanna wrote:Oh sorry EEOs....I must have misunderstood your saying that you'd take pictures of George naked & asleep and that you'd pay to see or hear interviews by EC ?

BTW, I never mentioned anything about payments.
I'm just talking about betrayal of trust I suppose, as that happened to a friend of mine & he was gutted.

I probably would take pictures of him but I wouldn't sell them or profit in any other way from them. No, I would not pay to hear EC talk in an interview - never said that, but I just might pay to see pictures of George in the buff as would most everyone else on here. I don't think I said anything offensive - I was just trying to make a point about how someone in George's position needs to protect himself and why he should have a contract. This will be my last post though because I'm sick of you dissecting and criticizing everything that I say. By the way, why are you so protective of Stacy and personally offended by everything said about her? I just don't get that or maybe I do.

You are right concerning Stacy, she's overprotected from the beginning on.

EEOsandy wrote: This will be my last post though because I'm sick of you dissecting and criticizing everything that I say. By the way, why are you so protective of Stacy and personally offended by everything said about her? I just don't get that or maybe I do.

Welcome "to the club" EEOsandy. You are not the only one that has "enough" of the constant attacks.

Don't go EEOsandy

EEOsandy said..."By the way, why are you so protective of Stacy and personally offended by everything said about her? I just don't get that or maybe I do."

Following a pm that I've had from EEOsandy it would appear that
I am considered to be a personal friend of Stacy Keibler or at least
"a fan" of hers by some ladies here.

I'm sorry, but after laughing my geriatric socks off, I just want to say that living in UK I'd never even heard of the women's wrestling scene in USA, let alone an individual called Stacy Keibler,
before she was brought onto this George Clooney forum.

Don't feel bad Joanna...I'm sure I'm also considered a "fan" of Stacy just because I reminded everyone that she's a human being with actual feelings and people should at least try to remember that when ripping her to shreds for dating someone they admire.

She's not the devil incarnate because she's dating George Clooney...

I'm with you Lighter.