Kim D, Teresa Giudice & Louie Ruelas: Loyalty, Betrayal, and the Case Against Vanessa Reiser
This latest development involves Kim D—and if you’ve been following the drama, you know it’s about to get messy.
A few weeks ago, we covered how both Kim D and Jackie Goldschneider submitted affidavits against Vanessa Reiser, claiming that their interactions with her violated the consent order—which, in simple terms, is a gag order preventing Louie and Vanessa from publicly discussing each other.
For context, the first time I even heard of Vanessa was back when she appeared on a podcast with Megan King (RHOC alum). She spoke in very general terms about her experience, never once mentioning Louie by name. In fact, she disclaimed at the beginning that she could only speak broadly and wouldn’t identify the other party involved.
Now, let’s talk about Kim D’s shifting stance on Vanessa. If you’ve been following her, you know she has gone back and forth about their relationship. When she was co-hosting a podcast with David Yontef, she openly said she had communicated with Louie’s exes—she even had Vanessa walk in her fashion show. Over time, her statements changed: first, they were friends, then just friendly, then ambiguous, and eventually, she claimed she wanted to distance herself from Vanessa altogether.
What changed? Well, her reunion with Teresa Giudice might have something to do with it. Around the same time, Kim D took issue with a Facebook post Vanessa made—one that she suddenly found inappropriate. Coincidence? Maybe. But the timing fits perfectly with her reconciliation with Teresa.
Now, here’s where things get really interesting. Kim D previously admitted that after meeting with Teresa and Louie (and Teresa “fixer” attorney James Leonard), she was asked to do a favor for them. She wouldn’t say what the favor was, just that it wasn’t “too big of an ask” and that she’d be happy to do it.
I don’t know for sure what that favor was—but looking at the timeline, was it Kim D submitting a legal statement against Vanessa to help Louie’s case? Because if you followed the online chatter, you know that Teresa’s camp was actively trying to “flip” Kim D, as bloggers reported. Even Kim herself joked about it on a live with Dana Wilkey, saying she’d flip herself, facetiously, of course.
Now, let’s be clear—fans love Kim D’s messy antics on RHONJ and on her podcast. But this situation raises serious concerns. If I were the judge, I’d expect Vanessa’s lawyer to file a motion to strike Kim D’s statements, and here’s why:
Kim D was an active defender of Vanessa and the exes for years. She called Louie every name in the book—Norman Bates, American Psycho, you name it. She vouched for Vanessa, even recommended her lawyer Douglas Anton to represent her.
Kim D’s credibility is in question. She wasn’t on good terms with Teresa when she was making these statements, yet suddenly changed her stance after making up with her.
Kim D was way too close to this situation to be considered an unbiased witness. She knew both sides intimately—doesn’t the court see how problematic that is?
I don’t know if Vanessa actually violated the consent order. But let’s pretend she did say something to Kim D in confidence. Maybe she believed she was speaking in a safe space. Vanessa never appeared on Kim D’s podcast, and in every other podcast she has been on, she never referenced Louie by name—only spoke about narcissistic abuse in general.
And here’s the real double-standard: Kim D once dragged Caroline Manzo for saying she was present when someone called the feds on Joe and Teresa Giudice. She was appalled that Caroline would sit there and watch someone call and tell on Teresa —yet now, she’s the one submitting affidavits against someone she once defended?
And then there’s Jackie Goldschneider. Why did she and Kim D feel the need to turn on the exes instead of just quietly severing ties?
Overall, this isn’t a good look for any blogger, podcaster, or researcher — it’s a terrible practice. In my opinion, it’s bad for business and sets a messy precedent. No one would willingly share information if they suspected it could later be used against them in a legal setting—unless it involved something truly criminal.
The Legal Twist…
On March 17, 2025, Louie’s attorney filed a letter requesting that Douglas Anton be removed from the case due to a conflict of interest—because of his ties to Kim D and the fact that his involvement in key facts makes him both a lawyer and a witness.
I get why Louie’s lawyer is pushing for this. But using the same logic, shouldn’t Kim D’s statements also be challenged, withdrawn, or at the very least, heavily scrutinized? She has contradicted herself multiple times and has been too involved on both sides of this situation to be considered a neutral party.
There’s More …
Months ago, on Kim D’s podcast, one of her co-host claimed that Vanessa personally told him at a fashion show that she was Louie’s ex and was “going to milk this for all it’s worth.”
To me, that statement never quite added up.
If Vanessa actually said that to Kim’s friend, turned co-host, back in 2021 or 2022, why did Kim D never mention it before? She had plenty of opportunities to warn her audience about Vanessa’s intentions, but she didn’t.
Instead, she spent years speaking unsavorily about Louie, giving the exes a voice, and insisting that she believed them. She only brought up her co-host’s statement after making up with Teresa.
So, I reached out to Kim D months ago and asked if I could speak with her co-host directly about his statement. She agreed. I covered this on my podcast at the time, and this is a verbatim transcript of what he responded back on April 28, 2024:
“And I see that you had a question for me. So I wanted to answer it for you. So you had asked me after I shared what happened at the fashion show with the ex, if I could tell you why I decided to share this information now versus before. So I appreciate your question and understand that, you know, you might have a question about why I didn't, but the truth is, is that it was just the timing. It felt relevant and appropriate for the current, you know, storyline of the podcast that we were discussing. And a couple of years ago, when I first learned about all of this, you know, and she told me all this information, I was surprised. And I told my friends who were into housewife things and things like that, but not like anyone of like a blogger status or that shared information with, you know, housewife gossip or anything like that. Well, it is also important to note that there were a lot of people at this Posche Fashion Show. So it wasn't really a secret as the ex voluntarily shared it with multiple people. So I didn't really think of it as a big secret to be honest. And I didn't see any reason to hold back on sharing this information. And when it came to the show, I just felt like it was the right time to address it. So the public could get a better understanding of the situation and the topics that we were talking about. I just had that little insight. So I wanted to make people aware of why I had the opinion that I did. And that's all. So I hope that was good answer for you.”
I may enjoy watching people on reality TV, but this isn’t about attacking or dragging Kim D. My priority has always been the truth. I can’t just ignore what I’ve heard over the years or pretend that Kim D didn’t say the things she said.
Kim D is entitled to change her opinions, but given how deeply involved she’s been in both sides of the Ruelas vs. Reiser situation, she cannot be seen as an impartial witness.
And that’s where I stand on it. Kim D’s statements should not hold weight in this case. This situation is questionable, and I am surprised that Vanessa’s legal team hasn’t moved to strike those affidavits.
#rhonj #teresagiudice #louieruelas #kimd #getrealwithkimd #danawilkey #behindthevelvetrope
Enjoyed the Newsletter? Leave a Tip!
If you liked this newsletter and want to support it, consider leaving a tip—no commitment necessary - Your support helps keep the content coming!