Bad Vegan’s Sarma Melngailis says she used Netflix money to pay employees

Spoilers for Bad Vegan
In my post Friday about the Netflix surcharge for sharing accounts, I used photos from the current number two show on Netflix in the US, Bad Vegan. I mentioned that I’d recently binged it and many of you said you’d like to talk about it. Bad Vegan is a four episode series about a successful restaurateur who was conned by a scam artist she married, Anthony Strangis. Anthony was similar to the Tinder Swindler in that he hinted that he was involved in nefarious mysterious operations and said he needed money. He spun a whole tale involving past lives, immortality for her dog and a “family” behind the scenes that needed proof of buy-in before they would accept Sarma. Anthony’s story was bolstered by a man claiming to be his father, who backed up his bizarre claim about being black ops for the government. Sarma ran a very popular raw vegan restaurant in New York city, Pure Food and Wine, and skimmed business accounts to pay Anthony about $1.7 million over two years, around 2013-2015. She eventually stiffed employees of wages and went on the run, getting caught by police in a seedy motel in Tennessee. Sarma’s motivation for paying Anthony was presented as monetary – she thought he was rich and would pay her off at some point. However this was a case of coercive control, an issue that was barely presented in this series despite how long it was. I will discuss more about that in a moment.

Sarma participated in this documentary and she did not come across to many viewers as sympathetic. She had a flat affect and a manner of fact demeanor. People who knew her described her a sweet, naive person whom they trusted. The fact that Sarma fled with Anthony and that she gave him money while neglecting payroll makes her seem complicit in the scam. Sarma was actually paid by the documentary’s producers for participation. In a post on her website she wrote that all of that money went directly toward paying employees she owed. She also said that the ending was misleading and that the phone call she made to Anthony was from an earlier time.

I’m writing this now mainly to address one issue about the Netflix documentary Bad Vegan (I’ll have more to say and clarify later). It’s standard practice—to say nothing of journalistic integrity—that subjects do not get paid for participation in documentaries, at least not the reputable ones. In my case, however, and at my insistence, the producers made an exception so that I could pay the total amount my former employees were owed—amounts that accrued after my disappearance in 2015. Of all the harm and the many debts resulting from my downfall, this portion weighed heaviest.

I think Bad Vegan conveys what anyone that knew me understood, which is that I was very close with so many of the employees over the years, and intentionally harming them is just about the last thing I’d have done. The good people who’d worked at the business back then were right to be devastated and angry. It was as if I’d abandoned them, which in effect I did. There was no actual gun to my head so it will be said that of course I had a choice. I get that. However, the response that I must be crazy and/or stupid is an easy, reductive one. I’m not stupid and I’m not crazy. I am humiliated and shamed by all the damage caused, but have been working to rebuild a strong foundation of self-reliance and self-awareness.

In exchange for the source materials and images I contributed to the documentary, the producers paid an attorney on my behalf who then, on the same day (which happened to be the day NYC restaurants were first shut down due to the pandemic in 2020) wired full payment directly to the attorney representing the employees. (While the funds bypassed me entirely, I did declare them for income tax purposes, just to be clear). The point is… beyond getting former employees repaid, I did not otherwise profit from Bad Vegan. Netflix and/or the producers can confirm this. Anyone who’s been the subject of a reputable documentary or who works in the industry could also confirm the standard practice of not paying subjects.

Also, the ending of Bad Vegan is disturbingly misleading; I am not in touch with Anthony Strangis and I made those recordings at a much earlier time, deliberately, for a specific reason.


I listened to an interview on the podcast Reality Life with Kate Casey with Debra Newel, the woman who was profiled in the Dirty John podcast after she married felon John Meehan. Debra was on with Laura Richards, a criminal analyst, and they talked about the issue of coercive control, which was not covered in the podcast Dirty John. Debra was manipulated and controlled by John over years. He carefully groomed and controlled her and she feared for her life.

Similarly the issue of emotional abuse and coercive control wasn’t discussed in Bad Vegan at all. It was a glaring oversight as the narrative focused on the salacious aspects of this story. Sarma wasn’t a perfect victim and she made terrible decisions that affected people’s livelihoods. Most of us would not have made the choices she did, especially at the beginning of that relationship. She’s naive and her decisions were infuriatingly bad and seemed massively dumb from the outside. She didn’t set out to make a lot of money and leave employees in the lurch.

Photos credit: Netflix

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

59 Responses to “Bad Vegan’s Sarma Melngailis says she used Netflix money to pay employees”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Mabs A'Mabbin says:

    Yeah I binged over the weekend, and simply seeing the difference between their hotel rooms actually said more about their personalities than the entire series.

  2. Anne says:

    Here’s what I don’t get… This woman went to Wharton. She is smart and had a successful business, to be honest she didn’t strike me as the vulnerable type who would be a target for this kind of abuse… goes to show that it could happen to anyone? I clearly need a whole college course on coercive control.

    • Vanessa says:

      Me too!

    • SophieJara says:

      I don’t know about that. Academic intelligence and emotional intelligence are very different. I was a scholarship kid at a fancy high school and I could have sold a lot of those kids a bridge. A lot of them are used to being fawned over for their accomplishments, which is fine, but have never had a pimp try to hustle them at the bus station. A lot of them don’t know.

    • Lolalulu says:

      I consider myself a fairly intelligent woman and I have been caught in a horribly coercive relationship. Thankfully it only lasted a year, but crawling my way out of it was terrifying. In retrospect, that relationship was a rebound from a horrible breakup. My early twenties were rough lol. But one of the best pieces of advice I’ve ever heard is: You don’t attract bad guys. Abusers aren’t picky. Because his behavior has nothing to do with you, it’s entirely about control.

      • kirk says:

        Lolalulu – I thought abusers were picky, as in they can spot potential victim’s vulnerabilities much easier than non-scammer folk (probly put out this vibe in 20s since one dude referred to me as ‘Daisy’). As to someone faking government type job – gung-ho pro-business (Wharton) type folk could be suckered since they look so far down their snooty long noses at government employees, they have no clue how actual government workers behave.

      • Princesspool says:

        I think he “picked” her because he quickly figured out how desperately she needed money.

        What I don’t understand is why he didn’t just help her grow the business and continue on the path of restauranteur/store/juice bar wealth and fame? Wouldn’t have that been easier, legitimized him? She was so beautiful and came with a business- why continue to con? Seriously strange situation

  3. LadyMTL says:

    I watched the series this past weekend (thanks to the earlier post here, it intrigued me) and I am really conflicted. While I agree that they didn’t really delve into the important issues of coercive control, manipulation, and the like, I don’t feel as if she was this totally innocent ‘pure as the newly fallen snow’ victim either.


    There’s one part in ep 3 I think where she goes to Florida to meet with her earliest investor Jeffrey Chodorow…she’s literally helping Anthony attempt to scam him. She knew that the person who Chodorow was going to meet didn’t exist, and she went along with it. At what point does she need to take responsibility for her own actions? I mean, she even said in one of the Vegas scenes that she could have run away, she could have called for help, but she didn’t.

    Anyway, apologies if this is really rambling, I have a lot of thoughts lol. I am glad that she used the Netflix money to pay her employees, so there’s that at least.

    • Vanessa says:

      Amen girl

    • L84Tea says:

      Yeah, this is the moment where I felt like she was/is completely full of shit. This story is bonkers.

      • princesspool says:

        I noticed this too! Her voice went up a register and she spoke faster when she was lying.

    • TeeMajor says:

      EXACTLY! when I saw the way she knowingly lied and tried to SCAM her mentor and the person who helped her open up that business. I just could not feel sorry or understand her.

      He IS a slob and once her employees and friends mentioned that he had felonies and an extensive record–she dove in more.

      I feel for her mother who also lost almost a half mil. giving to him.

    • Manolya says:

      I agree on your points. I expected something more solid from this. One more thing that is she literally discarded everyone while not being handcuffed. The people always wanted to get back and worried, she literally ignored all of those reach outs. And the point she is arrested is, she figured out nowhere else to go to.

      Also a detail that’s not included in her documentary, which is actually nothing new. She originally had a woman lawyer who was being supportive on her abusive relationship. Then she fired her and took the attorney who defended criminals including some very famous, then had a relationship with him. Then bad mouthed him.

      I don’t think this was left out because it was unnecessary, but the doc is prepared literally on her perspective. A lot of points do not make any sense. Like how can you allow the money drained out of your restaurant at such an early point, put people under you in such situation. We also figured out how she paid her debt to Jeffrey. So she will pay any interest? Because she should. People trusting her got themselves into probably even worse state. She was like “yeah yeah I know. I’m sorry. Could we talk about how this weirdo told me about our fairy tales?”

      Not because victim blaming, but I don’t feel real resentment, I don’t see any documents other than some vague chats and videos that could be interpreted many ways. She doesn’t even seem ever to believe whatever tales he said. I believe there is something else happened. Especially with the lawyer situation, she lost her credibility

  4. WiththeAmerican says:

    Wharton seems to be churning out some top notch con artists (one became president). I had to stop watching this series because I simply do not view this woman as a victim.

    I understand coercive control, and I’ve seen mostly smart people fall victim to it, but in this case, I saw something different. I do not understand sending money owed to employees to a man who is not owed anything. This just does not compute and knowing she has a business background, she would know how wrong that is.

    It’s one thing when people harm themselves due to coercion, but when they claim that’s why they harmed many others, it’s harder to sell IMO.

    • heygingersnaps says:

      I agree with you. I stop mid way to episode 2 and refused to watch it anymore. She didn’t display any accountability.
      I went on the watch the heist of Brazil’s central bank instead.

  5. keepyourheart says:

    Thank you Celebitchy! This is the kind of content I would love to see more on this site. I think the topic of coercive control is so important for women to understand because it explains how ladies you view as smart, rich, capable, and independent can get into situations that you would think they are “too smart” to be in. How it is possible for these ladies to get manipulated over (normally a longer period of) time. I think it is essential to understand that concept and understand that everyone can fall victim to that – no matter how educated or independent you are. I highly recommend Laura Richards or Dr. Jessica Taylor as starting points. Both of them also have a great podcast episode together about Britney Spears.

    • Mindy_DeLaCalle says:

      I’m commenting just to keep the traffic higher because I love dissecting these situations with you ladies! I agree with you up to a point. I wouldn’t compare the situation to Britney Spears because that coercion was from ‘inside the house’. It was her father and it started from childhood. There was a built in trust.

      Sarma in this case, I believe wanted to give away her control. She hit an emotional breaking point and was overwhelmed with her business. She wanted to blow up her life and she did.

      • Stefanie Says says:

        I agree with that she wanted to give away her control.
        She used to have a (business) partner and now had to decide everything on her own plus a huge debt.
        I have a business myself and find it sometimes really heavy to be the sole responsible one for the business and the employees.
        And while I don’t think I would fall for it ( I hope!) , I can partly understand she did, when she was so stressed and exhausted…

  6. DC says:

    @Anne. An education or bring smart doesn’t prevent someone from being exploited. Anyone can be exploited. The manipulator just needs to find a way in and then slowly build on it. In this case he used her love for her dog as a way in. He furthered it by playing on her fears about money and debt. Then he went further by creating a fantasy world with a “fairy tale ending”. She hoped it was true, then when she was so far in, she couldn’t bring herself to question it because she would have to see that she had done some truly crazy things and been completely duped by someone she had trusted completely.

  7. Harper says:

    Her behavior was a head scratcher. I wonder how much she was influenced by the fact that she first was made aware of Anthony through his online chatter on social media with Alec Baldwin, and she let this good-for-nothing guy into her life because she thought that Alec had somehow vetted him? IDK. I don’t understand how a Wharton educated, already highly successful woman, who didn’t even seem to be that attracted to Anthony when they finally met, gave him so much leverage in her life and let him in in the first place?

    • Vanessa says:

      Right, once she saw him in person and he wasn’t who he said he was and then the stupid mystery occupation? Done. IF she had been madly in love w him I could see her being duped but he actually made her skin crawl…

      • Orangeowl says:

        I agree. She really seemed like she forced herself to be with him, she wasn’t really swept up. I do not want to dismiss people who have been in abusive relationships but this is not what I saw.

    • Gertrude says:

      The fact that she seemed wistful things hadn’t worked out romantically with Baldwin is telling. And her ONS with Lewis CK is as well. Bad picker?

  8. Mindy_DeLaCalle says:

    I am so glad you posted about this because I binged it last night and I just couldn’t get my head around THIS type of control. They did point out that she was into the new age stuff and that led her to be open to this type of mystic other worldly thinking, HOWEVER. Did she really think she was his Bella? Or what’s that other show where a man comes in a takes her to a whole new world? The Discovery of Witches?

    I just think she was very overwhelmed and wanted a partner. She wanted someone to take over and take all the burdens of life and it got out of hand. She is not a perfect victim and I don’t think she’s a COMPLETE victim at all. She was just embarrassed and rightly so.

    When are we going to realize that people who are in black ops, or CIA DON’T TELL YOU ABOUT IT. They have covers and you are part of those covers.

  9. Vanessa says:

    She always thought she was meant to be a queen y’all 🤣🤣🤣🤣. I hope she pays her mom back.

  10. ch0tti says:

    I want to know how he “knew” Alec Baldwin and why he was always tweeting him? Why did they gloss over that??

    • Colby says:

      A few thoughts here: it was Alec’s foundation Twitter, not his personal one, and he probably had an assistant running it. Additionally, I think back in the early days of Twitter companies/brands responded to people a lot more as there were less people on the platform and it was a fun, new thing. No way he would not get that level of interaction now.

      I was more confused that she didn’t ask Alec about him. Perhaps they weren’t as good of friends as she made it seem?

      • ch0tti says:

        Interesting. That makes more sense. But ya, that is super weird that she wouldn’t ask Alec about him if she actually knew him.

    • girl_ninja says:

      In the VF article they write about how he just started Tweeting at Alec and Hilary and was super witty and that he charmed them all with his barbs. He also joined their Words With Friends group.

      • Orangeowl says:

        Yes, she was charmed by his online and twitter persona but freely admitted she wasn’t attracted to him after she met him in person. One of my big takeaways from this is that Alec Baldwin seems to get caught up with scammy people fairly easily. You’d think he would have his guard up more given his fame and money but it seems he doesn’t.

      • Colby says:

        @Girl Ninja wow I didn’t know that he was in a WWF group with Hilary and Alec. Crazy!

        @orange Owl I think with narcissist (like AB is or at least he has tendencies…) they think they are smarter than everyone so it may be that it can be easy to get in with them…just a little flattery and you’re in the inner circle. Another great example of someone with this behavior is Donald Trump.

  11. Um what says:

    Here’s the thing though. She married him thinking he had money. She married him not knowing his actual job. She married him after seeing that he was a fraud. She stayed married to him after giving him all that money, going on random trips, knowing he was using her email accounts to do stuff, etc.

    I’m trying to make sense of all that.

  12. Fuzzy Crocodile says:

    What also confused me was the dog thing…

    I would love for my dog to live forever.

    That’s just not going to happen.

    And they kept mentioning he was promising that? My little skeptic radar would have gone off on that alone.

    • KWM says:

      That’s because you are looking at it with a rational brain. I kept thinking this is how people get caught up in Scientology and sign a billion year contract or any other cult for that matter. You get someone to believe something just a bit off and then you build on that, that you do not notice the escalation of outlandish.

  13. girl_ninja says:

    I became fascinated with this story when I read this a couple of years ago. I was left wondering how this educated, successful business woman could be snowed by a person like Strangis. While I do believe that cohersive tactics were used by Strangis, I think she wanted to be free of the responsibilities of the life of a business woman. That maybe she WANTED to be apart of something adventurous and mysterious. She seems like someone who becomes bored easily and that he intrigued her in this way. I may have missed it some how, but in the VF article I know that she became upset with him after they had sex because he wasn’t “careful” (I don’t want to be crass or graphic) and she ran out to get Plan B so as not to get pregnant. Regardless it’s a fascinating story and I hope that all of her former employees truly received the money they were owed.

    Whew…long post.

  14. Pilar says:

    I didn’t think she couldn’t be a victim just because her demeanour was flat and sort of lacking in emotion and because she’s smart ( went to a top notch college).
    Academically smart doesn’t mean you are good at reading people or necessarily have a high emotional IQ.
    If you pay attention her sister said that even as a child she had problems expressing emotions. And her employees spoke about someone who was emotionally withdrawn. I think there’s a level were she has to take accountability for her actions and I don’t think this documentary necessarily showed that. But simultaneously I didn’t think that just because she sounded flat and has a business degree that she couldn’t also be a victim of a skilled manipulator.
    Also a lot of those new age people believe things that for other people seem completely bonkers. I grew up with an aunt who fell for the spiel of numerous sketchy gurus.

    • Emma33 says:

      I picked up on those things as well – her sister needing to express Sarma’s emotions, and also her sort of drifting into business school and Wall Street because other people were doing it. I think she has higher than normal dependent personality characteristics. She has trouble operating in the world on her own, so she was a pretty easy target for this guy. I agree about the coercive control – it is almost like he took over her mind.

  15. mrsbump says:

    i found a lot of similarities in the techniques of the various netflix scammers , whether it is Anna Delvay, the tindler swindler or this guy here.
    They all use other well known people to assert their credibility. Anna Delvay ingratiated herself with some well known people and then continuously used these people as stepping stones towards even more well known people.

    The Tinder guy was well known in super luxury hotels, he had tables everywhere, other people seemed to know him so the girls thought he was legit as well. This guy did the same thing via Alec Baldwin, the fact that she knew Baldwin, was wistful about the lost opportunity all primed her towards trusting him.
    if we trust person A and person A trust person B, then we are inclined towards trusting person B as well, this is human nature.
    Both the tinder guy and vegan guy used a similar pattern.
    -They both pretended to be wealthy hence the girls were not initially concerned their money was in danger.

    – There was also the talks about renting/buying incredibly luxurious properties together, again signaling that the man is wealthy and committed.

    – Requests for money only came after their lives were supposedly under threat, and they couldn’t access their funds. for Tinder guy this was corroborated by this bodyguard, and for Vegan guy, it was his data guy that corresponded with Sarma again corroborating everything.

    – Then there was the promise that the girls would be paid back not only in full but 10x whatever they had borrowed from them. For Sarma it got weird with the eternal dog life.

    i see the women’s situation akin to being in a cult, where the entire energy of the cult leader is concentrated on them and it is relentless. They are not perfect victims but then why should they have to be. I also found that Sarma’ good looks and the vegan angle unleashed some sort of schadenfreude where people were gleeful about her fall of grace , which was a little sad to see. for some reason, i felt that she was on the spectrum but i could most certainly be wrong

    • Emma33 says:

      I just listened to Sarma on the cultish podcast, and they were calling it ‘the cult of one’, which made a lot of sense. She also talked about how she would pull away from him when he was physically close to her, but as soon as she saw him again there was almost something hypnotic in his eyes and he would suck her in again.

      I think the netflix doco did a bad job of explaining coercive control. The podcast is really interesting, and Sarma seems more open and animated on it because she trusts the hosts.

  16. Mich says:

    I binged this over the weekend and my sympathy for her did not reach the level it did for the Tinder Swindler victims. She believed every insanely wild thing this man said from the beginning with absolutely no evidence to back any of it up. Simon (Tinder Swindler) hit like a tornado, first setting the stage for his scam by overwhelming his victims with his wealth so that his later scam at least had an air of believability. Not with Sarma’s guy. People tried to warn her early on and she cut them off. When her employees complained about needing to be paid, she insulted them. When she talked about how she tried to con her investors at the end, there was no remorse and, even with the benefit of hindsight, she seemed confused when asked if she felt bad about attempting to con them. I was left wondering if she had some kind of personality disorder.

    • Mindy_DeLaCalle says:

      Mich, I’ve been thinking about this too. There is something cold and off about her and like they had said previously in the series, as a child she was unable to process her parents divorce or talk about her emotions. She instead shut down for a period of time, then came out of her room and they didn’t talk about it. I think she basically shut down early on BUT that doesn’t make her a victim. Her parents and family would have helped her had she said ANYTHING to them. She is still accountable for her actions. She should go to jail. How many women have been led to do crazy things and STILL go to jail because they are not white, beautiful and a famous vegan.

  17. JustMe says:

    What a wild series…we binged on the weekend. After I googled her and apparently she had another lawyer (not the lady on the series) who was also El Chapo’s lawyers. He was married they had an affair. To me it seemed like she wanted a fairytale to be rescued from overwhelming items in her life and she got in so deep that to face reality was too much so she compartmentalized so she wouldn’t have to deal. Fascinating…NewYork was crazy in the mid 2000 Lol

  18. ErroneousPeony says:

    I had an interesting conversation with the BF, after he watched the last episode with me. I had been duped once also — nowhere near to this degree however — and he said something interesting: “It doesn’t have to be ‘all bullshit,’ you know. In fact, half-lies are actually the most convincing.” As with the Tinder Swindler, if someone can show just enough truth to create plausibility, it becomes very easy to believe him. Then, as things don’t add up, you look to those half-truths (“he bought me a first class ticket” or “he drove a Bentley”) to support the story you *want* to believe.

    And that’s the rub: women want to believe. Smart women. Accomplished women. Lonely women. (I could get into a whole dissertation on how many men over 30 are threatened by, afraid of or just plain hostile towards smart, accomplished women…such that they are left wading through the shallow dating pool and making excuses for the bottom feeders they find there. But I won’t.) Listen to the podcast “Do you know Mordechai?” for another story about one man who took advantage of women; he even agrees to be interviewed about why he lied so profoundly and profusely to the women he victimized.

  19. tw says:

    She is not sympathetic because she is a manipulator and a user. She sought out the talented chef and used him to start Pure Food and Wine. She used Chowdry to cut the chef out of the business. She was not attracted to Shane/Anthony but married and used him because there was a promise of great wealth. She manipulated Chodorow into accepting late or non payment. She manipulated Chodorow and other investors to get the restaurant open again, even after she KNEW where the money would go.
    She used her tiny blonde human pigtails to manipulate idiot men and then met her match in this con man. He was able to manipulate her because he identified her weakness – the belief that she was entitled to greatness. She repeatedly glosses over her own participation in events. Each time she speaks she begins with “somehow” this happened. As if she never actively participated in any of it. Yes, Shane/Anthony is a con artist and pure evil, but he found the perfect victim in her because she, too wanted money and power at all costs and married a man she didn’t even like to get it.

    PS I had a few overpriced meals at Pure and it was not good. A lot of hype. I say this as a vegetarian.

    • teatimeiscoming says:

      Same. I remember all of this coming out when it happened, and they glossed over a lot of the details so that this was a very soft-focus rosy glasses kind of series. You don’t run a successful resturant in Manhattan by being naive. You don’t con people like investors out because you’re so kind and innocent. I was deeply disappointed by how she responded to specific statements about specific events happened by her staff with “oh well i dont know” and “I don’t remember that.”

    • NickG says:

      @TW wow I’m so interested to hear about the food. I wanted to go to the restaurant so much, and was bummed when it closed, obviously not knowing the whole story. I did a lot of raw food at the time and had her books and the recipes were great, but a. it was clear they were Matthew’s recipes and b. it was clear she was kind of troubled somehow… there was a lot of self promotion that felt a little weird. The cookbook still enchanted me with all the many, many glamour shots of them looking loved up and beautiful, friends and wine, romantic patios oh yes and beautiful food. I just wanted to be there! Nevertheless, something was definitely “off” with her. She just looked like trouble.

      • tw says:

        @NickG I remember being excited to go the first time but then being underwhelmed. The lasagna just felt mushy to me. I went a few times because a close friend had an office a block away and the patio area was great. But I didn’t enjoy the food.

      • NickG says:

        @tw well, thank you. That’s some closure for me!

      • Gah says:

        The patio was great and juices/smoothies really nice.

        But as with lots of raw vegan food it relies heavily on cashew cream and cashew butter and cashew noodles.

        I had a lot of meals there and most of them left me incredibly bloated bc of the high nut and coconut content.

    • Ohcomeon says:

      Thank you for this. There is usually no real dialog allowed here except to paint the woman as victim, when someitmes she is complicit in her own victimization.

  20. Andrea says:

    Did anyone else think Anthony’s ex-wife was somehow involved? That looked like a lot of plastic surgery. Someone was paying!

  21. TeamMeg says:

    I was involved in the raw food movement at that time. Pure Food & Wine was the shizz and Sarma was considered by many to be a total goddess and role model. One Lucky Duck and all that. So I remember, this was a HUGE scandal. She always seemed a bit like a Mean Girl to me. Too cool for school, but I coulda been jealous, too. I will watch the series for sure.

  22. Mabs A'Mabbin says:

    I can’t believe she let him speak to her the way he did. She’d even be disagreeing with him or saying no, he’d insult and verbally abuse her, and she stays on the phone!

  23. JustMe says:

    Anyone else watch the first episode and think OMG Hilaria totally stalked Alec who was know to frequent there ?

    • tw says:

      Of course she did.

    • Nope says:

      Okay so I’m going to share something someone posted on another forum that seemed plausible and fascinating:

      “You learn by watching the show how close MeIngailis was to Alec Baldwin, who met his wife at Pure Food and Wine. Hillary Baldwin is a big grifter, having lied about her name, place of birth, ancestry, and her knowledge of who Alec Baldwin was, claiming she was unaware of who he was because in Spain, she claims, she “never watched TV” when, in fact, she knew who Baldwin was and it was Sarma who tipped her off as to when Alec would be dining at Pure.

      Sarma, being from Boston, was acquainted with Hillary’s mother Kathryn Hayward, and connected through their shared interest in plant-based foods. And Kathryn was in-the-know about the plan for Hillary to hook-up with Alec the night they met at Sarma’s restaurant.

      And soon after Hillary bended and twisted her way in Alec’s life, Kathryn Hayward and Hillary’s father Dave Thomas, scuttled off to Spain. Hillz would use that to continue her grift, telling people “her family all live in Mallorca.”

      There’s more than enough evidence to produce another grifter series on the Baldwin’s. And why not? Like Sarma Melngailis and Anna Delvey, Hilaria Baldwin has deceived and defrauded plenty of people with her Spanish heritage act from appearing on the cover of Hola! magazine to her appearance at the United Nations as a health expert from Spain.”

  24. AC says:

    It was crazy asf! I am vegan and all of us don’t think like that. Also, she is more raw food, and I know some folks that are like that and different is an understatement (not all) I think she wanted to be more than she is and he recognized and saw he could exploit her.