Blake Lively- Jason Baldoni and NYT - False Light claims

[Anonymous]

There is spinning going on for sure, but it's on Baldoni's side.

Last week, Freedman alleged that Blake Lively had asked Taylor Swift to delete evidence from her phone, and that Blake's lawyer threatened to release embarrassing things about Taylor if Taylor didn't release a supportive statement for Blake. Freedman claimed that THIS was the reason for his subpoenas of Swift and her lawyer.

But now, Freedman is telling the Daily Mail and TMZ that they "got what they needed." Only... suddenly there is no reference at all to those allegations of threats and spoliation of evidence. Here's TMZ:

Sources with direct knowledge tell us ... Baldoni's side dropped the subpoena after information was voluntarily provided to them.
Other sources, also in the know, say this "confirms the validity of the statement made last week that Taylor's involvement with this film was licensing a song.”

So suddenly the thing Freedman and Baldoni were trying to prove with their multiple subpoenas of Swift and her legal team was... that Swift was not directly involved in making this movie?

What does that have to do with this lawsuit? How does it show that Baldoni didn't SH Blake or try to retaliate against her? How does it prove Baldoni's defamation or extortion claims?

Blake has claimed all along that Taylor has nothing to do with this case and that focus on her is a distraction from the actual claims. And now today Freedman is claiming, victoriously, that they've just received evidence that proves Taylor Swift has nothing to do with this case. Congrats, dude?

Nothing about Lively's case rests on Taylor Swift. I'm sure whatever is going on with their friendship is important to Blake and who even knows, but from a legal perspective, it's irrelevant. The only person tryin to drag Taylor into this case was Baldoni, and now he's claiming that he was only trying to drag her in for the purposes of showing it has nothing to do with her?

Please.

[Anonymous]

Ever since last Wednesday, one or more of the Lively posters has repeatedly asked when the motion to quash was going to be with withdrawn since Freedman represented talks were close, insinuating it would not happen.

Now it happens and they are desperate to spin away.

Freedman isn’t going to catalogue what he received for Lively’s benefit. No competent attorney would.

Further, Taylor’s silence continues, with more and more negative stories about her relationship with Blake appearing. She isn’t supporting Blake because she knows firsthand that Blake is a liar and a manipulator.

[Anonymous]

From the latest Daily Mail article:

'Sending a subpoena to Taylor and Taylor’s response has provided Baldoni’s team with everything that they needed. Taylor stated that she was not involved at all, and this is in stark contrast to what Lively has said.

'Taylor’s lack of involvement proves that Blake lied about several very important details to this case. Furthermore, the court now has information that is documented to show that Blake’s attorney’s did, in fact, threaten to leak Taylor’s private texts. This is backed up by the evidence.
'Taylor was always considered to be the smoking gun in this, and everyone is extremely pleased with the end results and the information it yielded. They got exactly what they were hoping for and much more.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-14740399/taylor-swift-subpoena-blake-lively-lawsuit-update-friendship.html

[Anonymous]

You can tell a deal was made by the actions on Taylor’s side. After BF withdrew the subpoena, Venable mooted their motion to quash, which they didn’t have to do. They could’ve just let it sit but BF had said it would be mooted, so mooting it was likely part of the deal.

When the press reached out to Venable, they said no comment. If BF were twisting the facts and lying about them, I’m pretty sure they would make a statement that he’s a wacko on a fishing expedition.

BF also withdrew the subpoena against Taylor, which was never even contested b/c the motion to quash would’ve failed. So it’s pretty clear that what Taylor got in return for cooperating with Freedman is she won’t be subpoenaed for documents.

[Anonymous]

Maybe Baldoni’s team got what they wanted in the court if public opinion.

Regardless, if no threat was actually made by Blake to Taylor, why is Taylor reacting so strongly? She has basically disappeared from view. I don’t think there is any risk to Taylor’s reputation from all of this. She’s throwing Blake so thoroughly under the bus.

You can probably tell that I know nothing about this case.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You can tell a deal was made by the actions on Taylor’s side. After BF withdrew the subpoena, Venable mooted their motion to quash, which they didn’t have to do. They could’ve just let it sit but BF had said it would be mooted, so mooting it was likely part of the deal.

When the press reached out to Venable, they said no comment. If BF were twisting the facts and lying about them, I’m pretty sure they would make a statement that he’s a wacko on a fishing expedition.

BF also withdrew the subpoena against Taylor, which was never even contested b/c the motion to quash would’ve failed. So it’s pretty clear that what Taylor got in return for cooperating with Freedman is she won’t be subpoenaed for documents.

This is pretty much NAG’s take on this and I agree wholeheartedly

[Anonymous]

I think it's impossible to know what to think without knowing what was produced. I could see a situation where Taylor produced something very damaging as part of a deal, and then Freedman withdrew the subpoenas and Venable withdrew their motion.

I could also see a situation where Taylor produced basically nothing and it's the same outcome.

I think Freedman would claim victory either way, which is part of his job here.

So this is a wait and see for me. It doesn't look *good* for Blake but I continue not to understand what Swift has to do with anything in the actual lawsuit so I don't really get how it's bad for her either. But who knows.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think it's impossible to know what to think without knowing what was produced. I could see a situation where Taylor produced something very damaging as part of a deal, and then Freedman withdrew the subpoenas and Venable withdrew their motion.

I could also see a situation where Taylor produced basically nothing and it's the same outcome.

I think Freedman would claim victory either way, which is part of his job here.

So this is a wait and see for me. It doesn't look *good* for Blake but I continue not to understand what Swift has to do with anything in the actual lawsuit so I don't really get how it's bad for her either. But who knows.

You can’t understand that Taylor issuing a statement of support for Blake would have a huge impact on public opinion around this case? It would quite literally be a game changer.

[Anonymous]

TikTok creators noted that Blake’s legal team hasn’t responded. The quotes in People today are from a Lively rep - not Gottlieb or Hudson 🤔. Same with Daily Mail which credits a spokesman.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's impossible to know what to think without knowing what was produced. I could see a situation where Taylor produced something very damaging as part of a deal, and then Freedman withdrew the subpoenas and Venable withdrew their motion.

I could also see a situation where Taylor produced basically nothing and it's the same outcome.

I think Freedman would claim victory either way, which is part of his job here.

So this is a wait and see for me. It doesn't look *good* for Blake but I continue not to understand what Swift has to do with anything in the actual lawsuit so I don't really get how it's bad for her either. But who knows.

You can’t understand that Taylor issuing a statement of support for Blake would have a huge impact on public opinion around this case? It would quite literally be a game changer.

I guess? I am primarily interested in the legal side, and I don't see how any info she could produce would help or hurt either one because, by her own admission, she wasn't really involved. I get that her name grabs headlines but beyond that I don't see the relevancy. I don't care about her friendship with Blake.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think it's impossible to know what to think without knowing what was produced. I could see a situation where Taylor produced something very damaging as part of a deal, and then Freedman withdrew the subpoenas and Venable withdrew their motion.

I could also see a situation where Taylor produced basically nothing and it's the same outcome.

I think Freedman would claim victory either way, which is part of his job here.

So this is a wait and see for me. It doesn't look *good* for Blake but I continue not to understand what Swift has to do with anything in the actual lawsuit so I don't really get how it's bad for her either. But who knows.

Agree with this take.

[Anonymous]

The schemers are just digging a deeper hole the longer this carries on. Total imbeciles being exploited by all the grifters around them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's impossible to know what to think without knowing what was produced. I could see a situation where Taylor produced something very damaging as part of a deal, and then Freedman withdrew the subpoenas and Venable withdrew their motion.

I could also see a situation where Taylor produced basically nothing and it's the same outcome.

I think Freedman would claim victory either way, which is part of his job here.

So this is a wait and see for me. It doesn't look *good* for Blake but I continue not to understand what Swift has to do with anything in the actual lawsuit so I don't really get how it's bad for her either. But who knows.

You can’t understand that Taylor issuing a statement of support for Blake would have a huge impact on public opinion around this case? It would quite literally be a game changer.

I guess? I am primarily interested in the legal side, and I don't see how any info she could produce would help or hurt either one because, by her own admission, she wasn't really involved. I get that her name grabs headlines but beyond that I don't see the relevancy. I don't care about her friendship with Blake.

Part of the narrative they want to establish on Blake is that she is a liar. They want as much evidence of this before her deposition. According to DM, Taylor gave them exactly that. They want to impeach Blake’s credibility and show that she is a pathological liar, which let’s be honest is exactly what she is.

I also think it’s interesting that no one believes her. When Scarjo was asked about the lawsuit she burst into laughter. Countless comedians have made fun of her. Heck even Ryan has. The truth is no one would be laughing and joking if they thought her claims were serious. I think it’s pretty clear her claims are widely viewed as frivolous except amongst the most naive of 60 somethings and those with some sort of business relationship with Blake and Ryan.

[Anonymous]

Blake has lost Deux Moi which I never thought would happen. Shes an anonymous gossip podcaster that has a huge Instagram and newsletter following. Taylor‘s team goes to her. She’s always been very positive about Blake, even commenting before this lawsuit that she is scared of Blake and her people so “I would never say anything bad lol.”

She’s supported Blake. She has said she thinks that she was actually harassed. On her show this week, she is now reporting that Blake and Ryan are completely isolated from any friends that they shared with Taylor and that group. And that Taylor is done and plans to never speak to Blake again. The falling out of course started with the dragons text, and has escalated over the last few months, ending completely with the extortion attempt which is above and beyond anything Taylor ever imagined from her - and they’re no longer speaking and likely will not again.

I think anybody who’s even remotely close to Taylor will continue to distance themselves from Blake and Ryan.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's impossible to know what to think without knowing what was produced. I could see a situation where Taylor produced something very damaging as part of a deal, and then Freedman withdrew the subpoenas and Venable withdrew their motion.

I could also see a situation where Taylor produced basically nothing and it's the same outcome.

I think Freedman would claim victory either way, which is part of his job here.

So this is a wait and see for me. It doesn't look *good* for Blake but I continue not to understand what Swift has to do with anything in the actual lawsuit so I don't really get how it's bad for her either. But who knows.

You can’t understand that Taylor issuing a statement of support for Blake would have a huge impact on public opinion around this case? It would quite literally be a game changer.

I guess? I am primarily interested in the legal side, and I don't see how any info she could produce would help or hurt either one because, by her own admission, she wasn't really involved. I get that her name grabs headlines but beyond that I don't see the relevancy. I don't care about her friendship with Blake.

Part of the narrative they want to establish on Blake is that she is a liar. They want as much evidence of this before her deposition. According to DM, Taylor gave them exactly that. They want to impeach Blake’s credibility and show that she is a pathological liar, which let’s be honest is exactly what she is.

I also think it’s interesting that no one believes her. When Scarjo was asked about the lawsuit she burst into laughter. Countless comedians have made fun of her. Heck even Ryan has. The truth is no one would be laughing and joking if they thought her claims were serious. I think it’s pretty clear her claims are widely viewed as frivolous except amongst the most naive of 60 somethings and those with some sort of business relationship with Blake and Ryan.

60 somethings? I think 60-year-olds know what actual sexual harassment is.