Blake Lively- Jason Baldoni and NYT - False Light claims

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Awww, u mad because the real feminists and feminist lawyers are siding with Lively while Baldoni can only pull in the fakers and poseurs like Candace Owens, Meghan Kelly, etc? Sad.

The best she could gather is an individual and a group I’ve never heard of. The big names must have turned her down.

These are the CA organizations who helped draft the law and get it passed. Of course they are the ones to weigh in. You are being ridiculous because you continue to view this as a "Team Blake v. Team Justin" situation. Perhaps take a break while the grown ups discuss the legal matters, and then you can get back into things again when the conversation turns back to whether or not Ryan Reynolds is secretly gay for Hugh Jackman.

Well, they aren’t well known at all, so I stand by my statement. The major feminist organizations are not involved with those lawsuit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Awww, u mad because the real feminists and feminist lawyers are siding with Lively while Baldoni can only pull in the fakers and poseurs like Candace Owens, Meghan Kelly, etc? Sad.

The best she could gather is an individual and a group I’ve never heard of. The big names must have turned her down.

These are the CA organizations who helped draft the law and get it passed. Of course they are the ones to weigh in. You are being ridiculous because you continue to view this as a "Team Blake v. Team Justin" situation. Perhaps take a break while the grown ups discuss the legal matters, and then you can get back into things again when the conversation turns back to whether or not Ryan Reynolds is secretly gay for Hugh Jackman.

Well, they aren’t well known at all, so I stand by my statement. The major feminist organizations are not involved with those lawsuit.

This lawsuit

[Anonymous]

Something I find funny is that Baldoni supporters basically admitted the defamation suit was basically a baseless attempt at retaliation days ago by saying nobody expected him to win $400m from that suit. It had no basis in reality besides causing pain and discouraging proceeding with the affirmative suit. It’s a tool.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Women’s groups now taking position against male feminist Justin Baldoni’s weaponization of defamation claims, but sure, he is just a poor widdle victim here.

They’re in invested in upholding 47.1. Justin is just collateral damage to them. I suspect as much about most of Blake’s supporters. The best thing Blake can do for 47.1 is settle because she is the poster child for how this law can be abused. It’s a shame that the first test of this law relies on such an unworthy plaintiff. She’s really setting women back.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Women’s groups now taking position against male feminist Justin Baldoni’s weaponization of defamation claims, but sure, he is just a poor widdle victim here.

They’re in invested in upholding 47.1. Justin is just collateral damage to them. I suspect as much about most of Blake’s supporters. The best thing Blake can do for 47.1 is settle because she is the poster child for how this law can be abused. It’s a shame that the first test of this law relies on such an unworthy plaintiff. She’s really setting women back.

I agree, it also seems to be mostly targeted at helping victims of sexual assault, which of course is not applicable here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Something I find funny is that Baldoni supporters basically admitted the defamation suit was basically a baseless attempt at retaliation days ago by saying nobody expected him to win $400m from that suit. It had no basis in reality besides causing pain and discouraging proceeding with the affirmative suit. It’s a tool.

Wow. You’re so shameless. I said that and you are twisting as always. I said that the amount of damages set out in a complaint is different than what one would expect in a settlement.

It’s a valid claim.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Awww, u mad because the real feminists and feminist lawyers are siding with Lively while Baldoni can only pull in the fakers and poseurs like Candace Owens, Meghan Kelly, etc? Sad.

The best she could gather is an individual and a group I’ve never heard of. The big names must have turned her down.

These are the CA organizations who helped draft the law and get it passed. Of course they are the ones to weigh in. You are being ridiculous because you continue to view this as a "Team Blake v. Team Justin" situation. Perhaps take a break while the grown ups discuss the legal matters, and then you can get back into things again when the conversation turns back to whether or not Ryan Reynolds is secretly gay for Hugh Jackman.

lol. Thanks for posting that. I laughed!

[Anonymous]

If Blake wasn't the one to potentially lead to 47.1's demise, it would've been someone else who made a false accusation. It seems like the law is so shaky.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And again, Baldoni supporters are already making extremely abusive comments about SA victim Elyse Dorsey for her brief over on IEWL. Those are your people. That’s what you guys are doing, and that’s the kind of behavior Freedman’s tactics are leading to and encouraging. So have fun sitting with that.

DP. If they are, that’s wrong. But with the BS I’ve seen from the ‘totally organic’ Lively supporters, I would not doubt some of them are fake and just desperately trying to make Baldoni look bad.

That's ridiculous. I invite you to go in that thread and look at all the Baldoni supporters pointing to her submission and calling her disgusting, a "driveling mess," and telling her to eff off etc. I certainly recognize several of these redditor names as regular Baldoni supporters. No respect, not very many comments to the effect of "she may be misguided here but I support her generally" etc, just general hate and complete disrespect directed at Dorsey and her position. Classy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Something I find funny is that Baldoni supporters basically admitted the defamation suit was basically a baseless attempt at retaliation days ago by saying nobody expected him to win $400m from that suit. It had no basis in reality besides causing pain and discouraging proceeding with the affirmative suit. It’s a tool.

Wow. You’re so shameless. I said that and you are twisting as always. I said that the amount of damages set out in a complaint is different than what one would expect in a settlement.

It’s a valid claim.

Oh. I guess I did misunderstand what you were saying then. Sorry about that. You really think Baldoni was correct to sue for defamation for damages totaling $400M or more?

I really think that's baseless and that the amount he arrived at was intended to punish Lively for suing him in the first place and to make her settle as soon as possible. I'm glad she did not. And I hope a lot of his claims are dismissed and his claimed damages are set to an amount that is more based in actual reality.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Something I find funny is that Baldoni supporters basically admitted the defamation suit was basically a baseless attempt at retaliation days ago by saying nobody expected him to win $400m from that suit. It had no basis in reality besides causing pain and discouraging proceeding with the affirmative suit. It’s a tool.

Wow. You’re so shameless. I said that and you are twisting as always. I said that the amount of damages set out in a complaint is different than what one would expect in a settlement.

It’s a valid claim.

Oh. I guess I did misunderstand what you were saying then. Sorry about that. You really think Baldoni was correct to sue for defamation for damages totaling $400M or more?

I really think that's baseless and that the amount he arrived at was intended to punish Lively for suing him in the first place and to make her settle as soon as possible. I'm glad she did not. And I hope a lot of his claims are dismissed and his claimed damages are set to an amount that is more based in actual reality.

I think the number was fine. But settlement numbers are typically lower, and if they go to trial, the jury will decide after determining if there is liability or not.

[Anonymous]

^ and I believe the 400m represents multiple parties, no? Not just justin. The number is not unreasonable as a number in a complaint

I’ve seen people who have extremely modest incomes file for 25M and more.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Something I find funny is that Baldoni supporters basically admitted the defamation suit was basically a baseless attempt at retaliation days ago by saying nobody expected him to win $400m from that suit. It had no basis in reality besides causing pain and discouraging proceeding with the affirmative suit. It’s a tool.

Nope. No im a supporter and I did not say that. Maybe one supporter said that, and you’ve exaggerated that into several Baldoni supporters on this thread.

Nope.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love love love that Elyse Dorsey is filing an amicus brief. She survived Jeffrey Wright’s defamation harassment suit and is speaking out to prevent other victims from undergoing the same abuse if the legal system. Dorsey’s harasser even admitted via texts that he sued for defamation to bankrupt his accusers, also texting “maybe defamation for fun but not to win.”

These defamation suits are just fun little hurtful strategies that vindictive lawyers like Wright and Freedman are using to hurt victims of SH/SA, so that maybe they can settle the cases early and they never see the light of day.

Dorsey also compares Virginia’s relatively weak anti-SLAPP statute which allowed Wright’s defamation claims to proceed and require legal defense for over a year, against California’s stronger law which Dorsey argues Liman should allow to protect Lively here against Baldoni’s defamation claims.

Coming from Dorsey, this means something and I hope Liman listens.

Responding to myself to note that Baldoni supporters are already viscerally attacking Elyse Dorsey over on the It Ends With Lawsuits subreddit.

It will be interesting to see how Freedman responds to these briefs, if he chooses to, which I think he will. I don’t to ink he’ll be as aggro as he is against Lively, but I predict a 50% aggression level, still enough to insult actual SA/SH survivors (Wright was fired for cause by his university) in defense of Baldoni. Freedman gonna Freedman.

Again, many of us have been harassed and some of us support Freedman. You are trying to twist the narrative and make Baldoni/Freedman play against SA/SH victims and survivors. That’s not the case at all and is a false narrative that you continue to perpetuate.

The push is against those who ‘falsely’ claim to be SA/SH victims. Many, many of us still assert that BL was not a SA/SH victim by Baldoni, and we embrace the Baldoni-Freedman narrative.

Stop making this an anti SH/SA show. It’s an anti fake SH/SA show.

No. Actual victims of SA/SH and lawyers representing their interests have now filed two amicus briefs supporting Lively. Those are facts. What is false about that narrative? If Freedman responds, he will oppose them.

Baldoni filed a $400 million defamation claim against the woman who accused him of harassment. This is now a strategy in the handbook of harassers everywhere from Bill Cosby to Johnny Depp and now Justin Baldoni.

Zero such people and organizations have filed amicus briefs on behalf of Baldoni.

You don’t believe Lively, but I do, and these amicus briefs call Baldoni out for his defamation claims which are meant purely to punish and discourage victims for/from coming forward.

More contortions. Keep trying!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And again, Baldoni supporters are already making extremely abusive comments about SA victim Elyse Dorsey for her brief over on IEWL. Those are your people. That’s what you guys are doing, and that’s the kind of behavior Freedman’s tactics are leading to and encouraging. So have fun sitting with that.

DP. If they are, that’s wrong. But with the BS I’ve seen from the ‘totally organic’ Lively supporters, I would not doubt some of them are fake and just desperately trying to make Baldoni look bad.

That's ridiculous. I invite you to go in that thread and look at all the Baldoni supporters pointing to her submission and calling her disgusting, a "driveling mess," and telling her to eff off etc. I certainly recognize several of these redditor names as regular Baldoni supporters. No respect, not very many comments to the effect of "she may be misguided here but I support her generally" etc, just general hate and complete disrespect directed at Dorsey and her position. Classy.

Why do you keep yapping about Reddit? We don’t care. Stop going there if it annoys you.