Blake Lively- Jason Baldoni and NYT - False Light claims

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So what happens to Justin PR agents since they were also plaintiffs? They just started their company. There's no coming back from this for them.

Their claims are all dismissed and they are still being sued by Blake for the retaliation. Abel ans Stephanie Jones are also suing each other.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just do not understand the Blake Lively 'hate'. She doesn't seem any worse or more annoying than some other celebs. I really do think that there has been some sort of online propaganda campaign that has people really riled up. I guess I can see how she can come off as a little annoying or aloof but definitely not worthy of the vitriol and definitely not the only woman celeb like this.

And I say this as an anti-Meghan Markler so it's not like I can't have irrationally strong feelings of dislike towards celebs I don't even know.

I’m a woman and I’ll note that when women lie or exaggerate about SH or SA, the world is especially reactive. Blake should have considered that before she started this

That this is originally a SH claim at the heart of it all is lost in all of the noise, including this thread. I am not going to assume she is lying or exaggerating.

There is direct evidence that BL both lied and exaggerated.

Right and that’s why when pro Blake people gloat about this win today, I can’t help almost feeling bad for her for being such a sucker and taking this case forward (maybe she assumed wayfarer et al would buckle asap). She’s spent millions of dollars and only trashed her reputation further, and lost a relationship with TS. I saw some poll today saying approx 96% of people polled think she wasn’t SH. So her ‘win’ is not having to pay damages for defamation. Not sure that’s such a win. She is still viewed by most as a liar

Link please. This sort of talk just lends itself even more to bots/online smear tactics.

Again, there is direct evidence that BL both lied and exaggerated.

I want the link to 96% of people thinking BL lied about being SH please.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just do not understand the Blake Lively 'hate'. She doesn't seem any worse or more annoying than some other celebs. I really do think that there has been some sort of online propaganda campaign that has people really riled up. I guess I can see how she can come off as a little annoying or aloof but definitely not worthy of the vitriol and definitely not the only woman celeb like this.

And I say this as an anti-Meghan Markler so it's not like I can't have irrationally strong feelings of dislike towards celebs I don't even know.

I’m a woman and I’ll note that when women lie or exaggerate about SH or SA, the world is especially reactive. Blake should have considered that before she started this

That this is originally a SH claim at the heart of it all is lost in all of the noise, including this thread. I am not going to assume she is lying or exaggerating.

There is direct evidence that BL both lied and exaggerated.

Right and that’s why when pro Blake people gloat about this win today, I can’t help almost feeling bad for her for being such a sucker and taking this case forward (maybe she assumed wayfarer et al would buckle asap). She’s spent millions of dollars and only trashed her reputation further, and lost a relationship with TS. I saw some poll today saying approx 96% of people polled think she wasn’t SH. So her ‘win’ is not having to pay damages for defamation. Not sure that’s such a win. She is still viewed by most as a liar

Link please. This sort of talk just lends itself even more to bots/online smear tactics.

Again, there is direct evidence that BL both lied and exaggerated.

DP, I actually agree with you, but there's no way most people looked at the evidence. My guess would be a poll of the public would be pretty evenly split with a large chunk not caring or saying both suck. I was scrolling through reddit today and plenty of people on the main pop culture subs were against Baldoni or both.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think they should settle when that means paying Baldoni money. Isn’t most of his case going to vanish with the motions to dismiss, whereas none of hers is even really challenged? I think if they are able to get bad facts out about the actual bad actions taken by the PR team etc then people will start to see their side more. That was her reason for filing the suit in the first place, so let’s see what’s in the discovery.

If they do settle once discovery rolls in, maybe that signals to me that discovery resulted in a nothingburger.

What MTD?

Most of Baldoni’s claims against Lively have been challenged by the parties in motions to dismiss. Freedman just fought over coughing up various financials for his clients and lost except in terms of tax returns mostly. The fact that he fought these doc requests could also be signaling they can’t really show $400M in lost profits. Baldoni alone made $50M in profits off the movie and frankly doesn’t ever have to work again. If a lot of his claims get dismissed and the damages he is claiming go down, not sure there is a reason to settle unless Sarowitz is going to fork over a bunch of cash to Lively.

Lol. Those MTD weren’t granted. Tiny difference, no?

Are you new here? The MTDs challenging most or all of Baldoni’s claims (and Lively’s claims against Jed Wallace) are briefed but not yet decided. Only bad things can happen there for Baldoni by his claims being thrown out. None of Lively’s are challenged besides Wallace. The judge has already signaled that there is a good chance Baldoni’s claims against deep pockets NYT will be dismissed.

You’re silly and trying to spin.

Not new. Just bc someone files a MTD doesn’t mean it will be granted. lol. Baldoni likely didn’t challenge her claims for strategic purposes, not bc they’re at all legit.

The NYT case is separate from livelys. That case could be thrown out and the one against her will survive. But I think the NYT case will survive in some form.

The judge has already told Freedman he has a serious group pleading problem and strongly suggested several times he should amend his shambolic complaint, which Freedman has declined to do. This suggests that many claims will be dismissed, and how many he will be permitted to replead is an open question.

Are you Arlington mom? Talk to a litigator before you confine spouting off nonsense. All of this is normal and part of advocacy. None of it matters until decisions are actually made

Silly me, saying weeks ago that "If a lot of his claims get dismissed and the damages he is claiming go down, not sure there is a reason to settle unless Sarowitz is going to fork over a bunch of cash to Lively" and being told that was ridiculous via the above and that "Baldoni likely didn't challenge her claims for strategic purposes" lol. WRONG. (Yes, I am that petty - if you won't admit your ridiculous wrongness, I don't mind showing you.)

For Lively defenders who would like to see it, here is a reddit thread on the many different ways Freedman screwed up, including failing to replead when given the chance: https://www.reddit.com/r/ItEndsWithLawsuits/comments/1l7i068/the_judge_isnt_biased_freedman_didnt_write_a_good/

(I saw a Lively defender's earlier comment suggesting that Freedman didn't replead because he knew he couldn't fix the problems -- point taken, this is not directed at you ha.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I just do not understand the Blake Lively 'hate'. She doesn't seem any worse or more annoying than some other celebs. I really do think that there has been some sort of online propaganda campaign that has people really riled up. I guess I can see how she can come off as a little annoying or aloof but definitely not worthy of the vitriol and definitely not the only woman celeb like this.

And I say this as an anti-Meghan Markler so it's not like I can't have irrationally strong feelings of dislike towards celebs I don't even know.

Really? A lot of people have come out of the woodwork claiming she was abusive or toxic in prior workplaces. The cherry on top of the toxic cake was Taylor Swift.

If anything, the break with Taylor shows Blake has no grip on reality because she genuinely believed they were on the same playing field. You say you don’t understand the hate against Blake, have you forgotten how massive the backlash was against celebrities who wronged TS in the past? Jake Gyllenhall, Kim k, Kanye. Scooter Braun, etc. Blake thought she could blackmail Taylor and walk away unscathed. She thought she would win in a PR war with the world’s biggest pop star.

Blake’s also finding out that Taylor’s friendship shielded her from a lot of hate for her own bad behavior in the past. And now she’s fair game not only for anyone she’s pissed off, but also for an army of Swifties ready to strike. Taylor just won a battle against her former label to own her music, her fans are ready for the next villain. Blake fills those shoes perfectly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Has Freedman said anything about this?

He is not quoted in major outlets like CNN, Daily Mail, NY Times, and People. All say they reached out to Baldoni's team and got no comment.

What are the chances that Freedman steps down after this, and/or Sarowitz switches firms, with a thanks to Freedman for all the PR help? It would depend on how Freedman has been posturing the case to them. If he's been telling them leave to amend is freely granted and their chances of losing almost all their claims for good were small, they might be feeling betrayed right now. Plus, given the Daily Main reporter discovery that was just worked out, Freedman is practically a witness in the case now. Interesting that it's taking such a long time for a statement to come out from Freedman.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wouldn’t take a victory lap just yet if I were BL supporters. She still has to prove her own case, and let’s face it, she can’t. When she either withdraws her claims or loses in court, Justin will look like a victim of her abuse who was neutered by all of the privileges lively and others took advantage of. And it will be true because that’s exactly what happened here.

The judge didn’t say Baldoni’s case was frivolous. The judge even acknowledged that there was powerful inference that the NYT had the story months before the CRD complaint. He simply said litigation privilege prevents Justin from suing Blake and fair report privilege prevents Justin from suing NYT. This is a case where the law protected the abusers. If you want it changed, you’ll have to take it up with state legislatures or the Supreme Court. I said this earlier and no lively supporters have commented because they know it’s true. Baldoni was the victim of bad laws that stacked the deck against him.

Does anyone think Baldoni et al will appeal? I think that there will be a number of 3rd parties who might want to help appeal the decision against the NYT.

I would love to see him appeal the defamation claims, I think there is a argument that what she did went behind the litigation privilege, particularly in light of the Van Zan stuff.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Has Freedman said anything about this?

He is not quoted in major outlets like CNN, Daily Mail, NY Times, and People. All say they reached out to Baldoni's team and got no comment.

What are the chances that Freedman steps down after this, and/or Sarowitz switches firms, with a thanks to Freedman for all the PR help? It would depend on how Freedman has been posturing the case to them. If he's been telling them leave to amend is freely granted and their chances of losing almost all their claims for good were small, they might be feeling betrayed right now. Plus, given the Daily Main reporter discovery that was just worked out, Freedman is practically a witness in the case now. Interesting that it's taking such a long time for a statement to come out from Freedman.

Since Jones is no longer in the case, that discovery goes away.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Has Freedman said anything about this?

He is not quoted in major outlets like CNN, Daily Mail, NY Times, and People. All say they reached out to Baldoni's team and got no comment.

What are the chances that Freedman steps down after this, and/or Sarowitz switches firms, with a thanks to Freedman for all the PR help? It would depend on how Freedman has been posturing the case to them. If he's been telling them leave to amend is freely granted and their chances of losing almost all their claims for good were small, they might be feeling betrayed right now. Plus, given the Daily Main reporter discovery that was just worked out, Freedman is practically a witness in the case now. Interesting that it's taking such a long time for a statement to come out from Freedman.

Since Jones is no longer in the case, that discovery goes away.

That’s a separate case.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I just do not understand the Blake Lively 'hate'. She doesn't seem any worse or more annoying than some other celebs. I really do think that there has been some sort of online propaganda campaign that has people really riled up. I guess I can see how she can come off as a little annoying or aloof but definitely not worthy of the vitriol and definitely not the only woman celeb like this.

And I say this as an anti-Meghan Markler so it's not like I can't have irrationally strong feelings of dislike towards celebs I don't even know.

Liking Blake and hating Meghan Markle actually is not surprising, do you also like to visit plantations?

[Anonymous]

Did not realize until today that Liman is a nepobaby. Dad was Arthur Liman, a very famous lawyer for his role in investigating the Iran Contra affair among other things.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Did not realize until today that Liman is a nepobaby. Dad was Arthur Liman, a very famous lawyer for his role in investigating the Iran Contra affair among other things.

Me too. Total nepo baby!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just do not understand the Blake Lively 'hate'. She doesn't seem any worse or more annoying than some other celebs. I really do think that there has been some sort of online propaganda campaign that has people really riled up. I guess I can see how she can come off as a little annoying or aloof but definitely not worthy of the vitriol and definitely not the only woman celeb like this.

And I say this as an anti-Meghan Markler so it's not like I can't have irrationally strong feelings of dislike towards celebs I don't even know.

Really? A lot of people have come out of the woodwork claiming she was abusive or toxic in prior workplaces. The cherry on top of the toxic cake was Taylor Swift.

If anything, the break with Taylor shows Blake has no grip on reality because she genuinely believed they were on the same playing field. You say you don’t understand the hate against Blake, have you forgotten how massive the backlash was against celebrities who wronged TS in the past? Jake Gyllenhall, Kim k, Kanye. Scooter Braun, etc. Blake thought she could blackmail Taylor and walk away unscathed. She thought she would win in a PR war with the world’s biggest pop star.

Blake’s also finding out that Taylor’s friendship shielded her from a lot of hate for her own bad behavior in the past. And now she’s fair game not only for anyone she’s pissed off, but also for an army of Swifties ready to strike. Taylor just won a battle against her former label to own her music, her fans are ready for the next villain. Blake fills those shoes perfectly.

That would be a little weird given that Baldoni's PR firm was poised to take down Swift fans and their brand of feminism. Your whole comment above is written like we are all still in high school trying to date the same guy or something, but go off.

I frankly would not be shocked if Swift now said something kind about Lively given what a huge and emotional win this is for her, but I hope she doesn't, because it would frankly make her look like a fair weather friend, whereas I had thought she was someone who stuck through thick and thin usually.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just do not understand the Blake Lively 'hate'. She doesn't seem any worse or more annoying than some other celebs. I really do think that there has been some sort of online propaganda campaign that has people really riled up. I guess I can see how she can come off as a little annoying or aloof but definitely not worthy of the vitriol and definitely not the only woman celeb like this.

And I say this as an anti-Meghan Markler so it's not like I can't have irrationally strong feelings of dislike towards celebs I don't even know.

Really? A lot of people have come out of the woodwork claiming she was abusive or toxic in prior workplaces. The cherry on top of the toxic cake was Taylor Swift.

If anything, the break with Taylor shows Blake has no grip on reality because she genuinely believed they were on the same playing field. You say you don’t understand the hate against Blake, have you forgotten how massive the backlash was against celebrities who wronged TS in the past? Jake Gyllenhall, Kim k, Kanye. Scooter Braun, etc. Blake thought she could blackmail Taylor and walk away unscathed. She thought she would win in a PR war with the world’s biggest pop star.

Blake’s also finding out that Taylor’s friendship shielded her from a lot of hate for her own bad behavior in the past. And now she’s fair game not only for anyone she’s pissed off, but also for an army of Swifties ready to strike. Taylor just won a battle against her former label to own her music, her fans are ready for the next villain. Blake fills those shoes perfectly.

That would be a little weird given that Baldoni's PR firm was poised to take down Swift fans and their brand of feminism. Your whole comment above is written like we are all still in high school trying to date the same guy or something, but go off.

I frankly would not be shocked if Swift now said something kind about Lively given what a huge and emotional win this is for her, but I hope she doesn't, because it would frankly make her look like a fair weather friend, whereas I had thought she was someone who stuck through thick and thin usually.

Still in denial. . . .

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did not realize until today that Liman is a nepobaby. Dad was Arthur Liman, a very famous lawyer for his role in investigating the Iran Contra affair among other things.

Me too. Total nepo baby!

More positing that the real problem here is the judge, lol.

FWIW, I believe I read somewhere that although he was a Trump appointee, he was essentially one of the judges from the "democratic" set of that group, though I don't know whether it's true or not and I don't know the judge's political affiliations.