Blake Lively- Jason Baldoni and NYT - False Light claims

[Anonymous]

Daily Mail is reporting than Lively’s deposit has been delayed again, likely because there still is no Amemded Comlaint with respect to Wallace.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Daily Mail is reporting than Lively’s deposit has been delayed again, likely because there still is no Amemded Comlaint with respect to Wallace.

Deposition, not deposit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Daily Mail is reporting than Lively’s deposit has been delayed again, likely because there still is no Amemded Comlaint with respect to Wallace.

Hmm, and whose responsibility is it to amend the complaint?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is she going to do this 37 more times?
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.634304/gov.uscourts.nysd.634304.497.0.pdf

Truly an unhinged move on her part

I'm not defending the legal strategy behind these subpoenas (I question it also), but calling this "unhinged" as though your guy hasn't done much, much worse is certainly a take. You guys are still loathe to discuss Baldoni's entire legal complaint getting completely dismissed (and commonly attribute this to judicial bias lol!), much less Freedman's fake punching of his opposing counsel. You might want to consider some of these things in proportion to one another because you're going to be in a for a shock the next time Freedman promises to do something he never does or Fritz signs a sworn declaration attesting to what the legal standard is.

This is a really strange way of looking at this case. It was Blake who started this mess. She went to the New York Times with the story and filed this insane lawsuit. It’s pretty clear that Justin hired a communications crisis firm to help him with the communications crisis Blake created. It was absolute insanity to ever accuse him of a smear campaign.

Hollywood PR is dirty and gross and no one should know that more than Blake, who has used every dirty trick in the book to claw her way into a career. Justin was just playing the game because she set it up and no one would blame him for that. We all know this. What Blake is doing is truly embarrassing. It has cost her her hair company, her friendship with Taylor, which was probably her single greatest asset in celebrity world, and millions of followers and fans.

But yes, let’s talk about how crazy Justin‘s lawyer is lol.

Honestly, better to not engage. Unless you enjoy arguing with a brick wall.

DP this is a great way of putting it. BL supporters always scream that we don't engage with them both on DCUM and the IEWU subreddit (even though many of us did at the beginning), and it's just useless because they will not change their minds on anything, so what's the use? Blake's word is law, and there's absolutely no evidence that can change that, and every act of defense on Justin's behalf is actually an example of DARVO, so what is there to argue with?

Like, I'm firmly pro-Justin, but if at trial, they show the birthing video, and it's as Blake has claimed, I would completely change my mind about him. The reverse will not happen with Blake defenders. It could be completely different than what Blake claimed, but as long as Blake claims she felt uncomfortable, that is enough in their eyes for it to have constituted sexual harassment.

What exactly do you think the birth video is going to show? Even her claims are not that bad. She was not assaulted. She was not berated. She was not forced to do anything.

At worse, they had a different vision for the scene, and they wanted to push boundaries that she did not want to do. Unfortunately, she had not turned in her nudity rider, despite them begging for it, which would’ve put down parameters and probably avoided the conversation altogether.

She ultimately got her way, because she had way more power on the set. There was just no sexual harassment happening. I’m sure Justin has an annoying way about him and he doesn’t seem like the most socially aware guy, but that is far from sexual harassment.

Seriously! These women! Honestly, she’s looking at it all wrong. Just enjoy this mild bit of sexual harassment, as a treat.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is she going to do this 37 more times?
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.634304/gov.uscourts.nysd.634304.497.0.pdf

Truly an unhinged move on her part

I'm not defending the legal strategy behind these subpoenas (I question it also), but calling this "unhinged" as though your guy hasn't done much, much worse is certainly a take. You guys are still loathe to discuss Baldoni's entire legal complaint getting completely dismissed (and commonly attribute this to judicial bias lol!), much less Freedman's fake punching of his opposing counsel. You might want to consider some of these things in proportion to one another because you're going to be in a for a shock the next time Freedman promises to do something he never does or Fritz signs a sworn declaration attesting to what the legal standard is.

This is a really strange way of looking at this case. It was Blake who started this mess. She went to the New York Times with the story and filed this insane lawsuit. It’s pretty clear that Justin hired a communications crisis firm to help him with the communications crisis Blake created. It was absolute insanity to ever accuse him of a smear campaign.

Hollywood PR is dirty and gross and no one should know that more than Blake, who has used every dirty trick in the book to claw her way into a career. Justin was just playing the game because she set it up and no one would blame him for that. We all know this. What Blake is doing is truly embarrassing. It has cost her her hair company, her friendship with Taylor, which was probably her single greatest asset in celebrity world, and millions of followers and fans.

But yes, let’s talk about how crazy Justin‘s lawyer is lol.

Honestly, better to not engage. Unless you enjoy arguing with a brick wall.

DP this is a great way of putting it. BL supporters always scream that we don't engage with them both on DCUM and the IEWU subreddit (even though many of us did at the beginning), and it's just useless because they will not change their minds on anything, so what's the use? Blake's word is law, and there's absolutely no evidence that can change that, and every act of defense on Justin's behalf is actually an example of DARVO, so what is there to argue with?

Like, I'm firmly pro-Justin, but if at trial, they show the birthing video, and it's as Blake has claimed, I would completely change my mind about him. The reverse will not happen with Blake defenders. It could be completely different than what Blake claimed, but as long as Blake claims she felt uncomfortable, that is enough in their eyes for it to have constituted sexual harassment.

What exactly do you think the birth video is going to show? Even her claims are not that bad. She was not assaulted. She was not berated. She was not forced to do anything.

At worse, they had a different vision for the scene, and they wanted to push boundaries that she did not want to do. Unfortunately, she had not turned in her nudity rider, despite them begging for it, which would’ve put down parameters and probably avoided the conversation altogether.

She ultimately got her way, because she had way more power on the set. There was just no sexual harassment happening. I’m sure Justin has an annoying way about him and he doesn’t seem like the most socially aware guy, but that is far from sexual harassment.

Seriously! These women! Honestly, she’s looking at it all wrong. Just enjoy this mild bit of sexual harassment, as a treat.

And Justin should just happily accept being called a sexual predator by one of the most powerful men in Hollywood am I right? No such thing as bad publicity!!!

Look, Blake REEEALLLLY wanted to try her hand at directing. what is throwing the life away of one man if she can get that chance? She deserves it! She’s supposed to be satisfied with fronting crappy hair products and alcohol lines? She is a creative genius!!!!! She needs this! Scarlett is directing damn it! Why not her!

And since she has no talent might as well play the sexual harassment card am I right?

[Anonymous]

Popcorn Planet guy just filed something against Blake in Florida.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is she going to do this 37 more times?
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.634304/gov.uscourts.nysd.634304.497.0.pdf

Truly an unhinged move on her part

I'm not defending the legal strategy behind these subpoenas (I question it also), but calling this "unhinged" as though your guy hasn't done much, much worse is certainly a take. You guys are still loathe to discuss Baldoni's entire legal complaint getting completely dismissed (and commonly attribute this to judicial bias lol!), much less Freedman's fake punching of his opposing counsel. You might want to consider some of these things in proportion to one another because you're going to be in a for a shock the next time Freedman promises to do something he never does or Fritz signs a sworn declaration attesting to what the legal standard is.

This is a really strange way of looking at this case. It was Blake who started this mess. She went to the New York Times with the story and filed this insane lawsuit. It’s pretty clear that Justin hired a communications crisis firm to help him with the communications crisis Blake created. It was absolute insanity to ever accuse him of a smear campaign.

Hollywood PR is dirty and gross and no one should know that more than Blake, who has used every dirty trick in the book to claw her way into a career. Justin was just playing the game because she set it up and no one would blame him for that. We all know this. What Blake is doing is truly embarrassing. It has cost her her hair company, her friendship with Taylor, which was probably her single greatest asset in celebrity world, and millions of followers and fans.

But yes, let’s talk about how crazy Justin‘s lawyer is lol.

Honestly, better to not engage. Unless you enjoy arguing with a brick wall.

DP this is a great way of putting it. BL supporters always scream that we don't engage with them both on DCUM and the IEWU subreddit (even though many of us did at the beginning), and it's just useless because they will not change their minds on anything, so what's the use? Blake's word is law, and there's absolutely no evidence that can change that, and every act of defense on Justin's behalf is actually an example of DARVO, so what is there to argue with?

Like, I'm firmly pro-Justin, but if at trial, they show the birthing video, and it's as Blake has claimed, I would completely change my mind about him. The reverse will not happen with Blake defenders. It could be completely different than what Blake claimed, but as long as Blake claims she felt uncomfortable, that is enough in their eyes for it to have constituted sexual harassment.

What exactly do you think the birth video is going to show? Even her claims are not that bad. She was not assaulted. She was not berated. She was not forced to do anything.

At worse, they had a different vision for the scene, and they wanted to push boundaries that she did not want to do. Unfortunately, she had not turned in her nudity rider, despite them begging for it, which would’ve put down parameters and probably avoided the conversation altogether.

She ultimately got her way, because she had way more power on the set. There was just no sexual harassment happening. I’m sure Justin has an annoying way about him and he doesn’t seem like the most socially aware guy, but that is far from sexual harassment.

I don't think you understood the point of my post. I do not think the birth video will show anything. The point I was trying to make it is I can actually point to something tangible showing I am capable of changing my mind. In contrast, there is literally no hypothetical under which Blake supporters would change their minds. You could show them any evidence, and they would not change their minds, barring something very, very extreme, like Blake literally saying "I lied about this whole thing," and even then, there would still be some who say she's just saying that because she couldn't handle the pressure of the lawsuit anymore.

Some irony here in you trying to paint JB supporters as reasonable (and perhaps you are) because you are open to changed facts... and this JB supporter couldn't even deal with a hypothetical change of facts without being like NO THAT'S IMPOSSIBLE. You may very well be the outlier, but most JB supporters here are just as entrenched as BL supporters.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Popcorn Planet guy just filed something against Blake in Florida.

Bumping

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Popcorn Planet guy just filed something against Blake in Florida.

Interested to know if Lively will try to get it moved to Liman.

There are a few new motions on the NY docket. Many many letters and motions calling out the tactics. I know they will fall on deaf ears, but still good for them.

It seems to take a few days for the non-parties' stuff to be posted, so they are still posting responses to Hudson's letter that were apparently written prior to Liman's ruling. He rules quickly for Lively or against CC and when CCs make well-reasoned motions he sits on them until Lively has a chance to respond, then gives Lively what she wants before the CCs can answer.

I had previously posted it seemed unfair that he was giving the pro se CCs just two business days to respond to Lively's oppositions, but since Lively withdrew them, the CCs ended up getting less than one business day to respond (Hudson's letter posted Saturday July 26 and Liman ruled first thing Monday mooting them. So efficient!). Now the CCs are pointing out they also asked for a PO ruling that Lively cannot issue further subpoenas without a court order, since Lively's withdrawal is open ended. Liman should honestly do it for his own sanity so Lively doesn't clog up the docket with dozens more of these.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is she going to do this 37 more times?
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.634304/gov.uscourts.nysd.634304.497.0.pdf

Truly an unhinged move on her part

I'm not defending the legal strategy behind these subpoenas (I question it also), but calling this "unhinged" as though your guy hasn't done much, much worse is certainly a take. You guys are still loathe to discuss Baldoni's entire legal complaint getting completely dismissed (and commonly attribute this to judicial bias lol!), much less Freedman's fake punching of his opposing counsel. You might want to consider some of these things in proportion to one another because you're going to be in a for a shock the next time Freedman promises to do something he never does or Fritz signs a sworn declaration attesting to what the legal standard is.

This is a really strange way of looking at this case. It was Blake who started this mess. She went to the New York Times with the story and filed this insane lawsuit. It’s pretty clear that Justin hired a communications crisis firm to help him with the communications crisis Blake created. It was absolute insanity to ever accuse him of a smear campaign.

Hollywood PR is dirty and gross and no one should know that more than Blake, who has used every dirty trick in the book to claw her way into a career. Justin was just playing the game because she set it up and no one would blame him for that. We all know this. What Blake is doing is truly embarrassing. It has cost her her hair company, her friendship with Taylor, which was probably her single greatest asset in celebrity world, and millions of followers and fans.

But yes, let’s talk about how crazy Justin‘s lawyer is lol.

Honestly, better to not engage. Unless you enjoy arguing with a brick wall.

DP this is a great way of putting it. BL supporters always scream that we don't engage with them both on DCUM and the IEWU subreddit (even though many of us did at the beginning), and it's just useless because they will not change their minds on anything, so what's the use? Blake's word is law, and there's absolutely no evidence that can change that, and every act of defense on Justin's behalf is actually an example of DARVO, so what is there to argue with?

Like, I'm firmly pro-Justin, but if at trial, they show the birthing video, and it's as Blake has claimed, I would completely change my mind about him. The reverse will not happen with Blake defenders. It could be completely different than what Blake claimed, but as long as Blake claims she felt uncomfortable, that is enough in their eyes for it to have constituted sexual harassment.

What exactly do you think the birth video is going to show? Even her claims are not that bad. She was not assaulted. She was not berated. She was not forced to do anything.

At worse, they had a different vision for the scene, and they wanted to push boundaries that she did not want to do. Unfortunately, she had not turned in her nudity rider, despite them begging for it, which would’ve put down parameters and probably avoided the conversation altogether.

She ultimately got her way, because she had way more power on the set. There was just no sexual harassment happening. I’m sure Justin has an annoying way about him and he doesn’t seem like the most socially aware guy, but that is far from sexual harassment.

I don't think you understood the point of my post. I do not think the birth video will show anything. The point I was trying to make it is I can actually point to something tangible showing I am capable of changing my mind. In contrast, there is literally no hypothetical under which Blake supporters would change their minds. You could show them any evidence, and they would not change their minds, barring something very, very extreme, like Blake literally saying "I lied about this whole thing," and even then, there would still be some who say she's just saying that because she couldn't handle the pressure of the lawsuit anymore.

Some irony here in you trying to paint JB supporters as reasonable (and perhaps you are) because you are open to changed facts... and this JB supporter couldn't even deal with a hypothetical change of facts without being like NO THAT'S IMPOSSIBLE. You may very well be the outlier, but most JB supporters here are just as entrenched as BL supporters.

That prior PP was arguing essentially what the standard for MTD is... even if the scenes plays out exactly as Blake claims, those allegations don't give rise to SH in PP's opinion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Popcorn Planet guy just filed something against Blake in Florida.

Interested to know if Lively will try to get it moved to Liman.

There are a few new motions on the NY docket. Many many letters and motions calling out the tactics. I know they will fall on deaf ears, but still good for them.

It seems to take a few days for the non-parties' stuff to be posted, so they are still posting responses to Hudson's letter that were apparently written prior to Liman's ruling. He rules quickly for Lively or against CC and when CCs make well-reasoned motions he sits on them until Lively has a chance to respond, then gives Lively what she wants before the CCs can answer.

I had previously posted it seemed unfair that he was giving the pro se CCs just two business days to respond to Lively's oppositions, but since Lively withdrew them, the CCs ended up getting less than one business day to respond (Hudson's letter posted Saturday July 26 and Liman ruled first thing Monday mooting them. So efficient!). Now the CCs are pointing out they also asked for a PO ruling that Lively cannot issue further subpoenas without a court order, since Lively's withdrawal is open ended. Liman should honestly do it for his own sanity so Lively doesn't clog up the docket with dozens more of these.

I wonder if Liman would rule differently if one of these CCs retained a lawyer who also clerked for the same Supreme Court Justice he did. That would be fun to watch. Or do lawyers have an unspoken code -- do not take on any cases that would shake up the incestuous circle they're all part of?

[Anonymous]

The hoaxers Blake and Ryan have lost. Any other take is spin.

[Anonymous]

Live tweet of today's hearing on the subpoena for Liner Freedman's media comms: https://x.com/innercitypress/status/195062088861893445544

Interesting stuff. Liman seems inclined to give some of it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Live tweet of today's hearing on the subpoena for Liner Freedman's media comms: https://x.com/innercitypress/status/195062088861893445544

Interesting stuff. Liman seems inclined to give some of it.

Some of it? He will give her a majority of it, then head to the sauna with Gottlieb.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Live tweet of today's hearing on the subpoena for Liner Freedman's media comms: https://x.com/innercitypress/status/195062088861893445544

Interesting stuff. Liman seems inclined to give some of it.

Of course he does, even though Gottlieb’s timeline makes zero sense, and it sounds like all they will be getting is a giant privilege log. Liman is so off the mark here, I’d consider appealing it in Liner’s shoes, but probably not worth the effort.