Pitt Jolie FINALLY reach divorce settlement

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think he made a tactical error in not making a very generous financial settlement, very quickly. Things surely would have gone more smoothly if he had, and the chateau sale could have been part of it. It smacks of egotism and control. She's the mother of his six children and he should have been very generous. Just on principle, let alone his gross behavior on the plane.

What does wanting a big lump sum payout say about someone? Did she want money or justice?

I'm not saying she's an angel, far from it. But she was entitled to a huge sum for division of property and child support for six kids over 8 years, and it does seem like he withheld it to punish her for leaving and publicly embarrassing him. And she retaliated by withholding the kids, even when it seemed reasonable he was healthy and ready to co-parent. They both suck.

What kind of mother does this?

I'm sure she rationalized it to herself--he's an awful father and person, the kids were better off with her etc. Like most narcissists do.

I was a little shocked when she had a member of her team basically admit she's been brainwashing the kids to think they had no voice because their father has privilege and power. What? The kids worked with court-appointed therapists, who represented their perspectives in custody proceedings. Only a sadistic mother would want to put her kids through testifying in court. Four are now adults and are free to speak out at any time. At least three seem to have dropped his name, out of loyalty to their mother not because he's been a terrible father as far as we can see. There is no evidence to suggest he deserved to have his parental rights severed. She's a vindictive nutcase who absolutely cannot see the harm she's done to her family (after his initial harm, which while terrible seems to have been short-lived). It's always been about her and what she wants, not what's in the best interest of raising well-adjusted kids who have healthy relationships with both parents.

-1
He tried to hit the children.

Yes, terrible behavior when drunk. What about once he was clean and therapists agreed he deserved 50-50 custody?

Da but nope! Being sober doesn't undo traumatizing them. Abusers deserve limited contact with their kids

Active abusers yes. But I think the bulk of the research indicates that alienating a child from a parent who does not pose an ongoing threat to them does the child more harm in the long run because the child has so many unresolved issues with the parent. This is one of the reason why there are so many programs to link kids with their incarcerated parents — even if they are awful people, the children need to be able to navigate the relationship. I’m not saying it’s easy but as a parent you aren’t really doing your kid any favor by interfering with that process.

The kids don't seem like they are doing well. Can't wait for the Mommy Dearest books to come out some day.

Daddy dearest. It's getting closer by the day.

None of the children seem to have any skills or career prospects of their own. They seem to latch onto Jolie and live off what she provides them. Writing a book would only be evidence of their dysfunction and Jolie’s poor parenting.

Maybe it will be the fawning book that PP presumes will happen, but I will bet otherwise. Not many Hollywood offspring write those sorts of books.

I think people would just see that Jolie was behind the book, just like most people assumed she was behind Shiloh’s name change. Her filing about Brad on the airplane keeps being reposted on many different internet forums by her PR people, because she is angry that the public did not side with her and did not cancel Brad in response to her claims. She is better off just moving on instead of continuing to stew in her toxic battle for revenge.

Don’t forget the infamous Father’s Day post from “Pax” I’m sure Jolie didn’t have a hand in that at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:lol 😂 finally. Someone posted a link about Giselle and I saw that they signed Christmas day

Angelina did on Christmas, and Brad on the 30th lol. Lots of people saw this coming after she won his correspondences. They'll settle the winery sooner then later so he messages don't leak

Or perhaps she finally settled hoping for an Oscar nom.

Then why wouldn't she settle months ago? That's laughable. He doesn't want his communications out.

I like how his side said he settled because of his gf lol

That’s funny but he’s still an a ss

I find it sad their narrative isnt that he settled for kids but the girfriend instead.

Says a lot about how much he really did not care about his children. It was always a power thing for him. He had the time and money to prolong the matter, requiring Jolie to expend an enormous amount in legal fees. The attorneys always win.

He's starting to let the mask slip with his PR. Today there was an article from his side that side he's upset she didn't sell to him and instead "took the money for herself." How does that make any sense? She would have had the money if she sold to him as well. He's mad he can't control her anymore

No, he’s upset she sold an asset he built to a stranger he doesn’t want to be in business with. He and his business partner offered to buy her part of the winery. She refused to sell to them out of spite and sold it to a stranger behind his back. They went into business together, he gifted her part of his ownership stake, and she didn’t even have the decency to check if the buyer was a good fit for the winery before she sold. She’s a selfish and vindictive woman.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think he made a tactical error in not making a very generous financial settlement, very quickly. Things surely would have gone more smoothly if he had, and the chateau sale could have been part of it. It smacks of egotism and control. She's the mother of his six children and he should have been very generous. Just on principle, let alone his gross behavior on the plane.

What does wanting a big lump sum payout say about someone? Did she want money or justice?

I'm not saying she's an angel, far from it. But she was entitled to a huge sum for division of property and child support for six kids over 8 years, and it does seem like he withheld it to punish her for leaving and publicly embarrassing him. And she retaliated by withholding the kids, even when it seemed reasonable he was healthy and ready to co-parent. They both suck.

What kind of mother does this?

I'm sure she rationalized it to herself--he's an awful father and person, the kids were better off with her etc. Like most narcissists do.

I was a little shocked when she had a member of her team basically admit she's been brainwashing the kids to think they had no voice because their father has privilege and power. What? The kids worked with court-appointed therapists, who represented their perspectives in custody proceedings. Only a sadistic mother would want to put her kids through testifying in court. Four are now adults and are free to speak out at any time. At least three seem to have dropped his name, out of loyalty to their mother not because he's been a terrible father as far as we can see. There is no evidence to suggest he deserved to have his parental rights severed. She's a vindictive nutcase who absolutely cannot see the harm she's done to her family (after his initial harm, which while terrible seems to have been short-lived). It's always been about her and what she wants, not what's in the best interest of raising well-adjusted kids who have healthy relationships with both parents.

-1
He tried to hit the children.

Yes, terrible behavior when drunk. What about once he was clean and therapists agreed he deserved 50-50 custody?

Da but nope! Being sober doesn't undo traumatizing them. Abusers deserve limited contact with their kids

Active abusers yes. But I think the bulk of the research indicates that alienating a child from a parent who does not pose an ongoing threat to them does the child more harm in the long run because the child has so many unresolved issues with the parent. This is one of the reason why there are so many programs to link kids with their incarcerated parents — even if they are awful people, the children need to be able to navigate the relationship. I’m not saying it’s easy but as a parent you aren’t really doing your kid any favor by interfering with that process.

The kids don't seem like they are doing well. Can't wait for the Mommy Dearest books to come out some day.

Daddy dearest. It's getting closer by the day.

None of the children seem to have any skills or career prospects of their own. They seem to latch onto Jolie and live off what she provides them. Writing a book would only be evidence of their dysfunction and Jolie’s poor parenting.

Maybe it will be the fawning book that PP presumes will happen, but I will bet otherwise. Not many Hollywood offspring write those sorts of books.

I think people would just see that Jolie was behind the book, just like most people assumed she was behind Shiloh’s name change. Her filing about Brad on the airplane keeps being reposted on many different internet forums by her PR people, because she is angry that the public did not side with her and did not cancel Brad in response to her claims. She is better off just moving on instead of continuing to stew in her toxic battle for revenge.

Don’t forget the infamous Father’s Day post from “Pax” I’m sure Jolie didn’t have a hand in that at all.

Because 16 year old kids don't rant on their private accounts? Grasping for straws.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think he made a tactical error in not making a very generous financial settlement, very quickly. Things surely would have gone more smoothly if he had, and the chateau sale could have been part of it. It smacks of egotism and control. She's the mother of his six children and he should have been very generous. Just on principle, let alone his gross behavior on the plane.

What does wanting a big lump sum payout say about someone? Did she want money or justice?

I'm not saying she's an angel, far from it. But she was entitled to a huge sum for division of property and child support for six kids over 8 years, and it does seem like he withheld it to punish her for leaving and publicly embarrassing him. And she retaliated by withholding the kids, even when it seemed reasonable he was healthy and ready to co-parent. They both suck.

What kind of mother does this?

I'm sure she rationalized it to herself--he's an awful father and person, the kids were better off with her etc. Like most narcissists do.

I was a little shocked when she had a member of her team basically admit she's been brainwashing the kids to think they had no voice because their father has privilege and power. What? The kids worked with court-appointed therapists, who represented their perspectives in custody proceedings. Only a sadistic mother would want to put her kids through testifying in court. Four are now adults and are free to speak out at any time. At least three seem to have dropped his name, out of loyalty to their mother not because he's been a terrible father as far as we can see. There is no evidence to suggest he deserved to have his parental rights severed. She's a vindictive nutcase who absolutely cannot see the harm she's done to her family (after his initial harm, which while terrible seems to have been short-lived). It's always been about her and what she wants, not what's in the best interest of raising well-adjusted kids who have healthy relationships with both parents.

-1
He tried to hit the children.

If someone jumped on your back and kids got too close or tried to intervene on a bumpy ride, I’m sure your arms would be all over the place and someone would accidentally get hit. I suspect this is why the FBI and DCF didn’t press charges. She attacked him first.

I wouldn’t be surprised if she was prepping some of the kids ahead of time. “Your dad is mean to me, I fear him”, etc.

No she didn't. He had physical touched her and pushed her down before he went for one of the kids.

He may have just walked up to the kid and screamed at them. So she has no idea what he was going to do. And sometimes a kid deserves a spanking or a slap in the face (I.e., open hand).

I believe in spanking, but apparently, he was choking Maddox. That's abuse not discipline.

Only choking I found in FBI report was Jolie choking Pitt.

So you're cherry picking what parts to believe. Sure.

LA Times
“Jolie filed for divorce from Pitt on Sept. 20, 2016. Three days later, The Times reported that Los Angeles County’s DCFS was investigating an alleged in-flight physical altercation between Pitt and son Maddox Jolie-Pitt, then 15. No punching or hitting was reported.”

From his sources which we know was untrue due to the fbi report dummy

Show us where in the report he hit, punched or choked Maddox. Otherwise you are just listening to Joile’s sources.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think he made a tactical error in not making a very generous financial settlement, very quickly. Things surely would have gone more smoothly if he had, and the chateau sale could have been part of it. It smacks of egotism and control. She's the mother of his six children and he should have been very generous. Just on principle, let alone his gross behavior on the plane.

What does wanting a big lump sum payout say about someone? Did she want money or justice?

I'm not saying she's an angel, far from it. But she was entitled to a huge sum for division of property and child support for six kids over 8 years, and it does seem like he withheld it to punish her for leaving and publicly embarrassing him. And she retaliated by withholding the kids, even when it seemed reasonable he was healthy and ready to co-parent. They both suck.

What kind of mother does this?

I'm sure she rationalized it to herself--he's an awful father and person, the kids were better off with her etc. Like most narcissists do.

I was a little shocked when she had a member of her team basically admit she's been brainwashing the kids to think they had no voice because their father has privilege and power. What? The kids worked with court-appointed therapists, who represented their perspectives in custody proceedings. Only a sadistic mother would want to put her kids through testifying in court. Four are now adults and are free to speak out at any time. At least three seem to have dropped his name, out of loyalty to their mother not because he's been a terrible father as far as we can see. There is no evidence to suggest he deserved to have his parental rights severed. She's a vindictive nutcase who absolutely cannot see the harm she's done to her family (after his initial harm, which while terrible seems to have been short-lived). It's always been about her and what she wants, not what's in the best interest of raising well-adjusted kids who have healthy relationships with both parents.

-1
He tried to hit the children.

Yes, terrible behavior when drunk. What about once he was clean and therapists agreed he deserved 50-50 custody?

Da but nope! Being sober doesn't undo traumatizing them. Abusers deserve limited contact with their kids

Active abusers yes. But I think the bulk of the research indicates that alienating a child from a parent who does not pose an ongoing threat to them does the child more harm in the long run because the child has so many unresolved issues with the parent. This is one of the reason why there are so many programs to link kids with their incarcerated parents — even if they are awful people, the children need to be able to navigate the relationship. I’m not saying it’s easy but as a parent you aren’t really doing your kid any favor by interfering with that process.

The kids don't seem like they are doing well. Can't wait for the Mommy Dearest books to come out some day.

Daddy dearest. It's getting closer by the day.

None of the children seem to have any skills or career prospects of their own. They seem to latch onto Jolie and live off what she provides them. Writing a book would only be evidence of their dysfunction and Jolie’s poor parenting.

Maybe it will be the fawning book that PP presumes will happen, but I will bet otherwise. Not many Hollywood offspring write those sorts of books.

I think people would just see that Jolie was behind the book, just like most people assumed she was behind Shiloh’s name change. Her filing about Brad on the airplane keeps being reposted on many different internet forums by her PR people, because she is angry that the public did not side with her and did not cancel Brad in response to her claims. She is better off just moving on instead of continuing to stew in her toxic battle for revenge.

Don’t forget the infamous Father’s Day post from “Pax” I’m sure Jolie didn’t have a hand in that at all.

Because 16 year old kids don't rant on their private accounts? Grasping for straws.

The way it was written you know he didn’t write it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:lol 😂 finally. Someone posted a link about Giselle and I saw that they signed Christmas day

Angelina did on Christmas, and Brad on the 30th lol. Lots of people saw this coming after she won his correspondences. They'll settle the winery sooner then later so he messages don't leak

Or perhaps she finally settled hoping for an Oscar nom.

Then why wouldn't she settle months ago? That's laughable. He doesn't want his communications out.

I like how his side said he settled because of his gf lol

That’s funny but he’s still an a ss

I find it sad their narrative isnt that he settled for kids but the girfriend instead.

Says a lot about how much he really did not care about his children. It was always a power thing for him. He had the time and money to prolong the matter, requiring Jolie to expend an enormous amount in legal fees. The attorneys always win.

He's starting to let the mask slip with his PR. Today there was an article from his side that side he's upset she didn't sell to him and instead "took the money for herself." How does that make any sense? She would have had the money if she sold to him as well. He's mad he can't control her anymore

No, he’s upset she sold an asset he built to a stranger he doesn’t want to be in business with. He and his business partner offered to buy her part of the winery. She refused to sell to them out of spite and sold it to a stranger behind his back. They went into business together, he gifted her part of his ownership stake, and she didn’t even have the decency to check if the buyer was a good fit for the winery before she sold. She’s a selfish and vindictive woman.

Not true. Brad left their deal first and tried to change their NDA terms. Not to mention the article from his team flat out says "took the money for herself" The money was ALWAYS going to her so why would this part be added? He wanted to trap her in the business.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think he made a tactical error in not making a very generous financial settlement, very quickly. Things surely would have gone more smoothly if he had, and the chateau sale could have been part of it. It smacks of egotism and control. She's the mother of his six children and he should have been very generous. Just on principle, let alone his gross behavior on the plane.

What does wanting a big lump sum payout say about someone? Did she want money or justice?

I'm not saying she's an angel, far from it. But she was entitled to a huge sum for division of property and child support for six kids over 8 years, and it does seem like he withheld it to punish her for leaving and publicly embarrassing him. And she retaliated by withholding the kids, even when it seemed reasonable he was healthy and ready to co-parent. They both suck.

What kind of mother does this?

I'm sure she rationalized it to herself--he's an awful father and person, the kids were better off with her etc. Like most narcissists do.

I was a little shocked when she had a member of her team basically admit she's been brainwashing the kids to think they had no voice because their father has privilege and power. What? The kids worked with court-appointed therapists, who represented their perspectives in custody proceedings. Only a sadistic mother would want to put her kids through testifying in court. Four are now adults and are free to speak out at any time. At least three seem to have dropped his name, out of loyalty to their mother not because he's been a terrible father as far as we can see. There is no evidence to suggest he deserved to have his parental rights severed. She's a vindictive nutcase who absolutely cannot see the harm she's done to her family (after his initial harm, which while terrible seems to have been short-lived). It's always been about her and what she wants, not what's in the best interest of raising well-adjusted kids who have healthy relationships with both parents.

-1
He tried to hit the children.

Yes, terrible behavior when drunk. What about once he was clean and therapists agreed he deserved 50-50 custody?

Da but nope! Being sober doesn't undo traumatizing them. Abusers deserve limited contact with their kids

Active abusers yes. But I think the bulk of the research indicates that alienating a child from a parent who does not pose an ongoing threat to them does the child more harm in the long run because the child has so many unresolved issues with the parent. This is one of the reason why there are so many programs to link kids with their incarcerated parents — even if they are awful people, the children need to be able to navigate the relationship. I’m not saying it’s easy but as a parent you aren’t really doing your kid any favor by interfering with that process.

The kids don't seem like they are doing well. Can't wait for the Mommy Dearest books to come out some day.

Daddy dearest. It's getting closer by the day.

None of the children seem to have any skills or career prospects of their own. They seem to latch onto Jolie and live off what she provides them. Writing a book would only be evidence of their dysfunction and Jolie’s poor parenting.

Maybe it will be the fawning book that PP presumes will happen, but I will bet otherwise. Not many Hollywood offspring write those sorts of books.

I think people would just see that Jolie was behind the book, just like most people assumed she was behind Shiloh’s name change. Her filing about Brad on the airplane keeps being reposted on many different internet forums by her PR people, because she is angry that the public did not side with her and did not cancel Brad in response to her claims. She is better off just moving on instead of continuing to stew in her toxic battle for revenge.

Don’t forget the infamous Father’s Day post from “Pax” I’m sure Jolie didn’t have a hand in that at all.

Because 16 year old kids don't rant on their private accounts? Grasping for straws.

The way it was written you know he didn’t write it.

There's nothing higher sounding about the way that it was written. Grasping for straws.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think he made a tactical error in not making a very generous financial settlement, very quickly. Things surely would have gone more smoothly if he had, and the chateau sale could have been part of it. It smacks of egotism and control. She's the mother of his six children and he should have been very generous. Just on principle, let alone his gross behavior on the plane.

What does wanting a big lump sum payout say about someone? Did she want money or justice?

I'm not saying she's an angel, far from it. But she was entitled to a huge sum for division of property and child support for six kids over 8 years, and it does seem like he withheld it to punish her for leaving and publicly embarrassing him. And she retaliated by withholding the kids, even when it seemed reasonable he was healthy and ready to co-parent. They both suck.

What kind of mother does this?

I'm sure she rationalized it to herself--he's an awful father and person, the kids were better off with her etc. Like most narcissists do.

I was a little shocked when she had a member of her team basically admit she's been brainwashing the kids to think they had no voice because their father has privilege and power. What? The kids worked with court-appointed therapists, who represented their perspectives in custody proceedings. Only a sadistic mother would want to put her kids through testifying in court. Four are now adults and are free to speak out at any time. At least three seem to have dropped his name, out of loyalty to their mother not because he's been a terrible father as far as we can see. There is no evidence to suggest he deserved to have his parental rights severed. She's a vindictive nutcase who absolutely cannot see the harm she's done to her family (after his initial harm, which while terrible seems to have been short-lived). It's always been about her and what she wants, not what's in the best interest of raising well-adjusted kids who have healthy relationships with both parents.

-1
He tried to hit the children.

If someone jumped on your back and kids got too close or tried to intervene on a bumpy ride, I’m sure your arms would be all over the place and someone would accidentally get hit. I suspect this is why the FBI and DCF didn’t press charges. She attacked him first.

I wouldn’t be surprised if she was prepping some of the kids ahead of time. “Your dad is mean to me, I fear him”, etc.

Oh, you know she did. She talks constantly to the world about her pain and suffering and how awful he was. You think she didn’t do the same at home?

She guilted her children into thinking that she’s a victim and they need to protect her from this terrible suffering Pitt supposedly put her through.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:lol 😂 finally. Someone posted a link about Giselle and I saw that they signed Christmas day

Angelina did on Christmas, and Brad on the 30th lol. Lots of people saw this coming after she won his correspondences. They'll settle the winery sooner then later so he messages don't leak

Or perhaps she finally settled hoping for an Oscar nom.

Then why wouldn't she settle months ago? That's laughable. He doesn't want his communications out.

I like how his side said he settled because of his gf lol

That’s funny but he’s still an a ss

I find it sad their narrative isnt that he settled for kids but the girfriend instead.

Says a lot about how much he really did not care about his children. It was always a power thing for him. He had the time and money to prolong the matter, requiring Jolie to expend an enormous amount in legal fees. The attorneys always win.

He's starting to let the mask slip with his PR. Today there was an article from his side that side he's upset she didn't sell to him and instead "took the money for herself." How does that make any sense? She would have had the money if she sold to him as well. He's mad he can't control her anymore

No, he’s upset she sold an asset he built to a stranger he doesn’t want to be in business with. He and his business partner offered to buy her part of the winery. She refused to sell to them out of spite and sold it to a stranger behind his back. They went into business together, he gifted her part of his ownership stake, and she didn’t even have the decency to check if the buyer was a good fit for the winery before she sold. She’s a selfish and vindictive woman.

Correct. "took the money for herself" = just what it says, but in the context of it no longer being a family business that ultimately was intended for the kids and future generations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think he made a tactical error in not making a very generous financial settlement, very quickly. Things surely would have gone more smoothly if he had, and the chateau sale could have been part of it. It smacks of egotism and control. She's the mother of his six children and he should have been very generous. Just on principle, let alone his gross behavior on the plane.

What does wanting a big lump sum payout say about someone? Did she want money or justice?

I'm not saying she's an angel, far from it. But she was entitled to a huge sum for division of property and child support for six kids over 8 years, and it does seem like he withheld it to punish her for leaving and publicly embarrassing him. And she retaliated by withholding the kids, even when it seemed reasonable he was healthy and ready to co-parent. They both suck.

What kind of mother does this?

I'm sure she rationalized it to herself--he's an awful father and person, the kids were better off with her etc. Like most narcissists do.

I was a little shocked when she had a member of her team basically admit she's been brainwashing the kids to think they had no voice because their father has privilege and power. What? The kids worked with court-appointed therapists, who represented their perspectives in custody proceedings. Only a sadistic mother would want to put her kids through testifying in court. Four are now adults and are free to speak out at any time. At least three seem to have dropped his name, out of loyalty to their mother not because he's been a terrible father as far as we can see. There is no evidence to suggest he deserved to have his parental rights severed. She's a vindictive nutcase who absolutely cannot see the harm she's done to her family (after his initial harm, which while terrible seems to have been short-lived). It's always been about her and what she wants, not what's in the best interest of raising well-adjusted kids who have healthy relationships with both parents.

-1
He tried to hit the children.

If someone jumped on your back and kids got too close or tried to intervene on a bumpy ride, I’m sure your arms would be all over the place and someone would accidentally get hit. I suspect this is why the FBI and DCF didn’t press charges. She attacked him first.

I wouldn’t be surprised if she was prepping some of the kids ahead of time. “Your dad is mean to me, I fear him”, etc.

No she didn't. He had physical touched her and pushed her down before he went for one of the kids.

He may have just walked up to the kid and screamed at them. So she has no idea what he was going to do. And sometimes a kid deserves a spanking or a slap in the face (I.e., open hand).

I believe in spanking, but apparently, he was choking Maddox. That's abuse not discipline.

Only choking I found in FBI report was Jolie choking Pitt.

So you're cherry picking what parts to believe. Sure.

LA Times
“Jolie filed for divorce from Pitt on Sept. 20, 2016. Three days later, The Times reported that Los Angeles County’s DCFS was investigating an alleged in-flight physical altercation between Pitt and son Maddox Jolie-Pitt, then 15. No punching or hitting was reported.”

From his sources which we know was untrue due to the fbi report dummy

Show us where in the report he hit, punched or choked Maddox. Otherwise you are just listening to Joile’s sources.

The agent saw Angelina's bruise and the scratches on his neck. Saying no punching or hitting was reported was untrue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:lol 😂 finally. Someone posted a link about Giselle and I saw that they signed Christmas day

Angelina did on Christmas, and Brad on the 30th lol. Lots of people saw this coming after she won his correspondences. They'll settle the winery sooner then later so he messages don't leak

Or perhaps she finally settled hoping for an Oscar nom.

Then why wouldn't she settle months ago? That's laughable. He doesn't want his communications out.

I like how his side said he settled because of his gf lol

That’s funny but he’s still an a ss

I find it sad their narrative isnt that he settled for kids but the girfriend instead.

Says a lot about how much he really did not care about his children. It was always a power thing for him. He had the time and money to prolong the matter, requiring Jolie to expend an enormous amount in legal fees. The attorneys always win.

He's starting to let the mask slip with his PR. Today there was an article from his side that side he's upset she didn't sell to him and instead "took the money for herself." How does that make any sense? She would have had the money if she sold to him as well. He's mad he can't control her anymore

No, he’s upset she sold an asset he built to a stranger he doesn’t want to be in business with. He and his business partner offered to buy her part of the winery. She refused to sell to them out of spite and sold it to a stranger behind his back. They went into business together, he gifted her part of his ownership stake, and she didn’t even have the decency to check if the buyer was a good fit for the winery before she sold. She’s a selfish and vindictive woman.

Correct. "took the money for herself" = just what it says, but in the context of it no longer being a family business that ultimately was intended for the kids and future generations.

Grasping for straws. If she sold the winery to him the money would still be in her pocket. We know what he meant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think he made a tactical error in not making a very generous financial settlement, very quickly. Things surely would have gone more smoothly if he had, and the chateau sale could have been part of it. It smacks of egotism and control. She's the mother of his six children and he should have been very generous. Just on principle, let alone his gross behavior on the plane.

What does wanting a big lump sum payout say about someone? Did she want money or justice?

I'm not saying she's an angel, far from it. But she was entitled to a huge sum for division of property and child support for six kids over 8 years, and it does seem like he withheld it to punish her for leaving and publicly embarrassing him. And she retaliated by withholding the kids, even when it seemed reasonable he was healthy and ready to co-parent. They both suck.

What kind of mother does this?

I'm sure she rationalized it to herself--he's an awful father and person, the kids were better off with her etc. Like most narcissists do.

I was a little shocked when she had a member of her team basically admit she's been brainwashing the kids to think they had no voice because their father has privilege and power. What? The kids worked with court-appointed therapists, who represented their perspectives in custody proceedings. Only a sadistic mother would want to put her kids through testifying in court. Four are now adults and are free to speak out at any time. At least three seem to have dropped his name, out of loyalty to their mother not because he's been a terrible father as far as we can see. There is no evidence to suggest he deserved to have his parental rights severed. She's a vindictive nutcase who absolutely cannot see the harm she's done to her family (after his initial harm, which while terrible seems to have been short-lived). It's always been about her and what she wants, not what's in the best interest of raising well-adjusted kids who have healthy relationships with both parents.

-1
He tried to hit the children.

If someone jumped on your back and kids got too close or tried to intervene on a bumpy ride, I’m sure your arms would be all over the place and someone would accidentally get hit. I suspect this is why the FBI and DCF didn’t press charges. She attacked him first.

I wouldn’t be surprised if she was prepping some of the kids ahead of time. “Your dad is mean to me, I fear him”, etc.

No she didn't. He had physical touched her and pushed her down before he went for one of the kids.

He may have just walked up to the kid and screamed at them. So she has no idea what he was going to do. And sometimes a kid deserves a spanking or a slap in the face (I.e., open hand).

I believe in spanking, but apparently, he was choking Maddox. That's abuse not discipline.

Only choking I found in FBI report was Jolie choking Pitt.

So you're cherry picking what parts to believe. Sure.

LA Times
“Jolie filed for divorce from Pitt on Sept. 20, 2016. Three days later, The Times reported that Los Angeles County’s DCFS was investigating an alleged in-flight physical altercation between Pitt and son Maddox Jolie-Pitt, then 15. No punching or hitting was reported.”

From his sources which we know was untrue due to the fbi report dummy

The part of the FBI report released was her interview with the FBI. There was nothing else released. We all know the FBI closed the case without bringing charges. So did Child Protective Services. This is never brought up by the Jolie defenders. They believe her tales about how Pitt was supposedly the world’s worst abuser, yet two different law enforcement agencies declined to charge him after hearing all of her evidence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:lol 😂 finally. Someone posted a link about Giselle and I saw that they signed Christmas day

Angelina did on Christmas, and Brad on the 30th lol. Lots of people saw this coming after she won his correspondences. They'll settle the winery sooner then later so he messages don't leak

Or perhaps she finally settled hoping for an Oscar nom.

Then why wouldn't she settle months ago? That's laughable. He doesn't want his communications out.

I like how his side said he settled because of his gf lol

That’s funny but he’s still an a ss

I find it sad their narrative isnt that he settled for kids but the girfriend instead.

Says a lot about how much he really did not care about his children. It was always a power thing for him. He had the time and money to prolong the matter, requiring Jolie to expend an enormous amount in legal fees. The attorneys always win.

He's starting to let the mask slip with his PR. Today there was an article from his side that side he's upset she didn't sell to him and instead "took the money for herself." How does that make any sense? She would have had the money if she sold to him as well. He's mad he can't control her anymore

What he meant, cult follower, is that they both agreed the vineyard was to be an inheritance for their children. If kept in the family 100%, their children would inherit 100% of the profits/value. When she sold to an outsider and pocketed the money for herself, that ended. Come out if the bubble got a moment. She was the controlling one, btw.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think he made a tactical error in not making a very generous financial settlement, very quickly. Things surely would have gone more smoothly if he had, and the chateau sale could have been part of it. It smacks of egotism and control. She's the mother of his six children and he should have been very generous. Just on principle, let alone his gross behavior on the plane.

What does wanting a big lump sum payout say about someone? Did she want money or justice?

I'm not saying she's an angel, far from it. But she was entitled to a huge sum for division of property and child support for six kids over 8 years, and it does seem like he withheld it to punish her for leaving and publicly embarrassing him. And she retaliated by withholding the kids, even when it seemed reasonable he was healthy and ready to co-parent. They both suck.

What kind of mother does this?

I'm sure she rationalized it to herself--he's an awful father and person, the kids were better off with her etc. Like most narcissists do.

I was a little shocked when she had a member of her team basically admit she's been brainwashing the kids to think they had no voice because their father has privilege and power. What? The kids worked with court-appointed therapists, who represented their perspectives in custody proceedings. Only a sadistic mother would want to put her kids through testifying in court. Four are now adults and are free to speak out at any time. At least three seem to have dropped his name, out of loyalty to their mother not because he's been a terrible father as far as we can see. There is no evidence to suggest he deserved to have his parental rights severed. She's a vindictive nutcase who absolutely cannot see the harm she's done to her family (after his initial harm, which while terrible seems to have been short-lived). It's always been about her and what she wants, not what's in the best interest of raising well-adjusted kids who have healthy relationships with both parents.

-1
He tried to hit the children.

If someone jumped on your back and kids got too close or tried to intervene on a bumpy ride, I’m sure your arms would be all over the place and someone would accidentally get hit. I suspect this is why the FBI and DCF didn’t press charges. She attacked him first.

I wouldn’t be surprised if she was prepping some of the kids ahead of time. “Your dad is mean to me, I fear him”, etc.

No she didn't. He had physical touched her and pushed her down before he went for one of the kids.

He may have just walked up to the kid and screamed at them. So she has no idea what he was going to do. And sometimes a kid deserves a spanking or a slap in the face (I.e., open hand).

I believe in spanking, but apparently, he was choking Maddox. That's abuse not discipline.

Only choking I found in FBI report was Jolie choking Pitt.

So you're cherry picking what parts to believe. Sure.

LA Times
“Jolie filed for divorce from Pitt on Sept. 20, 2016. Three days later, The Times reported that Los Angeles County’s DCFS was investigating an alleged in-flight physical altercation between Pitt and son Maddox Jolie-Pitt, then 15. No punching or hitting was reported.”

From his sources which we know was untrue due to the fbi report dummy

The part of the FBI report released was her interview with the FBI. There was nothing else released. We all know the FBI closed the case without bringing charges. So did Child Protective Services. This is never brought up by the Jolie defenders. They believe her tales about how Pitt was supposedly the world’s worst abuser, yet two different law enforcement agencies declined to charge him after hearing all of her evidence.

Nope. We know the fbi agent saw the injuries and that report went to DCFS so his lies that "no hitting or punching" was in fact untrue. But thanks for showing exactly how his team lied about what happened in the beginning!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think he made a tactical error in not making a very generous financial settlement, very quickly. Things surely would have gone more smoothly if he had, and the chateau sale could have been part of it. It smacks of egotism and control. She's the nmother of his six children and he should have been very generous. Just on principle, let alone his gross behavior on the plane.

What does wanting a big lump sum payout say about someone? Did she want money or justice?

Because he grabbed her, not from hitting


I'm not saying she's an angel, far from it. But she was entitled to a huge sum for division of property and child support for six kids over 8 years, and it does seem like he withheld it to punish her for leaving and publicly embarrassing him. And she retaliated by withholding the kids, even when it seemed reasonable he was healthy and ready to co-parent. They both suck.

What kind of mother does this?

I'm sure she rationalized it to herself--he's an awful father and person, the kids were better off with her etc. Like most narcissists do.

I was a little shocked when she had a member of her team basically admit she's been brainwashing the kids to think they had no voice because their father has privilege and power. What? The kids worked with court-appointed therapists, who represented their perspectives in custody proceedings. Only a sadistic mother would want to put her kids through testifying in court. Four are now adults and are free to speak out at any time. At least three seem to have dropped his name, out of loyalty to their mother not because he's been a terrible father as far as we can see. There is no evidence to suggest he deserved to have his parental rights severed. She's a vindictive nutcase who absolutely cannot see the harm she's done to her family (after his initial harm, which while terrible seems to have been short-lived). It's always been about her and what she wants, not what's in the best interest of raising well-adjusted kids who have healthy relationships with both parents.

-1
He tried to hit the children.

If someone jumped on your back and kids got too close or tried to intervene on a bumpy ride, I’m sure your arms would be all over the place and someone would accidentally get hit. I suspect this is why the FBI and DCF didn’t press charges. She attacked him first.

I wouldn’t be surprised if she was prepping some of the kids ahead of time. “Your dad is mean to me, I fear him”, etc.

No she didn't. He had physical touched her and pushed her down before he went for one of the kids.

He may have just walked up to the kid and screamed at them. So she has no idea what he was going to do. And sometimes a kid deserves a spanking or a slap in the face (I.e., open hand).

I believe in spanking, but apparently, he was choking Maddox. That's abuse not discipline.

Only choking I found in FBI report was Jolie choking Pitt.

So you're cherry picking what parts to believe. Sure.

LA Times
“Jolie filed for divorce from Pitt on Sept. 20, 2016. Three days later, The Times reported that Los Angeles County’s DCFS was investigating an alleged in-flight physical altercation between Pitt and son Maddox Jolie-Pitt, then 15. No punching or hitting was reported.”

From his sources which we know was untrue due to the fbi report dummy

Show us where in the report he hit, punched or choked Maddox. Otherwise you are just listening to Joile’s sources.

The agent saw Angelina's bruise and the scratches on his neck. Saying no punching or hitting was reported was untrue.