Brad Pitt

[Anonymous]

Wow after everything he put the family through he still expected to cut her out of the business while controlling her money? No genuine remorse, classic abuser's playbook.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's been 6 years - they need to move on. This is not healthy for anyone, especially the kids. I feel like they are both stupid and in the wrong, but Angelina needs to be the bigger person and walk away at this point.

He filed a lawsuit to force nullification of the sale of her share of the winery. She should just walk away from the bulk of her assets being tied up in a business she wants no part of? According to her countersuit, after the split he wouldn't let her see the books and wouldn't distribute her share of the proceeds either. While putting out lies about an agreement not to sell--no evidence of any agreement--and saying she refused to sell to him--also not true since he walked away from an agreement out of anger over her custody filings and her unwillingness to agree to a gag order.

Would you let an ex control your finances when you see no benefit from your investment or would you fight back? Would you let an ex constantly minimize and deny the trauma he inflicted on the kids when they're old enough to read his lies? And are now adults, able to handle it? I did not start this whole debacle on her side, but I've come around.

He had first right of refusal if she wanted to sell, and she sold it to a Russian oligarch anyway.

NP. Let me break this down to a kindergarten level, so that you understand. Pitt and Jolie had an agreement in which Pitt was to buy Jolie’s share. Pitt became angry with Jolie and backed out of the sale. Jolie reevaluated and went to the second offer, the Russian. Pitt did utilize his right of first refusal. He did not realize Jolie had other options and it irks him that she does not have to depend on him.

That's . . . not the way right of first refusal works.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's been 6 years - they need to move on. This is not healthy for anyone, especially the kids. I feel like they are both stupid and in the wrong, but Angelina needs to be the bigger person and walk away at this point.

She has proven herself for years and years not to be the bigger person, or any sort of big person at all.

She's not going to start now.

And I'm reminded of the Britney Spears thread where posters were critical of what's-his-name posting the video of the kids because he should have been thinking of them - Angelina Jolie should have been thinking of the children but she doesn't, she never has.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wow, Pitt chokes one kid and hit another in the face, poured alcohol over his wife and kids, and his fans are on here trying to defend him? wtaf?

That's an allegation that has yet to be proven. You do understand how that works, don't you? If he said something similar, would you be on here saying the same thing? Let the courts sort it out, not the court of public opinion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's been 6 years - they need to move on. This is not healthy for anyone, especially the kids. I feel like they are both stupid and in the wrong, but Angelina needs to be the bigger person and walk away at this point.

He filed a lawsuit to force nullification of the sale of her share of the winery. She should just walk away from the bulk of her assets being tied up in a business she wants no part of? According to her countersuit, after the split he wouldn't let her see the books and wouldn't distribute her share of the proceeds either. While putting out lies about an agreement not to sell--no evidence of any agreement--and saying she refused to sell to him--also not true since he walked away from an agreement out of anger over her custody filings and her unwillingness to agree to a gag order.

Would you let an ex control your finances when you see no benefit from your investment or would you fight back? Would you let an ex constantly minimize and deny the trauma he inflicted on the kids when they're old enough to read his lies? And are now adults, able to handle it? I did not start this whole debacle on her side, but I've come around.

He had first right of refusal if she wanted to sell, and she sold it to a Russian oligarch anyway.

NP. Let me break this down to a kindergarten level, so that you understand. Pitt and Jolie had an agreement in which Pitt was to buy Jolie’s share. Pitt became angry with Jolie and backed out of the sale. Jolie reevaluated and went to the second offer, the Russian. Pitt did utilize his right of first refusal. He did not realize Jolie had other options and it irks him that she does not have to depend on him.

That's . . . not the way right of first refusal works.

What? He had right of first refusal, informally at least. He refused to sign off on their agreement, so she moved on. That's exactly how it works.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow, Pitt chokes one kid and hit another in the face, poured alcohol over his wife and kids, and his fans are on here trying to defend him? wtaf?

That's an allegation that has yet to be proven. You do understand how that works, don't you? If he said something similar, would you be on here saying the same thing? Let the courts sort it out, not the court of public opinion.

You seem to forget the children know exactly what happened, and there were third-party witnesses as well. It's all in the FBI report, which was heavily redacted in all details pertaining to the children.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow, Pitt chokes one kid and hit another in the face, poured alcohol over his wife and kids, and his fans are on here trying to defend him? wtaf?

That's an allegation that has yet to be proven. You do understand how that works, don't you? If he said something similar, would you be on here saying the same thing? Let the courts sort it out, not the court of public opinion.

You seem to forget the children know exactly what happened, and there were third-party witnesses as well. It's all in the FBI report, which was heavily redacted in all details pertaining to the children.

Oh honey. The fbi report doesn't confirm many of these ridiculous allegations. Please get a hold of uourself

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow, Pitt chokes one kid and hit another in the face, poured alcohol over his wife and kids, and his fans are on here trying to defend him? wtaf?

That's an allegation that has yet to be proven. You do understand how that works, don't you? If he said something similar, would you be on here saying the same thing? Let the courts sort it out, not the court of public opinion.

You seem to forget the children know exactly what happened, and there were third-party witnesses as well. It's all in the FBI report, which was heavily redacted in all details pertaining to the children.

Oh honey. The fbi report doesn't confirm many of these ridiculous allegations. Please get a hold of uourself

Oh brother, another delusional Pitt stan.

[Anonymous]

What a horrible situation. Poor kids. Seems she waited until the kids who experienced the brunt of it became adults before spilling the beans. It's possible he was so drunk he doesn't remember all the details, but they know the truth not the pro-Pitt hens on this thread. His access to the kids was seriously curtailed for a looong time and the first judge was found to have inappropriate business connections to the Pitt team and fired as a result. Just because he became sober (if he in fact is) doesn't mean the kids have to forgive or want to be with them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What a horrible situation. Poor kids. Seems she waited until the kids who experienced the brunt of it became adults before spilling the beans. It's possible he was so drunk he doesn't remember all the details, but they know the truth not the pro-Pitt hens on this thread. His access to the kids was seriously curtailed for a looong time and the first judge was found to have inappropriate business connections to the Pitt team and fired as a result. Just because he became sober (if he in fact is) doesn't mean the kids have to forgive or want to be with them.

I worry that the kids, who seem nice and have tried to keep their lives private, will feel compelled to give an interview to tell their side of the story.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What a horrible situation. Poor kids. Seems she waited until the kids who experienced the brunt of it became adults before spilling the beans. It's possible he was so drunk he doesn't remember all the details, but they know the truth not the pro-Pitt hens on this thread. His access to the kids was seriously curtailed for a looong time and the first judge was found to have inappropriate business connections to the Pitt team and fired as a result. Just because he became sober (if he in fact is) doesn't mean the kids have to forgive or want to be with them.

I worry that the kids, who seem nice and have tried to keep their lives private, will feel compelled to give an interview to tell their side of the story.

As the one who lives with them, I truly don't think Jolie would lie about what happened. As the estranged one who's always enjoyed positive public PR, he has plenty of incentive to lie. Or just doesn't remember. Also, why would he have tried to impose a gag order on her as a condition of the Miraval sale if he had nothing to hide?

[Anonymous]

Two kids are of legal age. If they wanted to stand up for Jolie they could go public with what happened. If they wanted to stand up for Pitt they could do the same.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What a horrible situation. Poor kids. Seems she waited until the kids who experienced the brunt of it became adults before spilling the beans. It's possible he was so drunk he doesn't remember all the details, but they know the truth not the pro-Pitt hens on this thread. His access to the kids was seriously curtailed for a looong time and the first judge was found to have inappropriate business connections to the Pitt team and fired as a result. Just because he became sober (if he in fact is) doesn't mean the kids have to forgive or want to be with them.

I worry that the kids, who seem nice and have tried to keep their lives private, will feel compelled to give an interview to tell their side of the story.

As the one who lives with them, I truly don't think Jolie would lie about what happened. As the estranged one who's always enjoyed positive public PR, he has plenty of incentive to lie. Or just doesn't remember. Also, why would he have tried to impose a gag order on her as a condition of the Miraval sale if he had nothing to hide?

He hasn't "lied" or really addressed much of anything publicly. All he has tried to do is have a quiet, private, amicable divorce. The one who has had lots of public PR is her. Including now.

[Anonymous]

He’s quiet because he’s ashamed as he should be.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Two kids are of legal age. If they wanted to stand up for Jolie they could go public with what happened. If they wanted to stand up for Pitt they could do the same.

The point is they shouldn't have to. Pitt's actions blew up the family. He should have given her whatever she wanted in the divorce within reason, including her investment funds back, and this all would have been settled a long time ago. The only reason the financial part is still in court is because he's trying to force her back into the Miraval partnership. Incredible since he's the one who walked away from their deal and her sale was court-sanctioned.