EVERY Six Months Jolie reiterates accusations against Pitt

[Anonymous]

**goes away

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://people.com/angelina-jolie-must-produce-years-of-ndas-brad-pitt-winery-case-8652487

Judge orders Angelina to turnover the NDAs she’s signed to Brad. Let’s see how many “unconscionable gag orders” she’s imposed on others.

I fail to see how an employee gag order is the same as a family member gag order, especially when there was abuse.

It was not a family NDA. It was a business NDA covering Miraval and its shareholders. It was a business contract.

There has never been proven to be any abuse, only her unproven allegations. I don’t understand why she keeps bringing her irrelevant allegations into a contractual dispute. It’s obvious she is trying to misdirect the judge and the public.

The allegations aren't irrelevant since what she filed in family cause him to try and negotiate their deal. If Brad didn't want mixing of the two cases then he shouldn't have kept it separate on his end.

The divorce is final. They are now arguing over financial BS. The kids are at the age to decide who they want to live with as long as there are no parenting issues, e.g., abuse. Jolie keeps bringing it up to prevent the twins, who are 15, from moving in with him. Rumors are Shiloh wants to move in with him when she turns 18 on 5/27. I suspect she won’t leave until the twins can go with her.

As i said, If Brad didn't want the mixing of the two cases then he shouldn't have kept it separate on his end. The custody was not final during the negotiations. There is no separating those issues. Shiloh doesn't use his name so I don't believe those "rumors" at all but nice story I guess.

He had to separate the issues to get the divorce finalized.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://people.com/angelina-jolie-must-produce-years-of-ndas-brad-pitt-winery-case-8652487

Judge orders Angelina to turnover the NDAs she’s signed to Brad. Let’s see how many “unconscionable gag orders” she’s imposed on others.

I fail to see how an employee gag order is the same as a family member gag order, especially when there was abuse.

Court news said the judge wanted to see them to have a better understanding on her thought process when signing them or deciding not to sign them. That makes sense. I don’t see how that ruins her credibility since she never denied using them? I am not really understanding his position tbh.

What do her employee NDAs have to do with anything? Shouldn't the judge be comparing whatever Pitt requested (and Jolie rejected) to standard business NDAs?

I would think so. I honestly don't understand why the judge needs to see NDAs between a celebrity and employees to gauge whether Pitt was stipulating something standard or not in a business context.

Da I don't get it either. Maybe to see what she usually considers a standard cause and if there's variations between NDA's depending on the situation. In that case I don't see how that helps Brad. Signing one NDA doesn't mean you have to sign them all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://people.com/angelina-jolie-must-produce-years-of-ndas-brad-pitt-winery-case-8652487

Judge orders Angelina to turnover the NDAs she’s signed to Brad. Let’s see how many “unconscionable gag orders” she’s imposed on others.

I fail to see how an employee gag order is the same as a family member gag order, especially when there was abuse.

Court news said the judge wanted to see them to have a better understanding on her thought process when signing them or deciding not to sign them. That makes sense. I don’t see how that ruins her credibility since she never denied using them? I am not really understanding his position tbh.

What do her employee NDAs have to do with anything? Shouldn't the judge be comparing whatever Pitt requested (and Jolie rejected) to standard business NDAs?

I would think so. I honestly don't understand why the judge needs to see NDAs between a celebrity and employees to gauge whether Pitt was stipulating something standard or not in a business context.

Da I don't get it either. Maybe to see what she usually considers a standard cause and if there's variations between NDA's depending on the situation. In that case I don't see how that helps Brad. Signing one NDA doesn't mean you have to sign them all.

I suspect there was an original NDA regarding Miravel.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://people.com/angelina-jolie-must-produce-years-of-ndas-brad-pitt-winery-case-8652487

Judge orders Angelina to turnover the NDAs she’s signed to Brad. Let’s see how many “unconscionable gag orders” she’s imposed on others.

I fail to see how an employee gag order is the same as a family member gag order, especially when there was abuse.

It was not a family NDA. It was a business NDA covering Miraval and its shareholders. It was a business contract.

There has never been proven to be any abuse, only her unproven allegations. I don’t understand why she keeps bringing her irrelevant allegations into a contractual dispute. It’s obvious she is trying to misdirect the judge and the public.

The allegations aren't irrelevant since what she filed in family cause him to try and negotiate their deal. If Brad didn't want mixing of the two cases then he shouldn't have kept it separate on his end.

The divorce is final. They are now arguing over financial BS. The kids are at the age to decide who they want to live with as long as there are no parenting issues, e.g., abuse. Jolie keeps bringing it up to prevent the twins, who are 15, from moving in with him. Rumors are Shiloh wants to move in with him when she turns 18 on 5/27. I suspect she won’t leave until the twins can go with her.

As i said, If Brad didn't want the mixing of the two cases then he shouldn't have kept it separate on his end. The custody was not final during the negotiations. There is no separating those issues. Shiloh doesn't use his name so I don't believe those "rumors" at all but nice story I guess.

When the money runs out from mommy, the kids will want easy jobs in HW. They’ll be adding his name back to get the doors opened for those jobs. HW does not like Jolie. They love Pitt. That should tell everyone something.

HW sucks so that tells me nothing and the kids don't seem like they're interested in Hollywood or are so money centric. Again sounds like a nice story.

Not interested in $$$ cause mommy has child support. Runs out in 3 years and less staring in June. They’ll want money when their easy floating life Glea’s away.

I am sure she and the kids will be just fine. This sounds more like a wish you strangely have.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://people.com/angelina-jolie-must-produce-years-of-ndas-brad-pitt-winery-case-8652487

Judge orders Angelina to turnover the NDAs she’s signed to Brad. Let’s see how many “unconscionable gag orders” she’s imposed on others.

I fail to see how an employee gag order is the same as a family member gag order, especially when there was abuse.

It was not a family NDA. It was a business NDA covering Miraval and its shareholders. It was a business contract.

There has never been proven to be any abuse, only her unproven allegations. I don’t understand why she keeps bringing her irrelevant allegations into a contractual dispute. It’s obvious she is trying to misdirect the judge and the public.

The allegations aren't irrelevant since what she filed in family cause him to try and negotiate their deal. If Brad didn't want mixing of the two cases then he shouldn't have kept it separate on his end.

The divorce is final. They are now arguing over financial BS. The kids are at the age to decide who they want to live with as long as there are no parenting issues, e.g., abuse. Jolie keeps bringing it up to prevent the twins, who are 15, from moving in with him. Rumors are Shiloh wants to move in with him when she turns 18 on 5/27. I suspect she won’t leave until the twins can go with her.

I don’t understand why she keeps bringing up the abuse. It has nothing to do with the financial items, the divorce or custody. The kids wanting to move makes the most sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://people.com/angelina-jolie-must-produce-years-of-ndas-brad-pitt-winery-case-8652487

Judge orders Angelina to turnover the NDAs she’s signed to Brad. Let’s see how many “unconscionable gag orders” she’s imposed on others.

I fail to see how an employee gag order is the same as a family member gag order, especially when there was abuse.

It was not a family NDA. It was a business NDA covering Miraval and its shareholders. It was a business contract.

There has never been proven to be any abuse, only her unproven allegations. I don’t understand why she keeps bringing her irrelevant allegations into a contractual dispute. It’s obvious she is trying to misdirect the judge and the public.

The allegations aren't irrelevant since what she filed in family cause him to try and negotiate their deal. If Brad didn't want mixing of the two cases then he shouldn't have kept it separate on his end.

The divorce is final. They are now arguing over financial BS. The kids are at the age to decide who they want to live with as long as there are no parenting issues, e.g., abuse. Jolie keeps bringing it up to prevent the twins, who are 15, from moving in with him. Rumors are Shiloh wants to move in with him when she turns 18 on 5/27. I suspect she won’t leave until the twins can go with her.

As i said, If Brad didn't want the mixing of the two cases then he shouldn't have kept it separate on his end. The custody was not final during the negotiations. There is no separating those issues. Shiloh doesn't use his name so I don't believe those "rumors" at all but nice story I guess.

When the money runs out from mommy, the kids will want easy jobs in HW. They’ll be adding his name back to get the doors opened for those jobs. HW does not like Jolie. They love Pitt. That should tell everyone something.

Hollywood loved Harvey Weinstein and Bill Cosby too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://people.com/angelina-jolie-must-produce-years-of-ndas-brad-pitt-winery-case-8652487

Judge orders Angelina to turnover the NDAs she’s signed to Brad. Let’s see how many “unconscionable gag orders” she’s imposed on others.

I fail to see how an employee gag order is the same as a family member gag order, especially when there was abuse.

It was not a family NDA. It was a business NDA covering Miraval and its shareholders. It was a business contract.

There has never been proven to be any abuse, only her unproven allegations. I don’t understand why she keeps bringing her irrelevant allegations into a contractual dispute. It’s obvious she is trying to misdirect the judge and the public.

The allegations aren't irrelevant since what she filed in family cause him to try and negotiate their deal. If Brad didn't want mixing of the two cases then he shouldn't have kept it separate on his end.

The divorce is final. They are now arguing over financial BS. The kids are at the age to decide who they want to live with as long as there are no parenting issues, e.g., abuse. Jolie keeps bringing it up to prevent the twins, who are 15, from moving in with him. Rumors are Shiloh wants to move in with him when she turns 18 on 5/27. I suspect she won’t leave until the twins can go with her.

I don’t understand why she keeps bringing up the abuse. It has nothing to do with the financial items, the divorce or custody. The kids wanting to move makes the most sense.

No your moving theory doesn't make sense. The reason he tried changing the NDA was because of the custody trial. Whatever was filed is obviously going to be questioned and made to light. He made it interconnected.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://people.com/angelina-jolie-must-produce-years-of-ndas-brad-pitt-winery-case-8652487

Judge orders Angelina to turnover the NDAs she’s signed to Brad. Let’s see how many “unconscionable gag orders” she’s imposed on others.

I fail to see how an employee gag order is the same as a family member gag order, especially when there was abuse.

It was not a family NDA. It was a business NDA covering Miraval and its shareholders. It was a business contract.

There has never been proven to be any abuse, only her unproven allegations. I don’t understand why she keeps bringing her irrelevant allegations into a contractual dispute. It’s obvious she is trying to misdirect the judge and the public.

The allegations aren't irrelevant since what she filed in family cause him to try and negotiate their deal. If Brad didn't want mixing of the two cases then he shouldn't have kept it separate on his end.

The divorce is final. They are now arguing over financial BS. The kids are at the age to decide who they want to live with as long as there are no parenting issues, e.g., abuse. Jolie keeps bringing it up to prevent the twins, who are 15, from moving in with him. Rumors are Shiloh wants to move in with him when she turns 18 on 5/27. I suspect she won’t leave until the twins can go with her.

As i said, If Brad didn't want the mixing of the two cases then he shouldn't have kept it separate on his end. The custody was not final during the negotiations. There is no separating those issues. Shiloh doesn't use his name so I don't believe those "rumors" at all but nice story I guess.

When the money runs out from mommy, the kids will want easy jobs in HW. They’ll be adding his name back to get the doors opened for those jobs. HW does not like Jolie. They love Pitt. That should tell everyone something.

Hollywood loved Harvey Weinstein and Bill Cosby too.

Hollywood is a boys' club, like a giant fraternity. What women find it easy to fit in to the power structure there?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://people.com/angelina-jolie-must-produce-years-of-ndas-brad-pitt-winery-case-8652487

Judge orders Angelina to turnover the NDAs she’s signed to Brad. Let’s see how many “unconscionable gag orders” she’s imposed on others.

I fail to see how an employee gag order is the same as a family member gag order, especially when there was abuse.

Court news said the judge wanted to see them to have a better understanding on her thought process when signing them or deciding not to sign them. That makes sense. I don’t see how that ruins her credibility since she never denied using them? I am not really understanding his position tbh.

What do her employee NDAs have to do with anything? Shouldn't the judge be comparing whatever Pitt requested (and Jolie rejected) to standard business NDAs?

I would think so. I honestly don't understand why the judge needs to see NDAs between a celebrity and employees to gauge whether Pitt was stipulating something standard or not in a business context.

Da I don't get it either. Maybe to see what she usually considers a standard cause and if there's variations between NDA's depending on the situation. In that case I don't see how that helps Brad. Signing one NDA doesn't mean you have to sign them all.

Okay so that kind of makes sense but his argument is bizarre. She only had problems with the NDA when he changed the terms. If he didn't change the terms then the deal would have went through. He sounds quite controlling.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://people.com/angelina-jolie-must-produce-years-of-ndas-brad-pitt-winery-case-8652487

Judge orders Angelina to turnover the NDAs she’s signed to Brad. Let’s see how many “unconscionable gag orders” she’s imposed on others.

I fail to see how an employee gag order is the same as a family member gag order, especially when there was abuse.

Court news said the judge wanted to see them to have a better understanding on her thought process when signing them or deciding not to sign them. That makes sense. I don’t see how that ruins her credibility since she never denied using them? I am not really understanding his position tbh.

What do her employee NDAs have to do with anything? Shouldn't the judge be comparing whatever Pitt requested (and Jolie rejected) to standard business NDAs?

I would think so. I honestly don't understand why the judge needs to see NDAs between a celebrity and employees to gauge whether Pitt was stipulating something standard or not in a business context.

Da I don't get it either. Maybe to see what she usually considers a standard cause and if there's variations between NDA's depending on the situation. In that case I don't see how that helps Brad. Signing one NDA doesn't mean you have to sign them all.

Okay so that kind of makes sense but his argument is bizarre. She only had problems with the NDA when he changed the terms. If he didn't change the terms then the deal would have went through. He sounds quite controlling.

He wanted a say in the children's upbringing but didn't get it because she is extremely controlling. He wanted control of his pet project, the vineyard. And he didn't get it because she is extremely controlling and extremely vindictive.

But sure, make him out to be the bad guy. That makes sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://people.com/angelina-jolie-must-produce-years-of-ndas-brad-pitt-winery-case-8652487

Judge orders Angelina to turnover the NDAs she’s signed to Brad. Let’s see how many “unconscionable gag orders” she’s imposed on others.

I fail to see how an employee gag order is the same as a family member gag order, especially when there was abuse.

Court news said the judge wanted to see them to have a better understanding on her thought process when signing them or deciding not to sign them. That makes sense. I don’t see how that ruins her credibility since she never denied using them? I am not really understanding his position tbh.

What do her employee NDAs have to do with anything? Shouldn't the judge be comparing whatever Pitt requested (and Jolie rejected) to standard business NDAs?

I would think so. I honestly don't understand why the judge needs to see NDAs between a celebrity and employees to gauge whether Pitt was stipulating something standard or not in a business context.

Da I don't get it either. Maybe to see what she usually considers a standard cause and if there's variations between NDA's depending on the situation. In that case I don't see how that helps Brad. Signing one NDA doesn't mean you have to sign them all.

Okay so that kind of makes sense but his argument is bizarre. She only had problems with the NDA when he changed the terms. If he didn't change the terms then the deal would have went through. He sounds quite controlling.

He wanted a say in the children's upbringing but didn't get it because she is extremely controlling. He wanted control of his pet project, the vineyard. And he didn't get it because she is extremely controlling and extremely vindictive.

But sure, make him out to be the bad guy. That makes sense.

He wanted to change terms when he could have let the sale closed so yeah that's on on him. And yes that does make him sound controlling. Not here for this poor little Brad narrative.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://people.com/angelina-jolie-must-produce-years-of-ndas-brad-pitt-winery-case-8652487

Judge orders Angelina to turnover the NDAs she’s signed to Brad. Let’s see how many “unconscionable gag orders” she’s imposed on others.

I fail to see how an employee gag order is the same as a family member gag order, especially when there was abuse.

Court news said the judge wanted to see them to have a better understanding on her thought process when signing them or deciding not to sign them. That makes sense. I don’t see how that ruins her credibility since she never denied using them? I am not really understanding his position tbh.

What do her employee NDAs have to do with anything? Shouldn't the judge be comparing whatever Pitt requested (and Jolie rejected) to standard business NDAs?

I would think so. I honestly don't understand why the judge needs to see NDAs between a celebrity and employees to gauge whether Pitt was stipulating something standard or not in a business context.

Da I don't get it either. Maybe to see what she usually considers a standard cause and if there's variations between NDA's depending on the situation. In that case I don't see how that helps Brad. Signing one NDA doesn't mean you have to sign them all.

Okay so that kind of makes sense but his argument is bizarre. She only had problems with the NDA when he changed the terms. If he didn't change the terms then the deal would have went through. He sounds quite controlling.

He wanted a say in the children's upbringing but didn't get it because she is extremely controlling. He wanted control of his pet project, the vineyard. And he didn't get it because she is extremely controlling and extremely vindictive.

But sure, make him out to be the bad guy. That makes sense.

He wanted to change terms when he could have let the sale closed so yeah that's on on him. And yes that does make him sound controlling. Not here for this poor little Brad narrative.

I think they're both controlling and nuts. She's now saying the NDA request is to punish her for leaving him. No, genius, it's about selling the family winery to a Russian oligarch.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://people.com/angelina-jolie-must-produce-years-of-ndas-brad-pitt-winery-case-8652487

Judge orders Angelina to turnover the NDAs she’s signed to Brad. Let’s see how many “unconscionable gag orders” she’s imposed on others.

I fail to see how an employee gag order is the same as a family member gag order, especially when there was abuse.

Court news said the judge wanted to see them to have a better understanding on her thought process when signing them or deciding not to sign them. That makes sense. I don’t see how that ruins her credibility since she never denied using them? I am not really understanding his position tbh.

What do her employee NDAs have to do with anything? Shouldn't the judge be comparing whatever Pitt requested (and Jolie rejected) to standard business NDAs?

I would think so. I honestly don't understand why the judge needs to see NDAs between a celebrity and employees to gauge whether Pitt was stipulating something standard or not in a business context.

Da I don't get it either. Maybe to see what she usually considers a standard cause and if there's variations between NDA's depending on the situation. In that case I don't see how that helps Brad. Signing one NDA doesn't mean you have to sign them all.

Okay so that kind of makes sense but his argument is bizarre. She only had problems with the NDA when he changed the terms. If he didn't change the terms then the deal would have went through. He sounds quite controlling.

He wanted a say in the children's upbringing but didn't get it because she is extremely controlling. He wanted control of his pet project, the vineyard. And he didn't get it because she is extremely controlling and extremely vindictive.

But sure, make him out to be the bad guy. That makes sense.

He wanted to change terms when he could have let the sale closed so yeah that's on on him. And yes that does make him sound controlling. Not here for this poor little Brad narrative.

I think they're both controlling and nuts. She's now saying the NDA request is to punish her for leaving him. No, genius, it's about selling the family winery to a Russian oligarch.

it honestly does sound like he's trying to punish her. The way he keeps bringing up how he's enriched her shows. There was a whole dailymail article a few weeks ago saying the same thing. He's mad she's not financially dependent on him anymore.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://people.com/angelina-jolie-must-produce-years-of-ndas-brad-pitt-winery-case-8652487

Judge orders Angelina to turnover the NDAs she’s signed to Brad. Let’s see how many “unconscionable gag orders” she’s imposed on others.

I fail to see how an employee gag order is the same as a family member gag order, especially when there was abuse.

Court news said the judge wanted to see them to have a better understanding on her thought process when signing them or deciding not to sign them. That makes sense. I don’t see how that ruins her credibility since she never denied using them? I am not really understanding his position tbh.

What do her employee NDAs have to do with anything? Shouldn't the judge be comparing whatever Pitt requested (and Jolie rejected) to standard business NDAs?

I would think so. I honestly don't understand why the judge needs to see NDAs between a celebrity and employees to gauge whether Pitt was stipulating something standard or not in a business context.

Da I don't get it either. Maybe to see what she usually considers a standard cause and if there's variations between NDA's depending on the situation. In that case I don't see how that helps Brad. Signing one NDA doesn't mean you have to sign them all.

Okay so that kind of makes sense but his argument is bizarre. She only had problems with the NDA when he changed the terms. If he didn't change the terms then the deal would have went through. He sounds quite controlling.

He wanted a say in the children's upbringing but didn't get it because she is extremely controlling. He wanted control of his pet project, the vineyard. And he didn't get it because she is extremely controlling and extremely vindictive.

But sure, make him out to be the bad guy. That makes sense.

He wanted to change terms when he could have let the sale closed so yeah that's on on him. And yes that does make him sound controlling. Not here for this poor little Brad narrative.

I think they're both controlling and nuts. She's now saying the NDA request is to punish her for leaving him. No, genius, it's about selling the family winery to a Russian oligarch.

it honestly does sound like he's trying to punish her. The way he keeps bringing up how he's enriched her shows. There was a whole dailymail article a few weeks ago saying the same thing. He's mad she's not financially dependent on him anymore.

They've been divorcing for 7 years. Of course he's mad. But him wanting her financially dependent on him? No way.

And let's be honest, their star power is not equal. It isn't now and it never was.