Blake Lively- Jason Baldoni and NYT - False Light claims

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I saw she did a promo event with Anna Kendrick. Surprised Blake's haters didn't flood this thread with the usual negative comments about her looks. I thought she looked nice.

She did look nice, but I always think Blake looks pretty.

It is pretty funny watching Anna Kendrick navigate this. Did you see when someone asked how was it working this blake again and her answer was “oh you know” and she turns away.

Then someone asked her how it was promoting the movie with everything that was going on and she goes, I did ashwaghanda and lost a year so I have no idea what you’re talking about.

That’s just funny.

She did mention how she enjoyed working with everyone again and proceeded to name all the people she worked with again on the movie and left out Blake. I think it’s pretty clear they don’t get along but that’s nothing new. I think we always knew that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Question for the lawyers here. Someone on Reddit made a point that I hadn’t considered but it does make sense. They asked how was it ok for Stephanie Jones to give Abel’s cellphone to Lively?

Initially I had run with the explanation that it was a work phone and therefore Jones’ property. But, the redditer pointed out that PR agents usually have an NDA or other agreement with their clients to safeguard their privacy. Baldoni was a client of Jonesworks and Jones handed over text messages from a time period when Abel was her employee and Baldoni her client.

Blake claims she had a subpoena but we know that wasn’t true b/c there was no case yet. Jones clearly handed the phone over, which had to be a contract violation with Baldoni’s rights/privacy as a client. No wonder BF calls the texts BL gave to the NYT “the illegally obtained text messages”.

So back to my question—can BF get the texts thrown out? And if so, what does BL really have at that point to prove retaliation?

PP here’s. There’s a lot of lawyers on the thread right now but no one has answered my question from yesterday. Any thoughts on the legality of the text messages? If they were about Baldoni (as a client of Jonesworks) or to Baldoni (as a client of Jonesworks) wouldn’t Jones be in breach of contract or likely an NDA?

On what basis are you saying there was no valid subpoena? There was. No one claimed it was issued from the case that had not yet been filed, obviously

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I saw she did a promo event with Anna Kendrick. Surprised Blake's haters didn't flood this thread with the usual negative comments about her looks. I thought she looked nice.

She did look nice, but I always think Blake looks pretty.

It is pretty funny watching Anna Kendrick navigate this. Did you see when someone asked how was it working this blake again and her answer was “oh you know” and she turns away.

Then someone asked her how it was promoting the movie with everything that was going on and she goes, I did ashwaghanda and lost a year so I have no idea what you’re talking about.

That’s just funny.

She did mention how she enjoyed working with everyone again and proceeded to name all the people she worked with again on the movie and left out Blake. I think it’s pretty clear they don’t get along but that’s nothing new. I think we always knew that.

Anna Kendrick handled it perfectly - deflecting but says everything about how it’s a joy to work with Blake.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I saw she did a promo event with Anna Kendrick. Surprised Blake's haters didn't flood this thread with the usual negative comments about her looks. I thought she looked nice.

She had her usual crazy interview persona. The look on Anna Kendrick’s face is priceless.

AK has a rep for being not at all nice. I wouldn't worry too much about what she thinks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I saw she did a promo event with Anna Kendrick. Surprised Blake's haters didn't flood this thread with the usual negative comments about her looks. I thought she looked nice.

She had her usual crazy interview persona. The look on Anna Kendrick’s face is priceless.

AK has a rep for being not at all nice. I wouldn't worry too much about what she thinks.

No one is worried about it. It’s just that Blake continues her long-standing tradition of not getting along with costars.

[Anonymous]

Some people here won’t be interested in this podcast for sure, but I found this recent Taylor Lorentz/Ophie Dokie discussion of the “Misogyny Slop Ecosystem” across various social media to be pretty interesting.

It discusses how some of these podcasts are basically the female equivalent of dudebro podcasters that are slowly moving people over to more conservative values, by feeding into a popular thirst for taking down uppity women like Amber Heard, Blake Lively, and Meghan Markle etc, which ultimately feeds directly into the Candace Owens/Megyn Kelly conservative pipeline.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Some people here won’t be interested in this podcast for sure, but I found this recent Taylor Lorentz/Ophie Dokie discussion of the “Misogyny Slop Ecosystem” across various social media to be pretty interesting.

It discusses how some of these podcasts are basically the female equivalent of dudebro podcasters that are slowly moving people over to more conservative values, by feeding into a popular thirst for taking down uppity women like Amber Heard, Blake Lively, and Meghan Markle etc, which ultimately feeds directly into the Candace Owens/Megyn Kelly conservative pipeline.

I don’t agree. Blake and Amber lied and used their white woman privilege to try to take someone down. It’s a tale as old as time (Emmitt Till comes to mind) and it’s a good thing that people are being more critical of accusations instead of just believing women (usually white women). Megan Markle honestly is probably collateral damage from Harry’s behavior. The way he publicly turned on his family was a bit off putting for people, and I think Megan’s just caught up in that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I don’t agree. Blake and Amber lied and used their white woman privilege to try to take someone down. It’s a tale as old as time (Emmitt Till comes to mind) and it’s a good thing that people are being more critical of accusations instead of just believing women (usually white women). Megan Markle honestly is probably collateral damage from Harry’s behavior. The way he publicly turned on his family was a bit off putting for people, and I think Megan’s just caught up in that.

Why do you believe white men?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I don’t agree. Blake and Amber lied and used their white woman privilege to try to take someone down. It’s a tale as old as time (Emmitt Till comes to mind) and it’s a good thing that people are being more critical of accusations instead of just believing women (usually white women). Megan Markle honestly is probably collateral damage from Harry’s behavior. The way he publicly turned on his family was a bit off putting for people, and I think Megan’s just caught up in that.

Why do you believe white men?

Dp, but I don’t believe any group of people categorically. Why do you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I don’t agree. Blake and Amber lied and used their white woman privilege to try to take someone down. It’s a tale as old as time (Emmitt Till comes to mind) and it’s a good thing that people are being more critical of accusations instead of just believing women (usually white women). Megan Markle honestly is probably collateral damage from Harry’s behavior. The way he publicly turned on his family was a bit off putting for people, and I think Megan’s just caught up in that.

Why do you believe white men?

DP. I didn’t believe one side or the other until I read the complaints and looked at the evidence available so far. Blake lied in a few places, so I feel it’s more logical to be skeptical of her claims. I can list the untruths if you’d like, but I think they’ve probably been hashed out enough here. And, at the end of the day, people are innocent until proven guilty, so he is innocent until she can prove otherwise. It is actually more ethical in our justice system to think of him as innocent until she can provide some proof, not the other way around.

FWIW, I have been sick since Trump took office. The only thing that could “convert” me is a head injury. We’ve politicized so much that has nothing to do with politics (like vaccines), please let’s not do this here. It’s absolutely destroying us.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I don’t agree. Blake and Amber lied and used their white woman privilege to try to take someone down. It’s a tale as old as time (Emmitt Till comes to mind) and it’s a good thing that people are being more critical of accusations instead of just believing women (usually white women). Megan Markle honestly is probably collateral damage from Harry’s behavior. The way he publicly turned on his family was a bit off putting for people, and I think Megan’s just caught up in that.

Why do you believe white men?

DP - that's an interesting point that the podcast also discusses. The Misogyny Slop Ecosystem youtubers who purport to analyze body language mostly are concentrating on picking apart the females in question, and are not picking apart the Baldoni body language. There is an appearance of non-partisanship in many of the videos/tiktoks that doesn't comport with reality when you analyze them, as though they seem like they are giving an objective view of the story when they are just giving a pro-male or anti-female view. And in many cases, their viewership would drop off if they actually gave both sides, so it's a self-perpetuating system.

And with Markle, oh, I'm sure the hits she takes here (current DCUM thread is 58 pages and counting, though I haven't been in there) and on the Internet are entirely attributable to Harry's and her own behavior and not at all to the double whammy of the racism and misogyny, lol.

On a side note, I just found out today that Sylvia Plath's husband, prior poet laureate Ted Hughes, actually was abusive to Plath, and tried to strangle her at one point, and though I knew he rearranged the order of her final book of poems, I didn't realize he did it to focus the emphasis on the idea of her mental instability as the locus for her suicide, rather than to keep the focus of the book on the dissolution of their marriage and the part he played in that. All you have to do is rewrite the narrative and focus people's attention where YOU want it to be to preserve your legacy and get people to keep thinking of you as a good guy ... to a point, anyway.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I don’t agree. Blake and Amber lied and used their white woman privilege to try to take someone down. It’s a tale as old as time (Emmitt Till comes to mind) and it’s a good thing that people are being more critical of accusations instead of just believing women (usually white women). Megan Markle honestly is probably collateral damage from Harry’s behavior. The way he publicly turned on his family was a bit off putting for people, and I think Megan’s just caught up in that.

Why do you believe white men?

DP - that's an interesting point that the podcast also discusses. The Misogyny Slop Ecosystem youtubers who purport to analyze body language mostly are concentrating on picking apart the females in question, and are not picking apart the Baldoni body language. There is an appearance of non-partisanship in many of the videos/tiktoks that doesn't comport with reality when you analyze them, as though they seem like they are giving an objective view of the story when they are just giving a pro-male or anti-female view. And in many cases, their viewership would drop off if they actually gave both sides, so it's a self-perpetuating system.

And with Markle, oh, I'm sure the hits she takes here (current DCUM thread is 58 pages and counting, though I haven't been in there) and on the Internet are entirely attributable to Harry's and her own behavior and not at all to the double whammy of the racism and misogyny, lol.

On a side note, I just found out today that Sylvia Plath's husband, prior poet laureate Ted Hughes, actually was abusive to Plath, and tried to strangle her at one point, and though I knew he rearranged the order of her final book of poems, I didn't realize he did it to focus the emphasis on the idea of her mental instability as the locus for her suicide, rather than to keep the focus of the book on the dissolution of their marriage and the part he played in that. All you have to do is rewrite the narrative and focus people's attention where YOU want it to be to preserve your legacy and get people to keep thinking of you as a good guy ... to a point, anyway.

What makes you think I believe white men? Like a pp said, innocent until proven guilty should be the standard. The Blake’s and Ambers of the world should not be able to just be believed because they’re white women, meanwhile they’re lying and ruining lives. It’s an absolutely ridiculous standard to put out there and even more ridiculous that so many people have gotten behind this “believe women” narrative that goes against the very basic principles of our justice system. It’s frankly dangerous and has been for black men for years. Only recently have white men started to feel it too.

[Anonymous]

Innocent until proven guilty, fwiw, is the standard of proof in certain criminal trials, where charges are brought by the state, which this is not. The Lively/Baldoni trial is a civil trial, where the standard is generally a preponderance of the evidence, so the plaintiff needs to show that their claims are more likely true than not, essentially requiring a greater than 50% chance that their facts are correct. That’s true for Lively and her claims as well as for Baldoni and his claims.

Nobody is trying to send Baldoni to jail here, this really isn’t an “innocent until proven guilty, beyond a reasonable doubt” kind of case. It’s a “more likely than not” civil trial where people are being sued for money, not their personal freedom.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Innocent until proven guilty, fwiw, is the standard of proof in certain criminal trials, where charges are brought by the state, which this is not. The Lively/Baldoni trial is a civil trial, where the standard is generally a preponderance of the evidence, so the plaintiff needs to show that their claims are more likely true than not, essentially requiring a greater than 50% chance that their facts are correct. That’s true for Lively and her claims as well as for Baldoni and his claims.

Nobody is trying to send Baldoni to jail here, this really isn’t an “innocent until proven guilty, beyond a reasonable doubt” kind of case. It’s a “more likely than not” civil trial where people are being sued for money, not their personal freedom.

The burden of proof is so irrelevant to the conversation and almost seems like you’re trying to miss the point. Whether preponderance of the evidence or reasonable doubt, the point that women should just be believed is insane. And no, BL isn’t trying to send JB to jail, just ruin him financially because that’s so much better.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Innocent until proven guilty, fwiw, is the standard of proof in certain criminal trials, where charges are brought by the state, which this is not. The Lively/Baldoni trial is a civil trial, where the standard is generally a preponderance of the evidence, so the plaintiff needs to show that their claims are more likely true than not, essentially requiring a greater than 50% chance that their facts are correct. That’s true for Lively and her claims as well as for Baldoni and his claims.

Nobody is trying to send Baldoni to jail here, this really isn’t an “innocent until proven guilty, beyond a reasonable doubt” kind of case. It’s a “more likely than not” civil trial where people are being sued for money, not their personal freedom.

The burden of proof is so irrelevant to the conversation and almost seems like you’re trying to miss the point. Whether preponderance of the evidence or reasonable doubt, the point that women should just be believed is insane. And no, BL isn’t trying to send JB to jail, just ruin him financially because that’s so much better.

You guys are the ones that both said “innocent until proven guilty” should apply here though it does not, so look inwards.