Why is Blake Lively so overrated?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.deuxmoi.world/latest/publicist-jennifer-abel-allegedly-breaks-silence-on-explosive-text-messages-in-baldoni-lawsuitist

Dummy. She doesn't need to be subpoenaed since these are work communications. They either subpoenaed the previous company or the company agreed to hand them over. Either way her permission is not needed. There is a message of her saying "I am having reckless thoughts about planting pieces over how're awful Blake is this week" so this "i would NEVER" is BS

I’m confused about when they subpoenaed the documents since the complaint was just filed this week?

You can subpoena to preserve evidence before a complaint is filed.

That’s different than forcing production. What was the mechanism to get the PR people’s emails and texts?

No it isn't. If a court signs a subpoena then they have to produce it.

You said preserve evidence that’s not the same as produce evidence.

I was also curious about this so I looked into it. Apparently the first step in a workplace sexual harassment case in CA is lodging a complaint against with the California Civil Rights Commission, which is has investigative (including subpoena) authority. The Commission then tries to get the parties to settle. If they can’t, then it goes on to a lawsuit.

The complaint is the commencement of the lawsuit. My understanding is that the subpoenaed communications are from the California Civil Rights Commission proceeding.

That makes sense thanks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting how the marketing plan was to focus on the reslience of the character and not on the domestic violence and to have Blake wear a flowered theme to reflect the character's work as a florist and then they used their own marketing plan against her to make her look shallow by not being serious and focused on the domestic violence themes.

This guy and the team he hired seem pretty sociopathic.

I also saw that the women who reposted the baby bump video where Blake made a comment was paid to repost it on a specific date by the crisis team Baldoni hired.

Right except my read on the timeline is that this marketing was failing before Baldoni started his PR campaign.

The marketing campaign was Sony. They directed her to talk about florals, not Justin.

yes I know. I meant that the marketing campaign was failing BEFORE Justin started his negative PR. so the negative PR was not the initial cause of the bad press she was getting.

They admit they were doing it. This isn't some huge mystery.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting how the marketing plan was to focus on the reslience of the character and not on the domestic violence and to have Blake wear a flowered theme to reflect the character's work as a florist and then they used their own marketing plan against her to make her look shallow by not being serious and focused on the domestic violence themes.

This guy and the team he hired seem pretty sociopathic.

I also saw that the women who reposted the baby bump video where Blake made a comment was paid to repost it on a specific date by the crisis team Baldoni hired.

Right except my read on the timeline is that this marketing was failing before Baldoni started his PR campaign.

The marketing campaign was Sony. They directed her to talk about florals, not Justin.

yes I know. I meant that the marketing campaign was failing BEFORE Justin started his negative PR. so the negative PR was not the initial cause of the bad press she was getting.

They admit they were doing it. This isn't some huge mystery.

What I’m trying to get at is that Blake coordinated the very public icing-out of Baldoni after the marketing started to tank, THEN he hired the PR agent to smear her. That is what the complaint and chronology show. Why did she coordinate to ice him out? She got what she wanted with her list of demands to restart production.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:People who don't understand the Blake dislike crack me up. This is a woman who got married on a plantation. That's like getting married at Auschwitz. Maybe she was sexually harassed, if it happened I hope it comes out in court and the guy faces consequences. But to me this is a woman who has shown time and again that she's a self involved ahole who is incapable of accountability.

This is incredibly offensive, PP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Justin is a disgusting, abusive creep.

Fool destroyed his own career.

+1 and ladies, it's okay to think this and dislike Blake Lively at the same time. It doesn't have to be one or the other.

[Anonymous]

I don’t understand why her “list of demands” includes “not showing or discussing pornography”? WTF?! Do people think it’s ok to talk about that at work? Glad I’m not in Hollywood. When my child was young, he was scouted to be in a commercial. I said no. To this day I have zero regrets. Hollywood sounds like a cesspool of degenerates. Lively isn’t any classier than the people she wrote this list of demands for. Yuck!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.deuxmoi.world/latest/publicist-jennifer-abel-allegedly-breaks-silence-on-explosive-text-messages-in-baldoni-lawsuitist

Dummy. She doesn't need to be subpoenaed since these are work communications. They either subpoenaed the previous company or the company agreed to hand them over. Either way her permission is not needed. There is a message of her saying "I am having reckless thoughts about planting pieces over how're awful Blake is this week" so this "i would NEVER" is BS

I’m confused about when they subpoenaed the documents since the complaint was just filed this week?

You can subpoena to preserve evidence before a complaint is filed.

That’s different than forcing production. What was the mechanism to get the PR people’s emails and texts?

No it isn't. If a court signs a subpoena then they have to produce it.

You said preserve evidence that’s not the same as produce evidence.

I was also curious about this so I looked into it. Apparently the first step in a workplace sexual harassment case in CA is lodging a complaint against with the California Civil Rights Commission, which is has investigative (including subpoena) authority. The Commission then tries to get the parties to settle. If they can’t, then it goes on to a lawsuit.

The complaint is the commencement of the lawsuit. My understanding is that the subpoenaed communications are from the California Civil Rights Commission proceeding.

If she just lodged the complaint, then wouldn’t the CCCC just have subpoena power now? How did the texts show up in the Complaint since it is a precursor. (Not following the timing).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.deuxmoi.world/latest/publicist-jennifer-abel-allegedly-breaks-silence-on-explosive-text-messages-in-baldoni-lawsuitist

Dummy. She doesn't need to be subpoenaed since these are work communications. They either subpoenaed the previous company or the company agreed to hand them over. Either way her permission is not needed. There is a message of her saying "I am having reckless thoughts about planting pieces over how're awful Blake is this week" so this "i would NEVER" is BS

I’m confused about when they subpoenaed the documents since the complaint was just filed this week?

You can subpoena to preserve evidence before a complaint is filed.

but they had the evidence already in the complaint. I’m unfamiliar with being able to subpoena something likely as contentious as personal texts before a complaint has even been filed? Surely the PR agency would have resisted discovery on grounds it was overbroad etc.

Yes this is my question. A potential defendant doesn’t just turn documents over.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People who don't understand the Blake dislike crack me up. This is a woman who got married on a plantation. That's like getting married at Auschwitz. Maybe she was sexually harassed, if it happened I hope it comes out in court and the guy faces consequences. But to me this is a woman who has shown time and again that she's a self involved ahole who is incapable of accountability.

This is incredibly offensive, PP.

People on the West Coast don’t get Civil War/Southern Culture. I grew up out West and none of this history was part of my world until I moved to the East Coast.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I think if Baldoni’s PR agents had trolls planted on her shampoo promo social media posts, that’s a quite strong claim for her of retaliation, tortious interference & significant damages.

Someone from Baldoni's PR team posted in a private PR group on FB. Here's her side of the story. It's long and covers a couple of different things so I can't TL;DR but she supports Justin, says their was no coordinated effort, the internet took over on it's own
https://www.reddit.com/r/popculturechat/comments/1hk3wi6/jennifer_abel_a_member_of_justin_baldonis_crisis/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I think if Baldoni’s PR agents had trolls planted on her shampoo promo social media posts, that’s a quite strong claim for her of retaliation, tortious interference & significant damages.

Someone from Baldoni's PR team posted in a private PR group on FB. Here's her side of the story. It's long and covers a couple of different things so I can't TL;DR but she supports Justin, says their was no coordinated effort, the internet took over on it's own
https://www.reddit.com/r/popculturechat/comments/1hk3wi6/jennifer_abel_a_member_of_justin_baldonis_crisis/

Is she aware we can all read

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People who don't understand the Blake dislike crack me up. This is a woman who got married on a plantation. That's like getting married at Auschwitz. Maybe she was sexually harassed, if it happened I hope it comes out in court and the guy faces consequences. But to me this is a woman who has shown time and again that she's a self involved ahole who is incapable of accountability.

This is incredibly offensive, PP.

People on the West Coast don’t get Civil War/Southern Culture. I grew up out West and none of this history was part of my world until I moved to the East Coast.

Slavery built America. All of America. And there was a ton of systemic racism and other jim crow laws on the west coast too

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I never understood the outrage against her this summer. It seemed so manufactured or trollish. Well.

This thread was started in 2018. Folks have disliked Lively for a long time.

She can be a b$%h and have grounds for a sexual harassment suit at the same time.

For the zillionth time, that’s not all she is alleging. She thinks the social medial comparing tanked her shampoo but people haven’t liked her for years and weren’t going to buy her shampoo anyway.

You're focusing on the least part of what she's alleging. Just skipping all the other stuff. Why is that?

1. That’s the part that seems to be in all headlines, the focus on the times article, and the press releases. (And yes I read the complaint).

2. It’s a huge part of damages and without that piece, it’s questionable whether she would have brought her case.

She has like 8 counts. Strange that you don’t focus on the other 7.

I think if Baldoni’s PR agents had trolls planted on her shampoo promo social media posts, that’s a quite strong claim for her of retaliation, tortious interference & significant damages.

You’re not understanding- there are no damages if no was going to buy her shampoo anyway.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I was not a fan and now will not watch anything she is in.

No one cares whether you watch or not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.deuxmoi.world/latest/publicist-jennifer-abel-allegedly-breaks-silence-on-explosive-text-messages-in-baldoni-lawsuitist

Dummy. She doesn't need to be subpoenaed since these are work communications. They either subpoenaed the previous company or the company agreed to hand them over. Either way her permission is not needed. There is a message of her saying "I am having reckless thoughts about planting pieces over how're awful Blake is this week" so this "i would NEVER" is BS

I’m confused about when they subpoenaed the documents since the complaint was just filed this week?

You can subpoena to preserve evidence before a complaint is filed.

That’s different than forcing production. What was the mechanism to get the PR people’s emails and texts?

No it isn't. If a court signs a subpoena then they have to produce it.

before the case is filed? In a fishing expedition?

Yes it happens all the time