Blake Lively- Jason Baldoni and NYT - False Light claims

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m the Lively supporter who listened in on the PO hearing. I predicted here yesterday that the court would strike the letter. And I was right.

Why do you keep bringing up that you listened to the PO hearing as if it's a badge of honor? We don't care.

It’s also not a shock that liman struck the letter but this poster will crow about it being a big loss for freedman for days

Pretty sure you guys thought Liman was going to call for a hearing and then present Freedman with some sort of award afterwards for protecting and serving the good people of SDNY or similar. You sure didn’t say he was going to strike Freedman’s letter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m the Lively supporter who listened in on the PO hearing. I predicted here yesterday that the court would strike the letter. And I was right.

Why do you keep bringing up that you listened to the PO hearing as if it's a badge of honor? We don't care.

It’s also not a shock that liman struck the letter but this poster will crow about it being a big loss for freedman for days

Pretty sure you guys thought Liman was going to call for a hearing and then present Freedman with some sort of award afterwards for protecting and serving the good people of SDNY or similar. You sure didn’t say he was going to strike Freedman’s letter.

Huh? I’ve been on the last few days and no one said that at all. Not sure if anyone closely discussed striking the letter but that’s bc it ultimately has no import. Cats out of the bag. TS isn’t objecting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m the Lively supporter who listened in on the PO hearing. I predicted here yesterday that the court would strike the letter. And I was right.

Why do you keep bringing up that you listened to the PO hearing as if it's a badge of honor? We don't care.

It’s also not a shock that liman struck the letter but this poster will crow about it being a big loss for freedman for days

Pretty sure you guys thought Liman was going to call for a hearing and then present Freedman with some sort of award afterwards for protecting and serving the good people of SDNY or similar. You sure didn’t say he was going to strike Freedman’s letter.

Huh? I’ve been on the last few days and no one said that at all. Not sure if anyone closely discussed striking the letter but that’s bc it ultimately has no import. Cats out of the bag. TS isn’t objecting.

Agree, someone did say that letter should be struck yesterday, but otherwise it wasn't discussed. Judge is probably so angry because he intended to strike it, and Freedman still managed to sneak in a pretty devastating affidavit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m the Lively supporter who listened in on the PO hearing. I predicted here yesterday that the court would strike the letter. And I was right.

Why do you keep bringing up that you listened to the PO hearing as if it's a badge of honor? We don't care.

It’s also not a shock that liman struck the letter but this poster will crow about it being a big loss for freedman for days

Pretty sure you guys thought Liman was going to call for a hearing and then present Freedman with some sort of award afterwards for protecting and serving the good people of SDNY or similar. You sure didn’t say he was going to strike Freedman’s letter.

Huh? I’ve been on the last few days and no one said that at all. Not sure if anyone closely discussed striking the letter but that’s bc it ultimately has no import. Cats out of the bag. TS isn’t objecting.

Agree, someone did say that letter should be struck yesterday, but otherwise it wasn't discussed. Judge is probably so angry because he intended to strike it, and Freedman still managed to sneak in a pretty devastating affidavit.

Devastating? Wut? It’s looking more and more like Freedman’s source is a scorned, fired, and mad minor PR reps for one of the involved firms (Abel?) who would have every reason to lie and likely wouldn’t have firsthand knowledge. If so, Freedman’s filings were extremely foolish.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m the Lively supporter who listened in on the PO hearing. I predicted here yesterday that the court would strike the letter. And I was right.

Why do you keep bringing up that you listened to the PO hearing as if it's a badge of honor? We don't care.

It’s also not a shock that liman struck the letter but this poster will crow about it being a big loss for freedman for days

Pretty sure you guys thought Liman was going to call for a hearing and then present Freedman with some sort of award afterwards for protecting and serving the good people of SDNY or similar. You sure didn’t say he was going to strike Freedman’s letter.

Huh? I’ve been on the last few days and no one said that at all. Not sure if anyone closely discussed striking the letter but that’s bc it ultimately has no import. Cats out of the bag. TS isn’t objecting.

Agree, someone did say that letter should be struck yesterday, but otherwise it wasn't discussed. Judge is probably so angry because he intended to strike it, and Freedman still managed to sneak in a pretty devastating affidavit.

Devastating? Wut? It’s looking more and more like Freedman’s source is a scorned, fired, and mad minor PR reps for one of the involved firms (Abel?) who would have every reason to lie and likely wouldn’t have firsthand knowledge. If so, Freedman’s filings were extremely foolish.

Doubtful and it isn’t looking more and more like anything because Liman shut the issue down. But I can see why you would want to believe that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m the Lively supporter who listened in on the PO hearing. I predicted here yesterday that the court would strike the letter. And I was right.

Why do you keep bringing up that you listened to the PO hearing as if it's a badge of honor? We don't care.

It’s also not a shock that liman struck the letter but this poster will crow about it being a big loss for freedman for days

Pretty sure you guys thought Liman was going to call for a hearing and then present Freedman with some sort of award afterwards for protecting and serving the good people of SDNY or similar. You sure didn’t say he was going to strike Freedman’s letter.

Huh? I’ve been on the last few days and no one said that at all. Not sure if anyone closely discussed striking the letter but that’s bc it ultimately has no import. Cats out of the bag. TS isn’t objecting.

Agree, someone did say that letter should be struck yesterday, but otherwise it wasn't discussed. Judge is probably so angry because he intended to strike it, and Freedman still managed to sneak in a pretty devastating affidavit.

Devastating? Wut? It’s looking more and more like Freedman’s source is a scorned, fired, and mad minor PR reps for one of the involved firms (Abel?) who would have every reason to lie and likely wouldn’t have firsthand knowledge. If so, Freedman’s filings were extremely foolish.

Nice try but no. Freedman and Daily Mail aren’t fools. They know not to rely on obviously biased sources.

[Anonymous]

If and until Taylor says it’s all BS, I’ll assume it happened.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If and until Taylor says it’s all BS, I’ll assume it happened.

Agree, that’s where I am.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If and until Taylor says it’s all BS, I’ll assume it happened.

Agree, that’s where I am.

Same!

[Anonymous]

Can someone give a summary of the issue? Why is this thread so long?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can someone give a summary of the issue? Why is this thread so long?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can someone give a summary of the issue? Why is this thread so long?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m the Lively supporter who listened in on the PO hearing. I predicted here yesterday that the court would strike the letter. And I was right.

Why do you keep bringing up that you listened to the PO hearing as if it's a badge of honor? We don't care.

It’s also not a shock that liman struck the letter but this poster will crow about it being a big loss for freedman for days

Pretty sure you guys thought Liman was going to call for a hearing and then present Freedman with some sort of award afterwards for protecting and serving the good people of SDNY or similar. You sure didn’t say he was going to strike Freedman’s letter.

You continue to lie and exaggerate Arlington mom who is sometimes a ‘litigator’

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can someone give a summary of the issue? Why is this thread so long?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone give a summary of the issue? Why is this thread so long?

Nice try again.

Google