Reply to Blake Lively- Jason Baldoni and NYT

Forum Index » Entertainment and Pop Culture

Reply to "Blake Lively- Jason Baldoni and NYT - False Light claims "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]I’m different PP than Po above, and the one who first posted about the mod change on that sub.

I don’t know what’s going on over there.  Was the change bought?  Was the mod who left the one who was being paid?  I dunno.

But the idea that the sub was “neutral” under prior mod is nuts. Pro-Lively posters were banned there frequently.

I saw a discussion about a mod turnover on a Swift sub, that previously criticized a Swift enemy who had bought her recordings.  With the change, the site turned into a Swift snark site?  I don’t know its status now.

What if that person had bought the prior IEWlawsuits mod. Now he is getting subpoenaed and might not want to have those connections. Also, remember the text between Nathan and the other PR rep, congratulating themselves on quieting a press story that could have been much worse, and ending with “at least they didn’t bring up scooter!”

This sounds like a conspiracy theory though so I’ll stop.

But the idea that the lawsuits sub was “neutral” even though it billed itself as such is a joke. Lively supporters were scorned and mocked. Similar to what Baldoni supporters do/did/are even now still doing here. PP above is still calling us bots, even though her entire weltanschauung is falling apart before her eyes because she has been wrong about everything and we, the Lively supporters, have been right.

[b]I hope more info on the smear gets exposed a[/b]nd I hope Amber Heard gets vindicated, too. [/quote]

You mean Blake livelys smear against justin? [/quote]

Well, that claim was just tossed out by a judge for being wholly unsupported.  While Lively’s claims all remain. Sorry not sorry. [/quote]

He didn’t bring a legal claim about the current PR smear campaign as far as I’m aware. But you can confirm as you spend 14+ hours a day on this case, even though you’re just a ‘neutral’ Arlington mom, right? Nothing to see here, right? Totally normal.

In any event, anyone paying attention can see the desperate PR efforts all over this thread and places like Reddit and TikTok. Your team even hired a psyops CIA guy to help.

Get real. [/quote]

I’m not a neutral poster, I’ve been saying I’m pro-Lively here for quite some time.  Really, in anti-Freedman, but whatevs. I even offered to meet people in person, which I’m pretty sure a PR rep wouldn’t do, but nobody from the Baldoni team was up for that lol.  Then you guys started asking for all sorts of personal info and wanted Lively supporters to post under logins. Wut?  No. I owe you nothing.

I’m a pro Lively DMV area lawyer who has been right about a lot more than any of the Baldoni people have.  I’m not a shill and I’m not being paid by anyone.  Sorry if I can’t take it too seriously when I’m lectured on this by a supporter of the creepy dude who hired Amber Heard’s crisis PR team. [/quote]

By ‘neutral’ I meant not paid. You’re obviously pro lively and will twist and turn any facts to get there.

If you’d like to meet, why don’t you take a first step and just start posting under a screen name here? Can still be anonymous. No one asked you for ‘all sorts of personal info’ in any real way. People are just tired of how obvious your PR push is and want you to stop droning on with nonsense.

As far as you being a lawyer, who knows? Who cares? I’m sure failed lawyers can become low level PR shills too. As many people on here have noted, for all your hours and hours just ‘randomly’ reading and listening to court documents and arguments, your analytical skills are not great, and you often write like an unintelligent and mean teen girl with your ‘lols’ of yourself and ‘sorry not sorry’ style. [/quote]

This is a terrific self own for Baldoni supporters and Freedman himself.  What does it say about all the Baldoni supporters who claim to be lawyers if the weakness of their legal claims are being pointed out by a layman, not even a lawyer?  And same, when 20 minutes of reading Liman's opinion made it completely evident to me that Freedman only had two claims remaining, after he went on live TV after a whole day to ingest the opinion to say he had four?

Sadly though I am a lawyer.  I think the only way for Baldoni supporters to deal with the fact they are losing is to assume that Lively's side is cheating.  Thus all the crazy conspiracy stuff they are posting.  You can do better, guys.[/quote]

Sigh. This isn’t a self own (I think it’s called own goal, but whatever, you continue with the juvenile style that is your trademark.). So are you and your PR twin lawyers or not? According to you two, everything lively or her lawyers do is ‘for women’ ‘for victims’ ‘so she won’t be another amber heard’ (although you mixed up her name with JDs above), and freedman is a fraud, bad, incompetent, Baldoni is a harasser, creepy blah blah. Your focus on Freedman is pathological at this point. Some people think you’re that Kat woman who is in love/hate with him. Im a lawyer myself and I’ve never seen anyone care so much about the lawyers’ representation in a case. Lawyers are typically barely even named in coverage, even in high profile cases. Yet you post about Freedman day after day, digging up his life history, as well as other defense lawyers, even claiming you know their current work calendars, and what work they can handle.

Your ‘analysis’ isn’t some sophisticated legal analysis, it’s primarily just one sided blustering. Yes, Lively has had some legal wins- some would argue primarily technical rather than substantive- and you crow for pages over them like a deranged lunatic, but you refuse to acknowledge anything good or decent on Baldonis side, or of course the many manipulations and outright lies that Blake and team have been caught in. The vanzam subpoena alone was a totally scummy move. As was going to the NYT. Just slimey behavior all around. But of course that doesn’t count to you.

Anyway, you can go on twisting and blustering. Any regular person on here sees it and mostly ignores you.

[/quote]

"Self-own" is proper usage here, e.g., [url]https://slate.com/human-interest/2019/01/self-own-era-politics-ocasio-cortez-gillette.html[/url].  But please continue to lecture me about language and the law!

I'm a lawyer.  I also have admitted weaknesses in Lively legal positions in the past.  For example, I have admitted weaknesses in the sanctions motions (filed more to support dismissal with prejudice than actually get sanctions); the early subpoenas (overbroad); some of the doc requests (overbroad); that Lively's retaliation claim is stronger to me than the SH claim (though it is improper to retaliate against someone for merely reporting perceived harassment); the VanZan subpoena (I don't know whether it's legally permissible or not but it seems shady); etc.

As I and others have noted here before, the difference between Lively and Baldoni supporters is that Lively supporters actually *do* admit when something bad happens.  [b]Unlike you, we have even said we'll switch sides if the facts really go that way, like if Gottlieb really threatened Taylor Swift with extortion[/b].  We have asked you all what would make you switch sides before and with a few exceptions where the facts coming out at trial would matter, you have all said that Lively is a terrible person and you would never take her side over Baldoni's.  Would anything switch you to Lively's side at this point?

How typical for you to try to figure out who I am and call me names.  When Baldoni fans spend hours looking into an issue its "sleuthing" and it's heroic, but if I spend 20 minutes tracking Baldoni's remaining claims its "pathological" and I'm a "deranged lunatic" (while at the same time you complain about [i]my[/i] tone, that's rich).  If you don't want me to insult you, then don't insult me.  As far as my picking on Freedman specifically goes, he has done this to himself by making wild statements to the press at every opportunity.  That's his MO and I think it's terrible lawyering to focus on that instead of the actual legal claims, as this week's order (and his ill-considered TMZ appearance) has shown.

I really cannot believe that less then a week after Judge Liman dismissed all of Baldoni's claims you are standing there lecturing me that "Your ‘analysis’ isn’t some sophisticated legal analysis, it’s primarily just one sided blustering. Yes, Lively has had some legal wins- some would argue primarily technical rather than substantive."  Lady, all but two of your dude's $400M claims are gone.  Sit yourself down and take the loss.  [/quote]

You’re kind of a joke at this point. Your huge ‘victory’ is that Lively- the woman who claimed to be a #metoo victim and wanted the entire world to view Baldoni as a serial predator - is currently not facing any multi million dollar legal claims for her obvious lying about basic facts and extortion of her best friend. That’s hardly a victory, no matter how hard you spin it. Good luck trying to convince a jury she’s a victim.

She ruined what was left of her half way decent reputation from her ‘self own’ PR blunders. And spent millions doing it, including on useless shills like you.

No one’s trying to dox you. You keep claiming to want to dox yourself by meeting in person, and I’ve just said you can use a consistent, but anonymous, sign-in here if you want to be real about how often you post. But of course you don’t. It’s all games, as always.

And freedman. You’re obsessed. Truly bizarre. [/quote]

Look at all the stupid insults you threw at me, when all I said to you was it was typical of you to call me names, which ha you totally did, and now did again, and that you should stop lecturing me because I've been more right than you.  But look at you telling me I'm a joke and obsessed and bizarre and a useless shill.  Does that make you feel better?

[/quote]

‘Anyway, you can go on twisting and blustering. Any regular person on here sees it and mostly ignores you.’
[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics