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]https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.634304/gov.uscourts.nysd.634304.347.0.pdf

This is a fun little email exchange that cuts off right where Melissa Nathan is about to talk about other stuff she and Jed worked on!  Could potentially be relevant if they mention wanting similar work done for you know who.

Some Lively supporters had speculated that Wallace is very underground and doesn't put things in writing or even gets paid in bitcoin or untraceable methods, but here he is using email and reference is made to a subcontract and a w9.
[/quote]

Yes, that cut off exchange where Nathan starts to reference prior work with Wallace is pretty tantalizing. Depending on how that email ends, we really could see discovery and exploration of the Depp/Heard trial in this case. Would be directly relevant if Nathan was using TAG's work for Depp against Heard as a selling point with Baldoni and Wayfarer. Couple that with, for instance, Baldoni's text with the screen shot of a tweet calling Hailey Bieber a "mean girl" (which, btw, is a take that is really aging like milk!) and saying "we need this" and it just becomes increasingly hard to see how this wasn't a retaliatory campaign.

"Please destroy Blake Lively the same way you destroyed Amber Heard and the way Hailey Bieber is currently being ripped apart online, quickly before she tells anyone about her experiences with me on the set of this movie." It's not a good look![/quote]

Right?  Agree.

This letter also hearkens back to Quote One (175K) and Quote 2 ($25K, which goes up to $30K) from the Melissa Nathan email, shows that Wayfarer chose Quote 2, which that email said "will be for creation of social fan engagement to go back and forth with any negative accounts helping to change narrative and stay on track."  I don't understand how Wallace could have been performing this work for $30K/month (more than originally quoted), not have a team or be working with anyone, but also only be monitoring socials and not actually doing any of the work he said he would be doing in this description (like going back and forth with any negative accounts helping to change narrative).  Something seems very wrong here.  At the same time, Wallace must have known this would get produced, so how could he sign that declaration?  It just makes no sense.[/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