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]Honestly it seems like the lawyers on here who support Baldoni stopped weighing in on almost every legal issue following their great embarrassment when Baldoni’s entire legal complaint was dismissed, and then follow up embarrassment two weeks later when Freedman didn’t even amend. So to say “hey we didn’t even say anything about those filings” is pretty rich.  Sure, you’ll never be wrong again — that’s one way to do it!  Congrats![/quote]

That filing happened over Fourth of July week and some of us have lives.  Happy to discuss the Van Zan ruling within you or if not you, the person who posted non stop about how embarrassing the motion was for  WF defendants.  Or the Swift motion.  Or Blake’s postponing her depo.  [/quote]

So what you're saying is you're happy to discuss exactly three filings where Baldoni's lawyers don't entirely come off looking like unprepared crooks, even if they also occurred over the fourth of July week (depo), but you have no legal opinions to share on the hundreds of remaining legal filings in the case lol.

For example, did you happen to catch the CA judge musing on why Freedman and Garofalo didn't even bother to address the transfer issue in their joint filing?  ("Indeed, Movant strangely did not respond to Respondent’s transfer arguments in the initial joint stipulation filing.")  Oh, Your Honor, we [i]also[/i] have many questions about wtf these lawyers are doing.  But I am guessing from the above that you have nothing to say about this, or any other filing where Freedman and co. come off looking like idiots.  Okay, NP.  We'll make sure to sound the alarm for you when any of those particular three filings you mentioned come up here.[/quote]

My point is that the motion to dismiss was over a month ago and WF has had some success since then.  I could have also mentioned the Swift textmotion Blake lost.

Baldoni supporters just choose, for the most part, not to engage with you and one or two of the other Lively supporters who don’t seem to live entirely in the real world and are unpleasant to boot.  Why bother, and with that, I’m off to enjoy thus beautiful afternoon.[/quote]

It's true, we're really not going to convince one another.  Our realities are too far apart from one another and we are just talking past each other every time we engage.  That's why I mostly stopped participating here for a week.  I have found it's the same on Reddit.  There is nowhere to discuss the case where people will actually discuss the legal issues without their own viewpoint/ideology getting in the way of a real discussion.  Maybe the Courts reddit sub -- I haven't tried that.

I will say, I did [i]try[/i] to participate evenly and pleasantly here, [u][b]literally for months[/b][/u], and was constantly assaulted with claims that I was a bot or a shill or getting paid or some insider.  Which I am not.  And most of my legal arguments turned out to be right, and those from Baldoni supporters turned out to be wrong.

So if you're mad that I'm "unpleasant" now, please look inward because I participated here literally for months with no insults until I got fed up with the constant attacks from your side.  If it's helpful I can go find the posts where I said I'd start insulting too if the insults didn't stop.  (Reader, the insults did not stop.)  So I don't care anymore, and I will snark if I want to, because I've earned it.  [/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