Reply to Lively/Baldoni Lawsuit Part 2

Forum Index » Entertainment and Pop Culture

Reply to "Lively/Baldoni Lawsuit Part 2"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Lively was right about Justin. He is porn and sex obsessed and he was trying to turn a movie about DV into a vehicle for his sexual fantasies. He was gross and many of the women on the movie thought so. Jamey Heath enables him and they both have boundary issues. And when they realized people might find this stuff out about them, their egos led them to hire sketchy people like Melissa Nathan, Jed Wallace, and Bryan Freedman to try and destroy Lively's reputation so no one would ever believe her. And they basically got away with it.

I do think Lively lost this case, the 47.1 motion not withstanding (we'll see, I have no faith), and I think that's fundamentally unfair because: she was right.

But life is unfair and 2026 America is not a bastion of truth or justice. I hate it, but I'm not going to pretend it's anything else.[/quote]

DP. This is a huge masterclass in gaslighting. I don’t even know what you and PP are talking about at this point, but none of this is factoring into the judge’s decision on 47.1. It feels like Blake fans are doing anything to change the subject b/c staying on topic is inconvenient for them.

The question is can a California law apply to something that happened in New Jersey (probably not); and if it could, does the law violate the constitution (yes, Justin’s first amendment rights); is it justifiable as an anti slap law, which has lots of precedent and is widely accepted (no, 47.1 is fundamentally different from other anti slap laws b/c it gives preference to a specific kind of speech and calls for more than simple fee shifting); and if Blake can get past all that (she probably can’t) was her case brought without malice (WF has brought compelling facts including Vanzan and spoliation evidence suggesting it was not.) Also you have to recall Blake was trying to get him fired from wme (remember the Sklenar “when wme drops him” text) and the nyt proudly proclaimed that Justin had gone unscathed until the article dropped and wme cut him. It’s in the article, they made the update, they were proud, just look for yourself. Yet they haven’t updated any of their bad facts. [/quote]

How can expressing my opinion about this case be a "masterclass in gaslighting." I am just an anonymous person on the internet, I have zero power over you and what you think. This is what I really think happened. If you disagree, fine, express your disagreement.

And I wasn't talking about 47.1. I'm talking about my general impressions of what happened here. Here's what I think happened: Justin is a porn and sex obsessed idiot, he was a bad director who treated the women on the movie badly and he deserved to be called out for it, but instead he hired people to smear Blake online and successfully discredited her so most people will never really understand what actually happened. I think that's awful, it makes me mad, but what are you going to do. I mean Trump is president and literally millions of people voted for him in 2024 despite ALL AVAILABLE EVIDENCE showing what a stupid idea that was, so of course a bunch of idiots online believe Justin. Of course. Again, it's America in 2026. It was so naive of me to ever think Blake would prevail. I thought maybe because she's wealthy and famous she could overcome the cards that are always stacked against women who tell the truth about men like this, but I was obviously wrong. Trump just opened a criminal investigation into the woman he raped. Of course Blake lost. This is the world we live in. [/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