Toggle navigation
Toggle navigation
Home
DCUM Forums
Nanny Forums
Events
About DCUM
Advertising
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics
FAQs and Guidelines
Privacy Policy
Your current identity is: Anonymous
Login
Preview
Subject:
Forum Index
»
Entertainment and Pop Culture
Reply to "Blake Lively- Jason Baldoni and NYT - False Light claims "
Subject:
Emoticons
More smilies
Text Color:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Violet
White
Black
Font:
Very Small
Small
Normal
Big
Giant
Close Marks
[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]If this is the basis for the Venable subpoena, why did Venable file the motion to quash? Freedman is now saying he thinks it will be mooted soon because they are working together. Curious what changed between Venables MTQ, which was pretty strongly worded, and this letter. Especially because in the meantime Lively joined the MTQ and filed the motion to intervene, and the wording of that motion seemed to indicate that Venable and Lively's team were working together. Curious to hear from Venable here. If they moot the MTQ then we'll know, but it doesn't look like it's happened yet.[/quote] The subpoena was likely overbroad. Once Freedman indicated the specific correspondence he wanted, Venable may have become more willing to produce.[/quote] Maybe. That doesn't square with Taylor's public statement about it though. She was unequivocal that she had nothing to do with IEWU. Do we really think Taylor Swift and her advisors are so stupid as to publicly and aggressively lie that she had zero involvement with the film, if in reality there were texts back and forth with Lively about the film, AND that Lively had asked her to delete them, AND that Lively's lawyer had supposedly tried to extort Swift into issuing a public supportive statement by threatening to release embarrassing content about Swift? It seems like if any of that had happened, Swift would have more clearly cut ties with Lively and also her attorneys would have negotiated a deal with Freedman to share just the damning communications from Lively. It doesn't make sense that if all that had really gone down, Taylor would offer a very clear "this does not concern me" statement and that her lawyers would issue a motion to quash.[/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