Anonymous wrote:Look at you women, tearing a woman down. Shameful.

Look at you trying to police other women’s thoughts. Please F all the way off with the shaming women BS. If you’re going to defend her, defend her actions. Stop generalizing by talking about all women. Not all women are the same and not all men are the same. Some women can be as evil and cruel and crazy as men.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think he made a tactical error in not making a very generous financial settlement, very quickly. Things surely would have gone more smoothly if he had, and the chateau sale could have been part of it. It smacks of egotism and control. She's the mother of his six children and he should have been very generous. Just on principle, let alone his gross behavior on the plane.

What does wanting a big lump sum payout say about someone? Did she want money or justice?

I'm not saying she's an angel, far from it. But she was entitled to a huge sum for division of property and child support for six kids over 8 years, and it does seem like he withheld it to punish her for leaving and publicly embarrassing him. And she retaliated by withholding the kids, even when it seemed reasonable he was healthy and ready to co-parent. They both suck.

What kind of mother does this?

I'm sure she rationalized it to herself--he's an awful father and person, the kids were better off with her etc. Like most narcissists do.

I was a little shocked when she had a member of her team basically admit she's been brainwashing the kids to think they had no voice because their father has privilege and power. What? The kids worked with court-appointed therapists, who represented their perspectives in custody proceedings. Only a sadistic mother would want to put her kids through testifying in court. Four are now adults and are free to speak out at any time. At least three seem to have dropped his name, out of loyalty to their mother not because he's been a terrible father as far as we can see. There is no evidence to suggest he deserved to have his parental rights severed. She's a vindictive nutcase who absolutely cannot see the harm she's done to her family (after his initial harm, which while terrible seems to have been short-lived). It's always been about her and what she wants, not what's in the best interest of raising well-adjusted kids who have healthy relationships with both parents.

-1
He tried to hit the children.

If someone jumped on your back and kids got too close or tried to intervene on a bumpy ride, I’m sure your arms would be all over the place and someone would accidentally get hit. I suspect this is why the FBI and DCF didn’t press charges. She attacked him first.

I wouldn’t be surprised if she was prepping some of the kids ahead of time. “Your dad is mean to me, I fear him”, etc.

No she didn't. He had physical touched her and pushed her down before he went for one of the kids.

He may have just walked up to the kid and screamed at them. So she has no idea what he was going to do. And sometimes a kid deserves a spanking or a slap in the face (I.e., open hand).

I believe in spanking, but apparently, he was choking Maddox. That's abuse not discipline.

Only choking I found in FBI report was Jolie choking Pitt.

How convenient.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have an abusive parent, and I still think Angelina is crazy and shouldn't be with the kids. She strikes me as abusive too. The kids should go into foster care.

Go die PP. You're either a troll or a fool. Nobody advocates for a child going into the foster care system where kids languish; are physically and sexually abused; graduate at third grade reading levels; and more.

Pp
I'm sure they have good friends. They'd never get near regular foster care.

The PPP said Foster Care

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think he made a tactical error in not making a very generous financial settlement, very quickly. Things surely would have gone more smoothly if he had, and the chateau sale could have been part of it. It smacks of egotism and control. She's the mother of his six children and he should have been very generous. Just on principle, let alone his gross behavior on the plane.

What does wanting a big lump sum payout say about someone? Did she want money or justice?

I'm not saying she's an angel, far from it. But she was entitled to a huge sum for division of property and child support for six kids over 8 years, and it does seem like he withheld it to punish her for leaving and publicly embarrassing him. And she retaliated by withholding the kids, even when it seemed reasonable he was healthy and ready to co-parent. They both suck.

What kind of mother does this?

I'm sure she rationalized it to herself--he's an awful father and person, the kids were better off with her etc. Like most narcissists do.

I was a little shocked when she had a member of her team basically admit she's been brainwashing the kids to think they had no voice because their father has privilege and power. What? The kids worked with court-appointed therapists, who represented their perspectives in custody proceedings. Only a sadistic mother would want to put her kids through testifying in court. Four are now adults and are free to speak out at any time. At least three seem to have dropped his name, out of loyalty to their mother not because he's been a terrible father as far as we can see. There is no evidence to suggest he deserved to have his parental rights severed. She's a vindictive nutcase who absolutely cannot see the harm she's done to her family (after his initial harm, which while terrible seems to have been short-lived). It's always been about her and what she wants, not what's in the best interest of raising well-adjusted kids who have healthy relationships with both parents.

-1
He tried to hit the children.

If someone jumped on your back and kids got too close or tried to intervene on a bumpy ride, I’m sure your arms would be all over the place and someone would accidentally get hit. I suspect this is why the FBI and DCF didn’t press charges. She attacked him first.

I wouldn’t be surprised if she was prepping some of the kids ahead of time. “Your dad is mean to me, I fear him”, etc.

No she didn't. He had physical touched her and pushed her down before he went for one of the kids.

He may have just walked up to the kid and screamed at them. So she has no idea what he was going to do. And sometimes a kid deserves a spanking or a slap in the face (I.e., open hand).

I believe in spanking, but apparently, he was choking Maddox. That's abuse not discipline.

Only choking I found in FBI report was Jolie choking Pitt.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They have been divorced. They fight was about money and custody and a bunch of the kids are adults. She is horrible to refuse contact.

Adults you say, and they still do not want anything to do with him. Speaks volumes.

They were brainwashed.

Of course they were, because children have no thoughts, feelings, opinions, agency of their own. Really people, have you never been a child yourself. THINK

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The posts here are crazy. There is literally an FBI report substantiating an extreme, physically and verbally abusive episode where both she and her kids appeared to fear for their physical wellbeing and could not escape. Whether it happened before does not even matter.

If that happened between my husband and I, I would also do anything I could to make sure my kids were NEVER in that situation again, and especially not while they are still children. Alcoholics relapse even after getting sober. I wouldn’t take the chance no matter how reformed he seemed, and I certainly wouldn’t take the chance that I wouldn’t be there to help them.

I cannot imagine feeling any other way as a mother. There is no excusing abuse, and there is no reason she has to forgive him for it. I don’t care if it happened once or repeatedly. There’s a line you cannot cross, and once it’s been crossed, it’s over. Good for her for having always been there for her kids. You can say a lot of things about Angelina and her weird past (especially pre children), but she’s never shown anything but dedication towards her kids.

You are essentially saying you would try to sever your children’s relationship with their father, the way Jolie has done. In the normal world, Brad would have received some sort of custody of his children. Even alcoholics get to see their children, and he got sober. Jolie used her wealth and position as a celebrity to hire a private judge, have him disqualified and upend the normal family law system. I find her quotes about her children learning that some people have too much power and privilege to be held to account to be ironic, because she wouldn’t have achieved what she did in terms of child custody without her power and privilege.

Brad literally has more wealth then her?! You don't think the kids understand the only reason she can fight back for as long as she hass because she has her own privilege and wealth?

Her atm is drying up. She’s in need of his money.

Doubt it. She's probably still receiving royalty checks from Kung Fu Panda

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think he made a tactical error in not making a very generous financial settlement, very quickly. Things surely would have gone more smoothly if he had, and the chateau sale could have been part of it. It smacks of egotism and control. She's the mother of his six children and he should have been very generous. Just on principle, let alone his gross behavior on the plane.

What does wanting a big lump sum payout say about someone? Did she want money or justice?

I'm not saying she's an angel, far from it. But she was entitled to a huge sum for division of property and child support for six kids over 8 years, and it does seem like he withheld it to punish her for leaving and publicly embarrassing him. And she retaliated by withholding the kids, even when it seemed reasonable he was healthy and ready to co-parent. They both suck.

What kind of mother does this?

I'm sure she rationalized it to herself--he's an awful father and person, the kids were better off with her etc. Like most narcissists do.

I was a little shocked when she had a member of her team basically admit she's been brainwashing the kids to think they had no voice because their father has privilege and power. What? The kids worked with court-appointed therapists, who represented their perspectives in custody proceedings. Only a sadistic mother would want to put her kids through testifying in court. Four are now adults and are free to speak out at any time. At least three seem to have dropped his name, out of loyalty to their mother not because he's been a terrible father as far as we can see. There is no evidence to suggest he deserved to have his parental rights severed. She's a vindictive nutcase who absolutely cannot see the harm she's done to her family (after his initial harm, which while terrible seems to have been short-lived). It's always been about her and what she wants, not what's in the best interest of raising well-adjusted kids who have healthy relationships with both parents.

Here's the quote: “The kids have grown up seeing that some people have so much power and privilege that their voices don’t matter. Their pain doesn’t count,” a source close to the matter shares with Us Weekly.

A good mother would have helped them get past one terrible day eight years ago. Kids are resilient and would have been okay if she encouraged reunification, explaining he was sick but is better now and loved them very much. She wanted them to stew in it because it served her purposes. I can't think of much more horrible parenting than that. Unless there is somehow more to it than that, but I think Wasser would have continued to help her if she felt she was in the right.

It wasn't just one day. That has been made abundantly clear

She herself said she left him the minute he became abusive toward the kids. So that was one day. If you're talking about the alcoholism, sure, but look how well Ben Affleck's kids are doing. Why? Because of parents committed to co-parenting peacefully and putting them first.

If she talks about her/their suffering so much publicly, can you imagine how much shes does privately? Those kids never had a chance.

As the middle aged adult daughter of an abusive alcoholic father, i speak from experience and much observation from decades working in advocacy in both family and criminal courts that kids raised by immature parents with substance use disorder and abusive behavior in their roles as spouse and parent will all face lifelong challenges of one sort or another - no one emerges entirely unscathed and some are far more damaged than others, depending on the temperament of the child and other influences in their childhood and adulthood.

I don’t think Jolie is without blame but I laud her for standing up for her kids and for setting the example of standing up for herself. I suspect she gets far more negative response than she deserves - those kids had choices and they are choosing to stay away from Brad and that says something more to me than it’s all Jolie’s fault. The one time my mother spoke of possibly leaving my father, I immediately replied with encouragement and asking that I not have to visit him after the separation.

What happened on that plane didn’t come out of nowhere. Brad Pitt is not a good guy. I’d happily watch anything Jolie is in, but for years now I avoid Pitt films just like I do Cruise and Gibson and Eastwood films. I’d rather save my diminishing time for artists who aren’t abusers.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think he made a tactical error in not making a very generous financial settlement, very quickly. Things surely would have gone more smoothly if he had, and the chateau sale could have been part of it. It smacks of egotism and control. She's the mother of his six children and he should have been very generous. Just on principle, let alone his gross behavior on the plane.

What does wanting a big lump sum payout say about someone? Did she want money or justice?

I'm not saying she's an angel, far from it. But she was entitled to a huge sum for division of property and child support for six kids over 8 years, and it does seem like he withheld it to punish her for leaving and publicly embarrassing him. And she retaliated by withholding the kids, even when it seemed reasonable he was healthy and ready to co-parent. They both suck.

What kind of mother does this?

I'm sure she rationalized it to herself--he's an awful father and person, the kids were better off with her etc. Like most narcissists do.

I was a little shocked when she had a member of her team basically admit she's been brainwashing the kids to think they had no voice because their father has privilege and power. What? The kids worked with court-appointed therapists, who represented their perspectives in custody proceedings. Only a sadistic mother would want to put her kids through testifying in court. Four are now adults and are free to speak out at any time. At least three seem to have dropped his name, out of loyalty to their mother not because he's been a terrible father as far as we can see. There is no evidence to suggest he deserved to have his parental rights severed. She's a vindictive nutcase who absolutely cannot see the harm she's done to her family (after his initial harm, which while terrible seems to have been short-lived). It's always been about her and what she wants, not what's in the best interest of raising well-adjusted kids who have healthy relationships with both parents.

-1
He tried to hit the children.

Yes, terrible behavior when drunk. What about once he was clean and therapists agreed he deserved 50-50 custody?

Therapist chosen by him and the judge that was dismissed for conflict of interests that he intentionally failed to disclose. Sure, you're right. I don't know of any reputable therapist that would agree to automatically say that an abusive parent should have fifty-fifty custody without any period of supervised visitation over a certain period of time for review. And this supposed therapist made this recommendation while dismissing the desires of the older children who were old enough at the time to provide their input and perspective. There's something that doesn't even begin to smell right.

The 50/50 was granted years after the plane. Kids should be over it by now.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have an abusive parent, and I still think Angelina is crazy and shouldn't be with the kids. She strikes me as abusive too. The kids should go into foster care.

Go die PP. You're either a troll or a fool. Nobody advocates for a child going into the foster care system where kids languish; are physically and sexually abused; graduate at third grade reading levels; and more.

Pp
I'm sure they have good friends. They'd never get near regular foster care.

Anonymous wrote:The posts here are crazy. There is literally an FBI report substantiating an extreme, physically and verbally abusive episode where both she and her kids appeared to fear for their physical wellbeing and could not escape. Whether it happened before does not even matter.

If that happened between my husband and I, I would also do anything I could to make sure my kids were NEVER in that situation again, and especially not while they are still children. Alcoholics relapse even after getting sober. I wouldn’t take the chance no matter how reformed he seemed, and I certainly wouldn’t take the chance that I wouldn’t be there to help them.

I cannot imagine feeling any other way as a mother. There is no excusing abuse, and there is no reason she has to forgive him for it. I don’t care if it happened once or repeatedly. There’s a line you cannot cross, and once it’s been crossed, it’s over. Good for her for having always been there for her kids. You can say a lot of things about Angelina and her weird past (especially pre children), but she’s never shown anything but dedication towards her kids.

If the FBI and DCF did not charge him then clearly they didn’t see abuse just from Brad. Plus the report is heavily redacted so we don’t know the whole story. And betting each of six kids have different versions of the story. If they match perfectly then they’ve been coached.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think he made a tactical error in not making a very generous financial settlement, very quickly. Things surely would have gone more smoothly if he had, and the chateau sale could have been part of it. It smacks of egotism and control. She's the mother of his six children and he should have been very generous. Just on principle, let alone his gross behavior on the plane.

What does wanting a big lump sum payout say about someone? Did she want money or justice?

I'm not saying she's an angel, far from it. But she was entitled to a huge sum for division of property and child support for six kids over 8 years, and it does seem like he withheld it to punish her for leaving and publicly embarrassing him. And she retaliated by withholding the kids, even when it seemed reasonable he was healthy and ready to co-parent. They both suck.

What kind of mother does this?

I'm sure she rationalized it to herself--he's an awful father and person, the kids were better off with her etc. Like most narcissists do.

I was a little shocked when she had a member of her team basically admit she's been brainwashing the kids to think they had no voice because their father has privilege and power. What? The kids worked with court-appointed therapists, who represented their perspectives in custody proceedings. Only a sadistic mother would want to put her kids through testifying in court. Four are now adults and are free to speak out at any time. At least three seem to have dropped his name, out of loyalty to their mother not because he's been a terrible father as far as we can see. There is no evidence to suggest he deserved to have his parental rights severed. She's a vindictive nutcase who absolutely cannot see the harm she's done to her family (after his initial harm, which while terrible seems to have been short-lived). It's always been about her and what she wants, not what's in the best interest of raising well-adjusted kids who have healthy relationships with both parents.

-1
He tried to hit the children.

If someone jumped on your back and kids got too close or tried to intervene on a bumpy ride, I’m sure your arms would be all over the place and someone would accidentally get hit. I suspect this is why the FBI and DCF didn’t press charges. She attacked him first.

I wouldn’t be surprised if she was prepping some of the kids ahead of time. “Your dad is mean to me, I fear him”, etc.

No she didn't. He had physical touched her and pushed her down before he went for one of the kids.

He may have just walked up to the kid and screamed at them. So she has no idea what he was going to do. And sometimes a kid deserves a spanking or a slap in the face (I.e., open hand).

I believe in spanking, but apparently, he was choking Maddox. That's abuse not discipline.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The posts here are crazy. There is literally an FBI report substantiating an extreme, physically and verbally abusive episode where both she and her kids appeared to fear for their physical wellbeing and could not escape. Whether it happened before does not even matter.

If that happened between my husband and I, I would also do anything I could to make sure my kids were NEVER in that situation again, and especially not while they are still children. Alcoholics relapse even after getting sober. I wouldn’t take the chance no matter how reformed he seemed, and I certainly wouldn’t take the chance that I wouldn’t be there to help them.

I cannot imagine feeling any other way as a mother. There is no excusing abuse, and there is no reason she has to forgive him for it. I don’t care if it happened once or repeatedly. There’s a line you cannot cross, and once it’s been crossed, it’s over. Good for her for having always been there for her kids. You can say a lot of things about Angelina and her weird past (especially pre children), but she’s never shown anything but dedication towards her kids.

You are essentially saying you would try to sever your children’s relationship with their father, the way Jolie has done. In the normal world, Brad would have received some sort of custody of his children. Even alcoholics get to see their children, and he got sober. Jolie used her wealth and position as a celebrity to hire a private judge, have him disqualified and upend the normal family law system. I find her quotes about her children learning that some people have too much power and privilege to be held to account to be ironic, because she wouldn’t have achieved what she did in terms of child custody without her power and privilege.

Brad literally has more wealth then her?! You don't think the kids understand the only reason she can fight back for as long as she hass because she has her own privilege and wealth?

Her atm is drying up. She’s in need of his money.

No it's not LOL.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They have been divorced. They fight was about money and custody and a bunch of the kids are adults. She is horrible to refuse contact.

Hes horrible for being abusive. She's right for listening to them and protecting them.

He wasn’t abusive to the kids therefore he should have been allowed to see them

I know right because choking your teenager is not abuse. /s

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think he made a tactical error in not making a very generous financial settlement, very quickly. Things surely would have gone more smoothly if he had, and the chateau sale could have been part of it. It smacks of egotism and control. She's the mother of his six children and he should have been very generous. Just on principle, let alone his gross behavior on the plane.

What does wanting a big lump sum payout say about someone? Did she want money or justice?

I'm not saying she's an angel, far from it. But she was entitled to a huge sum for division of property and child support for six kids over 8 years, and it does seem like he withheld it to punish her for leaving and publicly embarrassing him. And she retaliated by withholding the kids, even when it seemed reasonable he was healthy and ready to co-parent. They both suck.

What kind of mother does this?

I'm sure she rationalized it to herself--he's an awful father and person, the kids were better off with her etc. Like most narcissists do.

I was a little shocked when she had a member of her team basically admit she's been brainwashing the kids to think they had no voice because their father has privilege and power. What? The kids worked with court-appointed therapists, who represented their perspectives in custody proceedings. Only a sadistic mother would want to put her kids through testifying in court. Four are now adults and are free to speak out at any time. At least three seem to have dropped his name, out of loyalty to their mother not because he's been a terrible father as far as we can see. There is no evidence to suggest he deserved to have his parental rights severed. She's a vindictive nutcase who absolutely cannot see the harm she's done to her family (after his initial harm, which while terrible seems to have been short-lived). It's always been about her and what she wants, not what's in the best interest of raising well-adjusted kids who have healthy relationships with both parents.

-1
He tried to hit the children.

Yes, terrible behavior when drunk. What about once he was clean and therapists agreed he deserved 50-50 custody?

Da but nope! Being sober doesn't undo traumatizing them. Abusers deserve limited contact with their kids

Active abusers yes. But I think the bulk of the research indicates that alienating a child from a parent who does not pose an ongoing threat to them does the child more harm in the long run because the child has so many unresolved issues with the parent. This is one of the reason why there are so many programs to link kids with their incarcerated parents — even if they are awful people, the children need to be able to navigate the relationship. I’m not saying it’s easy but as a parent you aren’t really doing your kid any favor by interfering with that process.

The kids don't seem like they are doing well. Can't wait for the Mommy Dearest books to come out some day.

Daddy dearest. It's getting closer by the day.

None of the children seem to have any skills or career prospects of their own. They seem to latch onto Jolie and live off what she provides them. Writing a book would only be evidence of their dysfunction and Jolie’s poor parenting.

As long as he gives them money there will be no book,

Anonymous wrote:I have an abusive parent, and I still think Angelina is crazy and shouldn't be with the kids. She strikes me as abusive too. The kids should go into foster care.

Go die PP. You're either a troll or a fool. Nobody advocates for a child going into the foster care system where kids languish; are physically and sexually abused; graduate at third grade reading levels; and more.