Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, I did not mean to copy that whole post into this thread. Here’s the link to the post containing images of the actual responses from Lively. https://www.reddit.com/r/ItEndsWithLawsuits/s/2qKb9OAkan

Thank you, yeah, that's not the RFAs it's the statement of facts. I feel like Lively still wants to dispute it, but indeed, there is no evidence. That was weasely of NYT (I have no issue with them quoting the CRD and texts but they really did insinuate Flaa was involved or paid and there just has never been any evidence to support that).

Flaa has come out and said she had no involvement with Baldoni’s team. Further how would they even know that this interview existed? I don’t think the full video was ever shown back in 2016.

In addition to there being no evidence linking them, Do you really think this journalist is lying? She’s had a pretty long career and Blake lively is not her first celebrity rodeo. basically you’re just saying they can’t prove it so the journalist must be lying? Even though we’ve caught Blake in 100 lies. Doesn’t add up. There is no evidence, the journalist denies it, at some point we just have to accept that it went organic on its own because it was a really, really horrible display of celeb behavior.

Did anyone really think Wallace was lying? Or Melissa Nathan? And yet, signs point to yes, Case's testimony reflects that this whole team is filled with liars. So while Lively may not have definite evidence of Flaa lying yet, I would not in any way be surprised.

And if you don't think Nathan and Wallace lied, what is your explanation for Case's testimony that they did, and that Nathan instructed her to write text for the defamatory websites? How do you make that make sense? Please explain that to me, I would love to hear it.

I’d love to hear a real response from any of the Baldoni ass kissers on this question. Nathan and Wallace are very clearly lying about the work they really did in the case which they claim they never did.

What is your explanation for this?

How is this not perjury? And if they would perjure themselves on this, why wouldn’t they (and the rest of the Ds) perjure themselves on the rest of what they did and didn’t do? How do you think they have any credibility at all?

I don’t think are lying, they just didn’t need to do anything because Blake made herself look bad.

Anonymous wrote:Like, you’re popping off on here defending Flaa? When your own defendants in your own party have actually committed perjury in each of their depositions? And willfully destroyed evidence? But you’re mad lively gave some bad interviews 7 years ago?

Dudez! Please obtain a sense of proportion about wtf is actually happening in this case. And also recognize the writing is on the wall for your beloved Baldoni bro. At some point the united front of this defendant group is going to start turning on ano another to save themselves, but they all have so much dirt in one another that that will not go well. I’ll have my popcorn for when that happens.

Sweetie, you do realize we think Blake made pretty much all of this up?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, I did not mean to copy that whole post into this thread. Here’s the link to the post containing images of the actual responses from Lively. https://www.reddit.com/r/ItEndsWithLawsuits/s/2qKb9OAkan

Thank you, yeah, that's not the RFAs it's the statement of facts. I feel like Lively still wants to dispute it, but indeed, there is no evidence. That was weasely of NYT (I have no issue with them quoting the CRD and texts but they really did insinuate Flaa was involved or paid and there just has never been any evidence to support that).

Flaa has come out and said she had no involvement with Baldoni’s team. Further how would they even know that this interview existed? I don’t think the full video was ever shown back in 2016.

In addition to there being no evidence linking them, Do you really think this journalist is lying? She’s had a pretty long career and Blake lively is not her first celebrity rodeo. basically you’re just saying they can’t prove it so the journalist must be lying? Even though we’ve caught Blake in 100 lies. Doesn’t add up. There is no evidence, the journalist denies it, at some point we just have to accept that it went organic on its own because it was a really, really horrible display of celeb behavior.

Did anyone really think Wallace was lying? Or Melissa Nathan? And yet, signs point to yes, Case's testimony reflects that this whole team is filled with liars. So while Lively may not have definite evidence of Flaa lying yet, I would not in any way be surprised.

And if you don't think Nathan and Wallace lied, what is your explanation for Case's testimony that they did, and that Nathan instructed her to write text for the defamatory websites? How do you make that make sense? Please explain that to me, I would love to hear it.

I’d love to hear a real response from any of the Baldoni ass kissers on this question. Nathan and Wallace are very clearly lying about the work they really did in the case which they claim they never did.

What is your explanation for this?

How is this not perjury? And if they would perjure themselves on this, why wouldn’t they (and the rest of the Ds) perjure themselves on the rest of what they did and didn’t do? How do you think they have any credibility at all?

Sister, Blake filed an entirely bogus lawsuit with the Court in Van Zan where the entire nature of her claim was misrepresented, and also outright lied in her original complaint (allegations about dance video that were disproved by video and subsequently dropped in Amended Compaint), and you want to get in the high horse about credibility?

I don’t think it’s obvious anyone lied with respect to the Jones litigation, isn’t there just conflicting testimony?

Anonymous wrote:Wallace and Nathan should have just said he boosted stuff that was pro-Baldoni. It looks so much worse to pretend he did nothing, has no team, has no idea how to do any of the stuff he advertises and assumes Melissa Nathan did the things she specifically hired him to do, while she claims she barely knows how to turn on a computer.

It is **not** believable, and it makes the whole lot of them look like absolute liars who have been lying about everything from the beginning because they got together and created a story they decided they would stick to until they pressured Lively into settling.

Lying liars who lie.

Wallace and Nathan should have just said he boosted stuff that was pro-Baldoni. It looks so much worse to pretend he did nothing, has no team, has no idea how to do any of the stuff he advertises and assumes Melissa Nathan did the things she specifically hired him to do, while she claims she barely knows how to turn on a computer.

Like, you’re popping off on here defending Flaa? When your own defendants in your own party have actually committed perjury in each of their depositions? And willfully destroyed evidence? But you’re mad lively gave some bad interviews 7 years ago?

Dudez! Please obtain a sense of proportion about wtf is actually happening in this case. And also recognize the writing is on the wall for your beloved Baldoni bro. At some point the united front of this defendant group is going to start turning on ano another to save themselves, but they all have so much dirt in one another that that will not go well. I’ll have my popcorn for when that happens.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, I did not mean to copy that whole post into this thread. Here’s the link to the post containing images of the actual responses from Lively. https://www.reddit.com/r/ItEndsWithLawsuits/s/2qKb9OAkan

Thank you, yeah, that's not the RFAs it's the statement of facts. I feel like Lively still wants to dispute it, but indeed, there is no evidence. That was weasely of NYT (I have no issue with them quoting the CRD and texts but they really did insinuate Flaa was involved or paid and there just has never been any evidence to support that).

Flaa has come out and said she had no involvement with Baldoni’s team. Further how would they even know that this interview existed? I don’t think the full video was ever shown back in 2016.

In addition to there being no evidence linking them, Do you really think this journalist is lying? She’s had a pretty long career and Blake lively is not her first celebrity rodeo. basically you’re just saying they can’t prove it so the journalist must be lying? Even though we’ve caught Blake in 100 lies. Doesn’t add up. There is no evidence, the journalist denies it, at some point we just have to accept that it went organic on its own because it was a really, really horrible display of celeb behavior.

Did anyone really think Wallace was lying? Or Melissa Nathan? And yet, signs point to yes, Case's testimony reflects that this whole team is filled with liars. So while Lively may not have definite evidence of Flaa lying yet, I would not in any way be surprised.

And if you don't think Nathan and Wallace lied, what is your explanation for Case's testimony that they did, and that Nathan instructed her to write text for the defamatory websites? How do you make that make sense? Please explain that to me, I would love to hear it.

I’d love to hear a real response from any of the Baldoni ass kissers on this question. Nathan and Wallace are very clearly lying about the work they really did in the case which they claim they never did.

What is your explanation for this?

How is this not perjury? And if they would perjure themselves on this, why wouldn’t they (and the rest of the Ds) perjure themselves on the rest of what they did and didn’t do? How do you think they have any credibility at all?

It’s quite amusing to be that Lively has backed off her claim against Flaa, and the Blake bots still won’t let it go.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, I did not mean to copy that whole post into this thread. Here’s the link to the post containing images of the actual responses from Lively. https://www.reddit.com/r/ItEndsWithLawsuits/s/2qKb9OAkan

Thank you, yeah, that's not the RFAs it's the statement of facts. I feel like Lively still wants to dispute it, but indeed, there is no evidence. That was weasely of NYT (I have no issue with them quoting the CRD and texts but they really did insinuate Flaa was involved or paid and there just has never been any evidence to support that).

Flaa has come out and said she had no involvement with Baldoni’s team. Further how would they even know that this interview existed? I don’t think the full video was ever shown back in 2016.

In addition to there being no evidence linking them, Do you really think this journalist is lying? She’s had a pretty long career and Blake lively is not her first celebrity rodeo. basically you’re just saying they can’t prove it so the journalist must be lying? Even though we’ve caught Blake in 100 lies. Doesn’t add up. There is no evidence, the journalist denies it, at some point we just have to accept that it went organic on its own because it was a really, really horrible display of celeb behavior.

Did anyone really think Wallace was lying? Or Melissa Nathan? And yet, signs point to yes, Case's testimony reflects that this whole team is filled with liars. So while Lively may not have definite evidence of Flaa lying yet, I would not in any way be surprised.

And if you don't think Nathan and Wallace lied, what is your explanation for Case's testimony that they did, and that Nathan instructed her to write text for the defamatory websites? How do you make that make sense? Please explain that to me, I would love to hear it.

I have no idea about Nathan and Wallace. But saying Flaa lied just cause vibes is not going to cut it. She’s also a well respected journalist and I think it’s pretty crappy for you just to be assuming she lied.

Blake has had a ton of horrible publicity from past interviews. From talking about how she used to dress in black face to attract boys, to all the videos of her messing up DV questions in the interviews with it ends with us, to her making fun of her GG costar for being born to a mother who was in jail, I could go on and on, but she has dozens of bad videos. And to just all of a sudden think well, this well respected journalist (not a content creator or gossip hound like Perez) was in cahoots with Baldoni with no evidence, is just irresponsible.

Flaa is not a well respected journalist. She's done fashion and celeb coverage and is the kind of low-level hack who mostly just repackages press releases or asks weird questions at press junkets hoping to catch a celeb off guard so she can profit off their reaction.

Another example of the Blake bot supporting women.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, I did not mean to copy that whole post into this thread. Here’s the link to the post containing images of the actual responses from Lively. https://www.reddit.com/r/ItEndsWithLawsuits/s/2qKb9OAkan

Thank you, yeah, that's not the RFAs it's the statement of facts. I feel like Lively still wants to dispute it, but indeed, there is no evidence. That was weasely of NYT (I have no issue with them quoting the CRD and texts but they really did insinuate Flaa was involved or paid and there just has never been any evidence to support that).

Flaa has come out and said she had no involvement with Baldoni’s team. Further how would they even know that this interview existed? I don’t think the full video was ever shown back in 2016.

In addition to there being no evidence linking them, Do you really think this journalist is lying? She’s had a pretty long career and Blake lively is not her first celebrity rodeo. basically you’re just saying they can’t prove it so the journalist must be lying? Even though we’ve caught Blake in 100 lies. Doesn’t add up. There is no evidence, the journalist denies it, at some point we just have to accept that it went organic on its own because it was a really, really horrible display of celeb behavior.

Did anyone really think Wallace was lying? Or Melissa Nathan? And yet, signs point to yes, Case's testimony reflects that this whole team is filled with liars. So while Lively may not have definite evidence of Flaa lying yet, I would not in any way be surprised.

And if you don't think Nathan and Wallace lied, what is your explanation for Case's testimony that they did, and that Nathan instructed her to write text for the defamatory websites? How do you make that make sense? Please explain that to me, I would love to hear it.

But like you said, there's actual evidence suggest Nathan and Wallace are lying, in the form of Case's deposition and apparently these other documents she had that Liman did not make her hand over to Jones (regrettably). There doesn't seem to be any such evidence that Flaa lied or that she coordinated with Wayfarer.... like, I personally wouldn't be surprised if it turned out she did, but PP is right, she says she didn't, and there is no evidence that she did. She could just be a grifter who has jumped on the anti-Lively bandwagon, or Wallace could have somehow boosted her video back then without her knowledge or cooperation after she made her own decision to release it. It is kind of curious that Lively withdrew the subpoena to her, since she was more central to the case than the rando content creators.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, I did not mean to copy that whole post into this thread. Here’s the link to the post containing images of the actual responses from Lively. https://www.reddit.com/r/ItEndsWithLawsuits/s/2qKb9OAkan

Thank you, yeah, that's not the RFAs it's the statement of facts. I feel like Lively still wants to dispute it, but indeed, there is no evidence. That was weasely of NYT (I have no issue with them quoting the CRD and texts but they really did insinuate Flaa was involved or paid and there just has never been any evidence to support that).

Flaa has come out and said she had no involvement with Baldoni’s team. Further how would they even know that this interview existed? I don’t think the full video was ever shown back in 2016.

In addition to there being no evidence linking them, Do you really think this journalist is lying? She’s had a pretty long career and Blake lively is not her first celebrity rodeo. basically you’re just saying they can’t prove it so the journalist must be lying? Even though we’ve caught Blake in 100 lies. Doesn’t add up. There is no evidence, the journalist denies it, at some point we just have to accept that it went organic on its own because it was a really, really horrible display of celeb behavior.

Did anyone really think Wallace was lying? Or Melissa Nathan? And yet, signs point to yes, Case's testimony reflects that this whole team is filled with liars. So while Lively may not have definite evidence of Flaa lying yet, I would not in any way be surprised.

And if you don't think Nathan and Wallace lied, what is your explanation for Case's testimony that they did, and that Nathan instructed her to write text for the defamatory websites? How do you make that make sense? Please explain that to me, I would love to hear it.

I have no idea about Nathan and Wallace. But saying Flaa lied just cause vibes is not going to cut it. She’s also a well respected journalist and I think it’s pretty crappy for you just to be assuming she lied.

Blake has had a ton of horrible publicity from past interviews. From talking about how she used to dress in black face to attract boys, to all the videos of her messing up DV questions in the interviews with it ends with us, to her making fun of her GG costar for being born to a mother who was in jail, I could go on and on, but she has dozens of bad videos. And to just all of a sudden think well, this well respected journalist (not a content creator or gossip hound like Perez) was in cahoots with Baldoni with no evidence, is just irresponsible.

Flaa is not a well respected journalist. She's done fashion and celeb coverage and is the kind of low-level hack who mostly just repackages press releases or asks weird questions at press junkets hoping to catch a celeb off guard so she can profit off their reaction.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, I did not mean to copy that whole post into this thread. Here’s the link to the post containing images of the actual responses from Lively. https://www.reddit.com/r/ItEndsWithLawsuits/s/2qKb9OAkan

Thank you, yeah, that's not the RFAs it's the statement of facts. I feel like Lively still wants to dispute it, but indeed, there is no evidence. That was weasely of NYT (I have no issue with them quoting the CRD and texts but they really did insinuate Flaa was involved or paid and there just has never been any evidence to support that).

Flaa has come out and said she had no involvement with Baldoni’s team. Further how would they even know that this interview existed? I don’t think the full video was ever shown back in 2016.

In addition to there being no evidence linking them, Do you really think this journalist is lying? She’s had a pretty long career and Blake lively is not her first celebrity rodeo. basically you’re just saying they can’t prove it so the journalist must be lying? Even though we’ve caught Blake in 100 lies. Doesn’t add up. There is no evidence, the journalist denies it, at some point we just have to accept that it went organic on its own because it was a really, really horrible display of celeb behavior.

Did anyone really think Wallace was lying? Or Melissa Nathan? And yet, signs point to yes, Case's testimony reflects that this whole team is filled with liars. So while Lively may not have definite evidence of Flaa lying yet, I would not in any way be surprised.

And if you don't think Nathan and Wallace lied, what is your explanation for Case's testimony that they did, and that Nathan instructed her to write text for the defamatory websites? How do you make that make sense? Please explain that to me, I would love to hear it.

I have no idea about Nathan and Wallace. But saying Flaa lied just cause vibes is not going to cut it. She’s also a well respected journalist and I think it’s pretty crappy for you just to be assuming she lied.

Blake has had a ton of horrible publicity from past interviews. From talking about how she used to dress in black face to attract boys, to all the videos of her messing up DV questions in the interviews with it ends with us, to her making fun of her GG costar for being born to a mother who was in jail, I could go on and on, but she has dozens of bad videos. And to just all of a sudden think well, this well respected journalist (not a content creator or gossip hound like Perez) was in cahoots with Baldoni with no evidence, is just irresponsible.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, I did not mean to copy that whole post into this thread. Here’s the link to the post containing images of the actual responses from Lively. https://www.reddit.com/r/ItEndsWithLawsuits/s/2qKb9OAkan

Thank you, yeah, that's not the RFAs it's the statement of facts. I feel like Lively still wants to dispute it, but indeed, there is no evidence. That was weasely of NYT (I have no issue with them quoting the CRD and texts but they really did insinuate Flaa was involved or paid and there just has never been any evidence to support that).

Flaa has come out and said she had no involvement with Baldoni’s team. Further how would they even know that this interview existed? I don’t think the full video was ever shown back in 2016.

In addition to there being no evidence linking them, Do you really think this journalist is lying? She’s had a pretty long career and Blake lively is not her first celebrity rodeo. basically you’re just saying they can’t prove it so the journalist must be lying? Even though we’ve caught Blake in 100 lies. Doesn’t add up. There is no evidence, the journalist denies it, at some point we just have to accept that it went organic on its own because it was a really, really horrible display of celeb behavior.

Did anyone really think Wallace was lying? Or Melissa Nathan? And yet, signs point to yes, Case's testimony reflects that this whole team is filled with liars. So while Lively may not have definite evidence of Flaa lying yet, I would not in any way be surprised.

And if you don't think Nathan and Wallace lied, what is your explanation for Case's testimony that they did, and that Nathan instructed her to write text for the defamatory websites? How do you make that make sense? Please explain that to me, I would love to hear it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, I did not mean to copy that whole post into this thread. Here’s the link to the post containing images of the actual responses from Lively. https://www.reddit.com/r/ItEndsWithLawsuits/s/2qKb9OAkan

Thank you, yeah, that's not the RFAs it's the statement of facts. I feel like Lively still wants to dispute it, but indeed, there is no evidence. That was weasely of NYT (I have no issue with them quoting the CRD and texts but they really did insinuate Flaa was involved or paid and there just has never been any evidence to support that).

Flaa has come out and said she had no involvement with Baldoni’s team. Further how would they even know that this interview existed? I don’t think the full video was ever shown back in 2016.

In addition to there being no evidence linking them, Do you really think this journalist is lying? She’s had a pretty long career and Blake lively is not her first celebrity rodeo. basically you’re just saying they can’t prove it so the journalist must be lying? Even though we’ve caught Blake in 100 lies. Doesn’t add up. There is no evidence, the journalist denies it, at some point we just have to accept that it went organic on its own because it was a really, really horrible display of celeb behavior.

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, I did not mean to copy that whole post into this thread. Here’s the link to the post containing images of the actual responses from Lively. https://www.reddit.com/r/ItEndsWithLawsuits/s/2qKb9OAkan

Thank you, yeah, that's not the RFAs it's the statement of facts. I feel like Lively still wants to dispute it, but indeed, there is no evidence. That was weasely of NYT (I have no issue with them quoting the CRD and texts but they really did insinuate Flaa was involved or paid and there just has never been any evidence to support that).