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

Except in real life (not Hollywood) abusers get 50/50 all the time.

Right? These posts are bizarre. People who had one big blowup with their spouse in front of the kids still get 50/50. No family is perfect.

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

Except in real life (not Hollywood) abusers get 50/50 all the time.

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

Anonymous wrote:He is not canceled bcs Hollywood is a misogynist rapist town. We all know this, are you all not following the news?
Do we not all know now what happened to Justin Bieber? And what clearly everyone knew was happening to kids, newcomers, both men and women. How many had to bend over and endure abuses to get the job they wanted?
Why is Tom Cruise so popular? He has not seen his child for over a decade. Even if she is not biologically his, he is the father.
Yet, so many are willing to throw the women under the bus and called them nasty. Johnny Depp anyone? You all love him, and we all know he is a horrific abusive narc.

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.

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?

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.

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?

Therapists are a paid association. Anyway if they like him so m they can hang out with him.

Nobody is under any obligation to accept an apology ever. Treat people right the first time and you’ll never have to apologize. See how that works?

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?

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?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:lol 😂 finally. Someone posted a link about Giselle and I saw that they signed Christmas day

Angelina did on Christmas, and Brad on the 30th lol. Lots of people saw this coming after she won his correspondences. They'll settle the winery sooner then later so he messages don't leak

Or perhaps she finally settled hoping for an Oscar nom.

Then why wouldn't she settle months ago? That's laughable. He doesn't want his communications out.

I like how his side said he settled because of his gf lol

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.

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.

This. Yup he’s an idiot

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.