February 27Feb 27 13 hours ago, MrBig said: I think you make a good argument about the sexual assault settlement. I’m also wondering if you actually read the lawsuits filed by each side, or are you just making judgments based on what you hear on the news and social media? Are you on Blake Lively’s side just because she’s being attacked by people like Megyn Kelly and Fox? Not trying to give you a hard time I’m just curious how your views about this situation came to be. Me? I'm just shitposting and wondering why anyone (not you) on surly would have such strong feelings about some random actress who has no connection afaik to Texas. edit - if she's being attacked by a scum like Megyn Kelly, that pretty much tells me all I need to know, but I didn't know it until you pointed it out because I haven't watched tv news in 20+ years. Edited February 27Feb 27 by Chopper
February 27Feb 27 I think the strong feelings about Lively in a lot of places online, not necessarily the posters here, is due to her appearing with Taylor Swift at those football games last year so they're kindof attacking her by proxy. The pr strategy has been positioning Baldoni as David vs Goliath. Poor little helpless Baldoni (with his online fembot army and billionaire best friend/ride or die business partner) just trying to make a big important movie, going up against a Lively/Reynolds/Swift (CLOAK ROOM) and their iron grip on Hollywood Taylor distanced herself from the whole mess, to her credit
February 27Feb 27 Author Candance Owens and Megyn Kelly are covering this because it's great for views. This has been the strategy for a lot of content creators, not just right wing grifters. The fact they are siding with Baldoni probably has more to do with adapting their content to align with public opinion. Like being a Yankees fan, wanting to back a winner, and to use that popularity as a gateway to a new audience to whom they can spread their hate. We'll see how much of the evidence makes its way to the public, but so far Baldoni has been the clear winner in the "battle of receipts." The initial wave of anti-Lively stories and sentiment was undoubtedly the work of his PR team but what we're seeing today is mostly organic support. Lively's camp has been unable to beat the "mean girl" and "bully" allegations. Of course, her being a mean girl and being a bully are not an excuse or justification for subjecting her to SH or SA, so she can still win this if she proves she was harassed or abused. Unfortunately for her in the court of public opinion she has lost a ton of credibility, and the whole thing about being wed at a plantation and her general reputation for being manipulative has worked against her in a big way. Nobody will just take her word that any of these horrible things happened to her. She really needs these other employees to back up her version of events. Doesn't look good for her so far.
February 28Feb 28 6 hours ago, chainsaw said: Candance Owens and Megyn Kelly are covering this because it's great for views. I'm seriously pleased for you that you enjoy watching their garbage. Personally I'd rather put my stiff dick down a working garbage disposal.
February 28Feb 28 Popular Post 1 minute ago, Chopper said: Personally I'd rather put my stiff dick down a working garbage disposal. username checking out in a very morbid way.
February 28Feb 28 Look, I've banged a lot of hot celebrity chicks, and let me tell you, this is par for the course.
February 28Feb 28 17 minutes ago, Steel Shank said: Look, I've banged a lot of hot celebrity chicks, and let me tell you, this is par for the course. I respect that although myself, I'm not particularly into narcissists. But how many of 'em had a husband who wanted to bang your former colleague's gay husband?
February 28Feb 28 8 hours ago, Chopper said: I respect that although myself, I'm not particularly into narcissists. But how many of 'em had a husband who wanted to bang your former colleague's gay husband? It's a short list, I can tell you that. lol!!
February 28Feb 28 Author Like I said, content creators of all stripes are covering this. Here's a video from a law firm discussing a new ruling I think this means her subpoena is DOA or mostly DOA
March 15Mar 15 On 2/27/2025 at 10:45 PM, Chopper said: I'm seriously pleased for you that you enjoy watching their garbage. Personally I'd rather put my stiff dick down a working garbage disposal. Oddly specific.
March 17Mar 17 Author All Baldoni, All The Time https://variety.com/2025/tv/global/blake-lively-justin-baldoni-he-said-she-said-doc-1236339145/ Quote Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni Legal Saga to Be Explored in ‘He Said, She Said’ Doc for Channel 5, Investigation Discovery Quote The 90-minute “He Said, She Said: Blake Lively vs Justin Baldoni,” which is unlikely to be the only doc to emerge about the still rumbling legal battle between the actress and her “It Ends With Us” director, will premiere in the U.K. on Channel 5 Monday night. A shorter 60-minute version, acquired by Investigation Discovery in the U.S., is set to air on March 31 and will stream on Max and Discovery+. Quote “This story has captivated the world, perpetuated by social media which is still gaining momentum,” said Denise Seneviratne, commissioning editor at 5. “It feels really pertinent for us as a channel to be making this film within the context of ‘#Me too’. We’re very happy to be working with ITN on this UK feature length version.”
March 17Mar 17 5 minutes ago, wildcat09 said: Chainsaw's obsession with this story is giving off Nicole vibes. Does this mean APD is going to find Justin Baldoni's body in Town Lake near Rainey Street?
March 17Mar 17 Author 35 minutes ago, wildcat09 said: Chainsaw's obsession with this story is giving off Nicole vibes. I was hoping someone would make an Art Briles joke on the Waco thing.
March 17Mar 17 32 minutes ago, chainsaw said: I was hoping someone would make an Art Briles joke on the Waco thing. Chip and Joanna imo
March 17Mar 17 Author 5 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said: Chip and Joanna imo that's actually the hotel where it happened, some boutique hotel for the sort of people who would voluntarily endure any amount of time in Waco because they're Chip and Joanna fans
March 17Mar 17 52 minutes ago, chainsaw said: that's actually the hotel where it happened, some boutique hotel for the sort of people who would voluntarily endure any amount of time in Waco because they're Chip and Joanna fans Those Gaines mother fuckers bought Larry McMurtry's bookstore in Archer after he passed just so they could put the books in the "library" of their stupid ass hotel and give it some gravitas even though they stand diametrically opposed to everything Larry believed in. One has to wonder what they did with all of the books their book-burning asses didn't approve of, as he had that bookstore, in part, to make sure folks in his hometown had access to books other than the Bible and other evangelical-approved literature (whatever that is). Plenty of stuff on his shelves was too "progressive" or too "gay" for the Gaines. I suppose the obvious answer is they had a bonfire with the "bad" books and roasted marshmallows with Scott Drew and other local Antioch cult members. Of course, that didn't stop them from using McMurtry's status to boost their hotel's "genuine" Texan flavor. Fuck those assholes. The silver lining is that a local group repurchased the actual bookstore from the Waco cult dipshits and has turned it into a nonprofit literary center, something both of the Gaines could likely benefit from utilizing.
March 21Mar 21 Author Reynolds and Lively have filed motions to dismiss Baldoni's lawsuit. https://deadline.com/2025/03/blake-lively-justin-baldoni-ryan-reynolds-latest-dismissal-1236345498/ https://www.tmz.com/2025/03/20/justin-baldoni-lawyer-fires-back-blake-lively-motion-to-dismiss/ Quote Bryan Freedman tells TMZ ... "Ms. Lively's recent motion to dismiss herself from the self-concocted disaster she initiated is one of the most abhorrent examples of abusing our legal system."
March 21Mar 21 On 2/25/2025 at 4:21 PM, Chopper said: Freedman? And if you're going to tell me he didn't admit liability, I'll say in 1986 a college student didn't pay $40k to make a sexual assault charge disappear. The /s part was thatas someone who's committed sexual assault he therefore knows how it feels to be a victim of sexual harassment or whatever the fuck he's being accused of in this circumstance. If I recall correctly you guys are dickriding Freedman because he rep'd Oprah -- do I have that right? I'm not going back in the thread to look -- against the Texas Beef Council in a bogus lawsuit that you think gives him some gloss for some reason I can't fathom, the article lists some of the scumbags he's also rep'd. Perez Hilton, Bam Margera, David Dobrik, Tucker Carlson, Megyn Kelly. Seems like he reps a lot of garbage people. No, Chip Babcock. He's been Texas' leading defamation lawyer for a long time. From what I know of him, he's a good guy that's just good at what he does, on the substance, the merits. One thing that's interesting and maybe telling about him is all this time he's stayed at "lil ol" Jackson Walker, never chasing huger superstar "paychecks" at the latest national carpetbagger law firm. He's not one of these blowhards like this Freedman guy that seems to be effective, if he is, by being a shithead.
March 21Mar 21 Author 1 minute ago, TwiceHorn said: No, Chip Babcock. He's been Texas' leading defamation lawyer for a long time. From what I know of him, he's a good guy that's just good at what he does, on the substance, the merits. One thing that's interesting and maybe telling about him is all this time he's stayed at "lil ol" Jackson Walker, never chasing huger superstar "paychecks" at the latest national carpetbagger law firm. He's not one of these blowhards like this Freedman guy that seems to be effective, if he is, by being a shithead. I don't see Freedman as a shithead. Maybe I missed something about him, but he just seems like someone who understands the assignment. Fight this both in the courts and in the press.
March 21Mar 21 1 minute ago, chainsaw said: I don't see Freedman as a shithead. Maybe I missed something about him, but he just seems like someone who understands the assignment. Fight this both in the courts and in the press. That's usually the mark of a shithead in my book. Chip Babcock, for example, is a media/defamation lawyer that's tops in the field with victories in some very high profile cases. And no one outside the legal profession has heard of him. Perhaps I am naive or a retrogrouch (fully confess to the latter), but that makes Chip Babcock:
March 21Mar 21 5 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said: No, Chip Babcock. He's been Texas' leading defamation lawyer for a long time. From what I know of him, he's a good guy that's just good at what he does, on the substance, the merits. One thing that's interesting and maybe telling about him is all this time he's stayed at "lil ol" Jackson Walker, never chasing huger superstar "paychecks" at the latest national carpetbagger law firm. He's not one of these blowhards like this Freedman guy that seems to be effective, if he is, by being a shithead. I just couldn't recall who he was talking about. Moved from Austin about 7 years ago and I rarely see or hear his name anymore.
March 21Mar 21 Author 2 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said: the mark of a shithead This is hating the player, not the game. PR fights have always been a thing.
March 24Mar 24 On 3/21/2025 at 9:06 AM, chainsaw said: This is hating the player, not the game. PR fights have always been a thing. Well, then I hate that species of game. PR is one thing, but lawsuits shouldn't be tied in the press.
March 24Mar 24 Author 2 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said: Well, then I hate that species of game. PR is one thing, but lawsuits shouldn't be tied in the press. Remember that it wasn't Freedman's client who instigated this PR fight, or who first tried to use the lawsuit process to get news outlets to repeat her story. Now, it's okay to hate the game. I hate it just as much as you. I'm still glad that there are lawyers out there who are up to the challenge. Since we can't do anything about it, might as well sit back and enjoy the circus.
March 24Mar 24 11 minutes ago, chainsaw said: Remember that it wasn't Freedman's client who instigated this PR fight, or who first tried to use the lawsuit process to get news outlets to repeat her story. Now, it's okay to hate the game. I hate it just as much as you. I'm still glad that there are lawyers out there who are up to the challenge. Since we can't do anything about it, might as well sit back and enjoy the circus. I haven't followed this whole mess very closely, but I'm always interested in legal shenanigans. This whole thing strikes me as much like many of Trump's suits: some sort of statement, other than legal, that really doesn't belong in the court system. And, I don't really care who started it, they're both being loudmouths about it. To my view, the proper response to a loudmouth is "we'll see you in court, we're not trying this in the press."
March 24Mar 24 Author Just now, TwiceHorn said: the proper response to a loudmouth is "we'll see you in court, we're not trying this in the press." don't people have the obligation to stop the bleeding? if you're being smeared in the press on all the days between the court dates, what can you realistically ask a court to do to unring the bell? sometimes you gotta fight fire with fire
March 24Mar 24 25 minutes ago, chainsaw said: don't people have the obligation to stop the bleeding? if you're being smeared in the press on all the days between the court dates, what can you realistically ask a court to do to unring the bell? sometimes you gotta fight fire with fire He was banned from his own movie premiere. Forced to hide in the basement, accused of sexual misconduct etc. Why wouldn’t he go scorched earth? He has nothing to lose in the guilty until proven innocent climate. Edited March 24Mar 24 by ChickenSandwich
March 24Mar 24 Author 11 minutes ago, ChickenSandwich said: He was banned from his own movie premiere. Forced to hide in the basement, accused of sexual misconduct etc. Why wouldn’t he go scorched earth? He has nothing to lose in the guilty until proven innocent climate. That struck me as racially motivated on top of the personal hatred. Not a great look, putting the brown folks in the basement.
March 25Mar 25 11 hours ago, TwiceHorn said: And, I don't really care who started it, they're both being loudmouths about it. To my view, the proper response to a loudmouth is "we'll see you in court, we're not trying this in the press." Makes total sense if your client is an accountant or banker. But if your client is in Hollywood where public perception directly affects his marketability, I think fighting it in the press also falls under zealous representation of a client's best interest.
March 25Mar 25 16 hours ago, chainsaw said: That struck me as racially motivated on top of the personal hatred. Not a great look, putting the brown folks in the basement. Baldoni is brown? Italian?
March 25Mar 25 Author 3 minutes ago, huge said: Baldoni is brown? Italian? I thought he was Italian but apparently he's highly mixed race. I've read he's part Irish, part Iranian, part Italian, and at some point his family became Bahai. That might not count as "brown" to some people, but from a casting perspective the character he played on Jane the Virgin was heavily implied to be Latino.
March 25Mar 25 22 hours ago, TwiceHorn said: Well, then I hate that species of game. PR is one thing, but lawsuits shouldn't be tied in the press. It’s not that the lawsuit is being tried in the press, it’s that the public perception is just as, if not more, important than the suit itself. Depending who wins the PR battle, either Lively or Baldoni will probably be out of work for a very long time, regardless of the outcome of the case.
March 25Mar 25 Only one of these two is at risk of long-term damage to their career, and that damage is already done.
March 25Mar 25 Author This is like the West Hollywood Silverlake YouTube version of that photograph of the Bloods and Crips entering a truce
March 25Mar 25 5 hours ago, chainsaw said: I thought he was Italian but apparently he's highly mixed race. I've read he's part Irish, part Iranian, part Italian, and at some point his family became Bahai. That might not count as "brown" to some people, but from a casting perspective the character he played on Jane the Virgin was heavily implied to be Latino. He is not Iranian. Mom is Ashkenazi Jew, dad is Italian. His parents became Baha'i's as adults and raised Baldoni as one.
March 25Mar 25 Author 1 hour ago, Hank Kingsley said: He is not Iranian. Mom is Ashkenazi Jew, dad is Italian. His parents became Baha'i's as adults and raised Baldoni as one. I'll take your word for it. Either way, he's ethnically mixed and probably not white enough for Lively's liking
March 26Mar 26 17 hours ago, chainsaw said: I'll take your word for it. Either way, he's ethnically mixed and probably not white enough for Lively's liking You don't need to insert shit into her thinking. It's plenty bad as it is.
March 26Mar 26 Author 2 hours ago, huge said: You don't need to insert shit into her thinking. It's plenty bad as it is. They ain't calling her Plantation Khaleesi for nothing
March 31Mar 31 Author Two headlines published on the same day: https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/legal-expert-says-justin-baldoni-193057137.html Spoiler Legal Expert Says Justin Baldoni Has A 'Stronger Case' In Legal Battle Against Blake Lively Chukwudi Onyewuchi Mon, March 31, 2025 at 2:30 PM CDT https://people.com/blake-lively-stronger-case-justin-baldoni-lawyer-documentary-11705461 Spoiler 'Blake Lively Has the Stronger Case.' Lawyer Explains Potential Flaw in Justin Baldoni's Arguments Justin Baldoni's lawyers have said Blake Lively's claims "will be swiftly debunked as discovery moves forward, easily disproved with actual, evidentiary proof" By Benjamin VanHoose Published on March 31, 2025 12:15PM EDT The body of one of the articles seems not to support the headline it which it is attached. I'm gonna blame AI.
April 20Apr 20 Author Checking in here It seems from these videos that Lively back in September 2024 used a shell company to file a lawsuit against "Does 1-10" to get a subpoena for the cellphone that contained all the text messages that she used in the NYT article and then dismissed the lawsuit in December 2024. These lawyers and the guests including a former Florida judge who sat over the Parkland shooter trial think it was pretty underhanded on Lively's part. She says (57:00 mark) if the evidence was obtained illegally it shouldn't come in at trial and would report the lawyers who did it to the local bar and even disqualify them for "backdooring and not following the rules." She is very Floridian and Fox News host-like so I don't know how much credence to give her views.
April 20Apr 20 Author And there's this other thing about California Section 47.1 which is a new law that is supposed to protect people who report sexual harassment and they're trying to use it to toss Baldoni's suit.
April 20Apr 20 1 hour ago, chainsaw said: Checking in here Why? You’re the only one that gives a shit about this nonsense.
April 21Apr 21 Author 18 hours ago, Fudge Nuggets said: Why? You’re the only one that gives a shit about this nonsense. It's been the top celebrity story for months it seems. I hadn't paid any attention for a few weeks since the Waco stuff but the lawsuit is still going strong with this subpoena and 47.1 stuff
April 21Apr 21 Ok, guess I should have clarified that no one besides you, celebrity gossip airheads and random cringe YouTube / TikTok “influencers” gives a shit. Carry on.
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.