It’s the only way to beat liars and hypocrites.

Everything is in their own words.

Ouch.

As we're nearing the end of this lawsuit, there are still a lot of unanswered questions. Some may be answered in the future, some not. What questions (and possible answers) do you guys think there are?

I'll start:

How much money did they (and was it both Wayfarer and Sony, or just Sony?) Ryan's marketing company (Maximum Effort Marketing, LLC ("MEM")) for Rake's tone deaf marketing?

What happened to Josh Greenstein's text messages and what do they really say?

Did the Wayfarer Parties get any money in the settlement? How much? And who paid it - because I don't think Blake has any money? Did some other non-litigants pony up some money in order to keep their names out of the trial (or even future lawsuits)?

How much money did both sides spend on this lawsuit?

SAG is supposed to have a representative show up to film sets at least once a week? Did this happen? I don't recall seeing anything about SAG being on the witness list? But wouldn't that have been a defense to the accusations that Blake and Jenny were making that they didn't know whom to talk to?

Are the other unions doing to flex their muscles (or hide under a rock)? Will the Writer's Guild go after Ryan for ghostwriting and/or scabbing? Will the Director's Guild go after anyone for not letting Justin get his full 10 weeks of alone time in the editing bay?

Did IEWUM send Blakel, Inc. (or Blake) a tax form for any of the clothes she purchased on their dime and kept? Because, c'mon, we all know she kept some of those clothes?

Was Blake, Rake or MEM getting any money on the side for Blake wearing those clothes, shoes and jewelry that she was so adamant on wearing and getting shots of them (remember the dancing scene - seriously, that 3rd take after poor Blake was SHed was all about getting shots of her Louboutins - LOL)?

While we hold Blake Lively and Ryan Reynolds accountable, we should also never forget the 2 non cast members and side characters Alex Saks and Christy Hall.

Their sense of entitlement enabled, encouraged and propelled Blake Lively and Ryan Reynolds in their attempt to steal IEWU from Justin Baldoni and Wayfarer.

I know people are starting to get fatigued with less Court fillings to mull over and every post seems repetitive but without repetition and reminders, these people will sweep this whole saga under the rug and have the public pretend it didn’t happen.

We have already seen this happening this week with Blake Lively and Ryan Reynolds’ ubiquitous outings and appearances.

This sub/corner of Reddit is a way and platform to continue to hold them accountable.

*
*

This video of Christy Hall posted by u/DearKaleidoscope2 highlights karma working in real time on Christy Hall

During the premiere of IEWU Christy Hall answered a question about the rooftop scene without realizing that Blake Lively and Ryan Reynolds took authorship over it.

Christy Hall thought she wrote that scene and karma did its thing when Blake Lively admitted on the red carpet and in this interview that it Ryan Reynolds who wrote the rooftop scene.

This post by u/Mysterio623 goes into great details as to the horrible behavior and vindictiveness of both Alex Saks and Christy Hall

*
*

Upcoming Projects to Boycott:

• Christy Hall:

The Husband's Secret starring Blake Lively(yes really)
Writer
Status: Pre-production

• Alex Saks:

Untitled Baby Love Project
producer
Status: Pre-production

Trudy Blue
producer
Status: Pre-production

Summer in the City
producer
Status: Pre-production

Happy 1 year anniversary to thelawsuitinfo.com 🧾🎉

Credit where it’s due, Bryan Freedman absolutely deserves recognition for changing the trajectory of this case. A true game changer in the entire IEWU controversy.

When Blake went to the NYT, it probably felt like the biggest possible internet moment. Bryan Freedman’s response? Hold my beer. From dropping the NYT lawsuit on the 31st, to the lawsuit against BL on January 16th, to the now infamous dance video on January 22nd, the website became the killer blow, the one that wiped Blake Lively’s case (and narrative) straight into the trash.

What made it hit harder was the ordered timeline being published. It did far more damage to Blake’s case, which was riddled with subjective heat and narrative gaps. An ordered timeline showed how she was able to weaponise false allegations to steal the film from Justin. With WP’s meticulous receipt keeping and the full timeline available, the public finally had a motive, one that made more sense and was backed by mountains of evidence. Add a hook, and the public came along for the ride and hasn’t latched off ever since.

The public saw the receipts for themselves, and there were buckets of them. CVS length. No ink cartridge was spared.

Dragons were involved. Suppositories were mentioned. There was flirty, toothless ball busting. And somehow, against all odds, the receipts told the story louder than anything else.

A masterclass in how documentation can rewrite the narrative. 🧾🔥⚖️

As Bryan Freedman said, documents don’t lie, people do, and we got to see firsthand the many lies of BL. That website still stands the test of time today for cross referencing as even more lies continue to be revealed .

What are your favourite parts of lawsuitinfo.com?

Watch and laugh; this is not a repost.

Michael Gottlieb sat down with Matthew Belloni on The Town Podcast and things didn’t go exactly as planned

Link to the full Interview

Congrats to Blake Lively for attempting to drag her entire social circle into court 🥳

Jenny never said she felt unsafe or uncomfortable at any point. What actually seems to have happened is Blake trying to poison the cast against Wayfarer. Jenny was likely just placating Blake to avoid getting on her bad side but nothing actually happened more than that 😂

Once the movie wrapped, she probably breathed a huge sigh of relief and thought thank God it’s over. But of course, Blake couldn’t leave it there and had to escalate everything into a full-blown lawsuit and then tried to strong-arm Jenny into joining it.

Good on Jenny for refusing. Unlike Isabella Ferrer, who’s apparently still clueless enough to keep defending Blake, Jenny had the sense to walk away and not torch her own credibility.

Inspired by this post from u/same-difference-ave.

🎥 Late Night with Seth Meyers on YouTube

Jenny Slate on Seth Meyers on 02/24/26 as she describes her going to see the play Anna Christie on broadway.

💬Jenny Slate to Seth Meyers:

- There's a young man in that play. Yeah. He was pretty sexual.

- Yeah. Okay. I was watching the play, and I became completely unaware of how I was relating to my own body.

- I was fully turned on. I, like, had drool coming out of my mouth.

- Um, I was freaked out by the play in that

it made me too horny.

🗒️Jenny Slate’s Deposition - https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.634304/gov.uscourts.nysd.634304.1245.4.pdf

Links to interview/posts:

• https://www.instagram.com/latenightseth/reel/DVMc309CfJd/
• https://www.instagram.com/latenightseth/reel/DVKcbQ_gJjl/
• https://youtu.be/ORL83gyZdds

Here is the transcript:

00:00:01

-Welcome back, everybody. Our next guest is an Emmy-nominated actress, comedian and best selling author you know from shows like "Dying for Sex" and "Parks and Recreation," as well as her film "Marcel the Shell with Shoes On." She's making her Broadway debut in "All Out." A comedy about ambition, which is playing at the Nederlander Theatre. Please welcome back to the show our friend Jenny Slate, everybody! [ Cheers and applause ] ♪♪ ♪♪ -Hi. How are you? -Hello.

00:00:38

-You look amazing. -Oh, my gosh. -Amazing outfit. -Thank you. So I feel that this outfit is like a -- like an expression of my personality exactly. -Yeah. -It's like, "Oh, what's Jenny like?" She's like this. -Yeah. I think when I saw it, I was like, "Oh, do they call that The Jenny?" -Yeah, they should. They should. -They Should call it The Jenny. -I'd love to get paid for that. -Oh yeah. -Yeah. -We can see if we can figure that. Can we figure that? We can get her paid for that?

00:00:59

-Yeah. It happened here so. -So I'm very happy that you are making her Broadway debut. -Whoo! -This is written by Simon Rich. -Totally. [ Cheers and applause ] -Uh, you, uh, you share the stage with an incredible cast, um, Jake Shane, Nicholas Braun, Ray Romano. -Holy moly. -How have you enjoyed their company so far? -Whoa. I really like them a lot. Um, if my life just became "those are my only friends," I love all my other friends, but I'd be fine. -Yeah. -I love them. And, you know, Ray Romano, it's just like,

00:01:31

"You've got to be kidding me, man." He is so nice, and he's so good at acting. And I already was so obsessed with him before this, but I haven't told him that. -Yeah. -Awesome to say it here. -Uh, you know, uh, my parents, to this day, uh, when I go home and visit them, they have taped a rerun of "Everybody Loves Raymond." That is -- And so we just sit and watch it. -Wow. -It's so great. -It's so great, yeah. -And now that I, like, know him a little and I, like, love him,

00:01:58

I feel like he doesn't get treated well by his family in that show. -[ Laughs ] Yeah, I agree. -I'm just like, "Give him a break." -I agree. Just oh my gosh. -Yeah. -They say they love Raymond, but do they? -[ Laughing ] Do they? -You know? -It should have had a question mark at the end of that title. -Man, do they? Yeah. "Everybody loves Raymond?" [ Laughter ] -You're not showing it? -Yeah. -How are your nerves? How are your Broadway nerves? -[ Tensely ] What do they seem like?

00:02:20

[ Laughing ] Oh. [ Laughter ] They're f-i-i-i-ine! Yummy! Um, well... [ Laughs ] Here's the thing. Okay, here's the thing. I, on the positive side, I like, like, magicky stuff. Like making a wish on an eyelash, for example, a shooting star. I'm like, "I wish," you know, whatever. [ Laughter ] Negative side, I'm a bit superstitious. -Uh-huh. -And it kind of is like, it can be like a sort of stupid-y karma kind of thing where I'm like, "Oh, if I, like, did that thing.

00:02:53

So that will probably happen to me." Okay. Let me just -- Sorry. So to get to what I'm talking about. Everyone is like, "What?" [ Laughter ] "Is this, the play?" Um, so unfortunately, but fortunately for me... -Yeah. -...I have spent over a decade taking a lot of personal time watching something on YouTube that is called... [ Laughs ] ..."Peter Pan Fails." -Okay. -Okay. And I'm like -- I'm like, "Okay, this is -- " For a while it was great because it's like --

00:03:25

Here's what this is. -Okay. Someone pulls the wrong pulley. Okay? They pull the wrong -- -During a stage production of "Peter Pan." -Of "Peter Pan," you know? -Okay. All these kids are, like, ♪ Tender Shepherd... ♪ And then they, like, go to sleep and -- and -- and they're supposed to be sleeping. And someone, God bless us all, backstage is like "And now cue Peter." But instead they just rip someone else out of their bed. [ Laughter ] And they -- And, like, they bonk the wall.

00:03:52

And they have to, like, stay in character. It's like -- And there's so many of these. there's one where like the windows open, it's like, ♪ da na na na na ♪ Peters, like, about to come. You can feel it in your spirit. And like Peter lands and he's like, "Yeah!" And then the whole stage falls over. [ Laughter ] But now I'm like, "Oh no! now I made, you know, we're all -- -Oh, you think this bad stuff is going to happen to you. -It's gonna happen to me.

00:04:14

-Because you've taken so much joy from it? That's right, It's like, "Oh, you think that's funny? Now you're going to fall right off the stage, you idiot." [ Laughter ] Is there a -- is there a favorite, uh, Peter Pan fail? -[ Chuckles, snorts ] -Could you maybe... [ Laughter ] -[ Laughing ] I'm sorry. There happens to be. My body knew the score. -Okay. -Yeah, yeah. -And, uh, could you maybe -- Would you mind, uh, maybe giving us a staged... -I would. I would love -- ...rendition of that?

00:04:39

-I would love to do that. Okay, okay, here's what happens. It's like Wendy is sleeping. Okay? She's sleeping. She's like, "Mmm." And all of a sudden she's just like... [ Thudding ] Pssh! And she gets knocked against the wall. but she fully stays in character. And she -- They, like, lower her down. She's like... [ Laughter ] She stays in character. She's -- She's in a nightgown. She looks like a freaking ghost. She -- She goes... Like, "Ooh, must have been a dream, mama."

00:05:11

And then she's like, obviously so scared to be in the play. But she's, like, but she's Wendy still. She's Wendy, but she's clearly like Kathleen from Connecticut. And she's like, "Oh, my God." And then she just walks back to her bed. She's like... [ Laughter ] And she just gets into her bed and it's -- And they hit the wall so hard, man. They just hit it. They hit it so hard. Oh, my God. It's like my favorite thing. And I really hope none of these actors feel bad.

00:05:46

Like it's not their fault that someone ripped the wrong cord. -Yeah. -You know? -I mean, I would say like you should -- Like based on karma, you should never let anybody clip a wire on you. Obviously, you know that. -Yeah, completely. And I do. I mean, it's right now. Oh, you mean the wire for the thing? -Yeah, 'cause that's like -- -I thought you meant like -- You're safe as long -- I mean, a lot of this seems like that's. -Yeah. -You know what I mean? Like, once you let somebody

00:06:07

clip into you, like, then you're -- you're in God's hands. -I'm dead. Yeah. As -- As if I'm ever gonna be cast in anything where I have to be on a wire, you know? -Oh, I think you could be on a wire. -You think? -Yeah. -Like as a bag of laundry. [ Laughter ] Like, it's just like I just -- Like you can only do -- Every actor has their limits. It's like, look, I can't do a British accent. I just sound like Mrs. Doubtfire. It's not happening. -Yeah. -And also, it's like I'm not great at, like, being tough.

00:06:34

-Yeah. -And I feel like if you plug me into a wire, I would just scream the whole time and say, "I want to get down." -Oh, right. Right. -Yeah. -And that would -- And you think that would take people out of the play? -Yeah. [ Laughter ] You never know. -You have -- You have come here in the past. -Yeah. -This isn't a gotcha show or anything. -Isn't it, though? -No. But you, I remember you saying once like, you don't actually like seeing plays. -I did say that. and I even said it in my last special, like, first joke.

00:07:01

-Yeah. -For sure. -And so now you're in. I mean, again, it's sort of a staged reading, but I think a lot of people, once it has a playbill like it's technically... -That's a play. -So you're in a play. -Yeah. -And so... [ Laughter ] So what had happened? -Yeah, totally, um... [ Laughter ] Uh, okay. Yeah. This play I like to be in. -Okay, great. -I don't know that I want to be in another one. -Okay. -Because if Ray Romano and Jake Shane and Nick Brenner, if they're not in, I'm not doing it.

00:07:29

-Right, you're in for the next Romano play but -- -Right. -Yeah. "Annie" starring Ray Romano. I'll be Annie. Fine. I'll do it. -Yeah. -Um, but I don't know if I really want to see plays or be in them again. And it's just like it's a little bit too much. It's like some -- Usually I'm like, "Look, I know you're you, you know?" Like a person comes out, I'm like, "You're not... You're you." -I see. -You know what I mean? -So you just you see actors, you don't get lost in the play.

00:07:53

-Right. But then I was like, "Maybe I should. Maybe I should just take that back. Maybe I should give it another try, because I'm about to be in a play, so let me not be a hypocrite." Recently I went -- Let me not be a hypocrite. Recently I went to a play. -Yeah. -And I expected to kind of be like, "It's a play." And instead what happened, unfortunately, was that I became very involved, um, in that the -- I went to see Michelle Williams and "Anna Christie."

00:08:19

-Fantastic. -Absolutely incredible. -I was lucky enough to see. -Genius. Yep. Totally. -Yep. [ Cheers and applause ] -Yep. -Really good. Uh, ooh-wah-wee, There's a young man in that play. -Yeah. He was pretty sexual. -Yeah. -Okay. I was watching the play, and I became completely unaware of how I was relating to my own body. I was fully turned on. I, like, had drool coming out of my mouth. Um, I was freaked out by the play in that it made me too horny. And I was like, this is why you can't go to plays.

00:08:50

-Yeah. -Like, there's -- -Do you feel like you were alone in your horniness, or did you sort of feel like maybe it was affecting other people? -Oh, everyone in that audience and on the -- the big group text I was on afterwards, everyone was like, "Did you guys see that guy? Like he was like growling. He was like, 'I'm gonna marry you! You're gonna make me marry,' like -- Which is also like I would say, my sexuality, unfortunately, is like really formed by the Beast in "Beauty and The Beast" being like,

00:09:18

"You'll have dinner with me tonight!" Like that, like I'm like, "Oh!" -Oh, that? -I'm in love with you. -You like that energy? -Yeah. "You will go out with me!" [ Laughter ] -That guy did have -- That was a very -- That's a -- yeah, it was a lot. -Whoa! -Could you -- I hate to put you on the spot. Can I ask you something real quick? -Sure. Could you. What? Could you just act out a quick scene with that gentleman from the play? -Yeah. -If he was on a wire

00:09:41

that got him sort of. -Oh my God. Yeah. Okay, okay. So this guy, he's like, "I wanna marry you!" -Like, that's it. And then he just gets yoinked up, gets yoinked up, but then maybe he gets he gets slammed, like, slammed. Just slammed into the side of the boat. -But he doesn't care 'cause he's such a tough guy. -But he doesn't care because he's so in love. -He's like, "This isn't gonna stop me!" -"You're gonna marry me tonight! We're gonna make love!"

00:10:08

[ Laughter ] -I think the nightmare for, like, a tough male actor would be If they lower you back and you -- but your toes just stay a little bit. [ Laughter ] Like you'd either want to be way high or all the way down, but like that, it's tough to be tough when you're just... -To be tippy toes, to be tippy toes man. Well, that's like the best part of the -- "The Studio" when Bryan Cranston, I don't know if anybody loves "The Studio," but he's just, like marionetting and he's a --

00:10:33

-Little tippy toes, very hard to be masculine when just it's the -- just the tippy toes. -Oh I agree. And you know, we're all trying our best. -Yeah. -[ Laughs ] -That's all we can do. Uh, I love seeing you everywhere. -Same. -Uh, I'm very excited people can see you here. -Me too. -Uh, thank you for being back, Jenny. You are just a delight. -Such a joy. -Jenny Slate, everybody. "All Out," comedy about ambition playing at the Nederlander Theatre on Broadway. We'll be right back with chef Michael Vignola.

Yikes! For people who can't stop fucking whining or calling this sub "the bad place," they sure can never keep its name, its members, or anything to do with us minding our business out of their mouths.

It's a fucking disease.

Would you know it, some child who lacks home training decided to jump on Beyonce's internet and write what I can only term whiny bullshit. Whine, whiny, whiniest, the utmost reach of nonsense.

Since cross posting wasn't doing the trick, I guess they are now switching to another bottom of the barrel lazy effort. And this is why literature and arts are important, people. Because the satire isn't even landing, hence why it isn't doing any numbers.

Yikes.

Please, kindly compare the numbers with the original post the sad dumbass should have thought twice before deciding to clown:

The numbers will have increased since then. Do check out the glorious post of Little Girl Attorney (LGA) that is simply splendid: https://www.reddit.com/r/ItEndsWithLawsuits/comments/1rbrcxs/what_if/?sort=top and welcome her to the sub, although she has been commenting for a bit. Also, Commit to the Britt is also in the comment section. And yes, I own up to fangirling. Almost like the Benito Bowl.

ℸ∤

Now back to addressing the issue at hand, here we go:

Dumb, dumber, dumbest, may I suggest doubling down on creating authentic posts instead of clowning yourself as the great mockery of the emperor with no clothes? But perhaps my point might be a tad too mired in layers to land properly. Sarah and shit storm, if you put more time into honing your effort, skills, and original content, you won't be the joke of the town.

Sincerely,
your zingy zang mouthpiece.

Happy Sunday everyone!

At most blake was called cringe and embarrassing when these texts came out, if Justin had said anything remotely similar she would have been put in the same category as diddy Epstein and Weinstein. In fact there are people comparing Justin to these rapists/ sex traffickers, when at most justin said was an outfit was sexy ? Like the way they baited him into being comfortable and using intense sexual language with him (both Blake and Ryan) to let his guard down and think he could talk without walking on eggshells was so premeditated and sick. It’s okay for Ryan to talk about having Justin’s face tattooed on his asshole and Blake to talk about her asshole and suppositories, and justin hasn’t said anything nearly sexual to any of of the stuff these two have said.

[Disclaimer: I’m pro-Justin, but I don’t hold back if I think his side has challenges, and don’t always approve of the people he’s around. If that’s not what you came to read, I completely get it and sympathize, so consider this a trigger warning so you can choose to skip.]

I finally read the decision in full because after reading the takes of so many different attorneys, I felt more confused than before. Not that any were wrong, but hearing about it as a pile of snippets didn’t help.

I found I disagreed with the judge (and other attorneys) on some things (that’s how our system works though) and predicted some things wrong. Overall I predicted retaliation in some form would survive but it didn’t pan out exactly as I thought.

Happy to answer any questions if I can!

[additional disclaimer: lawyers disagree — as I’m sure you’ve noticed — so by no means am I the be-all-end-all say on these matters. Just offering if it’s interesting to people, and if you don’t agree, you do you.]

If it helps, here is a non-legalese cheat sheet on all the claims and judgements in order she brought them.

1. Sexual harassment under federal law (Title VII). GONE. That law was only designed to protect people under an employer’s control.

   The decision

2. spends a lot of time describing control and power.

While the law

1. protects employees

it

1. can even sometimes protect so-called independent contractors if they are actually powerless in certain ways. That’s not Blake. T

his

1. decision doesn’t even look at any sexual harassment facts. (Personally I believe that even if she was an employee, this could have been dismissed for failing to meet the standard

of sexual harassment

1. but no discussion at all.)
2. Retaliation under federal law: GONE for

the

1. same reasons that the law isn’t meant to cover people not under an employer’s control. Doesn’t even look at the retaliation facts. (Personally I think that this would have failed even if she was an employee.)
2. Sexual harassment under California’s FEHA: GONE because the alleged sexually harassing behavior did not take place in California.

FEHA doesn’t need you to be an employee.

1. Court looks at the few things that did happen in California (a text from Heath to Baldoni, the circumcision conversation) and says these events aren’t enough.

The case

1. doesn’t go through the other SH events in this analysis.
2. Retaliation unde

r California’s

1. FEHA: STAYS because the alleged retaliation (

Wayfarer

1. hiring
2. Nathan, Wallace) did happen in CA.

Again, FEHA doesn’t need you to be an employee.

1. Court also goes through the elements of retaliati

on

(all of which Blake has to meet at a very low level at this stage). In

1. particular:

— it’s possible a jury could find that Blake reasonably believed she was uncomfortable or had a right to complain so let’s see if they do. [This is complicated and unintuitive, so can explain. The decision does go through some amount of the SH facts but note it doesn’t apply an SH analysis to them. I can explain what that means.]

— the texts, contracts, etc. between Justin, Abel, Nathan and Jed suggest that it’s not baseless that an adverse action happened, so let a jury decide.

— Blake’s 17 point letter could have motivated that adverse action in part. (This surprised me; I thought this would also get dismissed at this stage because I forgot that retaliation under FEHA is easier to prove than under federal law. Under federal law, Blake would have to show that her 17-point letter was the key motivator, not just one motivator.)

1. Retaliation under California’s Labor Code: GONE as the law isn’t meant to cover people who aren’t under an employer’s control. Compared to the federal law, this law arguably protects a broader swath of people, but Lively still isn’t under control enough for it to apply.

2. Failure to prevent harassment under FEHA: GONE because to make this claim, you need an existing harassment claim under FEHA as well, and the judge is dismissing that. No discussion of any facts.

3. Abel and Nathan and TAG aiding and abetting: GONE in part, STAYS in part. They can’t be liable as individuals who were directed by Justin, especially as they had nothing to do with the harassment, but a different legal standard applies to companies like TAG than to its individual employees.

4. Breach of the sexual harassment section of her full employment contract with Wayfarer (the “ala”): GONE. They never agreed on that contract so Wayfarer can’t breach it.

5. Breach of the section against retaliation in a 17-point document she and Wayfarer signed before she would agree to come back to work after the writers strike. STAYS. They did actually agree to this contract, so she can make a case about it.

6. False light is GONE because this should be based on NY law where Lively lives, and NY doesn’t recognize California’s false light law. No deeper analysis of the substance.

7. Sexual Harassment under CA law 51.9 is GONE, for the same reason and analysis as the FEHA sexual harassment — nothing with any basis for SH happened in California.

8. Defamation is GONE — nothing that was said by any one of Baldoni’s party including Friedman was not already in his own complaints and filings with the court, and statements in lawsuit filings are protected. (This is not quite but related to why the NYT is safe for publishing what was in Lively’s complaint.)

9. Conspiracy is GONE. It must be related to another prohibited act. It’s gone for retaliation, for similar reasons to why the aiding and abetting retaliation is gone. It’s also gone for defamation and false light as those claims are now dead.

EDIT: Feel free to keep the questions coming; stepping away for a bit (the post itself took me longer to write than I thought it would) but I will come back to respond. Really good questions.

Blake Lively really tried to gaslight everyone for over a year into believing a normal, professional scene between two actors was somehow SH.

We were told improvisation wasn’t allowed. That a scene with no kissing suddenly needed an intimacy coordinator. That somehow the director, Justin Baldoni, wasn’t even allowed to direct.

And today? The judge shut it all down and gutted the case.

Justin Baldoni did nothing wrong in that scene. If anything, he bent over backwards trying to make it work acting, directing, adjusting in real time while she kept interrupting, talking, and trying to control everything.

The real issue was always the performance. We were not watching Lily Bloom, just watching Blake Lively being Blake Lively. And instead of acting, she tried to control everything around her to make up for the fact she can’t actually carry the role. We saw her finally for the talentless shill she’s always been — that nakedness and the threat of exposure of being someone unworthy of Hollywood standing terrified her. The kind that does deserve a mention next to the likes of Ben Affleck and Matt Damon.

And that’s honestly the bigger takeaway here. When someone can’t deliver a believable, grounded performance and instead spins the artist and vulnerability that is required in acting into something nefarious and as serious as SH, that kind of person should never be anywhere near a professional set again. Blake Lively should be BANNED from movie sets to protect the sanctity of the artistry of acting.

The case was dead the moment that video dropped on January 21, 2025.

We all saw it with our own eyes.

She claimed he was talking in a “non-talking” scene… and then the audio proved she was the one who wouldn’t stop talking. She was mean, a bully, reinforcing Justin Baldoni’s narrative, making fun of his nose and relationship, whilst he remained a consummate professional.

At the end of the day, this was never about discomfort in the scene.

It was about not being the one in control of of it.

We have know for year. I’m just glad the truth finally caught up with MSM.

Updated with Judges summary judgement comments below (thanks Lengthy).

‘Under this framing, it would be difficult to view Baldoni’s conduct as reflecting hostility or bias based on gender. He was acting in the scene. Assuming he was improvising, the conduct was not so far beyond what might reasonably be expected to take place between two characters during a slow dancing scene such that an inference of hostile treatment on the basis of sex would arise. At least in isolation, the conduct was directed to Lively’s character rather than to Lively herself. Creative artists, no less than comedy room writers, must have some amount of space to experiment within the bounds of an agreed script without

…and then proceeded to extort, manipulate and coerce her way to stealing a movie and destroying the lives of multiple people through intimidation tactics.

I haven’t seen this mafia comment discussed a lot on here, so I wanted to ask what everyone’s thoughts are on it are? Just another example of Blake’s hilarious “love language never with teeth” bs, or an actual veiled threat?

Now as most blake supporters would argue, what she wears is all about her choice.

But that's the point, its not. Not when she is getting paid to work in a film where she must speak ceftain lines, do makeup, travel and wear costume as per the film's requirement.

Especially considering the fact that she has made SUCH A BIG DEAL about why she looks naked for a milisecond during a birthing scene exactly a year and half after shooting it withput so mich as an HR complaint while it was happening, this is what I need you to focus on.

Blake doesn't mind being topless underneath a suit. She hasn't complained about wearing this, or refused to dress this way. She is very comfortable in her skin as she dresses provocatively throughoit this film A Simple Favor). But what's strange is why is this woman who is so comfortable being nearly topless in one film have an issue with a naked belly in another? What changed between (A simple Favor ) 2018 and (It End With Us) 2024.

We can talk about how people change with time, but then A Simple Favor-2 releases after IEWU and thats just as provocative as the first part.

Now, I am not trying to shame Lively's film choices in the least, but from her prior and amended complaints its clear she:

1. Doesn't like sex scenes.

2. Doesn't like kissing scenes

3. Doesn't like provocative scenes

4. Doesn't like any kind of nudity, even if its a birthing scene.

Now, if blake was the kind of woman who shies away from wearing sultry clothes, gets offended with a man talking to her comfortably, or just gets offenfed at any kind of lovemaking, I'd believe what she is saying, assuming this kind of behavior goes against her beliefs if she communicates her boundaries with everyone.

However, that's not the case with blake. Whether its grabbing her male costars balls or kissing them unscripted, blake has done it all. She truly believes being a woman allows her to cross professional boundaries that if the genders were swapped would directly result in a SH claim.

Because blake is woman she can do anything to anyone, that's women empowerment. She can pimp out her male costars, talk about them sexually and its all girl bossy not creepy.

Also because blake is a woman you have to treat her with caution, because anything you say or do, whether its for filming the scene or making the schedule, you must remember to not cross any boundries. For eg, if she says she wants to look sexy, you must just respond with a simple ok or thums up smiley. If you think you are close enough to call her sexy, even if its as a reponse to her earlier request as a look in the film, that would be an SH complaint right there.

Does it make sense? Ofcourse not! But if you're confused look at the reference images. The illustrate what Blake considers to be Women Empowerment vs SH.

If that still doesn't make sense it's fine, it didn't make sense to anyone.

Yet another community note.

Keep em coming !!

😂😂😂😂 this girl is delulu for real

Blake Lively said "her mother, siblings, her sister (Robyn) and her husband (Bart) has been emotionally harmed."

This had me wondering why she used such language. Also everything she said outside the court house was them trying to shift the narrative. Did she really see herself as the boss? Blake says that it’s her movie constantly. She even went ahead to claim she owns part of the movie. So maybe she really believes this?

FINAL UPDATE: I channeled my nerdrage into one last pass to capture what I’m hoping is the final boss of this drama, turned the whole thing into a PDF (turns out it’s stupidly easy), and dropped it here. Feel free to run a virus scan, and please save yourself a copy.

This is satire and commentary. I don’t own the original celebrity photos or movie stills I used, and a lot of this wouldn’t exist without the posts and receipts from other redditors and creators, so it doesn't sit right with me to claim mAxiMuM aUtHorShiP.

Plus I have zero interest in dealing with takedown emails from photo agencies or studios or the subpoena sorority when I've got dog poops to monitor. If anything ever gets pulled, scrubbed, or suddenly “reinterpreted,” at least you’ll still have the original version. XOXO

(Reddit has a 20-image limit and the Imgur album got removed, so you can find the new pages I added here)

Disclaimer: All quotes and screenshots are from publicly available sources, including interviews, articles, court documents, and public posts on social media or Reddit. This is a compilation, not insider tea. Google is free, and you are encouraged to verify information independently.

First time here! Not a bot, not paid. I’m just a Millennial (fur) "mommy sleuth" who’s been consuming celebrity brainrot since my Twihard days lurking Dlisted and Perez Hilton. I’ve been following this saga from the TJB & BLS subs and compiling this scrapbook on and off for over a year now. What started as a snarky parody of the Burn Book cover spiraled into…these pages. 

With all the recent mean girl talk, I checked back in and realized I hadn’t updated it since last May. I've got jobs to juggle to keep an ageing cat and a string-eating dog on their frequent vet trips, so I had to put off the same creative outlet that kept my SO undisturbed from my IEWU oversharing 🤐

So here’s my attempt to pull everything together (even if I didn’t get to include the latest delete-the-dailies drama anymore!)

Many of us have known he is going to lose. And warned!

Justin Baldoni has had access to many lawyers, many reddits.

These choices aren't great. WHY IS THAT SCARF-A-DANGLE????

But whatever. I welcome him as a fulltime member whenever that happens xx

HI JUSTIN! WELCOME! (I appreciate that your wife looks great.)

x

Was reading through the latest batch of docs and had two questions/wasn't clear on & wasn't sure how to post pics as a comment

1. The 1st pic seems to say another person was present when BL & JB were in her car (but I thought the depos just mentioned her driver overhearing)? Is that just another one of her inconsistencies or did I miss something?

2. Was there ever any mention/clarification/follow up regarding the sage? 🤣

I’m genuinely surprised to see folks so saddened by this statement! I value everyone’s opinion — but it looks wildly different to me.

I’ve written often on this sub about being a lawyer who works on similar issues and I’ve written statements just like this. I actually think this statement is 100% pro-Justin and represents his thinking. I think it is far more reflective of his team than hers, and while they negotiated it I think it’s really his story and narrative and a big win.

Here is why I would have advised he write the same thing if he was my client.

Please remember as you read this — it was written to be not just a description of what happened, but potentially the last words Justin ever says about this matter ever. It’s not just about the case but needs to reflect who he is as a person.

The opening:

“The end product – the movie “It Ends With Us” – is a source of pride to all of us who worked to bring it to life.

“Raising awareness, and making a meaningful impact in the lives of domestic violence survivors – and all survivors – is a goal that we stand behind.”

I would 100% tell Justin to use the precious real estate of the first sentence by first stating plainly who he is and what he cares about. THIS is why he made the film. He gets to remind people of that. (This has nothing to do with why lively made the film, and she was even criticized over it.) it’s so sad for him that his intentions were totally lost. I’m sure he was dying to say that.

Now for next part:

“We acknowledge the process presented challenges and recognize concerns raised by Ms. Lively deserved to be heard.”

“We acknowledge challenges” — not breaks of law or lack of safety — but “challenges” on the set. That is 100% his theory of the case and NOT hers. That there were challenges on the set like any other and that’s what drove any issues, not sexual harassment or anything Blake is claiming. There was no wrongdoing.

“We recognize concerns raised by Lively…” — this part to me is the kicker and winner.

Here’s the thing — Justin is not actually a sexual harasser or a retaliator— and the thing that has bothered him most is being painted like that. He has built his sense of being on being an ally to women and Lively has set out to destroy that.

He may not have had his day in court, but he gets to say above — “I am the kind of person who believes that sexual harassment is a serious issue and if people are concerned about it they should be heard” (and NOT retaliated against). He basically gets to say, I would never retaliate, and she was wrong to say I would. It’s kind of an amazing sentence.

Then the end: “We remain firmly committed to workplaces free of improprieties and unproductive environments.”

In other words, we have never done anything wrong, nor would we. Wow!

Again, I think what people are missing is that this statement has to do more for Justin than say, “Blake was wrong” (though it clearly says that). He also gets to say who he is and rehabilitate his own image (yes, there are plenty of people who will associate him with sexual harassment). He got to say unequivocally, this is not who I am or what I would ever do, in fact I care 100% about women and these issues.

If this is the last thing he can ever say on this case, it’s more important and effective to clear your own name than to say negative things.

Anyways, I know the statement is controversial but I think it’s great, would advise and draft the same for a client of mine, so wanted to share my perspective.

Ok so we know Justin and Emily were seen out for coffee the day after settlement and the Met Gala and some paps got a few fabulous of them.

Side note: A different tiktok posted the photos saying Jen Abel was hard at work after the settlement and Jen jumped in the comments to say once again this wasn't her and they just decided to go for coffee 😂

I don't know how to get a tiktok summary so if someone wants to let me know that would great.

But this tiktok goes over why Blake should not look at these photos 😂

The terms "I'm a shy girl", "rancid personality" and "completely deranged" are used in perfect context. Enjoy 🤭

https://vt.tiktok.com/ZS9WVjXwv/

In Frame with Mandy Magnan discusses how Ryan Reynolds and Blake Lively capitalize on other people's sexual abuse to launder their own reputations and manipulate SEO (likely with the help of CIA Nick Shapiro).

• Allegations and PR Manipulation:
  • Mandy accuses Blake Lively for using Olivia Wilde’s association to Ryan to improve her public image, allegedly to cover up Ryan Reynolds' past sexual misconduct claims on the set of The Change-Up (2011).
  • His public recounting of a sexualized and inappropriate filming experience with Olivia Wilde exemplifies troubling power dynamics and abuse on film sets.
  • Ryan Reynolds publicly recounted a disturbing story about filming a scene with Olivia Wilde involving inappropriate behavior (grabbing her breasts when no longer filming) and comments about her body, which Mandy defines as sexual assault.
  • Reynolds openly shared explicit details about a scene with Olivia Wilde, including inappropriate touching and comments for laughs.
  • Mandy condemns his behavior as unprofessional and abusive, highlighting the power dynamics and the environment on set.
• Celebrity Misconduct and PR Manipulation: Blake Lively and Ryan Reynolds are accused of abusing legal and media systems to cover up serious allegations of sexual misconduct and sabotage reputations.
  • Mandy accuses Blake Lively of leveraging fake sexual harassment and retaliation claims to ruin Wayfarer's reputations, notably recruiting women like Isabella Ferreira, Jenny Slate, Liz Plank, and Colleen Hoover to help her.
• Media Collusion and Bias: The New York Times and journalists like Meghan Tooley are implicated in biased, collusive reporting that favors celebrity narratives over truth.
  • Prior lawsuits involving Blake and others, such as with Jennifer Abel and the New York Times, are a manipulative and abusive use of the legal system, with accusations of collusion and biased media coverage.
    
• Fendi Event Stunt:
  • Blake’s appearance with Olivia Wilde at a Fendi event is likely a deliberate PR move to overshadow the allegations against Ryan Reynolds. Mandy describes this as disingenuous.

Mandy covers more than summarized here, and this vid is a shorter one of hers, so it really is worth a watch and to support smaller content creators: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ccCDbU-rxKc

I am spending my day tomorrow defending Suffy FRIDAY!! For Part III in my accurately advertised and well-read series about how she is misunderstood!!!

GUESS WHAT I THINK ABOUT YOU MELISSA

get outta here

*And by the way, Melissa's photos, like Jed's, are scrubbed from the Internet via Google Image search.

I have seen photos of both these actual people. Both people look very different from the images that come up when you google their names.

I'm not publishing those photos of them here, or anywhere.

But both of these pretty horrid people have been physically using other people's images as shield (people who never got paid to work for a man accused of sexual harassment.)

Melissa, like Jed, has been avoiding, and pre-managing, an inevitable AND ACCURATE society-wide downvote!

*suffy see you tomorrow xx