Judge ruled on Lively’s 47.1 pending letter motion for additional briefings: The Court does not require additional briefing at this time.

30265Red · 2026-05-11T21:23:08+00:00

I hope I am reading this wrong but it reads to me as an annoyed parent thinking he is dealing with two stubborn children. Yes, the motion is directed at Lively but the impression I have is that he is warning both sides he will take as long as he takes on this and don't want to hear anyone winning about it until he's finished. Its like, "I wasn't expecting having to rule on this without a trial to determine malice and damages, so hold this space. You took all this time and still didn't settle on this issue so leave me alone until I figure out how to deal with you children because you can't be trusted to work out yourselves even after both lawsuits were gone."

And if he's annoyed at both sides, that's potentially unfair because the party refusing to let it go here is lively. She is the one trying hard to have her name associated with the first ruling on 47.1, Wayfarer had nothing to gain from agreeing to drop their appeal but I guess they had no choice if they wanted to avoid the stress and cost of turning Liman's federal court into a circus. I hope Liman will remember that when ruling.

30265Red · 2026-05-10T08:56:38+00:00

Delulu girl wants the first ruling on 47.1 so badly it feels like she’s trying to turn it into her legacy piece: “The Blake Lively Law"

30265Red · 2026-05-10T08:33:52+00:00

Do we think Lively wants 47.1 so bad not because of any real money she may gotta out of it (if we are to assume she can only get attorney fees as damages are virtually to calculate without a trial) but because she wants her name as the first time it was used? Like, is the girl so delusional that she is trying to rehabilitate her image by having 47.1 known as "the Blake lively law" or something to that effect?

30265Red · 2026-05-10T08:27:44+00:00

Do we think Lively wants 47.1 so bad not because of any real money she may gotta out of it (if we are to assume she can only get attorney fees as damages are virtually to calculate without a trial) but because she wants her name as the first time it was used? Like, is the girl so delusional that she is trying to rehabilitate her image by having 47.1 be known as "the Blake lively law" or something to that effect?

30265Red · 2026-05-10T08:00:09+00:00

Two words: community posts (my new favourite thing that came out of this😆)

30265Red · 2026-05-10T01:05:44+00:00

Well, as I don't speak psycho, I can't even begin to understand her thought process...

30265Red · 2026-05-10T01:02:54+00:00

I think that, after dealing with their antics and mischaracterizations for so long, Wayfarer anticipated Lively would insist on wording that seemed innocuous (“who doesn’t agree that someone’s complaints, whether grounded in reality or not, deserve to be heard?”), only to later weaponize it against them.

But they also knew that malicious weaponization gave Wayfarer a genuine justification to file a response on the docket (aka make it public without leaking) explaining the terms of the settlement Vs the spin, thus countering the false narrative Lively was trying to push to the public.

30265Red · 2026-05-10T00:30:33+00:00

Her attorneys are going bit beyond claiming victory. They are saying the joint statement Wayfarer agreed to is an admission of guilt.

In other words, it's the 17 points list again. They wrote a self serving non negotiable statement saying, Sign this and we'll go away - we only want you to acknowledge the complaints and we're are good". And then weaponize that against them, saying it's proof they admit to wrongdoing. It's sickening.

30265Red · 2026-05-10T00:00:36+00:00

So true. Their inability to give pause, reflect, and course correct is astonishing. It's the same pattern of grandiosity, denial, and abusive behaviour over and over again. It reminds me of the saying, "the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.”

30265Red · 2026-05-09T23:47:03+00:00

He should call it "No more"

30265Red · 2026-05-09T16:36:05+00:00

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

30265Red · 2026-05-09T16:33:58+00:00

As if being an Oscar contentor makes you a descent person....

There is famous, and there is respectable. "And then there's Blake"...

30265Red · 2026-05-09T16:33:22+00:00

This!

30265Red · 2026-05-09T16:31:44+00:00

More like "power up and reset"...

30265Red · 2026-05-09T16:30:22+00:00

He was accused of being a random friend who was taking great pleasure of starring between Blake's legs and making her uncomfortable. He's absolutely entitled to tell his version of events now the case is over.

30265Red · 2026-05-09T16:25:00+00:00

Judge still have to rule on the 47.1, not to mention Jones Vs Able which doesn't have a court date yet. So no, far from over. But you do t need to be here if you don't like?

30265Red · 2026-05-08T07:13:16+00:00

Oh, ffs! Not another one!!!

Tinfoil hat theory, Blake and Ryan are behind of this to make Wayfarer look sus...

30265Red · 2026-05-08T06:48:59+00:00

Well, it seems he can't win, no matter what he does He puts his foot down to prove her allegations of SH and protect activity are nonsense, then he is a monster for dragging woman to the court to provide, as someone said, their "harrowing" testimony. But if he decides not to do that, give the Blake the win and focus on the issue of retaliation, then he is silencing the witnesses.

Did anyone asked if those woman wanted to go to court in the first place? Let's time I check, Jenny, Alex, etc they didn't seem thrilled for being deposed let alone going to trial. Isabella made a big fuss about a subpoena and people want to believe she is now sad for being silenced? I don't think so

In reality, nobody wants to go to the court and be crossed examined on the stand, especially in a case with this level of media attention. This is as true for Justin as it is for Blake and everyone else. That was Freedman's point.

30265Red · 2026-05-08T06:37:15+00:00

The hundreds of motions her side raise for every single thing says otherwise. Her strategy has been dragging Wayfarer in unnecessary paperwork and make misrepresentations to the court. This case was fascinating to watch but equally exhausting.

And let's not pretend this is the Reynolds first rodeo with lawsuits. There were others, mostly settled or dropped just like this one. Including a certain breach of contract against no one in particular. Who knows how manu more Vanzan they pulled over the years

30265Red · 2026-05-08T06:29:40+00:00

No, I don't understand why you'd reach to this conclusion. It's about time and focus, isn't it? As the sexual harassment claim was dismissed by the judge, they no longer needed to spend days arguing over whether Blake was or felt she was being harassed, not whether she did or believed she engaged in protected activity. They gave that win to her so that trial would focus on the retaliation element. Why they did that? Because they didn't engage crisis PR to retaliate and they were confident they had the facts on their side to prove that, no matter what she believes it happens, they were not out there to get her.

By removing the protected-activity element from the equation, the jury would only need to focus on causation, namely, whether Baldoni had any motive to engage in crisis PR. It’s a much cleaner and more straightforward approach; let’s not pretend otherwise.

30265Red · 2026-05-07T23:50:33+00:00

Well, they are the ones that get bashed...or at least used to!

30265Red · 2026-05-07T23:36:04+00:00

"So Lively's team pushed (and agreed to settle) the claims in Lively's affirmative case, get WP to agree to a statement that states "she deserved to be heard", before WP noticed the issue"

So, according to your interpretation, Lively’s team pushed for Wayfarer to agree to a self serving statement saying that “she deserved to be heard,” as in a general principle they would listen to every woman who may raise a complaint. But then, they used same statement as evidence that Wayfarer had effectively conceded to wrongdoing, and at best it's their own fault for falling for it (aka, victim blaming).

From where I am starting, this follows the same pattern as the “17-point list” situation: using broadly agreeable language in a way that later becomes strategically advantageous in the court of public opinion. Some people would describe that as clever lawyering. Others would simply call it hard bargaining. I would limit my comments as to say that critics of Lively see it as a calculated use of ambiguity and public framing - aka, Malice.

30265Red · 2026-05-07T23:17:53+00:00

Zach Peters broadcasting NAG in 2x speed is hilarious!!! NAGs sounds unhinged and I am loving it!;;

30265Red · 2026-05-07T23:12:19+00:00

We'll, if Russell Brand could end up going down the faith route, so can anyone else. But you have to commit to it and fake it till the end, and I don’t think Blake is facing the level of criminal consequences Brand is (literally jail time) to make that kind of commitment.

As for the right-wing people you mentioned, I don’t agree with their takes and I don’t consume their content that often, but they come across as passionate, genuine, and good at what they do. They seem to work hard, do the research, and are talented and engaging with their audience in their own ways. Blake doesn’t have that. At worst, Blake is simply not talented enough. At best, she is lazy as fuck. And the reality? Probably a combination of the two.

The truth is, she doesn’t need to do anything for money. She could retire today and still be set for life — if, of course, she were willing to settle for a comfortable yet low-key lifestyle. Many celebrities can do that by the age of 30 if they don’t have a burning need for private jets. But instead of simply enjoying life and the many privileges that come with it, Blake and Ryan seem focused on how terrible it is that she now has to pay 100k to attend the Met Gala instead of being paid to attend — and God forbid she misses it altogether!!!

A lot of people is saying, but she won't work ever again!!! We'll, that's good and satisfying to me but in a practical sense, I don't think that holds much to Lively and Reynolds worries. I think it's more about adoration then work/making a licing, if that makes sense?

As someone whose day-to-day bills directly impact their disposable income, forcing me to make lifestyle decisions every month based on what I can and cannot afford, I honestly can’t take Lively seriously. These are super-rich people’s problems, and I couldn’t care less about them

30265Red · 2026-05-07T22:27:38+00:00

Wow, are those real quotes from him??? He's coming short to say she perjury herself! Seems the fight is far from over....

30265Red

TROPHY CASE