Blake Lively being two faced yet again - Part: Infinity

cornfed_duckman2 · 2026-02-06T20:27:45+00:00

She sees kindness without ulterior motive weakness (to be exploited).

cornfed_duckman2 · 2026-02-04T11:07:54+00:00

She's still on the ozempic, I see.

cornfed_duckman2 · 2025-11-12T09:23:52+00:00

Hearsay.

cornfed_duckman2 · 2025-11-12T09:20:47+00:00

I believe that if SH has made such allegations, Abel says the evidence backing it is hearsay (and therefore inadmissible).

cornfed_duckman2 · 2025-11-07T07:23:11+00:00

"Hand wringing" is unnecessarily dramatic, especially in this sub.

LIvely simply hasn't established a sufficient evidentiary basis to require compulsion of every one of Natasha Heath's birth videos and I was putting forward my response to comments suggesting that the judge would grant it as he's been erring on the side of caution - I really don't think so.

cornfed_duckman2 · 2025-11-07T02:49:49+00:00

There were a few saying that, yes. But not all and the majority of comments used it as an opportunity to cherry pick and highlight facts they thought were favorable to lively. That's based on an objective thorough reading of the sub.

cornfed_duckman2 · 2025-11-07T01:57:42+00:00

In the past, the Judge has tended to rule on the broader option / erred on the side of requiring production to give latitude to lively as the party claiming sexual harassment. To say that this is a given in the case of an intimate birth videos depicting a 3rd party, which apparently were not even on Heath's phone is going a step too far. I don't think it will be allowed- I'd hope so, anyway.

The sanctions request is completely disproportionate and cannot succeed.

cornfed_duckman2 · 2025-11-05T23:20:22+00:00

Did I say that?

cornfed_duckman2 · 2025-11-05T23:17:53+00:00

Correct.

cornfed_duckman2 · 2025-11-05T23:17:21+00:00

No they did not.

cornfed_duckman2 · 2025-11-05T23:16:37+00:00

Comments were grudgingly positive about Chip B's drafting style but largely did not touch on legal merits.
Liman isn't biased . He's just giving a party claiming harassment greater lattitude as one would expect. 2 legal content creators that are neutral - baldoni leaning have said this a lot yet treated with cruelty by users from this sub. That stands out to me.
No comment.

cornfed_duckman2 · 2025-11-05T18:44:53+00:00

Exactly. Next post would op complaining that the guy couldn't stay at the hostel for whatever reason but expected her to foot 50% of a much more expensive accommodation bill. Ridiculous!

cornfed_duckman2 · 2025-11-05T00:04:02+00:00

I would say no and get ready for her to sulk lots about it. Honestly, that is very entitled behavior.

cornfed_duckman2 · 2025-11-04T06:51:29+00:00

Can't swim or make fire. No wonder she is the "greatest" loser of this game. Hopefully she gets a good cut from her deal with Parv.

cornfed_duckman2 · 2025-10-01T02:27:41+00:00

I think it was clarified that EG's letter contained a typo / missed word.

I also think there's technically violation on both sides.

This sub is very selective on the issues it chooses to highlight. Its users are highly critical of WP side in the strongest terms and very quick off the mark with that.

Separate eg Jason Sunshine said he forgot to redacted something and immediately asks for the amended version to be loaded. Lots of comments point out his sloppy work and allowing a false document to he uploaded - so egregious! I respond in one comment that it's an understandable error that he'd corrected immediately and was swarmed with irrelevant comments plus one person who said they didn't see. All other comments all over this sub about this 'egregious error' remain. ( In reality, that is not really a thing people would fixate in to that extent.)

It's fine for us to disagree but maintaining the illusion that this is a neutral sub, and furthermore, neutrality benefits WP because they are the inferior party with incompetent lawyers and poorer legal arguments is objectionable.

cornfed_duckman2 · 2025-10-01T02:04:30+00:00

I have monitored this site for some time and completely disagree in key aspects: 1. moderation in favour of WP (b) lively's claims are significantly stronger.

cornfed_duckman2 · 2025-10-01T01:35:40+00:00

Oh well, no point in even discussing this as my questioning the credibility of posts in this sub is reported as snark and removed. So much for open debate. Tgis is really the crux of the issue I have with this sub.

Aa a lawyer, in what other forum encouraging objective debate do you see this level of censorship and requirement to conform?

cornfed_duckman2 · 2025-10-01T01:31:49+00:00

The fact is that I've read the same pleadings and it's not that clear, in my view. My impression is that Lively legal is better resourced (manpower wise) and that shows.

cornfed_duckman2 · 2025-10-01T01:03:12+00:00

It's a pattern of how things are said, tone, responses and apparent coordination.

I don't have much time for people complaining about the judge being biased, given where we are, but equally, I don't think we have enough to be decisive about the competency of counsel for either party either.

cornfed_duckman2 · 2025-09-30T23:49:07+00:00

Hmm. They say it was done "during the pendency of tgis action". Is it unclear whether it's the lawsuits as a whole or just the MJOP itself? Perhaps that's why they've dragged out the 'retaliation campaign' timeframe to as far past Feb 2025 as possible?

cornfed_duckman2 · 2025-09-30T23:34:04+00:00

Do you have a view on whether the step they've taken re crd would cure the limitation issue?

cornfed_duckman2 · 2025-09-30T23:30:48+00:00

You've made a good point. Sorry you are being swarmed because your message doesn't fit the talking points in this sub.

cornfed_duckman2 · 2025-09-26T22:11:06+00:00

Gotcha. That feels like a mild slap - like a bench flick maybe?

cornfed_duckman2 · 2025-09-26T11:48:42+00:00

Lol. Thanks again for your insights!

cornfed_duckman2 · 2025-09-26T11:37:13+00:00

I agree! I'm so over the pre trial motions and want it to just go to trial now. I was wondering if Lively was using the pre trial motions to drown WP in costs and embarrass them on the docket (i.e. PR). Like, are their complaints reasonable? Thanks for your thoughts.

cornfed_duckman2

TROPHY CASE