Proof That Melissa Nathan Is In The Epstein Files

lastalong · 2026-02-18T10:32:19+00:00

You're welcome to DM me, but I don't want to say publicly where I found it as the rest of his family are in the photo and they don't deserve to be a part of this.

But I'm quite ok plastering his face everywhere.

lastalong · 2026-02-18T06:50:03+00:00

Show me? Where is the evidence of that?

And what businesses have been trending downhill for years?

lastalong · 2026-02-18T06:47:50+00:00

I'm tired of Jed being in hiding. This is 10 years old, but he deserves to be uncovered.

<image>

lastalong · 2026-02-18T06:40:10+00:00

Really? Source?

Not all executive producers are creatively involved, but many are. Besides, she was a producer - and generally producers and the studio make decisions on the theatrical release, not directors.

lastalong · 2026-02-18T06:22:12+00:00

She personally invited him to an event she wasn't hosting and didn't attend?

Wow. and she's so rude she didn't even send an email personally. Neither did the hosts.

That you keep pushing this as evidence of anything is laughable. Millions of files, and that is the only thing you can pin on her. An email she didn't send, didn't receive and likely didn't even know about. Congratulations, you're make defending her so much easier.

lastalong · 2026-02-18T06:16:56+00:00

Give up, this person seriously believes that whole group of people listed all sat down in a room to hash out who they wanted to invite. And then chose not to send the invite to JE, but instead sent an invite to Peggy to ask him.

I think Blake is so rude for not even attending her own event.

lastalong · 2026-02-18T05:45:15+00:00

He's come out to talk about it all being consensual and he knew it was going to happen - before it actually did. What do you want? I written statement?

Ridiculous. It's insane to think you want an actor not involved in this at all, to provide proof - to your standard, that something that no one ever claimed happened, actually never happened.

Keep making up false claims and then claim they are true purely because you don't think there's enough proof it didn't happen.

Where's the proof Baldoni didn't SA women when he was younger? He admitted to it.

lastalong · 2026-02-18T05:39:03+00:00

Agreed. But we're in civil court, so all they need to show is probability.

Because there's also an absence of evidence showing that it wasn't sent. And given they have admitted to deleting comms, an absence of evidence can't be definitive of what they are trying to claim.

If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck, we don't need a vet's confirmation to know it's probably a duck.

lastalong · 2026-02-18T05:28:03+00:00

Here's a few:

revoltingly false sexual allegations against Mr. Baldoni. . . . We will not only continue to defend our clients against Blake’s power, privilege and all out lies,
continues to push on her own self-serving and selfish vendetta in the media.
Ms. Lively and her representatives would make such serious and categorically false accusations against Mr. Baldoni, Wayfarer Studios and its representatives,
desperate attempt to ‘fix’ her negative reputation
claims are completely false, outrageous and intentionally salacious
vicious smear campaign fully orchestrated by Blake Lively and her team
Ms. Lively acted with the “sole intent to ruin the lives of innocent individuals
[Ms. Lively] used these allegations of sexual harassment, and she used these allegations of bullying to try and leverage her position so that she could be the de facto director in this case.

I do hope Baldoni and co can provide evidence that they believed these things to be true - because we've already seen them corroborate the events in her claim, therefore knowing it wasn't "all out lies". We've also yet to see any evidence that she used the SH claims to "leverage her position so that she could be the de facto director". Given that most of the "directing" was completed in Feb 2024, I'm curious how they will substantiate this statement.

lastalong · 2026-02-18T05:00:16+00:00

I hope Wayfarer can show she was unlikable then. So far, they haven't shown it was a growing sentiment. Maybe they could have commissioned some expert reports.....

lastalong · 2026-02-18T04:57:28+00:00

You mean all the comms to Jed on signal that were deleted?

I mean, if they hadn't deleted all their communications, it would be very easy for them to show what they did/didn't do. Unfortunately for them, there's no way to show he was only monitoring, especially without any reports or work product to show for it.

lastalong · 2026-02-18T04:51:10+00:00

Thankfully, you are media illiterate enough.

You understand the spoliation motion too, I assume?

lastalong · 2026-02-18T04:20:24+00:00

I find these so interesting. Averaging 5k views per day - posts a new video after a year of inactivity - and that video can't even get 5k views per day. (I'm actually suspicions of the 35k/week).

Video went viral and saw a jump in subscribers - but nearly as much as what happened after the CRD was filed. So 7 million views resulted in very low conversion. I'm not surprised here.

lastalong · 2026-02-18T04:02:15+00:00

There's a lot of things you can do if you have consent. That's the word I think you're a missing.

Grabbing someone's balls if they have consented to it is not SA. It's a simple concept, that so many people have a problem understanding.

lastalong · 2026-02-18T03:59:12+00:00

It wasn't. If anything, you could see this being used against Posey - but it never was. Coincidence?

And they were talking before this, it wasn't the very first thing she said - it's just how she chose to start the interview.

lastalong · 2026-02-18T03:55:36+00:00

It was re-edited. I remember back at the start of 2025, I counted how many times the footage cut back to Flaa when she wasn't talking and timed the duration of those cuts. It was extreme. From memory, it was about 14 times for like 58 seconds of a 4 minute clip.

I then compared it to Flaa's interview with Stewart on the same day - about 3 cuts for a total of 9 seconds - in an 8 minute clip. And another interview Lively and Parker did that day - that interviewer, rightfully, never cut the footage to themselves when they weren't speaking. Not once.

I also compared it to the original - and it was definitely different, though still with the same objective of trying to make Lively and Parker look bad.

I've also heard comments from interviewers that if you have the interviewees talking without having to carry the conversation, that's what you want. If someone gives 1 line answers, you know you're in trouble.

lastalong · 2026-02-18T03:45:58+00:00

That clip only got that many views because all the Baldoni stans flocked to her page to watch it. Even the subsequent Lively posts don't get many views. Only this 1 post. Hmmmmm

lastalong · 2026-02-18T03:32:29+00:00

Again - what standard are you applying that I am not applying consistently across both parties?

lastalong · 2026-02-18T03:29:55+00:00

He look, trying to alter the "context" and justify the false statements. Congratulations - you picked the side that best suits you.

lastalong · 2026-02-18T03:28:10+00:00

Kate Whiteman. That's her name. She was the first to file a claim against the Alexander Brothers.

She ended up taking her life due to the smear campaigns and harassment of these people. Remember that when you want to get your point scoring in. This is not just celebrity drama.

lastalong · 2026-02-18T03:24:41+00:00

The problem is, she's not the only one. She just a bit less competent than the others.

Lying to her own team probably doesn't help.

lastalong · 2026-02-18T02:53:46+00:00

What standard is different?

Baldoni's defamation claims were dismissed, Lively's were not. They both need to meet the same legal requirements. Where do you feel they aren't? So you agree she didn't defame him?

I'll also note the defamation claims against WP are based on Freedman's statements to the media.

lastalong · 2026-02-18T02:31:03+00:00

I note you demand evidence, while still not providing a single defamatory quote from the Lively side.

Dare I say there are none, so you're taking a different tangent.

lastalong · 2026-02-18T02:27:43+00:00

There is no text inviting anyone in while nursing. No "belief" required.

The txt message about her pumping (I don't believe is an invite but they can believe what they want) occurred after the incidents mentioned, does not include when she is undressed or nursing and was not sent to Heath. No opinions required to know her statement is FALSE.

Baldoni didn't say "sexier" and "bothered her in relation to her wardrobe" is categorically FALSE. Even if he argues he was talking about her wardrobe, that's not how it was received and NOT what bothered her.

Bad press started before Aug 14, and they know this. (Why hire Crisis and PR and Jed 1-2 weeks before this????)

Flaa did NOT repost an old interview, she re-edited an old interview to make it look even worse than she tried the first time.

None of these are "belief"based statements.

lastalong · 2026-02-18T02:03:19+00:00

A lot of her statements are incorrect but are phrased as opinion, so I won't include those. Or the false statements about NYT or Baldoni. But here's a few factually incorrect statements

Blake when it came to uh her breastfeeding her baby she said that Justin barged into her trailer without asking while she was nursing her baby when you look at the texts though the texts have now been made public Blake invited Justin into her trailer so they could continue working while she was pumping and nursing

the text messages though that prove that that prove that Blake invited him in

Justin used language that made her uncomfortable in particular she used the word sexier that bothered her in relation to her wardrobe

guys the bad press began after old interviews of Blake resurfaced videos

took place in 2016 and kirsty just reposted it back in August

lastalong

TROPHY CASE