California Civil Code Section 47.1 provides legal protection for individuals who report harassment or discrimination by allowing them to pursue defamation claims against those who file retaliatory lawsuits, with provisions for treble damages, punitive damages, and attorney's fees. This law was designed to prevent wealthy entities from silencing victims through expensive litigation, enabling victims to seek accountability and damages without facing financial ruin from retaliatory legal actions.
Installieren Sie unsere Erweiterung an, um sofort in jedem Video zu suchen
Not Over ! Blake Lively Settlement And 47.1. There May Still Be A HearingHinzugefügt:
Hey guys, it's go do your own research.
I hope everyone's doing really good. I know I've got my glasses on tonight.
Um I know I'm a bit late on this settlement thing, but it has been a crazy week.
um not just in terms of I was not expecting this settlement at all but just going on in my personal life. Um so yeah, when I was doing my last live stream, I don't know if you remember, but I sometimes get phone calls. I got a phone call and I said, "Oh, my daughter's broken her arm."
So yeah, she was in Iba and she was in a lot of pain. She thought she'd broken her arm. So I had to go and meet her from the airport. We went straight to the hospital and she's broke her arm in two places really bad. Like I've never seen her in that much pain ever.
And so they did like they'd already done an X-ray. There was two breaks in IBA. So back in the UK, they said, "Oh, we need to talk to a shoulder specialist to see if we need to do an operation." So she's literally been incapacitated for the whole week with this like intense pain, like she can't do anything. So I've basically become a full-time carer. Um, and we're waiting for her appointment, which is going to be next week. So yeah, that was all going on and then obviously I heard about the settlement. I was like, "Oh my god, I can't believe it." Um, and then I got really sick towards the end of the week. So I've just been all over the place. Um, but I feel like I've got I've put together something. I've looked over everything that's going on and so that's what I'm going to do tonight. Basically that is the plan. So we have this thing called 47.1. So yeah I I see at the beginning you know of course Brian Freriedman was doing a world tour on YouTube saying that it was a victory. Um another thing that's really been interesting about this week is I've realized that people in my real life actually know about this [ __ ] they actually know about the case and people have got opinions on it and basically everyone that I have spoken to about it completely randomly because I've never ever discussed it with them before thinks that Justin Baldon is a loser and that because they made a settlement then that feels like they're in the wrong.
But before we get on to that, the first thing I was going to do was actually show the settlement. Let me share my screen.
Um, so what I've got uh lined up is I've got the actual details of the settlement.
I've got the interview with Michael Gotley. I've got an interview with Sig McCauley.
And uh oh yes, I've got the paparazzi video of Jamie Heath. That is so stage. Actually, I've also got I was looking at the Reddit pages to see what was going on and I just checked them before I came on tonight and I'm like, what the actual hell? like these people don't seem to realize this smear campaign is over.
But anyway, oh yeah, cuz of course Blake Liby went to the Met Galler.
She looks so stunning in that picture, by the way. I I I was just checking it before I came on here. I'm like, "Wow, she brushed up well in that picture."
Right. Where am I going? Oh, there we go. Yeah. So, I have that. Oh, I know what I'm doing. Sorry, I'm a little bit rusty.
Uh, wait, that's not what I want to do. I want to do that.
There we go. Okay.
So, yeah, I thought we could read through the statement together because we do facts over here. Um, there's been Oh my god, what else have I seen? I've seen uh one of the actors uh one of the Bahay bros sorry one of the actors the bit parts Justin's mate that was in the Bahayi group chats was going on chesty floor show and then he's gone on to other channels as well. I'm just like oh gagging gagging at these people how thirsty they are.
Um, right.
I am really not with it.
Oh, there we go. Sorry. Sorry.
Okay. So, this says notice of settlement. So, it's been confirmed 100% and joint stipulation.
Oh god.
did not need that to happen.
So it says notice of settlement and joint stipulation pursuant to a settlement agreement and through their un and through their undersigned council.
Blake Lively on the one hand and Wayfairer Studios LLC. It ends with US Movie LLC, Justin Baldoni, Jamie Heath, Steve Sowitt, The Agency Group, PR LLC, Melissa Nathan, and Jennifer Ael, on the other hand, collectively the stipulating parties hereby stipulate and agree as follows.
with respect to the above captioned action numbers.
Wait, I need to check something. One second.
the lively action and the wayfairer action collectively the consolidated action.
The stipulating parties hereby irrevocably wave any appeal of any orders in the consolidated action, including without limitation any appeal by the way farer parties of the order on the motion to dismiss.
Two, notwithstanding anything herein, to the contrary, the stipulating parties acknowledge and agree that Blake Lively does not release and retains all claims, rights, and remedies in connection with her pending motion for attorneys fees, treble damages, and punitive damages.
Under California's Civil Code section 47.1 in the Wayfairer action, the stipulating parties agree that the 47.1 motion is not withdrawn and remain pending before this court. Oh gosh, it's very slippery this button.
Um, the stipulating parties further agree that they hereby irrevocably wave any appeal from the court's determination of the 47.1 motion.
And three, the lively action is dismissed with prejudice as between the stipulating parties pursuant to federal rule of civil procedure 41A dated May 7th, 2026.
And there it is. Signed by uh Ellen Gafello and Michael J. got along with well on behalf of I should say all these people that we know only too well. We don't need to read them all out right now.
Um we have someone in the chat.
You feel sorry for Blake.
I'm sorry. Her ego is more massive than that dress she wore to the Met Gala last week.
How can you have a law to help victims get money if the perpetrator was not found guilty?
Well, funny you should ask that, Aussie.
We're going to actually get on to that right now.
Seems unfair. Well, life ain't fair.
Hate to break it to you.
Uh, right. So, next up, I have a definition actually. There it is.
I have a definition of the California code 47.1.
California civil code I should say.
Current as of January 1st, 2025.
Yeah.
And it says, "A communication made by an in individual without malice regarding an incident of essay, harassment, or discrimination is privileged under section 47.
A prevailing defendant in any defamation action brought against that defendant for making a communication that is privileged under this section shall be entitled to their reasonable attorneys fees and costs for successfully attending defending themselves in this litigation plus treble damages for any harm caused to them by the defamation. action against them.
In addition to punitive damages available under section 3294 or any other relief otherwise permitted by law.
This section shall only apply to an individual that has or at any time had a reasonable basis to file a complaint of essay harassment or discrimination. whether the complaint is or or was filed or not.
For the purposes of this section, communication means factual information related to an incident of SA harassment or discrimination experienced by the individual making the communication, including but not limited to any of the following. An act of SA an act of sexual harassment.
An act of workplace harassment or discrimination.
Failure to prevent an act of workplace harassment or discrimination, aiding, a betting, inciting, compelling, or coercing an act of workplace harassment or discrimination, or an act of retaliation against a person for reporting or opposing workplace harassment or discrimination.
as described in blah blah blah blah blah. An act of harassment or discrimination or an act of retaliation against a person for reporting harassment or discrimination by the owner of a housing accommodation that's not applicable. An act of sexual harassment as defined, an act of harassment or discrimination or an act of retaliation against a person for reporting harassment or discrimination based on any of the protected classes enumerated in du an act of cyber sexual bullying.
So that pretty much explains it really.
Let me just see.
So I hope that answers your question there, Aussie 5050, because that's the law.
That's the Californian civil law.
All righty.
So, anyone telling you otherwise is not being honest.
Uh, right. We can close that up.
Now we have an interview with or a sitdown with Blake Liel's lead litigator Mike Gotautle. So this was on one day ago and it's with this guy Matt.
I thought his name was said Matt Bologna, but it's Bellan.
And in case you don't know, cuz I know not everyone has read all of the evidence or the exhibits, he was in the exhibits.
He has a subscription newsletter thing kind of like industry.
I don't want to say it's a gossip column, but it's inside info on what's going down in the industry that you have to sign up to. And Melissa Nathan was talking about it. She was like, "Oh, yeah. This is my friend." And I saw his co-founder was blabbing about it being in the evidence on LinkedIn.
So, interesting that Mike got went on there. Um, he actually mentions that he's friends with Brian Bradman, I think. But anyway, I thought we could play this and I might do a little bit of reaction.
>> You are able to come on the show and talk about it. I have many, many questions about.
>> Okay, it's a bit quiet.
Sorry about this. This is on top of it all.
Um, the laptop decided to die as well. That was another thing that went mad this week. So, we had to get a new laptop >> about this case because these statements that went out, you guys claimed victory.
You called it a resounding victory for your client. Brian called it a quote total victory for Justin Baldoni. So, one of you guys has to be wrong here.
Give me your 30 secondond pitch for why your client won here because I understand no money changed hands during the settlement. So confirm that's accurate and then tell us why your client won.
>> Yeah. So that's the debate now, isn't it? It's like, well, it was a settlement.
Who won?
As I mentioned earlier, the general consensus I've been getting, and this is just random people, they don't know that I've even been talking about this for months. I was like, "Oh my god, I didn't think anyone knew about it." Is that you don't pay a settlement unless you have are guilty of something? You know, why would you not want to prove your innocence?
It's just like kind of logical really.
>> So, let me tell you why our client is happy, ecstatic with this settlement.
The reason that our client is happy with this settlement is because it gives her the power and the opportunity to pursue what we believe is her most potent and powerful claim in a way that is efficient, in a way that is final, in a way that the defendants have no appeal rights over and in a way that cuts off uh most of the noise that would be surrounding this case and lets it >> I really hope it does cut off some of the noise because Good evening, Kayla.
Thank you. Yeah, I sorry I don't want to make it into a like oh gosh, you know, like telling you all my problems, but it's just been a wild time. Like that's genuinely why I haven't been on here.
Like I really wanted to come on.
I just physically wasn't able to.
Right, let me get back to it.
Oops, I lost my place.
Oh, there it is.
This gets straight to the core issue of how the defendants retaliated against her. Specifically, the retaliatory lawsuit that they filed that called her a liar, that branded her a liar.
>> This was for when when she asserted the sexual harassment claim. He filed a defamation case against her, saying that she was lying. And there is a specific law in California that says if you do that, it's designed to protect victims and people that may be afraid of coming forward. There's a law that says if you do that and there is a favorable outcome that you could be liable for pretty significant damages, that's what you're suing under or that's what you're allowed to continue under.
>> Not could be, shall be, shall be liable.
Uh, and that's that's an important distinction. It's not one of these statutes where there's discretion for awarding the damages once the conditions >> tell him are met. And we believe the conditions have essentially already been met. And what's important about that, Matt, is that they filed a $400 million defamation lawsuit against our client, against Ryan Reynolds, against Leslie Sloan. They claimed that all of this was a lie. It was all made up and they were going to prove it in court. They lost that. Their attorneys got sanctioned for bringing it and now they're going to be held liable for compensatory damages tripled punitive damages and attorneys fees when we establish the elements of this 47.1.
>> You hope you were essentially settling for the opportunity to litigate further and that's not a guarantee. I mean you seem pretty confident but others have expressed some skepticism about whether you guys are going to ultimately be victorious here. Well, all litigation is a is a bet.
>> Oh, I think they put in a opposition.
However, I don't think there I don't think the judge is going to side with them. I just that's just my personal view.
>> This is just a really >> of course, but you guys gave up a lot in settling.
>> This is a really really good bet. And they gave up everything. So, they gave up the right to appeal that $400 million defamation judgment. They those those claims are now gone and they got nothing in return for it and they have waved their right to appeal. And you know this because of your background, appeal is one of the ways that defendants often frustrate plaintiff's ability to collect on a judgment. It can drag out for years. You could be fighting a fight on and on and on. You could have difficulties collecting the judgment.
And so instead of doing that, we now have a direct shot with no appellet rights. And this particular action involves all of the defendants. It doesn't just involve the three entities that were at issue in the Lively versus Wayfair litigation. It involves all >> um Aussie. Yeah. I I honestly don't think this is the channel for you. Okay.
I'm just gonna say like why didn't she go to trial then? He's literally explaining it. He's literally explaining it. The other thing is that the reason why they had all those pre-trial hearings is so that the judge can try and get to a settlement before they go to trial.
So, here we are, you know, but I just get the feeling that you're going to be one of these people saying, "Uh, well, it's because she didn't want to go to trial." Like, she did want to go to trial. I was actually really shocked that she didn't and that this happened so late in the game. But talking about the retaliation, I'm going to show a document in a minute which funnily enough, Kayla, you was talking the other night about the Princess Cruise Lines and I didn't know what you was talking about. Well, that's mentioned in this document. Um, but yeah, if you can get to the result you want, which is what she's got, she's got they're not allowed to appeal and they're going to pay her legal costs and they've had to go out there and accept that what happened was wrong and that she had the right to do what she did without going to the trial, then I guess that's a good outcome.
It's just frustrating that we didn't get to see all the evidence presented. Like, I mean, at first I was disappointed, but as the days have gone by and I've listened to this man, I'm like, "Yeah, okay. I can see how we got here." Anyway, let me let him carry on.
I'll get to the update on the cruise line.
I couldn't believe it. I was like, "Oh, that's what she was talking about." But yeah, so another thing is that just before this settlement happened, they uploaded a whole load of new documents, evidence, the um what do you call it thingy?
uh Dober reports, the expert reports, a lot of stuff got got uh filed just before the settlement announcement, which I think is very telling.
Okay, I was going to put him on a little bit faster as well cuz otherwise we'll be here all night.
Let's put him on 1.25.
all of the individuals and all of the entities. And so there won't be any issue here in satisfying a judgment. And there won't be appeals to drag this out and delay it. It means speed. It means efficiency. It means that this is over much much sooner than it would have been otherwise.
>> So what are you hoping to get here? Give me a best case scenario dollar amount that you could collect and from who?
>> So I I want to step back from that because >> this lawsuit has never been principally about money for our client. It has been about accountability. It has been about shining a light on this underground smear machine that retaliated against her for raising claims of sexual harassment and retaliation and has harmed so many other people. And what you've seen since Blake stood up and brought this lawsuit is evidence coming out in our case that has led to to information being used now in other litigations. Uh the Nicholas case, um the Amanda Ghost case. I was like, "No, he didn't say that."
>> Anyway, >> this underground smear machine has been exposed and people are now on notice uh that if they see uh you know, if you see a matt bells sucks.net website pop up, you're going to maybe have an idea of who might have put that website up.
>> Oh, there are many many candidates, including some of the litigants in your case.
>> Um but but but you know what? She spent tens of millions of dollars on this case. I mean, at one point there were what, five law firms working on her.
>> Um, the trial would have been grueling. I can see why she settled. Yeah, I agree.
I mean, she's already been through enough like and you know, so much evidence is now out there for people to fact check things. Um, what's what I find really interesting about this interview as it goes on, I might skip past this bit. He's he's just asking him uh why did you have so many lawyers? And Mike takes on every um question. He's a pretty cool customer, but he's like, "Well, they had a lot of liars, too."
And we obviously had to get all this evidence together and present it on the docket, which takes a lot of people, which is fair enough. Nearly impossible to get a part impartial jury. Exactly. I think as well, um, hate to say it, but it would have turned into a circus. Um, I mean, look, I'm not as emotionally invested in this as some people are.
Like I I understand a lot of some people were very disappointed by this result. I was like shocked genuinely cuz I wasn't expecting it. I genuinely thought it was going to go to trial but you know I just was like well it is what it is. I mean I can't be disappointed. Like I genuinely wanted to see Jed Wallace get ripped to shreds in the courtroom. Honestly that was what I was there for. But that could still happen. So, um, but yeah, I mean, we all know how dirty these, uh, Baldon side have been playing it, or Brian Freriedman's side, I should say, and Shapiro makes me feel physically sick.
>> Her behalf in this case, and her brand business is sort of in shambles. She is now I arguably made herself and exposed herself in a way that she wouldn't have had to deal with had she not brought this case.
There has been an absolute Strand effect in this case. You know, I know you're going to say it's all worth it, but >> I think personally I think it's the other way round. I think the stri and defect has gone on to Baldon for doing this cuz honestly if he never done this people wouldn't think badly of him and I'm talking about people that I literally have no interest in him whatsoever. I was really surprised a guy I know was like oh yeah I heard he was a scumbag or something like that. Do you know what I mean? So obviously in the general public of the UK I'm talking about as well, his reputation has gone down the toilet.
>> You got to understand when reasonable people look at this case and say why why did she initiate this case?
>> So I don't actually think the data supports what you're saying. And what I mean by that is what the data supports in this >> love this bit.
I just like the way he handles the whole interview honestly >> came out in expert reports in our case is that the reaction to Miss Lively bringing this lawsuit was positive when that sentiment changed and we >> amongst who amongst the her agents at William Morris. No, overwhelmingly in the public. And what that sentiment shows and this this is measurable. You know this there's ways you can measure online sentiment.
>> What it shows is that that began to shift after the Wayfair parties filed their def their defamation lawsuit and they went out on a press tour branding her as a liar in the press. That's the importance of the 471. That's why we have focused on that claim. That's why we have focused on holding them accountable for bringing a frivolous retaliatory sham lawsuit. It was a It was an improper lawsuit under California law.
They've been sanctioned for Rule 11 for bringing it and it had this effect. That effect was what the >> Right. They've been sanctioned. Did you hear that? Uh Jess, the mess.
Justin is a victim. Justin is a victim of his own vality. I'm sorry. Justin is a victim of his own vality. if he never brought this action, if he he never sacked off um Stephanie Jones because he didn't think she was going to be vicious enough. None of this would have happened. That's the sad truth of it.
Blake is hated in America. Well, she he just said the data doesn't support that.
So, you've been misinformed.
Okay.
The whole JB drama introduced what Bahai was to you has made your interest on how that's viewed. Well, yeah, I'm supposed to be doing an interview with an ex Bahayi actually. Um I don't know when we're doing it, but he got in contact with me or he made a post that I replied to it and so we've been in contact. So yeah, that's going to be a very interesting combo. Um, hey Manderly Lively is not hated and Bowone isn't a victim. He's been sued repeatedly for discrimination and IP theft. Thank you. Yeah, he's definitely not a victim other than being a [ __ ] No, he's a fake. He's a fraud. He's a fake if he carries on from now. I I did read something about he's got some new project going on with someone that's known for being an abuser. So that's all going to have to be out on the table now. Um if you still want to support him, fine. But he's a fake. His whole brand was fake and he doesn't give a [ __ ] about women.
end of >> California legislature sought to prohibit when it enacted section 471.
And so this is important not just for Miss Lively. This is important for everyone else. That law was intended to benefit because what people are supposed to be able to do, Matt. They're supposed to be able to file a complaint about what happens to them in the workplace with the administrative agency responsible for that without being afraid that some loudmouth lawyer is going to go out and file a ninef figureure defamation lawsuit against them. That's why the California legislature passed the law. That's why we focused on the claim. That's why we're going to put our energies into enforcing it, holding them accountable, and collecting damages on as a result of it.
>> Okay. But you do >> So, I have heard people saying that did Brian Freriedman not know about this thing? I I have no comment on that. Just in case for the people that have just joined the chat, I actually did show a definition of the 47.1 civil code. Um, at the beginning of the video, just so we're clear, she's covered. She's more than covered.
It covers sexual harassment, reporting sexual harassment, um, and retaliation against reporting.
>> Have to at least think about whether there is some other strategy to rebuild a reputation than extended public litigation that costs tens of millions of dollars. That's what I think people look at this case from a business perspective and think this was a circus and you probably did not anticipate the level to which Belon and his legal team would make this a circus but it became one and this trial had it happened would have been an even bigger circus. So, >> I just don't like the way this talking point.
It feels very to me like a warning to people like this is what happens if you dare to complain.
If you dare to mess with the status quo, that's what it feels like to me.
Like the lesson from this case, isn't it that you have to think really really hard?
>> Like who are you? Who are you to be telling him about the lesson >> is what I want to know >> hard before you initiate a case like this. If you are a major celebrity and you have brand businesses and a film career and you want that to be what people know about you, not the back and forth bombs being dropped, >> I think you got to wait and see what we accomplish in our 471 before you write the final chapter of that book. But what I would say, Matt, is I don't think it's an option to sit back and let people assassinate your character and reputation with untraceable digital smear campaigns. I think when you discover that somebody has done that to you, that bringing that to light and holding those people accountable um is important. And I think that what um Miss Lively's lawsuit has shown is that there actually is a way to do that. You can shine a light on it and that can have an effect on others. And like I said, >> if you have unlimited resources, for sure.
>> Well, one of the reasons that, you know, Miss Lively felt so compelled to stand up is that if they could do this to her, they could do it to anyone. and and there are lots of people that don't have the resources to stand up and fight back. And that's one of the points of section 471 and this law in California.
The legislature recognized that most people don't have the ability to fight back against a large defamation lawsuit when it's brought by a large employer or somebody with a lot of a lot of money.
And so the law is supposed to operate to protect against retaliatory lawsuits like this. Blake thought it was important to stand up for those principles. She still thinks it's important to stand up for those principles. That's why we've focused on this element of the claim. That's why we have moved to pursue this element of the claim. It is more powerful. It is faster. Uh like I said before, we think we've already met almost all of the tests in it. She just has to prove that she is a prevailing defendant in a defamation action. She's proved that.
She has to prove that uh she has to prove that she made her complaints about sexual harassment and retaliation without malice. We think we've already proved that. We think they've essentially admitted to that in the statement that they've made when they've said her claims deserve to be heard. We think other parts of evidence in the case also bear that out. So there's not much left to do um in this particular aspect of litigation except for quantify the damage that's been done to her. And I think that when that process unfolds, you're going to see a powerful tool of accountability that will shine a light for others that face this kind of problem. So, procedurally, how does this >> I don't like him.
Um, I think if Blake didn't grab Oh, get off.
What does that have to do with it? You think if Blake didn't grab Henry Golding's groin unscripted, I would have believed the rage was more of a victim.
I It doesn't make any sense to me.
Angela chat, I think we're attracting the wrong people right tonight.
She didn't grab anyone's groin in this um movie, nor did anyone accuse her of doing that. Nor did anyone ever accuse her of harassment or um discrimination, not at her business.
That's the point here. Baldoni has a history of being sued, of people taking actual legal action against him that they they were in their rights to do and him settling with them. He settled with uh Flores and the other one, Shane Norman.
The stories you're talking about are hearsay things you've read on the internet that were part of the smear campaign. I'm just so tired of it.
He is a creep.
He is a creep. But that's not the point here. The point here is he created a hostile working environment.
She reported it and she was retaliated against and that's protected under this civil code. So now they have to pay her legal fees plus treble or whatever it is continue. Are we looking at motions filed within the month? Like can we find can we get a resolution by the end of the year?
>> Uh it's it's unknown. So we had a fully briefed motion. both the both sides sent in papers on this. I think it was complete in September. Um and we in uh filing >> it was completed in September. That's how long they've known about this >> settlement uh papers earlier this week asked the court for um leave to essentially submit a a brief that lays out a process for this moving forward.
Um so it it may take a little bit of time for the court to sort out how it wants to um handle the issue, how it wants to hear evidence. Um the you know the defendants uh uh may want Anyway, there there there are certain there are certain uh uh there's certain posturing that >> Okay, I just want to say this. Yeah, I'm not used to having so many interruptions. You believe that the producer from Another Simple Favor uh said that Blake Lively sexually harassed someone? Yeah.
Really?
Was it on Popcorn Planet by any chance?
That may occur uh by the parties as to how procedurally this should work going forward. U but certainly the court's going to take some more evidence on the quantification of damages. Um, there may need to be a hearing. There may need to be some kind of a trial on this.
>> Oh no, another trial.
>> Let me just play that again. My ears pricricked up >> on this.
>> Oh no, another trial. Well, that is certainly a possibility in the 471, which is this is this is one of the problems with, you know, what happened earlier this week in in in jumping the gun and going out um you know, before the settlement had even gone onto the court's docket and going out and starting to talk about um you know, spinning the settlement in the misleading way.
>> Well, you knew that was going to happen.
Come on. I mean, the funniest part to me was that the settlement was announced the day of the Met Gala, just in time for Blake to attend the Met Gala. Was that strategic?
>> I mean, both parties uh that the date of the Met Gala is public information and both parties participated in the execution of the settlement agreement.
So, I mean, >> yeah. Well, but you guys have an interest in her.
>> Might want to ask the defendants that question.
>> No, I would ask Blake that question because she's the one trying to build back her brand business and the Met Gala is the most important fashion moment of the year.
>> Yeah. She's focused on living her life and moving forward. She's not focused on the ins and outs of, you know, lawyer battlesh and statements in the press and things like that. I mean, she >> um yeah, I think that her going to the Met Gala I while I have literally no feelings about the Met Gala. I obviously don't really approve about it. Um, just before I came on here, actually, I see that Salty Lynn has popped up out of the woodwork again.
Um, what's her name?
The hairdresser one.
She was talking about Blake Lively at the Met Gala. And I'm like, Salty Lynn, if you got to go Ellie Wend near the Met Gala, you would jump at it.
These people are just so annoying.
Um, she was the one that said she went to school with her and she was like at least two years above her or something.
But anyway, I just think that it's kind of like good timing that she got to go to it that night because I I know she looks Yeah, I'll see if I can find it. Um, I think she looks good at the Met Gala, but like, you know, one thing that I saw in the evidence, which was in one of the reports, is how much she gets paid to go to the Met Gala in 2024. She got 300K to wear Charlotte Tilbury makeup to the Met Gala.
Come on.
That's what this stuff is about. That's crazy money.
Crazy money. All these people like saying what she should do and what she shouldn't do.
All in the same industry. That's what this industry is about. How much do you think Justin got for sticking that needle in his spine?
The Met was mid. I agree. It was trash.
I I've not really ever been a fan of it.
Um but Jeff Bezos taking it over is just the ultimate in it's just sickening really. But 300k is 300k. I mean this is how these people make money. I don't think it's it's you'd be hardressed to find any ethical people to work with in the Hollywood industry. That's just how it is.
Um, you hope Blake can just get back to bringing to being a mom. Happy Mother's Day to all the moms. Thank you. We had m we had Mother's Day uh a while ago here in the UK, but yeah, happy Mother's Day to the US moms.
All right.
Let's finish this interview.
He >> is happy about this settlement because it allows her to move forward because it allows her to focus on this particular aspect of the case which is so very important to her uh and to others. She's not getting lost in the in you know these these back and forth um details of you know lawyers trying to posture who won or lost the settlement. She's very happy with it. Um we don't begrudge uh you know the other side if they're happy with it also. Uh, but what what I would want you to do is to really focus not on what the lawyers are saying, focus on what the parties said, focus on the parties joint statement. The parties released a joint statement. The parties said uh that Miss Lively's claims deserve to be to be heard.
>> I'm sure that was heavily negotiated.
What does that even mean? I mean, it's so it's so like both sides could use that to bolster their claim. You guys say it's an admission that something was wrong. They're saying it deserves to be heard, but it was ultimately never proven in court.
>> But Matt, what deserves to be heard means what it can't mean is that they were fabricated, right? It can't means that they were holy lies. You can't simultaneously say this deserves to be heard and it's completely fabricated and damaging to people's reputations. It means that they are admitting whether they like it or not or whe whether their lawyer likes it or not. They're admitting that her concerns, her claims were made in good faith, that they were genuine, that they were reasonable, even if they disagreed with them, even if they thought they didn't rise to certain legal levels. They're saying they weren't fabricated. And that's that's a very important statement. But more importantly, the parties in issuing this joint statement, this is very different from the, you know, from the garbage that you're hearing from uh from one lawyer in particular.
>> You could say Brian Friedman. That's okay. the the the parties asked everyone to move forward constructively with the respectful environment online. Parties, Justin Baldon, Jamie Heath, Wayfair, Blake Lively, all asked for that. And that's what we're focused on. That's what Miss Lively is focused on.
>> Who is the client for you? How much was Ryan Reynolds involved in the strategy of this case?
>> This this is this is Blake Lively's case. This is Blake Lively's uh litigation. She is the plainif.
Obviously, Ryan Reynolds got sued, right? I mean, they they came in and sued him along with Blake Lively for $400 million. So, there was a time when he was a party in the case that was, in our view, always frivolous. It was always designed to retaliate against Miss Lively by bringing her husband into the litigation uh we think uh in an unwarranted fashion. uh their lawyers were sanctioned for some of the claims that they brought against Miss Lively and reprimanded for bringing those claims.
>> That cannot be repeated enough. Like I feel like he's kind of shutting down all the constant talking points that we keep hearing over and over.
They were sanctioned for bringing that action. That's most of your audience may not know this, but that's that's not a typical thing that happens in federal litigation. Um, so, um, he was involved because they decided to file a >> You hear that? He said that's not a typical thing in litigation.
The biggest points were just so swept under the rug >> involved because they decided to file a improper retaliatory lawsuit to drag uh Blake Lively's husband into the fight because they thought that would suit them for PR purposes. That's why we filed the 471. That's why we filed motions for sanctions because this is not what you're supposed to do. It's one thing to defend yourself. It's another thing to go out and file improper retaliatory litigation that's designed to harass, that's designed to intimidate, that's designed to send a message to others that you better not make claims like this against me or else this is what'll happen to you.
>> Who who is your sense of the >> you know what he just said then as well?
Like I was looking earlier at there's an article um from the 19 80s when So, oh yeah. So, Kayla, I don't know if you saw this. Yeah. You know, the other day when we were talking about uh the case from 1989, well, someone put in the comments or scientist put in the comments that she thinks they're talking about Brian Freriedman. And I was like, "Oh, yeah. I didn't even think about that." So obviously um that lines up because that happened in 1988 I think. Um but the case was brought in ' 89. I think it was the end of 88 the actual event happened or the crime. Um and um the settlement was paid in 91 I think. But yeah, the fact that Melissa Nathan was brainstorming about that, it just made me think, h um but yeah. No, so I was looking at this article from the local press, the Barkley local press when it happened talking about the case, talking well talking about it wasn't really a case, I guess.
It was like uh it started off as an allegation and then um Brian Freeman had to resign his his role as the USC like he was some kind of head of the frat group or something. Um and then he basically left that college.
So there was lots of different articles um about it, but he made a statement back then saying exactly that, like threatening people if they said if they tried to do anything about it or talking about him. Yeah, Oz is freaking smart.
Oz and um Diane is is good as well at legal stuff.
Um but let me get through this interview.
But yeah, Brian's been Brian Frerieden Freriedman's been threatening people to speak out about this kind of stuff since back since the late 80s 90s >> decision makers on the Baldoni side because obviously he's got this very wealthy benefactor in Steve Sowitz who he's involved in a religion with and is a big backer in Wayfairer. Did you get the sense that this was kind of bigger than him? That there were others that were backing this litigation on the other side?
>> I don't know that others were backing it. I mean, I know that Wayfair Studios was the, you know, defendant that was the connective tissue between all these different individuals. Wayfair Studios owned the movie, put out the movie, profited uh immensely from this wildly successful movie. Uh way >> that part That's another part that everyone forgets.
>> Fair Studios reaped the profits from that. Um, so that's the >> talk about an own goal >> connective tissue between all of these individuals. I I have no unfortunately I have no insights into uh who calls the shots over there. I mean in the case we heard testimony uh that uh Mr. Sowitz was the money uh behind the operation and that Mr. Baldoni was the fame, but beyond that, I uh not sure I have anything for you.
>> And who gets sequel rights in this settlement?
>> That's that's not an issue in this settlement. The >> It's not at all.
>> No, that's not an issue.
>> So, that was never an issue.
>> That's never an issue. That's a a figment of people's imaginations.
>> Okay.
>> That was a Melissa Nathan question.
It really sounded like it. Oh. Oh, you know what? I was thinking I would love someone to interview James Bushka.
>> Uh, why were there five law firms working for Blake Lively?
>> Oh, yeah. Right. I don't think we need to do that bit >> of litigation not just that has happened in our case but in other cases related to this kind of group of people and entities that engage in this kind of um digital and public relations work.
>> What a mess >> to uncover that requires a lot of work.
It requires a lot of discovery. It requires filing motions to compel. We f we had to file more motions to compel in this case um than I can count just to be able to recover documents and text messages that they refused to produce to us. We won I think most of those I don't have the count in front.
>> Um I on this thing of the sequel like stranger things have happened in Hollywood. They've literally made sequels till something has to to things like Greece, um, Jaws, um, Fast and Furious. Like, they'll do a sequel. If they think they're going to make money, they'll do a sequel, but I don't think anyone will go and see part two of this. I don't, but you just don't know with Hollywood.
Someone might put up the money for it.
Someone might be that stupid >> front of me. But that that takes time.
It takes energy. And it's >> But a lot of emotions, a lot of your emotions were dismissed. And I thought maybe that was why some of the firms were brought in because there was some frustration over the length, the circus nature of this, the kind of way certain motions were heard and decided. And you're saying that's not the case.
>> No, that's not the case. Okay.
>> So, let's talk about what is still ongoing. This >> is that one of the ones that Brian asked you to ask me.
>> Uh, no. I just wondered.
>> Okay.
>> Um, he actually he said he likes you.
>> Oh, that's nice.
>> Yeah.
>> I don't know if you guys are going to be hanging out playing pickle ball after this, but >> if I get the invitation, I'll let you know.
>> Imagine being able to build an app with your name on it just by thinking about it. Very He's very quick.
A lot quicker than Brian.
>> Oops.
>> The Stephanie Jones lawsuit with her former colleague Melissa N.
>> So FYI, Bellan hates Stephanie Jones.
I think it was part of the Stephanie Jones smear. Nathan. Um, there was all sorts of allegations that, you know, she stole her phone, that they took, you know, that text messages were recovered and you guys were the beneficiary of some improper behavior. Is there a chance that Lively will be forced to testify in one of those cases and we will see her on the stand? Well, I I just want to back up because like it's there has been discovery in that companion case Ann about that phrase you used stole stole her phone. It's established in the record what happened.
I mean that >> he ain't letting nothing slide on this interview.
>> The phone was a company phone that belonged to Jones Works. And when when Jen Ael left Jones Works, >> literally said that from day one. Come on. Uh Bellan, what's your name?
Matt, come on, Matt. You You're smarter than that. You know how it works. He's about to tell him >> like would happen if um I left my law firm or if one of your employees over there left, they have to turn in their devices. That's how that happened. So >> that's that's not how she characterized.
But I I get what you're saying, but there is litigation still ongoing amongst these PR firms and there's a possibility that Lively and Baldon will be forced to testify if there's a trial.
And yes, there has been extensive discovery in this case, but it's much different to see this stuff in a pleading than it is to see people on the stand in court.
>> Sure. I mean, Blake Lively has already testified under oath at a deposition in this case. She sat for seven hours and answered every question that was asked of her truthfully and effectively. So, if she's called to testify, whether in that case or any other, she's of course going to comply with that legal process and she's going to testify truthfully, effectively, without fear. I mean, she has nothing to uh absolutely nothing to hide. She's put everything out there.
She has produced uh all of her documents, text messages that have been asked for in this case, they've been provided to the other side. Um, and you know, if that's the way that those cases evolve, then that's the way those cases evolve. smear campaigns. Do you feel like you've done anything to change the way that some of these PR people operate and the dark arts of shifting online sentiment and attacking people we via bots or any of the other kinds of allegations that were made in this case?
>> Just to clarify, we did not allege in our complaint that they attacked with bots. Um, they claimed that we claimed that they attacked with bots so that they could knock so that they could so that they could knock down that straw man and make us appear unreasonable. Um, >> I think that's a really important point.
But I'll tell you what, I wish it had made people smarter about understanding this stuff, but unfortunately I don't see any sign of it yet. That's one thing that maybe having the trial might have helped. What we said occurred in this case was that a digital manipulation or what they called a social manipulation campaign was launched and that there was in their own words a very specific method um that they were using for that.
I do think that we've uncovered a lot about how that operation works and some of the people who are involved in it. Uh as I mentioned before, there's now ongoing litigation uh in other cases involving the same people uh for engaging in the same type of um uh again in their words, social manipulation or the attempt to manipulate essentially algorithms that exists online that affects what people see.
Are >> you being serious?
Well, I will say, yeah, Ethan Klein, I don't really know too much about him, but one of the people he sued, which was Ryan Cavana, he's definitely involved in that ADL [ __ ] I'm just saying.
And he made a didn't he make a website against him like that he looks like uh Harvey Weinstein or something?
So he is I don't know fair game to a lot of people I would say when they sign onto their social media platforms. I think we've learned a lot about that in this case. I think the if the 471 proceeding is going to continue to develop some of that evidence and bring it to light. I think these other cases that you've mentioned will do the same thing. Um >> I think there's now an awareness in the general public that there wasn't before.
I mean those of us in the legal and media community, we've known about these tactics. I've been the subject or victim. I don't want to call myself a victim, but I've had that happen to me in the past. And now I feel like you ask the average person about the tactics that people go to to manipulate opinion online and people kind of generally know now that there's stuff going on behind the scenes of what you read. So maybe you guys played a a role in that.
>> Yeah, I I I think we did. I hope we did.
I know that that was one of Miss Lively's goals in bringing this litigation was to shine a light on what um what these kinds of companies and individuals are capable of doing. And it's not obvious to most people that when they open up, you know, their their Facebook app or Instagram or Tik Tok or whatever that what they're seeing is being, you know, essentially manipulated. Somebody's got a thumb on the scale and that >> everybody hates Amber Heard. Why does everybody hate Amber Heard?
>> Well, it's not just that. It's also just like why am I seeing a certain video pop up at at this moment in time? And we know now that one thing that can be done is um you can manipulate the comment sections of a post in a way that increases or appears to increase user engagement with it. And that then causes more people to see it.
>> Oh, Craig, are you listening?
>> I don't know who Craig is. Um, Ethan Klene joked about making a website, but a lot of the recent stuff about him is deliberately misconstrued to justify harassing him. You don't think he's completely innocent, but an easy target?
I mean, I would say I see a lot more stuff about uh his enemy Hassan Per than I do about Ethan Klein. I know there is a lot of negative videos about Ethan Klein.
I don't know. I just Yeah, I I can't really say. Just have to go along with what you're saying there. Um but he definitely inserted himself into a lot of a mess along the way. Um what was I going to say? He's a bit of a male. He's a bit of a male Alexa Nicholas.
Um, right. I think this interview's nearly wrapped up.
>> We have to get the comments to be nicer on the town >> town bots.
>> No, I I I I think what you see actually is it it it it maybe doesn't even matter if they're nicer as long as it's more um and if there's more engagement and more active engagement within the comment section, suddenly that post is showing up in a lot more people's feeds. And if that's done in a sophisticated coordinated manner and it's done at the same time you have people out placing stories and backgrounding and influencing reporters, you can really have an effect on a narrative in a way that I think a lot of people haven't appreciated before. And if if that's what um our case does is it alerts people who are involved in these kinds of real-time situations what to look for um then we're very happy with what we've accomplished here.
>> It's also kind of a check. I feel like this stuff was going on underground behind the scenes and then exploded in >> with your pal >> public and it might cause these crisis PR people from engaging these consultants the next time around or putting all this stuff in email where they're going after someone to try to smear them and maybe say, you know what, I saw what happened in that case. I'm just not going to go there. Whereas before it's like you do whatever you got to do to help your client or the next guy is going to get the job. Maybe there's a shaming factor >> or maybe it encourages people to engage in all of the perfectly reasonable legitimate ways to boost visibility of a message, right?
>> Yeah. Whisper campaigns. What happened to oldfashioned shit-talking? You know that that still works. What I'm saying, Matt, is uh there are perfectly open, transparent ways of carrying a message, right? A press release, a statement that gets issued, having a conversation in an interview. There's there's lots of ways of doing that. And there's there's lots of ways of doing it in ways that aren't traceable. And and what people might think twice about uh moving forward is is it really worth it to um you know try to manipulate the comment sections of a Tik Tok post or try to manipulate the upvote or down vote count in a Reddit forum? Um is that is that really worth it in order to score a few extra points in terms of likability online? Um, I'm not sure it's worth it and maybe we've uh I hope we've sort of sparked that introspection and conversation and I hope that what we continue to do will do the same.
>> I don't know that I am convinced that you guys are the winners here. We just have to see how this plays out.
>> Right. So that's him. Um, yeah, I was going to say about Ethan Klene. Um, he was the Reddit king. Um, so I don't know. Yeah, Reddit is a strong theme of all of this smearing.
Um, the internet can ruin you if you allow it. Make all cases much more complicated.
I mean, I still feel like, okay, talking about this smearing thing. Yeah. Like people saying they've learned lessons, right? Okay. So, just recently I see a whole load of stuff about Katy Perry.
Now, I don't know whether what was being said about her was accurate or not, but it just felt a bit like everyone just immediately jumped into it. Didn't really have a lot to go on other than it was one person saying it and then it was like someone else said it, but then I heard that the club owner was like, "That's not what happened." So, I don't know. I just don't see people taking their time with stuff, which is what they should do. It's just this rush to like jump on every single story that I think is so toxic.
Um, that would be a good lesson to come out of this, especially amongst the communities that are supposedly supporting uh Blake Lively. I'm just saying.
Anyway, so this was the exhibit that I was going to quickly um jump to, which is very relevant to what a lot of what he just said. So, this was the um Betty Buzz, Betty Booze uh November 2024 confidential report. So, what I gathered was that the people that run her Betty B companies, yeah, they didn't really know uh about the ends with us stuff. They just knew that something was going on and then they found out like later on.
So that was kind of what alerted uh I think Blake Lively to this being a real problem. So I thought this report was really interesting and also because if we scoot down a little bit skip down a little bit we've got here Princess Cruises.
So apparently she had a deal with Princess Princess Cruis's um lined up and they noticed that there was something going on with her brand reputation.
Anyway, um, so it says the Betty Bee's brand Google search interest significantly decreased after the start of the negative PR beginning in August. So, uh, okay.
I guess these are spikes and these are dips. So, it's considerably gone down.
That's at the end of 24, I guess, after the negative press starts coming out.
Look, that's really like off the scale.
Um, I wonder what the peak was.
BL Instagram post. Oh, okay. So, when she posted about it, it got a lot of interest.
Betty booze and something.
Bollid bll spot. What's that?
Amazon Prime Day Instagram post. Oh, no wonder she was at the metall.
Um, okay. So, these are pretty definitive.
Before mid August, Betty Buzz was growing strongly on Amazon compared to last year. This trend has reversed since and the brand is declining versus prior year. Significant is what I meant. It's pretty significant differences here.
Look, that's crazy.
Um, now it's July 1st to August 15th, 23 24.
Yeah. So that's before obviously it ends with us came out.
Um mid August is when sales of Betty Buzz went from impressive to y growth to rapid decline on Amazon.
retail stores took a hit.
Um, significant slowdown in sales. So, well, the I mean, this is where they must be getting these figures for how much she was suing for.
It seems to be a pretty heavy impact on her brand. Looks crazy. Look at that.
23 to 24.
Um, negative PR has created heightened scrutiny from buyers who are showing less goodwill. Kroger, Princess Cruises, and Bright Line. The buyers from Kroger, Princess Cruises, Bright Line have expressed concern about the recent noise in the press, stating they will be closely monitoring our sell through.
Kroger is the number one grocery chain in America carrying both alk and non-alcoholic.
Not currently carrying buzz, but launching booze.
Bright line is the rail route that operates between Orlando, Florida, and Miami, Florida. Betty Boos and Bright Line were in discussion for a marketing partnership.
I think Princess Cruises were going to be carrying the uh hair products or am I getting confused? No, they weren't. Sorry. Ignore me.
And we're going to be carrying the drinks. We're talking about the drinks here. This is just the drinks.
Um, okay. So, these are pretty comprehensive.
We don't need to look at all of it, but anyway, this was stuff that hit.
Look, negative comments have plagued our social media comments.
I mean, speaking of negative comments, another smear campaign that you know that anyone anyone that watches my channel regularly knows that I take a big interested in is Michael Jackson.
Yeah. So, there was a new um a documentary that came out today on 60 Minutes Australia with featuring the um featuring the Casio family. Yeah. Oh my god, it is so heavy. I I just don't know how anyone can carry on defending this guy after that.
But one of the journalists from 60 Minutes made an Instagram post saying she had received crazy communication from Michael Jackson fans, her daughter's school, her her daughter uh her daughter, her children.
Um really wild insane communication from people cuz she's doing her job a journalist.
You're assuming the snark mods is just him suing the snark mods is justified.
It's a good chance they're behind the CPS call. Not to mention calling him a genocide level.
Okay, fair enough. Fair enough. You don't want to be [ __ ] around. Well, the Reddit mods. Um, yeah, we were talking about that the other day with that guy that got fired or got booted.
Um, you went to a concert and you're and you're waiting for actual proof, not just hearsay. Yeah. I mean, I don't think I've met Katie. I've seen Katie Perry. I know she was married to Russell Brand.
Um, she used to follow me on Instagram.
Actually, I got a lot of cudos for that, which is just so weird, but it was nothing it was nothing to do with me. I mean, it was just one of those things.
like once she liked one of my posts, it was incredible how many it was like the most liked post I ever had. Um, but I just haven't heard negative things about her being in that industry. That's my honest take on it.
the person who made the claim. I've heard a lot of stuff about, you know, I just think, you know, it's like people are still very much showing, well, I like this person, so I think it's okay to say about her, but I don't like this person. So, it's like, well, maybe you just need to be the same about everyone, you know.
Um, Faith Philosophy is starting a series on MJ's predilictions, deconstructing the legend status he has. I did see um there's a channel I kind of watch occasionally called Cam something or other. He did a negative critique of the film basically. Well, it was fair. He just said, "This isn't a good uh this isn't respectful of Michael Jackson's legacy. Like, this is a poor film. It's like an advert. It's like just promo songs. They've really not they've done a disservice to him as an artist. They haven't shown his pain.
They haven't shown his struggles. They haven't been honest about it." And he then did another video today talking about some of the comments he got. I could do one myself on the comments I get on my Michael Jackson video, which is doing pretty well. Like the views are are doing pretty good. Um, mainly supportive comments I get, but you just get all these crazed fans saying the same stuff like they have every single talking point, nothing relevant, nothing relevant to what's being discussed. It's just a kind of blindness, blind tunnel vision about him.
They just repeat the same things over and over. A little bit like what we've seen with some of the Baldon comments.
Right. I was going to watch this video, which is cigarette so we can get rid of what did you think of Mike? I thought he did a good job there. I thought fair play. He went and spoke to I mean I guess where do you go?
Like I don't know if he wasn't inundated with offers or why he chose that particular podcast to go on but I think he answered all the questions pretty well.
California law has a statute the 47.1 which is intended to fit this exact situation. You'll remember that during this case, uh, the Beldoni parties and the Wayfair parties sued Blake in a $400 million lawsuit for defamation. They did that based on the fact that she had raised claims of sexual harassment in the workplace. And this law is intended to prevent that kind of false and misleading type of lawsuit that is used to silence people who raise issues of sexual harassment in the workplace. So, it really has an incredible amount of strength. It provides for three times the damages of what would be awarded by a court if you're found to have violated this provision. It also provides the court the ability to award punitive damages, meaning a punishment on top of the treble damages, the three times damages, as well as attorneys fees. So, it really has a lot of strength. uh the California legislature felt that this was really important to pass this kind of legislation.
So what will be presented to the court are the damages that arise arise out of that defamation lawsuit. So the reputational repair costs, all of those issues that will be presented to the court. So the court's going to uh likely provide some supplemental briefing for the parties. You may remember that there were over 19 amikas briefs filed in support of Blake's motion by various um organizations throughout the c country.
And so the court will have all that before it and will likely um potentially hold some sort of a hearing where he can um hear that information on the damages.
So So a lot of this stuff has been forgotten. Like I had forgotten about all those organizations at the beginning that wrote those amicus briefs, not like the dodgy ones that were written on.
Also, I think people forget this woman was Virginia's attorney against Jeffrey Epstein. Like, can we have some can we put some respect on her name? Come on.
And formerly Prince Andrew. As part of the resolution, um, both parties waved any right to appeal. So, this will be a final judgment, a final decision before this judge. He will make the final ruling and that will be it. There will be no, you know, appeal or sort of lengthy process thereafter. The judge can allow a variety of things. the judge will have the briefing of the parties before it um and all of the supporting briefing of the various organizations who wrote in support of Blake and and this law and then the judge can hear testimony from from a variety of the parties if the judge so allows um as well as information from expert witnesses about the damages. So the judge will really dictate how this will proceed. The judge will dictate what evidence is allowed to be presented at that hearing. So he can ask for information from the expert witnesses.
He can take testimony from individuals and he will make an ultimate decision as to what um gets introduced at that evidentiary hearing. This suit is about so much more than money. I mean Blake has been so brave in this moment to stand up and fight back not only for herself but the other women who she observed in that workplace who were being sexually harassed. So she has has forged this path ahead and is leaning into this law which is such an important law for all people who are victimized in the workplace in this way. Uh this is a law that should protect them. So she will be one of the first to have this law litigated in the court in New York.
And so it is about much more to her. I think you're going to see great things from her in the future in this space of trying to build these types of laws in other jurisdictions. Um, you know, she she had to weather a a significant battle, a horrific digital retaliation campaign. Um, and and because of that, she has brought a lot of light and accountability to this space. And I think you're going to see great things from her in the future. Right now, she's working. Um, >> I do have to say like regardless of what I think about her as a person, I cannot disagree with what she just said there.
Like I have respect for what she did and other than the Instagram post she made like when was it? It was like literally seems like just over a week ago like when I really thought we were going to trial.
I don't think she hasn't really spoken about it too much. Like she's just been I don't know getting on with it in New York to help pass the legislation on the Speak Your Truth Act um which has been in the works working with advocacy groups to try to move that forward. And I think that will be something that you will see a lot from her in the future.
Uh she really had to fight so hard in a way that frankly no nobody who reports sexual harassment in the workplace should have to go through what she went through and she's very determined to help others as she moves forward. We are going to be in court um presenting the these issues under this really powerful statute. And the >> I just remembered as well the judge will be able to decide >> handy signal what those damages look like. Um so this is really a powerful way for us to finish this piece of legislation because it fasttracks this really critical statute and allows Blake to present that information to the court for a full decision.
Baldoni, the Wayfair parties, Steve Sowitz, Melissa Nathan, Jen Ael are all jointly and severally liable for these damages. So, whatever the court awards, they will all be responsible for. So, he is not out of this case.
So, the judge will dictate what that hearing looks like. Uh, he may allow testimony from witnesses. Now, this is Blake's uh case or the statute addresses the damage that she suffered. So he very well may be able to call her for that information if he sees so that that should be done.
>> Okay, great.
>> Oh, okay.
That's the end. Um MJ is both an innocent child and mega genius.
I tell you what, after the amount of research I have done into him, watching the 60 minutes today, I he's I just find him absolutely sickening. I just can't even look at his face anymore. I think he's disgusting.
Um, however, I still do sometimes still get his songs in my head. Um, especially when I'm doing the Michael Jackson research, it's impossible not to. Um, but I just find this idea of like the cover up and reinventing him as uh innocent and as a framed victim. I just I find it abhorent honestly.
Okay, what else was I going to show? Oh yeah. Oh yeah.
So, that was on the one hand. On the other hand, we've got this very staged uh I don't even know what it is. It's on this website. Um, Meow.
I heard someone say something about it was like you could hire these people or something.
to do paparazzi.
But look, well, this is what I want to know, right? Where is he coming from?
He's coming from here.
He did he come down the ladder and then he goes to get into his car over here, right? Let me show you.
Jamie Heath. I don't think Jamie Heath's ever been paparazzi in his whole life.
>> Heath, I wanted to ask you, are you pleased with the settlement with Blake Lively?
>> How you doing? What's your name? My name is Jeff.
>> Hi Jeff. How you doing, sir?
>> Good.
>> All right. All right.
>> Are you are you pleased with the the settlement?
>> Um I'll tell you what, we are pleased with the fact that um this stage of this is now over and um that's what I have.
>> How does Justin feel about it?
>> Um Justin's uh always going to be wonderful.
>> What's Justin's next project?
>> Um I tell you what, I got a lot of work to do. Okay.
>> And I know you're doing your job. I appreciate you. I don't have anything for you right now.
>> Sure thing. All right.
>> What? Tell me your name again.
>> My name is Jeff.
>> I wish you all the best, man. Doing your job and I appreciate it.
>> Thank you, Mr. Heath. Have a good day.
You see what I mean?
It's like what comes up as judged and I don't believe it. Um, yeah. I don't know where he was heading there, but I find it a little bit unbelievable that he was in a rush.
But I mean, they didn't even think about it. It's like, yeah, we just look like you're getting out of the car and then going to your car. Like, it's really bad.
Um, anyway, I don't know why they did that.
I have no idea. But speaking of which, I'm going to log off in a minute. Um, I just out of interest had a look at this Reddit site earlier cuz I mean, this thing's meant to be over, right?
I don't see any sign of it.
We have two posts from Natasha Heath's Instagram about Mother's Day with the flipping birthing picture, which is a it's a picture.
I don't know.
I just can't with them.
NY post article. Of all the attention seeking looks at the Met Guy of the presence of Blake Lively was the most shameless. Really? Really? You don't think Jeff Bezos is the most shameless?
Mr. Actual Friends with Epstein?
Um, Ryan Reynolds and Blake's family still not coming out and saying anything in support of her despite the case now being settled. Why should they? That guy just said it all for them. It's It's just Oh.
It's just being negative for the sake of it.
Stop trying to dox me.
Um, oh my god. One second.
I just hate this thing sometime.
Right.
It just logged into a random account.
I knew this was a mistake.
It's the curse of Reddit.
You was a big fan as a young lady but had a predator in your own family.
Your experience has made you a feminist.
Okay, good.
I think yeah, I don't really like to label myself, but I definitely try and stand for women. I respect Blake Lively for standing up for women's rights in the workplace in Hollywood where we've had the Me Too movement.
You know, we supposed to have had change. Justin Baldon made content in support of the Me Too movement.
He made out he was an ally. He clearly wasn't. She reported it and we've had all of this. It has been crazy. It's been unprecedented that she's received this much of a backlash. I genuinely I genuinely think that.
Um I don't even think that should be a feminist. It's just being a decent person that's saying, "Actually, you know what? This shouldn't be happening."
They act like Blake showed up wearing a fur coat made of puppies. I can imagine that there was a lot worse outfits than what she was wearing. I actually thought she looked beautiful.
Her face and everything flawless.
Absolutely faking flawless. Like, she looks better. That is one of the best pictures I've ever seen of her on that red carpet. I'm not too sure about the dress. I love the colors, but I'm not really a fan of the style of it, but I'm not a fan of the style of any of the dresses on there. Um, all right.
Where was I? Right. So, they've not said anything in support.
What's this? Who's this?
Uh, these are all new. Look, two hours ago, settlement nearly didn't happen.
Blake Lively and Justin Maldon settlement nearly collapsed over the one cause. Naughty but nice Rob. Who the hell's he? He's new. God, Zack Peter.
Oh god.
Oh, I meant to put it on. I always put it on new so I don't have to.
Where is it?
I put the new filter on because otherwise you get Zack Peter floating to the top. Um, I noticed Brian Freriedman didn't go on Andy Signal's channel that I know of. By the way, someone told me in the comments of my Andy Signal video that I was obsessed with Andy Signal because I made I'm not even sure how many videos it is.
That's the only me video I have made just about him. No, two I've made. One was about the girl that uh he suggested get onto Only Fans and downloaded all her pictures and made it into a folder on his computer.
Um but that still was talking about Only Fans as well. I didn't that was when I really found out how bad he was. I didn't really know up until then. Um, it was from doing my interview with her.
But yeah, um, I found the comments interesting. I just think a lot of these people that have been watching his content don't use their brains genuinely.
Was Brian Freeden sanctioned? Yes.
There she is.
She looks good. Come on.
Come on.
Shy wishes.
Yeah, it's not my cup of tea, but she looks good.
They've all come out to say something.
Two angry men, TMZ, Blake, Lively lost.
Well, you can think that. You can think that.
Um, they're in jail, both of them.
Where Blake Lively, Justin Baldon careers go next? Who wants to work with people that go this far?
Well, who doesn't want to work with them?
I'm sorry. What's the point? I said this all along. What's the point of having these laws if you're not allowed to um enforce them?
We still have drones. Able on the table.
Blake Lively and Ryan Reynolds have closed out their bot farms.
Listen, I have said all along that this whole argument about bots. I know that the people that comment are real. They are very real.
Um, bot technology and all accounts are definitely used to enhance um upvoting and engagement. That's been an admitted fact.
It was some of the evidence that was going to come out in relation to uh the other clients they had. And you know what I don't feel has gotten enough attention as well and like something I focused on for months and months and months and months is Melissa Nathan's other mainstream clients Jake and Logan Paul. These these are influencers to children. just not enough has been said about this, how they're using this spyw wear and um uh these dark techniques against people that are trying to protect children.
It's just really a serious issue that should be getting a lot more attention. It just hasn't.
Um, in my opinion, God, I just saw this earlier and I'm like, look at that.
Hey, John Gagger. Complete loss from Blake Lively. And the settlement spin cross the line and is beyond the pale.
Total defeat.
Blake's second take. How Blake Lively is masterminding huge career comeback after being Hollywood's most hated. Again, this is in the scum.
He just said the data doesn't back that argument that she's the most hated person at all. He said that a lot of people have been showing respect for her.
She's going to have a quiet life now.
That's what we just watched.
Um, Blake Lively's upcoming project.
There are none.
Hollywood is well aware that she is a liability. I mean, God, how dare she put up with all that sexual harassment? My god. I mean, not put up with it. Sorry.
Unreal. Unreal what we're witnessing that people are just going along with this.
Or is it me? I don't know.
Blake livey can't and stoke can't and won't stop lying. This time it's lying about never alleging use of bots.
You know what I think people don't pick up on is the fact that bots are on these platforms.
They are used by other users. They are used by the platforms themselves.
So the point is you can't really prove who the bots are paid for by. They're just there.
They're just there. You know, once you create an account, it's pretty hard to get rid of it.
Is this the biggest smear campaign?
So, oh my god. When there were initial theories that Lively never wanted to go to trial and her main intent was to change the narrative against Justin with the lawsuit and the New York article.
Her main intent was to change the narrative against Justin with the lawsuit and the New York article. I don't think that was her main intent.
The article was titled, "We can bury anyone inside a Hollywood smear machine." There was clearly one side that sacked off their longstanding publicist and hired a dirty lying crisis PR that works for Drake, Jake, and Logan Paul.
Um Sasha Baron Cohen allegedly uh yeah he did that. That was what the article was about.
What she did it was throwing light on that.
She also filed a CRD complaint.
When I started researching Justin Malone, I couldn't find anything negative about him. So to say that there was a smear campaign, show me the evidence of that smear campaign other than that article, which I don't even think really was about him really.
Um, Blake Lively will always be a mean girl.
Don't I suppose you mean tonedeaf bully?
Blake Lively snaps at her cousin and helpers at the Met Gala 2026. Oh yeah, I saw that earlier. Well, look where we This is what I'm talking about. This is in the Daily Mail.
I just don't get it. Yeah, these people that post this stuff, did you not see all the messages about how the Daily Mail operates?
Oh.
Oh god, they sent a post.
This is all since I've literally since I've gone live cuz I didn't see any of this previously.
Oh, they're dissing um cigarette.
Oh, crazy days and nights.
Jesus.
Okay, I've really I've had just about enough of this. I didn't think it was this bad, but I feel like this smear campaign is never going to end.
Michael Gotley went on a podcast and lied, claiming Blake Lively did not explicitly accuse Justin of using BS.
Both her and Ryan Reynolds did.
I can't.
He has an entire machine and team and bots prepared for this. None of us do.
Not even Sony because none of us had anything to hide.
That was in August 2024.
Wasn't in the lawsuit.
I mean, I know this is a text message that was in the lawsuit, but it wasn't in the complaint. I don't think they actually showed a text from Melissa Nathan, which I've literally brought up so many times from the start, talking about these troll farms where she says, "We do not use bots. It's AI algorithms and something the other team are doing." She's telling Justin, "We do not use bots." They That was in the original article.
It's just a bit It's just a bit crazy.
Anyway, oh god, it's just I I find it disgusting. I'm sorry. I really do.
Oh, I'm sick of seeing her.
This is This is Blake Lively being a bully.
Oh, a positive article.
Man secures important settlement for Blake Lively.
Adam Munchin.
Look, he's going on a flipping world tour. This is the most fame he's ever had.
Have to go. Was an eye opening chat for me. You were a flip flipper on this case, but I see that uh Sorry, my thing's in the way.
The media absolutely influences you. It influences everyone. We're none of us are immune.
Unfortunately, I I'm constantly checking myself about stuff like, you know, we're only human at the end of the day, but uh this there's stuff on here I just find extremely unhealthy. Right. Before we go, we're going to look at celeb legal drama.
what they're saying. They've got the same Natasha Heath Mother's Day post.
I think it's cringe. I think it's cringe AF to put that post up after everything that's been said about it.
It's lacking in taste. Very poor taste.
Um Oh, the Met Gala blah blah blah blah blah.
an average Justin Baldon supporter.
I don't really find that funny.
Don't know what that's about. I just think anyone who uses AI as well, just ignore.
Ignore.
Psycho arsonist Ryan Reynolds admits to burning down.
His school as a child with Morin Callahan. Serious XM. I'm like, just look at the SS.
You know what, guys? You know what I said the other day? Yeah, I did a deep a little bit of a deep dive on um Rebel Wilson.
Another one.
Everything that comes out of her mouth, it's not serious.
Proboni content creator Lethal Lauren.
Oh yeah, I saw this earlier. Reveals her connection to Justin Baldoni.
So yeah, she had um Freriedman on.
Was it Freriedman or the other one?
I spoke with my friend Aaron who has always had kind things to say about the Baldon family. Sorry for the bad webcam audio. It's all I had. This is not the full interview.
as we talked a lot about her film, The One, which I loved seeing at the ICFF.
Oh, you didn't see that. Sorry.
I thought it switched.
That's her tweet.
I mean, whatever. Honestly, that's a bit of a whatever.
By this time, I feel only people with accounts older than two years should post about Lively verse Baron case. The bots are getting out of hand. Look, I mean, I have seen people saying in these comments exactly the same thing I just said. Oh, well, I made up uh a separate account because I don't want this associated with my main account. That's what people do. That's what people in these comment sections do. You know, that's not a bot. It's just a all account. Um, some people have a lot more than others. Some people literally make a new one every day.
Rebel Wilson is a fantastical liar who made up terrible allegations against multiple people.
Court told Rebel Wilson. Oh, so I did watch the closing arguments on Rebel Wilson.
Um, and yeah, we need to we're waiting to see how that's going to go. Um, but I find it very interesting that people accept that Rebel Wilson is a liar.
Uh, okay. So, we've got MJ's post about the settlement, which I think kind of I covered everything that she talked about in regards to why they come under 47.1, even though I'm not a liar.
Um, hate drip from the tongues of Megan Kelly and Morin Callahan. Right. I've not heard of Morin Callan before, but I just feel like this is just going to go on and on and on.
Justin Baldone feels like he has a fresh start in Nashville and is focusing on moving forward.
The Onion. I don't know anything about them other than I heard that they bought Alex Jones's channel. So, that says a lot.
Yeah, just seems like a lot more propaganda here.
Blake Livey's lawyer confirms that Justin Maldoni sent the process server to Taylor Swift's house in today's episode of The Town. Oh, I missed that bit.
Um, oh, it was after I clicked off.
In my view, everything else that had to do with Taylor Swift in this case was an attempt to drag Miss Lively's friends and all of the circus into the case to distract from the real issues.
Absolutely. He got arrested jumping over the fence into her fiance's compound in Kansas City. Crazy.
And she Melissa was moaning about being served during the fires.
Um, okay. Blah blah blah.
Uh, I think I've covered everything.
I've had a text say I got to go and help and my caring duties are required. But yeah, I I think that's about it for tonight. I hope everybody enjoyed it.
Um yeah, I will come back if there's anything important to say, but at the moment I doubt if they there will be. Uh there are still other subjects that I talk about, so I definitely will still carry on talking about them and doing my own research.
Have a good night everybody. Thank you for joining. Bye.
Ähnliche Videos
Trump Impeachment STORM IGNITES as 29 Judges Vote for Conviction!!
DanielBriefDaily
2K views•2026-06-02
सुप्रीम कोर्ट में 5 जजों का शपथग्रहण समारोह #supremecourt #judges #oathceremony #shorts #ytshorts
Bharat24Liv
4K views•2026-06-02
THE STREISAND EFFECT AT BARBARA STREISAND’S HOUSE! - First Amendment Audit
KULTNEWS
1K views•2026-05-30
Jury seated in the Frisco Track Meet stabbing trial — opening statements set for tomorrow
Wfaa8
343 views•2026-06-03
Monkton family worries husband who murdered wife could inherit all of her assets
WMAR2news
152 views•2026-06-02
ترمب وأسواق المال الأميركية.. كيف أنعش "رأسمالية المطلعين"؟ - شرق غرب
AsharqBusiness
282 views•2026-06-04
They Dismissed Every Black Juror in the Karmelo Anthony Trial — Every Single One
Tim_Black
406 views•2026-06-04
Crashes involving e-bikes can mean gray area regarding insurance coverage
fox31
210 views•2026-06-05
