Legally Brunette: Blake Lively vs. Justin Baldoni

Emily and Shane discuss the legal battle between the “It Ends With Us” co-stars, Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni.

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:01):
Hi, guys, welcome to Legally Brunette with Emily Simpson and
Shane Simpson. Hi, guys, welcome to our second episode of
Legally Brunette. First of all, we apologize for having such
a kind of long space in between our first episode,
which was on the Menendez brothers, and our second episode,
which we are going to delve into the Blake Lively

(00:22):
and Justin Baldoni case. But first of all, I think
it's really important that we do a little bit of
an update on Menendez. If you did not listen to
our first episode, I would say go back and listen
to it. It's a good episode on Menendez. But as
of right now, they still have a resentencing hearing scheduled
for January thirtieth and thirty first. However, the attorney for

(00:45):
the family of the Menendez family members there's twenty four
relatives who support the immediate release of Eric and Lyle.
They are represented by Brian Friedman. He claims that he
plans to petition for the Menindez case to be trans
to a California Attorney General's office. That is because there
is in his opinion, and I would agree with him,

(01:07):
there is a conflict of interest So there is an
attorney named Kathleen Katie who represented the one member of
the Menendez family members who was against their receencing and release.
His name is Milton. He is the brother of Kitty Menendez.
He does not think that they should be released from prison.
Kathleen Katy represented him pro bono and she has now

(01:29):
been named the DA's Director of the Bureau of Victim's Services.
She represented Milton who did not want them released from prison.
She represented him pro bono. She was a big supporter
of Hawkman being the new DA, So I think there's
political undertones. And she has now been named the DA's

(01:50):
Director of the Bureau of Victim's Services, which means she
would be heavily involved in the resentencing.

Speaker 2 (01:56):
So there's going to be hearing on the conflict. Is
there going to be a determination with Well, that's.

Speaker 1 (02:01):
Where we're at. I think procedurally, what will happen is
I think that January thirtieth hearing will either get continued
or taken off calendar if he files a petition. I
think he'll either file a petition to recuse her from
the case or a petition to move the venue. So anyway,
I do know that today, the new DA is meeting

(02:24):
with the twenty four family members who support their release.

Speaker 2 (02:27):
I think the little I come across with the new DA.
Some people think that the new DA is opposed to
their release or some of the effect. But I think
it's more the DA needs to be He's new, he's
in office. He's going to be caught up on everything. Right,
He's not just going to green light it because it's
a Netflix special, right.

Speaker 1 (02:46):
I agree, And I think he needed the time to
go back and he wanted to go through everything thoroughly.
I do think people speculated that he was not in
favor of their recencing release because he met with Milton already,
and Milton is the brother of Kitty, like I said earlier,
who does not want them released from prison? And I

(03:07):
think people interpreted that as him being pro Well, you.

Speaker 2 (03:11):
Know what way to look at it? Do you want
the DA to be thorough?

Speaker 1 (03:16):
Right?

Speaker 2 (03:17):
Because if he or she is not thorough and then
something comes up that hinders the recensing hearing or they
are all their opportunities to be released. I mean, they
could go against them as well. So you want them
to be thorough and you don't want it to cause
an issue later down the road that maybe it's a
faulty hearing of some sort or I agree, and.

Speaker 1 (03:39):
I think it's not an issue of him being thorough.
I think that's a good thing. I think the issue
is that this Kathleen Katie is now part of the
DA's office and she's director of the Victim Services Section,
which would be representing the family members are considered victims
of a crime, certainly, and I think people are afraid
that there's a conflict of interests there because she's been
representing Milton pro bono and then that's the side that

(04:01):
she would lean to. So it looks to me like
a conflict of interest and that she should either be
ricus from the case or else the venue needs to
be changed.

Speaker 2 (04:08):
So anyway, we.

Speaker 1 (04:09):
Will continue to follow that and give you any updates
as they Yeah, time will tell you as they come up.
All right, let's get into the Blake Lively Justin Baldoni case,
which by the way, is so crazy and convoluted. I
have spent probably the last four or five days. I
have read the entire complaint that Blake Lively's attorneys filed,

(04:30):
and I have read the entire complaint that Justin Baldoni's
attorneys have filed on his behalf against The New York
Times as mostly there's several causes of action, but a
libel case.

Speaker 2 (04:42):
Okay, Well, then let's keep it simple, because I don't
know as much as you do on this case yet.
So what's the first in the order of events. What's
the first thing that has surfaced, whether it be a
legal proceeding or whether it just be a formal complaint
or an informal complaint.

Speaker 1 (04:59):
Well, let's go just a little bit, and let's just say,
let's just start with this. All surrounds the movie It
Ends with Us, which was a book written by Colleen Hoover.
I'm not sure exactly when she wrote it, probably I
don't know, but I read it i'd say three to
four years ago. It was a very popular book. It
Ends with Us, Okay, it has to do a domestic violence.

(05:20):
It has a very strong female leader. Her name's Lily Bloom.
I think a lot of people connected with it. I
liked it. I thought it was a great book. I
think I read it during the whole quarantine time frame
when I was reading a lot because there wasn't anything
else to do.

Speaker 2 (05:33):
Well, you like a lot of Hoover's book.

Speaker 1 (05:35):
I do, I do. I'm a big fan of Colleen
Hoover and actually good friends with her. I like her
very much. And just side note, Colleen does support Blake
in this situation. She posted on her Instagram and support
of Blake. She didn't say anything negative about Justin, which
I appreciated, but she did support Blake anyway. When the
movie premiered over the summer, there was a lot of

(05:56):
speculation that there was tension on set between Justin and
Blake Lively. Blake Lively was the lead role. Justin Baldoni
owns the production company called Wayfairer, and he and a partner,
Jamie He's owned the production company. They bought the rights
to the book to make a screenplay five years ago.

Speaker 2 (06:17):
Okay, so this so they bought the screenplay and they
planned to produce it themselves, right, And.

Speaker 1 (06:23):
He's also backed his company is backed by a third
friend who is a billionaire. His last name is Sarrowitz,
and he's also a part of all this.

Speaker 2 (06:31):
Legal Okay, so we got three people so far in
the production side.

Speaker 1 (06:34):
So when the movie premiered, I would say there was
a ton of press surrounding all this tension between these people.
I would say, based upon the things I read that
I was very much swayed towards Blake Lively being difficult,
being hard.

Speaker 2 (06:53):
To work with.

Speaker 1 (06:54):
I would say a lot of interviews and the past
resurfaced that showed her being kind of disrespectful, a little condescendings.
I think she got a lot of bad press. Also,
there was a lot of things being said that she
wasn't promoting the movie and the way it should because
it had to do with domestic violence, that she was
focusing more on it being like something you like a

(07:16):
chick flick, go go see it with your girlfriends, wear
a flowery dress, have a cocktail. And she was also,
I mean, the heart of the movie is domestic violence,
and it's I think it's considered intimate domestic violence where
it's they're married.

Speaker 2 (07:31):
Okay, But if she's promoting in a way where it's
a fun girl movie, how was I mean, maybe that's incorrect,
but maybe that's that's how she saw it. I don't know.
I mean, is that wrong that she I mean if
I think Diehard is a funny movie, but everyone else
thinks is an action flick, because we will think it's
a Christmas movie. I mean, is that wrong?

Speaker 1 (07:50):
Well, I think people took it as it was disrespectful
to people who have been of a serious situation. So
so that's just some of the background between those two parties.
When there was, you know, the movie premiere, I think
they weren't even on the red carpet together, and so

(08:11):
there was a lot of Art.

Speaker 2 (08:14):
And Lively and there are a couple in the movie.
Their characters are a couple.

Speaker 1 (08:19):
They're married in the movie. Okay, so on December twenty,
it's a twenty twenty four, Blake Lively files a sexual
harassment complaint against Justin Baldoni with the California Civil Rights Department.
Now this is important that she filed with the California
Civil Rights Department, which means it's more of an administrative
suit at this point, it's not a civil or criminal suit.

(08:40):
So she filed an eighty page legal complaint which accused
Baldoni of sexual harassment during filming, as well as retaliation
against Lively when she attempted to stand up against the
allegedmist behavior. Okay, it's I did read the eighty page complaint.
I read all the exhibits, but here's the crux of it.
Simultaneous with the complaint being filed, The New York Times

(09:04):
published a piece entitled we Can Bury Anyone inside a
Hollywood Smear Machine. It was published live on December twenty first,
the day after her complaint was filed. Now, if you
kind of cross reference it with Justin Baldoni's suit against
the New York Times, he claims that they were told

(09:24):
I think they were given notice. I don't remember the
exact time, but it was like nine thirty PM that
this piece was going to come out, and they had
I think only like a fourteen hour timeframe to respond
to it, and they were given until noon the next
day to respond, but they ended up publishing the article
earlier than what they had given them a time frame

(09:46):
to respond.

Speaker 2 (09:47):
Did that time frame? Where did that time frame come?

Speaker 1 (09:48):
It came from a New York Times The author of
the oh, like, we're going to publish this at such time.
I believe they sent the piece to them and said,
we're going to publish this. What's your response. You have
until noon the following day, But then they ended up
publishing it at like ten am.

Speaker 2 (10:06):
Okay, So I mean, can you.

Speaker 1 (10:08):
Imagine as an attorney or as the you know, the
as Justin Baldoni. You receive a ninety page complaint against
you with all these exhibits attached, and then you're supposed
to have a response to it.

Speaker 2 (10:20):
Well, you're supposed to absorb it all. Then you're supposed
to interview people to figure out what's going on and
then create a response.

Speaker 1 (10:27):
Right, Yeah, So I think that was a big I mean,
that was a problem.

Speaker 2 (10:31):
I believe you didn't really first filing. You said it
wasn't a civil complaint, and it certainly wasn't criminals, So
what was it?

Speaker 1 (10:37):
Well, no, it was more of an administrative complaint she
filed with the California is just a.

Speaker 2 (10:40):
Document kind of time stamp the complaint or was it
an hr A union?

Speaker 1 (10:45):
Yeah, I believe so, I don't really know. All I
know is that she did end up filing basically the
same complaint in federal court in New York. Okay, So
now we've got a California Civil Rights Department complaint filed,
We've got Justin Baldoni filing a libel suit against The

(11:09):
New York Times, and then we've got Blake filing basically
the same sexual harassment suit in a federal court in
New York.

Speaker 2 (11:16):
Okay, so have the eighty page complaint that you're right,
what's the juicy stuff it? Well, let's get to the
get to what we're here for.

Speaker 1 (11:25):
Okay, let's get to the juicy stuff. So, she claims
that during filming that she was subjected to sexual harassment
and some of her some of her examples are showing
nude images of women.

Speaker 2 (11:40):
But basically, no, no, no, who is she saying is
sexually harassing her?

Speaker 1 (11:46):
Well, this is the thing. I feel like you have
to read her complaint and then you have to read
justin Baldoni's complaint to actually understand what's going on. Because
she claims she's shown nude images. He claims those nude
images were his partner, mister Heath, showing her his wife
giving birth as part of because there's a scene where

(12:08):
she gives birth in the movie. Okay, So he claims
that it was a creative type of conversation, like you
should we should film it like this, Look here's my
wife giving birth.

Speaker 2 (12:19):
Okay.

Speaker 1 (12:20):
So to him, it's an innocuous, benign video of a
woman giving birth. To her, she's claiming.

Speaker 2 (12:28):
He's showing something inappropriate.

Speaker 1 (12:29):
Her showing inappropriate images of women, also talking about porn
and some type of porn addiction. And then apparently her
trainer was asked about her weight, which she claims is
body shaming. His response is, there was supposedly a scene
where he's supposed to pick her up, and he has
back problems, so he went to her trainer and asked

(12:52):
how much she weighed. Well, at least he didn't ask her. No,
he circumvented her. He went to the trainer asked how
much she weighed. I guess she found out about it,
and she basically claimed that he was body shaming her.
You know, that's a hard one for me. I can
see both sides. I can understand she just gave birth
when she filmed the movie four months prior, so I
can understand she gave birth in real life, and she

(13:13):
gives birth in the movie. And then he shows her
a video of birthing. Yes, it's a kind of a
birthing going on, So she claims that she was body shamed.
She also claims that there wasn't an intimacy coordinator on
set and that there should be. But then in his.

Speaker 2 (13:30):
I imagine the intimacy coordinator is probably always right. It's
probably standard thing. I know I would want one if
I was a production company, I would want one there
because you need like a third kind of neutral party
or someone to kind of set the record straight as
to what the place.

Speaker 1 (13:46):
I think what they do is they actually coordinate the
movements so that it's.

Speaker 2 (13:54):
Would you like hiring coordinators? We'll look into that, sir.
So there was none on set, No, there was.

Speaker 1 (14:03):
So in her complaint is she makes it like there
wasn't an intimacy coordinator. Then in his filing he says
there was an intimacy coordinator, and he shows text messages
where he texts Blake and said would you like to
meet with the intimacy coordinator? And she says basically like
not right now. So then Justin meets with the intimacy

(14:24):
coordinator on his own, takes notes, and then when he
goes to the scene, he's giving the notes apparently allegedly
from his Yeah.

Speaker 2 (14:34):
Yeah, he could have just wrote whatever he wanted. I mean,
that's true to she approved this, She approved this this.
So that's that's very faulty right there. You have a
you're saying he didn't protect himself. Yeah, yeah, exactly.

Speaker 1 (14:50):
You're saying you have an intimacy coordinator, she chooses not
to meet with intimacy coordinator. You meet with the intimate
intimacy coordinator, You take notes.

Speaker 2 (14:57):
If anything, she should have seen something, say she's waving
her opportunities to be with an intimacy coordinator. That's what
you do. Like if you get injured on the job. Yeah,
and then you refuse medical attention, you have to sign.
You typically sign something saying I refuse medical attention.

Speaker 1 (15:13):
Well, I don't think she didn't. As far as the
text messages that I saw in the complaint. In Baldoni's complaint,
she didn't refuse. She just said not now, maybe later.
And so he was meeting with the coordinator on his own,
taking his own notes, and then going back into the scene.
She claims that he was improvising these sex scenes too
much like he bit her lip. He was doing things

(15:35):
that were inappropriate, that were outside the scope. Okay, I
guess outside the scope of her nudity writer. I've never
heard of a nudity writer before. I'm not. I mean,
we don't have them on reality. Maybe we should need one.
But apparently outside of your regular contract as the main
star in this she also has a nudity writer which

(15:55):
outlines I'm sure it's specific, I haven't seen.

Speaker 2 (15:58):
Okay, So, cutting to the chase, she claimed he deviated
from whatever her expectations were and whatever her limits were.

Speaker 1 (16:05):
Right then, she also claims that not only Baldoni, but
also his business partner, mister Heath, would enter while she
was breastfeeding, and that that made her uncomfortable or that she.

Speaker 2 (16:17):
Was changing her That's where I have a problem. Why
wasn't her door locked? I mean, if I'm going to
change my pants, I'm going to lock the door. You know.
I'm not saying it's her fault. Yeah, but if she
if someone doesn't lock the door in a time where
they don't want someone walking in on them, and then
someone walks in on them, Okay, that's an unfortunate incident. Now,

(16:38):
lesson learned. Don't walk in without knocking, and also lock
the door, right.

Speaker 1 (16:44):
I don't you know the whole walking in on her
when she's breastfeeding or whatever. Again, I have to cross
reference it with Baldoni's complaining against The New York Times
because he does insert text messages where she invites him
in to work onlines while she's I believe pumping milk okay,
So I think she said a time.

Speaker 2 (17:04):
So I'm guessing that the initial complaints only showed her side.
He walked in on me, he showed me this video.
Then he eventually responds in whatever format and he's like, yeah,
but we had Now he's filling in the blanks. Yeah,
but we had text conversations. She was okay with me
being present while she was bumping for breast milk, and

(17:25):
she denied or she waved kind of the opportunity to
see the intimacy coordinate at least at that moment exactly.
So he's filling in these he's providing all his defenses, right,
and he's substantiating it with like texts and stuff.

Speaker 1 (17:39):
I believe his response to his suit against The New
York Times was very telling for me. I think, if
you are really interested in this case and you really
want to have an informed opinion on what's going on,
I would say, read Blake's complaint. It's eighty pages, but
you can read it pretty quickly. You know, every time
you file a complaint, attorney on your behalf, it's persuasive, right,

(18:02):
You're going to write it from the perspective you're going
to advocate for your own client, You're gonna you're going
to leave out certain things that are damaging to damaging exactly.
So you read her complaint and you're like, Wow, this
guy did all these things and he acted like this,
and he you know, you have this vision of him
like intruding into her space and you know, making out
with her when they say cut, but he's still kissing

(18:24):
her and you know. But then you read his complaint
against The New York Times, and he really kind of
a it does. He really substantiates what happened why, and
he has some really good defenses.

Speaker 2 (18:40):
Okay. And then there's and is that in the complaint?
Is that in the uh legal proceedings with the defamation suit?
Or is that in his response to.

Speaker 1 (18:48):
Her He hasn't responded to her yet.

Speaker 2 (18:50):
Oh, he hasn't responded her yet. No, okay, So we
only have her complaints, her complaints and then his defamation laws.
Did they initiated with The New York Times? Yes? And
you're saying, read both those and then that's what you're
putting together. Yes, and he has not yet responded to
her complaint. No, that would be more telling as well exactly.

Speaker 1 (19:09):
I know that they are actually and this is interesting.
I didn't make this connection earlier in this in this
conversation we're having. But Brian Friedman, who represents the Menindaz family,
is Justin Baldoni's attorney. So this man is a busy man.
He is out there representing the Menindaz family trying to
get them released from prison, while he's also representing Justin
Baldoni in this Blake Lively case. So Brian Friedman is

(19:33):
a busy man right now. So he claims that he well,
obviously they're gonna they're gonna file a response, which is
interesting because then I feel like we're gonna have to
do another episode because we're gonna have to go through
his response, which I assume his response is going to
kind of mirror what he filed against The New York
Times for libel. It's going to have a lot of

(19:53):
the same information in it.

Speaker 2 (19:56):
Right.

Speaker 1 (19:57):
So, also, she not only claims sexual harassment, but she
also claims in her complaint that they had a a meticulous,
very planned out, coordinated attack on her character.

Speaker 2 (20:08):
Because towards the why hold on, why would they plan
and attack? Assuming that's correct, why would they plan an
attack on her character, because when and what timeline of
events is this?

Speaker 1 (20:20):
Okay, So when the movie was about to be released,
Justin Baldoni hires a crisis management PR firm. They're the
same ones that represented Johnny Depp. This is her name
is Melissa Nathan. He also has another PR person named
Jennifer Abel.

Speaker 2 (20:35):
Why it's not normal. I'm going to release a movie.
I need to get a crisis management team.

Speaker 1 (20:39):
That's probably not normal. But I think he was thinking,
if she makes these, you know, sexual harassment allegations public, he.

Speaker 2 (20:50):
First complaints had already been made internally, and so he
had fear or worrisome that it would surface and probably
cause damage to his reputation or the movie.

Speaker 1 (21:01):
Right, So let's go back a little bit. So they
film half of the movie, let's just say half. Then
the writer's strike occurs, Okay, so they have to shut
down production. They don't film for months. On November, they production,

(21:24):
I know there's an actor's strike.

Speaker 2 (21:25):
There was an actor strike.

Speaker 1 (21:26):
Whatever the already done, right, Okay, there's an actor's strike.
There's a strike. Good thing I'm here, Good thing you
are here. Okay, there's a strike. They shut down production.
They can't film the rest of the movie. Got it
On November nine, the strike is over. Everybody can go
back to work. On that same day, there is an
email sent to Wayfair Justin Baldoni, his partner from Blake's

(21:48):
legal team, basically saying that they need to put a
protections for return to production into places. That's what you
called it, a protections for return to.

Speaker 2 (21:59):
Production, protections for return to production.

Speaker 1 (22:02):
Protections for return to production.

Speaker 2 (22:04):
Okay, what is that?

Speaker 1 (22:05):
In Layman's terms, it's basically seventeen items that were listed
that all needed to be adhered to and agreed upon
for Blake to return to the set to film the
rest of the movie.

Speaker 2 (22:19):
So again late terms, she fears things went off the
rail a little bit. They have a pause because of
the strike. They come back to set and she's saying,
these are seventeen issues that I need addressed right in
some fashion, right.

Speaker 1 (22:32):
And it's basically in Layman's You know, I didn't write
down all sets.

Speaker 2 (22:39):
One of them. Yeah, it had a lot of birthing videos.

Speaker 1 (22:41):
Birthing videos. It was basically in a nutshell to cease
on set behavior of mister Baldoni and his partner, mister
Heath both parties agreed to adopt it. And I do
know that I believe that there was a response to
those seventeen you know, requests of basically like, we don't
agree with everything that you're we're not asking, we're not admitting,

(23:02):
we're not admitting that we did these things.

Speaker 2 (23:04):
But will acknowledge your complaints and probably correct it going forward, right,
And well, that's pretty good, that's professional so far.

Speaker 1 (23:11):
Right, So basically it's like, look, I don't think we
did all these things, but in order to move ahead
and to film the rest of this movie, and everything
you're asking is reasonable. Clearly, there shouldn't be nudity, There
shouldn't be poorn, there shouldn't be sexual harassment, you shouldn't
be made to feel uncomfortable. Like we correct, We okay,
we agree, and you know, they signed off on it.

(23:35):
Part of those seventeen terms, one of them was an
it was called an all hands and meeting where she
wanted justin the Wayfarer people people from Sony because Sony
was the one that is the movie.

Speaker 2 (23:48):
She wanted a lot of the big wags right.

Speaker 1 (23:50):
And her there also with some producers and they were
doing it what's called all hands and yeah, so that
was scheduled for January fourth because January fifth was when
they were going to pick up production again.

Speaker 2 (24:04):
There was a little bit of pressure. So like the
day before, she wants a meeting, right, so they have
the meeting.

Speaker 1 (24:10):
They have the meeting. This meeting takes place at her
penthouse with Ryan Reynolds, who is her husband present, apparently
according to.

Speaker 2 (24:18):
Well, Okay, I don't know. I don't know how Hollywood
works or anything, but the husband being present, I don't
know that that. If the issue was with you, I
would support you one hundred percent. But I don't know
if i'd be the right person to be in the meeting.
You'd have to have a professional in there, like another lawyer,

(24:40):
someone that's kind of hired help. Well, I do as
opposed to like he's part of it.

Speaker 1 (24:45):
But she had representatives from Sony, she had some other
producer representative that she picked. I mean, she had other
people there.

Speaker 2 (24:53):
I mean, it's not wrong that he's there, but it
just if he if he was there and said nothing,
which I don't know what the answer is. He was
there and he said no, that's okay because he's there
to sport his wife. But if he's there and he's
chiming in on everything. Then then it just becomes like
more of an emotional thing and a personal thing as
opposed to like a professional issue that's being resolved. Right,

(25:14):
so he said.

Speaker 1 (25:14):
Something, Well, so this meeting takes place at their penthouse
in New York, and apparently, according to Baldoni's suit, who's
penthouse and Blake and Ryan their marriage.

Speaker 2 (25:27):
It's on their home turf.

Speaker 1 (25:27):
It's on their home turf and their own home. Apparently
there were A list stars coming in and out, is
what justin Baldonie's lawsuit says. So I'm like, who are
these A list stars that are just walking in and
out while this meeting is going on? But that's what
they claim. But also just to let you know, just
to give you a little background, supposedly Ryan Rynolds was
very involved in this film and actually rewrote a scene

(25:50):
and yeah, was there and involved in it. And so.

Speaker 2 (25:56):
Would you like me to do that when you're filming,
you want me to come in there and start to
say no, this needs to be said, you need to
do this.

Speaker 1 (26:02):
I mean sometimes I'd like to just bow out, bring
Shane in. That's my replacement. But so this meeting takes place.
It was called the all hands in meeting. It's on
January fourth. Apparently they're going through, you know, all these
grievances that she has, and then Ryan Reynolds goes off

(26:25):
on Justin Baldoni and attacks him for this reference he
made to Blake's weight that had to do with body shaming,
and apparently it was I don't know, it was traumatic
for him. He said, he's never been spoken to like that,
He's never been yelled at like that before. So I
just have this visual of these two A list actors
and their fancy pit house just going off on this.
Guys are just coming and going. So he claims in

(26:52):
his suit that a Sony representatives said that they regret
not getting involved and telling him that he was out
of line. Here, there's what I would like, and this
is what isn't in either of these complaints. And maybe
this will come later, but I would like declarations signed
under penalty of burgery from these people, because obviously that's hearsay,

(27:15):
just saying that Sony representatives said this.

Speaker 2 (27:17):
Yeah, you know, yeah, that's a tough one that now
looking back, you know, if the meeting was documented somehow,
that is stenography or something.

Speaker 1 (27:26):
That is just what at this point, what I feel
like is missing is I want declarations from people who
were there, who were witnesses saying this is the way.

Speaker 2 (27:34):
This goes back to what I said earlier with the
intimacy coordinator. You need to have a third person that's unbiased.
And so here you have a meeting with all these
people that are upset, and there should have been some
way to document what was said and what it was exchanged.
I don't and I don't know how they do that.
I don't know if that's normal to record it or

(27:54):
to you know.

Speaker 1 (27:56):
I don't know. But here's probably what's going on right now,
because justin Baldoni's going to a he's going to file
a response. I mean, I would assume that they're working
on all of that. Yeah, and his attorney came out today.
There was an article today that I read about Doni's attorney,
Brian Freeman, came out today and said they planned to

(28:17):
sue Blake personally and that he is more than happy
and to share all their text messages.

Speaker 2 (28:26):
Nice.

Speaker 1 (28:27):
So that's interesting as well. Here's my take on it,
and we'll get more into the legal aspect of it.
But here's my take away as someone who read the complaint,
saw the movie, has read lots of articles read the
complaint against The New York Times. My takeaway is is
that this is a power struggle between an A list

(28:47):
actress who's married to Ryan Reynolds, who really felt that
this movie was hers and that she developed the character
and that she was Lily Bloom, and she took control
of costuming, and she wore a lot of her own clothes,
and she wanted to rewrite scenes, and the end of
the movie, she ends up editing the movie herself and
kicking Justin Baldoni out, according to him. Allegedly, that's according

(29:10):
to him. And I think it comes down to a
power struggle between Justin Baldoni, who bought the film or
bought the rights to the film and wanted to produce
the film. But he's not a I didn't know who
he was until this.

Speaker 2 (29:24):
Have you ever heard of her creative differences?

Speaker 1 (29:26):
Creative differences, But I think those creative differences are based
on her being an A list actors getting her way.

Speaker 2 (29:33):
Wait, you're saying, Baldoni, this is his first kind of
big screen I mean, I know he was. He was
in a series. I can't remember what it was, but
I would say this is his I'd never heard of
him before until now. I mean, she's clearly the bigger starr.
But I think going into the movie, he was a director.
He's the owner, it's his production studio. But I think

(29:57):
there was a power struggle, and I I think that
something happened. I know what it is, but I think
something happened. I know it happens a lot, and there's
a lot of good movies that come out of it.
But he had too many hats. He was he had
too much responsibility. Yeah, you know, how can he direct himself?
So I mean, if he's being inappropriate with the intimacy scenes,

(30:22):
and then she goes in complaints to the director, which
is him, what's he going to do tell himself, like
stop biting her lip? I mean, he can't do that.
So there was there was not any There was no
neutral people in this to be able to help guide it.

Speaker 1 (30:38):
So you're saying his it was his fault that he
owns a production company, But he should have had safe
guards in.

Speaker 2 (30:44):
Place for him, because I know lots of actors do that,
and that's cool. I think Soles she's Stone, one of
my favorites, does that. He wrote, directs and acts because
he's like, I know Rocky, right, so I know it
can happen. It's not abnormal. But watching this you certainly,
especially if you're going to hire Blake Lively, you should

(31:04):
certainly have someone like security or someone in the room
all the time, right, Like I know at work, when
there's a complaint and a male boss is going to
have a female person in there that he always brings
in another female to sit there to make sure that
nothing inappropriates exchanged and if there is, then then that
person can report it. And obviously you pick the gender

(31:27):
because then you can remove any biases. So you're messed
up that way. Yeah, it doesn't mean he's guilty or anything.
I'm just saying he messed up that way. But who
knew what he was dealing with. Maybe he didn't want it,
and maybe maybe he wanted it to just be him
and Blake Lively.

Speaker 1 (31:41):
I don't know, but I'm here's my question. If the
first half of the movie was filmed and there weren't
really any documented issues, but then they have the strike
down and there's downtime for months, but then she reaches
out the day of the strike ends her through her
legal counsel, reaches out and says, here's these grievances. I'm

(32:02):
not coming back to it.

Speaker 2 (32:03):
It was the day before, right, January fourth. They before, that.

Speaker 1 (32:06):
Was the day they had the meeting of hands and leading, right.
So then after this meeting they all agree, they adopt
the you know, we're abide by everything you say. They
just need to get the movie made. I feel like
he had his hands tied, like he has to agree
to all her demands because he has millions of dollars
invested in this movie, right, and they they lost time.

(32:30):
They've invested millions of dollars. They've only got half of
this movie made. They have to finish it. I think
she knew the power that she had, and she consistently
was like, I'm not going to finish unless this. I'm
not going to finish unless this according to him, right.
I mean, I don't think he has any power in this.
She's the lead star. If she constantly threatens I'm not

(32:50):
going to finish. I'm not going to finish. I'm not
going to come back to work. I'm not going to
do this. They don't have time to argue they don't
have time to get counseled. They're not going to try.
They don't want to piss her off anymore. No, your
hands are tied in the situation. You basically just have
to be like, whatever you say, whatever, whatever you say,
I agree to whatever you say. But here's something that

(33:12):
I find interesting, And tell me what you think about this.
Once they agreed to those seventeen demands that she had,
it was all in writing. She even says in her
in her complaint that after that the movie was finished,
it was wrapped, there were no more issues.

Speaker 2 (33:28):
Oh wait, so she confirmed that the second half of
the filming right, things were appropriate, appropriate, It was wrapped,
So what's done? So okay, here's where the mess up
is Baldoni trying to do his crisis control because it
was a preemptive strike or attempt that may never have

(33:49):
needed to be in place to begin with. Let's get
into that. And I don't will never know because we
don't have a time machine. But it had he not
done that, it might have been all reasons.

Speaker 1 (34:01):
Well, I'm gonna I'm gonna agree with that, because my
take is these publicists whose private text messages have been
made public is what was the catalyst for her suit
against him. So he has a crisis PR team that
he hires. He also has a publicist named Jennifer Abel.

(34:21):
Jennifer Abel and Melissa Nathan are the two main characters
in this. They're constantly texting with Baldoni about PR and
you know, stories and all these things. Apparently he hired
this crisis management firm and they do this thing called astroturfing.
I don't really understand what it is. But then there
was this outside company hired some guy in Texas. I

(34:44):
don't think it's bots, but they do have some way,
some logistical way to put good things out and maybe
suppress bad things. They also have relationships with you know,
your big players like Daily Mail, Cartmry, all those things.
The thing that I thought from the very beginning when
I read the complaint and there were pages and pages
of personal text messages between Justin Baldoni, his publicist, Jennifer Abel,

(35:07):
and then the crisis management team, which was Melissa Nathan,
I'm thinking to myself, where did Blake Lively get all
these text messages? How did her team? How did her
legal team get these text messages? You know that you
would only be able to get those through discovery. After
you filed a complaint and then you go into a.

Speaker 2 (35:25):
Discovery the surfaced you done so in a way.

Speaker 1 (35:32):
I'll tell you how. I think it was surface in
Baldoni's lawsuit touches on it a little bit. There was
another There's a lot of key players, a lot of
publicists involved in this, but there was a woman named
Stephanie Works who was a publicist for Baldoni. Apparently they
had a falling out. She also worked with his other publicists,
Jennifer Abel and then something happened where Jennifer and Stephanie

(35:55):
split ways. Stephanie confiscated her work phone and then did
a forensic analysis on it, and that's where all these
text messages came from. I think, what she this is me,
I'm I'm this is me. Just my opinion. I think
this woman Stephanie saw all these text messages that had
to do with Blake Lively and all these you know,
ways to figure out how to suppress certain stories or

(36:19):
whatever's going on, and she gave those two Blake's team,
probably in return for something. I don't know. Blakelee Lively
is a huge A list actress. I'm sure it was like, hey,
I have this. I think that's what's called. It's like
a friendly subpoena. Oh, there's so many.

Speaker 2 (36:34):
I can't give examples.

Speaker 1 (36:37):
They would say, well, they would send articles back and
forth like did you see this? Did you see the
response to this? We need to do this, let's talk
to this, let's do this. Honestly, here's the crux of
his libel suit with the New York Times. If you
look at Blake Lively's complaint, she puts in text messages
that say things like he wants us to bury her,

(37:00):
you know, things like that that don't look so great
for him, that it looks like he's intentionally trying to
make her look bad. In the press, they publish text messages,
but they don't publish the entire conversation. If you look
at his suit against the New York Times, he publishes
the entire text chain.

Speaker 2 (37:22):
Yeah, which is how it should be, because I know
in quart a lot of times, when you print out
the texts a judgement very well say I want to
see the phone. I want to see the whole string
of texts, right, I don't want to see selective you
know print right.

Speaker 1 (37:39):
Let me just give you an example there's a lot
of examples. Let me just give you an example. There's
a text exchange about an article that says could Blake
Lively be canceled? They left out in Blake's complaint where
one of where Justin's publicist says, damn, this is unfair
because this is also not me. Everything now looks like
it's me insinuating that that wasn't her, that she wasn't

(38:03):
responsible for that article about Lively being canceled, but they
left that out in Blake's complaint.

Speaker 2 (38:08):
Well, we know what this is all going to come
down to. What no one's gonna work with Clively anymore? Well,
I don't think who would work with Baldoni. It doesn't
matter innocent or guilty or whatever. Who's going to work
with these people that are obviously litigious.

Speaker 1 (38:24):
No, I don't. I don't disagree. This isn't good for anyone,
and it's also not good for these publicists. I mean,
it makes everyone look bad. It looks like a smear campaign.
This movie there is and that's another question, like how
are you going to make this movie? You can't, You can't.
He owns the rights to the I believe he owns
the rights to the.

Speaker 2 (38:41):
You can't you can't do a sequel because the chemistry
is not there people watching it as long as assuming
all this surfaces, it'd be hard to watch a movie
knowing they hate each other when they're supposed to be
acting like they're in love or whatever the story is.
That's a tough one, and that sucks for Colleen Hooper
who had an opportunity to have a big movie on
the silver screen and then now so everyone's fighting in

(39:02):
the kitchen. Yeah, that sucks.

Speaker 1 (39:05):
Yeah, you know, the only way this movie could be
made is if he sells it to another production company.

Speaker 2 (39:11):
But then he's in the movie. You said, yeah, he's
in a movie.

Speaker 1 (39:14):
Yeah, Well, they can't be in a movie together. So
there's never going to be a sequel unless it's completely
different actors and he sells it to another production company,
and then I don't know if people are invested in it,
because now you have different people and.

Speaker 2 (39:24):
It might be very well delayed, you know, actually far
out Blake wanting to produce it herself and star in
it and then finding someone to take him, right, Reynolds, Yeah,
that's what Yeah, okay, wow, Well what I learned is

(39:44):
I need to now make sure. I have a third
person in my production company. So when I do a
film with Sophia Bergara, Carmen Electra, I need to have
someone on set, right, Yeah, and you are not allowed
in the room if there's any complaints. Okay, that was
bad on Ryan Reynolds Port.

Speaker 1 (40:09):
All right, let's talk a little bit about the backlash
that Justin Baldoni has faced amid all these Blake lively claims.
First of all, a lot of A list actors, actresses
came out in support of Blake.

Speaker 2 (40:21):
I would say, Blake's the bigger star. Well, no one
knows Baldoni, right, I mean.

Speaker 1 (40:28):
Right? And Also, let's be honest. The people that are
coming out in support of her, did they read the complaint?

Speaker 2 (40:34):
Did they read No?

Speaker 1 (40:37):
No, they're just saying I like Blake. I'm coming out
and support of Blake. So popularity, it's a popularity contest.
She's always going to win the popularity contest. Also, let's
just go back a little bit to the publicist and
supposedly this takedown of Blake, which is what her complaint
is about. Here's where it gets muddled. How can you
tell the difference between crisis pr for planting stories or

(41:02):
reaching out to you know, media outlets to get negative
stories out there, and an organic just negativity against Blake
because of her own actions. How do you It's hard
to differentiate. I think a lot of the negative press
surrounding her had to do with her own demeanor when
she was marketing the movie. And then there were you know,

(41:25):
old interviews at resurface where you know, there was the
one reporter that said congratulations on your little bump, because
she had just announced that she was pregnant, and she
looks at the reporter and goes, congratulations on your little bump.
I mean, it was so it was cringey. I couldn't
even watch it. It was so bad. So how much
is I think she was embarrassed by the negative reaction

(41:48):
to her in the public. I think a lot of
people were going against her. They were talking about how
she wasn't marketing the movie properly, how she was glazing
over the whole domestic violence situation. She didn't look good.
There were a lot of articles out her that were negative,
and I think her way of getting back at that
is to blame Justin and his team for planting those

(42:11):
instead of taking any accountability for maybe it was some
things that you did yourself.

Speaker 2 (42:17):
Some woman in my life do that. They point the
finger at me. We'll talk about that.

Speaker 1 (42:23):
All right. So the backlash that Justin Baldoni has faced,
Baldoni's talent agency w m E, dropped him as a
client immediately when the complaint.

Speaker 2 (42:32):
Was But that's normal, right, Well, I don't know.

Speaker 1 (42:34):
They represent Blake and Ryan.

Speaker 2 (42:37):
Yeah, so they picked Aside, They clearly picked up, clearly
picked Aside. Oh wow, I thought like it was it
was just representing him and they dropped him just kind
of like we don't want to go there. But you're
saying they they said, will continue to represent Lively and
Reynolds and not well the bigger stars. Right, there's probably

(42:58):
there's certainly a lot more money involved in representing Lively
in Reynolds and Reynolds never turns down the script, so
they'll do all of this stuff.

Speaker 1 (43:08):
So Deadline reported that the decision that the decision was
made by wm E leadership and was partly due to
Lively's lawsuit. I mean, let's be honest here, it's not
partly due to the lawsuit. It's one hundred percent because
of the lawsuit. Baldoni was awarded at the twenty twenty
four Vital Voices Solidarity Awards, which is an awards program
that honors remarkable men who have shown courage and compassion

(43:29):
and advocating on behalf of women and girls worldwide. On
December twenty third, Vital Voices announced they rescinded the award
and alerted Baldoni on the decision amid the legal drama. See,
I don't like that people are are making decisions about
who's right and who's wrong before everything has come out,

(43:49):
before he's allowed to lead his own case. Yeah, but
we all tend to do that to some degree. But
the publicist company definitely did that. Oh yeah, until he
claims in his countersuit that and I don't know. This
is just alleged that at a premiere of a movie
that Ryan Reynolds went up to one of the representatives

(44:12):
of this of WM and was like, you have to
drop Baldoni.

Speaker 2 (44:16):
So and I don't know, probably, I mean.

Speaker 1 (44:19):
I'm sure there was pressure. Baldoni hosted the podcast Man
Enough alongside author Liz Plank. On December twenty third, Plank
announced her departure from the show after four years. She
wrote in a statement obtained by people. We all deserve better,
and I know that together we can create it. I
will have more to share soon as I continue to
process everything that has happened. In the meantime, I will

(44:41):
continue to support everyone who calls out injustice and holds
the people standing in their way accountable. Lastly, in the
wake of Lilly's Lively's lawsuit, Elizabeth Day, a host of
the podcast How to Fail, deleted an episode where she
interviewed Baldoni about it ends with Us. I have made
the decision to remove the recent How to Fail interview
with Justin Donate from all platforms while the distressing allegations

(45:03):
made against him and Blake Lively's recent lawsuit are fully investigated.
Every individual has a right to a safe workplace. Every
woman has the right to dignity in that workplace. Every
form of abuse should be called out, and I salute
the individuals who have the courage to do so. Here's
my question, if Blake were really we're talking about Blake Lively,
if she were truly reasonably and really uncomfortable, why would

(45:29):
she sue a year later?

Speaker 2 (45:31):
Oh, it is a fair question, but sometimes it takes time,
and sometimes people don't want to But then they can't.
Maybe they think they're going to walk it off right,
then they can't get over it, so then they want
to file. Then they have to find an attorney.

Speaker 1 (45:47):
But it doesn't seem to you.

Speaker 2 (45:48):
I never think that time is an absolute defense. It's
like it makes it's a fair question, like if there's
a violent situation and someone waits a couple of years
to reap it, Well, there are reasons.

Speaker 1 (46:02):
Here's just my takeaway. She accuses him of retaliating against
her by hiring this pr firm because of the allegations
that she made. However, when she files her complaint simultaneously
with the New York Times article, which kind of cherry
picks what text messages it's using, she's doing the exact

(46:25):
same thing that she claims that he's doing. She's clearly
going after his character and reputation. That's just my opinion.

Speaker 2 (46:34):
They both have dirty hands, yeah, or unclean hands, both
of them, And to some degree, he was preemptively trying
to address things publicly, which probably made it worse because
maybe it never would a surface because they were just
kind of hr complaints for lack of better words, right
in the beginning, and then he now makes it a

(46:55):
bigger issue, or at least enough for her to think,
what the hell's he doing to me? So then she,
you know, fires back, and now it's just all over
the place. So they're both in a way, in a way,
there both had some degrees of unprofessionalism. Yep, the public
opinion is on lively side. So far, you had Hoover,

(47:15):
who is the author. You had the PR firm, right.

Speaker 1 (47:18):
Well, it's not a PR firm, it's their management firm.

Speaker 2 (47:21):
Management firm they are. Then you have the New York
Times that didn't really help them.

Speaker 1 (47:26):
No, it didn't help them at all, help them at all.

Speaker 2 (47:28):
No, And then it's pretty it's pretty bad.

Speaker 1 (47:32):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (47:33):
Ryan Reynolds is you know, he's got some leverage. I'm sure.

Speaker 1 (47:36):
Talk about Ryan Reynolds for a little bit, because he
was involved in the film. According to Justin Baldoni's suit
against The New York Times, if you read the whole thing,
he does make so when they went to do press,
I never understood this, and I tried to understand it. It
doesn't really lay it out completely, but something happened so
that when it was press time for this movie it's

(47:59):
now being released, they would not be together Apparently Blake
would not allow Justin Baldoni to be at the premiere
of the movie. Was she banned him according to him.

Speaker 2 (48:11):
But at this time point in time, there was no
legal proceedings file, nothing like that, and no one internal
thing right.

Speaker 1 (48:17):
And that's where I don't understand where the breakdown happened.
Because she made her grievances known on January fourth, they
put it in writing, they finished the movie.

Speaker 2 (48:26):
They did what they could to accommodate her issues, right.
They finished the movie. The movie wraps on February ninth.
Then they go into the editing process. Here's where I
think the breakdown took place. Blake wanted to take over
the movie. She wanted to edit the movie herself. Apparently
she allowed he allowed her to come into the editing bay.

(48:47):
It went from like a couple times editing too. I
think she fully took over. Then there ends up being
two versions of the movie. There ends up being an
editor's cut, which is Baldoni's cut. How does that happen?
How does an actor just walk into an editing room
and be like, excuse me, and then they start editing.
I mean, don't she have people that are professionals that
that have that experience, that know what to do, and
they said, he just have some lady to walk in

(49:08):
that says like, you know, cut this out and do that.
I mean, that's weird.

Speaker 1 (49:12):
I don't disagree.

Speaker 2 (49:13):
So how do they let that slip?

Speaker 1 (49:16):
I think because she has so much power that she
basically was like, I want to edit scenes myself. I
want to do this. I think she has Ryan Reynolds
backing her, and.

Speaker 2 (49:26):
This can't be normal. I mean it's not like Kevin Costner,
where he's he's done a million things directing and editing,
where it's like he might chime in and then the
others say, yeah, you know, this is Kevin Costning, like
they want to pick his brain, they want his input.
This is like some actress that I don't even know
what she's done. What she done.

Speaker 1 (49:45):
She was in Gossip Girl, She's been in.

Speaker 2 (49:46):
A lot of us, done things, but she's just in
front of the screen. I mean she she walks into
the I think she has some producing credits, But so
what happened? This is where I think the tension just
escalates off the charts. He includes several text messages between
him and editors where the editors are reaching out to
Justin Baldoni basically offering yeah, no, they're offering him support,

(50:10):
basically saying, we're so sorry this is happening to you.
Just focus on the movie. Just fo Yeah, okay, So
the editors are kind of like so that implies like, yeah,
we know, she's kind of like dictating the terms here.
We got your back, like just keep doing what you're doing, right,
and we're not okay with it? Like right.

Speaker 1 (50:30):
So then eventually, or apparently according to him in his
New York Times suit, she fires the editors that he hired.
How does she fire editor I don't know and here
and hires editors that Ryan Reynolds uses. She apparently also
fired the composer that Wayfairer had hired and hires happen.

Speaker 2 (50:53):
I don't know. That's our contracts in places scope of
employment and all that stuff.

Speaker 1 (50:58):
That's why I'm telling you. I think the majority of
the attention is a is a hostile takeover and a
power struggle. So then eventually, according again I just want
to say, this is according to Justin that their ends,
and it's also memorialized in these text messages that he
includes in this New York Times suit, there ends up

(51:18):
being two cuts of this movie. There's a director's cut,
which is his cut, and then there's the Blake cut,
which is her cut. Apparently they go to Sony and
they're like, we have two versions of this movie, and
Sony's like, okay, well, we'll do a focus group type
of testing in whichever scores higher.

Speaker 2 (51:36):
That's so, what did they do that?

Speaker 1 (51:39):
They did according to Justin and scored higher his, But
guess which one was released hers? I mean, I actually
feel sorry for this professional. So then when it comes
to the release of the movie, they do a premiere
and apparently he was not allowed at the premiere period.

(52:00):
How did hers get released? Because I think she I
think she agreed initially to release whichever one tested higher,
and then I think she were nigged on it later
after they came back with the results.

Speaker 2 (52:10):
And said no, sorry again at least according to your understanding. Again,
she has a leverage, and she's like, Rich, don't believe
your I think according to I'm doing this right.

Speaker 1 (52:20):
According to him, she basically would refuse to market the
movie or refuse to do things if people did not
if they didn't release her version. I think she banned
him from the premiere, but then I think he had
to fight really hard to be able to be there.
And then he was allowed to go to the premiere,
but he could not arrive at the same time as her,
He couldn't be on the red carpet the same time

(52:41):
as her, he couldn't go to the after party. And
apparently he and his friends and his family were banned
to some like makeshift area where they were in some
holding cell because they couldn't be on the red carpet
the same time as her, and things like that. This is,
according to him, and.

Speaker 2 (52:56):
No one's going to want to work with her again. Difficult.

Speaker 1 (53:00):
I don't know. I mean, I honestly, after reading his
complaint that he filed against The New York Times, I
felt really badly for him.

Speaker 2 (53:10):
I did.

Speaker 1 (53:10):
That's just my takeaway based upon what I've read so far. Again,
clearly the New York Times is going to file a
response and it open.

Speaker 2 (53:17):
You're not invalidating her complaints because you're saying her plaint
complaints were addressed.

Speaker 1 (53:22):
Her complaints were addressed.

Speaker 2 (53:23):
I feel like it was formalized, everything was on track
to support her and whatever her needs and issues and complaints.
And then they finished filming without issues, right, I wouldn't
work with her.

Speaker 1 (53:41):
Well, so if she wants to start and I'm not.

Speaker 2 (53:44):
Reading any scripts now, you're not. No. But then again,
no one's gonna want to work with him either. I mean,
this has become the fire. There's too much of an issue.
And it's also like Colo Baldoni White letting people walk
into the editing room and just taking over and firing
your people. That makes no sense.

Speaker 1 (54:06):
I don't think he had I don't think he felt
like he had recourse, and I can't in a lot
of if I.

Speaker 2 (54:10):
Walked into bra was editing. Excuse me? I did a
focus group. When I listen to it, We're gonna do
my editing version? Could you more less Emily? Less emily?
Thanks a lot?

Speaker 1 (54:22):
I was like, could it make me look good?

Speaker 2 (54:23):
Please? Oh wow? That yeah?

Speaker 1 (54:28):
Okay, So you guys, this is a very interesting story.
I mean, if you've been following it like I have,
I would love to know your opinions on it. There
to come, and there's there's so much more to come.
Because these are all initial filings. The Baldoni still has
to file a response to her complaint and the civil
complaint and the federal complaint. New York Times has to
file a response to his libel suit, and also Brian Friedman,

(54:53):
his Baldoni's attorney, has also said he's going to sue
Blake personally and all the text messages are going to
come out between the two of them.

Speaker 2 (55:00):
The cause action for his complaint against her, I don't know.

Speaker 1 (55:02):
I would say some type of intentional. I don't know
that they'll pile on as many causes of action I'm
sure as they can. And also has.

Speaker 2 (55:12):
Got a lot of money those dead pockets there also,
I will guess or I will say that I think
there'll be a lawsuit against Stephanie works.

Speaker 1 (55:23):
That's just me guessing that I don't know anything. But
she is the one who I believe released all the private,
confidential text messages. And I'm sure that's another thing.

Speaker 2 (55:33):
Where is the sacina selectively? Right?

Speaker 1 (55:36):
Probably selectively? But I would like to see this subpoena.
But I have not seen a subpoena yet, so I'm
assuming it's some type of friendly subpoena where she probably said, Hey,
I have all this information. I would love to turn
it over to you, so you know, if you slip
me a subpoena, I'm happy to comply something. Give me
a reason to give you all this information. So this

(56:00):
is a messy, messy, muddled situation.

Speaker 2 (56:04):
Too many people with too much money and too many opportunities.

Speaker 1 (56:07):
Too much power.

Speaker 2 (56:08):
Yeah, so we will. I'm never going to get over
the walking into the editing or being step aside.

Speaker 1 (56:14):
Well, I don't know exactly what happened, clearly what you said, Well,
I'm saying according to his complaint against The New York Times,
he does claim that basically she took over editing and
there there ends up being two versions of the film.
How does that happen unless she edited her version. Well,

(56:36):
we know it's the Rynolds version, the right, the Ryan version.
So all right, guys, thank you so much for listening.
If you get the opportunity to go back and listen
to our Menindez podcast, we will always keep you updated
on that because that's an ongoing case. And also we
will keep you updated on the Blake Lively and just
a Baldoni case because I feel like we are just
at the tip of the iceberg on this and that

(56:57):
there is going to be a lot more that comes out,
So we will definitely follow that. So thanks for listening.

Speaker 2 (57:03):
Thank you,