Roman Schatow
@schatow • 1,294 subscribers
Shorts
Videos
Cate Blanchett wondered why #MeToo got “killed very quickly,” and honestly, people are acting like we didn’t all just watch Blake Lively help put the final nail in it. Lively’s fantastical sexual harassment claims got tossed by Judge Liman, yet the public is somehow still expected to applaud the performance like it was some fearless act of truth-telling… 🤡🤡 Her attorney, Sigrid McCawley, said Lively was focused on “exposing the digital retaliation campaign here that was weaponised against her.” Great — and the ideal place to expose the alleged retaliatory campaign would’ve been… court. You know, that inconvenient little place where evidence gets examined instead of curated through entertainment outlets and Instagram captions. But somehow this “exposing” turned into dropping the claim, settling the lawsuit by Blake Lively and then speed-running to the Met Gala three hours later dressed like the curtains from a condemned Versailles timeshare. Nothing says “I’m determined to expose the digital retaliation campaign” quite like abandoning the battlefield and immediately posing for Vogue photographers under chandelier lighting. Blake Lively doesn’t get to brand herself as bravely fighting injustice and then quietly exit before having to prove any of it under oath. At some point, people stop seeing Lively’s activism and start seeing luxury victimhood with a glam team attached. You suck #blakelively / xoxo
Roman Schatow121,706 görüntüleme • 3 ay önce
Wayfarer ask Judge Liman to exclude Blake Lively’s evidence about picketing/respect for picketing during the writers’ strike… Blake Lively insists that her evidence isn’t about “bad character,” but to prove her “retaliation claim”… for allegedly targeting Lively’s husband—Ryan Reynolds—who, coincidentally, is not the one bringing the claim—but is very much present in the narrative as both the supposed target and the creative force behind the rooftop scene revisions. So he’s simultaneously the injured party, the behind-the-scenes writer 😁😁😁😁 #blakelively #justinbaldoni #livelyvsbaldoni
Roman Schatow29,648 görüntüleme • 4 ay önce
So let's get it straight: after months of headlines about a massive retaliatory conspiracy, a coordinated smear campaign, and promises of explosive evidence that would supposedly destroy Wayfarer & Justin Baldoni in court… we got no findings of liability, no admissions of wrongdoing, no conspiracy proven, and no dramatic courtroom reckoning. Just Blake Lively's settlement wrapped in triumphant PR language. Then comes Blake Lively’s lawyer, #MichaelGottlieb, declaring this a “resounding victory” and saying his client is “ecstatic” because the settlement lets her pursue her “most potent and powerful claim” in a way that is “final,” “efficient,” and comes with “no appeal rights.” Interesting strategy. Usually when someone has the most potent & powerful claim imaginable, they want the courtroom, the evidence, the witnesses, the cross-examination, and the verdict. Not an explanation about how wonderful it is to avoid appeals and “cut off the noise.” 🤦🏼🤦🏼 Apparently, in 2026 PR language, “fully vindicated” means please accept this celebratory press shit as the substitute and #MichaelGottlieb essentially arguing that not proving the case is somehow the same thing as winning it. 🤦🏼🤦🏼 #blakelively #justinbaldoni #livelyvsbaldoni
Roman Schatow24,900 görüntüleme • 3 ay önce
Very recent ... directly from your mouth MJ the Lawyer and these are only two pieces of evidence and there are more ... You’re still spreading misinformation and lies. VANZAN is related to the film. You haven’t provided any evidence of it. The WF Parties have denied it several times. VANZAN is a corporation affiliated with Blake Lively and Ryan Reynolds VANZAN a good lawyering?! The VANZAN sham action issued by manatt alleges a breach of contract claim against ten Doe defendants, who although parties to an allegedly breached contract with VANZAN, were never named or served. There’s no link to Abel and the film. And it’s very unclear how the VANZAN sham subpoena could be court-ordered given that no judge was assigned to this action, which is a requirement for Doe actions in NY. Surely you must know that. Can you explain to us how you can sign a contract, but you don't know the parties? Do you actually know that Doe actions must be assigned to a judge?
Roman Schatow14,496 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce
Daha fazla içerik yok.