00:04:15.300And Dean is working really hard to get these dogs out.
00:04:18.740And also remember that he is facing 31 years in prison for helping to rescue these dogs.
00:04:24.800So it's important to still keep pressure on.
00:04:27.640But this was really great news today, and it makes me so happy to share it with all of you guys.
00:04:32.600Anyways, let's get into the drama in Hollywood.
00:04:35.460So yesterday, Brian Friedman did a very unusual thing by publishing the entire settlement agreement between the Wayfair parties and Blake Lively.
00:04:49.060And the reason for doing that, I think, is because he doesn't want any more confusion out there of what it actually said.
00:04:57.060So we can read from this agreement that something that we already knew that Blake got zero dollars from the wafer parties.
00:05:05.880But another interesting thing here, which is why I think he did this, is that there's been a lot of speculations if Blake Lively could try to get her damages in another vehicle in another court, probably in California.
00:05:20.700I was speculating around that as well because Blake Lively's attorneys insinuated that that was a part of their plan.
00:05:29.260But now reading the settlement agreements, there are some interesting facts there that changes things a little bit.
00:05:36.020So this is how Brian Friedman explained this to Megyn Kelly.
00:05:39.960I mean, honestly, whether there is a legitimate avenue remaining for her to try to punish him more with these damages.
00:05:47.400I think what Judge Lyman was ruling on was he was saying, look, there were other ways this could have been done and that that was not chosen, that that was not the path that was chosen.
00:05:59.940And as a result of that, there is no ability then to recover punitive damages, treble damages or compensatory damages.
00:06:09.840The only recovery that's allowable at this point is attorney's fees.
00:06:15.940Yeah, so Brian Friedman is saying here that Blake can't really take this anywhere else and try to get triple damages and punitive damages, which we know could end up being a lot of money.
00:06:27.760But that totally contradicts what Blake Lively's attorneys have been saying since the judge ruled on these fees.
00:06:35.180As you know, she is entitled to get fees, but no damages.
00:06:39.920And of course, these fees are not going to be in the millions that some media outlets have been speculating in.
00:06:47.100We have to mention that New York Times is also asking to get their attorney's fees covered and they're asking for one hundred and fifty thousand dollars.
00:06:54.600And they basically defended themselves against the same lawsuit.
00:06:58.580So if Blake Lively is going to ask for millions and the New York Times spent one hundred fifty thousand dollars, that doesn't really add up.
00:07:05.360So what Blake's attorneys was hanging on to when they did these, when they shared these
00:07:10.800statements to different outlets was that the judge said that if she's looking for damages,
00:07:20.240So they're saying that the judge opened the door to that, but still they signed in the
00:07:25.440agreements that they're not allowed to do that.
00:07:28.660So let's look at what they actually signed in this settlement agreement.
00:07:32.400In this little part, they're saying that the parties have already agreed to and have already released a mutual statement regarding this agreement, which is attached, blah, blah, blah.
00:07:42.080That was the statement that they gave out that Blake Lively's attorneys later used against them.
00:07:46.880As you know, she deserved to be heard, they said.
00:07:49.720And as you know, Lively's team used that against them later, saying that, oh, they said she deserved to be heard.
00:08:02.400They also say here, the parties agree that now withstanding anything heraim to the contrary,
00:08:09.260Lively does not release and retains all claims, rights and remedies relating to her pending 47.1 motion.
00:08:17.720At that time, that motion was pending.
00:08:20.980That motion is the Me Too law that she was trying to use to get the attorney's fees and damages.
00:08:26.180The parties agree that any and all proceedings related to the pending 47.1 motion will be heard before Judge Lyman, the Wayfair Party's expressively reservable claims, rights and remedies relating to Lively's 47.1.
00:08:44.080motion including without limitation the right to oppose any substantive or procedural motion
00:08:50.900letter to the court request for relief or argument asserted by lively and the parties agree to
00:08:58.600irrevocably i don't know how to say that word waive any and all appellate rights associated
00:09:04.980with the wayfarers complaint or the lively complaint including any appeal or challenge
00:09:11.860to disposition of the 47.1 motion, whether by Judge Lyman or otherwise.
00:09:19.340To me, that sounds like she can't bring this motion anywhere else0.99
00:09:23.580and try to get these damages anywhere else.
00:09:26.580So let's look at what Blake's attorney said to Deadline
00:09:28.780five minutes after the judge had ruled on these fees.
00:09:32.100As you know, Dominic Patton at Deadline has been writing
00:09:35.820on behalf of Blake Lyman's attorneys this entire time.
00:09:38.960And he had this headline on the article saying,
00:09:41.860Blake gets Baldoni's bucks for lawyers, but not damages yet.
00:09:47.200And then he's saying here how much those fees will be.
00:09:51.300The fees that she's now getting is to be determined.
00:09:54.280However, a conservative estimation is it will be in the tens of millions0.98
00:09:59.420for the legions of lawyers that Lively alone employed
00:10:02.980since before the court fight began, blah, blah, blah.
00:10:06.580Of course, this is totally misleading.
00:10:08.720It's not going to be in the tens of millions.
00:10:10.320And he's insinuating here that Baldoni has to pay for all her legal fees.
00:10:37.200So here, Blake Lively's attorneys are quoted in a statement saying this,
00:10:42.960the court is awarding Ms. Lively attorney's fees and costs and has explained that a prevailing defendant under Section 47.1 may seek damages using different procedural mechanisms.
00:10:56.860The party settlement agreement expressively preserved Ms. Lively's rights to obtain those damages.
00:11:02.900i mean they were just contradicting what they signed in that settlement agreement it didn't
00:11:10.260say that at all miss lively is gratified that her lawsuit shows how section 47.1 laws like
00:11:17.020like it create a path for survivors blah blah blah to hold accountable those who weaponize
00:11:22.780online attacks retaliatory lawsuit to intimidate and silence survivors whatever but nowhere does
00:11:28.220say in the settlement agreement that they preserve Ms. Lively's rights to obtain damages.
00:11:34.320They just made that up. Isn't that interesting? Yeah, I wonder how they're going to come out and
00:11:38.920defend this now, because I'm sure they're going to respond to the fact that Brian Friedman released
00:11:43.580this. And they're saying that this is a continuation of the smear campaign and throw in some
00:11:49.320Darvo and whatever, you know, how they operate. So, yeah, let's see how that ends. And also,0.99
00:11:55.060as i mentioned in the beginning here how the hollywood reporter published this article saying
00:12:00.880it ends with a settlement post-mortem blake lively made a bold wager on a legal theory and lost
00:12:07.660the case that captivated hollywood ends with justin baldoni paying legal fees but no additional
00:12:13.780financial concession to lively whose team had bet on that outcome also here that's misleading it's
00:12:21.680not Justin Baldoni paying the legal fees it sounds like he is personally paying these fees
00:12:27.260that's not gonna happen and there were a lot of other defendants here so to just point at him like
00:12:32.260that yeah whatever but I have to mention that this whole article in the Hollywood Reporter
00:12:37.240is basically just quoting Brian Friedman for the first time I've seen they've done actually
00:12:43.780a reasonable balanced article about this mess and they're quoting what Brian Friedman said on the
00:12:51.000meghan kelly show here he said all blake lively needed to do was to say no i'm not settling let's
00:12:56.220go to trial and the jury of our peers and let's see what we can get if it was so good why do you
00:13:02.320settle a case exchanging no money it doesn't make any sense it doesn't pass the smell test he said
00:13:08.600and then they say this there will never be a definite answer of who came out on top in the
00:13:13.460court of public opinion it appears sentiment against lively shifted as the litigation escalated
00:13:20.280I think it's pretty clear where the public opinion is.
00:13:23.500And then they say the last remaining issue before the court is how much Baldoni should pay in legal fees.
00:13:28.300Still nothing is stopping Lively from pursuing another lawsuit for damages over his allegedly retaliatory defamation claim,
00:13:36.280though Friedman is of the belief that it's now time to move on.
00:13:41.840Yes, it seems like no one really agrees if Blake could or could not pursue these damages somewhere else.
00:15:26.200And that brings me to this community note.
00:15:29.000Thank you, Amanda, for pointing this out.
00:15:31.520This was on Hollywood Reporter on threads.
00:15:35.060they don't have this on their instagram account for some reason but she saw this on thread this
00:15:42.340is the story a hollywood reporter published the day that the judge ruled that blake should get
00:15:47.960her attorney's fees covered and they said in the title blake lively's legal fees to be paid for by
00:15:54.100justin baldoni court orders very misleading headline if you ask me leaning very much towards
00:16:00.020Blake but then they added a description here saying Blake Lively will have her legal fees
00:16:05.020paid by Justin Baldoni but isn't entitled to damages for harm caused by his defamation claim
00:16:11.880a court found Friday. As we learned so many times from the trade magazines reporting on this
00:16:16.800all of them have leaned towards Blake Lively and then this community note here is quite interesting
00:16:22.440because it doesn't attack the fact that this headline is misleading that Justin Baldoni does
00:16:28.180not have to pay her legal fees he has to pay a small amount and it's not him having to pay
00:16:33.560it's the wayfair party whatever anyways let's talk about the community note it says judge
00:16:37.880lyman noted that justin baldoni's team failed to provide any evidence that blake lively acted
00:16:43.660with malice when she made her original claims against him that has nothing to do with this
00:16:49.400article at all they are saying that she's getting fees but no damages and then they're just adding
00:16:55.520this information so now it makes me believe this is what maximum effort is up to just posting a lot
00:17:02.540of community notes to get more information out there just random facts i mean of course he
00:17:09.140couldn't prove that she filed her lawsuit with malice because he's not inside blake wife's head
00:17:15.140which is basically where you have to be to prove malice because if she didn't tell that to the
00:17:20.040world that i filed this lawsuit knowing it was false then there's no evidence of that um so yeah
00:17:26.860very interesting observation there and then there's a few interesting comments as well saying
00:17:31.440i'm positive he has content creators working for him but also positive he doesn't pay them
00:17:36.360someone saying here he's more than likely scamming them to do it for free under some sort of
00:17:41.660beneficial guys such as training them promising them bigger and better things in the future like
00:17:47.580when they ripped off that photographer they used and conned for years by using her aviation gin
00:17:53.800photographs so true i have another story coming up soon with someone who worked on a set with
00:18:00.600ryan reynolds and that person could tell me a lot of similar stories and how they were being used to
00:18:07.860work for ryan for free so that does not surprise me at all as you know they also failed to pay
00:18:14.780their contractors in that house they're building, which was a big news story a couple of weeks ago.
00:18:19.780Yeah, I'm not surprised by anything anymore when it comes to Ryan Reynolds for some reason.
00:18:24.060Anyway, so let's look at this other lawsuit that Blake Lively used also against the Wayfair parties.
00:18:30.080So this Nickelodeon actress called Alexa Nicholas also sued Brian Friedman, Justin Baldwin's attorney,
00:18:38.820Jed Wallace, the hired gun behind the smear machine, and Melissa Nathan,
00:18:43.800the crisis manager who also Justin Baldoni hired to help him out of the mess during the It Ends
00:18:51.740With Us saga. So she sued these people for orchestrating a smear campaign against her,
00:18:58.240mainly a smear website that was spreading lies about her according to her lawsuit. So I was
00:19:04.240trying to figure out her motivation for suing these people who is behind this smearing. I mean
00:19:09.720they must have been hired by someone at least to try and smear her. And there was a link there
00:19:15.320because Brian Friedman represented her ex-husband Michael Mills when she sued him for SA and
00:19:23.480intentional infliction of emotional distress. She later, he denied all those claims and she later
00:19:30.380just dropped that lawsuit. But that made her furious with Brian Friedman and she's been
00:19:35.680advocating for victims for a long time and she believes that this smear campaign was orchestrated
00:19:42.520against her because of that she doesn't believe that it's her ex-husband behind it she doesn't
00:19:47.520really clarify who's behind it but anyways as you know the hollywood reporter picked that up
00:19:53.740creating this big expose about the smear machine in hollywood a few months ago connecting blake
00:20:02.060Lively's case to this case and to the Rebel Wilson case which I also talked about here on my channel
00:20:09.620and now for some reason it seems like Alexa has lost her interest in this case so she explained
00:20:17.900that it was because of Blake Lively's lawsuit that she figured out who had who was behind her
00:20:24.680smear campaign as well and as you know Blake tried to use this case in her case against them saying
00:20:31.200that this is a pattern. Look, they did this to Alexa as well. But just a few days ago, the judge
00:20:36.580put on the record that Alexa had failed to serve the defendants in this case. She had not filed
00:20:46.360any proof of that service on the docket. And now the judge said, we have to have a meeting with
00:20:52.620you. So she has to come to court on September 28th to explain why she has failed to do this.0.93
00:20:58.840She could be sanctioned for that, and eventually her lawsuit could also be dismissed if she keeps failing to do things like this.
00:21:07.420To me, it's really interesting and strange that she all of a sudden kind of loses interest in her own case here.
00:21:14.940Why did she bring on this case in the first place if she's not interested in pursuing it?
00:21:20.180It's very tempting to speculate that Blake and Ryan maybe helped her or encouraged her.
00:21:29.440I'm just going to say that these are just speculations in filing that lawsuit.
00:21:34.160And now they don't need that lawsuit anymore because she's settled hers and there's no other vehicle here, according to Brian Friedman, not according to them.
00:21:43.460So there's no reason for her to really pursue this.
00:21:46.380or has she realized that she doesn't have any evidence at all as Blake Lively did and then just
00:21:51.580had to settle it I don't know but should be interesting to follow this as well and I have to
00:21:57.100say reading about all these smear websites as you know Stephanie Jones Justin Baldoni's publicist
00:22:04.060who later ended up suing him and jumped over to Blake Lively's team she also claimed that she
00:22:11.820has been a victim of a smear campaign and she also said that it's the same people behind her
00:22:19.100smear website but when you look at these women who are accusing the same people of smearing them
00:22:25.080all of them have been very controversial figures so stephanie jones is a very unpopular person
00:22:33.720and we've learned that through all the text messages that have been released in this case
00:22:38.280she was called the c-word by so many different people one of them being Blake Lively's own
00:22:45.680publicist so there's so many people who could have potentially created a website like that
00:22:51.200and as I just said Alexa sued her ex-husband and then just voluntarily dismissed everything
00:22:56.800herself and then of course there is the Weber Wilson case that I also spoke about here on my
00:23:01.480channel and I have to say I have no idea if any of these people had anything to do with any of
00:23:06.720these smear websites. But what I have to say is that I think it's so much worse to go to a huge
00:23:12.760newspaper and a very respected newspaper like the New York Times and feed them with a narrative
00:23:19.400that was designed to ruin someone's life and ruin someone's reputation. I bet you a lot more people
00:23:27.220read that article in the New York Times than ever visited any of these smear websites. And I think
00:23:33.380these anonymous smear websites is a common thing for celebrities to have to deal with when you're
00:23:40.080a public figure people are going to have opinions about you and they're going to be very vocal about
00:23:45.320those opinions and some people want to be anonymous when they're vocal about their opinions but as you
00:23:50.660know there is still one lawsuit that's also active in the Blake Lively world which is Stephanie Jones
00:23:56.480that publicist suing her publicist that used to work for her and Jennifer Abel which is her name
00:24:03.240suing her back because she took her phone and gave it to Blake Lively who gave it to the New York
00:24:09.760Times and everything in that article was based on a few text messages on that phone so in a couple
00:24:16.440of months I'm guessing we'll get more from that case will we get more evidence because they're
00:24:21.240in the middle of discovery right now so should be very interesting to follow as well anyways that's
00:24:27.100it for me today you guys thank you so much for watching and thank you for supporting my channel
00:24:32.040and for supporting those dogs at Rydland Farm.