Flaawsome Talk with Kjersti Flaa - WOW, It's Happening AGAIN !!

00:00:00.000 That quote alone makes me believe that this is the work

00:00:03.600 of Blake Lively's new publicist, Kelly Bush-Mulwag.

00:00:13.560 Hi and welcome to Flossom Talk. I'm Kjersti Floor, journalist, Hollywood truth teller,

00:00:18.040 and your voice of reason in a town built on delusion. Okay, so the New York Times did it

00:00:25.240 Again, another hit piece on Justin Baldoni.

00:00:29.140 I mean, when I saw this story yesterday, I was like, wow.

00:00:33.140 It's been almost two years since they did the original hit piece based on Blake Lively's lawsuit

00:00:39.140 with cherry-picked text messages taken out of context.

00:00:43.000 Now, they're trying to establish this truth one more time by creating a guilty by association article.

00:00:51.980 In this article, there are four other women that are also accusing the same team that Justin Baldoni used, according to the New York Times, to smear them.

00:01:04.840 They're saying that some people wanted to harm them and they hired this team to create smear websites against them and to spread false narratives about them.

00:01:14.160 In this article, they say Ms. Lively's legal efforts helped the other women who sued realize their campaigns were connected, they all told the Times.

00:01:24.820 That quote alone makes me believe that this is the work of Blake Lively's new publicist, Kelly Bush Novak. 0.92

00:01:33.780 You know, she fired her publicist from 20 years last week, Leslie Sloan.

00:01:39.040 And now I'm starting to think that that was not a coincidence, by the way.

00:01:42.340 But what is clear to me after reading this article is that the main goal of it

00:01:46.820 is to convince us that they were right about Blake Lively all along.

00:01:53.220 They were right in their reporting that there was a smear campaign against Blake Lively.

00:01:59.100 It's interesting that they kept me out of this story.

00:02:02.280 As you might remember, if you follow this channel for a while,

00:02:06.020 I was accused by the New York Times in their last hit piece

00:02:09.460 of being part of a smear campaign against Blake Lively

00:02:13.100 because I published an interview with Johnny Depp during his trial

00:02:17.080 and he was represented by Melissa Nathan.

00:02:20.620 Therefore, when I published an interview I did with Blake Lively

00:02:25.200 that wasn't showing her best side,

00:02:28.900 I had to be a part of a coordinated smear campaign.

00:02:33.860 And it was insinuated very strongly that I was working with Melissa Nathan,

00:02:38.740 whom at that point I had never heard of.

00:02:41.580 Right after that happened, somebody attacked my Wikipedia page

00:02:46.300 and started changing up the information about me there,

00:02:49.740 making me look like an unreliable journalist with no integrity

00:02:54.920 who's been paid to swear Blake Lively.

00:02:59.160 Interestingly enough, that is one of the things that they mention in this article

00:03:03.800 that these women have been victims of as well.

00:03:08.000 someone went and changed up their Wikipedia pages.

00:03:11.960 Obviously, it's not the same people. 1.00

00:03:14.420 But anyways, all these women have different stories 1.00

00:03:16.980 and they have different reasons to believe that someone wanted to harm them. 0.98

00:03:21.260 They're all trying to make the connection to Brian Friedman,

00:03:24.460 Justin Baldoni's attorney, Melissa Nathan, his crisis manager,

00:03:28.460 and Jed Wallace, this guy in Texas who Blake claimed

00:03:31.860 was responsible for creating this untraceable smear campaign.

00:03:37.200 It says here that to examine the allegations, New York Times interviewed more than 60 people,

00:03:44.080 reviewed court documents and chat transcripts and analyzed hundreds of anonymous websites

00:03:49.220 and fabricated social media profiles.

00:03:51.540 It's so interesting how they interviewed 60 people and they don't mention who any of

00:03:56.280 these 60 people are.

00:03:58.040 Are they any experts in any areas or did they just interview 60 random people about this?

00:04:03.280 They don't specify that, which I find really strange.

00:04:06.320 They also mention again how this was untraceable, but there were some breadcrumbs left here and there.

00:04:12.360 So the New York Times somehow was able to find the connected dots here.

00:04:18.380 They're not explaining how, and as of now, none of these allegations are proven in the court of law.

00:04:26.000 And as you know, Blake Lively's lawsuit settled, and there was never shown any evidence of a smear campaign.

00:04:32.740 But anyways, in this article, they created this map of people showing that this must be connected because, look, we made a drawing out of it with pictures.

00:04:41.680 And here on the victim list now, guess who's there?

00:04:44.960 Stephanie Jones, the woman who stole her employee's phone and took all the content of her personal information from that phone and never gave it back to her, by the way. 0.98

00:04:58.720 and gave it to Blake Lively so she could cherry pick or New York Times could cherry pick the 0.82

00:05:04.660 content and publish it to the world. She is now on this victim list. I mean, you can't make this

00:05:12.980 stuff up. It's interesting. I'll get into some more text messages later on in this episode,

00:05:17.660 by the way. One of them being that Leslie Sloan, Blake Lively's own publicist, called Stephanie

00:05:24.300 Jones, the C word to a journalist. If that's not smearing someone, I don't know what is. But

00:05:31.680 anyways, that's not interesting information in this article. What's interesting is untraceable

00:05:37.760 smear machines, not for the people representing the main character in this article, that there

00:05:43.900 are text messages showing that she is smearing another person to the press. That's not important

00:05:51.600 information here according to the new york times this article also claims that blake lively's

00:05:56.800 claims of sh were dismissed on legal technicalities she was an independent contractor not a full-time

00:06:03.580 employee on the set of the film meaning federal employment anti-discrimination laws could not be

00:06:09.660 applied but in april a judge in new york federal court allowed three claims including two centered

00:06:16.240 on the allegation of a smear campaign to proceed to trial although the actress opted instead to

00:06:23.300 settle the case in May. I mean how much information did they not choose to put in here? This is

00:06:32.400 outrageous. As you know one of Blake's strongest claims was from that slow dance the dancing scene

00:06:39.560 where she claimed that Justin Baldoni smelled her hair and smelled her body and said that she smelled

00:06:45.680 good and planted an unplanned kiss on her and as we later learned from text messages Blake Lively 0.99

00:06:53.840 wanted Sony to wipe that footage she wanted to wipe out the dailies because she knew that she

00:07:01.340 was going to sue him for it we also learned that she didn't know that there was any audio

00:07:05.800 on that dancing scene or on that b-roll so we could all hear what was going on there

00:07:11.420 They're also leaving out here in this article, obviously, what the judge said when he dismissed all of Blake Lively's SH claims and when he dismissed all the individuals from the lawsuit.

00:07:24.420 The three claims that went forward that was going to trial, there were claims that involved a company, not any of the individuals that she sued.

00:07:33.520 and the judge said creative artists no less than comedy room writers must have some amount of space

00:07:40.720 to experiment within the bounds of an agreed script basically saying they were in character

00:07:47.360 and they were supposed to play two characters falling in love yeah the new york times forgot

00:07:52.400 to mention that too also interestingly enough i forget to mention that the judge dismissed 10

00:07:57.900 out of her 13 claims, meaning that he dismissed more of her claims than he did of Justin Baldoni's

00:08:07.020 claims. When he dismissed parts of Justin Baldoni's lawsuit against Blake, he dismissed only three

00:08:14.260 out of the seven claims. So over 50% of his lawsuit was left. But the New York Times instead chooses

00:08:20.800 to say that it was dismissed. They also forget to mention that they were sued because of that

00:08:25.860 article. But I guess that's not important either. They also take out of context that Blake Lively

00:08:31.480 received $407,000 in legal fees. They forgot to mention that she asked for $8 million. And the

00:08:41.880 reason why she could even ask for these $400,000 is because Justin Baldoni was being generous.

00:08:48.800 He could have fought that, but instead he said, I want to support future victims that want to be protected by this law, so that's why I am going to give in on that.

00:09:00.800 And of course, they weaponized that against him, as they did with the settlement statement, as you know.

00:09:07.320 They make it sound like in this article that she received the $400,000 in legal fees because her lawsuit was successful in any way.

00:09:16.180 It wasn't.

00:09:16.840 The article also says that Tagg and Jed Wallace, Tagg, the crisis PR company, are both defendants in lively suits, but they weren't.

00:09:26.900 Wallace and his company were dismissed early on because Blake didn't have any jurisdiction over him because he's based in Texas.

00:09:35.180 But the really shady thing here is they're trying to connect all these people through this drawing that you scroll up and down and you're like,

00:09:42.500 oh, okay, yes, all of this is definitely connected

00:09:45.360 because I see some of the same people here

00:09:48.080 with the same lines in between them.

00:09:51.200 So this is obviously evidence.

00:09:52.840 I have to say in regards to some of these cases,

00:09:56.220 there might be some shady business going on.

00:09:58.460 I'm not gonna say that nothing happened

00:10:00.440 in the Amanda Ghost case, the Rebel Wilson case.

00:10:03.980 There are some recordings there that suggest

00:10:07.180 that something shady was going on.

00:10:09.760 But the thing is,

00:10:10.360 when the New York Times writes an article like this,

00:10:12.680 and then they praise Blake Lively for bringing this to light,

00:10:17.780 most people who are a little bit informed about this

00:10:21.480 will not believe any of these women. 0.98

00:10:23.780 So they're actually doing the opposite of what the goal is for this article.

00:10:28.620 They're also saying here, with the picture of Blake Lively there,

00:10:32.440 these women became the subject of websites and posts

00:10:35.780 with fabricated disparaging narratives. 0.92

00:10:38.820 after their adversaries connected with at least one of the three.

00:10:44.620 So the three are Melissa Nathan and Brian Friedman and Jed Wallace.

00:10:50.400 So where are the smear websites about Blake Lively?

00:10:55.300 And where are the posts with fabricated disparaging narratives?

00:11:00.200 We haven't seen any of that. 0.96

00:11:01.800 She has filed thousands and thousands of documents

00:11:05.960 And there are no evidence of any smear website.

00:11:10.880 She never actually claimed that they created a smear website because obviously there wasn't one.

00:11:16.280 And when she was asked in her deposition to point to any articles that printed anything about her that was untrue and that she believed came from the Justin Baldoni camp, she couldn't point to anything.

00:11:29.540 So the fact that the New York Times is printing this under the picture of Blake Lively is so misleading.

00:11:37.800 Anyways, now that we have established what this article wants to do,

00:11:41.420 let's look at what Blake Lively's team, especially Leslie Sloan, her ex-publicist that she fired last week,

00:11:49.080 what she was up to when this alleged smear campaign was going on, according to Blake Lively.

00:11:55.540 But before we get into that, a big thank you to the sponsor of this video, Jones Road Beauty.

00:12:01.560 I'm sure you've seen me talk about Jones Road Beauty many times before here on my channel,

00:12:06.200 and that is because I really, really like this brand.

00:12:08.800 And this is my little magic trick, the Miracle Balm, that I use every day here on my show.

00:12:15.060 This is my favorite color, Dusty Rose, and I always wear it on my lips.

00:12:19.400 I also put a little bit here up on my cheekbones, and sometimes I'll add a little bit under my brows as well.

00:12:25.120 So yeah, when I'm ready to film, I want to look nice and polished without spending hours in front of the mirror.

00:12:30.120 This comes in so many different colors, and it's the perfect way to get a little extra glow without adding a lot of different products.

00:12:37.520 Also perfect for traveling, and it doesn't take up much space in your bag.

00:12:41.380 So it's easy to bring this everywhere with you if you just need a little touch-up.

00:12:45.400 John's Rod also just launched minimalist defining mascara for a natural looking length, fullness, and definition for your lashes.

00:12:53.840 And no clumps, no smudging, and no flaking.

00:12:57.660 Jones Road makes modern-day makeup that's clean, strategic, and multifunctional for effortless routines.

00:13:05.060 For a limited time, you as my viewer and listeners get a free full-size mascara with your first purchase using code FLOR, my last name.

00:13:14.560 Head to jonesroadbeauty.com and use code FLOR.

00:13:18.800 After you purchase, they might ask where you heard about them, so please mention my name to support my channel.

00:13:24.260 Okay, let's get back into it.

00:13:26.060 Okay, this is a part that I find really fascinating, of course because I am a journalist myself,

00:13:31.360 and of course because I was shocked when these text messages from Leslie Sloan, Blake Lively's publicist,

00:13:39.480 were revealed through discovery in the Blake Lively vs. Justin Baldoni case.

00:13:45.100 So there are several messages from Leslie Sloan where she is basically terrorizing journalists to write what she wants them to write. 0.76

00:13:56.140 Here is one where she's asking a journalist at Us Weekly to change the headline of the story.

00:14:03.120 And this journalist here, Travis, is obviously happy to do that.

00:14:07.540 He's saying here, we're cutting the word demands and making all other suggestions.

00:14:12.100 would love any source quotes to respond to Blake made wardrobe and script changes behind Justin's

00:14:18.700 back. Headline is Inside Blake Live and Justin Baldoni's Bitter Creative Struggle on It Ends

00:14:25.520 With Us. And Leslie Sloan says, why? That's not cool. And then he asks her, what would you like

00:14:32.240 me to change? And she says, take out butter. And she means bitter. And then Travis likes that.

00:14:39.020 And then Leslie asks him, is it out?

00:14:41.840 The word bitter, and Travis' response just made the ask,

00:14:45.800 we'll confirm in a couple of minutes.

00:14:47.600 Changing to intense, he says.

00:14:50.100 So she's allowed to decide the wording of the headline in an article.

00:14:55.100 That, to me, is just mind-blowing.

00:14:58.440 As a journalist, this, like, I just, like, I could not believe this when I saw it.

00:15:02.940 Anyways, so Leslie says, can we take out the adjective?

00:15:06.440 she doesn't want any adjective in that headline and she says please and and Travis says I'll try

00:15:13.500 it was a fight to get bitter changed and then should I call Dan Leslie Sloan suggests that's

00:15:20.640 probably the editor or something and then Travis explains to her that it's important to have an

00:15:25.800 adjective there because of an SEO thing because of the search engines and then Leslie says I just

00:15:33.060 hate it and he says let me see what i can do uh but they seem to be set on an object on an

00:15:39.820 adjective and then leslie's saying she's begging him and then he says trying and then she's at him

00:15:46.160 again an hour later saying any word what about our other story she says and then travis says just

00:15:53.900 heard we can use any other adjective but it's not an engaging but it's not an engaging other story

00:15:59.920 without it and then Leslie says let's think and then they go on about this headline it's crazy to

00:16:07.380 me and then he sends her and then he sends her a link to the article when it's out and she says

00:16:14.360 this you forgot to link the fat shaming and the inappropriate kissing allegations that is Leslie

00:16:21.780 Sloan telling the journalist to link more negative stories that they already planted

00:16:27.280 about Justin Baldoni in the press to link it to this story in Us Weekly and then Travis is saying

00:16:34.260 adding it now and he said just ask and we have to go back to his rep about it will be added in soon

00:16:42.500 his team hasn't denied that in the past so shouldn't be an issue and she said it's in the

00:16:48.000 press already so why shouldn't you just be able to add that and he says but we didn't but we didn't

00:16:53.940 yet so we have to run by being added in within 10 minutes unless it says okay that's blake

00:17:00.480 lively's publicist blake who accused justin baldoni of a smear campaign and here is another

00:17:07.560 one so here is leslie sloan talking to a reporter at page six and sarah nason here working for page

00:17:15.520 six of the new york post is the sister of melissa nason the crisis pr manager that you know justin

00:17:22.660 Baldoni hired. And in another text message to Sony, Leslie Sloan tells them that Justin Baldoni

00:17:29.700 hired Melissa Nathan, who is a friend of hers. So Leslie Sloan Blake, liveless publicist, was a friend

00:17:37.660 of Justin Baldoni's crisis PR manager. I mean. And here, the sister of Melissa Nathan, who works

00:17:44.440 for Page Six, says, Leslie, call me when you can. And Leslie's asking what's up. And Sarah says,

00:17:49.880 I just checking that he's still not going to London or Denmark just about to talk to editor

00:17:55.700 how are you feeling says Sarah to Leslie and she says he's not I think you should put up a story

00:18:01.360 Justin's camp called Daily Mail blaming Blake and then Sarah says I'm on it unless he says I need

00:18:09.300 artist sauce whole cast isn't speaking with him and they had spectate screaming rooms at premiere

00:18:16.000 everyone but him was with the cast his cult had their own room stephanie is a lying c-word

00:18:25.760 that is coming from leslie sloan blake like this publicist just called stephanie jones who's the 0.98

00:18:31.900 victim in the new york times article a lying c-word and sarah nathan agrees and then leslie

00:18:38.580 says blake is a producer on the film and she has put her heart and soul into this she has said

00:18:43.920 this to everyone everyone pjs find quote the film is so important and needs to be seen and then

00:18:51.740 sarah is telling leslie sloan that i'm trying to hold off this story for you and leslie says thank

00:18:58.280 you and then leslie says daily mail is holding i scared them so she scared the daily mail uh so

00:19:06.300 much that they were holding an article they were supposed to publish about this feud and then she's

00:19:13.300 saying that stephanie jones is getting a call from the studio blake worked so hard i want this to 1.00

00:19:19.360 work leslie says and sarah says oh and then leslie says stephanie is really bad she is a horror show

00:19:29.280 says sarah nathan and leslie says they know your story and are appreciative you're holding and then

00:19:38.240 And Sarah is again saying later down here that Stephanie is the worst holding for a beef. 1.00

00:19:44.220 But I do think Stephanie is going to do something to be annoying. 1.00

00:19:48.640 Did I tell you I heard three things? 1.00

00:19:51.740 Sarah Nathan is telling Leslie Sloan here.

00:19:55.620 Blake felt he looked at her while she was breastfeeding.

00:19:59.440 Two, he lingered too long while kissing her in a scene.

00:20:02.300 Three, he told her she smelled good.

00:20:05.480 and Sarah says that's a bit creepy let's speak when you land and then Sarah is telling Leslie 0.98

00:20:13.080 Sloan that my sister is being brought in by Jen Abel who reps Justin she hates hates Stephanie

00:20:19.800 Jones with a passion for your info she wants to chat so here Sarah Nathan says to Leslie that

00:20:28.180 her sister Melissa who's repping Justin Baldoni wants to talk to Leslie Sloan and here's a

00:20:35.180 conversation she had with her contact at the daily mail james vitushka who as you now know famously

00:20:41.580 sued the daily mail for firing him for getting involved in this lawsuit and here leslie sloan

00:20:48.560 is saying that stephanie jones is lying because james says that he got all this information from

00:20:55.640 stephanie jones that blake wanted control over the script of the movie amongst other things

00:21:02.420 and Leslie says I promise she's lying this will not look good for your sides and then James is

00:21:09.400 asking can you give me anything about what the issue is then because there are so many rumors

00:21:13.240 that something's going on behind the scenes of the set of It Ends With Us and she says no I'm

00:21:18.380 on a plane she's always on a plane by the way and then Leslie says he talking about Justin went on 0.96

00:21:24.440 today's show and praised her this a.m. how dumb are you people and Stephanie I don't know what 0.98

00:21:31.340 she meant about that because justin praised blake lively then she thinks that everyone's dumb if 0.97

00:21:37.620 they believe that i guess well i mean and then at the end of this exchange james says to leslie 0.89

00:21:44.800 i've convinced emma who is probably his editor to kill the reporters bullshit blake info and she

00:21:51.820 asked them to reveal to her who their sources are and how they would be private to such info 0.97

00:21:58.420 I shut it down and we're going to discuss tomorrow what we're going to do since Stephanie Jones fed us lies.

00:22:06.240 So here again, Leslie Sloan has convinced the press that everything that they hear from the Justin Boldoni side is untrue.

00:22:16.420 And it's also clear here how involved Stephanie Jones is in all of this.

00:22:20.880 The one who's now suing everyone because she's saying that she's also a victim of a smear campaign.

00:22:26.300 I mean, how are we ever going to take anyone involved in PR seriously after reading all of this stuff?

00:22:32.920 This one is one of the worst, though, because here Leslie Sloan, again, is talking to Sarah Nathan.

00:22:39.300 And then Sarah is sharing the information that she's going to put in the article, saying,

00:22:43.600 Blake Lively was given final edit approval on It Ends With Us to make the movie more feminine.

00:22:48.880 According to sources, the star and the rest of the cast are not speaking to director and co-star Justin Baldoni.

00:22:54.980 And Brandis Glenar particularly has a problem with him over, we're told.

00:22:59.920 Although not greenlit, as we predicted, there will now be a battle over the sequel.

00:23:05.320 It starts with us, as Baldoni owns the rights to the film,

00:23:08.360 but due to the rift with Lively, it's unknown that it will happen.

00:23:12.080 A studio source says, there were two edits and the studio went with a more feminine edit.

00:23:18.240 Blake had the right to do that. 0.99

00:23:19.900 She had final edit approval.

00:23:22.180 And then Leslie Sloan says,

00:23:24.440 not a source a studio insider and then she says again it always needs to say studio source

00:23:32.840 these are things coming from Leslie Sloan this information and she's telling the press to lie

00:23:40.880 about the source of this information saying that it came from a studio source when it's obviously

00:23:47.740 coming from her and then Sarah sends her the entire article and Leslie Sloan still doesn't

00:23:53.300 like it so she says I hate this and Sarah says sorry and then Leslie says this will hurt Blake

00:23:59.960 you're airing an animal calling Justin Baldoni an animal and in her own deposition she's asked

00:24:07.360 about that by his team why would you call Justin Baldoni an animal and her response is because I

00:24:13.660 felt like it I can say whatever I want I felt like calling him an animal and Sarah here tries

00:24:20.380 to convince Leslie that it's not pro-Justin Baldoni.

00:24:24.080 And she also says, we can amend it.

00:24:27.180 And Leslie says, yes, it is.

00:24:29.000 And she says, no, it's not.

00:24:30.720 Tell me what to amend, Sarah says.

00:24:32.720 And Leslie said, and the internet will continue to hate her

00:24:35.860 by quoting his lies about her.

00:24:37.880 It's awful as he is lying and manipulating

00:24:40.920 and thus he has you.

00:24:42.880 And then Sarah says, we can take out some of the quotes

00:24:46.020 from previous interviews if that helps.

00:24:48.420 And Leslie says, he's a gaslighter.

00:24:51.240 You don't see it.

00:24:52.120 He's playing a game.

00:24:53.640 You will be helping him with.

00:24:55.640 You will be helping him win.

00:24:57.520 Just drop the whole attack.

00:24:59.740 Sarah says, okay, we will take out all the quotes at the end, okay?

00:25:04.320 And Leslie says, just stop this.

00:25:06.260 There is no news and you will hurt Blake.

00:25:09.160 And Sarah says, this is the last piece and this already went in Hollywood Reporter.

00:25:15.040 And then Leslie says, no one reads that.

00:25:16.700 And then Leslie says, the end isn't the issue.

00:25:19.720 It's the other quotes.

00:25:20.680 I don't get why this story is happening.

00:25:23.060 She lost control of this story, obviously.

00:25:25.380 And now the truth is about to come out.

00:25:28.320 And Sarah says, because everyone is writing about this.

00:25:31.340 It's on Puck.

00:25:32.380 It's on people.

00:25:33.420 It's everywhere.

00:25:34.940 And Leslie says, so is everyone no out a window?

00:25:37.760 Would you, you already wrote?

00:25:39.920 This is making me want to pull my cover.

00:25:43.620 No one reads Pucks.

00:25:44.760 I don't know.

00:25:45.340 her spelling is sometimes all over the place so i'm not sure what that means and sarah says this

00:25:50.560 is not a bad story all it's saying is that blake helped shape the film into the hit it is then

00:25:56.640 leslie says at the end all the justin quotes are manipulative and then sarah ends it with

00:26:01.900 i took them all out how can anyone who reads these text messages say that there was not

00:26:10.760 a smear campaign going on against Justin Baldoni here. It is so obvious to me. I think another

00:26:18.280 interesting question here is, is it worse to create an anonymous website about someone or is

00:26:24.500 it worse to create an entire article, a hit piece on someone in one of the biggest and most respected

00:26:32.640 outlets in the country? And then you reinforce that narrative almost two years later while that

00:26:39.700 person and his family and the other people involved are finally ready to move on. When they

00:26:46.780 finally have come out and said that they are healing and that they're looking forward and

00:26:53.100 they don't want to look back, you're bringing out the knife and you're just twisting it around in

00:26:58.140 that old wound. So you can pat yourself on the back and say, hey, we exposed this with our

00:27:05.360 investigating journalism. As the New York Times mentions here, these are just allegations.

00:27:11.520 Nothing has been proven in court yet. And that's why I think the New York Times sees the need

00:27:16.960 to be the court here. They are the judge of Justin Baldoni because the case that Blake

00:27:22.740 Lively filed against him never went to trial. The New York Times is saying, hey, we can be the judge

00:27:29.420 of that he is guilty anyways that's it for me today you guys thank you so much for watching

00:27:35.400 and as you can see my executive producer oscar is back today he's working really hard as you

00:27:41.580 can see thinking about tomorrow's episode he also wants to remind everyone to subscribe to

00:27:48.500 my channel and hit the notification bell as well so you never miss an episode of floss and talk

00:27:55.160 right oscar and we'll see you tomorrow

00:27:59.420 some talk.

Flaawsome Talk with Kjersti Flaa - October 08, 2026

WOW, It's Happening AGAIN !!

Episode Stats

Transcript