Blake Lively’s Non-Existent Smear Campaign Falls Apart!!!!

Blake Lively’s Non-Existent Smear Campaign Falls Apart!!!!

I her castle of kaka is crumbling. Hello my frame. It is Perez, the queen of all media, the original influencer and your number one source for everything it ends with us. Saga. If you’ve been following along with me, then you know that butthole Lively had her deposition this week. And allegedly falsely accused sexual predator Justin Baldoni was in the room. And now we have finally heard the first bombshell from Ku Klux Khesi’s own words, under oath. And this is a game changer. As many of you might know, also this week, the lawyers for both parties were in front of Judge Lyman in New York City. The judge, who in my opinion is biased in favor of the plaintiff and thankfully will not be ruling on my motion to quash her uninforcable subpoena against me. The lawyers were in Judge Lyman’s courtroom arguing over the subpoena that subpoena Serena issued against Justin Baldon’s lawyer Brian Freriedman and his law firm. This is a very very unusual step in litigation. Courts overwhelmingly safeguard materials between attorneys and their clients. attorney client privilege and also work product. The judge ended that hearing without ruling. So, we still don’t know if Brian Freriedman and his law firm are going to have to turn over a lot of information to Ku Klux Khesi. Hoping to make their case stronger, each side has now submitted letters to the judge. Lawyers for the unliftable Lively tell the judge, quote, for the avoidance of doubt, Miss Lively did not intend for the subpoena to capture privileged communications exclusively with the Wayfairer defendants or those with the Wayfairer defendants and third parties that have been produced through party productions and is amendable to a narrowing of the subpoena. In that respect, Miss Lively also agrees that the subpoena could be narrowed further to exclude from the scope of the request any memoranda internal to Liner, the law firm, or work product prepared by council reflecting Liner’s communications with sources. How kind. No, you go. So, team Kaka gave the judge a lot more kaka. But seems like their approach, their tactics are changing now. They claim that Brian Freriedman has defamed Blake Lively through public statements that he’s made. And this is laughable. I’ve paid attention to all of Brian Freriedman’s interviews. He’s a really good lawyer. He knows what to say and what not to say. There’s not a single thing that Brian Freriedman has said publicly that is defamatory. Privately, I don’t know. But publicly, not a thing. Yet the very mid cockarrific lawyers that Ryan Reynolds has been paying millions and millions of dollars to think it’s a good idea to go down this route. Her lawyers tell Judge Lyman, quote, “Miss Lively respectfully notes that this case is distinguishable from many of the others cited in the papers, in part because Liner, the law firm, was given clear advanced notice on December 23rd, 2024, that Mr. Freriedman had defamed Miss Lively and that his conduct had amounted to public relations work rather than that of an attorney. [Music] [Laughter] [Music] At the same time, council specifically advised Mr. Freriedman that he was a fact witness to the unlawful retaliation against Miss Lively and as such instructed Mr. Freriedman and Liner to preserve their documents, including without limitation all documents electronically stored information and metadata in their possession, custody, or control that relate to or are reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of evidence related to this matter in any way. Given this, Liner was on notice no later than December 23rd, 2024 that Mr. Freriedman was a fact witness in this matter and that further public attacks on Miss Lively would be subject to discovery requests if not liability. Having ignored that notice, Liner cannot now claim that providing the preserved documents about which Miss Lively gave Liner notice more than six months ago constitutes undue burden or unfair surprise. Well, Baldon’s law firm is coming back with a juicy one. They tell the judge to justify the harassing subpoena, the letter erroneously alleges that Brian Freriedman, Esquire, defamed Lively and that his conduct had amounted to public relations work rather than that of an attorney. It appears that Lively is slowly realizing that there is no retaliatory smear campaign by the wayfairer parties against her. Belon’s lawyer just told the judge. Consequently, the letter continues, “Lively is shifting her focus to Liner Freedman in connection with her 14th cause of action, defamation, which alleges that certain wayfairer parties through their attorney, Freriedman, purportedly defamed her via postlitigation statements to the media.” And here is the best part. The letter alleges upon questioning by Freriedman Brian did the depo at her recent deposition, Lively admitted that the only ongoing smear campaign about which she has personal knowledge involves and then it was redacted. We don’t know, but I’m going to guess. Seeing as just this week in the hearing that I told you about earlier, team garden variety actress brought up to the judge me. I’m going to think the redacted part of this letter is about me. Me. And let me state for the record one more time, my opinions are mine. I have not been paid by anyone and I have not been told to smear her. She is very smearable all by herself. Deservedly tauntable, I would say. Their letter goes on to say that with regards to defamation, New York law provides an absolute privilege for communications made by individuals participating in public functions such as executive, legislative, judicial, or quasi judicial proceedings. So, Brian Freriedman is good. They cite the case law. And they add, “In any event, Lively does not adequately address the court’s inquiry concerning the undue burden imposed upon Liner Freriedman by the subpoena.” And his lawyers argue smartly that they basically were told back in December, as team Dulu mentions, to cease and desist, which they weren’t going to, and that’s not enforceable. he has every right to have his lawyer defend him publicly because remember the judge earlier this year did not issue a gag order. So for all of these reasons, Team Wayfair argues that the motion to quash her subpoena should be granted and it really should because this has repercussions in other cases. how Judge Lyman rules could affect other courtrooms. But I think he’s going to go her way because this judge is corrupt in my opinion. What do you think? Let’s discuss everything in the comments section.

👏 👏 👏 👏 #BlakeLively #JustinBaldoni #TaylorSwift

Join this channel to get access to perks:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCaHE2Xd6bhJbfM7T1TAmI9Q/join

Listen to The Perez Hilton Podcast with Chris Booker HERE: http://PerezPodcast.com

Sign up for my Patreon and get lots of exclusive content at http://Patreon.com/PerezHilton

Follow Me!
MAIN CHANNEL: http://youtube.com/PerezHilton
WEBSITE: http://PerezHilton.com
PEREZ’S INSTAGRAM: http://Instagram.com/ThePerezHilton
WEBSITE’S INSTAGRAM: http://Instagram.com/PerezHilton
GET A PERSONALIZED VIDEO FROM ME HERE: https://www.cameo.com/perezhilton
LISTEN TO MY PODCAST HERE: http://PerezPodcast.com
WEBSITE’S FACEBOOK: http://Facebook.com/PerezHilton
PEREZ’S FACEBOOK: http://Facebook.com/ThePerezHilton
WEBSITE’S TWITTER: http://Twitter.com/PerezHilton
PEREZ’S TWITTER: http://Twitter.com/ThePerezHilton

Check out my merch: http://BuyPopStuff.com

About Perez Hilton:
The original influencer, Perez Hilton founded and oversees one of the most iconic websites ever. In addition to his eponymous blog, he is the host of a very successful podcast, has a loyal following across two YouTube channels, has written four books, has acted in countless TV shows and films – as well as the stage. And, most importantly, he is the proud father of three happy and thriving kids and an adult child, his mother. Perez is one of the most sought after commentators and your best friend!

Blake Lively’s Non-Existent Smear Campaign Falls Apart!!!!

Perez Hilton
https://www.youtube.com/perezhilton