Blake Lively’s CASE AGAINST Justin Baldoni TAKES WILD TURN UNSEALED Testimony REVEALS SHOCKING TWIST

Blake Lively’s CASE AGAINST Justin Baldoni TAKES WILD TURN UNSEALED Testimony REVEALS SHOCKING TWIST

so remarkable. You know, if if if a scene wasn’t working or or you you know, you just didn’t feel like you connected to a certain thing, your character wouldn’t do this, and you would talk to him as the writer. You would change it in such a beautiful way and and just transform the scene and and make it exactly everything you felt but couldn’t articulate. As an actor, he was such a strong co-star. You never felt like he was judging you or critiquing you or, okay, what am I going to change when we cut? You just felt like he was so present. You were able to lose yourself in the scene because he was so convincing. Hey besties, welcome back to my channel. Blake Lively and Ryan Reynolds claimed that there was a digital campaign implemented in the short span of two days from August 9th until the 15th or the 11th. And during the two days, the entire internet turned against Blake Lively. And a lot has been said about text messages about Jed killing it on Reddit and shaping the narrative online and they were going to bury Blake. But what if I told you there’s testimony that just got unsealed of Jed Wallace claiming that much of what Melissa Nathan sold Wayfair about what he could do was not true. In fact, newly unsealed documents that were attached to Blake Lively’s case related to spoilation that are filed related to Jed Wallace’s involvement and Tag’s involvement and deposition transcripts and testimony paint a different story. In fact, it’s a story that Tag and Wallace really didn’t do a whole lot other than monitor what was happening online. There’s been a lot of discussion about Jed and Tag deleting evidence, but I just don’t think there’s evidence to be deleted. And I’m also starting to question the business practices of Jed Wallace and Melissa Nathan based on this testimony. But that could also be why these pages are being released. and were seeing things maybe a little bit out of context, but Jed was deposed about some of the work that he had done for other clients. And in that testimony, Michael Gotley pointed out to claims that he was making that he could elevate content across all kinds of different platforms through an algorithm. And he claimed that he had a team and got say, “Was your team capable of elevating content across algorithmically driven platforms?” And he said, “I don’t have a team.” And he said, “Is Street Relations capable of elevating content across those platforms?” Absolutely not. And he said, Gotibly said, “So you’re being untruthful to the client when you said that our team can elevate across these platforms.” And he said, “Yeah, not at all. You are not at all being untruthful.” No. Okay. So, Street Elations can’t do that, right? Correct. So, who is your team capable of elevating across these platforms? If I’m referencing tag, it would have been whoever works for tag to post stories. So when he was telling people about teams, the team he’s talking about is tag apparently. And he says that tag is the one that posts stories and places them. He said yes. Or let me be specific like with what is to help their clients get things posted as news stories which would 100% elevate it across all driven platforms. Okay. and you believe that when you’re writing so I can share with the teams and get it to get it into the systems what you’re talking about is sharing the content with tag and he said I do do you believe this is a system that’s in reference to something tag has it’s a system of posting or at least getting content covered for their clients so really what they’re saying here is that they’re using language that might be confusing to clients and really when they’re saying that they can manipulate algorithms they’re placing stories for their clients to help their clients in the algorithm because then the story will get pushed out across other outlets. And here’s what’s interesting. Do you remember that list that Melissa proposed to Wayfair about what they could get from the social teams about how they could do things on Reddit and they could do full takedowns and work with different platforms to post things. Apparently, he says that he can’t do that. He says, ‘ Do you see the next bullet down says use our team of specialists to build all digital Reddit site X 4chan, Discord, etc. messaging to trend and dominate in clients favor? He said, I do. Are you aware of any teams of specialists that exist that can do that? And he said, I’m not. Is Melissa Nathan a technically sophisticated person? Yeah, I I need a more specific question. Do you think she understands the concept of something being algorithmically weaponized? And he said, ‘I don’t know. Do you think she understands how to influence content on 4chan? He said, I don’t know. Would it surprise you to learn that her testimony under oath in this case is that she doesn’t even have social media? And he said, I don’t know. I don’t have I have no idea that if that would surprise me or not. It would be news. So he said, do got says, “Okay, so but your testimony is that you don’t know anyone who could build all of the digital messaging from these platforms to trend and dominate in the client’s favor. Is that right?” And he said, “Correct and you can’t do that personally.” And he said, “I cannot.” Okay. So assuming Melissa Nathan is also not capable of doing this personally given your testimony that you can’t do it and you don’t know anyone else who could do this personally, is this a truthful representation of the statement of work that you tag and Brian Freriedman could provide? And he testified, “I have no idea what some of these are.” Says, “So this would not be truthful and accurate representation of a service that collectively you, Melissa Nathan and Brian Freriedman could provide.” Jed says, “Not from my perspective.” Gotleb says, “Why do you think Melissa Nathan repeatedly sends out statements of work that represent digital services that you can’t provide?” And he kept asking, “Can you repeat the question?” And he says, “I have no idea. Does it concern you?” And he said, “I don’t know enough about it.” As you sit here today, Gotautle says, he says, “That it concerns me.” Sorry, I didn’t mean to interrupt, says Gotle. As you sit here today, we’ve now looked at a few of these, right? Uh-huh. Okay. So, I’m just asking you as a businessman who runs his own business, who has a has a representation, does it bother you at all that you are being held out to provide services that you are sitting here telling me under oath? Not only can you not provide them, but don’t even know what they are. Does that bother you? I don’t know that she’s talking about me. Okay. If she’s talking about you, if her testimony is in providing descriptions of digital services, she was talking about you and street relations, then would it bother you? Jed says, I don’t have enough details there. So Jed’s being a little bit difficult here. I’ve been in enough depositions and I’ve witnessed depositions to know when someone’s trying to avoid answering questions. And he’s definitely, in my opinion, avoiding answering questions. So Jed’s testimony under oath is that he cannot manipulate social media. He doesn’t have the capability and it’s not something he can do. He doesn’t have a team. He can’t manipulate algorithms. But his testimony is that he can’t do that. But Melissa Nathan, according to Gotle, is representing this to clients that this is something he can do. There was something always odd to me about Jed and like I when I first saw his email to Jamie Heath and he said my team will get working on it and then his he later told the court he had no team. He’s just either bullshitting or he’s just plain out like lying on this deposition or he’s like ripping people off. He says, “Mr. Wallace, you’ve been handed a document marked as exhibit 18 bearing the Bates number blah blah blah.” Exhibit 18 is an email exchange of an attachment that involves you, a number of people from TAG, and someone from blank. Is that right? Yes. Is blank a client that you did any work for around this time? They were a client of tags. Okay. A client of tags. Did you or street do any work for them in connection with tag services? I had a few consulting calls with them. Okay. And this was August. This was August 3rd. This is around the same time you began working for performing the work you did on behalf of Wayfair Studios. No, it was later for Wayfair. A few days later, August 9th. This is around the same time you began talking to Miss Nathan and Mr. Beldon and Wayfair. Is that right? I don’t recall. Okay. At most. Then I think what you’re saying is that 6 days apart from when you were engaged according to the this date. Yes. Okay. And there’s a scope of work for what is attached to the end of this email chain. Is that right? Jud says yes. And at 8 on Friday, August 2nd, you reply to the introduction that blank has sent. Is that right? He says yes. And then he says this. I see the date of the article you have and have my forensic team building a quick report on the sentiment and how it engages so we can discuss all the paths to solve. Do you see that? And he said, I do see. And got says, “Who’s your forensic team you’re referring to here?” And he says, “I don’t have one.” Who were you referring to when you wrote my forensic team? And he said, “I don’t recall.” Do you think you had someone out there that was building a quick report on the sentiment? Jed says, “No, not at that point.” Do you think you asked someone whether human, AI, or otherwise to build a sentiment report at this point in time? Jed says, “I did not.” So this was a misrepresentation that you made to blank. He said, ‘It was a forward thinking before I looked into the case. And he said, ‘I’m not sure I understand what you’re saying. And Jed says, ‘I hadn’t had a chance to review. I was going to review myself first. Okay, so you didn’t yet have anyone building a quick report, but what you’re telling me, I think, is that your intention was to prepare some kind of sentiment report. And he said, I don’t have enough details. I don’t recall. Okay, but you certainly recall that it was not correct that you had a forensic team at the time building a quick report on the sentiment. Correct. And when he’s pushed and pushed and pushed about these claims that he’s making to clients about having teams and forensic teams and manipulating algorithms, he says it’s puffery. Puffery. Jed’s choice of the word puffery is really problematic to me. And I’ve had a lot of issues with the Jed issue for a while because I’ve often felt like maybe Jed ripped them off. Maybe Jed and Melissa ripped them off. And now I’m starting to feel like Jed ripped them off because when he claims puffery, puffery is the use of an exaggerated or subjective claim or opinion in advertising and sales that no reasonable person would take literally as factual statements. It’s a form of like blustering or boasting intended to puff up a product’s image and attract consumer attention without making concrete verifiable claims. Okay? So, it would be like this is the best coffee ever. You can’t prove that, right? Or this is the world’s greatest or it’s the best, the finest, the most amazing. These are claims that are not provable and so they’re not actionable. someone like a consumer would understand these as sales talk and they wouldn’t rely on it to make a decision. But what Jed was saying was he has a forensic team that could create a report and that he had another team that could manage and manipulate algorithms. And his testimony is that is puffery. And that’s not puffery. That’s actually false advertising. It’s making a false statement of a material fact to a client to induce a business transaction and it can constitute fraud or deceptive business practices. The client could have grounds to sue for damages. So, he’s either lying under oath or he ripped them off. And this doesn’t help Jed’s credibility in terms of like what his testimony is because he’s admitting that he’s lying to consumers, calling it puffery when he’s actually telling the consumer that he can do things on Reddit that he can’t do. Telling people that he can manipulate the algorithm when he’s saying he can’t do that. Telling people that he has a forensic team that will look into things when he doesn’t have one. He says that’s puffery. So, he’s either committing perjury or he’s advertised falsely. But what he told them they could do is not puffery. It’s false advertising. Now, when you correspond Jed’s testimony against the other documents that were filed related to this, what is clear is that there was no digital campaign at all. In fact, Briana Costello’s attorney filed some documents and it’s a conversation that occurred on August 7th between Katie Casease and Rana Costlo and they acknowledge that because of the date and where they were at with the date and like as far as it’s you know the 7th and the movie comes out on the 9th. They tell each other there’s no way that they could implement the digital campaign. It’s too late. On August 7th at 3:20, Briana says to Katie, “It’s likely too late for the social plan to be really effective.” Katie says, “I agree.” Katie says, “All they can do now is suppress.” And then at 4:00, Briana shares this with Katie about what their plan is. Melissa asked if I can screenshot you what we sent for 30K and share with Jed on Signal. This is what we sent. It needs to be kickstarted. How do we kickstart? Do you mind looping me in as well? She called me about Jen freaking out. We all agree there are only three or four steps here. Social kill. Feed the line for today’s show. Either go out heavy before her or wait and see. No specifics of what happened or what’s leaked. We can’t stir up more. So, the rules here was we can’t play stories. We can’t cause any problems. Our only agenda here is give him talking points for the Today Show with this interview. Try to kill social pieces if you can and either go out heavy or wait. So despite realizing it’s too late, despite knowing that it’s not going to be effective, they still sell Wayfair that they can do this for them and they will do this for them. And then they send them a document of what Jed can do for them. And then Jed’s testimony is, I can’t do any of that. And as I’m looking through these pages and pages of evidence, a lot of this is stuff that we’ve already seen before where they’re running through the different scenarios. They’re talking about pieces that are getting planted. They’re writing copy of what Justin should say on the Today Show, but there’s nothing about socials. Jed isn’t doing anything on socials. The only thing they talk about with Jed on the socials has to do with the theme about the marketing and the marketing theme with the marketing being great and flowering whatever. And during that time, Wayfair was putting out the marketing that was produced by Blake and Ryan, but there was nothing happening behind the scenes. I have to wonder sometimes when I’m reading through these, I’m seeing the way that Melissa and her team are talking about Justin. I see how they’re talking about Jen Abel and they’re mocking her for not having kids and they’re talking about how crazy Stephanie Jones is and they’re they’re talking and complaining about Jen as a person and what Jen wants and I keep thinking, is this how you run your business? Is this how you run your business? You have clients paying you thousands of dollars per month. I don’t know what Wayfair ended up paying Melissa Nathan. I think she got somewhere like 25 to 30,000 maybe more per month for the short engagement that she had with Wayfair. And her team is just trashing them, talking so poorly about Jennal, talking about how crappy Stephanie Jones is. And yet admittedly, they know that it’s too late for the social mitigation and yet they sell it anyway. Jed isn’t part of their case and he he wasn’t brought into this lawsuit. And I just wonder at what point did Wayfair figure out that there wasn’t anything like this discovery is all out there. You know, Wayfair has said since the beginning they never implemented it. And TAG sold this product to Wayfair and then told them, but don’t get caught up in what the scenarios are. These are just things that might happen, but we don’t know if they will. And by the time they were hired, there was already so much crazy press happening. There was nothing they could do but talk to reporters, try to set the narrative, try to prepare if something leaked or happened, try to get Justin’s side of the story if Leslie was going to plant Stephanie Jones’s planting stories about her clients and about Blake. If this is what publicists do and what crisis PR does, it seems like a ripoff. If you can’t manipulate things, if if you can’t do the things that you’re selling, why sell it? So, here’s my concern. There’s either a few things happening, and none of them are good. Either Jed, Melissa, and Tag are selling products they know that will not be needed and they cannot achieve or accomplish, right? So, they’re telling people that they can do things that they can’t do, which Jed calls puffery, which is not puffery. It’s false advertising. if that’s true. And if he can’t do it, then it’s false advertising. But if he can do it and he says he can’t do it, then he’s perjuring himself. And I have said from the beginning, if you did nothing for someone for 3 months, why are you charging them $30,000 a month? It was clear that TAG was doing stuff like they were working with reporters. They were helping with copy and helping JB with his interviews and giving him talking points for what he should say, preparing him for the premiere, helping him with the press, giving him how to manage con like discussing creative differences without discussing it, you know, without throwing anyone under the bus. Putting out fires when Stephanie Jones and Leslie are planting things, working with TMZ. In fact, there’s evidence now that they’re the ones that gave TMZ a copy of the CRD complaint as soon as Blake sent it to them because they were tipped off about the Times was about to publish a story, which we knew came from Wayfair, right? And they were trying to get ahead of it. So TMZ published the case because published the story ahead of the New York Times only like an hour or two earlier. But there’s nothing in here for social manipulation. And again, it’s either way it’s not good. Either JB was completely ripped off and Wayfair spent almost $100,000 for products that they couldn’t deliver and they didn’t receive or they’re lying under oath. And because he’s testified that it was puffery, I’m going to guess that he lied to them about what he could provide because he has a declaration under oath that he doesn’t have a team. Now, he’s testified under oath that he doesn’t have a team. But there are emails to Jaime that he has a team when he never had a team. The world of PR is unregulated. You don’t need a degree. You don’t there’s no standards. These are people that can come from any walk of life. They don’t they don’t need to have any experience in it. They could be some rich guy’s daughter or a nepo baby or a friend of Scooter Braun. I don’t whatever. You know what I mean? Melissa came from the PR world and I know Jed’s had some experience, but this is the second case where I’ve seen Jed misrepresent to clients about what he does. I mean, he claims that he helps people with mental health, but he doesn’t have a degree to do that. And he says he facilitates that. And he was involved in the BAM Marggera situation with Paramount. And in that situation, he misrepresented that he had the background, the health background to do what he did. And in this case, now he’s admitting to lying about what he can do. Is is this why they didn’t have Jed in this lawsuit? Did they like figure out after a while that like Jed lied? And how does it’s humiliating that this would come out for Wayfair. Like you paid for something you didn’t get. They told you they could do it. Melissa told you and told Jen that they should implement the social, but they knew that it wasn’t needed. There was no social manipulation. It was too late. But they still charged Wayfair money for it. This is insane. Now, obviously, we’re only getting snippets of the testimony here, but what was uncovered today doesn’t look good for Tag and it doesn’t look good for Jed cuz it looks like they ripped off Baldon. At least it looks like Jed did for what I don’t know. What this conclusively proves with the mountains of documents that just got unsealed was there was no digital campaign. and Blake trying to claim that deleted evidence would prove that there’s digital campaign doesn’t match the evidence that’s been provided that is text messages, signal messages. The only person that’s not really in there is Jed and Jed’s testimony is I did nothing and tag is all it was too late. There was no digital campaign and the spoilation issue is a nothing burger, but Blake didn’t get smeared. Baloney got ripped off and then he got smeared by Blake over the false claims that Jed made and represented to a client. Think about that. We can bury her. That was, you know, we can manipulate socials. We can make sure that your story is out. And then that promise ends up getting Justin destroyed in the media and it was all based on a false promise from Tag and Jed. It’s horrible. So, what are your thoughts? Let me know in the comments below. Make sure to give this video a thumbs up. Make sure to subscribe to my channel if you haven’t subscribed and click the bell so you never miss a video. Thanks so much for watching. Bye, bestie.

#blakelively #justinbaldoni #itendswith us

Newly unsealed testimony reveals a shocking betrayal that blindsided Justin Baldoni and his team. The details expose a twist that not only proves that no digital campaign occurred against Blake Lively, but that the deception of individuals on Justin’s team caused the lawsuit to happen

Support the Channel By Becoming a Member:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqW9ZAW0ZNqfWo9PZ3OX4Fg/join

Follow Katie Joy on Social Media:

Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/withoutacrystalball/

Facebook:
https://www.facebook.com/withoutacrystalball/

Disclaimer:

Without a Crystal Ball is a commentary channel. The views expressed by Katie Joy are her opinions and should not be considered fact. Katie Joy discusses trending topics, current events, reality tv & More. This channel is for your entertainment. Please make sure you conduct your own research on any topics to verify any information.

All Clips Obtained through TLC YouTube & Used under Fair Use:

The Copyright Laws of the United States recognizes a “fair use” of copyrighted content. Section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Act states:

“NOTWITHSTANDING THE PROVISIONS OF SECTIONS 106 AND 106A, THE FAIR USE OF A COPYRIGHTED WORK, INCLUDING SUCH USE BY REPRODUCTION IN COPIES OR PHONORECORDS OR BY ANY OTHER MEANS SPECIFIED BY THAT SECTION, FOR PURPOSES SUCH AS CRITICISM, COMMENT, NEWS REPORTING, TEACHING (INCLUDING MULTIPLE COPIES FOR CLASSROOM USE), SCHOLARSHIP, OR RESEARCH, IS NOT AN INFRINGEMENT OF COPYRIGHT.”
THIS VIDEO AND OUR YOUTUBE CHANNEL IN GENERAL MAY CONTAIN CERTAIN COPYRIGHTED WORKS THAT WERE NOT SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED TO BE USED BY THE COPYRIGHT HOLDER(S), BUT WHICH WE BELIEVE IN GOOD FAITH ARE PROTECTED BY FEDERAL LAW AND THE FAIR USE DOCTRINE FOR ONE OR MORE OF THE REASONS NOTED ABOVE.