CHAOS?! Blake Lively & Ryan Reynolds DODGE Shady Vanzan COVER-UP!?

CHAOS?! Blake Lively & Ryan Reynolds DODGE Shady Vanzan COVER-UP!?

Guys, I’m kind of shocked. This just in. The judge denied information regarding this Van Zam. Is this a cover up that we’re seeing with our own eyes? [Applause] Welcome to Popcorn Planet. I am Andy Signor. Spoiler alert, not exactly. I’m here with It’s Kim. We are live, an impromptu live. We were We went through a lot of this earlier, so if you want to watch the full explanation of the past, what Vanzam is and all that, let me know. The shortest version I think that’s important for you guys to know. Vanzam was this corporation that Blake Lively made in order to get the stolen phone of Jennifer Ael, Justin’s uh publicist. Those text messages, we can bury anybody. Came from that device. Stephanie Jones had them oddly I legally. That’s the question. Uh was going through them, sharing them amidst other people to harm Jennifer Ael. And then suddenly Blake Lively comes in and uses a a this Vanzam Corporation to go against anonymous John Doe’s to demand the evidence from Stephanie Jones, allowing her to legally seemingly get this phone and all its contents. All of Jennifer Abel’s personal contacts, not just text messages regarding Wayfair. Uh this was proven via uh messages that Melissa Nathan shared in their follow-up docu lawsuits showing that you know both Leslie Sloan it seemed Stephanie Jones all of them were sort of using the intel against them. But this is where it gets really crazy is Van Xan turned out to be belong to this company that justified the subpoena belong to Blake Reynolds uh Blake Lively’s married name. And they use this as a way to get the information the texts and subpoena it without anybody knowing. not Jennifer Ael, not uh Justin, nobody. So, they use this as a way to sort of very sneakily, and I’m going to use the word shadily, get this intel. And then also use that to justify for the New York Times why they were able to publish those texts because this was from a subpoenaed document. And D, the real question came is, were any of these texts allowed to be there in the first place? Could these be thrown out? It’s it’s a big question mark and a huge part of this case, guys. You got to understand Vanzam, otherwise known as Van Sham. And we’re going to get more into it because this piece is crucial. If those text messages go away because they were uh gotten illegally, Blake his whole case is dead because again, they’ve proven nothing. The texts sound bad. I’ll admit it, but they don’t prove they did anything. We organically covered this case. We weren’t paid or told by anything Wayfair parties did. Uh so if if Blake was out there shady stealing Jennifer Abel’s personal data to use it against her and all this, shame on them. So this is where it’s relevant today. I want to go through quickly. We’re going to try to wrap this up as re recap all this because it’s a lot to digest. But basically yesterday there was this uh demand to uh subpoena uh a individual from Vanzam is what they really wanted to have a in order to compel nonparty Vanzam to designate a witness prepared to testify about the full period of its relationship with pliff Stephanie Jones and Jones work. Vanzam is attempting to curtail its testimony and emit important information that the court has already declared relevant, which they did previously. The judge acknowledged this is all very relevant. It’s not like, oh yeah, let’s screw this up. So, uh, again, Abel’s counter claims alleged in August 2024, prior to her scheduled departure from Jones work, the Jones party seized her cellular phone, accessed the contents, downloaded them. Counter claim further alleges that Stephanie Jones disclosed some of the private communication to lively parties no later than August 21st. They continued to access her private text messages thereafter and at some point transmitted Miss Abel’s stolen communications to Miss Lively, her husband Ryan Reynolds, and Leslie Sloan, all to harm Miss Ael. Hard to deny this one, Blake. It really is hard to deny this one. You’re saying, “Well, it was for us to do lawsuits.” But no, there’s some shady looking texts from Stephanie and others to try to like basically shut Melissa and Jennifer down. Uh they alleged that Miss Lively conspired with the Jones parties to obtain Miss Ael’s stolen foam under the data and its data under the guise of the legal process using this company Vanzan to file this lawsuit in New York Supreme Court against John Doe’s. That’s as I sort of summed up that’s really what this became about. What the problem was is they’re saying, well, Lively’s not only they did not want to give somebody allegedly, but they only want to give it up to a certain date, basically the date after uh the lawsuit happened. So, none of the stuff prior to the lawsuit and all the findings of why the subpoena would have been needed. They’re deeming all that irrelevant. And Wayfair is basically like, uh, no, nice try. It’s not how it’s going to work. In fact, Van uh W or sorry, Blake’s company, Vanzan responded. Now they’re saying, “Well, look, we’ve we said on multiple occasions that we we can provide a designate to testify and all the topics uh defendants in writing multiple occasions before they filed, which seems odd, but they uh they the questions topics on September 30th. There’s nothing for this court to compel. It’s m it’s moot.” Now, this is where Wayfair did mess up. Wayfair messed up because the judge did deem their uh denied their motion to compel. A lot of people are saying, “Oh, he’s we originally thought too.” Oh my god, how is this? What do you mean it’s denied? The reason it’s denied is because Wayfair once again didn’t follow Lyman’s very strict protocol. Lyman and and and Ron Zambrano confirmed this. Uh Lyman has a very specific way he does this with protocol as to what you’re supposed to do first meet and confers etc etc which Wayfair kind of is which I understand why they are Kim sort of trying to jump the gun to get ahead of this to sort of move on faster and Lyman’s basically like no go back and do it the slow way is really what’s happening here. So it’s frustrating because Wayfair should know by now you can’t go the fast way with Lyman. He’s very meticulous and annoying in his process. And so this was denied based on lack of process, which basically is like as as as uh as Blake was saying, well, they didn’t even meet and confer. We told them we had a person blah blah blah blah blah. The problem is though in this document from Blake, as much as she wants to say she’s not evading, she still is evading. She’s absolutely evading her response here. She’s trying to work around and use her own things to sneakily make it clear that, you know, she she well the time we’ll give you a witness, but only covering after September 2024, which conveniently cuts off the exact window when all the shady stuff would have happened. And then they dismiss it as a waste of the court’s time without addressing why pre-lawsuit discovery shouldn’t come in. It makes no sense. They want to basically file this lawsuit, grab the evidence, and then uh they’re way it’s deliberate evasion. They the the kind of thing that only makes sense if there’s something to hide. In my opinion, uh they they argue boilerplate objections, but then basically block the questions that matter most. They are absolutely hiding something here. In my opinion, they’re making it more difficult. They’re they’re blaming Wayfair Kim and saying that they’re wasting time while clearly not addressing the main issue, which is the dates in question. Stop ignoring that, Blake. That’s clearly what the most important parts are here. And it’s frustrating because those dates are incredibly relevant. We need to know why the subpoena was happened, who did they talk to, what was the purpose of the John Doe’s, etc. All of it’s incredibly relevant. So, at the end of the day, yes, the the judge ultimately sadly denied this failure to satisfy rule 4C of the court’s individual practices. Banzam may move to for letter brief for expenses, etc. This sounds bad, but no. I confirmed again with Ron et other attorney advice this is not a loss this is a mess up it’s messy filing they should have done better and they should have avoided this but they just didn’t follow rule 4C which requires the meet and confers the conversations prior before they and then a proper document which then allow forces uh the the protocol for lineman to then uh compel so they still can refile this it’s just again it’s annoying the wayfairer keeps making these stumbles uh Uh Kim, I can’t deny it. At the same time, Blake is is trying to like I’m doing nothing wrong. She absolutely is uh in my in my opinion evading and I do think attempting to cover up actions here because if it’s not a cover up, Blake, what are you trying to hide here? You keep trying to you always blame Justin for oh, they’re not giving this is an incredibly important detail that you can’t just ignore now. And if it’s all legit, you should have nothing to hide. Why won’t you make sure the dates are clearer? You want all the time period to prove the the the smear campaign, but now when it matters most as to where you got this evidence. Well, no, we we it doesn’t matter. All that stuff known. Yeah, we’ll give you somebody. I I can’t wait to figure out who the Van Xan person is as we finally get more. This is going to be a fascinating deposition. But Kim, now that I’ve summed it all up and got us sort of the the justification of why this is so important, why this is so shady, why this needs to be exposed, and why I’m worried about Judge Lyman, where do you stand on this? Are you I know we were both worried about Lyman’s counter, but as as Ron conferred, this is very standard. This does not mean they lose. Uh that that’s what he was he just wanted to make clear. Uh do you does that does that ease your mind? And do you think that if Wayfair refiles, Judge Lyman will take this more seriously? I mean, I think I really hope that Lyman is is fair in this because one thing I do want to say, I don’t know if you can pull up Van Xan’s letter, um, which is document 132. If you go down to the bottom of page two, there’s a footnote here, and I feel like this kind of to me, and I’m not a lawyer, full disclosure, this is my opinion based on reading all this stuff this morning and experiencing whiplash as all this stuff was coming in. But it just says the subpoena contained a time period that began on January 1st of 2022. That’s what they wanted. They wanted communications going back. It seems any mention of Vanzan and the claims in the Jones litigation relates to Vanzan’s involvement in a New York State lawsuit that was filed in September of 2024. We know what that is. Thus, Vanzam objected and stated that the appropriate time period was on or about the filing of the lawsuit. And generally, I I looked it up. On or about usually means it’s a pretty narrow timeline. It it’s stuff like, you know, you’re the way that I’ve seen it in the past is, okay, I need you to recall something that happened back in 1999. You know, did you have a lunch with somebody? And you don’t really have the records anymore, right? Like, you don’t know. You paid for it on your credit card. That doesn’t mean that the date that it came through on the credit card was the date that you paid. It could have been delayed. So, it’s like, okay, we had that lunch in that city on or about July 24th, 1999. Okay. so that they can’t be like, “Oh, well, you didn’t give the exact date, but so on or about filed in September of 2024. Vanzam objected and stated the appropriate time period was on or about the filing of that lawsuit.” So that is September 27th of 2024. It did not, however, refuse to answer questions prior to that date or provide a corporate designate. So if you’re objecting to the timeline and you’re objecting that anything on or about prior to the date of filing is not you’re objecting that does feel like you are refusing. Mhm. That is the vibe that it gives and it feels like there’s just a lot of like picked language and it to me it looks very suspicious. That’s my opinion. Now, I also understand from the Wayfair parties that they have this deposition coming on the 30th. They’ve got to figure out what the heck is going on. It’s Friday. Deposition is Tuesday. So, I think maybe part of the reason that they might have evaded from proper protocol is because of how down to the wire they’re getting. Does that mean that it was acceptable for them to do this? Apparently, to the judge, no. But I feel like it’s there’s just so much about this that it kind of comes to a place where I feel like it’s the question of ethical and legal and it’s getting messy, right? It’s like I I I I can only have so much empathy for Lyman because I understand he wants to follow his rules, but I’ve ne This case is bonkers. It’s bonkers and and it’s frustrating that he can’t attempt to break some rules and and these are like legal cleanup rules. These aren’t like legal rules. just like, “Okay, respond to this.” Be like, “Agreed. Uh, what’s your response?” You know, blah blah this just help to fasttrack to get some of this stuff crossed off instead. Now, all this time spent from both sides making their arguments d. And instead, it’s like they’re clearly not mean conferring and the thing’s on the 30th. Why aren’t they giving them the time? They It does seem strange to me that Lyman’s being so difficult in these denials just because you didn’t file this way. Now, at the same time, it’s like frustrating that they’ve waited till the last minute, it seems. And in filing these things, again, it’s hard for me to judge. I’m not a lawyer. I’m not trying to throw Wayfair’s legal team under the bus. It just But it from what I’ve gathered in the recaps, yes, this was this is something they should have saw coming knowing the way Lyman is. So, it’s on Wayfair to not have at least had the meet and confer like days ago. I we tried to have a meet and confer. They wouldn’t have the phone call. Then just say it. You know what I mean, Kim? That’s what’s frustrating to me. Like, cross those dumb things off the list. So you can put it in your documents so Lyman doesn’t keep throwing out. He’s gonna expect you to do it. Do it. Stop not not doing it. You know what I mean? It’s like with the whole Isabella Ferrer thing, like why didn’t you send it to the address that was on the release form and and and and avoid this time wasting. It does feel like both sides are skipping steps or trying to do things. And I can understand why given the birth of what they’re all facing. And I imagine both teams in midst of depositions and stuff right now. This has got to be exhausting. Exhausting for all parties involved. Uh so it’s frustrating because I I this better not get lost. This better not get lost. This is a immensely important piece of this puzzle that that legally is so incredibly important and relevant and relevant in my eyes. I just I hope and pray Lyman and and and lawyers are going to be on top of this to ensure this doesn’t get lost in the shuffle because exactly how can you have a deposition on the 30th if you don’t have the information? They’re clearly not going to get it by then. And now it’s Friday and now they’ve been denied. And it’s just it’s frustrating that they didn’t preemptively see this coming. And but it’s also frustrating, I guess, to be fair, that Lyman doesn’t see the time crunch as well in an attempting to help instead of just a denial with a with a stamp like trying to figure out like, well, yeah, he should want the truth. I that’s so I I can’t stand when when trials are going to go about because of a misfiling. It’s like Come on. like an extra day on a delay could have gotten more information. All that stuff is important in discovery. I understand there’s rules and everyone’s going to follow him, but I’m sure the judge could have helped. He’s helped Blake a lot, Kim. I feel like, don’t you? I feel like he’s helped Blake a a lot of times. Well, this is throw it away, but you can refile and like, but then when it’s that something that comes down to the time, I I I I can’t deny I am starting to see the bias of Judge Lyman and his favor favorable, you know, making Justin’s team jump through all the hoops and and and it seems barely letting Blake have to jump through as many. It’s frustrating. So, I hear you guys, but also just know this isn’t over. This isn’t over. This is a standard response. Very common, I’m told. So fingers crossed that this isn’t just a flatout denial. But get concerned because this is if this gets lost, Kim, I’m going to be so pissed. The other thing I want to say, guys, is literally the amount of filings that have happened with this and the exhibits and everything that have gone with it have been very overwhelming in the past 15 hours. Look at this. September 25th and a lot. Yeah, we are not attorneys. This is not legal advice in any way. We’re going to continue to follow this and we’re going to continue to ask our trusted sources and our trusted friends who are lawyers to get clarification on these things, but I would not be surprised if there is more filings to come and this could potentially get a bit more complicated. So, we will do our best to keep you up to date and to give you as accurate information as we can as we move forward because this is absolutely bonkers and uh if if we’ve made a mistake, we will we will correct or whatever. But based on what we’re hearing from our lawyer our lawyer contacts, this is what’s going on right now. Yeah, agreed. Uh I wanted to make sure you had that. We were live uh for a little bit. You can watch the full show over at popcornplant.com. Appreciate you guys. Sorry we’re not longer and sorry you missed yesterday, but we’ll be back next week. We got a lot more coming your way. So, make sure you hit that subscribe if you haven’t already. Hit the bell for all alerts. Smash that thumbs up as well and uh leave your comments down below. What do you guys think? Are you getting nervous? Are you getting worried? Did we give you some hope? At least I hope that was our goal. Uh we got a lot more coming your way regarding the case and so much more. So stay tuned. Thank you for watching live. Sorry to rush out so quick.

CHAOS?! Blake Lively & Ryan Reynolds DODGE Shady Vanzan COVER-UP!?

Help Support Our Documentary “It Ends With Justice: Justin Baldoni vs Blake Lively & Ryan Reynolds here: http://ItEndsWithJustice.com
Watch the Trailer here: https://youtu.be/v2OGwByAIQU?si=8HfJvuD41dNH_St0

You can also become a MEMBER or Purchase New Merch here: http://PopcornedPlanet.com – All paid members will be able to see our documentaries first and all funds raised there go toward future productions!

Thumbnail images are fairuse satire created by adobe photoshop and artificial intelligence artwork.

S U P P O R T T H I S C H A N N E L:
Join, Donate, & Follow here: http://PopcornedPlanet.com or here: https://linktr.ee/AndySignore

Popcorned Planet offers commentary on the biggest Celebrity News, Pop Culture Outrage and Viral Internet Stories from all over the internet. Created and hosted by Andy Signore (as seen on Piers Morgan Uncensored) Popcorned Planet is your one stop place Daily News, Celebrity Gossip, Drama, Hollywood insight and Pop Culture Commentary.

C O N T A C T / B U S I N E S S : PopcornedPlanetTeam@gmail.com

Or Send Packages, Toys & Fan Mail To:
Andy Signore
16350 Bruce B Downs Blvd
PO Box # 48742
Tampa FL, 33647