Whatever happened to Safety Monkey

Been scrolling and scrolling and haven’t seen Fleabag mentioned yet. So, Fleabag!

~30 years ago my family would have Thanksgiving dinner at rhe Pankin’s.

Fleabag series three

His son is an exceptional poet. “Letters to Guns.”

Then Saturday came around and I said
"Who's this stupid clown blockin' the bathroom sink?"

I get that regular people usually don’t get so riled up over the kind of astroturfed nonsense you’re generating. The nihilism of it is astounding. I hope someone at Wilkie or Manatt sees all this and finds a way to tie your spin doctoring up to the Wayfarer PR folks.

I don’t know or care anything about what happened on set! What I am reacting to is your mind-boggling argument that there aren’t TWO SIDES to this PR battle and your attempts to blink reality, including the example just pictured that you continue to ignore!

You ignore clear evidence against Wayfarer et al and focus only on Lively’s side. Have been wondering about the nature of your motivated reasoning but it seems plainly intentional/tactical. I hope they’re paying you well. I don’t care about Lively’s rep, plenty of what she did was tone deaf.

The aggressive conduct by the Wayfarer-funded PR people that is quoted at length in the story. I am not implying anything about what happened in set. Your one-sided reading of these texts is divorced from reality. I don’t work for her or anyone’s PR firm, but it seems plain that you do.

The idea that the subpoena “didn’t get her anything” is laughable. The texts are extremely damning. Hard to conclude you aren’t just another sock puppet account in this well funded PR battle.

A subpoena is not a legal loophole. Her filing with CA is public. If Wayfarer doesn’t cave, there will be a civil suit and they’ll get reciprocal discovery. Your focus on “planting” stories is both wrong on the facts and seems designed to distract from the range of aggressive conduct by Baldoni.

Both sides are engaged in an expensive PR battle, there is billionaire money behind Wayfarer. And again you’re ignoring the texts, Baldoni’s people take credit for an article in the Daily Mail. Lively filed with a CA state agency, which as the NYT notes is a precursor to a civil suit.

Lively engaging a public legal process suggests whatever the bad facts are on her side, they’re worse for Baldoni et al. No one is blameless here but the idea that Lively wasn’t the target of an expensive smear campaign does not stand up to scrutiny.

Your repeated responses defending Baldoni in this thread are very odd. Did you read the texts quoted in the story? Baldoni’s own PR people are reveling in their success at advancing a narrative that they don’t agree with. Lively is behaving strategically *also* but the texts speak for themselves.