Roman Schatow

[Roman Schatow @schatow]

Cate Blanchett wondered why #MeToo got “killed very quickly,” and honestly, people are acting like we didn’t all just watch @blakelively help put the final nail in it.

Lively’s fantastical sexual harassment claims got tossed by Judge Liman, yet the public is somehow still expected to applaud the performance like it was some fearless act of truth-telling… 🤡🤡
Her attorney, Sigrid McCawley, said Lively was focused on “exposing the digital retaliation campaign here that was weaponised against her.” Great — and the ideal place to expose the alleged retaliatory campaign would’ve been… court. You know, that inconvenient little place where evidence gets examined instead of curated through entertainment outlets and Instagram captions.
But somehow this “exposing” turned into dropping the claim, settling the lawsuit by @blakelively and then speed-running to the Met Gala three hours later dressed like the curtains from a condemned Versailles timeshare. Nothing says “I’m determined to expose the digital retaliation campaign” quite like abandoning the battlefield and immediately posing for Vogue photographers under chandelier lighting.

@blakelively doesn’t get to brand herself as bravely fighting injustice and then quietly exit before having to prove any of it under oath. At some point, people stop seeing Lively’s activism and start seeing luxury victimhood with a glam team attached.

You suck #blakelively / xoxo

[Variety @Variety]

Cate Blanchett in #Cannes:

"It's very disconcerting if you've found that you've worked with someone or are working with someone who has behaved in ways that are reprehensible."

[Roman Schatow @schatow]

What puzzles me is why I’m being dragged into something I had no involvement in. I didn’t create the content in question—I simply reposted Andy’s video exactly as he originally published it.
If there are concerns about the video itself, those concerns should be directed toward the creator, not someone who merely shared publicly available content without altering it or adding anything misleading 🤷🏽🤷🏽
I’m genuinely trying to understand what specific action on my part is being questioned, because from my perspective, reposting someone else’s original video does not make me accountable for its creation or the claims made within it.

[Roman Schatow @schatow]

Blake Lively "Didn't Win ANYTHING!" Mark Geragos Says She Could Go After... https://t.co/THPs64wF7q via @YouTube

#blakelively #justinbaldoni #livelyvsbaldoni

[Roman Schatow @schatow]

Why are you directing this at me?

I didn't interview Geragos, and I didn't make or edit the video. If your issue is with the video and the text, so contact Andy: @PopcornedPlanet 🤷🤷

[Roman Schatow @schatow]

@S_B_Larsen Enig med dig: problemet er ikke klipningen, men indholdet. Dramaturgien kan forstærke indtrykket, men den kan ikke opfinde ord, der ikke er blevet sagt. Hvis budskabet virker nedladende eller moraliserende, så er det dét, folk reagerer på... just saying

[Roman Schatow @schatow]

@IsiahSingl30431 @kyle4prezident Thanks. Two morons!!

[Roman Schatow @schatow]

@Lars___Dalgaard @jacob_feldborg Kan du se Odense? Du er jo helt til grin. Men det er fint nok – når man løber tør for argumenter, begynder man typisk bare at kaste med tilfældige bemærkninger... mute/skjult 🤡🤡

[Roman Schatow @schatow]

@Lars___Dalgaard @jacob_feldborg Måske skulle du læse lidt mere grundigt… Det er Odense, ikke København. Men hey, hvis forskellen på byer allerede er svær, giver det måske mening, at resten af pointen også gik tabt undervejs... men det er ok!!

[Roman Schatow @schatow]

@DunnSearcher I was cheeky enough to drop my comment ⬇️⬇️

[Roman Schatow @schatow]

@Lars___Dalgaard @jacob_feldborg Og hvad er egentlig din pointe? Hans opslag handler om regeringen – ikke om ham.....

Men selvfølgelig, hvis man er pensionist og har masser af tid, kan man jo altid bruge den på at gøre helt almindelige opslag til en personlig fodboldkamp.

[Roman Schatow @schatow]

@Missintrospect1 @LeaveHeardAlone @blakelively That's true 💯
I have mentioned it before. And she also explained procedural dismissals in connection with 47.1.

[Roman Schatow @schatow]

Interesting how @LeaveHeardAlone leaves out the parts that don't fit her manipulative narrative.

Victoria Burke didn't criticise @blakelively because she supported the bill. She criticised her because @blakelively centered herself in a bill Burke authored, publicly trying to take ownership of work that wasn't hers. Burke also objected to the addition of provisions regarding plaintiffs' attorneys and repeatedly stressed that the legislation was supposed to be about survivors—not a celebrity PR campaign. Hence her comment about not wanting it turned into "the Met Gala."

Then there's the small matter of meetings with advocacy groups allegedly taking place without Burke's knowledge or involvement, despite her being the architect of the bill.

But sure, reducing all of that to "Burke was mad because the bill couldn't stay under the radar" is certainly a creative interpretation. It's just one that requires omitting most of the actual criticisms.

The facts for @LeaveHeardAlone become much less inconvenient once they're left out of the story 🤦🏼🤦🏼

#blakelively #blakelivelyisamenace

[Roman Schatow @schatow]

@LeaveHeardAlone keeps claiming this is all a PR stunt and that @blakelively deserves credit because the bill passed. There's just one small problem with that narrative: the actual architect of the Speak Your Truth Act disagrees.

The professor, lawyer, and sexual-harassment survivor who spent years developing the legislation publicly criticised @blakelively, accusing her of taking ownership of work that was never hers and reshaping it around her own interests. She even said she didn't want her bill to "turn into the Met Gala."

More importantly, she argued that @blakelively should not receive fees or damages. And when discussing concerns about false accusations, she specifically pointed out that someone like Johnny Depp would still have prevailed under the law because he proved actual malice.

At some point, it becomes difficult to ignore the fact that the people who wrote the law, advocated for the law, and understand the law are saying one thing, while delusional internet commentators are insisting they know better 🤦🏼🤦🏼

But by all means, trust a TikTok prediction over the woman who actually drafted the legislation. Apparently the new standard is that if a celebrity stands next to a bill long enough, they become its author, legal expert, and future damages calculator all at once 🤣🤣

#blakelively #blakelivelyisamenace

[Roman Schatow @schatow]

@Duffer277 @YouTube @markgeragos Thanks. I’ll have to listen to that.

[Roman Schatow @schatow]

@Duffer277 @YouTube @markgeragos I didn't know that 👏🏽👏🏽

[Roman Schatow @schatow]

@Duffer277 @YouTube @markgeragos I agree—he is a very thoughtful lawyer whose arguments reflect careful analysis, and a strong grasp of complex legal issues.

[Roman Schatow @schatow]

@LethalLauren904 @andysignore @SFFNY Isn’t it the same organisation that submitted one of the amicus 🩲 in support of BL?

[Roman Schatow @schatow]

@LethalLauren904 Her reasoning and argumentation no longer make sense and are getting worse imo🤷🤷

[Roman Schatow @schatow]

@danielvasilios HAHAHAHA

[Roman Schatow @schatow]

@Storgaaard Det må være det, man kalder en “2-for-1 deal” på politik – bare uden den anden vare på lager 😆😆

[Roman Schatow @schatow]

@rockenrollah @YanaLukeman @SFFNY @vmmaloney @TainaBorrero @blakelively But Lively is celebrated as a "survivor." I would really like to know a survivor of what... her stupidity or her mediocre acting skills?!

[Roman Schatow @schatow]

Så vi gik fra at snakke om to konkrete folketingspolitikere til pludselig at handle om hele regeringen. Kan du ikke se, at du dermed undgår den oprindelige pointe? Man kan selvfølgelig også inkludere politikere, der sidder i Europa-Parlamentet.

Hvis argumentet handler om to personer, så er det dem, du skal forholde dig til. At trække hele regeringen ind i diskussionen ændrer ikke på det, der blev sagt – det flytter bare fokus væk fra emnet.

[Roman Schatow @schatow]

Jeg har allerede sagt, hvad jeg mener om at afvise noget, før man overhovedet har prøvet det. Du har din holdning, og jeg har min.
For mig er det langt mere værdifuldt at prøve end at give op på forhånd og aldrig finde ud af, hvad man egentlig er i stand til.
Jeg tror ikke, vi kommer til at blive enige om det her, så der er nok ikke så meget mere at diskutere. Vi ser bare forskelligt på det, period.