Leave a comment

andres01234 October 9 2017, 14:12:57 UTC
omg, pieces of shit

Reply

(The comment has been removed)

deja_vu822 October 9 2017, 15:42:08 UTC
do you think they didn't know what Lombardo's purpose was, though? especially if they were asked to vouch for him bc the Times was writing an expose on him.

Reply

(The comment has been removed)

pantless_deacon October 10 2017, 00:02:50 UTC
You wrote a paragraph, without even answering their question.

Do you actually believe these 2 were 100% unaware of WHY they were being asked to vouch for his credentials? It seems unlikely. I highly doubt they were just called and told "hey, tell these people I'm not a nobody!". This shit was pretty big, and they were likely aware as to WHY they were vouching for his credentials.

But, go on..cape those already known problematic White bros.

Reply

theyjitterbug October 9 2017, 15:45:41 UTC
But I think she makes it clear in her story that the reason why Damon and Crowe were vouching for Lombardo was due to Weinstein telling them to do so/knowing that if Lombardo went down, Weinstein would go down, and in turn their movies wouldn't do well: "After intense pressure from Weinstein, which included having Matt Damon and Russell Crowe call me directly to vouch for Lombardo and unknown discussions well above my head at the Times, the story was gutted."

It seems to me that by defending the role of Lombardo, Damon and Crowe were really defending Weinstein against the allegations from the Times.

The whole thing is actually pretty sneaky and calculated by Weinstein.

Reply

tetrazzinichikn October 9 2017, 16:04:32 UTC
Maybe I should withdraw my thanks to that commenter below. #whatisthetruth I'm so lazy.

Reply

triviagogo29 October 9 2017, 19:02:36 UTC
The truth is that Matt Damon and Russel Crowe obviously knew what they were doing when they called the Times to quash the story. They did it as a favor to The Weinstein Company and they were aware of the harrassment allegations.

Reply

(The comment has been removed)

sugary_placenta October 9 2017, 18:05:06 UTC
This is how I read the article as well...

Reply

pantless_deacon October 10 2017, 00:05:14 UTC
That's how you read:

"After intense pressure from Weinstein, which included having Matt Damon and Russell Crowe call me directly to vouch for Lombardo and unknown discussions well above my head at the Times, the story was gutted." ?????

Hmmm....

Reply

triviagogo29 October 9 2017, 19:05:18 UTC
The lengths ONTD go to defend predatory men....

Damon and Crowe were obviously acting under Weinstein orders and it's highly unlikely the Times did not mention what the allegations were.

Reply

tetrazzinichikn October 9 2017, 16:03:27 UTC
Thank you for his, because I really wasn't going to read it tbh. Posts like this shouldn't be allowed.

Reply

okwerq October 9 2017, 16:40:47 UTC
LMAO

op is out to end careers

Reply

meadowphoenix October 9 2017, 18:09:49 UTC
Wait so you really think Matt Damon and Russel Crowe called up this woman and told her Lombardo was a-ok, and she didn't bring up what she thought his real job was to get their assessment? Really girl? And like this is me giving them the benefit of the doubt, because there's 100% no reason to try to quash this story with their credibility unless they knew the alternative for his role she was going to present. They're not dumb, they know that if you're going to accuse someone in the public of not having a real job, you're also going to have to put into print why you think they're in a certain role.

Reply

rainstormraider October 9 2017, 19:59:47 UTC
LMAO.
I'm still enjoying OP's attempt though! Its inspired!

Reply


Leave a comment

Up