Her complaint is 59 pages long and loaded with a bunch of really forced Star Wars references, but all the extra nonsense aside, at the end of the day she literally admits herself in her own words she was contracted episode by episode with Disney as a guest performer. She was hired on an at will basis at the discretion of the studio and because of her public statements they felt reflected poorly on their company and interests her contract was not renewed.
Can someone please explain what she thinks Disney did that was illegal here? Being anti trans is not a legally protected class, so it’s not discrimination to no longer employ her because of her statements. Just walk me through how you think she has a case please.
https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/24410222/gina-carano-disney.pdf
 It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
 UFOs Are A Psyop Shirt $21.68 |
It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
she knows she hasn't got a case but would you look at that? now she's getting attention from every website
It keeps the youtube nerds happy.
i fricking hate disney but she's moronic
>NOOO THIS BRAND DOESN'T BELIEVE I AM SUITABLE TO PRESENT IT TO THE PUBLIC BASED ON DIFFERENT BELIEFS
just go fricking work with ones that do share the same interests?
Her Daily Wire western flopped because the right wing audience hates women who kick ass.
Wrongful termination due to her political views. She'll win
>t. employment lawyer
>Wrongful termination due to her political views.
She wasn’t fired for who she voted for or endorsing a political party. Being a bigot is not a political party. That just doesn’t hold water.
Why didn't other people get fired over what they posted?
What part of “at will employment” are you not understanding? Legally Disney could decide not to renew her contract at any time for any stupid reason they felt like. If she and Pascal literally said verbatim identical things and they just decided they didn’t like how it sounded when she said it but they liked how it sounded when he did- legally that’s a perfectly valid reason for not renewing her contract.
Yeah conservatives pass these stupid right to work (aka right to fire) laws and then b***h when it actually affects them.
Holy shit I’m not even American and can spot how fricking moronic you are.
as I understand it, Disney is in trouble not because they fired her, but because of the statement they released explaining her firing, which seems to have all but confirmed it was politically motivated. if they just fired her and played coy as to the reasoning, they'd be safe.
They didn’t fire her for being a Trump supporter, they simply didn’t renew her contract because of her series of anti trans public statements that they felt were damaging to their image. Hating a minority group is not in anyway similar to an employer demanding to know who you voted for and discriminating based on that
Let’s review her “anti-trans” statement
>beep/boop
And that was in response to the gay mafia demanding that she display her pronouns, as if they have any sort of authority. Go frick yourself, you disingenuous c**t.
Let's assume what you say is true - I'm just glad Disney loses whether they win the lawsuit or not, because now their image is just being dragged through the mud even more in the eyes of more than half the nation
Please quote me the exact Disney statement for firing her, and her so-called bigoted posts.
They’re a private company, not the government. They’re in no way private obligated to continue employing a person whose views don’t align with the values of their company and is running around making public statements damaging their reputation. Lmao part of her complaint is literally demanding the court order Disney to rehire her. She’s trying to argue in court that legally Disney must renew her contract whether they like it or not
Answer the question.
What question? It’s fake. He shared a fake conspiracy post for maybe the billionth time. It’s also completely unrelated to the actual topic of Gina Carano’s ridiculous lawsuit, which you really seem to be desperate to change the subject from
Then why isn't he being sued for libel?
He genuinely might be- it literally just happened a few hours ago
That should be entertaining.
Seething leftoids always try the private company angle. Bake that cake homosexual
so disney's the government?
>what is BlackRock
literally the same type of ~~*people*~~ are paying and looting both
the frick are you talking about
And yet Christian bakeries can be put out of business by the courts for refusing to bake a cake that celebrates something they don’t agree with… even after finding alternatives for the homosexuals.
>her series of anti trans public statements that they felt were damaging to their image
Surely you have screencaps of these.
...because the rest of us have screenies of Marxist wienersuckers like this who are still employed there.
I can't believe a grown balding man publicly said this about a bunch of kids.
I can't imagine saying that about a transfreak kid. I may not like what he is doing but I'd never say that I want a child dead.
Then you haven't been paying attention.
Remember, this was about a kid standing still and smirking while an Indian started beating a drum in front of his face. People like this are evil.
Yep. Remember what the surviving European israelites told us: When someone says they want to kill you, believe them. Buy a rifle and plenty of ammo. Practice at least twice a year. By the time you need it, you won't be able to get it.
Hate boners aren't any more profitable than small-c conservatard sneering at how hypocritical someone is being while they're beating the shit out of you.
You can’t fricking fire someone for not wanting to engage in identity politics.
Anyway, ignoring all that, what’s really going to get them is the official announcement of her “non-renewal”, where they straight up publicly call her racist/transphobic/anti-semitic, which was clearly meant to hurt, defame, and make future potential employers think twice about hiring her. Where’s your “right to work” there?
In order for a statement to qualify as defamation among many other things it must first and foremost be untrue. And the problem is they didn’t lie. There’s just no case here
at will does not exist anymore since the civilrights act
IT contractor here: I'm afraid it does. last I looked most job shops require you to give two week's notice, but your employer can let you go at any time for any reason. It does a neat end-run around the entire US labor code. And it's legal.
That said, Elon wouldn't be backing Cara Dune unless she had a solid case. The recurrent open discrimination angle must be at work here.
>That said, Elon wouldn't be backing Cara Dune unless she had a solid case.
lol, no. No way he knows or cares if the case is solid. It's just to highlight the importance of twitter.
I disagree. Musk is demonstrably not into virtue signalling. He has always been ruthlessly results oriented. He puts money in and gets more money out. Maybe Disney is the next Twitter....
/makes popcorn
I think you are new to Cinemaphile, but when you are trying to bait there is no need to add a sarcasm disclaimer, it's actually discouraged for best results
>/makes popcorn
holy shit go back
at will is good, i meant the civilrights act being bad and suing for discrimination being bad
if a company can fire and hire me at will, i can quit at will, and not give two weeks notice, if they don't respect me i don't have to respect them.
Elon just has a hate boner because Disney pulled ads from twitter
so he's helping an actor sure for 75k? He really is a dumbass. They're just gonna pay her.
you misunderstood his point. The civil rights act said that even if a person is at will it's illegal to fire them (or refuse to hire them) because of certain protected categories like race.
have a nice day disney troony
>moron thinks he knows laws better than the lawyers filing suit
sit back and watch it unfold Disney shill, this isn't the courtroom
>Literally
Spotted the moron
So a power imbalance is good when it’s a gigantic megacorporation using shitty legislation to crush an individual? You leftist idiots really are something else, man.
They're not idiots. They know exactly what they're doing with their heads-I-win tails-you-lose bullshit. They're evil.
At will employment is an issue the right wing has fought tooth and nail for, no clue why they’re complaining about it now
It’s been part of US common law for over a century and literally no state government, blue OR red, has ever made an attempt to fully overturn it.
>b-but muh republicans
Delusional.
There are a bunch of exceptions to at will employment in almost every state pushed through by various workers rights groups
>Being a bigot is not a political party
I didn't know being against discrimination meant being a bigot. The more you know...
>bigot
You don't even know what that word means, you limp wristed homosexual.
>Being a bigot
I remember the days when Cinemaphile wasnt riddled with zoomer transgendered homosexuals.
Yeah, I didn’t ever get bans back then for just posting what I thought. Soo fricking strange these homosexuals want to be here with us, even though we hate each other. Fricking idiots.
correct
and we still don’t care, we just like that disney is getting sued. What about this is so complicated to you dickless shits anyways?
Everything you just said. A hundred percent.
We're not at troon central, talking about troons and praising them, so troons come here to insert themselves where they are not wanted, pissing everyone off because troons only want to talk about troon bullshit, and then the troons get upset when they get told to frick off back to twitter with their troon shit.
You'd think the troons would get the point that being fricking annoying makes them no friends, but they are mentally unstable and half moronic, so they never learn.
They need to go be a troon over there, not here, we aren't here to be therapists for trannies.
Group think sheckles have been put into your account.
also i don't think she was fired
the just didn't hire her again
>increasingly nervous leftist posting sweatily as the fragile walls of his carefully constructed ‘reality’ start crumbling
See you in November, kiddo.
>biggot
that's a made-up word that has no meaning
Not renewing her contract is not illegal. You also cannot entirely prove that they let her go based on her political beliefs.
no one posting here can prove that, correct. That would be what the trial is for.
>prove that they let her go based on her political beliefs.
Then why was she let go? Is Hollywoods political leanings a mystery?
Because she made statements that could be seen as damaging to the company's image. Come on anon, learn to read.
But not the guy who posted about killing children? What makes them different?
>You also cannot entirely prove that they let her go based on her political beliefs.
You are right. Imagine how stupid Lucasfilm film would be if they gave a public statement where they state it as a reason, that would be really stupid.
oops
That’s not illegal though. It’s not defamation because she admits herself she did say those things, and it’s not discrimination because the cause wasn’t for religion or ethnicity or her membership in any of the other protected classes. That statement was completely legal.
>it's not defamation
lmao that's a clear-cut case of defamation.
It would be even if she actually said that, which she didn't, because truth is no impediment to a defamation lawsuit.
>lmao that's a clear-cut case of defamation.
In order for something to be considered defamation first and foremost it must be untrue. You can’t sue someone for defaming you because they told people you said something you really did say. That’s just telling the truth
So, we can throw gays and trannies in jail because they chanted "We are coming for your kids!"?
Thank you for admitting that.
ok, lets see her denigrating people based on their cultural or religious identifies?
I'll save you some time.
You won't see it, and the dickless guy you are responding to will not provide any evidence.
All of the evidence exists only in their diseased brains.
Disney said themselves among the multiple statements she made online it was when she trivialized the holocaust by comparing anti trans bigotry to being israeli in Germany during the Nazi occupation. All kinds of groups of people were offended by that in particular, and it’s a completely valid reason for not renewing her contract
your post reads like you support the ADL.
Every time you post, you just prove that even more that you are a troony.
I know that trannies are mentally deficient, but holy shit you are proving it.
saying beep/boop doesn't qualify as "denigrating people based on their cultural and religious beliefs" but something tells me you already know that and just like being a massively disingenuous rat for laughs.
The guy you're replying to has no dick because he cut it off and wears dresses.
Nothing about anything he says or does is genuine.
He's just here to poison the well.
>let her go
They didn't let her go though, they simply stopped writing her guest character. If I was disney I would just say we are considering her for future plot lines and then just leave the whole thing in limbo until she dies of old age.
Every time you post, you expose yourself as a troony.
This was my first post? Which other poster do you think I am, kek
We can see your posts.
Just because this board does not have IDs does not mean you are untrackable.
Was this not mentioned in your brief before you were assigned to post here?
Yeah nice try, I was being sincere about that being my first post though.
it's partially a clout chasing lawsuit for sure but she has a better chance than people think simply because pascal did do the trump = hitler comments which shows that disney has a bias
if her lawyers can get 12 people on a jury to buy the equivalency she might very win
i hope she does because i hate cancel culture
>which shows that disney has a bias
Why would that matter at all? They’re a private company, they’re 100% allowed to have an ideological bias, just the same way any private citizen is allowed to. Disney is not the government
There’s laws against a workplace persecuting someone for their political beliefs, and that’s a part of why Musk is helping. They’re not interested in a settlement, this is about getting all of Disney’s dirty doings out in the open in discovery during a trial. All Gina’s asking for is what she was owed based on what they agreed upon before she was shitcanned unceremoniously, and I don’t even think that it adds up to a million.
Musk has some damn good, damn expensive lawyers, and after looking over everything she provided them with, they felt confident enough that they had a solid enough case to pursue a suit.
>There's laws against a workplace persecuting someone for their political beliefs
There's laws against discriminating, i.e. an employer asking job candidates if they're a member of a political party or if they won't hire people based on their political views. However, there's nothing illegal about a company firing someone that is sharing things that can be seen as damaging to the company's image.
Yeah, except the problem with that is hating trans people is not a political belief.
that would potentially be argued in court, and boy what a circus this case would be if it comes to that.
you "trans" homosexuals are only a politically issue, as human reproduction cannot be replicated with surgical scar tissue.
what exactly do you think think political speech is? homosexuals can't force the bakers to bake the cake and the trans homosexuals can't legally force Carano to do a struggle session with 45 troony homosexuals
period. now stfu you piece of shit.
being fired for your political affiliation ≠ being fired for inciting hate towards trans people
>inciting hate towards trans people
Far as I'm aware she stated real women are biologically, born with a vag, women.
A man isn't a woman.
Not hate speech. Just facts.
>trans people is not a political belief
Love it when you trannies climb back into their hole when reality kicks in
c**ts like yourself made it into a political belief.
Governments are literally flying your homosexual flag.
>Musk has some damn good, damn expensive lawyers
It’ll be interesting to see whether Disney’s lawyer team has the same diverse backgrounds as the casts and crews of their goyslop media products, or a monocultural team of Chosenite sharks in $10k suits…
Shit no. They'll be israeli. Depend upon it.
>private company are above laws
Do zoomers really?
Companies are allowed to align with ideologies
Correct and yet they don't have the right to terminate employees solely based on the fact that said employees don't align with the company's ideology.
How hard is it to understand?
>Correct and yet they don't have the right to terminate employees solely based on the fact that said employees don't align with the company's ideology.
Yeah they were absolutely within their rights to not renew her contract. Hating trans people is not a legally protected class. Not renewing her contract because they didn’t like her statements is absolutely a legitimate legal reason they could use
There you go with your troony bullshit with zero proof.
You have yet to post anything Gina posted that was anti troony.
Seems more like you are a troony listening to the voices in your head to me.
i'm reading the pdf and what i'm seeing is both "BLM" and "GLAAD" trying to strong-arm her.
she gloriously refuses.
they shid their pance.
Multiple people have already posted her Instagram post trivializing the holocaust several times now, but regardless I don’t know how many times it needs to be repeated before people understand: SHE WAS AN AT WILL CONTRACT EMPLOYEE. Disney did not need any reason whatsoever to not renew her contract. In this case the burden of proof rests solely on her. She’s the one claiming she was wrongfully terminated, so she’s the one that needs to explain hot Disney either illegally broke their contract with her, or how hating trans people is somehow a recognized ethnicity, because otherwise she has no case for illegal discrimination
and when action jackson posted something similar?
>Page 36 of 59 Page ID #:36
Where did you get this idea that companies weren’t allowed to have ideological biases? Because they 100% are. None of that is illegal, and I have no idea what gave you the impression that it was
we all know that companies were strong-armed during that period. hence why 45 people were her selected jurors. she didn't take the knee, but invited a handful out to dinner to discuss the situation.
her case is going to blow the lid off of a lot of shit and elon knows it.
>"Trivializing the holohoax"
Nothing of the sort. She pointed out that it happened because the government turned neighbors against each other along political lines.
You have now been found out as a israelite, in addition to being a troony.
It doesn’t matter if they have a bias because being stupid is not a legally protected class.
You can discriminate freely based on political affiliation. In the same way you can freely discriminate against fat people. They aren’t protected.
> In the same way you can freely discriminate against fat people. They aren’t protected.
Unironically that is changing. In New York Weight discrimination is against the law. You think i am fricking with you but look it up
I was recently talking to my Employment Law professor about this, and he said that the way the law was written it will be almost impossible to prove. You'd need to basically have evidence of the employer saying "I won't hire you because I don't hire fat people." You wouldn't be able to show that they disproportionately hire non-overweight people, like you could show they only hire white people in a race discrimination suit.
>Your honor, my client the plaintiff is based. Moreover, the defendant is cringe. I rest my case.
if I ever have a similar case, I'll hire you.
if I was a jury your client would win based solely
I thereby sentence both of you to death. Dumb frog.
>Your honor, this lawyer is a smol frog with a crappy toupee. Case closed.
If she was gay and got fired would any of your Disney defense arguments hold up in court? No. She has rights.
>If she was gay and got fired would any of your Disney defense arguments hold up in court?
No, because sexual orientation is a federally protected class. It’s illegal for employers to discriminate on the basis of race, religion, sexual orientation or identity, age, or nationa of origin. Being a bigot is not a religion.
actually sexual orientation isn't federally protected, but most states protect it
There’s both wrongful termination, in which they were blatantly persecuting her for her political beliefs, and also the way they fired her. The basically all but called her an anti-Semite in their statement after firing her.
God I wish my wife's legs were that fat
Maybe read the damn thing you posted?
(“It is not
necessary for [Plaintiff] to plead the elements of breach of contract in
order to bring a section 1101 claim.”).
Case 2:24-cv-01009 Document 1 Filed 02/06/24 Page 51 of 59 Page ID #:51
157. Defendants’ actions damaged Carano, not only in the loss of
her role on The Mandalorian but the role promised her and already
approved by Disney in Rangers of the New Republic and the movies to be
based on these series.
158. Defendants’ actions further damaged Carano by causing
others to stop doing business with her and lost future employment
opportunities.
159. Carano has suffered emotional distress because of
Defendants’ actions.
160. Defendants’ harassment and termination of Plaintiff and
refusal to hire her for other promised roles were (1) intended to cause
injury to Carano; (2) amounted to despicable conduct undertaken with
willful and conscious disregard of Plaintiff’s rights under California law:
and (3) amounted to despicable conduct that subjected Carano to cruel
and unjust hardship in conscious disregard of her rights, thus supporting
punitive damages.
>158. Defendants’ actions further damaged Carano by causing
others to stop doing business with her and lost future employment
opportunities.
>159. Carano has suffered emotional distress because of
Defendants’ actions.
Lmao “you’re not allowed to fire me because it’s going to make it really hard to find work in the future if you do, and it’s going to make me real sad!” Is not in fact a valid legal complaint
how you go about firing someone is indeed a legal complaint. Emotional stress over a public firing is also indeed a legal complaint. Have you ever even had a job?
She’s a public figure who was employed by one of the biggest movie studios in the world. By your nonsensical standards no employer would ever be legally allowed to fire anyone for any reason because it might cause them “emotional distress” or “make it difficult for them to find work in the future” Lmao it’s just entirely ludicrous
lol, confirmed for never having a job. We don't need NEET opinions on this.
Companies fire people for the most inane things all of the time, especially major companies. Gina still has no case
given that she is not paying her own legal expenses, she has no reason not to pursue the trial, since there's still a chance at a settlement, and it also further destroy's disney's beleagured image (their stated reason for firing her)
I recall something about a woman scorned being dangerous
prove it, show an online post by a non-disney company that highlighted an employee was fired.
Why do you think so many companies conduct social media background checks you actual moron?
gee, that would be a HIRING process, not a FIRING process. Get a job NEET
Both have to do with looking for things that might damage a company's image. If you have ever worked under any high profile company you would know this.
Also, again she was an AT WILL employee. Legally they could have fired her for absolutely no reason at all and that would be legitimate. Why is everyone acting like Disney was under any obligation to give some sort of a reason in the first place, let alone scrutinizing if different people unrelated to the company approve of it?
except they did give a reason, that's the issue. They should have just fired her and been vague. Lucasfilm made a point to mock the things she posted online.
Yes, and that’s a completely valid reason to not renew her contract. Again, being anti trans is not an ethnicity- it’s not a class federally protected from discrimination. They’re allowed to not renew her contract because of that
>Yes, and that’s a completely valid reason to not renew her contract.
I agree. You can't have your action figures played by someone saying certain things, it is valid under the right circumstances.
>Again, being anti trans is not an ethnicity- it’s not a class federally protected from discrimination
I disagree with this statement. You have to prove she said something that's anti-trans first and that debate I think is worthy of a trial. Also to publicly claim she is anti-trans or homophobic is unnecessary. Fire her, but you don't need to highlight that's the reason, it does damage the employees reputation to do this, and again I think worth arguing in court.
>Also to publicly claim she is anti-trans or homophobic is unnecessary. Fire her, but you don't need to highlight that's the reason
Yeah, except absolutely none of that is illegal. Disney didn’t break any laws by publicly explaining why a character on one of the most watched tv shows in the world would not be returning. She can be as butthurt about it as she wants, but nothing they did was illegal, so she doesn’t have a case
I think that's debatable and hence this case. Also they didn't explain why a character wasn't returning, but emphasized, very ahead of production of season 3 of Mandolorian, that an actor was not returning. It was an unorthodox measure to take. It is against the law to say untrue things about an employee regarding their termination. If you feel you fully understand the law and feel Lucasfilm did not break it, they'd probably want you on the jury.
Legally Disney is under no requirement to continue employing her and can choose not to for any reason. Lmao absolutely none of this is debatable, there simply is no case at all
>I'm gonna reply and ignore the part I don't like and say it's not debatable.
Glad you're not my lawyer.
>except they did give a reason, that's the issue.
You mean the statement that they gave that made it pretty clear that they let her go because they believe she is damaging to the company's image?
Correct, you now have to prove it damaged their reputation and said statement was solicited and not unprovoked. Now they have a lawsuit.
>you now have to prove it damaged their reputation
No they don’t. Why would they? They’re not attempting to sue her for defamation. She was a contract employee and they chose not to renew her contract. End of story. They’re legally allowed to do that for any reason they feel like, lmao what is this nonsense?
Then you can't claim it damaged their reputation. You have to be able to prove claims.
Not renewing someone's contract isn't illegal and they have receipts to back up their reason for doing so
also people running their mouths as to they they fired her, lol
>You can fire someone whenvever you want
true
>they fired her cause she was damaging their reputation
prove it
>you can fire someone whenever you want tho!
You're doing what disney did, and saying unnecessary things. If the companies reputation is not a factor, then stop defending that point.
It is a factor. It's a reason for not renewing her contract. A lot of people are trying to frame it as her being fired for being conservative.
then prove it damaged their reputation and don't circle back to "They can fire her whenever they want" or this is just non-sense.
What part of “Disney is under no obligation to prove damages” are you not understanding. FOR THE THIRD TIME NOW: they would only be required to do that if DISNEY was suing GINA for defamation. They’re not doing that, and that’s the only scenario where that’s a requirement.
Then it's not a relevant point and your a complete idiot for ever mentioning more than once. If a company is going to make a claim they fired someone for a specific reason, yes they have to be able to prove it.
No. This is different. Warning an employee to cease behavior is not the same as damaging a companies reputation. Her acting and behaving in a way contrary to the companies request is a separate issue. When it comes to certain ideologies that is not within a companies right to do so.
>If a company is going to make a claim they fired someone for a specific reason, yes they have to be able to prove it.
That’s the point: no they don’t. I don’t know where you got the erroneous idea that Disney is required to prove damages in a case where they’re not suing for defamation, but that absolutely is not the case. If you insist on repeating it, then you’re going to have to prove it, because that’s not actually a requirement anywhere.
It's a reply to this comment you idiot.
If the company is going to claim she is damaging their reputation and let her go because of it, yes they have to be able to prove said claim. The better thing to do would to have said nothing. As people have said and I agree, you can fire someone whenever you want, you don't need a reason. It changes when you publicly state why you fired someone. Disney fricked up, don't do that.
For the fifth time. No they don’t. They would only be required to do that in the case of them attempting to sue Carano for defamation.
I’m done with this, you keep saying the same thing over and over despite being told several times you’re mistaken, so either provide some legal evidence backing up what you’re saying or stop replying because you’re just not correct
OK, so you can be fired for sexual harassment and the company can tell the world you were fired for sexual harassment? Whether its true or not, or if they have proof or not. That's what you're saying right now.
If you are going to claim there is a cause for firing someones, yes you have to prove it. Its why firings can result in lawsuits. And companies sometimes can back up claims and sometimes cannot. It's why some lawsuits are won and some are lost. Someone said the reason was;
>she is damaging to the company's image
then if that's the case, yes they have to prove it. I keep saying the same things, because it's all still accurate and true. The things I say won't change and apparently your understanding of it won't either.
>Whether it’s true or not, or if they have proof or not. That's what you're saying right now.
No, that would be defamation, and if you tried to sue the company for it you would be required to prove A) what they said was untrue but also B) that you suffered damages from it among several other requirements. But again Disney is not suing for defamation so that’s not required.
>If you are going to claim there is a cause for firing someones
She was an at will contract employee hired episode by episode at the discretion of the company. That means no reason (or literally any reason at all) is required to not renew her contract
> A) what they said was untrue but also B) that you suffered damages from it among several other requirements
HOLY SHIT, it's like.... what you do in a trial and what's starting to happening RIGHT NOW!
>>If you are going to claim there is a cause for firing someones
>>If you are going to claim there is a cause
>>If you are going to claim
Do you not understand this statement? Cause you keep ignoring it. You just affirmed you company cannot say something that is untrue. Do you get there's a difference between firing an employee and making a public statement about an employee?
You're a fricking moron.
The law does not mean shit at the level they are at.
We saw that at the Trump defamation trial.
>He raped me!
No I didn't.
>Goes to trial. New law passed during trial saying that you are not allowed to say that you didn't rape someone if they say you did.
GUIILTY!
Despite the whole law that you can't charge someone for a crime that wasn't a crime when they did it.
You're a fricking moron.
>You're doing what disney did, and saying unnecessary things. If the companies reputation is not a factor, then stop defending that point.
It's not a hard concept to get. She was warned multi times about her actions. She didn't correct those actions. So they didn't go forward with her show. Which is their right to do so.
wut, sounds like something that needs to be proven in court in a jury of her peers, first time i ever heard that kind of detail
Found the Yidsney shill!
Probably got a tiny hat on and everything.
I don't give a shit about Disney. I just think the whole thing is moronic and the fat roastie has done nothing but whine about it for the last three years. I don't like redditor Musk either.
>Doesn't care.
>Comes to a thread you don't like and spams dozens of lies and left wing talking points.
We can tell you don't care, troon shill.
Just clearing up the facts anon. Facts don't care about your feelings.
And are the troons in the room with us right now?
No, you're spamming bullshit, troon.
You are mentally disabled, your "facts" only exist in your head.
It is a FACT that you can sue anyone at any time for any reason, if you have enough money.
Elon has a lot of money.
My dick is intact as far as I can tell. You couldn't hold your own shouting "troon!", lmao.
Maybe one day you'll be able to form cohesive arguments on the internet.
They would if Disney was trying to sue her for defamation, but again, they’re not. Legally they can not renew her contract for any reason they see fit, they’re under no obligation to provide a reason to her or anyone else for that matter
>you have to prove it
No they don't. Not in this case.
Oh god those legs
I'm gonna have to fap
Same bro
hell yeah brother, bust one for the Hulkster
She's dominating headlines on every media website right now.
>A short time ago in a galaxy not so far away, Defendants made it clear that only one orthodoxy in thought, speech, or action was acceptable in their empire, and that those who dared to question or failed to fully comply would not be tolerated. And so it was with Carano.
The lawyer who made this should quit, this is the most embarassing way to open up a legal complaint
I was just reading the transcript of the a recent NLRB hearing against Trader Joe's where their attorney raised the argument that they didn't engage in union busting because the NLRB is unconstitutional. During the NLRB lawyer's opening statement she defined Trader Joe's as a "nuatical themed upscale grocery store" and then continually made nautical references throughout her remarks. We need to get some jock lawyers to beat these people up.
i can hate disney and make fun of a fat woman at the same time
Look at this FAT b***h. Does Elon really wanna hit that??
Who cares about the complaint, I just want her to sit on my face.
a case of mallomars
the only case she has is for murdering me with her massive thighs
Your honor I argue in the case of "would" Do the Ayes have it? :3
Aye
I want to lingus her cunni, if you know what I mean.
oh look, it's the pathetic "at will" homosexual that spammed the last thread with a dozen identical posts.
if you don't work for disney you should buy a length of rope and test it out
This case will be settled out of court with mutual NDA and both sides claiming victory. Who knows how the mouse accountants show it in their books.
Literally no cared about her for like 2 years now all of the sudden people do?
Can OP explain why open racial and sexual discrimination is legal?
You just admit you read the case. You can't fire and ruin the career of someone because of thier political views.
They absolutely can unless they fired her specifically because of her affiliation. They made it pretty clear that they didn't fire her simply because she's a Republican.
They said fired her because they didn't like a tweet. Did the same thing to Rosanne. The real reason they fired her is because she is a Conservative and touched thier precious transfreaks.
If that was the case they still wouldn't be employing Tim Allen and Kelsey Grammer. But again, nothing they did was illegal or could be framed as such.
what Im hearing is, Disney doesn't support women.
They did it to Tim Allen
He stars in and executive produced two seasons of a new Santa Clause show and had a role in Toy Story 4. Nope.
No they didn’t do it to Tim Allen as the second anon here correctly points out, but even if they had none of that would be illegal. Companies are allowed to hire and fire whoever they choose for any reason they feel like or none at all (except obviously for discriminating against a protected class).
It's about attention/right-wing grift money. If she can get a settlement out of it that's a bonus.
I disagree. Certainly Gina's lawsuit and the Startling Revelation!
coming like a one-two punch are no accident.
But as with all else, I guess we'll see.
i think it's funny that she thinks studios won't hire her because of Disney, as if she hasn't doubled down on her political tirades
i'm going to be honest with you gentlemen, the only reason i entered this thread was to check if there were any nice pics of gina that i don't have saved. sad to say i am disappointed. do better you lazy swine
Here. Have some.
she was a fricking athlethe
why can't she just lose the weight and become hot again. if she wasn't fat an army of coomsters would be behind her
she and elon are doing it for the lols. its a massive waste of tiem for the rat
Architecture
>LEAVE MY MULTIBILLION WOKE CORPO ALONE!!!
you shills really are the scum of the universe
She realized Ben Shapiro couldn't save her sorry ass so now she finally realized the career and money she threw away and is crawling back to Daddy Disney
nobody gives a frick about Elon, commietard
Elon is paying for her lawyer fees
It’s funny that all the Disney shills are on this now
>Disney shills
They're so well-spoken on the one hand and so fricking argumentative on the other that they give themselves away. Yidsney is PAYING PEOPLE TO TROLL Cinemaphile. It is to LOL.
Just to clear things up, all I ever wanted was for someone to clearly explain how she thinks she has a case here, because according to the law it really looks like she doesn’t have a leg to stand on. The overwhelming majority of people responding have just been angry and spewing nonsense, but there have been a handful of people genuinely trying to lay out how they think she has a path forward, but even with them when I respond by explaining why they’re mistaken they get just as angry and vitriolic. But at the end of the day I just seriously wanted to have a discussion about why she might believe she has a case
im a huge fan of female legs
>anons state that jt's a whole big nothingburger
>"AHAHAHA LOOK TROONS ARE SEETHING!"
you have the mental capacity of an ape
But, I still have my dick, and it works fine.
You, however, do not, troon.
So, which one of us is batshit crazy again?
why do you keep projecting your sick fetish onto me, gay?
I didn't make you a troon.
You cut YOUR dick off, I had nothing to do with it.
>still projecting and doesn't deny it
do you fantasize about every person that you disagree with being a troon?
Shut up gay.
>gay
im not the one fantasizing about another person's genitals getting cut off
gay.
i accept your concession
Boy-molesting wet-lipped scat-fetishist enema-kit-carrying diseased homosexual.
i hope you get the help that you need eventually anon
I hope you die of a antibiotic-resistant strain of syphilis.
And, there you go, people.
I found the troony assigned to minding this thread and keeping it up.
It's simple.
Find the idiot posting stupid shit.
Call them a troony a few times.
They then expose themselves instead of ignoring you.
Always. Trannies are at heart narcissistic sociopaths, they must have attention, no matter if it is positive or negative. They cannot stand to not be the center of attention in all things.
Try it. The worst thing you can do to a troony is to ignore them. Now that dickless has been outed, all you have to do is ignore him and his thread is dead.
Not him but you're a troon. If you keep replying you're proving the point of being a troon.
how could my post be interpreted as admitting anything about being a troon, you stupid homosexual?
why are you trying so hard to push this fantasy/narrative?
you have the mental capacity of a transexual
Idk but is this movie as bad as I remember it being? Thinking about giving it a rewatch
Honestly crazy impressive cast for a movie with an MMA fighter headlining.
Discrimination lawsuits have reverse burden of proof assuming they pass prima facie if the company is mid-sized or larger.
It all comes down to how good her lawyer is and how much they shopped around for a pliant judge.
Reminder the religion is a federally protected class and troon ideology goes against core Christian beliefs.
that's not how that works
Seethe and cope homosexual. Mama kk and Bobby iger are gonna have to pay the piper. Nelson peltz is mobilizing an army of pissed off consumers and investors.
Borrowing to start paying out dividends again just lets the sharks know there is blood in the water.
her lawyers are looking for a paycheck
>her lawyers
it's literally fricking Elon, numbnuts
She doesn't. It's Ben Shapiro and Musk doing a PR stunt. Dailywire is discredited with their israeli genocidal rants. They need to talk about woke and cancel culture because Israel is difficult to defend rn. Just enough stuff to distract opposition while the israelites are genociding Gaza.
She thinks Disney was pleased with her performance and the public reception of Cara Dune, and that they promised her more work until they found out her political beliefs, in which they tried to force to say things she didn't believe and when she would not they "fired" her, refused to renew her contract. She's claiming that this treatment of her was different than the way other actors were treated for also posting "controversial" or factually incorrect political or personal beliefs, on the basis that she is a woman.
I don't know if she normally would have a case but based on the way discrimination laws are seen now...maybe.
it's interesting, cause Bill Burr was also not in season 3. They didn't make any statements about him though. It seems she was treated differently. I could see Disney not wanting Bill Burr back for various reasons too, but he didn't go through the same thing.
>They didn't make any statements about him though. It seems she was treated differently.
A lot of people have been parroting this same talking point about “being treated differently” so I think it’s important to point out there is no legal requirement for that. I’m not sure how people got the idea that there was, but it’s not against the law to do that
Yes and no. That is where discrimination can come in, if she feels that some how she was targeted for "correctional behavior" or something similar and other co-workers were not. A pattern of consistent behavior would look better for Disney right now, but there's also exceptions and firings tend to be that. The black and white of the law isn't clear when we don't have all the details, but it seems there's enough gray that the lawyers are going to walk that line.
>That is where discrimination can come in
No, it would only qualify as discrimination if the treatment was because of her status as a member of a protected class. Those classes being age, race, religion, sexual orientation or identity, nation of origin, veteran status, or pregnancy. Hating trans people does not fall into any of those categories, so there’s no discrimination case there and therefore no wrongful termination
Wouldn't be just termination. It's not just about her firing but also treatment while an employee. If they only made her do any kind of meetings and such to discuss and correct her behavior and not anyone else, then it could be discrimination, a lawyer will just have to look for patterns. If it only happens to straight women, then there ya go. Then again you're going to have to prove other employees also said or did similar things that would have warranted such meetings.
>If they only made her do any kind of meetings and such to discuss and correct her behavior and not anyone else, then it could be discrimination
No it couldn’t. Companies are legally allowed to require employees attend mandatory meetings at their discretion, and it’s one of the most commonly practiced institutions. It’s not illegal to require an employee to attend sensitivity training if their behavior violates company policy, which it did. None of that is illegal.
So, uh, why can't Christian bakeries tell gays to frick off again?
The court ruled in favor of the bakeries
So, you are rewriting history, and pretending that the Colorado bakery is not in court again for the exact same reason?
Weak bait.
If they’re back in court that’s news to me- all I know is the court ruled in favor of them not being required to bake cakes for gay weddings because it violated their religious beliefs already
it is illegal if they don't require other employees who violate policy to also attend. You really like to skip over valid points. I bet you own a time share.
Yeah I don’t know where you got the idea that was illegal, but it’s just not
>I bet you own a time share
Lmao what?
if she's the only heterosexual woman that's been required to do so, it's a very strong case for discrimination. Disney is also known for firing Roseanne and James Gunn based on twitter activity. One of which got re-hired, the other is a heterosexual woman.
Except neither Disney, but more importantly, or SHE are claiming she was told to attend sensitivity training because she was a woman. She’s not claiming that, so it’s irrelevant.
it would be brought up in court, because they'd have to make this claim first and look into during discovery.
Lmao they would have to file an entirely new lawsuit because they didn’t make any of those claims in the complaint. She can’t just make things up as she goes along. And she can’t do that if she loses this case or it gets dismissed. Once it’s been ruled on you can’t just keep filing indefinitely on the same case, it ties up the court’s time. That’s why it’s very important to have your case laid out BEFORE you file your complaint, because once you do- that’s it.
>She can’t just make things up as she goes along.
LOLOLOLOLOLOL
literally done. Prosecution can absolutely add charges to a claim if new evidence is discovered, as a I fricking said in discovery. This is not a criminal trial where a DA is..... forget it, you're an idiot.
Yeah, that’s not a thing anyone can do. When you sue someone you need to lay out what it is you’re claiming they did in your complaint. Obviously evidence can be produced in discovery, but you can’t change the grounds on which you’re attempting to sue them as the trial goes on, that would just be ridiculous
I have an explanation for that idiot.
Number one: it's a troon.
Number two: it lives in California, so it has no idea of the difference between civil and criminal, state or federal, laws.
It's so moronic that it thought chopping off it's dick was a good idea.
Kicking morons is fun, but you should not act as if anything they say is worth listening to.
>Lmao what?
yeah why would anon imply that you have a stake in disney when you're actively defending them? what a weird thing to say!!! "Lmao what" indeed!!!!
Do you know what a time share is?
why are you asking me a question i can just google and come back to pretend to know the answer?
>and that they promised her more work
It’s my understanding there were discussions of a possible spinoff, but no formal contract, so it wouldn’t be wrongful termination since they didn’t break any contract
>until they found out her political beliefs
Except hating minorities isn’t a political ideology, so it’s not a protected class. They didn’t approve of the public statements she was making online, so they decided to part ways with her. None of that is illegal, so I’m just not sure how she thinks she might have a case
>Except hating minorities isn’t a political ideology, so it’s not a protected class.
Not being forced to believe in gender ideology falls under religious beliefs and is in fact a very protected class.
Not that I think that's the tack they're going with in this lawsuit.
There’s no recognized religion that says anything about trans people, but more importantly in her complaint she says nothing about religion
Literally most major religions do not recognize anything but male and female and Christianity in particular makes a point about it being the only two options.
>So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
Now in an actual justice system they'd win on that alone considering that's what they were upset with, but this being America of course they're going to pin it on muh woman and defamation claims.
A) none of the major recognized religions make any statements one way or the other about trans people but more importantly B) Carano HERSELF doesn’t claim she was being discriminated against because of her religion
>A) none of the major recognized religions make any statements one way or the other about trans people
Bzzt wrong.
Pope literally called it dangerous ideological colonization and all trinitarian Christians reject the notion wholesale.
They explain it on page 3 moron.
Is it true that she wants 70.000 bucks? Daily Wire money must have been shit
and to appear in the upcoming Mandolorian and Grogu movie.
Wait until you find out that her family owns something like fifteen casinos in Vegas.
I don't think it is about the money.
Why? If her case was this shut in case she could sue for tons of money
Are you asking me why anyone would NOT want to kick Disney in the dick?
Hell, I think executing about 90% of the people running Disney would make the world better, just on general purposes.
Not even charging them with any crimes, just straight up bullet in the head.
Disney used to be like Michael Jackson, a little weird, but they made billions of people happy with good content.
Now?
He's dead, they're REALLY weird and probably responsible for tens of thousands of vanished children.
At least Mike let the kids go home with a ton of money if they weren't happy.
Not to mention the ongoing anti-American anti-white indoctrination. There must be millions of parents going into turbo-redneck mode when discover what their kids have been watching when they assumed oh, it's Disney, it's SAFE.
I just watched the webm, in what way was that anti-american or anti-white?
You're a troony.
You would not understand even if small words in your language was used.
not an argument
Trannies are mentally deficient, and low IQ.
you cant see the problem because you are the problem. move along now. try not to molest any kids on your way out.
if you can't actually explain the problem then there is no problem, you're just desperate to feel like a victim
White fragility. These people see a cartoon made by and for blacks that talks about racism and slavery, and automatically think that they're being persecuted. White republicans want to be the victims so bad.
Discrimination law is all kinds of fricked so she could possibly frick Disney pretty hard over this.
Lordy, she's dummy thicc
I want AI nudes of thicc Gina if I can't get the real thing. Get on it guys.
>N-No you have to understand! You HAVE to hire me after my contract ran out gibme money!
I thought we hated charity and women?
>i'm not a disney shill or a leftist homosexual. i just chose to side with the massive multi billion dollar company over a single woman because i'm massively anti wrestling.
i hate disney more so anything that hurts them is a-ok
As do we all, anon. As do we all. The days of pathological altruism are over. The buggers wanted nuclear culture war, well, okay.
I'll break it down so you don't have to read pages. Gina Carano is suing The Walt Disney Company, Lucasfilm, and Huckleberry Industries for wrongful termination. Key points below.
Reason for Termination:
>In February 2021, Carano faced heavy criticism after she authored a social media post that likened the Holocaust to the US political climate at the time.
>She stated, “Jews were beaten in the streets, not by Nazi soldiers but by their neighbors… even by children.” Carano continued, “Because history is edited, most people today don’t realize that to get to the point where Nazi soldiers could easily round up thousands of israelites, the government first made their own neighbors hate them simply for being israelites.”
>Lucasfilm, a subsidiary of Disney and the production company behind The Mandalorian, confirmed that they no longer employed Carano and did not plan to employ her in the future. They cited her social media posts as the reason for her termination.
Carano’s Defense:
>In her recent social media post, Carano defended her statements, emphasizing that she did not compare Republicans to israeli people in the Holocaust.
She questioned the merit behind accusations of racism and clarified her intent.
Lawsuit Claims:
>Carano’s lawsuit alleges wrongful termination based on sex and political views.
>The lawsuit contends that Disney and Lucasfilm created an environment where only one orthodoxy of thought, speech, or action was acceptable, and dissenting views were not tolerated.
>Former Disney CEO Bob Chapek’s statement that Carano was fired because she didn’t align with company values is also referenced in the lawsuit.
Carano’s case revolves around defamation, wrongful termination, and alleged suppression of differing viewpoints. Whether she has a strong legal case will ultimately depend on the evidence presented and the interpretation of relevant laws.
I hate Disney and I hate Elon Musk, so no matter what the outcome is I'll be laughing
i thought working with ben shapiro was better than disney? i thought chuddy blumpkins were about to usher in their own cinema renaissance with the daily wire? hmm, makes you think
>make fun of pronouns
>get death threats
It evens outs
I wonder if elon knows that some of these people are disney(and other company) employees
jesus christ elon, how many aces do you have up your sleeve?
Gina was getting death threats before the pronoun bullshit. Just like every other celeb out there, everyone got threatened to put BLM in their bio but Gina refused. They didn't even give her support and just told her to shut up then eventually fired her. When it comes to social media, Disney is absolutely fricking useless when it comes to protecting their actors. Reminder that they fuelled the hatred towards Jake and Ahmed when they tried hard to make the public hate the prequels even more towards TFA release yet none of them did anything unless Ahmed had a cameo recently. Reminder that Ewan posted a video on Twitter addressing racism but turned a blind eye to both Jake, Ahmed and Hayden. Daisy and Kelly deleted their social media too. Hell, I remember that Obi-Wan VA nearly got cancelled simply for having that app that was similar to Twitter. Twitter even tried hard to cancel Rosario after the casting announcement because she beat up a troony. What a shitty company to work for.
She's suing because Disney claimed she used "aggressive" and "disparaging" language against troons. However nothing she posted was aggressive or disparaging anyone. Also if that's what it takes to be fired people like that one mexican who plays Mando and other Disney execs should be fired for similar reasons. If not they have to explain the difference between Gina's post and theirs's and why one is acceptable and the other isn't.
I really want that one shitty conservative outlet that made lady ballers to make a space balls type movie where they complain about black people and trannies for 90 minutes but with shitty sci fi outfits on
Since they effectively lied about her in order to harm her career she's likely to win a defamation case unless the lawyers were moronic and filed it in Reedy Creek.
Ronnie has a lot of time to pick pointless legal battles with reedy creek now, he should come to her rescue
This is an absolutely based thread and OP is performing a surgery on these moronic chuds
Can defamation and discrimination lawsuits lead to discovery?
If so this is going to be fricking hilarious.
>100. All this occurred while Lucasfilm was publicly supporting
“Krystina Arielle and her declaration that all white people are racist.”9
>101. Indeed, Defendants even publicly claimed that people should
speak their mind based on their conscience. Of course, when Carano did
so, Defendants targeted her because her conscience did not align with
their ideology.
oh boy
Aw man, at any stage, at any point in her life, Gina has always been prime.
Her being a bit of a geek just makes her even more perfect.
Can't believe no one has posted our favorite Scottish drunkard yet.