A Big Difference Between Republicans and Democrats
When elected officials get in trouble, Democrats and Republicans respond differently. Republicans scatter while Democrats encircle, deflect, and defend. Even for Susanna Gibson.
Scandals are a dime a dozen in politics - even accounting for inflation - but one lesson continues to be learned. The political party you belong to when engulfed in one matters.
Just ask Susanna Gibson, the Democratic nominee for House Delegate in Virginia’s 57th District. And unlike the Russia collusion hoax and the phony Christopher Steele dossier, a real pee tape is involved (sort of).
The Washington Post first broke the story earlier this week. The Post usually doesn’t identify its sources with much specificity (at least in the case of the now-discredited Russia Collusion hoax). But they did here: “a Republican operative,” as if they were apologizing, with no connections to the opposing GOP campaign of former homebuilder David Owen. His response:
“Me and my team found out about this story today like everyone else,” Owen said in a written statement Monday afternoon, soon after The Post published an article about Gibson. “I’m sure this is a difficult time for Susanna and her family, and I’m remaining focused on my campaign.”
When your opponent is digging themselves a hole, sometimes it’s best to keep out of their way, even show a little sympathy, even if your statement has a glaring grammatical error. Sometimes you hand them a shovel, but that’s not necessary here.
Morgan, a nurse practitioner and married mom of two children, has become an international story over the disclosure of, well, we’ll let the UK’s Daily Mail describe it:
A Democrat running for Virginia's House of Delegates has refused to drop out of the race despite being outed as an online porn star.
Susanna Gibson can be seen in videos obtained by DailyMail.com performing sex acts with her husband online and encouraging watchers to pay them with 'tips' for specific requests.
Mississippi, New Jersey, and Virginia hold off-year legislative elections on November 8. Gubernatorial elections are on the ballot in Kentucky, Louisiana, and Mississippi. But none are receiving more attention now than the Commonwealth of Virginia, where Democrats hold a slim majority in the Senate and Republicans a slightly slimmer one in the House. Gov. Glenn Youngkin has put presidential aspirations on hold while hyper-focusing his time, attention, and ample resources on achieving a Republican trifecta in the purple-ish Old Dominion State. If successful, it may catapult him into the GOP presidential contest, if not guarantee him a slot on the ticket as a vice presidential nominee.
Youngkin and GOP operatives are going on offense with, first, a well-timed full pardon of the Loudoun County father of a daughter who was sexually assaulted in a public school bathroom - the second such assault by a “trans” teenager - that local school officials tried to cover up. The distraught dad was arrested by Loudoun County sheriff deputies when he protested at a school board meeting and was aggressively prosecuted by Soros-funded Democrat Buta Biberaj.
And now this gem via Susanna Gibson. I wonder what other shoes may drop in my adopted state, just as early voting starts on September 22nd.
My readers may remember a post from a couple of years ago when I talked about how to respond to a political attack, such as an alleged scandal. As a quick reminder, there are four ways in descending order of effectiveness: 1) deny, 2) “It’s not what you think,” 3) I’ll never do it again, and 4) the most often used strategy, counter-attack and undermine the credibility of the “attacker.” You can also choose not to respond and hunker down, but this is clearly not one of those cases.
Let’s analyze this one.
Gibson’s campaign issued the following statement after the story broke.
“This is an illegal invasion of my privacy designed to humiliate me and my family. It won’t intimidate me, and it won’t silence me. My political opponents and their Republican allies have proven they’re willing to commit a sex crime to attack me and my family because there’s no line they won’t cross to silence women when they speak up. They are trying to silence me because they want to silence you, and I won’t let that happen. My opponent and his allies know that the people of this district are on our side on the issues, so they’re stooping to the worst gutter politics. There’s too much at stake in this election, and I’ll never stop fighting for our community.”
“Illegal invasion of privacy” . . . . “humiliate me and my family” . . . “sex crime” . . . “silence women” . . . “worst gutter politics.”
Notably, after announcing her candidacy, Gibson didn’t stop her online porn routine. The New York Post:
Gibson apparently maintained her Chaturbate profile, called “hotwifeexperience,” after having announced her campaign in July 2022 — uploading at least one image of herself on the sex streaming site a month later.
She garnered some 5,770 Chaturbate followers — whom she repeatedly pressed for more “tokens” in exchange for certain acts in “private” showings.
She told her fans that she was “raising money for a good cause.”
As they say, in rural Virginia, that dog won’t hunt. It’s laughable to call this an invasion of privacy after she advertised and sought tips for performing sex acts to her 5,770 followers. She and her attorney are alleging a violation of Virginia’s “revenge porn” statute, which is also laughable, despite CNN’s efforts to give it credibility. She’s still married, and it wasn’t a vengeful estranged husband who shared the videos without her consent. And gutter politics? An odd charge by a married porn star who sleeps around (see below). As for her and her family being humiliated, that‘s rich with projection and an overdose of chutzpah.
I wonder if she disclosed her online porn income in any required financial disclosure statements? I also wonder what the “good cause” was - her campaign? Campaign fundraisers will no doubt take note, especially if she wins.
But she has help from Democrat allies in the media. Democrats are running on the issue of abortion, despite their extreme position of abortion at any time, for any reason, up to the moment of birth. Youngkin and Republicans in Virginia are proposing a curb on abortion after 15 weeks, long after a heartbeat is detected (usually six to eight weeks) and a point where the fetus feels pain. It polls well, although it would only affect less than one in ten abortions. Yet, that qualifies somehow as an “abortion ban,” and voters must not be distracted, say Democrats.
But that’s not stopping the media from trying to tie this scandal to the abortion issue. “The future of abortion rights in Virginia may depend on what voters think of Chaturbate,” screamed the left-leaning Business Insider.
I may have to update my “ways to respond to an attack” with two more tactics - projection (accusing your opponent of that which you are guilty) and diversion or distraction - the “look at that shiny object over there!” response. But these are just subsets of the tactic to undermine the credibility of your attacker.
The real question is how wealthy suburban voters west of Richmond - parts of Henrico and Goochland counties - will respond with their votes. In the meantime, the media should amend its description of her “between the commas,” as we say: “Democratic candidate for delegate, nurse-practitioner, and porn star.” That’s undoubtedly how voters will remember her when voting, not necessarily in that order.
And Democrats remain steadfast in their support of Gibson. “At least one prominent Virginia politician, Senate President Pro Tem L. Louise Lucas, immediately came to Gibson's defense, blaming operatives working for Virginia's Republican Gov. Glenn Youngkin for trying ‘to embarrass and humiliate her.’” reported Business Insider.
This overall approach by Democrats to surround, defend, deflect and protect their own is consistent with other scandals, including the Hunter and Joe Biden bribery scandal. Democrats are stonewalling, defending, and attempting to gaslight their defense of the unpopular president. There’s no better example than US Rep. Dan Goldman (D-NY): “New York Rep. Dan Goldman, who was representing Democrats inside the (hearing) room (where Biden business partner Devon Archer testified), told reporters after the interview that Archer testified that Hunter sold the ‘illusion of access’ to his father by taking credit for things his father did as vice president that he had no part in.”
Goldman lied in his spin to the media. Archer didn’t testify to that, but Goldman did attempt to lead the witness in his questioning. Those were Goldman’s words, not Archer’s. It's very brazen, but it’s no mystery why some Democrats do that. It works. That helps explain Gibson’s response.
US Rep. George Santos (R-NY) must look at the reaction to Susanna Gibson’s situation with amazement, if not envy. Republicans are either silent or joining Democrats in clamoring for his prosecution and resignation over his resume scandal.
One can argue whether being a porn star (and more - see below) and lying on a resume - neither of which is illegal (Santos has been accused of illegalities) - are morally equivalent. To be clear, I’m not defending Santos, whose situation is under all kinds of investigations. Gibson may be guilty of violating the porn site Chaterbate’s terms of service, so there’s that. Imagine violating a porn site’s “standards,” such as they are.
I’ll leave the moral equivalency argument to you, but one can confidently surmise that Republicans hold their candidates and incumbents to a higher standard than Democrats.
So does everyone else, it seems, from the US Department of Justice to the corporate media. Election day in Virginia this year will be interesting, and eyes will be on Virginia’s 57th legislative district.
Oh, I almost forgot. PARENTAL WARNING. Especially for Gibson’s two children.
I mentioned a “pee tape” dimension to the Gibson “controversy.” This was reported by the Daily Mail:
In one clip obtained by DailyMail.com, Gibson tells her husband: 'I'll let you f*** me in the a** doggy style in a private room if someone wants to pay. That's the deal.'
At another point she says: 'Y'all can watch me pee if you tip me and some tokens - again, I'm raising money for a good cause.'
At another, Gibson explains she is in an open relationship with her husband even though he 'doesn't like sharing.'
'Yeah I f*** random strangers if you're hot,' she says.
'We have tried swapping. I was telling them earlier about ethical non-monogamy.
'We, uh - he doesn't like sharing.'
Ethical non-monogamy?
Christopher Steele and Bill Clinton, call your offices.