Politico: Susanna Gibson's Online Sex Life Was Exposed

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:90% of millennials take nudes?! Really?

That read Cosmo.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I still want to know the technical details about how the GOP found her live stream videos.

She made these long before she ever announced her candidacy. Millions of streamers make these videos EVERYDAY that are ostensibly streamed, but not archived.

Even if if there are websites that archive every adult stream (so millions of streams per day), you still need to match a handful of archived videos with a single person running in an obscure state-level legislative race. She wasn't a national candidate.

No one has ever explained HOW they were able to pinpoint her videos. It's actually frightening and fascinating.

Not really. Everyone remembers if a neighbor, coworker, classmate, etc had a video out there. When she ran for office I'm sure someone remembered they had the video on an old drive and sent it out

The odds that a neighbor, coworker, or classmate saw one of her 15 videos is infinitesimal. Millions of videos produced daily on a global basis. Times 365 days per year. And it seems that the videos were only uploaded to a public site within a few months of the election (so likely uploaded by the Republican political consultant himself).

I don't know about that. I grew up in Old Town and 'dated' Charis Van Metre (of Van Metre homes) way back in the 80s as a teenager and about 15 years later I saw her in a Playboy magazine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I still want to know the technical details about how the GOP found her live stream videos.

She made these long before she ever announced her candidacy. Millions of streamers make these videos EVERYDAY that are ostensibly streamed, but not archived.

Even if if there are websites that archive every adult stream (so millions of streams per day), you still need to match a handful of archived videos with a single person running in an obscure state-level legislative race. She wasn't a national candidate.

No one has ever explained HOW they were able to pinpoint her videos. It's actually frightening and fascinating.

Not really. Everyone remembers if a neighbor, coworker, classmate, etc had a video out there. When she ran for office I'm sure someone remembered they had the video on an old drive and sent it out

The odds that a neighbor, coworker, or classmate saw one of her 15 videos is infinitesimal. Millions of videos produced daily on a global basis. Times 365 days per year. And it seems that the videos were only uploaded to a public site within a few months of the election (so likely uploaded by the Republican political consultant himself).

Honestly she probably bragged about it to someone and word got around. Everyone I know who is involved in some kind of kink can’t shut up about it.

Or her DH did. Or an ex-partner who was bitter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I still want to know the technical details about how the GOP found her live stream videos.

She made these long before she ever announced her candidacy. Millions of streamers make these videos EVERYDAY that are ostensibly streamed, but not archived.

Even if if there are websites that archive every adult stream (so millions of streams per day), you still need to match a handful of archived videos with a single person running in an obscure state-level legislative race. She wasn't a national candidate.

No one has ever explained HOW they were able to pinpoint her videos. It's actually frightening and fascinating.

Actually I read she made 1-2 videos AFTER she announced her candidacy in summer of 2022. I think she did her last known live stream in September 2022.

Correct.

No - that was the last time a recording was uploaded. The live streaming happened years ago.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:90% of millennials take nudes?! Really?

I wonder how much the pandemic increased that %.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She intended it to be streamed in a private, adult setting.

Recording it was unethical.

Distributing the recording was unethical.

Publicizing it widely was unethical.

Sending screenshots & quotes of it to unsuspecting families in VA was unethical.

You may or may not agree with what she did, but there was a lot of other crap that happened that she is calling out.

The only thing she should be calling out is her own incredibly irresponsible and STUPID behavior in making online porn videos in the first place. That you won't acknowledge this tells us everything we need to know.

I already called it stupid and poor judgment.

And there is some POS who recorded it and uploaded it to a public website.

Sweetie, she was the one who put it on a public website. Like literally anyone in the world could have watched.

Chaturbate is one of the most popular webcam sites on the internet, and since its launch in 2011 has had a 3,200% increase in interest from users around the world. Viewers can watch for free or pay tips if they'd like to see certain sex acts performed.

“We decided to just have fun on camera, doing exactly what we wanted to do,” she explains. “This means we gave away a lot for free our first night, making only $8 (£6) the whole night.” Beth drew in an audience of 380 people, but she thinks the top ‘cammers’ earn thousands of pounds a night.

https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/love-sex/webcam-camming-couple-sex-strangers-chaturbate-a7424416.html

It’s not available on chaturbate. And it wasn’t public when she was live streaming. Someone else recorded it and made it public.

How old are you? Not too familiar with interwebs, eh?

DP. Forgive us if we're "not too familiar" with chaturbate, as you clearly are. Are you actually so dumb to presume no one would record a livestream? Whether for their own purposes or to make it public - doesn't really matter. Pretty sure the audience for a chaturbate sesh isn't exactly the most upstanding crowd. Stop defending this idiot pretending to be a victim. You look as stupid as she does.

I’m familiar with live streaming.

This PP was incorrect: “she was the one who put it on a public website. Like literally anyone in the world could have watched.”

She wasn’t the person who put it on a public website.

She started multiple live stream on chaturbate which is a public site. Like you can go to it now click on a window and start watching some random person masturbate. She did offer to go to a private room for cash, but the offer was to the public.

I open to a rebuttal of this argument with actual facts but stomping your feet and claiming to be a “familiar with live steaming” isn’t that persuasive.

Show us her videos on Chaturbate. Oh wait. They aren’t there because it was live stream years ago.

The only way it was available for public viewing in 2023 was because someone else recorded it and uploaded it onto another website after she entered the race. And because a Republican POS reported it to WaPo.

The only way it was available for public viewing is that she put it on a public live stream in the first place.

+1.

PP will next claim trademark infringement or copyright violation.

The chick put videos of herself get boned on the internet. Ain't no way in hell anyone is convincing anyone she is a victim.

No, she did not “put videos of herself” on the internet. It was live streaming.

She herself freely agreed to the platform’s terms of use so she could broadcast her sexual activity for the possibility of making some money. The terms of use specifically warn that the content streamed may be recorded. She consented to the terms of use.

She knew it could be recorded.

And there are bots which record ALL of this stuff, especially bots located outside the USA.

Ever notice FaceBook’s facial recognition software? It is not new. It is simple, cheap, and available.

And yes, there HAVE been Republicans shamed over somewhat similar situations (though nothing this egregious), but they did not go blaming everyone else for their poor judgement when the truth came out.

She’s done, politically.

Which Republicans were shamed for similar situations?

No one will care next time she runs. She only lost by <1000 votes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I know Gibson lost and the other thread was closed. But she just gave an interview to Politico and is framing this as a revenge porn situation. I voted for her, but didn't she willingly film herself on a porn site? I'm surprised that fact got scrubbed from this article:

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2023/12/09/susanna-gibson-virginia-digital-privacy-00130883

Moral: Republicans don’t understand consent when it comes to women’s bodies.

I think a big underlying factor that really needs to be addressed, and our society needs to start being educated on, is there is this devaluation and misunderstanding of consent, especially when we’re talking about digital privacy. Content that is initially made in a consensual context, which is then distributed in a non-consensual context digitally, is a crime. Just because someone consented to share something in one particular context doesn’t mean that it is or should be fair game for the whole world to see.

Choosing to share content, online or in whatever medium, with select people with the understanding that it will disappear and can only be seen by those present at the time — when we’re talking live streaming, webcamming and Skype — that is a far cry from consenting for that content to be recorded and then broadly disseminated. And there is case law precedent confirming this.

Daniel P. Watkins, a lawyer for Gibson, said disseminating the videos constitutes a violation of the state’s revenge porn law, which makes it a Class 1 misdemeanor to “maliciously” distribute nude or sexual images of another person with “intent to coerce, harass, or intimidate.”
“We are working closely with state and federal law enforcement,” Watkins said.


Watkins said Gibson was not aware of, and had not authorized, the posting of Chaturbate material on other sites.
Asked why Gibson had a reasonable expectation of privacy on Chaturbate, Watkins pointed to a 2021 Virginia Court of Appeals ruling that found it was unlawful for a man to secretly record his girlfriend during a consensual sexual encounter even if he did not show the video to others.
In that case, Ronnie Lee Johnson v. Commonwealth of Virginia, the court found that consent to being seen is not the same as consent to being recorded, writing that there was a “stark distinction between an image existing only in someone’s memory … [and] a permanent file that may be shared or re-viewed indefinitely.”

[Anonymous]

You don’t have a reasonable expectation of privacy in videos you livestream to the internet. This isn’t hard and should not be controversial.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I still want to know the technical details about how the GOP found her live stream videos.

She made these long before she ever announced her candidacy. Millions of streamers make these videos EVERYDAY that are ostensibly streamed, but not archived.

Even if if there are websites that archive every adult stream (so millions of streams per day), you still need to match a handful of archived videos with a single person running in an obscure state-level legislative race. She wasn't a national candidate.

No one has ever explained HOW they were able to pinpoint her videos. It's actually frightening and fascinating.

Not really. Everyone remembers if a neighbor, coworker, classmate, etc had a video out there. When she ran for office I'm sure someone remembered they had the video on an old drive and sent it out

The odds that a neighbor, coworker, or classmate saw one of her 15 videos is infinitesimal. Millions of videos produced daily on a global basis. Times 365 days per year. And it seems that the videos were only uploaded to a public site within a few months of the election (so likely uploaded by the Republican political consultant himself).

I don't know about that. I grew up in Old Town and 'dated' Charis Van Metre (of Van Metre homes) way back in the 80s as a teenager and about 15 years later I saw her in a Playboy magazine.

Ah, the lovely Charis Boyle. You can see all of her on the internet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She intended it to be streamed in a private, adult setting.

Recording it was unethical.

Distributing the recording was unethical.

Publicizing it widely was unethical.

Sending screenshots & quotes of it to unsuspecting families in VA was unethical.

You may or may not agree with what she did, but there was a lot of other crap that happened that she is calling out.

The only thing she should be calling out is her own incredibly irresponsible and STUPID behavior in making online porn videos in the first place. That you won't acknowledge this tells us everything we need to know.

I already called it stupid and poor judgment.

And there is some POS who recorded it and uploaded it to a public website.

Sweetie, she was the one who put it on a public website. Like literally anyone in the world could have watched.

Chaturbate is one of the most popular webcam sites on the internet, and since its launch in 2011 has had a 3,200% increase in interest from users around the world. Viewers can watch for free or pay tips if they'd like to see certain sex acts performed.

“We decided to just have fun on camera, doing exactly what we wanted to do,” she explains. “This means we gave away a lot for free our first night, making only $8 (£6) the whole night.” Beth drew in an audience of 380 people, but she thinks the top ‘cammers’ earn thousands of pounds a night.

https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/love-sex/webcam-camming-couple-sex-strangers-chaturbate-a7424416.html

It’s not available on chaturbate. And it wasn’t public when she was live streaming. Someone else recorded it and made it public.

How old are you? Not too familiar with interwebs, eh?

DP. Forgive us if we're "not too familiar" with chaturbate, as you clearly are. Are you actually so dumb to presume no one would record a livestream? Whether for their own purposes or to make it public - doesn't really matter. Pretty sure the audience for a chaturbate sesh isn't exactly the most upstanding crowd. Stop defending this idiot pretending to be a victim. You look as stupid as she does.

I’m familiar with live streaming.

This PP was incorrect: “she was the one who put it on a public website. Like literally anyone in the world could have watched.”

She wasn’t the person who put it on a public website.

She started multiple live stream on chaturbate which is a public site. Like you can go to it now click on a window and start watching some random person masturbate. She did offer to go to a private room for cash, but the offer was to the public.

I open to a rebuttal of this argument with actual facts but stomping your feet and claiming to be a “familiar with live steaming” isn’t that persuasive.

Show us her videos on Chaturbate. Oh wait. They aren’t there because it was live stream years ago.

The only way it was available for public viewing in 2023 was because someone else recorded it and uploaded it onto another website after she entered the race. And because a Republican POS reported it to WaPo.

The only way it was available for public viewing is that she put it on a public live stream in the first place.

+1.

PP will next claim trademark infringement or copyright violation.

The chick put videos of herself get boned on the internet. Ain't no way in hell anyone is convincing anyone she is a victim.

No, she did not “put videos of herself” on the internet. It was live streaming.

She herself freely agreed to the platform’s terms of use so she could broadcast her sexual activity for the possibility of making some money. The terms of use specifically warn that the content streamed may be recorded. She consented to the terms of use.

She knew it could be recorded.

And there are bots which record ALL of this stuff, especially bots located outside the USA.

Ever notice FaceBook’s facial recognition software? It is not new. It is simple, cheap, and available.

And yes, there HAVE been Republicans shamed over somewhat similar situations (though nothing this egregious), but they did not go blaming everyone else for their poor judgement when the truth came out.

She’s done, politically.

Which Republicans were shamed for similar situations?

No one will care next time she runs. She only lost by <1000 votes.

Bobert has a following on DCUM. Perhaps you have heard of her?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She intended it to be streamed in a private, adult setting.

Recording it was unethical.

Distributing the recording was unethical.

Publicizing it widely was unethical.

Sending screenshots & quotes of it to unsuspecting families in VA was unethical.

You may or may not agree with what she did, but there was a lot of other crap that happened that she is calling out.

The only thing she should be calling out is her own incredibly irresponsible and STUPID behavior in making online porn videos in the first place. That you won't acknowledge this tells us everything we need to know.

I already called it stupid and poor judgment.

And there is some POS who recorded it and uploaded it to a public website.

Sweetie, she was the one who put it on a public website. Like literally anyone in the world could have watched.

Chaturbate is one of the most popular webcam sites on the internet, and since its launch in 2011 has had a 3,200% increase in interest from users around the world. Viewers can watch for free or pay tips if they'd like to see certain sex acts performed.

“We decided to just have fun on camera, doing exactly what we wanted to do,” she explains. “This means we gave away a lot for free our first night, making only $8 (£6) the whole night.” Beth drew in an audience of 380 people, but she thinks the top ‘cammers’ earn thousands of pounds a night.

https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/love-sex/webcam-camming-couple-sex-strangers-chaturbate-a7424416.html

It’s not available on chaturbate. And it wasn’t public when she was live streaming. Someone else recorded it and made it public.

How old are you? Not too familiar with interwebs, eh?

DP. Forgive us if we're "not too familiar" with chaturbate, as you clearly are. Are you actually so dumb to presume no one would record a livestream? Whether for their own purposes or to make it public - doesn't really matter. Pretty sure the audience for a chaturbate sesh isn't exactly the most upstanding crowd. Stop defending this idiot pretending to be a victim. You look as stupid as she does.

I’m familiar with live streaming.

This PP was incorrect: “she was the one who put it on a public website. Like literally anyone in the world could have watched.”

She wasn’t the person who put it on a public website.

She started multiple live stream on chaturbate which is a public site. Like you can go to it now click on a window and start watching some random person masturbate. She did offer to go to a private room for cash, but the offer was to the public.

I open to a rebuttal of this argument with actual facts but stomping your feet and claiming to be a “familiar with live steaming” isn’t that persuasive.

Show us her videos on Chaturbate. Oh wait. They aren’t there because it was live stream years ago.

The only way it was available for public viewing in 2023 was because someone else recorded it and uploaded it onto another website after she entered the race. And because a Republican POS reported it to WaPo.

The only way it was available for public viewing is that she put it on a public live stream in the first place.

+1.

PP will next claim trademark infringement or copyright violation.

The chick put videos of herself get boned on the internet. Ain't no way in hell anyone is convincing anyone she is a victim.

No, she did not “put videos of herself” on the internet. It was live streaming.

She herself freely agreed to the platform’s terms of use so she could broadcast her sexual activity for the possibility of making some money. The terms of use specifically warn that the content streamed may be recorded. She consented to the terms of use.

She knew it could be recorded.

And there are bots which record ALL of this stuff, especially bots located outside the USA.

Ever notice FaceBook’s facial recognition software? It is not new. It is simple, cheap, and available.

And yes, there HAVE been Republicans shamed over somewhat similar situations (though nothing this egregious), but they did not go blaming everyone else for their poor judgement when the truth came out.

She’s done, politically.

Which Republicans were shamed for similar situations?

No one will care next time she runs. She only lost by <1000 votes.

Bobert has a following on DCUM. Perhaps you have heard of her?

Oh right. Forgot that she fondled some dude in public. Are people really still talking about that?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I still want to know the technical details about how the GOP found her live stream videos.

She made these long before she ever announced her candidacy. Millions of streamers make these videos EVERYDAY that are ostensibly streamed, but not archived.

Even if if there are websites that archive every adult stream (so millions of streams per day), you still need to match a handful of archived videos with a single person running in an obscure state-level legislative race. She wasn't a national candidate.

No one has ever explained HOW they were able to pinpoint her videos. It's actually frightening and fascinating.

Not really. Everyone remembers if a neighbor, coworker, classmate, etc had a video out there. When she ran for office I'm sure someone remembered they had the video on an old drive and sent it out

I know NO ONE who has a video "out there". Are you hanging out with the Kardashians or Paris Hilton?

This isn't the early 00's. Everyone hears about who did porn or nude streaming and eventually the videos are found. It just takes mentioning it to a coworker and the next day, poof, all the guys know about it and have the videos playing on their phone. Young teachers have problems with this pretty frequently.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She intended it to be streamed in a private, adult setting.

Recording it was unethical.

Distributing the recording was unethical.

Publicizing it widely was unethical.

Sending screenshots & quotes of it to unsuspecting families in VA was unethical.

You may or may not agree with what she did, but there was a lot of other crap that happened that she is calling out.

The only thing she should be calling out is her own incredibly irresponsible and STUPID behavior in making online porn videos in the first place. That you won't acknowledge this tells us everything we need to know.

I already called it stupid and poor judgment.

And there is some POS who recorded it and uploaded it to a public website.

Sweetie, she was the one who put it on a public website. Like literally anyone in the world could have watched.

Chaturbate is one of the most popular webcam sites on the internet, and since its launch in 2011 has had a 3,200% increase in interest from users around the world. Viewers can watch for free or pay tips if they'd like to see certain sex acts performed.

“We decided to just have fun on camera, doing exactly what we wanted to do,” she explains. “This means we gave away a lot for free our first night, making only $8 (£6) the whole night.” Beth drew in an audience of 380 people, but she thinks the top ‘cammers’ earn thousands of pounds a night.

https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/love-sex/webcam-camming-couple-sex-strangers-chaturbate-a7424416.html

It’s not available on chaturbate. And it wasn’t public when she was live streaming. Someone else recorded it and made it public.

How old are you? Not too familiar with interwebs, eh?

DP. Forgive us if we're "not too familiar" with chaturbate, as you clearly are. Are you actually so dumb to presume no one would record a livestream? Whether for their own purposes or to make it public - doesn't really matter. Pretty sure the audience for a chaturbate sesh isn't exactly the most upstanding crowd. Stop defending this idiot pretending to be a victim. You look as stupid as she does.

I’m familiar with live streaming.

This PP was incorrect: “she was the one who put it on a public website. Like literally anyone in the world could have watched.”

She wasn’t the person who put it on a public website.

She started multiple live stream on chaturbate which is a public site. Like you can go to it now click on a window and start watching some random person masturbate. She did offer to go to a private room for cash, but the offer was to the public.

I open to a rebuttal of this argument with actual facts but stomping your feet and claiming to be a “familiar with live steaming” isn’t that persuasive.

Show us her videos on Chaturbate. Oh wait. They aren’t there because it was live stream years ago.

The only way it was available for public viewing in 2023 was because someone else recorded it and uploaded it onto another website after she entered the race. And because a Republican POS reported it to WaPo.

The only way it was available for public viewing is that she put it on a public live stream in the first place.

+1.

PP will next claim trademark infringement or copyright violation.

The chick put videos of herself get boned on the internet. Ain't no way in hell anyone is convincing anyone she is a victim.

No, she did not “put videos of herself” on the internet. It was live streaming.

You CANNOT be this stupid. Would you advise your kids to live stream themselves doing porn? Get a clue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She intended it to be streamed in a private, adult setting.

Recording it was unethical.

Distributing the recording was unethical.

Publicizing it widely was unethical.

Sending screenshots & quotes of it to unsuspecting families in VA was unethical.

You may or may not agree with what she did, but there was a lot of other crap that happened that she is calling out.

The only thing she should be calling out is her own incredibly irresponsible and STUPID behavior in making online porn videos in the first place. That you won't acknowledge this tells us everything we need to know.

I already called it stupid and poor judgment.

And there is some POS who recorded it and uploaded it to a public website.

Sweetie, she was the one who put it on a public website. Like literally anyone in the world could have watched.

Chaturbate is one of the most popular webcam sites on the internet, and since its launch in 2011 has had a 3,200% increase in interest from users around the world. Viewers can watch for free or pay tips if they'd like to see certain sex acts performed.

“We decided to just have fun on camera, doing exactly what we wanted to do,” she explains. “This means we gave away a lot for free our first night, making only $8 (£6) the whole night.” Beth drew in an audience of 380 people, but she thinks the top ‘cammers’ earn thousands of pounds a night.

https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/love-sex/webcam-camming-couple-sex-strangers-chaturbate-a7424416.html

It’s not available on chaturbate. And it wasn’t public when she was live streaming. Someone else recorded it and made it public.

How old are you? Not too familiar with interwebs, eh?

DP. Forgive us if we're "not too familiar" with chaturbate, as you clearly are. Are you actually so dumb to presume no one would record a livestream? Whether for their own purposes or to make it public - doesn't really matter. Pretty sure the audience for a chaturbate sesh isn't exactly the most upstanding crowd. Stop defending this idiot pretending to be a victim. You look as stupid as she does.

I’m familiar with live streaming.

This PP was incorrect: “she was the one who put it on a public website. Like literally anyone in the world could have watched.”

She wasn’t the person who put it on a public website.

She started multiple live stream on chaturbate which is a public site. Like you can go to it now click on a window and start watching some random person masturbate. She did offer to go to a private room for cash, but the offer was to the public.

I open to a rebuttal of this argument with actual facts but stomping your feet and claiming to be a “familiar with live steaming” isn’t that persuasive.

Show us her videos on Chaturbate. Oh wait. They aren’t there because it was live stream years ago.

The only way it was available for public viewing in 2023 was because someone else recorded it and uploaded it onto another website after she entered the race. And because a Republican POS reported it to WaPo.

The only way it was available for public viewing is that she put it on a public live stream in the first place.

+1.

PP will next claim trademark infringement or copyright violation.

The chick put videos of herself get boned on the internet. Ain't no way in hell anyone is convincing anyone she is a victim.

No, she did not “put videos of herself” on the internet. It was live streaming.

She herself freely agreed to the platform’s terms of use so she could broadcast her sexual activity for the possibility of making some money. The terms of use specifically warn that the content streamed may be recorded. She consented to the terms of use.

She knew it could be recorded.

And there are bots which record ALL of this stuff, especially bots located outside the USA.

Ever notice FaceBook’s facial recognition software? It is not new. It is simple, cheap, and available.

And yes, there HAVE been Republicans shamed over somewhat similar situations (though nothing this egregious), but they did not go blaming everyone else for their poor judgement when the truth came out.

She’s done, politically.

+100, and regarding the bolded - can you imagine the names Democrats would be calling this woman if she was a Republican? There would be hundreds of pages, slut-shaming her. But because she's a Democrat, they're all rushing to her defense. Never change, Democrats.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I still want to know the technical details about how the GOP found her live stream videos.

She made these long before she ever announced her candidacy. Millions of streamers make these videos EVERYDAY that are ostensibly streamed, but not archived.

Even if if there are websites that archive every adult stream (so millions of streams per day), you still need to match a handful of archived videos with a single person running in an obscure state-level legislative race. She wasn't a national candidate.

No one has ever explained HOW they were able to pinpoint her videos. It's actually frightening and fascinating.

Not really. Everyone remembers if a neighbor, coworker, classmate, etc had a video out there. When she ran for office I'm sure someone remembered they had the video on an old drive and sent it out

I know NO ONE who has a video "out there". Are you hanging out with the Kardashians or Paris Hilton?

This isn't the early 00's. Everyone hears about who did porn or nude streaming and eventually the videos are found. It just takes mentioning it to a coworker and the next day, poof, all the guys know about it and have the videos playing on their phone. Young teachers have problems with this pretty frequently.

DP. I'm with the PP. You must run in a very different crowd.