Susanna Gibson, a Democrat running in one of seven tossup House seats in the closely divided legislature, denounced the “illegal invasion of my privacy.”

A Democratic candidate in a crucial race for the Virginia General Assembly denounced reports on Monday that she and her husband had performed live on a sexually explicit streaming site.

Susanna Gibson, a nurse practitioner running in her first election cycle, said in a statement that the leaks about the online activity were “an illegal invasion of my privacy designed to humiliate me and my family.”

The Washington Post and The Associated Press reported on Monday that tapes of live-streamed sexual activity had been recorded from a pornographic site and archived on another site. The New York Times has not independently verified the content of the videos. The Democratic Party of Virginia did not respond to a request for comment.

Ms. Gibson, 40, who appears on her campaign website in hospital scrubs as well as at home with her husband and two young children, is running for the House of Delegates in one of only a handful of competitive races that will determine control of the General Assembly. Republicans hold a slim majority in the House, and Democrats narrowly control the State Senate, but both chambers are up for grabs in November.

  • Jordan Lund
    link
    fedilink
    English
    71 year ago

    I think that’s the problem, it wasn’t an automatic archive.

    She and her husband were streaming on Chaturbate. Someone archived the videos.

    A month after she announced her candidacy, someone took the archived copies and uploaded them.

    A little different than if she or her husband did it themselves or if it were automatic. The timing seems retributive.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Are you sure it’s not from an automated archive? The news sites I saw made it sounds like they were just pulling stills from recurbate or one the similar clones that are just automated archives.

      No doubt the timing of the story being raise was retributive, but it’s not illegal to point out something a candidate did publicly that might be embarrassing to them.

      • Jordan Lund
        link
        fedilink
        English
        11 year ago

        If it were automated, it wouldn’t have waited until one month after she filed as a candidate. ;)