Read on Twitter
Dems say it's a non-scandal that a candidate for office was performing sex acts on video in exchange for money because while it may be unsavory, it's not illegal.
But lawyers say that in fact, the Virginia prostitution statute makes such conduct a crime.
dailywire.com/news/virginia-…
But lawyers say that in fact, the Virginia prostitution statute makes such conduct a crime.
dailywire.com/news/virginia-…
She performed specific sex acts with her husband when people online paid her to. The prostitution "statute is very clear, you cannot for money or its equivalent perform sex acts,” a lawyer said. “It doesn’t matter who’s paying for the act, if it’s an observer or the recipient.”
She could also potentially be charged with a crime for deliberately causing hotel workers to see her in action against their will in order to get a thrill. She said if people paid enough, she'd trick room service into walking in on her.
Will she be charged with a crime? The prosecutor in her jurisdiction--a fellow Dem with political aspirations--didn't respond to my email. 20 minutes after she read it, I got a call from Gibson's lawyer saying he was tipped off about my story by a source he wouldn't disclose.
The Dem leader of the state Senate has said the scandal makes it all the more important that people donate to Gibson, raising questions about whether lawmakers are ignoring what their own laws say.
Finally, @realdailywire can report that the AP newswire had the Susanna Gibson porn candidate story a week before the Washington Post did, tipped off Gibson about it-leading her to get the videos removed-and decided not to run the story, despite seeming obviously newsworthy.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
