The Conservative Cave
Current Events => Breaking News => Topic started by: franksolich on February 04, 2019, 01:47:51 AM
-
Stanford Fellow Hints At Possible Justin Fairfax Sex Assault
A woman named Vanessa Tyson, who is a fellow at Stanford University, says that a man who allegedly sexually assaulted her at the 2004 Democratic National Convention is now an office-holder about to get a “very big promotion,” according to a screenshot provided by a tipster. A friend of Tyson’s named Adria Scharf, based in Richmond, Virginia, shared the “heartbreaking” message, which Tyson wrote as a private post.
Tyson is a fellow at California-based Stanford University and professor at California-based Scripps College, which means the alleged sexual assaulter must hold office on the East Coast. Tyson says her alleged attacker won statewide office in 2017.
Justin Fairfax was a John Kerry staffer in 2004, and won an election in 2017 in an East Coast state. Now, he is poised to become governor of Virginia if racist Ralph Northam resigns as Democratic leaders and his own state party demand......
https://bigleaguepolitics.com/stanford-fellow-hints-at-possible-justin-fairfax-sex-assault/
-
Yawn.
Yeah, it's been probably a month or so. It's time for another #MeToo load of shit.
-
I'm somewhere between wary and skeptical. Let her name names, places, and dates, and maybe people with whom she spoke about it and there's something to investigate. A 15YO allegation isn't much easier to fact-check than a 35YO allegation.
-
:popcorn:
-
WaPo Replies To Virginia Lieutenant Governor: No, We Didn’t Find “Red Flags Or Inconsistencies” In Your Accuser’s Story (https://hotair.com/archives/2019/02/04/wapo-replies-virginia-lieutenant-governor-no-didnt-find-red-flags-inconsistencies-accusers-story/)
The statement he (Fairfax) released last night claimed that not only had the Washington Post run down his accuser’s story and found nothing to substantiate it, it uncovered “significant red flags and inconsistencies” that all but discredited her.
Not true, says WaPo. What they found, it seems, is a he said/she said situation in its purest form. There’s no evidence to support the claim that Fairfax sexually assaulted anyone — and no reason to believe the accuser is lying.
...
The Post says it called people who knew Fairfax in college, law school, and socially and no one’s ever heard of him engaging in any sort of sexual misconduct. As for the accuser, the paper says they couldn’t corroborate her claim because “she had not told anyone what happened.” You mean she never told anyone until she first approached WaPo in 2017, or she didn’t tell anyone at the time and for a long time after it happened but then opened up to confidants much later? Because the latter would be the Christine Blasey Ford standard, of course.
This is a double ZAP! To Fairfax, because he made a false claim. To the WashPost, because of its double-standard in publishing the unverified accusation against Kavanaugh, but declining to publish the unverified accusation against Fairfax. Because Trump.
As to Fairfax, I have no strong opinion one way or the other as to the veracity of the accusation. But his false claim about the WashPost looks kind of ugly.
Like DLR Pyro said, :popcorn: .
-
Washington Post pushes back on Justin Fairfax denial of sexual-assault claim, publishes graphic details (https://www.foxnews.com/politics/washpost-pushes-back-against-justin-fairfax-statement-on-sexual-assault-allegation)
Graphic new details are emerging about a newly revealed allegation of sexual assault against Virginia Lt. Gov. Justin Fairfax, as The Washington Post pushes back against Fairfax’s claim that the newspaper found serious problems with the original accusation when it initially opted not to publish the account.
“The Post did not find ‘significant red flags and inconsistencies within the allegations,’ as the Fairfax statement incorrectly said,” the Washington Post said in a story published Monday, sharply disputing the lieutenant governor's statement.
...
In its Monday story, the Washington Post acknowledged investigating the claims and deciding not to publish. But it said the Fairfax statement “incorrectly” claimed the paper found “significant red flags and inconsistencies within the allegations.”
“Fairfax and the woman told different versions of what happened in the hotel room with no one else present,” the paper said. “The Washington Post could not find anyone who could corroborate either version.”
...
“The woman described a sexual encounter that began with consensual kissing and ended with a forced act that left her crying and shaken,” The Washington Post reported. “She said Fairfax guided her to the bed, where they continued kissing, and then at one point she realized she could not move her neck. She said Fairfax used his strength ...
Sounds like the WashPost was particularly peeved at Fairfax's misrepresentation. And published more of the story than he probably wanted published.
-
And what's even more fun is that he thinks Northam himself might be behind the story.
-
And what's even more fun is that he thinks Northam himself might be behind the story.
Yep, and even if Northam could prove he and his peeps had nothing to do with it, Fairfax probably would not believe him. Victimhood and a CT mindset are an unpleasant combination.
I highly approve of Prog Autophagy!