Susanna Gibson: A Democratic candidate for the Virginia legislature whose campaign was shaken by the discovery that she and her husband livestreamed their s€x continued with her campaign on Tuesday and attracted some early support in the crucial race.One of a few fiercely contested races that could decide the balance of power in the General Assembly has Susanna Gibson, a nurse practitioner with two kids, competing against a Republican businessman. An off-year legislative campaign in a suburban district outside of Richmond has drawn a lot of funding and interest.
In the South, where several states have implemented additional restrictions in the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2022 decision overturning Roe v. Wade, Gibson has been gathering support as an abortion rights candidate in a state that is becoming an increasingly unusual abortion access location.
Susanna Gibson’s viral video everywhere
The video leak, according to Gibson, was “the ugliest gutter politics.She declared, “I will not be intimidated or silenced.”
There is no limit to what my political rivals and their Republican friends will do to silence women who speak out, as evidenced by the fact that they are willing to perpetrate a s€x crime in order to harm me and my family.
Considering how much money and attention have been invested in the conflict, the discovery might significantly alter the balance of power in the Virginia General Assembly.Democrats have a four-vote majority in the Senate. Republicans hold a similar majority in the House of Delegates, which has four open seats.
According to Gibson, making the films public is “an illegal invasion of my privacy designed to humiliate me and my family.
“According to Gibson’s lawyer, Daniel P. Watkins, “a criminal act has occurred here, and it is the dissemination of retaliation porn by a Republican operative.”He highlighted a Virginia Court of Appeals decision from 2021 that stated it was unlawful for a man to covertly record his girlfriend having a consensual sexual interaction, even if he did not show the footage to anyone else.
The judge ruled that giving consent to be seen is different from giving consent to be recorded.if you want full video of her you can click here for full video