Sensitive question re: Justin Fairfax accusation

[EffieBlack]

As reluctant I am to give this any oxygen while we know so little, I am very puzzled by this situation and would like to hear what others here think.

Apparently, the young woman approached the Washington Post last year, but the Post couldn't confirm her allegation and, therefore, did not report it. I seems that she made no other efforts to follow up on her allegation or to make it public.

But over the weekend, according to the right-wing website, she posted a veiled but obvious accusation on her Facebook page (obvious enough to make clear whom she was talking about but veiled enough to avoid a libel charge) and then gave permission to a friend to capture a screenshot of it, showing her name and photo, and send it to the right-wing website. But she has since declined to go public or to discuss the allegation with the media.

I am very, VERY wary of questioning the credibility of any woman who alleges she was sexually assaulted, so I am treading very lightly here. But, on the other hand, I am also concerned about baseless allegations - particularly against black men, who are consistently viewed with much more suspicion and given considerably less benefit of the doubt.

Does it seem odd to anyone else that someone has allowed an allegation to float into the conversation without making an actual accusation that can be addressed or subjecting herself to any accountability, putting just enough out there to raise questions that really can't be answered? Does the way she went about this make sense? Is there are reason that, if she wants the information to come out and doesn't mind having her name and face identified with it that she did it this way (Facebook page, screen grab, etc.)?

This is a complicated situation and more can come out that would change my take on it, but right now, it just seems odd.

I'd appreciate people's thoughts on this.

[madville]

1. The WaPo didn't do Fairfax any favors today

They published the explicit details and said his statement from this morning was not accurate or in line with what their investigation found. Basically they couldn't confirm or debunk the accusation, it's essentially "he said-she said" since they are the only two witnesses to the encounter, and both confirmed there was an encounter.

None of us know what really happened, I'll just stay neutral on it I guess since we'll never know who is telling the truth.

[KT2000]

2. I think we are at the point

where accusations against Dems must be made public by accusers who put their name behind the accusation (no innuendo), investigations be held, before action is taken against anyone. The R's are engaging in smear campaigns and that is a fact. The media seems willing to take the word of political organizations, no matter how silly or discredited they may be. There are so many wannabes trying to make a name for themselves.

Fairfax replied well and every Dem here on out should just say "I will only respond to conclusions of a non-partisan investigation. But make no mistake, there is no truth to this accusation." The party should also refrain from making conclusions until there are results from the investigation.
We cannot fall for the smear campaigns that have so far been successful for the R's (Franken).

[2naSalit]

5. +1

[gopiscrap]

57. +2

[Dawson Leery]

71. The GOP will stop at nothing.

Fairfax said he found is suspicious that the allegations came against him just as his chances of taking the Governorship increased.
Everyone needs to back away for a minute and let the dust settle.

Next, the GOP will try to remove Roy Cooper, since the GOP controls the legislature in NC, they can replace him with a Neo-Fascist Deplorable.

[Hortensis]

3. Not odd at all. The Republicans are now stealing elections and taking

power to decide away from the people wherever they can that Democrats might be elected. So much that a possible plot to undo the last gubernatorial election and take power back in VA immediately sounds very plausible to me.

Why a claimant would do anything any particular way is a question for investigative journalists to dig into. As we're seeing so surprisingly, the people who lend themselves to right-wing dirt tricks and are often erratic and stupid in their behaviors, rationality and good sense not strong characteristics. But also, this vagueness, letting it roll out slowly seemingly from one person might well be planned. They're experts in swiftboating now.

I'm thinking that now that this is becoming national news, the WaPo and other investigative journals will be investing significant resources into looking into this claim.

[peacefrogman]

4. Not only could Washington Post not confirm, they said there were red flags.

I also hear she is a Democrat and a respected person.

Fairfax immediately came out to call for a suit on accusation and was very definite that he has not assaulted.

These three things are important points I think. That is all I have. Waiting and watching.

[Hortensis]

8. I wish being registered Democrat guaranteed she was a respectable person

who would never lend herself to one of the Republicans' swiftboating operations. Plus, anyone can register Democrat, including their agents.

Btw, I'm trying to remember that woman who was found to have answered an ad or some such thing to be a swiftboating agent. Investigation of her story also threw up red flags, and WaPo journalists were able to prove through setting careful traps for her that she was lying. What was that one about?

[Cha]

10. I so wonder what the "red flags" were?

Since the Wapo wouldn't publish without "corroboration" she sends it to a known rw RF website. knowing they don't need any pesky corroboration.

But over the weekend, according to the right-wing website, she posted a veiled but obvious accusation on her Facebook page (obvious enough to make clear whom she was talking about but veiled enough to avoid a libel charge) and then gave permission to a friend to capture a screenshot of it, showing her name and photo, and send it to the right-wing website. But she has since declined to go public or to discuss the allegation with the media.

I fervently hope Lt Gov Fairfax is telling the truth.

[Historic NY]

80. That is the exact way the the NY Post and Fox worked handed in hand to plant stories....

The NY Post would report a story that was picked up on Fox and the corroborated again

[octoberlib]

18. The Washington Post did not say there were red flags. They refuted this in their article today.

The Post did not find “significant red flags and inconsistencies within the allegations,” as the Fairfax statement incorrectly said.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/virginia-politics/justin-fairfax-would-become-virginias-2nd-black-governor-if-northam-resigns/2019/02/02/a632c054-266a-11e9-90cd-dedb0c92dc17_story.html?utm_term=.0320927dd0a2

[peacefrogman]

45. Thanks for the information.

[George II]

98. They also said (from the same article):

"The Post, in phone calls to people who knew Fairfax from college, law school and through political circles, found no similar complaints of sexual misconduct against him. Without that, or the ability to corroborate the woman’s account — in part because she had not told anyone what happened — The Post did not run a story."

[melman]

19. They did not say there were red flags

Fairfax and the woman told different versions of what happened in the hotel room with no one else present. The Washington Post could not find anyone who could corroborate either version. The Post did not find “significant red flags and inconsistencies within the allegation,” as the Fairfax statement incorrectly said.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/va-lt-gov-justin-fairfax-denies-sex-assault-allegation-from-2004/2019/02/04/05fb0f6c-272b-11e9-ad53-824486280311_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.9a06d3517649

[peacefrogman]

46. Thanks for the information.

[pnwmom]

31. No, the WA Post said they hadn't found confirmation OR red flags. n/t

[Fresh_Start]

64. actually that was fairfax representative who said red flags

washington post responded they did not see any inconsistencies or red flags

it was he said/she said without collaboration since there were only the two of them present

[peacefrogman]

82. Thanks for letting me know. That is them coming out calling Fairfax on that. That matters.

They should not have put out there were red flags, especially if it is made up. Not good.

[EffieBlack]

83. It still doesn't make her story credible.

Perhaps the Fairfax team erred in saying there were no red flags, but that doesn't change the fact that the allegation is unsupported - and it certainly isn't as damaging as another team's "That's me in the picture and I apologize and I'm going to work to make amends. Did I say that was me? My bad. No, I thought the guy in the blackface standing next to the Klansman was me. But it's not. I did dabble in a little blackface in those days, but only on my cheeks 'cause you know what blackface does to delicate complexions. Wanna see me moonwalk?" fiasco.

But I have no doubt that many of the people who are defending Northam will make a much bigger deal of the erroneous "red flag" claim than they have of the governor in blackface and lying about it.

[peacefrogman]

84. "It still doesn't make her story credible." Nor did I say it did. Is there a competition

going on I do not know about, what is worse?

I thought reading there were red flags was significant in what we do know. All I posted about was points I thought we should keep in mind, stating we need to watch and listen. That is all. Why are you assigning all kinds of stuff to me I have not put out there?

I was corrected. I appreciate being corrected so I do not put out erroneous information. That is a good thing.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

6. I don't know what to say.

I don't know what to say other than we need to evaluate every allegation on its merits and Justin Fairfax is entitled to the presumption of innocence up to and until his accuser/victim makes her allegation on the record and we can weigh it's credibility.

For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.
-Matthew 7:2

[atreides1]

52. Okay

[DemocratSinceBirth]

70. ?????

[saidsimplesimon]

7. It appears on a right-wing site, that justifies your caution.

There are reasons why reputable editors want to vet stories before publishing.

You are also correct that Republican operatives have some skill in promoting gossip while avoiding the libel.

I consider your threads a learning experience from which I benefit greatly. Thank you, Effie

[2naSalit]

9. I smell ratfucking going on here for

very political reasons. If we don't think that they've got our number on these issues, think again. How many times will we fall for it? We don't have many more chances to get it right.

I agree with all the reasons made for removing this guy from office and I think that we have also been played. How long has this guy been a member of our party? Did he become a D to get elected? Is he an infiltrator? Is he legit but ot a very bright bulb when it comes to these things? Seriously, he sure is incompetent in front of the press for someone who had to run for office.

I am not convinced either way so watching, as it were, from the sidelines I am dismayed at the rapid attacks without much confirmation.

I am not a person who is afflicted with white privilege, so take that into consideration for those who are mad at my opinion... which is no opinion.

[FakeNoose]

11. Zack-ly it's all ratf*ing now

Unless there's a police report somewhere, unless the accuser (supposed victim) comes forward and tells her story unequivocally, then I refuse to play this game any more.

[blueinredohio]

12. Doesn't anyone think it's odd that it's both men from Virginia?

[lostnfound]

13. Not odd at all. The rightwing is very successful at teardown strategies. Nt

[jberryhill]

41. Complete coincidence

Same website broke both stories, too.

Amazing luck.

[Atticus]

14. While I totally agree with your take on this situation and your inclination to tread "very lightly"

it does seem to me that perhaps they are using our fundamental decency against us. They KNOW that most of us will be reluctant to question an allegation such as this and they see that as an opportunity to smear a POC who just happens to be an up and coming Democrat.

I don't know the answer to the ultimate question---"Is it true? But, I do know that the Washington Post---not exactly a slouch in the investigative journalism department---spent 3 months looking into this same allegation a year ago and the found nothing to corroborate it.

That works for me.

Addendum: I also understand that the source of this story, "Big League Politics", was started about a year ago by RWNJ's who left Breitbart because it wasn't "aggressive" enough.

[2naSalit]

68. +1

[Hassler]

15. When this broke last week, we heard demands that Northam quit

Because Fairfax, an African-American would be his replacement. Lost on those making those demands was the reality the the VA GOP is in a coup designed to remove both Northam and Fairfax so the GOP Speaker can take over. Trying to excuse Fairfax after so quickly turning on Northam will be used to show how anti #metoo the Dems are. Well, played.

[EffieBlack]

17. No one is trying to "excuse" Fairfax

The two situations are completely different.

Among other things, we have photographic proof of Northam's conduct - which he admitted to himself, before he denied it.

On the other hand, Fairfax is the subject of a whispering campaign based on an allegation he has vigorously denied and that is unsupported and uncorroborated. And if the young woman doesn't come forward with something more than a cryptic Facebook post that she allowed to be screenshot and sent to a right-wing site, it will be impossible to determine any facts or to allege that this is a #metoo situation.

Don't get the two twisted.

[NotAPuppet]

22. We don't have photographic proof of Northam's conduct!

We have a picture of 2 men on his yearbook page. 1. We don’t know if Northam was one of the men pictured. 2. We don’t know if he was aware of the picture or not. 3. We don’t have ONE person who has come forward and accused Northam of racist conduct, neither as victims or observers. All we have is a f***** picture.

I’m all for treading lightly. In both cases.

[EffieBlack]

23. Oh please

We have a photo that Northam says was of him - before he changed his mind and said it wasn't.

if someone showed you a picture of a person in blackface standing next to a person in a Klan robe, would you, even for a second, suspect that it might be a picture of you, much less two two official statements, one via video, saying that you were in the photograph?

"All we have is a f**** picture!" Yeah. That's the problem for Northam and his apologists.

[NotAPuppet]

24. You're entitled to your opinion!

Just remember that we’re all providing opinions without knowing all the facts. I’ve read your opinion on this topic for the past few days and I disagree with you.

Accusing Fairfax of sexual assault without any evidence is just as problematic as calling Northam a racist without any evidence.

[EffieBlack]

25. The problem is not that there's no evidence of Northam being a racist.

The problem is that some people are ignoring and downplaying the very clear evidence that's right in their face.

Welcome to DU, by the way.

[jberryhill]

32. On your marks, get set.....

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-01-31/trump-is-said-to-consider-herman-cain-for-federal-reserve-board

Trump Considering Herman Cain for Federal Reserve Board, Sources Say

[Atticus]

77. "---calling Northam a racist without any evidence", Gracie? Not to put too fine a point on it

but, well, let's just say that is not even close to true. On some level, I suspect even you realize that.

[NotAPuppet]

85. Where's the evidence?

Go back to my initial post and answer my questions with facts, not with your opinion.

Why did Northam apologize at first? I can’t answer that question for him, and neither can you. I don’t like to presume things about people without having enough information, and the yearbook picture alone is not sufficient for me. The press conference did certainly not help.

Disclaimer: I supported Tom Perriello and I never liked Northam very much to begin with. Would be easy for me to join in and slam Northam, but I don’t judge people based on one puzzle piece.

[Atticus]

88. I am tempted to quote what Barney Frank had to say about arguing with a dining room

table, but I'll just say "We're done."

[pnwmom]

33. Yes, we do. We have a video of him admitting to putting shoe polish on his face

in 1984 before he did a Michael Jackson dance at a dance competition.

[2naSalit]

69. I noticed that too...nt

[Atticus]

74. Give us one believable reason why someone who was NOT in such an offensive

photo would, when first confronted with it, ADMIT that he was in the picture and apologize?

[MarcA]

26. Well Stated. Divide and Conquer.

In all these cases find out what happened, what the responses were and
what they are doing now.

[MH1]

93. When there is credible evidence against Fairfax,

we can talk about the right course of action.

If you had a diamond ring but no evidence you ever owned such ring, then you accuse your cleaning lady of stealing your ring, that no one knew you had, and you have no record of ownership at all, with NO evidence she stole anything ... I don't know how insurance or the cleaning company would handle it, but I'd call it an unproven accusation. All the friends of the cleaning lady who KNOW she would NEVER steal from a client, would be awfully pissed at you. You would never convince them they were wrong about her character. And, she certainly wouldn't be going to jail for stealing. Okay, maybe if she is black in certain parts of the country, she would. But she shouldn't, right?

That may sound cold if something DID happen to that woman but why should we take someone down when there is no proof? A woman claiming her date went badly wrong - but she never told anyone else about it, until she wants to stop the guy's political career - is a lot different than a photo of a KKK costume in a yearbook.

[EffieBlack]

96. Excellent explanation!

[Vinca]

16. I don't think we can hold anyone responsible for phantom allegations.

[octoberlib]

20. I'm about where you are on this. The Post also talked to people he went to school with and

in his political circle and didn't find a whiff of sexual misconduct. Doesn't mean it didn't happen that one night but I need more evidence.

[Baltimike]

21. I think this is a ruse...they want to avoid state charges in VA

and I also think that's why the Northam thing happened too.

[peggysue2]

27. I have no problem saying . . .

I'm completely suspicious of the recent allegation, particularly since the source is the same from which the Northam reveal came. And how coincidental that the allegation (second round) against Fairfax comes out . . . now. Plus this quote from the publication's editor:

“Why are you running interference for the man accused of sexual assault instead of listening to what the accuser has to say?”

Oh please, gag with a spoon. As if any right-wing smear machine is interested in 'what the accuser has to say.' How many women have accused the Trumpster of sexually abhorrent behavior? And yet, Republicans defend him.

Northam's downfall is entirely different; he damned himself by is own words and performance, probably because he panicked once the yearbook page was released. No doubt, he knew how damaging that photo was but instead of being completely honest and open, he rocked back on the first apology during that appalling presser, and then admitted another blackface moment. This incident went from bad to worse to utter fiasco. The source is secondary to the man's behavior.

Justin Fairfax came out immediately, strongly denying the allegation. And that's all it is at this point, an allegation. Unless the young woman has additional details and/or evidence to back up her claim and is willing to come forward then I don't see this going anywhere. Beyond tarnishing Fairfax's reputation. And yes, I think we have to be sensitive to women's stories but women need to do their part as well. The accusation--regardless of what it is--can't take on a hit and run quality. Because if that's the case then MeToo becomes MeOnly and ultimately women will lose the very thing they're fighting for: an equal voice in these matters.

Just as an aside, I do not understand a woman, purportedly a Democratic woman, going to a right-wing outlet to voice her allegation. That simply doesn't make sense. Not to me anyway

[Blue_true]

48. If it was just her and Fairfax in a room.

Even if she has a blue dress with a come stain on it, who is to say that it was not consensual? The exception would be if she told someone immediately after what she claim was done to her was done, but at the same time, some actual rape victims tell no one else. The situation is a tough one, the GOP can put out the inuendo, exactly how can a person defend against it unless both people are willing to take truth confirmation tests before an ethical third party. The GOP is comfortable playing in this type of slop because they don't care about destroying lives, we are not comfortable making those trade offs.

[peggysue2]

51. Agreed.

This is a classic he said/she said scenario and without an impartial investigation and/or corroborating evidence (that friend, for instance, that a victim might discuss a harrowing event with), there's no way to draw any real conclusion.

Right, too, about the GOP's willingness to play in slop. Too often our good faith is used against us.

[Blue_true]

60. I must admit on Northam, O am all over the place.

On Fairfax, I am more clearheaded, he should not resign and should fight the allegation and sue once they are proven to be a lie, he should sue her and the publication(s) that published them, especially if the publications traffic in political character assination.

We as democrats do truly have a problem, we cannot ignore victims of harrassment or sexual violence, but at the same time unethical people can use that to cause us to do the wrong thing.

[UTUSN]

28. Another sensitive question, but first one of fact: *Did* somebody herself post the allegation?

Last edited Tue Feb 5, 2019, 06:21 PM - Edit history (1)

'Cause all I've seen so far is that the wingnuts ratf***er blog posted an anonymous "fellow" saying it all without names. Now for my sensitive question, why the caution now when it's possible the previous allegation was ratf***ing?


*****ON EDIT (way belated) - so as not to be coy about what I am getting at in arriving at posting this/below separately from this thread, and not to kick this thread while it is not at the top of the page:

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100211774060

Each of us probably has membership in a "home" facet of the coalition: Racial/ethnic, gender, social/civil/economic justice, environmental, et al. - each sub-set with their individual #1 agenda item, but below that one, it's all subsumed with all the rights issues we all have in common.

I will say that in our current iteration of being divided among ourselves it appears that in the foreground among some of us is individual loyalty to our own sub-group, precedence over our ultimate unity to the coalition.

Iow, if a member in my own smaller sub-group gets accused of whatever criminal or other wrong-doing, the accusations being true, that fellow member of mine is dead to me. They lose all claim to the "Democratic" label.

Remember when there was "an abortion doctor" who committed crimes of death of both women and/or their newborns? The wingnut outlets kept labeling him as an "abortion doctor" as their usual way of denigrating Pro-Choice. I say now as then that he was neither a doctor nor performing abortions: He was simply a serial killer who used medical techniques as his m.o. of choice. It had nothing to do with his being supposedly a member of the Democratic coalition, nothing to do with "pro-Choice" or of whatever race or ethnicity usually associated with the Dem coalition.

Iow (again), if a member of whatever sub-group of the Dem coalition commits crimes or malfeasance, that person is on their own. If somebody doesn't "get" what I'm saying, please just pass on by.

*****END of the lack of coyness.

[EffieBlack]

38. To answer your question - because the circumstances are completely different

If a right wing website had published a screenshot of a Facebook post alleging that a public official, unidentified by name but whose identity was obvious, had, in the past, mocked black people and hung out with people who dressed up in Klan outfits - and we found out that that person had taken that story to the Washington Post, which investigated it but declined to publish it because they could find now support for the story, it would make sense for people to say that, without more evidence, the public official should not be accused of any wrongdoing based solely on the allegation.

And I'm sure people would insist that, if only there was a photograph or other proof. And then a photo emerged of the public official named in the post wearing blackface, standing next to someone wearing a Klan outfit and that official admitted that was him in the photograph and that he had worn blackface on other occasions, anyone would be hard-pressed to continue claiming that the allegation was without merit or that the photograph proved nothing.

On the other hand, the allegation against Justin Fairfax is just that - an allegation and not even much of that at this point. The story has been investigated and found to be lacking and the woman who allegedly made the allegation has refused to come forward and say more. We have no corroboration, no details, no nothing.

Just as a quasi-anonymous allegation that Northam had done something wrong would not have been taken seriously if that's where it ended, the allegation against Fairfax is meaningless unless and until additional evidence comes forth.

Northam ADMITTED doing exactly what he has been accused of and there's a pictures to prove it. Fairfax vehemently denies doing what he is accused of and there is no evidence, so far, that he has ever behaved that way with any other woman in his life.

[Blue_true]

49. I agree 100% with your take on the Northam situation.

I don't agree fully on Northam. Could it be possible, as he is claiming, that he did wear blackface but was not one of the two people in the Klan photo? I have had pictures from years ago shown to me and I did not know all the circumstances of my participation at that time, to me it is totally plausible that Northam once wore blackface, remembers it, and when shown the first picture concluded that maybe he was in that picture, but after having time to dig into his 35 years ago memory conclude that no, it was not him in that picture, but he did wear blackface at another time? With both Northam and Fairfax, I prefer to look at their track records on race and sexual conduct, Northam over the years after the yearbook picture, Fairfax during the years before the allegation against him. My experience with them is that some people that were insensitive on race issues change for the better, but people that are sexual deviants never do unless they are threatened - what does that mean? Northam could have become a good person, and if Fairfax had no history of inappropriate conduct with women, it is most likely that the woman making the allegation is lying, or there was a misunderstanding, he may have inadvertently touched her and did not make an effort to apologize on the spot (that has happened to me a few times, because of space issues (on packed trains, elevators, ect, I inadvertently ended up in a woman's personal space, I always made an effort to apologize on the spot and things have always been cool.

[UTUSN]

67. Yip, first I have *no* answer to fact, did the subject (woman) make allegation herself?

If so, we're into "Me, Too" territory - which involves being-listened-to. Repeating, the first and last I heard, the wingnut blog quoted some dude saying some-other-dude made the allegation.

Repeating: DID the alleged woman HERSELF *say* any of the allegations?

[EffieBlack]

75. I don't buy the "he looked at the picture and thought it was him but was wrong"

What sane or intelligent politician in the situation that he was in, when confronted with a photograph he supposedly had never seen before takes a quick glance and says, "Yeah, that's probably me" and then puts out video and written statements saying it was him and apologizing profusely. Wouldn't he look at it closely? Wouldn't he try to remember when and where he took such a picture and who he was with at the time? Wouldn't he have said, "You know, I remember wearing blackface, but I sure don't remember grinning next to a guy in a Ku Klux Klan robe like we're besties."?

And there's a big difference between Northam's and Fairfax's situations. Northam wasn't accused of racism and then someone came up with a photo to corroborate it. The photo is what started the whole thing. It is conclusive proof of his conduct. He even admitted himself when he said, unequivocally that it was he in the photo. He didn't say it looked like him or could have been him or he wasn't sure but he couldn't rule it out. That photo is Northam, he knew it was him, he never told anyone about it, never atoned for it, never apologized for it until Friday. And he himself said he must atone for it and he was taking a first step.

Fairfax, on the other hand, has been had a veiled accusation lobbed at him from over the transom under some suspicious circumstances. There is no corroborating evidence, no proof, and no indication that he has ever behaved that way toward any other woman ever in his life. That's a completely different situation.

Frankly, I'm tired of what another poster here has referred to perfectly as the goalpost moving. Whenever black folk raise a concern about racism, we're told we're overreacting or we're misunderstanding or misinterpreting and that we have no conclusive proof that someone is a racist. I often joke that, apparently the only way to prove someone a racist it to find a picture of them in a Klan hood. Well ... here we have something very similar - a picture of a man in blackface hanging out with a man in a Klan hood. And now we're being told: "I know there's a picture of him looking and acting like a stone-cold racist. But other than THAT, what proof do you have that he's ever done anything racist?"

[UniteFightBack]

29. She went to a newspaper.....did she also go to the police?? nt

[jberryhill]

30. It's for the purpose of setting up Herman Cain

I don't think anyone here on DU had an issue with the accusations against Herman Cain. He was, after all, a Republican:

https://upload.democraticunderground.com/1251334163

I don't know if you were on DU then, but there was certainly no suggestion he should get the benefit of the doubt.

But, in recent Herman Cain news:

https://www.democraticunderground.com/10142256960

Herman Cain, the former pizza company executive who ran for the Republican presidential nomination in 2012, is being considered by President Donald Trump for a seat on the Federal Reserve Board.

Cain, 73, was in the White House on Wednesday, according to people familiar with the matter. Two seats on the Fed board are vacant, but nominating Cain raises the prospect of a Senate confirmation hearing focused on the sexual harassment and infidelity accusations that ended his presidential campaign.

I think people on DU markedly underestimate the mathematical models developed on the basis of social media experiments which are known to the other side, on how "culture war" stuff helps them.

However, be prepared to apply the same standard to Herman Cain in the very near future.

The Northam thing was stockpiled oppo reserved for future use, but it seems that they have found another use for it in order to get to Fairfax.

[peggysue2]

36. Lordy, Lordy

The tangled webs we weave. Yes, I'd forgotten about the Trumpster's interest in placing Cain on the Federal Reserve Board. And, of course, you're right about those previous allegations; the sexual harassment stories on Cain pretty much clocked his campaign.

That being said, I'm still willing to give Fairfax the benefit of the doubt. Unless some damning/convincing evidence is revealed where I can't.

[Jarqui]

34. There was an allegation last night that Northam was

spreading some stuff to the media to look into on Fairfax
https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=11769684

Last evening it was reported that he had a meeting with blacks in his admin without Fairfax in attendance.

The conservative website released their story and started tweeting it.

The press release in response by Fairfax was a mistake. With it, the media in general could run with the story because they had corroboration a "he said she said" existed. Without it, many media outlets hands would have been tied as they had since last summer when she first came forward. WaPo couldn't corroborate so they did not go to print with the story last summer but with the press release and their name being brought up, they can now weigh in.

Media have to corroborate stories like this or they can get severely sued.

Fairfax's situation reminded me of a potential Al Franken.

His accuser reminded me of a potential Christine Blasey Ford with her academic credentials.

Without further evidence being brought forward, Fairfax can probably ignore it.

[EffieBlack]

39. A big difference is that Christine Blasey Ford came forward, told her story publicly and offered

substantial corroboration. So far, Fairfax's accuser has offered and is saying nothing.

[LisaL]

42. What substantial corroboration?

As for Fairfax accuser, she went to Washington Post in 2017 with her accusation. So it wouldn't be accurate to claim she said nothing.

[EffieBlack]

43. A photograph

You know, the one he said was of him before he backpedaled the next day because hasn't everyone at some point mistakenly assumed that they were the ones depicted in photos of people in blackface and Klan attire?

She went to the Post, the Post couldn't corroborate it and so she said not another word about it - not to any other publication or CNN or FOX, or the Democratic Party, etc., until she let a friend send a screenshot of a Facebook Post to the right-wing website that had just happened to release a photo of the governor in blackface a couple of days before.

A photo is substantial corroboration. A cryptic Facebook allegation repeating an allegation that was rejected by the Washington Post a year ago is not.

Only in bizarro world is a photograph that someone admits they were in NOT evidence that that person was doing exactly what he was doing in the picture.

[jberryhill]

53. The question "what substantial corroboration?" was directed to the Ford allegation

You had mentioned that Ford had offered "substantial corroboration", and the question "what substantial corroboration?" was in reply to your comment about Ford.

[EffieBlack]

54. Aw - missed that. Thanks.

[EffieBlack]

58. I'm surprised that I have to explain to anyone here what corroboration Blasey Ford had, but

She produced other witnesses who were willing to tell investigators that they suffered or witnessed behavior by Kavanaugh consistent with Blasey-Ford's allegation.

Here's more in-depth information: https://rewire.news/ablc/2018/10/04/corroborating-evidence-christine-blasey-ford-allegations/

[Jarqui]

44. That is a very big difference

And a difference Republicans have no standing to comment on because they went ahead and confirmed Kavanaugh with multiple accusations - while refusing to look into them.

[yardwork]

35. I'm happy to weigh in on this.

Sexual assault is a criminal matter, and allegations of sexual assault are best handled through the criminal justice system.

We all know that the criminal justice system is imperfect and can be unfair. However, the potential for imperfect, unfair outcomes is much, much higher when accusations are "handled" via social media.

I don't reflexively believe every person who comes forward with an accusation. People deserve respect, dignity, and the right to have their accusations taken seriously as part of an investigation. Until such an investigation takes place, we can't assume anything.

[Cha]

87. Excellent point, yardwork!

Of course it should have been reported to the police right away, if it's a sexual assault.

I hope it's not true One of those classic he said/she said.. how the heck do we find out who's telling truth?

[bobbieinok]

37. Question for info--is accuser white? Have avoided all stories about mess.

Whole VA thing does seem like a massive GOP attempted coup.

Ya really hav' ta wonder why Northam thing came out just NOW after so many campaigns and supposed oppo research.

[EffieBlack]

40. She's black

[denverbill]

47. Well, I don't know about the accusation against Fairfax, but I do know Republicans.

I'm sure once Northam is out of the way, the victim will go public, probably with other victims, real or not. Why would they put all their cards on the table before Democrats play their hand?

[janmichael3]

50. Wow. I know so many people that have been burned for less. Forced oral sex? Wow. To the top.

Just the accusation or less has sunk so many other political and celebrity ships.

Clinton didn't even get accused of forcing anyone to blow him but burned anyway. His peccidillios (sp?) are his and Hillary's issue not ours.

Assisi got accused of an awkward sexual in nature "but not" encounter. Nothing else but burned. Really though...

Franken...just burned baby. I will never forgive this one. No forced mouth stuff here.

Andy Dick - weirdo and still working?

Richard Dreyfus? Old but still working kinda.

Dustin Hoffman for years ago not forcing a blow job.

Jesse Jackson???? Really? A uncorroborated thigh touch a hundred years ago???

Fairfax just got accused of real on sexual assault of a woman of color.

As good Democrats we should rush to judgement. Off with his head. That one, really. Benefit of the doubt? Not for us.

Yes I am the zombie poster.

[gopiscrap]

79. welcome to DU!

[Cha]

86. Did you lose your

password?

[Stinky The Clown]

55. Effie, I have no inside info, but I see this as an attempted Double Ratfuck

[EffieBlack]

59. It likely is

But I think they misjudged the environment and misplayed their hand.

[Stinky The Clown]

61. I sure hope Fairfax survives this. . . .

. . . . after, I hope, Northam resigns.

[EffieBlack]

63. I think they messed up by throwing the dirt at Fairfax while Northam is still trying to hang on

I also understand from friends and family in Virginia that Northam's people have been doing a whispering campaign on Fairfax for several days now in hopes of discouraging people from pushing him out (do you REALLY want to trust this black guy in the job?) - a real problem in and of itself - and that's why the Fairfax allegation broke prematurely.

Whatever, I think people can see what's going on here.

[Stinky The Clown]

66. I hope Democrats/Fairfax can play this to advantage.

[LisaL]

73. The allegation was made first in 2017.

So not sure what you mean by "breaking prematurely."

[EffieBlack]

76. She went to the Post in 2017 and then dropped it completely until it was brought up yesterday

I suspect that the plan was for it to be whispered about sub rosa - as they were doing - but not to let it break publicly until after the Northam matter was much farther down the road, but Northam's people jumped the gun.

[jalan48]

62. Sounds fishy to me.

[Horse with no Name]

65. unfortunately I think we are going to lose a Governor to racism

and a Lt. Governor to the "me too" movement.....and both will probably be replaced with a racist sex-predator republican.
Nobody wins.

[EffieBlack]

78. I seriously doubt that's going to happen.

[Demsrule86]

92. It doesn't have to happen if we stand by our people. A 35 year old picture is not reason enough

to force Northam to resign...and an unsubstantiated claim is not enough to force Fairfax out or it shouldn't be. Until we fight for our people when obvious dirty tricks are involved, we will lose elections. This could affect our chances in Virginia for a long time if the Fucking Gop gets their way and is in office during a census year.

[Marcuse]

72. The AG is a Democrat. Virginia Constitution Article V, Section 16:

If a vacancy exists in the office of Lieutenant Governor when the Lieutenant Governor is to succeed to the office of Governor or to serve as Acting Governor, the Attorney General, if he is eligible to serve as Governor, shall succeed to the office of Governor for the unexpired term or serve as Acting Governor.

https://law.lis.virginia.gov/constitutionexpand/article5/

[EffieBlack]

81. But, according to some people here, they can knock out the AG and then a Republican will get the job

Yes, I know that's stupid. But several people have posed that.

That's like saying Congress shouldn't impeach Trump because then Pence will take over and then they'll find a way to get rid of Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Grassley and Mike Pompeo will be next in line ...

[Demsrule86]

90. What they can do is call for an election for LT governor if Northam resigns.

And then they force Fairfaix out ; they have laid the groundwork for this Thus the GOP essentially steals the governorship. The GOP controls Virginia during a census year. They stole what they couldn't win via an election. Northam should not resign nor should Fairfield.

[Demsrule86]

89. Make no mistake, this is a coup by Republicans for Virginia...and we should not cooperate with any

of this...not Northam and not Fairfax. Th GOP will take what they can't win at the ballot box by dirty tricks...

[EffieBlack]

91. Northam's continued presence is an insult and affront to every black person in his state

I don't care HOW the information about his past behavior came to light. He needs to go.

[temporary311]

94. And Fairfax's isn't to every woman?

I suppose we can hope there is only the one accuser and that she isn't reliable, but how often is there ever just one?

[EffieBlack]

95. How is a man an affront and insult to every woman in a state solely because

a woman makes a secondhand and uncorroborated allegation against him?

And let's not forget that this allegation WAS investigated by the Washington Post and nothing was found to support it. Part of that investigation was a look into Fairfax's past and not one indication arose that he ever did anything like this either before or after.

Now, maybe if a picture turned up of Fairfax and his buddies demeaning women and glorifying sexual assault and misogynistic terrorism, that would be different. I sincerely doubt that anyone in such a case would brush that off as as no big deal that shouldn't be held against him because they don't have proof that he did anything bad to woman afterward ...

So, no, Fairfax ISN'T an affront to every woman.

[temporary311]

97. Hopefully you're right,

but I'm not sure if I'd count on it. The woman in question has apparently hired the law firm that represented Ford. But i dunno, maybe we'll be lucky and the nazis behind this will play fair and not try to pull a Franken on Fairfax with anonymous accusations that magically stop once he resigns.

[Demsrule86]

100. I see...but I feel a Republican would be worse. They are coming for Fairfax as well in order to

take the governorship. I do not believe a 35 year old picture from a guy who has not engaged in any racist behavior that i am aware of since the photo (and he does claim he is not the one in the photo) is reason to give away a governorship to an undoubtedly racist
Republican scumbucket which is what is going to happen. At the least, Northam should be accorded some time to prove the man in the picture is not him. And how many Black people will be denied the vote if the Republicans are in office during the census?

Also, I believe in redemption. I was never on the wrong side of racial issues but I was not sufficiently supportive of LGBTQ issues which is why I argued for a second chance for Joy Reid. I have been there. This is no different. I really like and respect you and am rarely not in agreement with you. I just think you are wrong on this issue. Republicans are targeting our people. It must stop.

[MineralMan]

99. I started a new thread, which is pertinent to this:

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100211776076

You're right. It's very complicated and will probably not be resolved any time soon. It could have been avoided so easily, too.

[LisaM]

101. The Republicans are trying to invalidate an election.

And they're doing it - in my opinion - by trying to attack the elected Democratic governor and lieutenant governor on the basis of both racism and sexism, and trying to pit people fighting for women's rights and civil rights against each other. This has been proven to work in the past.

I don't know the answer here. My inclination is not to fall for it (though I know the circumstances are different and evoke very painful triggers), the way people did with the Franken set up, or what I believe was a set up. It may be that Northam ultimately should resign, I'm not saying that day shouldn't come, but I think it's better to go very slowly here.

This all came out because of attempts to strengthen abortion laws and the ultimate goal by the right is to not have a Democratic governor or lieutenant governor, but to somehow get Republicans in there and make sure that they deny a woman's right to choose, and even weaken abortion laws ahead of some anticipated Supreme Court decisions. It's important not to let that happen, but the seeds of division have been sowed. Somewhere someone is sitting back and chuckling, but it's not Democrats.

[happybird]

102. +1