They’re dated 2020 and Boebert was already in congress then.
Doesn’t matter:
@kimstu: So you’re cool with the fake slut pix? Slut shaming women with sexy pix of themselves? That’s okay?
Boebert’s first term started on January 3, 2021.
As far as her being an escort-if she got out of it and feels that’s a reason to tell others to “find Jesus” or whatever, I don’t see it as hypocritical. If she openly discussed her alleged abortions and used them as a club to deny others their rights, that would be worse, but hiding them and chiding others is certainly deplorable.
I’m not comfortable spreading what may be “fake news.” And these allegations wouldn’t be pleasant for her kids.
You know what else is unpleasant for kids? Being forced to carry a pregnancy full term because we live in a theocracy, apparently.
Is that why they did it? I would have 100% assumed the purpose was to highlight that the image of the escort claims to be and does in fact look like Boebert.
And it was why others were easily able to argue that this sort of fakery is common. You don’t usually use your real name in these professions. The escort could just be someone with a resemblance to the Congresswoman, who is using her name. The image could even be altered to make her look more similar.
If this is actually true information, then I would not want people’s desire not to slutshame to result in this information not getting out there. It is very much an issue of hypocrisy if she is someone who rails against these things in her public life but did these things in her private life. However, like the others in that thread, I remain quite skeptical that it is actually her.
And I think we’ll be able to find out, as she’s dumb enough she would make it obvious if it is real when she responds to it.
I’m going to guess that this is her response to the allegations:
In a rational society, she wouldn’t have custody of her kids.
Whether or not Newsweek still has any integrity … here’s their coverage of the story:
Setting aside the salacious aspects, the (additional) allegations of campaign finance violations (particularly as Ted Cruz is allegedly involved), and the Utah ‘failure to report’ subsequent to an ORV accident (causing injury) are newsworthy.
And it would be hard to report on the campaign finance issues without at least making reference to the prurient aspects as a way of connecting the dots, corroborating the story, and including specific details as a way to further shore it all up.
I am of course not “cool” at all with any journalistic misrepresentation of fact. If any news source is falsely alleging that any recent picture of Boebert is a professional escort photo that she used over a decade ago, then that is obviously not a true allegation.
Which, in case I need to spell it out for you, means that it is not covered by the statement I made with the condition “if the allegations are true”.
Now you’re moving the goalposts to shore up your weak attempt at an argument. Nobody is saying that “slut shaming” Boebert merely for having appeared in “sexy pix” is okay.
In fact, nobody is saying that slut-shaming Boebert merely for having been a sex worker, if indeed she ever was one, is okay.
But hypocrisy-shaming Boebert for taking moralistic stances against things that she’s secretly engaged in herself (if the allegations that she’s done so are in fact true) is definitely okay. Do you not agree that hypocrisy-shaming is okay?
So, I’m of many minds about the information presented by the PAC, it does seem over the top, but that doesn’t mean parts (or even all) of it are incorrect. IMHO - seems, from the POV of most social liberals, too good to be true, but hey, I’m predisposed to dislike Boebert for many, many reasons.
As for slut shaming / double standard attacks, I’m absolutely in the view that what’s being targeted on the board is the hypocrisy, BUT what’s going on in general media (and especially social media) is much closer to slut-shaming or prurient interest - so @squeegee getting defensive is not uncalled for.
But, for the record, the source did also try to distance itself from judging on both the paid work and abortions in their open note from the team - they at least claim that they also are only targeting the hypocrisy inherent in Boebert’s stance.
Personally, I’m a lot more concerned about the abuse of campaign funds and hope that if/when proven, she suffers the maximum state and/or federal consequences - the abuses of the PACs and dark money are bad enough without going to the next level, and since she hasn’t endeared herself to the rest of the R’s particularly, I’d love for them to make an example out of her.
I think we have strayed well away from the subject of Madison Cawthorn, don’t you?
Less Madison Cawthorn, more Ashley Madison.
I flagged it to ask the mods if they think it’s worth splitting this off into its own thread. I suspect we’re not done with the Boebert issue just yet 
As the Cawthorn talk had largely died down anyway, I’m going to allow this sideline. It is somewhat related and splitting the thread really doesn’t seem worth the work. I think the same posters are in for both related people.
For the record, that was the second flag and if this happened when the thread was fresh, I would have moved it out of the thread. But at this point in P&E, it is fine.
To bring the thread sorta back to Cawthron, my question is why target Boebert?
My understanding of the PAC targeting Cawthorn was his cocaine orgy nuttery, history of blatant easily-verified lying and attempted district switching flip flopping made him a liability with the possibility of causing the district to flip to blue. So the Rs brought him down to put in a more “traditional” Republican to improve their chances of holding the seat.
But why is the same group targetting Boebert? Wikipedia says the district is R+6, but is she really in any danger if she makes it to the general in November? I see that she got her seat by primarying the 5-term incumbent in 2020. Could this be establishment Rs getting revenge?
Maybe they figure as long as they have to send someone to Washington, it might as well be someone half-assed normal, not this embarrassment.
I have all kinds of mixed feelings about this one. I normally wouldn’t take delight in the misfortunes of others, this is a person who openly said she wants Joe Biden to die, so there’s that. Also, the Ted Cruz angle. TMI.
I don’t think this particular PAC is strongly associated with establishment Republicans — there were a lot of players working more or less independently to bring down Cawthorn. They certainly wouldn’t have dragged Cruz into this if they were working on behalf of the party.
Probably right, but to quote Al Franken:
“Here’s the thing you have to understand about Ted Cruz,” Franken wrote in the book, an excerpt of which was published by Axios. “I like Ted Cruz more than most of my other colleagues like Ted Cruz. And I hate Ted Cruz.”
“One thing Ted Cruz is really good at: uniting people who otherwise disagree about everything else in a total hatred of Ted Cruz.” - Ted Cruz’s freshman year college roommate Craig Mazin