The big Nadia Naffe barn incident story is online. I don’t particularly feel like linking or quoting it; I’m sure you can find it if you want to. I don’t have a lot of time to discuss it, so I’ll just throw out a few quick questions to Nadia that I predict she and the partisan hacks writing about this story (hi Tommy Christopher!) will ignore:
- Where is the evidence of a “rape plot”?
- Where is the evidence that Andrew Breitbart ignored a “rape plot”?
- If there was a “rape plot” then why did you testify that what happened that night was not harassment?
- Why not call a cab? Why call Andrew Breitbart (who was all the way across the country) instead?
- “James had downloaded and/or linked his Gmail account to my device.” What does “and/or” mean? Don’t you know which happened?
- If someone accesses their Gmail from your phone or computer, and you are later able to re-enter their account, does that morally entitle you to access their account and download years’ worth of emails, as you insinuate you have done — or to publish all their emails online, as you have threatened to do?
- Just how “remote” was this barn?
- Why didn’t you mention your threat to destroy O’Keefe’s computers?
- Is there anything missing from your republication of that email you sent to O’Keefe and his board of directors? If so, what does it say?
- Why all the coziness with Anons and Internet thugs on Twitter?
The “and/or” thing is quite striking.
Countdown to Tommy Christopher uncritically repeating all this as if it’s a damning story with no holes in 5…4…3..