Current Representative Katie Hill (D-Cal) and a future 2024 Democrat Presidential nominee is demanding that the Daily Mail, a British newspaper, remove this offending photograph from its website. Ever try to get toothpaste back in the tube?
Rep Katie Hill announced her intention to resign from Congress. No word if this is a first step towards seeking the 2024 democratic nomination for President in 2024.
https://www.yahoo.com/entry/rep-katie-hill-threatens-legal-235623700_n_5db2f1a4e4b0a893740370cf
I guess these rocket surgeons have never heard of the “Streisand Effect.” They sent a threat to the Daily Mail demanding that the paper remove the offending photos.
I don’t think the legal team appreciates the shit storm they are fixing to unleash. It is one thing for the MSM to ignore the antics of Katie Hill. However, what the lawyers have done is attack a member of the MSM horde. That act will whip the rest of the jackals into a frenzy. The story of the attempt to silence the “Fourth Estate.” will get wider circulation than naked pictures of Katie Hill. In this context, they cannot be separated. That tactic might work against bloggers but not the MSM.
Here is the definition of the Streisand Effect and link from Wikipedia the lazy man’s reference:
The Streisand effect is a phenomenon whereby an attempt to hide, remove, or censor a piece of information has the unintended consequence of publicizing the information more widely, usually facilitated by the Internet.[1]
Wikipedia
The first thing that occurs to me is; where does personal responsibility fall into this? Look at the picture, forget the naughty bits for the moment. The honorable Rep. Hill is likely aware that the photograph is being taken. She is looking in the direction of the camera.
Consider the behavior exhibited in the picture. Is she attempting to cover up? Does she attempt to block the camera or grab it? Does she attempt to hide the bong clutched in her hand?
I don’t think it is unreasonable to assume she was a willing participant in this photo session.
So the question isn’t about the content of the photo so much as it is the forum. This seems to be a case of, “it is okay for me to pose for such a picture but wrong for you to look.”
Her supporters will say that she may have been a willing participant in the photo session. However, she did not consent to the Daily Mail posting it. That’s fine as far as it goes. But, if reporters can print “Top Secret” documents with impunity, then why not dirty pictures? Nearly fifty years on I don’t think Daniel Ellsberg, of “Pentagon Papers” fame, has made it back on to the Pentagon Christmas card list.
Long before the Internet Henry Wadsworth Longfellow wrote a poem that anticipated path on the information highway. The only point he missed is that the destination was as likely to find enemies as friends.
Now the big boys at the Daily Mail report that:
Metadata from the picture reveals it was taken on 9/11 in 2017, before marijuana was legalized for recreational consumption in California.
It is unclear whether the congresswoman had a medical license for the drug at the time.
They also make an observation about the tattoo:
The picture also shows an iron cross tattoo on Hill’s pubic area, similar to the symbols formerly used by white supremacists referencing a World War II Nazi medal.
The only unequivocal statement that the tattoo in question is a Nazi symbol comes from her own attorneys:
“The claim that Representative Hill has Nazi imagery on her body in the form of a tattoo is false and defamatory,”
I don’t know where the Daily Mail got the photograph. One possible source is mentioned in the Daily Mail story, but ignored by her attorneys.
In 2016, Heslep, who Hill is currently divorcing, allegedly posted a naked picture of his wife on two forums of social media site Reddit called ‘WouldYouF**kMyWife’ and ‘wifesharing’, according to a source close to the couple.
It would seem that Hill and her estranged hubby posted nude photos of her on the Internet. This, in an effort, to recruit others for sexual escapades. One can surmise that any email communications between Katie and prospects included additional photos. Like they say, the Internet is forever.
So I have a question for the readers. How many filthy pictures of your significant others do you keep around?
I have executed over a thousand search warrants, usually centered around dope, dope records, proceeds, and weapons. That means the search is pretty exhaustive. I have seen more naked pictures and action shots than I care to recall. There is a good reason that Playboy photographers used an airbrush. Most folks don’t look particularly appealing naked. As for the action shots the 4th Earl of Chesterfield knew what he was talking about.
Sex: the pleasure is momentary, the position ridiculous, and the expense damnable.
Philip Stanhope, 4th Earl of Chesterfield
The bottom line is that Katie put herself in this position and doesn’t have a bitch coming. I haven’t seem her divorce filing. She is so brazen that I expect she accused her husband of infidelity because he participated in threesomes with her.
