It’s 7:30 p.m. on Monday night, and the day’s most vilified blogger is driving somewhere in California, though he declines to specify where, and with whom. As he talks into the telephone, he confesses he feels hunted: He’s recording the conversation. Someone has already hacked him that day. He’s deluged with threats. His mom, he said, “is worried about me and worried about herself.”
This is Charles C. Johnson, the one-time Daily Caller contributor who just outed a woman he claims is Rolling Stone’s “Jackie,” whose widely-trumpeted gang-rape account at a University of Virginia fraternity has now come under suspicion. And today, Johnson sighed, has been quite a day. Jezebel called him “vile.” Slate called him a “vicious troll.” The Frisky called him a “complete piece of s–t.” Others, some of whom criticized Twitter for failing to censor his allegedly revelatory tweets, have been even less kind.
Whine. Johnson seems to be one of those who can dish it out but doesn’t know how to take it. He has been vile. He had defied acceptable public behavior. He has been called out.
Before the Rolling Stone article, I mercifully had no clue who Charles C. Johnson even was. I had never heard of him. In fact, the first I heard of him was on Moonhowlings.
At any rate, this dude has clearly jumped the shark and fancies himself some sort of news God. He is not. He is just another POS with a big ego and delusions of grandeur about his own self importance. The WaPo continues:
He isn’t driven by ideology, colleagues say. He’s driven by “scalps.”
“He told me he likes to get scalps,” said Daily Caller alumnus Mark George, who had just authored a GotNews story that called into question Rolling Stone’s piece on campus rape at the University of Virginia. “Journalistically, he likes to get scalps. And Rolling Stone is a sloppy slow-moving target that’s had problems for years. … But I’m completely against him running this girl’s identity.”
A lot of people are. But reservations over public perception has rarely deterred Johnson. So at 9:39 a.m. on Sunday, he posted an introductory warning: “I’m giving Jackie until later tonight to tell the truth and then I’m going to start revealing everything about her past.”
This was a very unusual step — one that breached both societal and journalistic conventions that discourage the identification of alleged sexual assault victims. (The Post does not name rape victims.) His delivery was both menacing and pugnacious. “Because I am merciful,” he then tweeted, “I always give my opponents an opportunity to do the right thing. [She] has until midnight to tell the truth about making it up. #IStandWithJackie.”
Trying to destroy a person is simply not cool. Hopefully, Johnson will be sued. He goes beyond freedom of the press. If harm comes to him, well, that’s the risk you take. He has threatened a Virginian. Not a smart thing to do.
Stay tuned….
“…dish it out but doesn’t know how to take it” sums it up nicely.
What a vile and disgusting POS.
” Hopefully, Johnson will be sued.”
For what? Outing someone he accuses of falsely accusing and individual of rape? If anyone has grounds for a lawsuit, it’s “Drew”, the Lifeguard. Who does he sue? RS? Jackie?
Actually, I meant in general. He outs. Who is to say is he correct or even telling the truth?
Look at James O’Keefe. His “journalism” was full of lies and half truths.
If the picture he posted of Jackie is correct, she is cute, BTW. I had thought perhaps she was a troll.
In Wahoo vernacular, troll equals U-bag
Ha! Why am I not surprised.
Mom, you have been remarkably silent during this discussion. What say you?
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/44111_Another_Massive_Fail_by_Smear_Merchant_Chuck_C._Johnson-_Posts_Photo_of_Wrong_Woman
Charles Johnson says that Charles C. Johnson “outed” the wrong woman.
It isn’t always about women. I get the PWC incident report. Some doctor was arrested at Patient First for sexually molesting a 23 year old male. Details weren’t provided.
I don’t think it’s wrong that her identity become known. She’s not a sexual assault victim, as far as anyone can tell. She’s a liar who started a hoax.
You really cannot prove she is not a rape victim. You cannot prove she is not a sexual assault victim. You are believing one side of this story.
@Moon-howler
All you girls from Mary Washington and R.M.W.C,
Never let a Virginia man an inch above your knee,
He’ll take you to his fraternity house and fill you full of beer,
And soon you’ll be the mother of a bastard Cavalier!
or the slightly more offensive verse
She’s a helluva twat from Agnes Scott;
She’ll spread for fifty cents.
Just lay her ass upon the grass,
Her panties on the fence.
You supply the liquor.
And she’ll supply the lay.
And if you can’t get it up, you son of a bitch,
You’re not from UVa.
Agnes Scott was a long road trip. Real long. Mary Wash and Randy Mac, not so far.
@Moon-howler
I preferred Sweet Briar
why?
@Moon-howler
Relative wealth of the investment properties, err, dates.
How I would venture to say that Hollins might have had similar investment values but definitely a little higher on the IQ scale in many cases.
I can’t believe this po’ girl is having this discussion.
@Moon-howler
If IQ were that important, probably wouldn’t have left the Hook