October 12, 2004
Wu Sex Assault Allegations
Great. Just great.Evidently, there are allegations of David Wu sexually assaulting a young woman, 28 years ago. Let's take a whiff:
Early in the reporting, The Oregonian approached Wu for his side of the story. Over several months, his campaign manager repeatedly said Wu would not comment on "unsubstantiated allegations."Several former Stanford officials and professors, as well as friends of the woman, provided accounts of what they said was a violent encounter.
The woman did not seek out reporters to tell her story. A reporter contacted her, and she declined to comment for privacy reasons. Reporters talked numerous times with a representative of the woman in an attempt to confirm the various accounts.
So, a clear case of he-said, she-said. Except that neither of them are saying anything. And, over several months, only to come out three weeks before the election? Is that just a coincidence? What was it about the timeline that made now the most appropriate time for it to come out? Why not six weeks ago, or six weeks from now? Did it just happen to correspond to three weeks before the election? Or was it timed?
Let's look again:
Wu's ex-girlfriend has steadfastly declined to comment, both in person and through an intermediary, citing privacy concerns.The meat of the article comes from an interview that happened in May - the woman who gave the interview died in August.Reporters contacted scores of former Stanford students, current and retired university officials and professors, law associates, and former campaign staffers and friends of Wu to determine what occurred.
Current Stanford officials would not discuss what happened between Wu and the woman or the university's handling of the matter, citing university policy and student confidentiality laws.
I'm not the biggest fan of David Wu. I didn't like his Medicare mischief, and his replies to me about the Help America Vote Act have been less than satisfying. But if there was actually anything serious to these allegations, evidently an open secret in Democratic circles since before Wu took office six years ago, it shouldn't have been withheld until three weeks before election day. Shame on the Oregonian.
Update: - Only three days previously, the Oregonian endorsed Wu's opponent, Gol Ameri. Note how it makes no mention of these allegations or the investigation they had underway. The Oregonian shouldn't have made an endorsement in this race when they were so heavily invested in this multi-month "investigation". This is an incredibly transparent conflict of interest.