Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you.
Posted on 10/29/2026 8:19:27 PM PDT by lightman
At least two Harrisburg-area television stations have taken down an ad from a Trump-aligned PAC that sought to boost Republican Congressman Scott Perry by airing an unsubstantiated allegation of public nudity against Janelle Stelson, his Democratic opponent.
The now-stricken ad relies on a statement from Stelson’s next-door neighbor, Sharon Orr, that she saw Stelson naked outdoors and took a photo before calling the police – the same allegation that Perry has used in ads from his own campaign, which began airing online last week.
Perry has declined to say what, if any, attempts were made to verify Orr’s account before promoting her claims in the ads. Stelson says the allegation is false.
But Perry’s campaign has doubled down, even going so far as to recut the original ad to include an altered quote from PennLive in an attempt to lend credence to Orr’s allegation, despite Perry previously calling this outlet’s reporting on the matter “garbage” and “propaganda.”
The television ad was booked by No Going Back, a political action committee (PAC) financed by President Donald Trump’s MAGA Inc.
A representative from ABC27’s parent company told attorneys representing Stelson that the ad would no longer be airing, according to emails later shared with PennLive. Those attorneys told Democratic operatives that FOX43 had also pulled the ad, according to those emails.
A third station, WGAL, told campaign lawyers that it was not airing the ad, although it was unclear whether the ad had never been booked or had been scheduled and then pulled before its first airing.
None of the stations immediately responded to calls seeking further information on whether or when the ad had run.
“Their ad was so dishonest that TV stations are refusing to air it, which is the first time we’ve seen that happen this year anywhere on the House battlefield,” Stelson’s campaign manager, Alma Baker, said in an email.
On Tuesday, attorneys from the Elias Law Group sent letters to multiple Harrisburg-area stations requesting that the No Going Back ad be yanked, saying it was defamatory. Elias frequently represents the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) as well as individual Democratic candidates.
The ad displays a written statement from Orr and highlights the lines in which Orr says she saw Stelson “walking around outdoors, naked in the public sphere, with her breasts and buttocks fully exposed and in plain sight of my minor aged grandchild who lives with me.” In another part of the statement, Orr says that her grandchild is disabled.
A voiceover in the ad then says that Stelson is alleged to have “exposed herself to a child with special needs,” and that “that child with special needs didn’t deserve to be exposed to Janelle Stelson.”
The ad, from Perry’s own campaign committee and still running online as of Thursday afternoon, is very similar, displaying Orr’s statement and highlighting the same portions with a voiceover saying that “police have been called to investigate Stelson for exposing herself totally naked to a neighborhood child.”
Both ads describe Orr’s statement as an affidavit. However, as the attorneys’ letter points out, the document is a signed and notarized statement with no indication that it was submitted to a court in a legally binding manner.
Orr threatened to call the police when a PennLive reporter knocked on her door last week and said she had the photo but would not show it to anyone.
Crucially, the lawyers wrote to the TV stations that the No Going Back ad “cannot hide behind an argument that it is merely repeating allegations Ms. Orr made in the affidavit,” given that the voiceover makes claims above and beyond the actual text of Orr’s statement.
Even without this, the PAC “would still be liable for repeating the affidavit’s false statements” and presenting them as de facto credible, the attorneys said. The veracity of Orr’s statement has already been called into question, the attorneys wrote, given that Orr told ABC27 that her granddaughter did not actually see Stelson naked.
Politico reported Wednesday that MAGA Inc. wrote letters to the stations arguing that the “ad is true and must remain in rotation.” FCC rules generally limit the ability of broadcast stations to edit or censor ads from qualified candidates, but are less strict when it comes to third-party political committees.
Perry’s own ads featuring the same allegations continue to run. Several days ago, Perry began using a revised version of the ad that includes text attributed to PennLive, reading that “East Pennsboro Police confirmed they responded to complaint [sic] at Stelson’s home.”
That text does not appear in any previous PennLive coverage. The closest thing is a line that reads “East Pennsboro police confirmed to PennLive that they had responded to the complaint at Stelson and Orr’s homes,” which Perry’s campaign appears to have altered to scrub any mention of Orr’s direct involvement. All versions of the ads blur Orr’s name when her statement is shown on-screen.
The contest between Perry and Stelson for Pennsylvania’s 10th Congressional District, which includes all of Dauphin County and parts of Cumberland and York counties, is one of the nation’s most closely watched House races.
Perry, a former chair of the hard-right House Freedom Caucus and a key ally of President Donald Trump, has been a target of Democrats for several election cycles. Stelson lost to Perry in 2024 by just over 5,000 votes. Recent polls have shown the rematch in a dead heat.
|
|
Click here: to donate by Credit Card Or here: to donate by PayPal Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794 Thank you very much and God bless you. |
Pennsylvania Ping!
Please ping me with articles of interest.
FReepmail me to be added to the list.
There is no such thing as bad publicity. Inquiring minds will want to know.
FTA——The campaign ad displays a written statement and highlights the lines in which she saw Stelson “walking around outdoors, naked, with her breasts and buttocks fully exposed and in plain sight of her disabled grandchild.”
A voiceover then says that Stelson is alleged to
have “exposed herself to a child with special needs.”
A sixty-six year old bod?
“… Both ads describe Orr’s statement as an affidavit. However, as the attorneys’ letter points out, the document is a signed and notarized statement with no indication that it was submitted to a court in a legally binding manner.…”
***************************************************************
Ahh… nice try at misdirection. It still is an affidavit meaning it was a written declaration that was signed UNDER OATH before an authorized magistrate of the state. Notaries are authorized to perform that function.
ai can do wonders.
Ai-ai-ai-ai-ai!
Ai can still barf!
Indeed.
Well. It’s Pennsylvania.
In Massachusetts this is done in the streets in ‘Pride parades’. Kids of all ages all over the place see it all.
Ma must think Pa should get over it. Join the dems. She’s a dem.
Togetherness.
Could be Ma and Pa.
It still is an affidavit meaning it was a written declaration that was signed UNDER OATH before an authorized magistrate of the state.
A signed and notarized statement connotes nothing as to the truth of the statement contents.
An affidavit and a notarized statement are not the same thing. Every properly executed affidavit is notarized, but not every notarized document is an affidavit. The governing distinction is the notarial act used: an affidavit requires a jurat, which is a notarial act in which the signer swears under oath to the truth of the document’s contents. A notarized acknowledgment, by contrast, confirms only the signer’s identity and that their signature was voluntary, without any oath about the truth of the contents.
If there’s no pic it didn’t happen. If there is one this might be the way to go about it. Wait until PennLive is put in a position to be repudiated after all that ‘unsubstantiated’ defense crap. 2 reasons:
1) To establish the truth.
2) To establish guilt. Guilty?/not guilty.
“Abner!” 😁
True story! No policemen were harmed. Probably 2010 during the Obama depression in SE MI.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.