Rep. Nancy Mace sued by businessman over accusations of sexual abuse in scorched earth House floor speech

A South Carolina businessman accused by Rep. Nancy Mace of being part of a group of sexual predators is now suing her for defamation.

Brian Musgrave, one of four businessmen whom the South Carolina congresswoman claimed were involved in sex trafficking and in filming non-consensual nude videos of women - including herself - filed a scathing lawsuit against the politician on Thursday.

The complaint, filed in a South Carolina federal district court, denied all of Maces previous allegations.

These men didn’t just harm their victims; they recorded their depravity as if it were a badge of honor, Mace alleged during a blistering House floor speech on February 10. These men aren’t just criminals – they’re predators.

Mace, 47, made a series of allegations of sexual abuse and voyeurism against the four predators, Musgrave, her ex-fiance, Patrick Bryant, and two other South Carolina men.

All of the men have denied any wrongdoing.

Now, it is with unbridled disgust that Brian Musgrave through this lawsuit is forced to utter the words: "I am not a rapist." "I am not a predator." "I am not a sex trafficker," the complaint states, according to The Hill.

Through this action, Brian Musgrave seeks to recover that which has been wrongfully taken from him – his good name and reputation, the lawsuit continues.

Brian Musgrave (right), 51, filed a scathing lawsuit against Rep. Nancy Mace on Thursday

Nancy Mace, 47, a South Carolina congresswoman, claimed the four men were involved in sex trafficking and in filming non-consensual nude videos of women - including herself 

Musgrave is the Chief Executive Officer at Teamphoria - an employee engagement software company

The Republican politician claimed to have found a hidden camera on a property owned by Bryant and Musgrave which had intimate photos of women, allegedly taken without their knowledge or consent.

Mace also claimed that she blacked out for the first and only time in her life after being served two small vodka sodas by her ex and one of his business partners at a property co-owned by Musgrave.

The complaint acknowledges that Musgrave jointly owns the South Carolina condo with the congresswoman’s ex-fiance, who is described as Musgrave’s longtime friend.

However, the suit claims that Musgrave did not place the camera, never had access to it and was not present for any of what Mace alleged.

Musgrave however was not accused of the most serious offenses that Mace listed in the blistering House floor speech, such as being raped after having blacked out one night, believing she was purposefully incapacitated.

But she listed Musgrave along with the other three men and their photos on a sign she displayed on the House floor that read: Predators.

Filed in federal court in Charleston, the lawsuit names Mace and five unnamed people - who are alleged to have conspired with her - as defendants.

The businessman seeks damages in an amount to be determined by a jury.

The damages he seeks would be sufficient to impress upon the defendant the seriousness of her conduct and to deter such similar conduct in the future, the suit reads.

Mace made a series of allegations of sexual abuse and voyeurism against the four predators, Musgrave, her ex-fiance, Patrick Bryant, and two other South Carolina men, during a blistering House floor on February 10

The Republican politician claimed to have found a hidden camera on a property owned by Bryant and Musgrave which had intimate photos of women, allegedly taken without their knowledge or consent

Mace, who presented no evidence during her remarks, is shielded from potential criminal prosecution and civil lawsuits by the Constitution’s speech and debate clause, which provides lawmakers with immunity for acts taken within the legislative sphere.

Musgraves lawsuit, however, will be a major test for the Speech and Debate protections granted to lawmakers.

The law firm representing Musgrave in his complaint, Bland Richter, acknowledged the constitutional protection, but said it aims to test the legal limits of that protection.

Musgrave contends the mere fact Ms. Mace was elected to serve as a United States Congresswoman does not grant her the power to destroy a man’s reputation with impunity and use the hallowed floor of the House of Representatives as a sanctuary to destroy him, a statement released by Bland Richter reads.

The law firm added that Mace rejected the repeated offers simply to retract her allegations against Brian Musgrave and apologize before the lawsuit was filed.

She has elected instead to litigate these matters. Truth is the defense to defamation. Brian Musgrave welcomes the truth, Bland Richter said, the New York Post reported.