2 (ok, maybe 3) women accused Herman Cain of inappropriate behavior

[240 is Back]

so not cain is "backing off" accusing perry of leaking the info?  

He needs to PROVE Perry did this - or APOLOGIZE to him for it!!!!!!!!!!!!!

how emotional, reactionary, and out-of-control is he, to outright accuse a competitor of such a terrible thing?

[MCWAY]

so not cain is "backing off" accusing perry of leaking the info?  

He needs to PROVE Perry did this - or APOLOGIZE to him for it!!!!!!!!!!!!!

how emotional, reactionary, and out-of-control is he, to outright accuse a competitor of such a terrible thing?

PLEASE!!!

A former member of his Senate campaign staff joins Perry's staff less than 2 weeks ago.....This story breaks less than two weeks ago.

One of the accusers, who claimed he saw Cain's "inappropriate remarks", just HAPPENS to run a Perry superPAC. But, despite no known confidentiality clause, he conveniently can't give the specific actions that "anyone" associated with NRA knew happened.

The Perry camp claims that the Romney camp might have leaked the story.

And, now we learned that when CNN's Anderson Cooper asked a Politico reporter, point blank, if a rival campaign leaked the information to them, that question got DUCKED big time.

[MCWAY]

Free Republic
Browse · Search   Pings · Mail   News/Activism
Topics · Post Article
Skip to comments.

National Restaurant Association chairman during Cain’s tenure: ‘It’s a hatchet job’
The Daily Caller ^ | 11/03/2011 | David Martosko
Posted on November 3, 2011 8:23:10 PM EDT by martosko

In an interview with The Daily Caller, former National Restaurant Association board chairman Joseph Fassler offered a firm defense of GOP presidential front-runner Herman Cain, along with an explanation for how Washington’s best kept secret — the identities of Cain’s sexual-harassment accusers — was also kept from the association’s board.



“The accusations? It’s a hatchet job, in my opinion,” Fassler told TheDC from his Phoenix, Ariz. office. “My gut tells me it’s a hatchet job. He gets a lead, he gets some traction, and the next thing you know, here come these allegations. It’s sad.”

(Excerpt) Read more at thedc.com ...

Fassler is saying what I said earlier, that these women got severance pay. This does NOT look like some legal settlement, especially if no lawsuit was actually filed.

[Soul Crusher]

The Romney perry crowd are pushing this

[240 is Back]

1) a year of severace pay is a LOT. 

2) Cain accused Perry without evidence. 

[MCWAY]

1) a year of severace pay is a LOT. 

2) Cain accused Perry without evidence. 

When this story broke, the report was that both women got five-figure severances. So they both got a year's pay ($35,000 for one, $45,000 for the other). How is the precise amount for the latter woman news? She got five-figures as reported.

Plus, Cain didn't accuse Perry's camp without evidence. I've cited the preliminary evidence at least twice.

[240 is Back]

When this story broke, the report was that both women got five-figure severances. So they both got a year's pay ($35,000 for one, $45,000 for the other). How is the precise amount for the latter woman news? She got five-figures as reported.

Plus, Cain didn't accuse Perry's camp without evidence. I've cited the preliminary evidence at least twice.

So who talked to the reporter?

All you know is that a guy who knew went to a competitor.

Maybe he left when politico started asking Qs, as he KNEW the ship would soon be sinking.  Makes sense, right?

If I'm high end campaign worker keeping secrets - and politico shows up asking about some bombshell which I know is going to sink my candidate, well yeah, i'm wondering 1) who will benefit and 2) how fast he can hire me lol....

it's just as likely, MCWAY.  politico has been asking Cain these Qs on film for 14 or 15 days now.  Did they start asking him Qs the same day they found out?  I thought they researched it and called the HR manager, etc - FIRST?   

Sounds like dude heard the Q and booked town.

[MCWAY]

So who talked to the reporter?

All you know is that a guy who knew went to a competitor.

Maybe he left when politico started asking Qs, as he KNEW the ship would soon be sinking.  Makes sense, right?

If I'm high end campaign worker keeping secrets - and politico shows up asking about some bombshell which I know is going to sink my candidate, well yeah, i'm wondering 1) who will benefit and 2) how fast he can hire me lol....

it's just as likely, MCWAY.  politico has been asking Cain these Qs on film for 14 or 15 days now.  Did they start asking him Qs the same day they found out?  I thought they researched it and called the HR manager, etc - FIRST?   

Sounds like dude heard the Q and booked town.

Cain has answered those questions (or similar ones, at least), on several occasions.

Cain's proverbial ship has yet to sink. His fundraising is WAY UP, as his poll numbers in SC, and he still leads Romney in the Rasmussen poll.

[240 is Back]

his initial numbers are up, but he can claim anything, can't he?  Didn't romney strettttch those number with that 10 million "pledge" day that never materialized?

Give it two weeks.  Let some of these accusers issue their statements.  See how "he joked about sticking his finger up my ass" or other nonsense will play with moderate female voters...

[LurkerNoMore]

Cain has answered those questions (or similar ones, at least), on several occasions.

Cain's proverbial ship has yet to sink. His fundraising is WAY UP, as his poll numbers in SC, and he still leads Romney in the Rasmussen poll.

Sounds great for you if we take make that bet.

Still up for it?

[MCWAY]

Sounds great for you if we take make that bet.

Still up for it?

I already accepted your wager, under the condition of a 7-point spread, since Cain and Romney have been neck-and-neck for weeks, now.

You claimed this controversy was going to tank Cain's campaign. A fluctuation of a couple of points isn't tanking.

[LurkerNoMore]

I already accepted your wager, under the condition of a 7-point spread, since Cain and Romney have been neck-and-neck for weeks, now.

You claimed this controversy was going to tank Cain's campaign. A fluctuation of a couple of points isn't tanking.

Ok, how about this:

Two weeks from today - 11/18 Romney will be 4 points ahead.
Four weeks from today - 11/25 Romeny will be 7 points ahead.

We will average the scores from three major polling sites.  RCP, Ramuss, and whatever you think is an unbiased 3rd one.

How is that?

[Soul Crusher]

Cain accuser attorney: Client sees 'no value' in revisiting issue
CNN ^ | 11/4/11 | CNN/wire staff

Posted on Friday, November 04, 2011 4:38:06 PM by ColdOne

CNN) - Joel Bennett, the attorney for one the women who has accused Herman Cain of sexual harassment, said Friday that his client "made a complaint in good faith about a series of inappropriate behaviors and unwanted advances" from the GOP presidential candidate.

Bennett said his client sees "no value" in revisiting the issue now, but "stands by the complaint that she made."

Bennett said his client would disagree with Cain's characterization of the alleged harassment incidents.

He confirmed that the alleged harassment occurred in 1999 over a period of "at least a month or two." There was "more than one incident," he said.


(Excerpt) Read more at politicalticker.blogs.cn n.com ...






fucking cvnts.    whoever leaked this and refuse to say what the accusation was are pofs.   

[Dos Equis]

Kafkaesque.

[Soul Crusher]

With No Specifics to the Accusations, Herman Cain Wins This Fight
National Review ^ | 11-4-2011 | Jim Geraghty

Posted on Friday, November 04, 2011 5:53:14 PM by smoothsailing


With No Specifics to the Accusations, Herman Cain Wins This Fight
Jim Geraghty


November 4, 2011


Joel Bennett, the lawyer for one of the former employees of the National Restaurant Association who accused Herman Cain of sexual harassment, spoke to Wolf Blitzer live on CNN moments ago.

Bennett said that in his legal opinion, what occurred between Cain and his client met the legal definition of sexual harassment. But despite repeated questions from Blitzer, he refused to specify what the alleged actions were, and he said his client would not be appearing to shed any further light on the matter.

When Blitzer pointed out Cain’s vehement, blanket denial, Bennett replied, “In all my years of lawyering, I’ve never seen anyone accused of sexual harassment say, ‘I did it.’”

In short, Mr. Bennett is arguing, ’I won’t say what he did, but trust me, he’s guilty of wrongdoing.’ This is ridiculous. To Politico, the public is supposed to take this into account in their assessment of Cain but we can’t even get any sense of what triggered the original complaint, and whether this was much ado about nothing or whether Cain actually did something wrong.

Without the basic details, the public cannot take this into account in their assessment of Cain, or ought not to. Despite all the drama of the week, we know about as much as we did Monday. Two employees made complaints, but we don’t really know much about what the complaints were. Was there some bad behavior on Cain’s part? Were the NRA payments just designed to avoid the cost of litigating the claims? Who knows?

“It’s over, from our perspective,” Bennett said of the controversy.

Yes, this story ought to be over. While this story does not reassure much about Herman Cain and his campaign – i.e., blaming Perry, walking back the accusation, then having Cain seem to walk back the walk back – he’s been wronged by having a politically damaging accusation widely aired but never being able to cross-examine his accuser or refute the charges.

[Soul Crusher]

Statement from the National Restaurant Association
The Right Scoop ^ | Nov 4, 2011



Joel Bennett held a press conference moments ago on behalf of his client who alleged sexual harassment charges against Herman Cain, and it amounted to a big fat zero of any relevant information to this. The woman doesn’t want to reveal her identity or her side of the story. What’s interesting is that the NRA, according to their statement below, would have released her from the confidentiality portion of the agreement to allow her to vocalize her side of the story. But they still opted not to. So, end of story.

Here is the NRA’s statement:

“We have seen the statement Joel Bennett released earlier today on behalf of his client, a former employee of the Association. The Association consented to the release of that statement, at the request of Mr. Bennett’s client.

“Based upon the information currently available, we can confirm that more than a decade ago, in July 1999, Mr. Bennett’s client filed a formal internal complaint, in accordance with the Association’s existing policies prohibiting discrimination and harassment. Mr. Herman Cain disputed the allegations in the complaint. The Association and Mr. Bennett’s client subsequently entered into an agreement to resolve the matter, without any admission of liability. Mr. Cain was not a party to that agreement. The agreement contains mutual confidentiality obligations. Notwithstanding the Association’s ongoing policy of maintaining the privacy of all personnel matters, we have advised Mr. Bennett that we are willing to waive the confidentiality of this matter and permit Mr. Bennett’s client to comment. As indicated in Mr. Bennett’s statement, his client prefers not to be further involved with this matter and we will respect her decision.

“The Association has robust policies designed to ensure that employees with concerns may bring them forward for prompt investigation and resolution, without risk of retaliation. The Association is fully committed to equal employment opportunity and to an environment that is free from any discrimination or harassment.”

The agreement was made between the NRA and the client with no admission of liability. And Cain, just as he said, wasn’t a party to the agreement.

Also, remember how the press wanted to make a big deal out of the fact that Herman Cain used the word “agreement”? Just to point out, that’s exactly the word used in this statement. What does it matter? Not much at this point.

So, all in all, this is over and there is nothing to indicate that Cain did anything wrong. Let the Cain Train keep rollin’ on!









SO EVEN THEN HE DISPUTED THIS BS.   HE WAS NOT A PARTY TO THIS AGREEMENT AND WAS NOT IN A POSITION TO ALTER THE SETTLEMENT IN ANY WAY.   

[Dos Equis]

Statement from the National Restaurant Association
The Right Scoop ^ | Nov 4, 2011



Joel Bennett held a press conference moments ago on behalf of his client who alleged sexual harassment charges against Herman Cain, and it amounted to a big fat zero of any relevant information to this. The woman doesn’t want to reveal her identity or her side of the story. What’s interesting is that the NRA, according to their statement below, would have released her from the confidentiality portion of the agreement to allow her to vocalize her side of the story. But they still opted not to. So, end of story.

Here is the NRA’s statement:

“We have seen the statement Joel Bennett released earlier today on behalf of his client, a former employee of the Association. The Association consented to the release of that statement, at the request of Mr. Bennett’s client.

“Based upon the information currently available, we can confirm that more than a decade ago, in July 1999, Mr. Bennett’s client filed a formal internal complaint, in accordance with the Association’s existing policies prohibiting discrimination and harassment. Mr. Herman Cain disputed the allegations in the complaint. The Association and Mr. Bennett’s client subsequently entered into an agreement to resolve the matter, without any admission of liability. Mr. Cain was not a party to that agreement. The agreement contains mutual confidentiality obligations. Notwithstanding the Association’s ongoing policy of maintaining the privacy of all personnel matters, we have advised Mr. Bennett that we are willing to waive the confidentiality of this matter and permit Mr. Bennett’s client to comment. As indicated in Mr. Bennett’s statement, his client prefers not to be further involved with this matter and we will respect her decision.

“The Association has robust policies designed to ensure that employees with concerns may bring them forward for prompt investigation and resolution, without risk of retaliation. The Association is fully committed to equal employment opportunity and to an environment that is free from any discrimination or harassment.”

The agreement was made between the NRA and the client with no admission of liability. And Cain, just as he said, wasn’t a party to the agreement.

Also, remember how the press wanted to make a big deal out of the fact that Herman Cain used the word “agreement”? Just to point out, that’s exactly the word used in this statement. What does it matter? Not much at this point.

So, all in all, this is over and there is nothing to indicate that Cain did anything wrong. Let the Cain Train keep rollin’ on!









SO EVEN THEN HE DISPUTED THIS BS.   HE WAS NOT A PARTY TO THIS AGREEMENT AND WAS NOT IN A POSITION TO ALTER THE SETTLEMENT IN ANY WAY.   

This is outrageous.  I suspect a large segment of the voting public will see through this kind of witch hunt.

[Soul Crusher]

Free Republic
Browse · Search   Pings · Mail   News/Activism
Topics · Post Article
Skip to comments.

We were wrong about Herman Cain and sexual harassment
http://www.washingtonpost.com ^ | 11/4/2011 | By Alexandra Petri
Posted on November 4, 2011 9:26:08 PM EDT by Maelstorm

Maybe we were reading these sexual harassment allegations wrong.

They don’t seem to have hurt Cain at all. If anything, they’ve made him stronger. A Washington Post-ABC Poll found him still nearly tied with Romney in the polls — even after the allegations made news!

The Monday after they surfaced was a banner day for fundraising Cain. More than a million dollars of donations reportedly poured in. Maybe the Rick Perry staffer who so cleverly traveled back to the past to seed these allegations more than a decade ago should have thought harder. So far, they seem to be having the opposite of their expected effect.

“We were worried that ‘sexual harassment’ might be going too far,” someone murmurs in a bunker. “It’s a touchy subject. It’s not as clear-cut as an affair. It’s like pornography — you know it when you see it, and you try to keep it out of the office. But it turns out people enjoy a salacious sideline to their daily barrage of 2012 news.”

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...

[Soul Crusher]

Politico's Martin Still Can't Explain Exactly What Herman Cain Did
RealClearPolitics ^ | November 6, 2011
Posted on November 6, 2011 5:07:12 PM EST by 2ndDivisionVet

(VIDEO AT LINK)

In an interview with Howard Kurtz on CNN, Politico's Jonathan Martin still can't explain what exactly it is that Herman Cain reportedly did to the women who received payouts from the National Restaurant Association. Mr. Martin's main argument is because the story hasn't been fully challenged, it must be true. Here's a partial transcript of the back-and-forth between Martin and Kurtz.

Howard Kurtz, CNN: "Jonathan Martin, let's talk about the first story last Sunday, you and three colleagues reported this and what it didn't contain in the way of details. Here's the language from the story. Sexually suggestive behavior that made the women angry and uncomfortable, descriptions of physical gestures, not always overtly sexual, innuendo, and in one case, an unwanted sexual advance at a hotel."

"Why publish the story then when you couldn't answer the essential question: What precisely is Herman Cain alleged to have done to these women?"

Jonathan Martin, Politico: "Howie, I think any journalist would find the, uh -- a report of two women got a five figure, each, cash payout after alleged sexual harassment against a CEO of a trade group that is now a major contender for president, newsworthy. And that's the story we had, and that's what we published."

(Excerpt) Read more at realclearpolitics.com ...

[240 is Back]

wait til cain is  the candidate and this tape comes out in october 2012.

"He asked how many fingers he could fit up my ass" and other sick shit. 

Good luck with the women vote. 

it's like yall want obama - Cain lied about the charges repeatedly - then as the facts emerged, he changed his story.  All you have right now is not the truth - rather, it's the latest VERSION from cain.   At some point, the document WILL come out - you know that, right?   Then cain will change his story again.

of course, your naive self bought Cain's first two stories, so you're probably buying this one too

[Soul Crusher]

Women voted for bubba. 

[240 is Back]

Women voted for bubba. 

yeah, but they thought he was hot.  They kinda wished it was them that scumbag clinton was hitting on.

Cain?  ehhh


Either way, 33, you're defending cain - when you should be praying that romney or paul or newt gets the nod.  Obama will destroy cain in the debates.  EVERY SINGLE time cain takes the mic now, he completely embarasses himself.  Anything of substance - he just isn't smart.

Repeat that, bro.  Please.  Cain is not that bright.

I'd release all the GITMO bad guys?
China doesn't have nukes?
Newt... why don't you answer that?

He's dumb.  Stupid.  He will have one of those "I don't care who the leader of Russia is, I hate obama" moments against obama in the polls...

Oh well.  Back him.  Defend him.  And cry for 4 more years when Obama beats him.  What the fuck ever.

[Soul Crusher]

O am voting for RP in the NYS GOP primary and ABO in the GE. 

[240 is Back]

O am voting for RP in the NYS GOP primary and ABO in the GE. 

i can dig that.

[LurkerNoMore]

Ok, how about this:

Two weeks from today - 11/18 Romney will be 4 points ahead.
Four weeks from today - 11/25 Romeny will be 7 points ahead.

We will average the scores from three major polling sites.  RCP, Ramuss, and whatever you think is an unbiased 3rd one.

How is that?

mcway>