Uh oh: Witness found to Cain incidents?

posted at 1:25 pm on November 2, 2011 by Ed Morrissey

So far, neither of the two alleged complainants from Herman Cain’s tenure at the National Restaurant Association have come forward publicly, although it appears at least one would like NRA to release her from her confidentiality agreement to do so.  However, a pollster who worked for NRA at the time told KTOK in Oklahoma that he witnessed both incidents — and that if the women talk, Cain’s candidacy would be over:

Interviewed today on KTOK’s Mullins in the Morning, [Chris] Wilson, of Wilson-Perkins-Allen Opinion Research headquartered in Washington, D.C. explained he was a witness to the incident.  “I was the pollster at the National Restaurant Association when Herman Cain was head of it and I was around a couple of times when this happened and anyone who was involved with the NRA at the time, knew that this was gonna come up.”

Wilson described the woman as a low level staffer who was maybe two years out of college.  “This occurred at a restaurant in Crystal City (Virginia) and everybody was aware of it,” he continued.  “It was only a matter of time because so many people were aware of what took place, so many people were aware of her situation, the fact she left—everybody knew with the campaign that this would eventually come up.”

Wilson claims that he also can’t discuss the specifics, for legal reasons.  I’m not quite clear as to what that might be.  He may have signed a broad non-disclosure agreement with NRA to get the polling work, but if that’s the case, he just violated it with this statement today.  Unless he also participated in the settlement/severance agreements with the women, he’s as free to discuss the details as the fact that he witnessed them.  And it’s difficult to see how Wilson would have been involved in a settlement between NRA and the two employees.

However, Wilson isn’t only linked to NRA and Cain from years gone by.  His firm has conducted polling in this presidential race for the Make Us Great Again PAC.  And guess which candidate is favored by MUGA-PAC?  Why, none other than … Rick Perry.  The PAC has no formal connection to Perry’s campaign, but it’s certainly boosting Perry as the Republican nominee in the primary.

Could Wilson be more than just a witness in this story?  Could he be a source?  It could just be a coincidence that a witness to these alleged incidents did work for an organization pushing Perry, and that the story mysteriously got to Politico as Cain took support away from Perry in mid-October.  If he is the source, then conducting an interview on the topic has to be one of the dumber political moves I’ve seen.

Update: Some are saying that this indicates Romney as the source of the leak, but I’m not terribly convinced that a one-time donation means much.  Romney has less to fear with Cain as his main opponent than others in the race, and besides, no one knows whether Anderson ever knew about the incidents at all.  Other board members say they didn’t.  YMMV, however.

Update II: There have been plenty of developments that we have covered in other posts, but this development should be noted here:

Wilson emails THE WEEKLY STANDRD: “To be clear, and you can ask any of the reporters covering this story, I had nothing to do with leaking this in any way, and I’ve never discussed or shared this story with any of my clients – period.”

I’m pretty sure Politico won’t confirm or deny on any speculation on sources, but Wilson’s denial should be noted on this post.  However, John McCormack notes that Wilson has another indirect connection to the Perry campaign:

But pollster Tony Fabrizio, who was Wilson’s boss at Fabrizio, McLaughlin & Associates at the time of the alleged incidents, was hired by the Perry campaign in October.

Although Wilson claims that “anyone who was involved with the NRA at the time knew that this [incident with Cain] was gonna come up,” Fabrizio says he didn’t now that Cain was accused of sexual harassment.

“Our firm worked for the NRA prior to Herman Cain’s ascendancy there, during his presidency, and even for a little bit after that,” Fabrizio tells THE WEEKLY STANDARD. “But I was never witness to any of what Chris is saying, or at least what I’ve read as the account of what he’s saying.”

But did Wilson ever tell his boss about any of these incidents or allegations? “No, not that I recall, no,” says Fabrizio.

We’ll see.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6

Okay so where are these “bombshells”?

Methinks Politico’s bomb is a dud. Way to bend the sex card. That too, is broke now. Cain didn’t trump it, he couldn’t by its age and obscurity. Limbaugh just did for those who listen. Fold Politico. Leave the table.

Caststeel on November 2, 2011 at 2:21 PM

kerrhome on November 2, 2011 at 2:18 PM

Disagree, but I suspect you knew that already, lol. I like Romney, Im a proud supporter, but I get im in the minority. Thats ok, thats the process. Just fun to talk it out once in a while.

nswider on November 2, 2011 at 2:22 PM

It really does not matter who leaked it as long as it is true.It also has shown how woefully incompetent Cain and his staff are. They had 10 days notice and still blew it.

Southernblogger on November 2, 2011 at 2:15 PM

And they’re still blowing it.

HondaV65 on November 2, 2011 at 2:18 PM

And nothing indicates that they have any plan to stop blowing it…

JohnGalt23 on November 2, 2011 at 2:22 PM

You don’t know that Cain broke any kind of NDA.

JohnTant on November 2, 2011 at 2:18 PM

Judge: My dear – why did you tell your story when you signed a non-disclosure statement.

Plaintiff: Because, your honor – Mr Cain told the entire nation that my complaint was invalid and he insinuated I was a liar. He also made statements that I was offended at certain gestures I was not offended by – but failed to mention the bad ones that I was.

Judge: Yeah but – Mr. Cain never mentioned your name on national TV – so no one in the nation knew who you were.

Plaintiff: That’s not true your honor – there are plenty of people who work for and worked for the NRA – along with my friends and relatives, who knew about his story.

**Like I said … Good Luck to the NRA with that.

HondaV65 on November 2, 2011 at 2:23 PM

It really does not matter who leaked it as long as it is true.It also has shown how woefully incompetent Cain and his staff are. They had 10 days notice and still blew it.

Southernblogger on November 2, 2011 at 2:15 PM

Again, Politico’s lying game.

Hypothetical: Politico calls and says they’re doing a story on Cain, but doesn’t get into details — or perhaps states that they’re reviewing his tenure as head of the NRA.

Do you think they told him, “We’re going to run a nonexistently-sourced story based on hearsay from people who knew two people that you allegedly did something to, although they can’t talk about it and won’t confirm it, fifteen years ago?”

Hardly. They’re not truthful under the best of circumstances, and this is nothing more than them trying to take out someone who is humiliating BOTH Obama and their preferred Republican frontrunners.

In short, they no doubt were “in contact” with Cain ten days ago. But notice that Politico never said what they were in contact with Cain about.

northdallasthirty on November 2, 2011 at 2:23 PM

But here is the thing. I want us conservatives to be better. But can you imagine if this BS was playing out with a Democratic candidate? They would circle the wagons. And you know what? That makes them better then us. Politically and ethically….

tottoritodd on November 2, 2011 at 2:20 PM

Good words…

right2bright on November 2, 2011 at 2:24 PM

whatcat on November 2, 2011 at 2:15 PM

Yeah, Camp Romney is happy with where they are for sure. Fairly or not, Cains going to take a hit in the polls for this so thats helpful. Perry is kind of stuck where he is right now and the only candidate surging is Newt. So yeah overall I think their feeling pretty good.

nswider on November 2, 2011 at 2:18 PM

It’s an spectacle, that’s for sure. But unless there’s some horrific story of brutal rape down the pike, Cain might surge as he has when attacked before. Just telling some woman that she’s short likely won’t matter much to most folks.

whatcat on November 2, 2011 at 2:24 PM

I don’t like RomneyCare nor Tokyo Rove – but if these charges are true – they have just done us all a huge favor in leaking them.

You cannot cover something like this up – it ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS comes out. If not now – in the general.

GOP voters have a RIGHT to know about this before they select a candidate to run in the general. I don’t care who leaked it (I still think it was the Dims) – but whoever leaked it – we owe them a THANK YOU!

Because “Saint Herman” wasn’t going to tell us about this little problem. It’s a big deal and it needs to be vetted.

People can pound the table all they want – deal with it folks!

HondaV65 on November 2, 2011 at 2:02 PM

I completely agree. I would be so pissed off if this was kept quiet and then came out AFTER he got the nomination! That would make Obama a shoo in.
Said with the caveat that the allegations are true.

ArmyAunt on November 2, 2011 at 2:24 PM

I don’t think so … that woman’s story is coming out and you can take that to the bank. Deal with it now or later.

HondaV65 on November 2, 2011 at 2:16 PM

My theory is there’s no serious story there to come out. No there there. I also think if there were a serious story, it would be out by now. But I agree that if there is one, it will come out, and better sooner than later.

petefrt on November 2, 2011 at 2:25 PM

Judge: My dear – why did you tell your story when you signed a non-disclosure statement.

Plaintiff: Because, your honor – Mr Cain told the entire nation that my complaint was invalid and he insinuated I was a liar. He also made statements that I was offended at certain gestures I was not offended by – but failed to mention the bad ones that I was.

Judge: Yeah but – Mr. Cain never mentioned your name on national TV – so no one in the nation knew who you were.

Plaintiff: That’s not true your honor – there are plenty of people who work for and worked for the NRA – along with my friends and relatives, who knew about his story.

**Like I said … Good Luck to the NRA with that.

HondaV65 on November 2, 2011 at 2:23 PM

As long as you’re doing silly hypothetical conversations:

Judge: Why did you talk to the journalist in the first place?

Woman: ummmmmm…….

Remember…no one knew about any of this, nor was there any chatter about it, until Politico broke the story. That’s the hurdle you have to clear before you start claiming this woman is victim of some kind of smear.

She brought it up. That’s what’s missing in all of this navel-gazing.

JohnTant on November 2, 2011 at 2:25 PM

whatcat on November 2, 2011 at 2:24 PM

Exactly, if there is no “there” there this will all blow over. This isnt even hurting him right now, its actually helping galvanize his supporters, but he needs this story to be over soon.

nswider on November 2, 2011 at 2:27 PM

Judge: My dear – why did you tell your story when you signed a non-disclosure statement.

Plaintiff: Because, your honor – Mr Cain told the entire nation that my complaint was invalid and he insinuated I was a liar. He also made statements that I was offended at certain gestures I was not offended by – but failed to mention the bad ones that I was.

Judge: Yeah but – Mr. Cain never mentioned your name on national TV – so no one in the nation knew who you were.

Plaintiff: That’s not true your honor – there are plenty of people who work for and worked for the NRA – along with my friends and relatives, who knew about his story.

**Like I said … Good Luck to the NRA with that.

HondaV65 on November 2, 2011 at 2:23 PM

Nice try, Honda.

But unfortunately you forgot one thing — by talking to Politico and naming Cain, this woman already broke the NDA.

By talking to her friends and relatives, she broke the NDA.

This is a summary dismissal waiting to happen. Unless she can prove she signed under duress, which is darn near impossible since she cashed the check AND has people already stating she had problems, she is toast in front of a judge.

That’s why this morning her ambulance-chaser is starting to whine that she doesn’t want to talk. Cain called her bluff — she smeared him by name publicly, which breaks the NDA, and now she and the people who tried to leak this are cornered.

northdallasthirty on November 2, 2011 at 2:28 PM

Most people will want some facts of substance, and since there are none, except in the fantasy mind of a few posters, who I am afraid are probably typing with one hand on the keyboard and the other, well the other.
This is a non-issue to most people, until actual facts…and so far the facts have been.
Sexual harassment…no
Sexual intimidation…no
Intimidating hand gestures…no
Some one some where wants to talk about something….

right2bright on November 2, 2011 at 2:30 PM

They would circle the wagons. And you know what? That makes them better then us. Politically and ethically.

No, it doesn’t make them “better than us.”

Especially not ethically.

It certainly makes them effective politically. And they have the media on their side for the most part, which gives them that necessary cover that they need to “kill” accusations by simply starving the stories of oxygen or changing the subject.

Politics and ethics, however, are mutually exclusive. By holding our candidates to a higher standard (or at least trying to) than they hold theirs to, we are showing them what ethics actually are. Not that they care. But we do.

To suggest the political left – the OWS crowd, more or less – are more ethical than we are because they circle the wagons at the first sign of adversity no matter what the facts are, where we pursue facts and try to act accordingly (even if where they lead is not pleasant or is inconvenient), is unfair.

Good Lt on November 2, 2011 at 2:30 PM

Looks like the lynch mob hung itself. How ironic.

Christien on November 2, 2011 at 2:31 PM

How many people would have been privy to discovering the details of the settlement outside the lawyers, the plaintiffs, and the top officers of the NRA?
Lawdawg86 on November 2, 2011 at 2:04 PM

Also any secretary or support staff member who ever typed up any of the correspondance or contracts regarding the incident or listened to any of the pricipals discuss the same. Which means just about anyone who worked at either the law firm or the NRA.

tommyboy on November 2, 2011 at 2:31 PM

by talking to Politico and naming Cain, this woman already broke the NDA.

By talking to her friends and relatives, she broke the NDA.

This is a summary dismissal waiting to happen. Unless she can prove she signed under duress, which is darn near impossible since she cashed the check AND has people already stating she had problems, she is toast in front of a judge.

That’s why this morning her ambulance-chaser is starting to whine that she doesn’t want to talk. Cain called her bluff — she smeared him by name publicly, which breaks the NDA, and now she and the people who tried to leak this are cornered.

northdallasthirty on November 2, 2011 at 2:28 PM

Those are all excellent points. I don’t believe they can be logically refuted.

whatcat on November 2, 2011 at 2:32 PM

northdallasthirty on November 2, 2011 at 2:28 PM

It’s useless posting to him…he claimed that their were charges filed against Cain, and when asked for the links, he slinked away.
He is just a drive by, whining about Cain, but has nothing but his fantasies to drive him.
Let him rant, he seems to, ummmm, errrrr, enjoy it?

right2bright on November 2, 2011 at 2:32 PM

But can you imagine if this BS was playing out with a Democratic candidate? They would circle the wagons.
tottoritodd on November 2, 2011 at 2:20 PM

They circle the wagons and we make a circular firing squad.

petefrt on November 2, 2011 at 2:33 PM

“I can’t say what I saw, but if I did..oh boy!”

Seriously? This passes for news? People either need to put up or shut up. It is awfully easy to smear someone through vague implication. But until this turd has some actual statements with specifics to make concerning these so called incidents of harassment, why are we chasing phantoms?

NotCoach on November 2, 2011 at 2:33 PM

Herman was done after he displayed an appalling lack of knowledge about foreign policy issues some months back. After he ended up not being done then, the next time he was done was when he said he liked Alan Greenspan. After he ended up not being done then, the next time he was done was when he said he could see himself trading Gitmo detainees for hypothetically captured US troops. After he ended up not being done then, the next time he was done was when he said he wanted to put an electric fence on the Mexican border. After he ended up not being done then, the next time he was done was when his campaign purchased copies of his own book. After he ended up not being done then, the next time he was done was when he “flip-flopped” on abortion. After he ended up not being done then, the next time he was done was when he didn’t come out and defend himself quickly enough about the sexual harrassment allegations charges. After he ended up not being done then, the next time he was done was when he…keep swinging, you chicken-little hystericals, you PerryKrishnas, and other wishful thinkers – you’ll make contact with the ball one of these times. Right? Hopefully? ROFL! :)

Bizarro No. 1 on November 2, 2011 at 2:34 PM

Which means just about anyone who worked at either the law firm or the NRA.

tommyboy on November 2, 2011 at 2:31 PM

Which means jail time if they come forward…sorry but it isn’t that “easy”…

right2bright on November 2, 2011 at 2:34 PM

Update: Some are saying that this indicates Romney as the source of the leak, but I’m not terribly convinced that a one-time donation means much. Romney has less to fear with Cain as his main opponent than others in the race, and besides, no one knows whether Anderson ever knew about the incidents at all. Other board members say they didn’t. YMMV, however.

I would expect all of the campaigns to be involved in opposition research. Everyone is supposed to believe that none of the campaigns are doing opposition research?

Dr Evil on November 2, 2011 at 2:34 PM

Bizarro No. 1 on November 2, 2011 at 2:34 PM

did you paste that from Mother Jones or Media Matters?

right2bright on November 2, 2011 at 2:34 PM

Some are saying that this indicates Romney as the source of the leak, but I’m not terribly convinced that a one-time donation means much. Romney has less to fear with Cain as his main opponent than others in the race, and besides, no one knows whether Anderson ever knew about the incidents at all. Other board members say they didn’t. YMMV, however.

Bingo.

Buy Danish on November 2, 2011 at 2:35 PM

They circle the wagons and we make a circular firing squad.

petefrt on November 2, 2011 at 2:33 PM

Ha, no kidding…

right2bright on November 2, 2011 at 2:35 PM

Exactly, if there is no “there” there this will all blow over. This isnt even hurting him right now, its actually helping galvanize his supporters, but he needs this story to be over soon.

nswider on November 2, 2011 at 2:27 PM

LOL… the Romneybot praying that Cain maintains his standings in the poll just long enough to allow Romney to wrap the primaries up early.

Sorry… not going to happen.

:)

TheRightMan on November 2, 2011 at 2:35 PM

But can you imagine if this BS was playing out with a Democratic candidate? They would circle the wagons.
tottoritodd on November 2, 2011 at 2:20 PM

They circle the wagons and we make a circular firing squad.

petefrt on November 2, 2011 at 2:33 PM

You just described the Democrat’s strategy to get Obama reelected.

Dr Evil on November 2, 2011 at 2:36 PM

“I can’t say what I saw, but if I did..oh boy!”

Seriously? This passes for news?
NotCoach on November 2, 2011 at 2:33 PM

I could tell you if it passes for news or not, but since I’m sure somebody else signed a non-disclosure agreement somewhere – I can’t.

whatcat on November 2, 2011 at 2:36 PM

northdallasthirty on November 2, 2011 at 2:28 PM

You know what? I really don’t care. Because I know if the NRA goes after her – that in itself will be a national story and she’ll get high-profile pro bono legal representation.

So – it really doesn’t get any better for Cain if it goes that route.

And her story is coming out one way or the other.

HondaV65 on November 2, 2011 at 2:37 PM

Which means jail time if they come forward…sorry but it isn’t that “easy”…
right2bright on November 2, 2011 at 2:34 PM

Jail time for what? There would be civil repercussions (which don’t scare libs at all) but I know of no criminal repercussoins for a lib secretary calling politico and disclosing the existance of a sexual harrassment settlement agreement between Mrs. X and the NRA and involving Cain.

tommyboy on November 2, 2011 at 2:38 PM

On this, as even HA noted in the Green Room a week and a half ago:
Rick Perry’s Prime Directive: Destroy Cain

whatcat on November 2, 2011 at 2:15 PM

OK, but Politico got this tip over a month ago. Perry wasn’t even thinking about Cain then. Perry was on top then and Romney still couldn’t break into the 30s.

kerrhome on November 2, 2011 at 2:38 PM

She brought it up. That’s what’s missing in all of this navel-gazing.

Uh no. No one knows who brought it up. She only said something through her attorney AFTER the media got ahold of it.

ArmyAunt on November 2, 2011 at 2:39 PM

TheRightMan on November 2, 2011 at 2:35 PM

Ok, but if my guy was in fourth place I would be the one praying, not telling the supporter of the guy whose either leading or in second place in most polls. Its a long hill to climb for you, must be nice to be so confident, still waiting for a poll that supports it.

nswider on November 2, 2011 at 2:40 PM

I can see why so many don’t want to go into politics. It’s a dirty, nasty game, and it seems once one is in, the conscience, and good will go out the door.

capejasmine on November 2, 2011 at 2:40 PM

As long as we keep wringing our hands and ‘re-posting’ this bull***t… we keep this ‘Gotcha nonsense’ alive… they win.

Thats how they kick our a$$es everytime…

We play their Bull***t games.

deedtrader on November 2, 2011 at 2:41 PM

Those are all excellent points. I don’t believe they can be logically refuted.

whatcat on November 2, 2011 at 2:32 PM

You know what? I really don’t care

HondaV65 on November 2, 2011 at 2:37 PM

Ok then.

:)

JohnTant on November 2, 2011 at 2:41 PM

That’s why this morning her ambulance-chaser is starting to whine that she doesn’t want to talk. Cain called her bluff — she smeared him by name publicly, which breaks the NDA, and now she and the people who tried to leak this are cornered.

northdallasthirty on November 2, 2011 at 2:28 PM

If she broke the NDA, can the NRA go after the money she received?

PrettyD_Vicious on November 2, 2011 at 2:42 PM

Cain has bungled this so badly I’d be hard-pressed to support him even if it turned out he was clean as the driven snow.

He seems to be on a reverse learning curve — getting worse each day in how he handles it. His comments on Fox were just stupid. Does he think about any of this? Does he have a consciousness of the battle? I believe Dan Riehl when he says Cain never even wanted the presidency.

Romney and Perry are two sides of the same coin — nowhere men. Neither has a chance against the Left.

Gingrich is the only cunning and able-bodied warrior we have. But he seems fairly schizoid — preternatually lucid half the time, a tone-deaf dunderhead the other half.

rrpjr on November 2, 2011 at 2:43 PM

And her story is coming out one way or the other.

HondaV65 on November 2, 2011 at 2:37 PM

Unfortunately, Cainiacs refuse to acknowledge this… sigh.

If Cain’s campaign can’t handle this dirt during primary season, they think he can during the general when the media/Dems pull out all the stops?

I bet they are lining up every single woman that Cain has crossed path with and cueing them for the TV shows.

By the time they are through with him, even Bill Clinton will look like an angel.

Compare and contrast this with Perry’s handling of the “racist rock” incident. His campaign put out all the facts on day 1 and effectively killed off the story.

TheRightMan on November 2, 2011 at 2:43 PM

northdallasthirty on November 2, 2011 at 2:28 PM

But unfortunately you forgot one thing — by talking to Politico and naming Cain, this woman already broke the NDA.

Except one of the authors already claimed that the source was from the NRA, which by definition eliminates the woman in question.

Fail.

By talking to her friends and relatives, she broke the NDA.

Not if she told them after teh incidnet but before the settlement.

JohnGalt23 on November 2, 2011 at 2:44 PM

did you paste that from Mother Jones or Media Matters?

right2bright on November 2, 2011 at 2:34 PM

If you’re saying I had to leave the premises here at HA to gather up with all of those examples of Cain being done, I am offended. :)

Bizarro No. 1 on November 2, 2011 at 2:44 PM

and everybody was aware of it,” he continued.  “It was only a matter of time because so many people were aware of what took place, so many people were aware of her situation, the fact she left—everybody knew with the campaign that this would eventually come up.”

If everybody was aware of it how come we haven’t heard of it before? Is everybody at the National Restaurant Association under this legal confidentiality agreement?

DSchoen on November 2, 2011 at 2:45 PM

Romney and Perry are two sides of the same coin — nowhere men. Neither has a chance against the Left.

rrpjr on November 2, 2011 at 2:43 PM

Sure… just like Reagan and Bush I were two sides of the same coin. /sarc

TheRightMan on November 2, 2011 at 2:45 PM

Gingrich is the only cunning and able-bodied warrior we have. But he seems fairly schizoid — preternatually lucid half the time, a tone-deaf dunderhead the other half.

rrpjr on November 2, 2011 at 2:43 PM

It’s not even that he blows it half the time. He gets it right so often.

But when he blows it, he blows it spectacularly, and at the absolute worst possible moment.

JohnGalt23 on November 2, 2011 at 2:46 PM

Uh no. No one knows who brought it up. She only said something through her attorney AFTER the media got ahold of it.

ArmyAunt on November 2, 2011 at 2:39 PM

There’s such a thing as Occam’s Razor.

NRA/Cain had no incentive to bring it up, so they’re ruled out. The counsels on either side couldn’t bring it up else they’d be disbarred. The staffers involved in the relevant correspondence couldn’t bring it up else they’d be fired, sued, and wouldn’t get a job of trust again for the rest of their lives.

That leaves Ms. Anonymous as the most likely original source. Politico pulls a lot of things out of their butts, but this isn’t something they made up. Someone went to them, and Occam suggests the person with a reasonable incentive is someone who, say, is POed about an imagined slight from years ago.

Of course, I suppose there could be some conspiracy theory that this woman mentioned the NDA to a friend who then later went to Politico, but that still doesn’t refute the basic fact that this woman is the most likely original source.

JohnTant on November 2, 2011 at 2:46 PM

Jail time for what? There would be civil repercussions (which don’t scare libs at all) but I know of no criminal repercussoins for a lib secretary calling politico and disclosing the existance of a sexual harrassment settlement agreement between Mrs. X and the NRA and involving Cain.

tommyboy on November 2, 2011 at 2:38 PM

Releasing privileged information means breaking the law…and yes you can go to jail and lose your law license.

right2bright on November 2, 2011 at 2:48 PM

Which means just about anyone who worked at either the law firm or the NRA.

tommyboy on November 2, 2011 at 2:31 PM

Which means jail time if they come forward…sorry but it isn’t that “easy”…

right2bright on November 2, 2011 at 2:34 PM

“Jail time” for violating a civil NDA? I don’t think so…

LASue on November 2, 2011 at 2:48 PM

JohnTant on November 2, 2011 at 2:46 PM

your reasoning for why NRA staff wouldnt release the info applies to the woman also, so its just as likely to be someone on staff as it is to be her. possibly more likely since the nda might specify some hefty penalties that a staffer not bound by it wouldnt face.

chasdal on November 2, 2011 at 2:50 PM

Cain has bungled this so badly I’d be hard-pressed to support him even if it turned out he was clean as the driven snow.

He seems to be on a reverse learning curve — getting worse each day in how he handles it. His comments on Fox were just stupid. Does he think about any of this? Does he have a consciousness of the battle? I believe Dan Riehl when he says Cain never even wanted the presidency.

rrpjr on November 2, 2011 at 2:43 PM

He’s bungling his campaign so badly that’s he dropped from over 30% in the polls to the single digits. Oh wait – you said Cain, not Perry. My bad!

Bizarro No. 1 on November 2, 2011 at 2:50 PM

That’s why this morning her ambulance-chaser is starting to whine that she doesn’t want to talk. Cain called her bluff — she smeared him by name publicly, which breaks the NDA, and now she and the people who tried to leak this are cornered.

northdallasthirty on November 2, 2011 at 2:28 PM

If she broke the NDA, can the NRA go after the money she received?

PrettyD_Vicious on November 2, 2011 at 2:42 PM

Sounds like they’d have a pretty good case. The problem is that it would seem petty and be cost-prohibitive. Would only have value as a warning shot to other employees who could get the idea in their heads after they’ve signed a like agreement.

whatcat on November 2, 2011 at 2:50 PM

JohnGalt23 on November 2, 2011 at 2:46 PM

Correct.

rrpjr on November 2, 2011 at 2:51 PM

As long as people like you think it’s true…that is all that counts.
That’s all the MSM worries about, is placing doubt in weak willed peoples minds.
Enough stories about a person, and most of you will buckle…notice the bait and switch, of course you didn’t but you fell for it…sucker.
First the sexual harassment, no, it was sexual intimidation, no it was a hand gesture, no, actually it was the way he answered something that didn’t happen.
And you, like many others, just fall for what the MSM is doing…a conned man never admits he has been conned…but I just laid it out for you…and they will, and are doing, the same to Perry, Newt, Bachmann (she is done), Romney, Rubio (potential VP)…and one by one you will fall for it.
Oh, you will defend Perry, but others will do what you have done, and attack Perry.
Just a bunch of weak minded, putty brained, easily led voters…so easy for them to manipulate you…sucker.

right2bright on November 2, 2011 at 2:21 PM

OK, this is simple-minded blather from a Cainiac, but you win the brass balls award after sitting here during Rock-Gate preaching about how Perry had to be hung out to dry by our side to show we don’t tolerate that stuff. What happened to that story????????

Southernblogger on November 2, 2011 at 2:51 PM

right2bright on November 2, 2011 at 2:48 PM

not this kind of info, only info classified by the govt. there is civil law and there is criminal law. find me the criminal statute that would send someone to jail for breaking an NDA

chasdal on November 2, 2011 at 2:51 PM

The counsels on either side couldn’t bring it up else they’d be disbarred. The staffers involved in the relevant correspondence couldn’t bring it up else they’d be fired, sued, and wouldn’t get a job of trust again for the rest of their lives.

People do things carrying such consequences all the time if they think the reward is great enough. None of them think they will get caught and they go for it. Heck, Clinton was even sneaking blow jobs from empty headed interns right in the oval office – damn the torpedos, full speed ahead, nobody will ever know……..

tommyboy on November 2, 2011 at 2:52 PM

If you’re saying I had to leave the premises here at HA to gather up with all of those examples of Cain being done, I am offended. :)

Bizarro No. 1 on November 2, 2011 at 2:44 PM

No, they are just nonsensical talking points of the left…figured you were too lazy to keep copies, so it would have been easier just to google them.
But a good summary of what the left wants us to embrace…it shows how easy it is to manipulate a weak mind.
Seems like “every time he was done” by the MSM, his poll numbers went up…not all of us are so stupid as to buy into what the left wants us to.
A conned man never sees he is conned…you are a sucker, and the MSM loves you for it.

right2bright on November 2, 2011 at 2:53 PM

He’s bungling his campaign so badly that’s he dropped from over 30% in the polls to the single digits. Oh wait – you said Cain, not Perry. My bad!
Bizarro No. 1 on November 2, 2011 at 2:50 PM

Have you noticed how it seems some Perry supporters have issues with projection?

whatcat on November 2, 2011 at 2:53 PM

Fold Politico. Your sex card has been trumped. Or maybe folded, spindled and mutilated.
Nobody is “coming forward” about a discharge settlement.
Leave the table Politico. You are intellectually broke. Reputation thrown away on another failed attempt to keep teh Won in office.

Caststeel on November 2, 2011 at 2:53 PM

You know who this helps?

The question is, does it help him enough to make it plausible that he’s the source?

didymus on November 2, 2011 at 2:55 PM

Which means jail time if they come forward…sorry but it isn’t that “easy”…
right2bright on November 2, 2011 at 2:34 PM

If you’re this clueless – you shouldn’t comment.

There’s no legal penalty for violating a non-disclosure agreement that didn’t even involve a court.

It’s totally civil.

You Cainlusionals – no Judge is going to throw these women in jail so they don’t talk.

Sorry.

HondaV65 on November 2, 2011 at 2:56 PM

WASHINGTON (AP) — Despite her lawyer’s claims, a woman who accused Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain of sexual harassment in the 1990s is reluctant to talk about the episode in public.

Since we’re all speculating here, what if this woman is reluctant to come forward because it has nothing to do with monetary gain or loss? What if the original complaints are true: that both of these women filed complaints that were found to be baseless and false, yet they “settled” with the NRA’s lawyers and moved on? What if this woman’s lawyer is looking for his/her fifteen minutes of fame, but the lady has no compunction to extend her baseless accusation or for that matter is choosing not to destroy Cain’s ambitions based on lies, or false testimony? How would Politico, (or those who despise Cain), deal with this scenario?

Rovin on November 2, 2011 at 2:56 PM

chasdal on November 2, 2011 at 2:50 PM

Maybe, but then from many if not all accounts, Cain was well liked at the NRA. I’m not sold that a staffer at the NRA in a position to know about this NDA/situation would a) think to make a copy of it in case it came in handy 15 years later or b) would hate Cain enough to sow rumors about it in the first place.

Not an impossible situation, but more likely that the woman is the original source since she would (theoretically) still have an axe to grind.

JohnTant on November 2, 2011 at 2:56 PM

Releasing privileged information means breaking the law…and yes you can go to jail and lose your law license.
right2bright on November 2, 2011 at 2:48 PM

Not everything that is illegal is a criminal offense which carries jail time. Most secretaries have no law license to lose and I know of no criminal statute prohibiting what I described – this isn’t insider financial information. If you know of an applicable one please let us know.

tommyboy on November 2, 2011 at 2:56 PM

Bizarro No. 1 on November 2, 2011 at 2:50 PM

Are you suggesting Cain hasn’t bungled it?

Are you using polls as a substitute for your own judgment?

rrpjr on November 2, 2011 at 2:57 PM

Good Lt on November 2, 2011 at 2:30 PM

I am sorry, but I disagree, although I have no doubt you are an ethical person.

You are saying that we should hold our candidates to a higher degree of ethics. That is true by our very nature, I think as conservatives.

But what I am saying is that we are being held to a “different degree of ethics” not a higher one.

Imagine you are watching your child play in a football game. Your child’s team is playing by the rules, but the other team is literally punching and hitting with sticks. Not just small things but blatant. Literally your kid is the QB and the opposing team is shooting him with a BB gun right after the snap. Meanwhile, every time your team makes makes a stop on D, they are called for a penalty, regardless if they actually commit one.

Sorry for the football analogy, but that is what came to me. Any sport would do.

And to add to it, this has been going on for a while. Not just one game. Is it ethical for you to let your kid keep playing? Or do you say to your kid, fight back?

I find it unethical to let your kid not fight back.

And that is what we are facing. A team fighting dirty (Dems) with a ref who hates us (mainstream media). So yeah I disagree with you on ethics in this case. I find it unethical to play by their rules, which is what has been going on for too long. Meanwhile, as we kill each other, American is dying.

tottoritodd on November 2, 2011 at 2:57 PM

JohnTant on November 2, 2011 at 2:56 PM

they wouldnt need to make a copy of it 15 years ago, they could make a copy 15 days ago. you think that paperwork was just thrown out after awhile?

chasdal on November 2, 2011 at 2:59 PM

Releasing privileged information means breaking the law…and yes you can go to jail and lose your law license.
right2bright on November 2, 2011 at 2:48 PM

You’re an idiot.

The non-disclosure agreement was a CIVIL agreement. There’s no legal penalty for breaking a civil agreement.

In fact – the NRA would have to sue her in court to get anything from her.

YOu simply don’t know what you are talking about.

HondaV65 on November 2, 2011 at 2:59 PM

How would Politico, (or those who despise Cain), deal with this scenario?

Rovin on November 2, 2011 at 2:56 PM

Heavy drinking and weeping?

katy the mean old lady on November 2, 2011 at 3:00 PM

There’s such a thing as Occam’s Razor.

JohnTant on November 2, 2011 at 2:46 PM

Motivation: revenge and money, getting even for getting fired – and a pay day. Not necessarily in that order.

Dr Evil on November 2, 2011 at 3:01 PM

There’s no legal penalty for breaking a civil agreement.

Well, there is a legal penalty but it’s a civil legal penalty in the form of a lawsuit for damages.

tommyboy on November 2, 2011 at 3:01 PM

I think there’s more substance to a Romney/Rove connection than a Perry one. Ed seems to want to paint Perry with it but, for the reasons you point out, the Romney stream seems more salient. We just don’t know until we know, then we’ll know.

JonPrichard on November 2, 2011 at 2:21 PM

In the end, I don’t think the source of the story is all that big of a deal. Candidates research their opponents and leak damaging information to the media at opportune times– that’s just how politics goes, democracy encourages it. That doesn’t mean candidates should do whatever it takes to win, but I don’t consider leaking the existence of two sexual harassment settlements to the media to be crossing the line. Its part of the vetting process.

If Cain winds up as the nominee, he will be thankful that this came out now instead of in the general election. Romney is behind this revelation, but that just goes to show his preparedness. I don’t like Mitt and won’t be supporting him in the primaries, but I don’t begrudge Mitt for leaking damaging, substantive information about his co-frontrunner to the media. If the polls are right, Cain has a serious shot at winning the nomination. His life is now public, and any information about the sexual harassment allegations needs to be disclosed asap so that voters can decide for themselves how scandalous Cain’s hand gestures were. There is no point in dragging out the media feeding frenzy in something like this, the details will have to come out.

Lawdawg86 on November 2, 2011 at 3:04 PM

Recognize the card. This was 20 years or so ago. It was an insignificant incident embarrassing to the one fired but no one else cared. The fired fool is made into a victim by choosing appropriate verbiage by a third party with an agenda.

No new ideas means D’rats must simply repeat SOS failures and lies.

Caststeel on November 2, 2011 at 3:04 PM

How would Politico, (or those who despise Cain), deal with this scenario?

Rovin on November 2, 2011 at 2:56 PM

Heavy drinking and weeping?

katy the mean old lady on November 2, 2011 at 3:00 PM

Politico heavy drinking and weeping over Big Fail. I would pay to watch that online.

Dr Evil on November 2, 2011 at 3:05 PM

they wouldnt need to make a copy of it 15 years ago, they could make a copy 15 days ago. you think that paperwork was just thrown out after awhile?

chasdal on November 2, 2011 at 2:59 PM

So now an existing NRA staffer who knew about the situation (or had reason to go on the fishing expedition to begin with), knew to dig up the NDA (and is high enough to have a position of trust to have access to it in the first place) hates Cain enough to endanger his job and risk a lawsuit to leak a $35k settlement.

Again, not sold. Legal documents aren’t kept haphazardly where any entry-level person can idly find them, and a person in a position of trust wouldn’t endanger it so lightly.

There are a lot of leaps of faith necessary to assume some NRA employee leaked, but not many needed to believe that the woman did.

JohnTant on November 2, 2011 at 3:06 PM

I think the left wing media will use this to force the republican party to reject Cain, then they will harp about how the republicans are so racist for not backing up Cain because he is black.

AverageJoe on November 2, 2011 at 3:07 PM

Rush pointed out on todays radio show that Steven C. Anderson (the man who replaced Cain as chief executive officer of the NRA) is one of Romney’s main supporters. He is also one of very few people who had access to this information about Cain. http://amerpundit.com/2011/11/01/did-romney-supporter-leak-cain-allegations-to-politico/

via http://www.breitbart.tv/gop-pollster-i-witnessed-cains-behavior/?utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitterfeed#IDComment215915869

kerrhome on November 2, 2011 at 3:07 PM

In fact – the NRA would have to sue her in court to get anything from her.
YOu simply don’t know what you are talking about.
HondaV65 on November 2, 2011 at 2:59 PM

listen you o so obvious anti-Cain harpie, something shook this accuser up big time for her to want to keep her trap shut, either a big fine or suit. She’s no better than a capitalist-piggie prostitute if she squawks for money and that should discredit her comments.

gracie on November 2, 2011 at 3:07 PM

Chris Wilson is as honest as they come and for anyone to infer he is saying this because his organization does polling for Rick Perry is one of the most disgusting comments I have seen on here.

This is one woman who will never support Cain if he is the last man standing. No woman I know will now support him but then a lot of us have been on the receiving end and it is something you don’t forget. When I heard his explanation on Greta, I knew there was more to her complaint and now Cain admits there is more.

He was a man of power who thought he could get what he wanted from a much younger person. Yet some of you are defending him and it is her fault for not taking it I guess.

After the emails from his SuperPAC this morning they paid to send out about the media lynching a black man and asking for donations, they can take it and shove it. The media didn’t do the sexual harassment.

Cannot believe what I just read.

This is about a man who to this day is still changing his story when it seems pretty cut and dry. Obviously some of you have never seen a sexual harasser in action. They are demeaning and then say they didn’t consider it sexual harassment and that the women are overreacting. He cannot even decide if he will allow the woman to speak.

Was steamed about Cain and the people tying this to race but to try and tie it to Perry because Wilson told the truth is even worse.

PhiKapMom on November 2, 2011 at 3:09 PM

Well, there is a legal penalty but it’s a civil legal penalty in the form of a lawsuit for damages.

tommyboy on November 2, 2011 at 3:01 PM

That’s right – but that’s not what right2bright is saying – he’s alleging the women could go to jail …

He’s incorrect.

NRA will have to sue these women and it’s doubtful they’ll get any more than a refund of the $35K. If National Enquirer offers them $50K for the story – they profit by breaking the agreement.

Not sure the NRA would take the women to court. It would be a national story and these aren’t rich women. If they were actually harassed then it would be very hard for a judge to make a judgment against them.

In any case – it’s not an easy affair for the NRA.

But … I want to know – why are the Cainlusionals hiding behind the legal system? What’s wrong with letting these women tell their stories?

HondaV65 on November 2, 2011 at 3:09 PM

If you’re this clueless – you shouldn’t comment.

HondaV65 on November 2, 2011 at 2:56 PM

Take your own advice…notice I stated “law license”, there are severe penalties for breaking attorney/client privilege and that extends to the para-legals who handle the contracts.
I never mentioned “non-disclosure”, I stated “privileged information”, that language pertains to attorney’s, as my follow up sentence explains…next time, learn to read before commenting, you are clueless.
And now, where are those links you have that states the fact that sexual harassment chargers were filed against Cain?….I am afraid you are the one who is clueless…making false accusations, and not having the huevos to back them up or apologize for making them.

right2bright on November 2, 2011 at 3:09 PM

listen you o so obvious anti-Cain harpie, something shook this accuser up big time for her to want to keep her trap shut, either a big fine or suit. She’s no better than a capitalist-piggie prostitute if she squawks for money and that should discredit her comments.

gracie on November 2, 2011 at 3:07 PM

Or the payoff wasn’t high enough and the lawyer is telling her to take a walk.

katy the mean old lady on November 2, 2011 at 3:10 PM

More unsubstantiated rumors?

Arghhh…

Talking about stuff you can’t talk about, leading people to conclusions that may not be correct..

… is just as much a lie, as outright lying.

If you can’t speak the facts, then don’t speak, otherwise you’re just as wrong as whomever your supporting or accusing.

Lawrence on November 2, 2011 at 3:11 PM

Not an impossible situation, but more likely that the woman is the original source since she would (theoretically) still have an axe to grind.

JohnTant on November 2, 2011 at 2:56 PM

How about her self-promoting lawyer friend as the original source? He knew about her severance agreement through their personal friendship. Then when Cain became a frontrunner, he suggested to her that she re-open the matter, then let it slip to Politico that she had the goods on Cain. Mr. Lawyer jumped the gun, and now she declines to proceed.

By the way, today Rush pointed out that an earlier WaPo (I think) story reported that the lawyer said he’d never been to the NRA offices and the NDA with his client was probably negotiated either by fax or by phone. Plus he no longer had the file on it. In other words, it was so routine a severance that little attention was paid to it at the time. (Note: Rush said a subsequent version of the story in the same newspaper edited out this part.)

petefrt on November 2, 2011 at 3:11 PM

That’s right – but that’s not what right2bright is saying – he’s alleging the women could go to jail …

HondaV65 on November 2, 2011 at 3:09 PM

Man, you are just an outright liar…show me where I stated that…that is two “absolutes” you posted today that were outright lies…good grief, you do have a problem with the truth when it invades your little world.

right2bright on November 2, 2011 at 3:11 PM

listen you o so obvious anti-Cain harpie, something shook this accuser up big time for her to want to keep her trap shut, either a big fine or suit. She’s no better than a capitalist-piggie prostitute if she squawks for money and that should discredit her comments.

gracie on November 2, 2011 at 3:07 PM

Who says she doesn’t want to talk? You don’t even know the woman’s name and you believe all this.

Maybe she’s holding out for money. It’s likely she’ll lose the $35K if the NRA takes her to court – maybe she can’t pay it right now?

But if the National Enquirer pays her $50K …

Look man – the story’s coming out. You won’t stop it. This woman WILL talk.

HondaV65 on November 2, 2011 at 3:12 PM

No, they are just nonsensical talking points of the left…figured you were too lazy to keep copies, so it would have been easier just to google them.
But a good summary of what the left wants us to embrace…it shows how easy it is to manipulate a weak mind.
Seems like “every time he was done” by the MSM, his poll numbers went up…not all of us are so stupid as to buy into what the left wants us to.
A conned man never sees he is conned…you are a sucker, and the MSM loves you for it.

right2bright on November 2, 2011 at 2:53 PM

LOL I’ve noticed a recurring problem with your reading comprehension here at HA – do you own a sarcasm/irony detector, or, maybe for humor’s sake, you’re pretending you don’t have one?

Bizarro No. 1 on November 2, 2011 at 3:12 PM

NRA will have to sue these women and it’s doubtful they’ll get any more than a refund of the $35K. If National Enquirer offers them $50K for the story – they profit by breaking the agreement.

HondaV65 on November 2, 2011 at 3:09 PM

Assuming the NDA is missing boilerplate language forbidding the woman from selling or otherwise profiting from disclosure.

And that’s a really lousy assumption.

JohnTant on November 2, 2011 at 3:12 PM

But … I want to know – why are the Cainlusionals hiding behind the legal system? What’s wrong with letting these women tell their stories?

HondaV65 on November 2, 2011 at 3:09 PM

Ummmm, just a guess, but maybe some of us believe in the rule of law…that a contract is just that, a contract and should be upheld.
Of course, if one was unethical, and made unsubstantiated charges, like you have, I could see your confusion in ethics.

right2bright on November 2, 2011 at 3:13 PM

Man, you are just an outright liar…show me where I stated that…that is two “absolutes” you posted today that were outright lies…good grief, you do have a problem with the truth when it invades your little world.

right2bright on November 2, 2011 at 3:11 PM

Uhm …

Which means jail time if they come forward…sorry but it isn’t that “easy”…
right2bright on November 2, 2011 at 2:34 PM

HondaV65 on November 2, 2011 at 3:13 PM

PhiKapMom on November 2, 2011 at 3:09 PM

What is Cain being defended from?

NotCoach on November 2, 2011 at 3:16 PM

LOL I’ve noticed a recurring problem with your reading comprehension here at HA – do you own a sarcasm/irony detector, or, maybe for humor’s sake, you’re pretending you don’t have one?

Bizarro No. 1 on November 2, 2011 at 3:12 PM

Actually, it’s rather funny, you fall into it with the “electric fence” bit, and the “gitmo”, those were exactly what the liberal rags were stating and you bought into it…but of course you would never see you as being manipulated….just that every talking point you stated were exactly what was on Huffpo, Media Matters, Mother Jones, DailyKos…just a coincidence I suppose.
And of course Rubio, Perry, Romney, etc, they will all have people creating a list just like you did…you will still support your man, but the others will pull out their list, like you did, and never realize what is happening.
And I will accuse them of the same and they will say “How ironic”…of course you don’t see it, that’s the point….duhhhhh!

right2bright on November 2, 2011 at 3:18 PM

On this, as even HA noted in the Green Room a week and a half ago:
Rick Perry’s Prime Directive: Destroy Cain
whatcat on November 2, 2011 at 2:15 PM

OK, but Politico got this tip over a month ago. Perry wasn’t even thinking about Cain then. Perry was on top then and Romney still couldn’t break into the 30s.
kerrhome on November 2, 2011 at 2:38 PM

From blog entry:
Interviewed today on KTOK’s Mullins in the Morning, [Chris] Wilson”

Regardless of when the Perry camp did it’s oppo-info dirt digging – and I would expect them to have done it early on – what we have here, today, is a Perry-backer delivering the hit job. Hence, the blog entry.

whatcat on November 2, 2011 at 3:19 PM

NRA will have to sue these women and it’s doubtful they’ll get any more than a refund of the $35K. If National Enquirer offers them $50K for the story – they profit by breaking the agreement.

HondaV65 on November 2, 2011 at 3:09 PM

Assuming the NDA is missing boilerplate language forbidding the woman from selling or otherwise profiting from disclosure.

And that’s a really lousy assumption.

JohnTant on November 2, 2011 at 3:12 PM

True. Also to be factored in would be the possibility of punitive damages in such a suit.

whatcat on November 2, 2011 at 3:22 PM

From blog entry:
“Interviewed today on KTOK’s Mullins in the Morning, [Chris] Wilson”

Regardless of when the Perry camp did it’s oppo-info dirt digging – and I would expect them to have done it early on – what we have here, today, is a Perry-backer delivering the hit job. Hence, the blog entry.

whatcat on November 2, 2011 at 3:19 PM


Did Romney Supporter Leak Cain Allegations to Politico?

by Stephan Tawney on November 1, 2011
Joel P. Bennett, lawyer for one of the women who accused Herman Cain of sexual harassment (but couldn’t prove her case), apparently told a CNN panel this evening that his understanding is the story was “leaked to Politico from a Board member of the National Restaurant Association”.
On a completely unrelated note, Steven C. Anderson — the man who took over as chief executive officer of the NRA after Cain’s departure — is a big Romney supporter. It’s entirely possible — likely even — that he would have been privy to information regarding the settlement.

Dr Evil on November 2, 2011 at 3:23 PM

what we have here, today, is a Perry-backer delivering the hit job. Hence, the blog entry.

whatcat on November 2, 2011 at 3:19 PM

Dude also backs Karl Rove.

Can you prove Rick Perry gave him the info? Oh wait – no you can’t – because the guy coming forward says he was a personal witness to the harassment.

You cannot make a logical leap from a Perry/Rove supporter to Perry/Rove. Sorry – but you need proof.

You insist that proof be provided before Cain is convicted of harassment right? Why don’t you allow the same courtesy to Perry?

HondaV65 on November 2, 2011 at 3:24 PM

This woman WILL talk.
HondaV65 on November 2, 2011 at 3:12 PM

at her own peril and for money. you know what she’ll be called and that’s what she will be. she got the better deal 15 years ago.

gracie on November 2, 2011 at 3:25 PM

He was a man of power who thought he could get what he wanted from a much younger person. Yet some of you are defending him and it is her fault for not taking it I guess.

After the emails from his SuperPAC this morning they paid to send out about the media lynching a black man and asking for donations, they can take it and shove it. The media didn’t do the sexual harassment.PhiKapMom on November 2, 2011 at 3:09 PM

Sure glad that YOU know all the facts. We can all rest easy now that Cain has been judged and hanged by our resident “mom”.

Rovin on November 2, 2011 at 3:26 PM

This doesn’t pass the giggle test. The only people who have relevant information about the incidents are Cain, who says he’s innocent, the women, who say he’s guilty, and the restaurant association’s independent investigators, who don’t seem to have rendered judgment on the merits of the accusations.

KingGold on November 2, 2011 at 1:33 PM

You don’t know who knows what. That’s the problem. Cain is doing nothing to answer these charges.

I don’t get this! If someone accused me of something I did not do, I would be BEGGING them to come out and show the evidence. Mr Cain acts as if all is well, but now we have “sources” saying they could end his campaign! Dare them! Mr Cain should say “Bring it ON!” Force their hand! Why is this so complicated? Someone make me smart!

WhatsRight on November 2, 2011 at 1:39 PM

Exactly.

Bill C on November 2, 2011 at 3:26 PM

at her own peril and for money. you know what she’ll be called and that’s what she will be. she got the better deal 15 years ago.

gracie on November 2, 2011 at 3:25 PM

Wishful thinking. Interesting that you haven’t even heard her story and yet, you are willing to think the worst of her.

HondaV65 on November 2, 2011 at 3:26 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6