Cain to hold presser on new allegations at 5 ET

posted at 11:35 am on November 8, 2011 by Ed Morrissey

The strategy of ignoring the allegations of sexual impropriety has been tabled by the Cain campaign.  Instead, Herman Cain will hold a press conference at 5 ET today from Phoenix to address the new charge from Sharon Bielak that emerged yesterday as she became the first to go public with an accusation of, well, unprofessional conduct at the least.  In announcing the press conference, Cain’s spokesman went after both Bielak and her attorney, Gloria Allred:

In a news release announcing Cain’s Phoenix press conference, his campaign took aim at Bialek’s lawyer, Gloria Allred, suggesting her involvement is suspicious.

“It is noteworthy that Gloria Allred is a celebrity lawyer who specializes in generating publicity for herself and her clients,” J.D. Gordon, a spokesman for Cain, said. “Ms. Allred is a high-profile Democrat[ic] Party donor and activist who has given over ten thousand dollars to liberal Democrats like Barack Obama, Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer.”

“The questions the media should be asking are who’s paying for Gloria Allred’s fee, how did Ms. Bialek get introduced to Ms. Allred, and was she paid to come forward with these false accusations or was she promised employment?” Gordon said.

Cain’s campaign says he has never sexually harassed anyone. “After attacking Herman Cain through anonymous accusers for a week, his opponents have now convinced a woman with a long history of severe financial difficulties, including personal bankruptcy, to falsely accuse the Republican frontrunner of events occurring over a decade ago for which there is no record, nor even a complaint filed,” Gordon said.

Ironically or not, Gordon himself made a very public claim of sexual harassment in 2009 against a Miami Herald reporter, while serving as a spokesman for the US Navy.  The claim went nowhere, and it provides a strange twist on the new strategy that Cain and his team are deploying in this statement by attacking Bielak over her bankruptcies.  The first preceded her time at the National Restaurant Association, which would then prompt a question for Cain why his organization hired her at all if that was a significant dent in her overall credibility.  More to the point, though, what do two bankruptcies have to do with the incident Bielak described?  Either it happened or it didn’t, and the bankruptcies are immaterial to determining which is the case.  Honest people can have financial failures, and at the moment, she doesn’t seem to have a financial problem that would require her to make a bundle off of a National Enquirer story, either.

ABC and other media outlets are reporting that she’s not taking any money for her story, although that could certainly change:

Sharon Bialek, the woman who went public Monday with an accusation that GOP presidential candidate Herman Cain had sexually harassed her in 1997, said today that despite questions raised by Cain’s campaign, she was not financially compensated for speaking out.

“I was not paid to come forward, nor was I promised any employment. Nothing at all,” Bialek said on ABC News’ “Good Morning America”. “I’m just doing this because it’s the right thing to do.”

If her story holds up, it won’t be worth all that much cash anyway.  It would only be salable while Cain remains a prominent figure in the presidential race, and Bielak’s story might put that to an end, especially if more stories come out from women willing to go on the record.  As for who’s paying Allred, that’s an interesting question — but it’s possible that Allred is doing this pro bono for the publicity she’s reaping from it. What if that turns out to be the case?  Making an accusation without having any evidence to back it up created a very embarrassing moment for Cain and his campaign last week, and they may be setting themselves up for another this week.

On the other hand, Bielak seemed at ease enough with Cain to get a hug at the TeaCon Midwest event a month ago, according to one of the hosts of the event:

They hugged each other backstage in a full embrace like old friends.

She grabbed his arm and whispered in his left ear.

She kept talking as he bent to listen, and he kept saying “Uh, huh. Uh, huh.”

Huh? …

The Sneed source … is WIND radio co-host Amy Jacobson, who tells Sneed she witnessed the Cain/Bialek encounter a month ago while backstage at the AM 560 WIND sponsored TeaCon meeting in Schaumburg Sept. 30-Oct. 1 at the Renaissance Hotel and Convention Center.

That actually corroborates Bielak’s own account.  She says that she wanted to confront Cain over the incident, and that she did.  Jacobson says she couldn’t tell whether Bielak was being “flirtatious” or giving Cain the “kiss of death,” but noted that Bielak was “inches away from his ear” during the encounter.  (Full disclosure: WIND is a Salem Radio affiliate, and is owned by Hot Air’s parent company Salem Communications.)

Speaking of putting names on the record, at least one more former colleague of Cain described an uncomfortable situation to the conservative Washington Examiner, in which Cain asked her to arrange a meeting with an attractive woman who asked Cain a question during his presentation:

A former employee of the United States Agency for International Development says Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain asked her to help arrange a dinner date for him with a female audience member following a speech he delivered nine years ago.

Donna Donella, 40, of Arlington, said the USAID paid Cain to deliver a speech to businessmen and women in Egypt in 2002, during which an Egyptian businesswoman in her 30s asked Cain a question.

“And after the seminar was over,” Donella told The Washington Examiner, “Cain came over to me and a colleague and said, ‘Could you put me in touch with that lovely young lady who asked the question, so I can give her a more thorough answer over dinner?’”

Donella, who no longer works for USAID, said they were suspicious of Cain’s motives and declined to set up the date. Cain responded, “Then you and I can have dinner.” That’s when two female colleagues intervened and suggested they all go to dinner together, Donella said.

That’s not the same thing as sexual harassment, very obviously, but it does suggest — if true — a tendency toward the inappropriate in Herman Cain.  At some point, the sheer volume of allegations, especially from people willing to go on the record and provide details of the incidents, will have conservatives asking if Cain is worth supporting as a candidate, even while they defend him from what they see as unfair treatment.  In my column for The Week today, I ask whether we may have reached that tipping point:

This accusation leaves no room for misinterpretation, and no possibility of misunderstanding. There is no media filter for conservatives to criticize. A married man should not put his hand up the skirt of another woman under any circumstances, nor pull the head of another woman toward his lap, especially not when that action is unwelcome. Doing so as a condition of granting assistance in finding a job may not constitute sexual harassment in a workplace environment, but it undeniably would equate to demanding sexual favors by exploiting a serious power differential.

Cain vehemently denies that any of this took place. His campaign issued a statement that said, “All allegations against Mr. Cain are completely false. … [A]ctivist celebrity lawyer Gloria Allred is bringing forth more false accusations against the character of Republican frontrunner Herman Cain.” …

Republican voters may well decide that they don’t need to settle this to a moral certainty. They like Cain. But is Cain so indispensable that voters will be willing to risk more shoes dropping in a general election? We may already be seeing evidence that they will cut Cain loose and look for another candidate. Peggy Nance of Concerned Women for America put out a statement late Monday calling for Cain to “address these new allegations head on,” clearly unsatisfied with the terse denial from him earlier in the day. Nance wrote that “Ms. Bialek appeared credible and I was very disturbed by her characterization” of the alleged incident. Thee Des Moines Register‘s Jennifer Jacobs reported that while Cain’s most passionate supporters are remaining loyal, some of them are also calling for Cain to be more forthcoming. Bob Vander Plaats, president of the social conservative activist group Family Leader in the state and a Republican candidate for governor in 2010, called this a “tipping point for the viability of his campaign.”

In court, Cain would not have to prove his innocence, but on the campaign trail, he has to prove his superiority over the other choices. Cain’s argument for winning the nomination has always been novel — that his lack of electoral experience would be eclipsed by his problem-solving abilities and his expertise at rescue strategies in the private sector. Voters who might have been tempted to take a risk on Cain could decide that the inability to foresee or effectively handle the crises of the past several days makes that argument moot, or just figure that they don’t need to take that much risk of more scandal with an untested novelty candidate.

There are other Republicans vying for this nomination, including a couple with at least as much conservative credibility as Cain.  In his press conference today, Cain will not only have to make the argument that he’s innocent with something more than Bielak’s bankruptcies and Allred’s invoices, but that conservatives have no reason to fear that more of these stories won’t surprise them later in the cycle — especially in a general election.  The risk/reward calculation may have already tipped too far toward the “risk” end for some, and a response that doesn’t appreciably improve on last week’s debacle will lose Republican voters for good.

Update: Via Katrina Trinko at The Corner, the Cain campaign sent out this lengthy statement attacking Bielak:

As Ms. Sharon Bialek has placed herself in the public spotlight through making patently false allegations against Herman Cain, it is only fair to compare her track record alongside Mr. Cain’s.

In stark contrast to Mr. Cain’s four decades spent climbing the corporate ladder rising to the level of CEO at multiple successful business enterprises, Ms. Bialek has taken a far different path.

The fact is that Ms. Bialek has had a long and troubled history, from the courts to personal finances – which may help explain why she has come forward 14 years after an alleged incident with Mr. Cain, powered by celebrity attorney and long term Democrat donor Gloria Allred.

In the courts, Ms. Bialek has had a lengthy record in the Cook County Court system over various civil lawsuits. The following cases on file in Cook County are:

·         2000-M1-707461 Defendant against Broadcare Management

·         2000-M1-714398 Defendant in lawsuit against Broadcare Management

·         2000-M1-701522 Defendant in lawsuit against Broadcare Management

·         2005-M1-111072 Defendant in lawsuit against Mr. Mark Beatovic.

·         2007-M1-189176 Defendant in lawsuit against Midland Funding.

·         2009-M1-158826 Defendant in lawsuit against Illinois Lending.

Ms. Bialek was also sued in 1999 over a paternity matter according to ABC 7 Chicago (WLS-TV).  Source: WLS-TV, November 7, 2011

In personal finances, PACER (Federal Court) records show that Ms. Bialek has filed forbankruptcy in the Northern District of Illinois bankruptcy court in 1991 and 2001. The respective case numbers according to the PACER system are 1:01-bk-22664 and 1:91-bk-23273.

Ms. Bialek has worked for nine employers over the last seventeen years. Source: WLS-TV, November 7, 2011

Curiously, if Ms. Bialek had intended to take legal action, the statute of limitations would have passed a decade ago.

Which brings up the question of why she would make such reprehensible statements now?

The questions should be – who is financing her legal team, have any media agreed to pay for her story, and has she been offered employment for taking these actions?

As the first commenter on Trinko’s post retorts, this is all rather non-responsive:

And not one single statement of fact regarding the alleged incident. Did they have a meeting? Did they have dinner? Did Cain change the reservation? Were they in a car together, alone? Not one single rebuttal. All we get is the usual Clintonesque attack on the personal life of the woman. Have we all seen this movie before? Do we know how it turns out? Will we ultimately be relieved that this vetting of Cain happens in the primary, when there is time to correct course, as opposed to the general? This will be what is presented at the “news conference” this afternoon.

I imagine that Cain will have specific rebuttal points at the presser — or at least he’d better have them.  If all they want to do is talk about Bielak’s history in court, we’re likely to have uncomfortable reminiscences about the treatment Paula Jones got at the hands of Bill Clinton’s defenders and the media.

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

It’s cause he’s black. I know we all hate identity politics around here, but this and Palin reek of double standards.

abobo on November 8, 2011 at 11:39 AM

I guess HotAir has picked a side.

MisterPundit on November 8, 2011 at 11:39 AM

I would die for a Newt/Romney/Perry/Paul/Bachmann/Santorum post on some issue – any issue.

gophergirl on November 8, 2011 at 11:40 AM

Am I the only one who cares about Eric Holder’s ongoing testimony? I came here expecting a running commentary. Instead…crickets.

Stayright on November 8, 2011 at 11:42 AM

Honest people can have financial failures, and at the moment, she doesn’t seem to have a financial problem that would require her to make a bundle off of a National Enquirer story, either.

Boyfriend is out of work.

katy the mean old lady on November 8, 2011 at 11:43 AM

Has this become the tipping point for Republican voters?

No

I guess HotAir has picked a side.

Yes

pseudonominus on November 8, 2011 at 11:43 AM

Strong Black man and White women. Finally, some racism enters US politics and all the usual suspects are mum.

Hening on November 8, 2011 at 11:44 AM

Am I the only one who cares about Eric Holder’s ongoing testimony? I came here expecting a running commentary. Instead…crickets.

Stayright on November 8, 2011 at 11:42 AM

Forget about that while Ed is riding his hobby horse.

pseudonominus on November 8, 2011 at 11:44 AM

Amy Jacobson? This Amy Jacobson?

Chicago Reporter Fired for Swimming With Missing Mom Lisa Stebic’s Husband is ‘Devastated’

Yes, that’s the way to get a scoop Amy. Cavorting around with a murder suspect who’s missing wife has still not been found.

Ms. Jacobson is still reviled by most of us in the Chicago area for her shameless behavior.

Knucklehead on November 8, 2011 at 11:44 AM

One accusation = Benefit of the doubt.

Five accusations = Okay, what’s going on?

I just don’t see him politically surviving this.

However there are some here who would be defending Cain if he had a dead hooker in his Hotel Suite.

portlandon on November 8, 2011 at 11:45 AM

More to the point, though, what do two bankruptcies have to do with the incident Bielak described? Either it happened or it didn’t, and the bankruptcies are immaterial to determining which is the case. Honest people can have financial failures, and at the moment, she doesn’t seem to have a financial problem that would require her to make a bundle off of a National Enquirer story, either.

The problem, Ed, is that this woman doesn’t seem all that honest. She has a history of financial problems. She’s had a paternity suit filed against her. She can’t hold down a job. She’s been in contact with David Axelrod(yes, THAT David Axelrod!). She was seen schmoozing with her alleged assaulter a month ago. And she retained the legal services of one of the sleaziest publicity wh0res around(who just happens to be a big-time Democrat).

This doesn’t pass the smell test. The woman seems too shady to simply take at her word. So unless some additional details emerge from either this case or the ones that were settled by the NRA, I’m inclined to give Cain the benefit of the doubt.

Doughboy on November 8, 2011 at 11:45 AM

Stayright on November 8, 2011 at 11:42 AM

Juvenile behavior > govt murdering its own citizens

lorien1973 on November 8, 2011 at 11:46 AM

Quotes from Bialek’s supposed friends.

“She has a very infectious personality. It’s easy to see how she won [Cain] over. But the reality of her situation is — she’s a complete gold digger. It’s all about the money.”

Adding that she was from a middle-income family but lives in a posh house while running from bill collectors, the source said: “Most of her jobs ended in termination. It’s always the employer’s fault, not hers.

This is a lady who lives off the system. She is hellbent on finding a way of never having to work and living the lifestyle she wants to live, a very affluent lifestyle.”

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2058983/Murky-past-Herman-Cain-accuser-Sharon-Bialek-starts-emerge.html#ixzz1d8A5EsMH

Hard Right on November 8, 2011 at 11:48 AM

How can he promise there won’t be anymore people coming forward?

If these allegations aren’t true, there could be an infinate number of untrue allegations in the near future. Especially since they seem to be working.

Just how many of our candidates are we comfortable allowing to get hounded out of contention anyway?

(Note: if the allegations ARE true, then I have no need to continue to support Cain, but I’d like to see something, ANYTHING a little more concrete before I reach my “tipping point.”)

DrAllecon on November 8, 2011 at 11:48 AM

I don’t think this will end well

cmsinaz on November 8, 2011 at 11:48 AM

One accusation = Benefit of the doubt.

Five accusations = Okay, what’s going on?

I just don’t see him politically surviving this.

However there are some here who would be defending Cain if he had a dead hooker in his Hotel Suite.

portlandon on November 8, 2011 at 11:45 AM

I know what you are saying, but really, this is the first. The others were all non-issues. I am curious as to what he will say and what this girl will reply back. People forget that we went through this with Clarence Thomas and Juanita Hill turned out to be a liar.

jeffn21 on November 8, 2011 at 11:48 AM

One accusation = Benefit of the doubt.

Five accusations = Okay, what’s going on?

I just don’t see him politically surviving this.

However there are some here who would be defending Cain if he had a dead hooker in his Hotel Suite.

portlandon on November 8, 2011 at 11:45 AM

You got that right!

sidemeat on November 8, 2011 at 11:49 AM

Ed Morrissey you are dumping Cain? You were among the first to promote Cain as a serious contender for the presidency before it was cool. Now you are throwing him, your friend, under the bus? So sad, but that’s how powerful the tentacles of the GOP Establishment can be to even turn people against their friends.

milemarker2020 on November 8, 2011 at 11:49 AM

BTW, FWIU one of the claims made against Cain at the NRA was rejected.

Hard Right on November 8, 2011 at 11:49 AM

Sharon Bielek, the same Sharon Bielek who lived in the same building as David Axelrod?

Cain Accuser Sharon Bialek Lived In Same Building As David Axelrod

Knucklehead on November 8, 2011 at 11:50 AM

Juvenile behavior > govt murdering its own citizens

lorien1973 on November 8, 2011 at 11:46 AM

DING, DING, DING. We have the Winner!

Nero Fiddling.

BierManVA on November 8, 2011 at 11:51 AM

A 5pm presser, naturally since Rush is over at 3pm. We won’t find out until tomorrow what Cain really said. Sorry, but I don’t trust the guy. I’ve seen too many like him in the corporate world. Maybe he did and maybe he didn’t, we may not ever know since the witness and her lawyer are not very credible and all of this is coming out of Chicago. The political machine there uses sex scandals like the mob used bullets. Cain did run and lose in 2004 for the senate. Any facts on who he lost to and why?

Kissmygrits on November 8, 2011 at 11:52 AM

More to the point, though, what do two bankruptcies have to do with the incident Bielak described? Either it happened or it didn’t, and the bankruptcies are immaterial to determining which is the case. Honest people can have financial failures, and at the moment, she doesn’t seem to have a financial problem that would require her to make a bundle off of a National Enquirer story, either.


She is hard up for money… then she hired Gloria Allred.

Her boyfriend is also out of work. This is a setup for cash.

Sharon Bielek also lives in David Axelrod’s building…

tetriskid on November 8, 2011 at 11:52 AM

How about reading my first post? That is what her FRIENDS are saying about her.

Hard Right on November 8, 2011 at 11:53 AM

When one person comes out of nowhere and makes allegations (Anita Hill) that are years old and never before reported, I can dismiss that.

When multiple people pop up (Bill Clinton and his bimbo eruptions) then I start to have second thoughts.

I would not put it past the Libs to pay people to make these allegations to make it look like he was guilty. Guilty or not; Cain has been damaged by this. If only 5% of independent voters buy it, Cain would not be able to defeat Obama.

Cain is toast.

The Rock on November 8, 2011 at 11:54 AM

One accusation = Benefit of the doubt.

Five accusations = Okay, what’s going on?

I just don’t see him politically surviving this.

However there are some here who would be defending Cain if he had a dead hooker in his Hotel Suite.

portlandon on November 8, 2011 at 11:45 AM

Look at what happened to Palin! The moment the media treats ONE Jerry Springer-like allegation with THAT much love and respect, you open the floodgates to more fame-seekers and opportunists.

MisterPundit on November 8, 2011 at 11:54 AM

How can he promise there won’t be anymore people coming forward?

If these allegations aren’t true, there could be an infinate number of untrue allegations in the near future. Especially since they seem to be working.

DrAllecon on November 8, 2011 at 11:48 AM

If these allegations aren’t true or fail to damage Cain, then this will go away soon. If the media keeps pushing anonymous claims or the pathetic excuse for a “5th accuser” that Ed cited, then this will fast become a joke and an obvious witch hunt. At some point, there’s gonna have to be an instance where people witnessed some inappropriate behavior. There’s no way Cain is this big of a horndog and managed to keep it hidden from everyone. Even Clinton got busted a few times.

Doughboy on November 8, 2011 at 11:54 AM

WHERE ARE THE ACCUSERS FROM GODFATHERS PIZZA AND THE FED? HMMMM??? Did he only sexually harass NRA women?

djl130 on November 8, 2011 at 11:56 AM

Man, I take a long weekend, and you people let Gloria Allred get involved in this?

JohnGalt23 on November 8, 2011 at 11:56 AM

If Cain drops out, Obama wins re-election in 2012. Here’s why Obama will beat everyone else:

Romney-The Obama of the GOP, imagine Obama in a debate with Romney talking about how much he agrees with the Romney of a few years ago.

Gingrich-Think Kennedy/Nixon or Clinton/Dole.

Huntsman-Who?

Bachmann-VP

Santorum-Secretary this or that in the next GOP Administration

Paul-Yeah right

Blue Collar Todd on November 8, 2011 at 11:57 AM

The Rock: If what you say is true, then the only franchise in this country is that of the media.

What you are saying is that the media can (and clearly will) completely destroy candidates for public office. Therefore, the only votes that matter are the votes of the media.

Scott H on November 8, 2011 at 11:57 AM

Quotes from her supposed friends.

“She has a very infectious personality. It’s easy to see how she won [Cain] over. But the reality of her situation is — she’s a complete gold digger. It’s all about the money.”

Adding that she was from a middle-income family but lives in a posh house while running from bill collectors, the source said: “Most of her jobs ended in termination. It’s always the employer’s fault, not hers.

This is a lady who lives off the system. She is hellbent on finding a way of never having to work and living the lifestyle she wants to live, a very affluent lifestyle.”

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2058983/Murky-past-Herman-Cain-accuser-Sharon-Bialek-starts-emerge.html#ixzz1d8A5EsMH

Hard Right on November 8, 2011 at 11:57 AM

They hugged each other backstage in a full embrace like old friends.

She grabbed his arm and whispered in his left ear.

She kept talking as he bent to listen, and he kept saying “Uh, huh. Uh, huh.”

Huh? …

WTF is going on herre?

ted c on November 8, 2011 at 11:57 AM

True Conservatives dont ask questions.

ReformedAndDangerous on November 8, 2011 at 11:58 AM

With this woman on the loose (and women like her) then every man in America needs to be afraid, because you are next.

Virginia Shanahan on November 8, 2011 at 11:58 AM

I guess HotAir has picked a side.

MisterPundit on November 8, 2011 at 11:39 AM

I have lost a lot of respect for Ed this week.

Allah’s bias against Cain has been evident for awhile, but I expected more of Ed.

Norwegian on November 8, 2011 at 11:58 AM

Some serious questions to those who will answer it:

1. What is the final number of people coming forward, or sexual harassment settlements before you will end your support for Cain?

2. Do we as a party still have credibility for holding Bill Clinton responsible for his sexual harassment issues, and defending Herman Cain for his?

portlandon on November 8, 2011 at 11:58 AM

portlandon on November 8, 2011 at 11:45 AM

I am just defeinding Cain against the ususal unsubstantiated attacks from the left. We as republicans never seem interested in doing that and always let the left destroy our candidates one by one until we are stuck with the one they want. How can you not see this? If Cain is guilty, then fine, but until I see definitive proof I am not rolling over and playing dead for the leftist puppet masters running the country. The only way we win this time is by fighting fire with fire.

gator70 on November 8, 2011 at 11:59 AM

Amy Jacobson? This Amy Jacobson?

Chicago Reporter Fired for Swimming With Missing Mom Lisa Stebic’s Husband is ‘Devastated’

Yes, that’s the way to get a scoop Amy. Cavorting around with a murder suspect who’s missing wife has still not been found.

Ms. Jacobson is still reviled by most of us in the Chicago area for her shameless behavior.

Knucklehead on November 8, 2011 at 11:44 AM

That was pretty bizarre. At the time I thought it was just putting your all into getting a story. (She does look damn good in a bikini.) But it was over the line. I don’t know if it warranted firing, she was a good reporter for a long time. I do know I am not fond of her on the radio. I wish WIND would get Cisco (SP?) back.

Bill C on November 8, 2011 at 11:59 AM

So Cain, the lobbyist, wanted to arrange a dinner to talk to and influence somebody. Wowsers! I bet that’s the first time a lobbyist ever tried the dinner angle! Buy them food! What a concept!

Allahs vulva on November 8, 2011 at 12:00 PM

Oh, well, if Amy Freaking Jacobson is the source for some info, then it has to be legit.

After all, she is an impeccable source for determining sexual propriety.

(google her name and ‘bikini’ if you don’t remember her claim to fame)

playblu on November 8, 2011 at 12:00 PM

I have lost a lot of respect for Ed this week.

Allah’s bias against Cain has been evident for awhile, but I expected more of Ed.

Norwegian on November 8, 2011 at 11:58 AM

Cain cannot ignore specific charges by someone who has revealed their identity. He has to give a denial and answer detailed questions. This is fair.

Bill C on November 8, 2011 at 12:00 PM

I have lost a lot of respect for Ed this week.

Allah’s bias against Cain has been evident for awhile, but I expected more of Ed.

Norwegian on November 8, 2011 at 11:58 AM

It’s gonna be Romney… & it’s going to be awesome to see him fail.

tetriskid on November 8, 2011 at 12:00 PM

That’s not the same thing as sexual harassment, very obviously, but it does suggest — if true — a tendency toward the inappropriate in Herman Cain.

Okay…so it’s apparently inappropriate for a man to not want to dine alone?

Additionally, and this must be said: he’s from Georgia. Those in the South have a very different attitude towards social relations than many of us Yanks. As with the Iowa radio host’s claim that Cain’s asking a woman to “doctor his tea”…it’s not a matter of Cain being inappropriate, but of someone inferring inappropriate subtext from such an action. Because Cain asks someone at a function, male or female, to have dinner with him, we should assume that he has prurient intentions?

Apart from the unproven allegations, there is nothing that we know of that would indicate that he carries on in an untoward way with women. Yet, because of the allegations, you’re assuming he has a tendency to the inappropriate? Ed, if several people accused you of shoplifting, with no evidence, should we assume you have a tendency towards theft? Your approach to this is very disappointing.

MadisonConservative on November 8, 2011 at 12:01 PM

However there are some here who would be defending Cain if he had a dead hooker in his Hotel Suite.

portlandon on November 8, 2011 at 11:45 AM

That’s unfair.

The people “coming out” against Cain aren’t giving us anything credible.

blatantblue on November 8, 2011 at 12:02 PM

Cain cannot ignore specific charges by someone who has revealed their identity. He has to give a denial and answer detailed questions. This is fair.

Bill C on November 8, 2011 at 12:00 PM

He denied it from the very beginning. He’s said he never sexually harassed anyone. Why is this insufficient for you and some others? Does he have to add a “really”?

MadisonConservative on November 8, 2011 at 12:02 PM

she doesn’t seem to have a financial problem that would require her to make a bundle off of a National Enquirer story, either.

Oy. Yet another extremely poorly (if at all) researched blog entry by Ed, a la Career politicians?

The reality:

‘She’s a complete gold digger’: Murky past of Herman Cain accuser starts to emerge

“Meanwhile, a friend of Ms Bialek, from Chicago, told the New York Post: ‘She has a very infectious personality. It’s easy to see how she won [Cain] over. But the reality of her situation is — she’s a complete gold digger. It’s all about the money.’

Adding that she was from a middle-income family but lives in a posh house while running from bill collectors, the source said: ‘Most of her jobs ended in termination. It’s always the employer’s fault, not hers.

‘This is a lady who lives off the system. She is hellbent on finding a way of never having to work and living the lifestyle she wants to live, a very affluent lifestyle.’”

whatcat on November 8, 2011 at 12:02 PM

I really can’t believe how many of us are falling into the media trap

blatantblue on November 8, 2011 at 12:03 PM

There are some people you are willing to go the extra mile for on stuff like this- Mr. Cain isn’t one of them, for all of Romneys squishiness as the alternative.
I’m not going to the wall for a neophyte with possible girl problems verses Obama- the stakes are too damn high.

jjshaka on November 8, 2011 at 12:03 PM

If Cain is guilty, then fine, but until I see definitive proof I am not rolling over and playing dead for the leftist puppet masters running the country. The only way we win this time is by fighting fire with fire.

gator70 on November 8, 2011 at 11:59 AM

Nobody is saying that Cain is guilty. Just that he has to answer the charges. I hope he is innocent.

Bill C on November 8, 2011 at 12:03 PM

Some serious questions to those who will answer it:

1. What is the final number of people coming forward, or sexual harassment settlements before you will end your support for Cain?

It will take more than one not-so-credible accuser to do it for me. Some credibility would help.

2. Do we as a party still have credibility for holding Bill Clinton responsible for his sexual harassment issues, and defending Herman Cain for his?

portlandon on November 8, 2011 at 11:58 AM

Given that Bill Clinton was credibly accused by several women who went on the record of rape harassment and other various and sundry sexual malfeasance (not to mention the blue dress), I think the comparison is rather false. Unless of course you think that Bialek is somehow a credible accuser.

gryphon202 on November 8, 2011 at 12:03 PM

However there are some here who would be defending Cain if he had a dead hooker in his Hotel Suite.

portlandon on November 8, 2011 at 11:45 AM

Port, you know better than that. I know it’s hyperbole, but give me a break. For a second, let’s take your notion seriously. A dead hooker in his hotel suite would be evidence. Proof. There is none in these allegations. You’re comparing apples and dump trucks.

MadisonConservative on November 8, 2011 at 12:03 PM

BTW, when a guy files a paternity suit it’s because he and she both know they are the kid’s parents but she wants to lie about it.

Reasons to deny that she knows the father’s identity: she doesn’t want to share the kid; she was doing the nasty with more than one guy; she’s shopping for a husband to be the father and doesn’t want complications; she is selling access to the kid (I’ll let you see the kid if you pay me x dollars); she told current boyfriend that she was raped but she’s pro-life; she doesn’t like the new girlfriend of the kid’s daddy; etc. etc. etc.

All of these reasons have lying as a foundation.

platypus on November 8, 2011 at 12:04 PM

Since evidence is irrelevant, how about reporting what Macs Mind is reporting:

Sharon Bailek Remembered By A Co-Worker as a time waster and rabble rouser that didn’t get her way she cried sexual harassment.

http://macsmind.com/wordpress/2011/11/07/sharon-bailek-remembered-by-a-co-worker-as-a-time-waster-and-rabble-rouser-if-she-didnt-get-her-way-she-cried-sexual-harassment/

Is it true she was fired from NRA for filing false claims of sexual harassment?

Virginia Shanahan on November 8, 2011 at 12:05 PM

I have no idea why so many people got behind Cain. There was a reason he didn’t win the Iowa Straw Poll. He has made so many stupid mistakes it’s not funny.

ninjapirate on November 8, 2011 at 12:05 PM

2. Do we as a party still have credibility for holding Bill Clinton responsible for his sexual harassment issues, and defending Herman Cain for his?

portlandon on November 8, 2011 at 11:58 AM

Clinton admitted being with Gennifer Flowers. Cain has never admitted any extramarital activity. Again…you are comparing apples and Windex.

MadisonConservative on November 8, 2011 at 12:05 PM

He denied it from the very beginning. He’s said he never sexually harassed anyone. Why is this insufficient for you and some others? Does he have to add a “really”?

MadisonConservative on November 8, 2011 at 12:02 PM

The denials are sufficient if there are no detailed charges and the accusers are anonymous. You can’t expect a man to defend himself against nothing. However, having a named accuser with detailed charges requires that he answer detailed questions. It didn’t happen, end of story is not sufficient. If that is his response today i would hope that you would see that this is the wrong way to handle this. BTW, I would expect this of any candidate.

Bill C on November 8, 2011 at 12:06 PM

Nobody is saying that Cain is guilty. Just that he has to answer the charges. I hope he is innocent.

Bill C on November 8, 2011 at 12:03 PM

In what manner besides “these accusations are baseless and false” do you think he should answer them? Need I remind you that his accusers are trying him in the court of public opinion?

gryphon202 on November 8, 2011 at 12:06 PM

I have lost a lot of respect for Ed this week.

Allah’s bias against Cain has been evident for awhile, but I expected more of Ed.

Norwegian on November 8, 2011 at 11:58 AM

I get where Ed is coming from. Yes, at some point this does become a distraction. Where I disagree with Ed and others is in their willingness to cast Cain aside and go with someone else from the GOP field. How long before the next candidate we rally around gets the same treatment from the drive-bys and becomes a distraction? They already did it to Palin. A lot of people in the conservative base no longer wanted to have anything to do with her because she became too controversial and polarizing.

At some point we have to take a stand. We can’t keep sacrificing foot soldiers one after the other to placate a media that will never let up. We’ve given them Palin. We’re about to dump Cain. We’ve scared off people like Daniels and Ryan for ever running in the first place. Who are we gonna have left at the rate we’re going?

Doughboy on November 8, 2011 at 12:07 PM

Some serious questions to those who will answer it:

1. What is the final number of people coming forward, or sexual harassment settlements before you will end your support for Cain?

2. Do we as a party still have credibility for holding Bill Clinton responsible for his sexual harassment issues, and defending Herman Cain for his?

portlandon on November 8, 2011 at 11:58 AM

1. There are only two known settlements. One of the claimants has refused to talk. Anything else must be chalked up to innuendo and dirty tricks, since no one thought that it was important to come out about Cain for all these years he’s been in the public eye. It’s only when he’s risen to the top the polls these accusations are suddenly important.

2. Clinton had real, on the record, accusations and real evidence against him. When Clinton settle with Paula Jones, that was no nuisance settlement, it was for $850,000 directly out of his pocket. We know about Lewinsky. And then all of the other women who came out publicly, not behind leaks, innuendo, and anonymous. In Cain’s case, it was the NRA that settled with two women, one of which Cain was not even aware of. So I think we can question the veracity of these allegations raised against Cain and maintain our credibility about Clinton. Really your angst should be directed at the media’s credibility. They told the public not to make a big deal of the Clinton charges, but are going into hyper drive about Herman Cain’s.

milemarker2020 on November 8, 2011 at 12:07 PM

what will he sing tonight?

sesquipedalian on November 8, 2011 at 12:07 PM

I really can’t believe how many of us are falling into the media trap

blatantblue on November 8, 2011 at 12:03 PM

It’s character assassination and it appears that Ed, along with a lot of so called conservatives have bought into it.

Knucklehead on November 8, 2011 at 12:08 PM

Drudge has a headline that caught my attention. One of the first anonymous accusers works for the Obama administration….and has been in various government spokesperson positions for a while. She still refuses to comment publicly, but her family and friends vouch for her.

Mord on November 8, 2011 at 12:08 PM

He denied it from the very beginning. He’s said he never sexually harassed anyone. Why is this insufficient for you and some others? Does he have to add a “really”?

MadisonConservative on November 8, 2011 at 12:02 PM

Because Gloria Allred is such a super-smart lawyer… it must obviously be true.

I mean, I believe that this person with no job living in David Axelrod’s building just decided to claim this after 14+ years.

tetriskid on November 8, 2011 at 12:08 PM

The denials are sufficient if there are no detailed charges and the accusers are anonymous. You can’t expect a man to defend himself against nothing. However, having a named accuser with detailed charges requires that he answer detailed questions. It didn’t happen, end of story is not sufficient. If that is his response today i would hope that you would see that this is the wrong way to handle this. BTW, I would expect this of any candidate.

Bill C on November 8, 2011 at 12:06 PM

Keep your powder dry, boss. There is a press conference scheduled for tonight. I dunno that Cain is going to say a whole lot that hasn’t already been said, but I think last week he gave the anonymous accusers all the attention they deserved, which is to say very little.

gryphon202 on November 8, 2011 at 12:08 PM

Bill C on November 8, 2011 at 12:03 PM

Fair enough, however I think the burden of proof is on the accuser and the media driving this, not the defendant. Anyone can accuse anyone else of anything, that doesn’t make it true.

gator70 on November 8, 2011 at 12:08 PM

2. Do we as a party still have credibility for holding Bill Clinton responsible for his sexual harassment issues, and defending Herman Cain for his?

portlandon on November 8, 2011 at 11:58 AM

The problem with clintoon was he lied under oath.

ColdWarrior57 on November 8, 2011 at 12:09 PM

MadisonConservative on November 8, 2011 at 12:03 PM

It does get tiring when otherwise normal commenters pretend to be as dense as a rock, just to make some point.

platypus on November 8, 2011 at 12:09 PM

New accuser works in Obama administration.

Schadenfreude on November 8, 2011 at 12:09 PM

He denied it from the very beginning. He’s said he never sexually harassed anyone. Why is this insufficient for you and some others? Does he have to add a “really”?

MadisonConservative on November 8, 2011 at 12:02 PM

Well then he can hire Anthony Wiener as his spokesman.

pedestrian on November 8, 2011 at 12:09 PM

New accuser works in Obama administration.

Schadenfreude on November 8, 2011 at 12:09 PM

Yeaaaaaah… Nothing to gain.

tetriskid on November 8, 2011 at 12:10 PM

Hey, this is really cool. We can have a story before the press conference about how Cain is going to have a press conference. Then during the press conference we can have another story about how he is doing. Then after the press conference we can have yet another story about what he should have said.

Then tomorrow…….
…we can have an analysis of the public response to the press conference…..

Then the day after that . . . .

Skandia Recluse on November 8, 2011 at 12:12 PM

It’s character assassination and it appears that Ed, along with a lot of so called conservatives have bought into it.

Knucklehead

They seem to WANT to buy into it.

Hard Right on November 8, 2011 at 12:12 PM

Larry Sinclair has more credibility than this woman. Did we have even one Larry Sinclair thread?

flyfisher on November 8, 2011 at 12:12 PM

Well then he can hire Anthony Wiener as his spokesman.

pedestrian on November 8, 2011 at 12:09 PM

You don’t think if there was any credible evidence at all a la Weiner, it would have come out by now? Seriously? How about all the folks here who said, “Just wait until the general election.” And it took them a week. A WEEK!

gryphon202 on November 8, 2011 at 12:12 PM

Man, I take a long weekend, and you people let Gloria Allred get involved in this?

JohnGalt23 on November 8, 2011 at 11:56 AM

Well NOW we know who’s fault it is!

ColdWarrior57 on November 8, 2011 at 12:13 PM

Hey, this is really cool. We can have a story before the press conference about how Cain is going to have a press conference. Then during the press conference we can have another story about how he is doing. Then after the press conference we can have yet another story about what he should have said.

Then tomorrow…….
…we can have an analysis of the public response to the press conference…..

Then the day after that . . . .

Skandia Recluse on November 8, 2011 at 12:12 PM

I think you just summed up the whole HotAir Experience ™

gryphon202 on November 8, 2011 at 12:14 PM

Niger Innis is on Fox News right now, he’s calling it the Mandingo effect – the fear of the black man’s virility. I have to admit that’s what came to my mind when Karen Finney made her spin about the color of the accuser being white, would upset republican voters. Because republicans are all white, and afraid of minorities sexual libido/

This must be true, because we are living in pre civil war America, and not the year 2011 post election of our first bi racial President…….apparently.

Dr Evil on November 8, 2011 at 12:14 PM

“Honest people can have financial failures, and at the moment, she doesn’t seem to have a financial problem that would require her to make a bundle off of a National Enquirer story, either.”

What??? She currently has collection attorneys chaing her down through the court system to collect on a judgment the obtained against her. If that’s not a financial problem I don’t know what is.

tommyboy on November 8, 2011 at 12:14 PM

Other shoe has dropped.
(Been waiting for all of this news about who the accusers actually are.)

HERMAN CAIN! HERMAN CAIN! HERMAN CAIN!

balkanmom on November 8, 2011 at 12:15 PM

Keep your powder dry, boss. There is a press conference scheduled for tonight. I dunno that Cain is going to say a whole lot that hasn’t already been said, but I think last week he gave the anonymous accusers all the attention they deserved, which is to say very little.

gryphon202 on November 8, 2011 at 12:08 PM

Fair enough, however I think the burden of proof is on the accuser and the media driving this, not the defendant. Anyone can accuse anyone else of anything, that doesn’t make it true.

gator70 on November 8, 2011 at 12:08 PM

But, but, but…I want to engage in speculation today. /whine I was busy yesterday and missed out on the 1000 comment posts.

Of course the burden of proof is on the accuser and I think she needs to produce the corroborating witnesses. That being said there are facts in her accusation and Cain needs to address them.

BTW, I think there is a little bit of gold digger in every woman. E.g.; they will compromise to be in a relationship with a man of means. Just that some seek it out more than others.

Bill C on November 8, 2011 at 12:16 PM

Larry Sinclair has more credibility than this woman. Did we have even one Larry Sinclair thread?

flyfisher on November 8, 2011 at 12:12 PM

No. Because you can’t talk about that.

tetriskid on November 8, 2011 at 12:16 PM

Check the this story:

http://patdollard.com/2011/11/bialek-deconstructed-accustations-quickly-erode-under-scrutiny/

If the author has anything to back it up then it is game over for this witch hunt.

tommyboy on November 8, 2011 at 12:16 PM

Well NOW we know who’s fault it is!

ColdWarrior57 on November 8, 2011 at 12:13 PM

You’re real good at snapping that towel.

platypus on November 8, 2011 at 12:17 PM

Some serious questions to those who will answer it:

2. Do we as a party still have credibility for holding Bill Clinton responsible for his sexual harassment issues, and defending Herman Cain for his?

portlandon on November 8, 2011 at 11:58 AM

This is the most pathetic thing I’ve read today. Clinton raped women. There is no equivalence here. Seems you’re only occupying your own stuffy head.

MaggiePoo on November 8, 2011 at 12:17 PM

Bialek Fired From NRA For False Accustations of Sexual Assault

tetriskid on November 8, 2011 at 12:14 PM

Thank you for the link.

Cain will be vindicated.

blatantblue on November 8, 2011 at 12:17 PM

That would be a great headline for a Cain post “Herman Cain get’s the Mandingo treatment from the liberal media” LOL!

Where there is smoke there is fire….but there isn’t any smoke, there is just media manufactured vapor.

Gloria Allred: Oh my, I think I’m getting the vapors…..SNARK.

Dr Evil on November 8, 2011 at 12:17 PM

I guess HotAir has picked a side.

MisterPundit on November 8, 2011 at 11:39 AM

They picked a side months ago before this whole episode.

Chudi on November 8, 2011 at 12:18 PM

The denials are sufficient if there are no detailed charges and the accusers are anonymous. You can’t expect a man to defend himself against nothing. However, having a named accuser with detailed charges requires that he answer detailed questions. It didn’t happen, end of story is not sufficient. If that is his response today i would hope that you would see that this is the wrong way to handle this. BTW, I would expect this of any candidate.

Bill C on November 8, 2011 at 12:06 PM

So here’s how it works.

Woman: That man sexually harassed me.
Man: I never sexually harassed anyone.
Woman: He grabbed my crotch.
Media: We know you denied sexually harassing her, but she said you grabbed her crotch. That’s sexual harassment. Did you sexually harass her?
Man: I already said I never sexually harassed anyone.
Media: Yeah, but now we’ve got details.
Man: I already denied this. Why do details change the fact that I denied it?
Spectators: OHHHHH HE WON’T DENY IT AGAIN! HE’S GUILTY!
Man: Okay, I’ll hold a press conference to repeat what I said a week ago.
Spectators: Too late. You screwed this up by only denying the charges. What we really wanted you to do was deny the charges.
Man: But…
Spectators: Shut up, Pizza Man. Make way for Newt. We want a guy that we KNOW cheats on a regular basis.

MadisonConservative on November 8, 2011 at 12:18 PM

This is the most pathetic thing I’ve read today. Clinton raped women. There is no equivalence here. Seems you’re only occupying your own stuffy head.

MaggiePoo on November 8, 2011 at 12:17 PM

Clinton was alleged to have raped one woman. Not reported until he was president. If you want presumption of innocence for Cain you should be willing to maintain presumption of innocence for Clinton.

Bradky on November 8, 2011 at 12:19 PM

What a country we live in.

You can accuse someone of something, remain anonymous, and the person you accused gets strung up in the public square.

blatantblue on November 8, 2011 at 12:19 PM

Cain cannot ignore specific charges by someone who has revealed their identity. He has to give a denial and answer detailed questions. This is fair.

[Bill C on November 8, 2011 at 12:00 PM]

Of course he does.

By the same token, acting like naifs in an effort to appear as unbiased reporters of news rather than the opinionated investigative journalists they otherwise purport themselves to be with this site leaves the two wide open for losing respect of their commenters.

It was just yesterday that AP wrote this, “Anyone know if Arret is trustworthy? And if so, I want to know which reporters were in the room and refused to report.” Bialek’s story and how it came about being presented to the public is rife with reasons for skepticism, and totally divorced from any response by Cain, competent or otherwise. That neither show it is more than surprising to me.

Dusty on November 8, 2011 at 12:19 PM

BTW, I think there is a little bit of gold digger in every woman. E.g.; they will compromise to be in a relationship with a man of means. Just that some seek it out more than others.

Bill C on November 8, 2011 at 12:16 PM

Speak for your female relatives… not mine.

Bradky on November 8, 2011 at 12:21 PM

You’re real good at snapping that towel.

platypus on November 8, 2011 at 12:17 PM

Well when someone leaves a door open, I HAVE TO WALK THROUGH IT.
:D

ColdWarrior57 on November 8, 2011 at 12:21 PM

Clinton was alleged to have raped one woman. Not reported until he was president. If you want presumption of innocence for Cain you should be willing to maintain presumption of innocence for Clinton.

Bradky on November 8, 2011 at 12:19 PM

Clinton’s accuser was a helluva lot more credible than Bialek.

gryphon202 on November 8, 2011 at 12:23 PM

Bialek Fired From NRA For False Accustations of Sexual Assault

tetriskid on November 8, 2011 at 12:14 PM

Wake me up when u have a source better than one unknown blog quoting another unknown blog.

pedestrian on November 8, 2011 at 12:24 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4