5 p.m. ET all across the cable-news dial. David Brock once called Anita Hill “a little bit nutty and a little bit slutty”; judging from Team Cain’s statement today, they’re going to paint Bialek as a little bit needy and a little bit greedy. Here’s the obligatory link to Andrea Peyser’s new column quoting “someone who knows Bialek” as saying she’s “a complete gold digger.” Could be, but as Ben Smith notes, she seems to be doing all right these days: She lives with her fiance, a corporate executive who supports her financially, in a five-bedroom home and she’s probably got a window of just a few weeks to somehow cash in on this story before everyone loses interest. And if she was planning to do that, why reveal the most sordid details at yesterday’s presser? What’s left to tell?

Cain told ABC this afternoon that she’s a liar and said, “I can categorically say I have never acted inappropriately with anyone, period.” As a riposte to that, The Daily has an article out today naming one of the two women at the NRA who accused him of harassment in the 90s. The story makes her sound perfectly credible (“an extraordinarily good person,” “a consummate professional”) but it looks like they limited themselves to interviewing friends and family as part of a basic character sketch. Meanwhile, new from CNN:

A longtime friend of one of Herman Cain’s unnamed accusers tells CNN that Cain dangled a job promotion in front of the accuser at the same time he “made her very uncomfortable” with sexual “innuendo and overtures.”

This woman told CNN she spoke extensively with her friend about Cain’s conduct in 1998 at the time the accuser was allegedly being harassed by Cain while they both worked at the National Restaurant Association…

The friend tells CNN the accuser would sometimes “come home in tears, and it would all come pouring out how upset she was.”…

At one point, the friend recounts, “They [association members] went to a conference in Chicago and I remember her coming back and mentioning some things that he had said, along with the innuendo of job promotion.” In the end, the friend adds, the woman did not get the promotion. “I think she was up for something and didn’t get it,” she said, adding that her friend worried it was because she had rebuffed Cain.

It’s not clear to me if that accuser is the same one named in The Daily piece or the other one who received a settlement. Finally, here’s the latest from Gallup showing some movement in Cain’s “positive intensity” score since the allegations first started flying. He’s still leading the field with a robust +25, but there’s obviously been some fallout:

The graph doesn’t capture the full extent of the decline either. According to Gallup, he was at +29 in interviews conducted the last week of October but just +20 in interviews conducted through November 6 — and that’s without any effect from Bialek’s allegations, which weren’t made public until yesterday, November 7.

While we wait, take 10 minutes and watch Glenn Beck interview Amy Jacobson, the WIND reporter who told the Sun-Times that Bialek hugged Cain when she saw him at the tea-party event in Chicago last month. Proof positive that Bialek’s lying now, right? Not quite: Jacobson tells Beck that she believes Bialek’s story and makes it sound here like the encounter was tenser than it sounded originally (“you could cut it with a knife”), with Bialek having “stormed off” once she was done saying whatever she had to say to Cain. Interesting. Click the image to watch.

Update: CNN reports that the accuser named by The Daily “is considering having a press conference in the future, perhaps with some of the women who have accused Cain but have not yet made their stories public.”

Update: According to a Reuters online poll, 39 percent of Republicans say they believe Bialek and 40 percent say they now view him less favorably.