Cain accuser stands by allegation; he ducks issue
The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.
JAPAN NEWS AND DISCUSSION
-
U.N. observers warn of Syria civil war after massacre
( 7 )
-
Obama on the defensive over spending, debt
( 18 )
-
Egypt's top candidates try to broaden support
( 1 )
-
Queen marks diamond jubilee riding wave of popularity
( 0 )
-
Thousands take part in 'Slut Walks' in Brazil
( 10 )
-
- Business Teaching Positions - Part-time - Kanto Region
- Interac, Tokyo
- Salary: ¥3,000 ~ ¥5,000 / Hour
-
- National Relief/Substitute Teacher - summer start
- Interac, Tokyo
- Salary: ¥275,000 ~ ¥300,000 / Month
-
- 営業パーソン
- 加治金属工業株式会社, Tochigi
- Salary: ¥240,000 ~ ¥350,000 / Month Negotiable
Order by Time Order by Popularity
54 Comments
Login to comment
2
Molenir
Despite leading in the polls, even after this 'scandal', his campaign is apparently hobbled by it. Honestly, who writes this stuff?
-3
SushiSake3
One of the fundamental rules of crisis management - get in front of the cameras and talk.
Cain doesn't have a clue.
1
Laguna
Look at the bright side: at least it's distracting attention from his insane domestic policies and abysmal lack of international knowledge.
0
LFRAgain
Honestly, sexual harrassment claims aside, I just don't like the man. His disdain for non-conservatives is clearly apparent in almost every interview he does, which isn't going to fly well when half of his constituency is made up of Democrats. Even Bush knew how to be amicable to the Left. Cain just plain doesn't like us. If anyone thinks a candidate like him winning the nomination, much less the preseidency will result in anything productive getting done over the next four-year-term is living in a fantasy.
0
yabits
A Republican with honor.
And something else entirely.
-3
smithinjapan
"Republican presidential contender Herman Cain got upset with reporters and vowed he would never answer questions about allegations of sexual harassment a decade ago..."
Bad choice. Cain doesn't seem to understand that by trying to duck the issue, it sticks to you and looks worse than it actually may be. Calling the media 'unethical' or what have you simply for asking questions about the past is ludicrous unless they're sneaking into his house or accosting his family for details, etc.
If nothing else, Cain has proven that he's unfit to lead the nation. Does he think the public and media will be less 'nit-picky' about his past or present actions if he becomes their president? He reminds me of a sarah palin with half a brain -- she too blamed all her own actions on the media.
-3
PussInBoots
There is simply nothing more to know on this subject. He told one woman she was hot and invited her to his apartment. He stood next to another and commented that she was as tall as his wife. I don't see any sexual harrassment at all, but they got their payout and are not pressing charges. Case closed.
If anyone should be appalled at anyone its us with the press who keep asking questions about a dead issue that is totally irrelevant to us, and not asking questions that are relevant and pertinent. They keep grasping for sensationalism and can't be bothered to keep the public informed about things that are actually important. I salute the man for telling the press to shove it.
What I want to talk about his 9-9-9 plan. Its relevant and pertitent. Its also an insane grouping of random numbers. Don't tell me God gave him the numbers in a dream!
-1
cracaphat
Vowed what? Never to talk about...? If Clinton had to talk about stains on a dress you gonna have to answer for your actions whether true or not.Cain is just another would be pol who has some female dirt or airport stance dirt.
-2
smithinjapan
PussinBoots: "If anyone should be appalled at anyone its us with the press who keep asking questions about a dead issue that is totally irrelevant to us..."
How is it irrelevant? If he's just some Joe on the street and we are not nor have any relationship with those assaulted and don't want to feel any empathy towards them or anger about people who commit assault, then yes. BUT, the man is a candidate for the GOP head and may end up running for the president, which means he will be the head of the US. As such it is ENTIRELY relevant for people to ask questions, and quite showing of his character that he refuses to answer -- he's not presidential material.
-2
PussInBoots
Its irrelevant because legal charges were not filed and won't be filed. We won't ever know the truth. And what I am hearing sounds like the women would not stand a chance in court anyway.
Continued interest in this dead story is at best, morbid curiosity or an attempt by the press to foster morbid curiosity. At worst its character assassination.
Some people seem to be hoping for details that simply are not there or hoping that by hammering at it, people will imagine false details on their own.
This garbage won't change my opinion of him. I like the way he stiff arms the press, but man, that 9-9-9 thing. That is what makes him not presidential.
0
unreconstructed
SmithinJapan - You aren't making much sense. Exactly what has Cain been accused of?
0
yabits
In the court of public opinion, Cain is accused of -- after being given 10 days lead time by his own admission -- acting like an unprepared, deceptive, arrogant, ignorant buffoon. His fellow black Republican, Condi Rice, has decried his playing of the race card. His assertions of race not being a factor and then saying things like "the media is scared that a real black man might run against President Obama**" make him either an idiot or a hypocrite. (I don't believe it's the former.)
Cain's standing in the Republican, conservative ranks is more an accusation on them: How could anyone in their right minds believe that this simpering, hypocritical ignoramus -- qualities now confirmed after weeks of public exposure -- has the qualities to lead all Americans as their president is beyond me.
1
sailwind
Yabits,
Kindly explain how Politico contacted Cain's campaign about the allegations on Oct 20th and how they responded on Oct 24th and I quote from the original Politico article how it fits with your "facts".
On Oct. 20, Politico first approached Gordon about whether Cain had been the subject of complaints of sexual harassment.
Gordon didn’t respond for several days but emailed Politico on Oct. 24 that any dispute about Cain’s conduct at the restaurant association “was settled amicably among all parties many years ago.”
“These are old and tired allegations that never stood up to the facts,” Gordon said in an email response to Politico. “This was settled amicably among all parties many years ago, and dredging this up now is merely part of a smear campaign meant to discredit a true patriot who is shaking up the political status quo.”
And Politico published it on Oct 30th anyway after his campaign already had responded to them.
-1
Serrano
"Cain just palin doesn't like us ( liberals )"
Yeah, well, you don't like conservatives, so what's the big deal?
"Cain has proven he's unfit to lead the nation"
He has not.
-1
Serrano
Yeah, I meant "Cain just doesn't PLAIN like us ( liberals )" lol
-1
Serrano
Yeah, I meant "Cain just PLAIN doesn't like us ( liberals )" lol
-1
sailwind
The lead Politico reporter on this Politico hit peace....errr ....story, a Mr. Jonathan Martin was just on CNN being interviewed about his scoop. Real Clear Politics wasn't impressed with his answers in the interview they have the video link. They titled it:
Politico's Martin Still Can't Explain Exactly What Herman Cain Did
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2011/11/06/politicosmartinstillcantexplainexactlywhathermancain_did.html
-1
yabits
Perhaps RCP is ignorant of the women's allegations that Cain hit on them in a sexually-suggestive way.
What was settled amicably? Why should the public take Gordon's word that the allegations never stood up to the facts? The women, through their legal counsel, claim Cain is lying. That doesn't sound very amicable to me.
Nevertheless, Cain had 10 days to come up with all the details he should have needed to make this go away. Recall that initially, Cain denied there was ANY allegations. Then he changed it to one woman. Then the story changed to two women. At first he said there wasn't any payout, then he changed and said there was a small one.
The man was all over the place after being given 10 days lead time. Gordon's "response" is totally unfit for a candidate running for president.
-1
realdoll
I'm like Cain but have a hard time taking him seriously. Lately seeing that he isn't too bright and that debate sitting next to Gingrich made him look really dumb. He even looked blank after being asked a few questions and asked Newt to go first.. then after Newt finished he said he agreed then added a little more.
On this thing though, he probably did something inappropriate and is attacking the media for not letting it drop. His poll numbers will drop. If he was white people would be more critical of his intellect.. right now people are still infatuated by him being "different".. a conservative black.
0
sailwind
So what exactly did he say Yabits, so we can judge if it was really in a sexually-suggestive way?
0
samwatters
"...several female employees..." ".... A lawyer for one accuser of Cain..." "...None of the three women has come forward publicly" Names. Until I get the names of the women, I do not believe these accusations one bit.
-1
smithinjapan
Pussinboots: "We won't ever know the truth."
Especially when a would-be president refuses to acknowledge it and instead gets angry at people who question him. Quite the leader, that man! And it's interesting to see you comment on what you call a non-issue... TWICE!
unreconstructed: My bad, not sexual assault but harassment. We can still be angry, or not if we choose not to, at people in the world who commit sexual assault, can't we? That's what I said, after all "If he were just some Joe on the street...").
Serrano: ""Cain just palin doesn't like us ( liberals )"
Now was that a Freudian slip, perhaps? :)
0
Molenir
lol, Coming from a supporter of Obama, thats an amazing sentiment.
Whats most pathetic about this story, is that its all anonymous character assassination. Some women, not naming names, claimed he said or did something, and got a bunch of money because of it. But we don't know who it was. Only that there were several of them. Seriously, if they can't name the source, then whats the story?
-1
unreconstructed
If only Teddy Kennedy were alive to lead the Dems' attack on Cain, eh.
1
Triumvere
Sailwind, Samwatters, & Molenir:
You do realize that, at least in the case of the first two women, that they had to agree to a confidentiality agreement as part of their settlements against Cain and the Nat'l Restaurant Assossiation. They can't tell you their names or their stories because they are legally bound to silence. That's why you only get vague statements from the women's lawyers. The only way we can get their side of the story is if Cain and the NRA waive or break the agreement. They have the power to do so, but they won't.
I don't have any idea how credible these charges are, and neither do you. But this is not some sort of anonymus hit-job on candidate Cain: these accusations were raised and settled years ago. The only reason you don't know the names and details is because Cain doesn't want to tell you.
0
Madverts
The dems aren't attacking anyone old Friend. "Presidential contender Herman Cain got upset with reporters and vowed he would never answer questions about allegations of sexual harassment"
See, it's right there in the article. The media have dug up dirt on Cain, but for some reason he's vowed not to answer questions about the incident(s).
Perfectly normal behaviour from Mr Cain I agree, perhaps it's time to bring back the Chevy Volt to the discussion I wouldn't want a republican having to answer for past deeds of sexual misconduct. That's reserved for Democrats and French politicians accused in the US dammit, and boo-hoo that the media are reporting on stuff you don't want to hear!
0
Madverts
molenir,
"Whats most pathetic about this story"
Pathetic to you die-hard partisans perhaps because you are using the well re-knowed blinker La La technique, for unwanted news. I'm wondering what sort of miscreants they'd have to be before you guys take off the party blinkers.
0
unreconstructed
A form of harassment not unfamiliar to crooked cops in certain parts of zee world: "We have some dirt on you. Why don't you tell us what you think it might be."
Exactly what has Cain been accused of?
0
samwatters
"You do realize that, at least in the case of the first two women, that they had to agree to a confidentiality agreement as part of their settlements against Cain and the Nat'l Restaurant Assossiation. They can't tell you their names or their stories because they are legally bound to silence."
So then we must reach the logical that they agreed that whatever amount of money they agreed to was worth whatever self-esteem may have been violated...? Either way, these presumed victims had to agree to such a bargain.....and still they seem to be sharing a lot of information.
1
Fadamor
The fact that a confidentiality agreement was required indicates that embarassing things WOULD be divulged should the women talk. Their confidentiality agreement related to issues involving a businessman, not a potential front-runner for the Presidential election. Regardless of which side of this issue you're on, I would hope you see the difference and why the information needs to be divulged.
I believe the National Restaurant Association has given the women permission to speak on the matter, so I now await more details.
0
samwatters
@Fadamor. Well said.
-1
Taka313
From the freaking story:
First two paragraphs.
Apparently unreconstructed doesn't know the meaning of the word allegations.
Taka
1
Madverts
Ahem. I supposed Cain has been accused of nothing, if you're wearing eye-blinkers, have your hands against your ears and are screaming "la la I can't hear you".
Heh, hit me with some more thumbs down Old Friend, I know you are un-fairly equipped to give me several.
0
Madverts
"Their confidentiality agreement related to issues involving a businessman, not a potential front-runner for the Presidential election."
Even if he's applying to be the Republican representation at the Frisco Gay Pride parade the confidentiality issue relates to the man Herman Cain, not his job title.
"Regardless of which side of this issue you're on, I would hope you see the difference and why the information needs to be divulged."
The only person I presume that can release that information is Mr Cain himself.
Only he's vowing not to speak about the issue. Heh, you guys certainly know how to back a loser.
-3
SushiSake3
Simply amazing to see conservatives on this thread trying to shut down all talk about yet another one of their own dearly beloved embroiled in yet another dodgy scandal.
As Fadamor correctly stated, the only reason a confidentiality clause would be signed in a case like this is to shut someone up from leaking damaging information.
While decent individuals would actually be interested to find out whether or not this particular presidential candidate is playing above board, conservatives are falling over themselves to smother the truth from getting out, while internally, the ones with a shred of a conscience are shrieking ‘Not another one!?’
-2
SushiSake3
The more Cain stonewalls the American people from the truth, the worse it's going to get.
Heh, and there's been some conservatives on these Cain threads screaming that attacks on Cain are "racist." It's incredible that these people actually pretend to take themselves seriously.
Cain is like a boxer who suddenly turns on himself and repeatedly punches himself and his coach in the head. Pretty much the story of the entire GOP-TP, it would seem......
1
Triumvere
I'm not entirely sure; the NRA was part of the settlements. It may be the case that their permision is required as well. Also, there exists the possiblity that if Cain says too much about the allegations in question that he will have violated the agreement from his end, thus freeing the women to speak. At least one of the women, from my understanding, wants to speak publicly but cannot legally do so at present.
-1
yabits
What conservative backers of Cain want to do is to put the women who filed complaints against Cain on trial. Guess what? They aren't running for president.
I don't need to know exactly what he said to them. We have at least three different women who personally experienced what they saw as Cain's come-ons to them. Two of them felt it was egregious enough to file a complaint against their own CEO at the time the improper behavior took place. The thing that differentiates the women from Cain at this point is that the women have never changed their stories as Cain has.
Paying off multiple women is akin to admitting that the women had a valid grievance -- which, they have asserted through their attorneys, was of a sexual nature.
0
Madverts
" Also, there exists the possiblity that if Cain says too much about the allegations in question that he will have violated the agreement from his end, thus freeing the women to speak."
Good point, though rather moot for our fringe conservatives as their argument seems to hinge on this being some sort of conspiracy by the MSM (which is apparently run by left-wing Che's for the length of a democratic presidency) to smear Mr Cain, and obviously that these women were nothing but money-grubbers (although we can't mention what they said months back about DSK).
In fall fairness Mr Cain shouldn't really care about speaking of the incidents and therefore anulling the confidentiality clause, unless there is some truth in the allegations.
And more to the point, who cares anyway? His candidacy was toast before these "revelations".
0
Triumvere
I can't agree with these statements. In sexual harrasment suits against corperations, its often cheaper to settle than to go to court, even when the charges are baseless. I don't see a settlement as proof of guilt. Nor is it hard to see why Cain, if innocent, would want to stop the women from publically detailing their allegations. As to whether or not waiving the confidentiality clause would be benifical or not to Cain from a politcal standpoint, I don't really know.
The two point hurting Cain right now, as I see it, are A) the number of allegations, and B) Cains (mis)handling of the response. Sexual harrasment is an abuse of power as much as it is anything, and offenders repeat. The more women that come forward with allegations, the more I am inclined to beleive them. From a purely political perspective, however, I am inclined to find B considerably more worrying, however. Presidents have to manage crises, and Cain's performance so far has not engendered confidence.
-2
Taka313
The Chevy Volt is part of the liberal media conspiracy to take down Herman Cain!
All those reporters drive Chevy Volts when they ask questions Herman Cain doesn't want to answer.
Now THAT's a conspiracy!
I'm sure Obama is behind all of this somehow. Sneaky Chicago-politics style.
Taka
0
yabits
Hot off the press: A fourth woman is going public with her allegations this afternoon (NYC time).
0
Madverts
"I'm sure Obama is behind all of this somehow"
And let's not forget Obama's ties to terrorist Billy Ayres, I'm sure that has something to do with this. Didn't they, like - go to the same America-hating church for muslims or something?
0
Madverts
" In sexual harrasment suits against corperations, its often cheaper to settle than to go to court, even when the charges are baseless."
Another good point, but we're talking at least two settlements.
" As to whether or not waiving the confidentiality clause would be benifical or not to Cain from a politcal standpoint, I don't really know."
That's my point - if waiving the clause cleared the matter up for Mr Cain then he should surely show no qualms about breaking silence on the issue?
"The more women that come forward with allegations, the more I am inclined to beleive them."
I disagree. I know we talked about this in DSK's saga, but I'm inclined to believe the first two and not those piping up now. It reminds me of Ms Bannon in that case, only she was after fame rather than money. I wonder how much these ne claimees have been offered for their storiues by the gossip drooling media?
In all fairness you just had to be a woman working with Cain years back to be on every front page right now, whether he touched that ass or not.
0
Madverts
Also Triumvere,
Sexism was alize and well when these women made these claims, something not as easy to do back then as in this day and age. Somebody earlier said that we shouldn't take these claims into consideration as they can't be compared to today's standard. That's simply myopic.
0
Triumvere
I don't know. How do you determine such a thing? Sexual harrassment often boils down to "he said/she said." There is a distinct possibility that releasing the details will clarify nothing, but rather only make Cain look bad by assosiation. (The "he said/she said" thing is the reason why multiple allegations lend credibility - they strengthen the "she said" in comparison to the "he said.")
Things may be easier today, but sexism is surely still "alive and well." The weird thing with rape/sexual harassment allegations is that they very hard to make if you've been victimized, but are much easier to make if you haven't. I'm not sure how we deal with that.
The only clear conclusion we can draw is that the original allegations were not made to damage "candidate Cain" as they predate his running for office by a great margine.
0
Triumvere
Uhhhh....
For those of you who wanted names and details, the fourth accuser, Sharon Bialek, has some for you... and they are not at all pretty.
0
yabits
Word has it she's a longtime registered Republican.
0
YuriOtani
Taka313, the Democratic Party and President Obama are not behind this attack. Gee they would of waited for October. This is from the Republican party and Rick Perry. He has everything to gain and nothing to lose. Then it might be one of the other candidates. Group of no good backstabbers if you ask me.
0
Serrano
"Word has it she's a longtime registered Republican"
She must be ditsy then, right, yabits?
0
yabits
She appears to be more of a supporter of Huntsman. Urbane and intelligent.
-1
PussInBoots
I am pretty freaking far from being a conservative, and I want this shut down.
What information about a man's sex life could be positive unless it was so chaste it was practically non-existant? Bill Clinton survived all the crap that came out about him, although he was certainly damaged, but he never would have gotten elected if the info about his sex life came out earlier. We never would have had Clinton if so. So many good politicians have been lost due to the slightest hint that they are sexual beings. Whether R or D, I don't want to go there unless charges are pressed.
Any time sexual stuff is brought up, its less like a trial and more like jumping straight to the execution. Most of the words spoken are more like jeers from the crowd. Its like a monster none of us red blooded males should lightly unleash, let it come back to get us too.
Decent individuals would respect the out of court settlements and confidentiality agreements. Dragging this up is not only hurting Cain, whether he should be or not, but they are also hurting the alleged victims, whether they should be or not. A decent individual would have dropped this long ago. Most are hanging out hoping for smutty details, and could not care less about Cain himself or politics or the future or anything.
-1
PussInBoots
Oh, okay. You know they are honest. And you did hear what was said even if you happen to think that less information would aid clarity. And any woman acting like that after those words are hyper-reactive.
Yeah. Well the women are not running for president, as you said. They are not on trial. They have it real easy. Have they been cross checked at all? You can't light a fire under Cain's ass and then point to people sitting on soft cushions and exclaim "Why does he scream? These others aren't!".
0
WilliB
If anybody is still in doubt about the mainstream media bias, just look at the sh*tstorm of messages about this non-story. Even on this site, not 1 article about this unproven, unprovable, and un-disprovable accusation, but 3 right on top of the news.
Pathetic.
Back to top