Tag Archives: Allegations

A Well-Orchestrated Take-Down

One can’t help but notice all the suspicious coincidences surrounding the Herman Cain “story” (all accusations included) that has been sucking the oxygen out of the GOP media-cycle for weeks. Least among the curious coincidences in the stories is that all of these accusers come out of a 3-year period where Cain served as President of the National Restaurant Association. No other complaints come from any other organization in his decades-long career. That’s too strange to understand. The distraction is undoubtedly deliberate, but who stands to gain the most from it?

Are the accusers receiving money or other incentives for going public with these accusations now? And what’s up with all of the Cain accusers being evicted? Just yesterday, Sharon Bialek, the first accuser to come out of the shadows and speak publicly about her accusations, was served eviction papers.

Ginger White, who has had numerous evictions or threats of eviction over the years, also decides to go public now with an alleged 13-year long affair with Cain, even though she didn’t seem compelled to speak out when he ran for the Senate a few years ago to represent the state in which she lives. Desperation really brings out the worst in people, but this seems to be more than a woman trying to get a book deal or her 15-minutes of fame. It’s all too smoothly-scripted, and the media is eagerly getting into character.

This begs the question: Who is orchestrating this take-down?

The MSM is terrified of Herman Cain. While he has some significant shortcomings on his political resume, he is a dynamic leader with proven business success, and he has a fierce intensity of support among white and black Americans. This is clearly a threat to the re-election of Obama, since having two black candidates on the 2012 ballot would level the playing field for those who insist on voting exclusively along racial lines.

However, the fact that this story broke during the primary season instead of remaining buried until the GOP nominee had been decided leads me to believe that it might have been initiated by an opponent on the right. The best strategy for a sitting Democratic President would clearly have been to drop the sexual impropriety allegations as an October surprise, but that isn’t at all what has happened. Either someone is wagging the dog – maybe to distract those on the right from all the outrage brewing in response to Obama’s absurd abuse of power (he’s signed like 9,000 executive orders this year) – or the news was strategically leaked in an effort to benefit someone hoping to win the GOP nomination. Would a candidate on the right sabotage the campaign of one of his conservative brethren? Sadly, the answer to that question is a resounding yes.

Whoever it is that has their hands on the marionette strings should be given some credit, because clearly the plan is working. Herman Cain, the most refreshing capitalist to join Presidential politics in generations, is witnessing total disintegration of his campaign. Because of the path this scandal has taken, he’s pretty well tarnished to the point that he can’t even be considered a viable option for the veep position. It’s unfortunate, and we can only hope that the truth will eventually be revealed, but for now, it looks like Herman Cain is about to exit stage right.

Herman Cain Better Be Telling The Truth


Oh, Herman.  Why did you double down so forcibly?  I hope Cain’s innocent, really I do.  Tuesday’s press conference gave him little wiggle room.  Within the first 1 minute and 45 seconds, Herman Cain said that he saw Sharon Bialek for “the very first time”, that he “doesn’t even know who this woman is”, and that he “doesn’t recognize her name at all”.  By the 2 minute and 20 second mark, he had repeated that he didn’t know who Sharon Bialek is and that he didn’t recognize her name.

I hope that’s true.  We already know that he saw her in September of this year, but that might have been the only time he’s ever seen her, and he may honestly have forgotten about it.

But when you think back to Sharon Bialek’s original press conference, Sharon was very, very specific in her accusations.  Here’s some of the transcript from that press conference.

“I took the train into Washington, D.C. When I went to check into the room I was shocked to be taken to a palatial suite. I said to the bellman that there must be some mistake, but he insisted that there was no mistake. I later found out that Mr. Cain had arranged for the suite, though at the time I thought that maybe my boyfriend had tried to surprise me.

“I met Mr. Cain in the lobby of the bar at the Capitol Hilton at around 6:30 p.m. We had drinks at the hotel, and he asked how I liked my room, which is kind of normal, and I said I was very surprised. I said, I can’t believe it, I’ve got this great suite, it’s gorgeous. Mr. Cain kind of smirked, and then said, ‘I upgraded you.’

“He then took me to an Italian restaurant where we had dinner. During dinner, Mr. Cain looked at me and said, ‘Why are you here?’ I said, ‘Actually, Herman, my boyfriend, whom you met, suggested that I meet with you ‘cause he thought you could help me because I really need a job. I was wondering if there’s anything available at the state association level or perhaps if you could speak to someone at the foundation to try to get my job back, perhaps even in a different department.’ He said, ‘I’ll look into that.’

“While we were driving back to the hotel, he said that he would show me where the National Restaurant Association offices were. He parked the car down the block. I thought that we were going to go into the offices so he that could show me around. At that time I had on a black pleated skirt, a suit jacket and a blouse. He had on a suit with his shirt open. But instead of going into the offices, he suddenly reached over and he put his hand on my leg under my skirt and reached for my genitals. He also grabbed my head and brought it toward his crotch. I was very, very surprised and very shocked.

“I said: ‘What are you doing? You know I have a boyfriend. This isn’t what I came here for.’ Mr. Cain said, ‘You want a job, right?’

“I asked him to stop and he did. I asked him to take me back to my hotel which he did, right away.”

Here are some of the details just from that transcript:
She said that she stayed in the Capitol Hilton
He upgraded her room to a suite.
She met him in the lobby bar for drinks
They went to an Italian restaurant.
She had on a pleated skirt.

When you listen to her tell the tale in her press conference (that the transcript above is from), she really seems to be making specific accusations and “recalling” specific details.  When Herman Cain says that he doesn’t even know who Bialek is, he’s denying a LOT of things.  So, if even ONE of them is true, it casts a lot of his testimony into question.

If any one of the things Ms. Bialek claims is proven to be true, then Herman’s goose can be cooked.  (hotel records, credit card records, etc…)  I feel that Mr. Cain took a very big gamble by saying he had did not even know who Sharon Bialek is.  I think it would have been a safer bet for him to say he’s “not sure” if he’d ever seen her before, but by making such adamant claims, he’s really given himself little recourse in the event (or if) he’s ever proven to not be telling the truth.

Of course… if he IS telling the truth, then his gamble may likely pay off.

What do you guys think?  Did Herman take too big of a risk by saying so adamantly that he did not even know who Sharon Bialek is?  Should he have been more vague and just said that he “didn’t recall ever meeting her”?  Or, should he have “put his chips all in”, as it seems he has?  What would you do, if you were accused of wrong doing by someone on national TV, for that matter?  I’m not sure what I would do, if I was in that situation, myself.

As always, let us know what you think in the comments below.  I know a lot of you are tired of this conversation, but we’re trying to choose a leader of the free world, and part of the process is gauging how candidates do under pressure.  And right now, I’d say Herman Cain is under pressure.

 

Herman Cain Releases Statement About Anonymous Accusers


Below is a statement Herman Cain released today in regards to anonymous accusers.  No mention was made of Sharon Bialek.

I am a serious person, seeking the opportunity to do a serious and very important job. Our nation has very serious problems, particularly of an economic nature, and Barack Obama does not have the skill, knowledge or will to solve them.

I do.

Unfortunately, the media-driven process by which one must seek this opportunity is fundamentally unserious. I have touched on this before – the emphasis on “gaffes,” gotcha questions and time devoted to trivial nonsense – and everyone knows the process only became further detached from relevance this week as the media published anonymous, ancient, vague personal allegations against me.

Once this kind of nonsense starts, the media’s rules say you have to act in a certain way. I am well aware of these rules. And I refuse to play by them.

There are several reasons for this. One is that, lest anyone forget, we actually have serious matters to talk about. Since the media went bananas over this so-called story, my schedule has not changed in the slightest. I have continued to make all planned public appearances. I have continued to answer questions about my 9-9-9 tax reform plan. I have continued to do everything else that our strategy proscribes.

Another reason I refuse to play by these rules is that, by doing it my way, I’m getting much better results. My fundraising has skyrocketed since all this nonsense began. Just this weekend, the Washington Post has come out with a new poll – taken since all this started – showing me in the lead nationally, with my numbers on the rise.

The media may be obsessed with this business, but the voters are not. And I am not.

But there’s another crucially important reason I refuse to play by these rules: These rules stink. Can the process by which we pick the leader of our nation be any more absurd? I’m not talking about the primary process or the role of the electorate. There is nothing wrong with that. I am talking about the media’s trivializing of such an important matter.

Consider: I held various executive positions in corporate America for several decades. I had thousands of employees working for me. I can’t even begin to recall how many conversations I had with people during that time, how many directives I gave, how much friendly banter might have taken place.

I also had to make tough decisions during these years. I turned around a poorly performing region for Burger King, then turned around a struggling Godfather’s Pizza organization. At some point during a career like this, someone will not like things you do, or how you do it. Someone will complain.

That is just the nature of things if you’ve ever done much in your life.

So once the editors of Politico started looking for people who would make claims against me, their chances of finding a few takers were probably about 100 percent. These people will not give their names. The so-called “witnesses” who purportedly corroborated their stories also will not give their names. That’s about what you would expect when people are engaging in a “hatchet job,” as it’s been described by Joseph Fassler, who was chairman of the National Restaurant Association board when I was there.

It’s easy to make accusations when, by virtue of your anonymity, you don’t have to be held accountable for the claims you’re making. It’s easy to publish them when, like Politico, you don’t follow basic rules of journalism by naming your sources or giving any details whatsoever about what supposedly happened.

But the process by which we choose our presidents has become so warped that, when something like this happens, the media and political strategists start grading you on whether you play an absurd game by their absurd rules.

When someone stops you on the street and hits you with an accusation like this, they subsequently write a story about the look in your eyes, and how many seconds it took you to speak some words in response. They go to “crisis management experts” who offer the usual sage wisdom about “getting all the information out” – as if you can get any “information” out (aside from telling them nothing happened, which they don’t want to hear) in response to allegations that are unsourced and nonspecific.

Then, when you haven’t “calmed the firestorm” – if only because the people wielding the blow-torches have no intention of putting them out – more experts are put on the air to say this proves you are “not ready for prime time.”

Maybe that would matter if I was trying out for the cast of Saturday Night Live. But this should be a slightly more serious undertaking than that.

Contrary to the belief of experts, so wise and learned in the ways of politics, I do know what the established rules say I am supposed to do. I simply refuse to do it. That’s because the rules are ridiculous, and they produce leaders like Barack Obama, who play the political game like experts but govern like complete incompetents.

The nation needs its tax structure reformed, its spending brought under control, its debt reduced and its overall governing structure made far more responsive to the needs of the people. The nation needs many other problems addressed. If it’s OK with the American people, I would like to address them.

If the media want to continue talking about nonsense, that’s fine. I’m not going to join them. It doesn’t look like the citizenry plans to join them either.

**Update: Cain Camp Blames Perry For Leaking Sexual Harassment Story


It’s going to be a long week for Herman Cain, if this is dropping so late on a Wednesday night….

This just in from Politico:

Cain’s inflammatory charge came in an interview with Forbes:

In the summer of 2003, Cain recalls briefing Anderson—his general campaign consultant at the time—that sexual harassment claims were brought against him while he was chairman of the National Restaurant Association from 1996 to 1999.

“I told my wife about this in 1999 and I’ve got nothing to hide,” Cain told me Wednesday. “When I sat down with my general campaign consultant Kurt Anderson in a private room in our campaign offices in 2003 we discussed opposition research on me. It was a typical campaign conversation. I told him that there was only one case, one set of charges, one woman while I was at the National Restaurant Association. Those charges were baseless, but I thought he needed to know about them. I don’t recall anyone else being in the room when I told him.” …

Aside from knowing about the alleged sexual harassment accusations, Cain campaign officials point to the timing of Anderson’s hiring by Perry as evidence of his involvement. The campaign announced Anderson’s role on October 24, just a week before Politico broke the story.

Does he regret telling Anderson about it? “I don’t regret it at all,” Cain says. “The guy who was supposed to help with strategy should know everything. I put it on the table right from the get go. I wasn’t trying to hide it.”

UPDATE:
Herman Cain’s campaign manager, Mark Block, went on Fox News to personally accuse the Perry campaign of leaking the sexual harassment charges to Politico.  He says, “The actions of the Perry campaign are despicable.”  Video is below.


UPDATE 2:

Now the Perry camp points their finger at the Romney camp. (I kid you not, people)
This via CBS.com:

Rick Perry’s presidential campaign says it is “absolutely not” responsible for leaking the fact that Herman Cain was accused of sexual misconduct while head of the National Restaurant Association to Politico, which broke the explosive story Sunday night.

“That is false, patently untrue, no one at this campaign was involved in this story,” said Perry communications director Ray Sullivan.

Sullivan then suggested to CBS News and National Journal reporter Rebecca Kaplan that Mitt Romney’s campaign is behind the allegations.

“I wouldn’t put it past them,” he said, stating that blog posts have noted that Cain’s successor at the Restaurant Association “is a big Romney donor.”

“There are much closer connections between the Restaurant Association, Cain and the Romney camp than there are with us,” he said.

Federal Election Commission records show that Steven C. Anderson, who succeeded Cain as the Restaurant Association’s CEO, gave $1,000 to Romney’s campaign on July 14, Kaplan reports. He also gave a total of $1,000 to Cain in two $500 installments during Cain’s 2003-2004 Senate campaign.

In response to Sullivan’s comments, Romney spokesperson Andrea Saul offered two words to CBS News: “Not true.” She declined to elaborate.

Herman Cain Talks About How Accusations Of Sexual Harassment Have Affected His Campaign

On Tuesday night, Herman Cain went onto the O’Reilly Factor to discuss (among other things) how the allegations of sexual harassment have impacted his campaign.  According to him, business is better than ever.  Watch the video below to see what Cain says about how these allegations have impacted him and his campaign.

 

 

 

 

I have to admit that Cain makes some compelling points in this video, especially the fact that over a course of 42 years, these (supposedly) “baseless” accusations are the only thing he’s been confronted with.

What do you think?  Is this story finally behind him?  Or does Herman still have some ‘splainin to do?  Let us know in the comments below, or if you’re feeling really ambitious, you can rent out a billboard with your opinion on it.  Prizes will be awarded to the most creative billboard that’s submitted.  The deadline is 3pm tomorrow afternoon. (but we suggest telling us in the comments section; it’s much simpler for all of us)