Herman Cain Accused of Inappropriate Sexual Behavior: Two Women Receive Financial Settlements

reply to post by Indigo5

Now this is a comment that could be misinterpreted...if I had a crude mind.

Sorry...couldn't resist the humor.

Ha! I just now see the humor!

To make my post useful.....If Cain simply had a raunchy sense of humor like myself, I would be OK with it as long as he understood when it was appropriate and when it wasn't...between a man and woman in a professional working relationship? Nope. Secondly, seeing as each of these complaints indicate that the humor was followed by an invitation to his hotel room or apartment...it looks to be one part humor, one part harrasment, one part infidelity.

Well, if these accusations turn out to be true, then I'll be the first to toss Herman under the bus. I have known those type of guys, and they disgust me. Some Alpha male walking into a room and spraying his musk around... gtfoh! Makes the whole room uncomfortable. But I have to be convinced before I will ruin a guy's life, is all.

reply to post by Eurisko2012


I agree with what you said. I also want remind people that this issue can be used to divide us. This incident happened 12 years ago and if he was behaving in this manner as recent as nowadays then fine hold it against him but this happened 12 years ago. Let the past die....and if you feel that he lied because he can't remember what went down 12 years ago then fine be that way. The End!

reply to post by Eurisko2012

I'm awake! It's Gov. Sarah Palin!

----------
She will take on Hillary Clinton while Obama hides out at the golf course.

Obama approval ratings will go down further and force him to concentrate on running the
country while Hillary takes over as the one running for the democrats in January 2012.

NO! We've seen what happens when he runs the country! Don't give him the keys! Just buy him an ice cream cone and sit him in the corner in the shade...

Come off your high horse Mishigas - YOU'RE the one who started comparing this to John Edwards - no one else.

John Edwards - extramarital affair - not illegal - Edwards driven out of politics over it.

Herman Cain - accused of sexual harassment - sexual harassment is illegal - Cain living in denial over it.

Yes it needs to be confirmed if it happened, but circumstances are shaping up that looks like it is, and he PAID to make this woman go away. (well, 2 now) And more sources are coming forward that this indeed did happen. This is a far cry from an affair between two consenting adults, sexual harassment is a crime, often settled in civil court but sometimes in a criminal court.

No one gave Edwards a pass and he is out of politics over his affair. Gingrich did far worse in this respect (i.e. multiple affairs) and no one is driving him out of politics for it. Clinton didn't receive a pass, last time I checked he was impeached over his affair.

Oh and BTW, Cain's tax plan is a huge farce - in case it escaped your notice, his plan requires the creation of a brand spanking NEW system of revenue, the national sales tax, to be added on top of whatever local, city, and states sales tax already in place. And you know after the first year those "9's" are going to start creeping up. What happens when it's no longer "9-9-9" but "25-25-9"? Creating a wholly new tax revenue (nat. sales tax) is the proverbial letting of the genie out of the bottle - once it's done, it can't be undone. And if you really think it will remain at 9%, then you are seriously naive.

Originally posted by Eurisko2012
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

 

The impeachment came AFTER he lied under oath. - Perjury -

The MSM gave him a pass and Clinton was elected with the help of Ross Perot.

The impeachment also came "AFTER" he started his second term...Clinton was neither elected nor ran after the impeachment. You seem confused on time.

reply to post by Blackmarketeer

Come off your high horse Mishigas - YOU'RE the one who started comparing this to John Edwards - no one else.

Because you made some absurd statement about how affairs are OK because they are legal. Doesn't matter that Edwards was found guilty while Cain is target of rumors...you're convinced that he should be able to remember everything that happened 12 years ago.

And Edwards was guilty of using campaign funds to pay for his honey's rent. . ILLEGAL!

John Edwards - extramarital affair - not illegal - Edwards driven out of politics over it.

Herman Cain - accused of sexual harassment - sexual harassment is illegal - Cain living in denial over it.

See what I mean?

Yes it needs to be confirmed if it happened, but circumstances are shaping up that looks like it is, and he PAID to make this woman go away. (well, 2 now) And more sources are coming forward that this indeed did happen. This is a far cry from an affair between two consenting adults, sexual harassment is a crime, often settled in civil court but sometimes in a criminal court.

No one gave Edwards a pass and he is out of politics over his affair. Gingrich did far worse in this respect (i.e. multiple affairs) and no one is driving him out of politics for it. Clinton didn't receive a pass, last time I checked he was impeached over his affair.

And here he goes, ladies and gentlemen, attempting to derail the issue by bringing Newt Gingrich into the talk... notice the partisanship at play here...

Oh and BTW, Cain's tax plan is a huge farce - in case it escaped your notice, his plan requires the creation of a brand spanking NEW system of revenue, the national sales tax, to be added on top of whatever local, city, and states sales tax already in place. And you know after the first year those "9's" are going to start creeping up. What happens when it's no longer "9-9-9" but "25-25-9"? Creating a wholly new tax revenue (nat. sales tax) is the proverbial letting of the genie out of the bottle - once it's done, it can't be undone. And if you really think it will remain at 9%, then you are seriously naive.

Huh?? Who's talking taxes? You're skipping tracks here, bunky.

Originally posted by mishigas
But I have to be convinced before I will ruin a guy's life, is all.

I suspect he did what is in those complaints.

I know he handled this horribly and changed his story multiple times, pointed fingers, dishonestly claimed to be unaware of the complaints, tried to shift the focus to Liberals, Rick Perry, Mitt Romney, TPTB and even played the "racist" card.

For me the second part is sufficient not to want the man to be our President. I don't need to be convinced of the first.

reply to post by Indigo5

The impeachment also came "AFTER" he started his second term...Clinton was neither elected nor ran after the impeachment. You seem confused on time.

Just remember that his impeachment had NOTHING to do with the affair, per se. He was impeached because he lied under oath to Congress.

Originally posted by Eurisko2012
The impeachment came AFTER he lied under oath. - Perjury -

And that has WHAT to do with the fact that you claimed Clinton didn't have a sex scandal and got a pass because he's a Democrat? Nothing. But keep trying to change the subject.

Originally posted by mishigas
You knew this, I'm sure. But still, you chose to convict him.

Convict him of what?

Originally posted by Eurisko2012
Clintons scandals were big news BUT the MSM made excuses for him.
Well, who cares about all this? It looks like a bunch of sex. Who cares? Scandal?
What scandal???

Prove it. I REMEMBER the MSM coverage and it was not pretty and did not favor "Slick Willie".

They attacked the credibility of the accusers.

Which is ALSO happening now.

And in the news...

Second Accuser Receives Even Bigger Settlement

I like Cain, but things are not stacking up well for him right now. It might be best to just let it all air out at this point. Let his accusers come out and tell their tales. THE MSM is certainly doing their job in vetting this particular candidate. Too bad they didn't turn the same screws on vetting Obama back when he was still a candidate. He would have never won the primary against Hillary. No chance. The MSM ignored any and all Obama scoop.

If Cain has the skeletons, get them out and deal with them. Then move on with the campaign if its still viable. Better now than on Election Eve.

MUST SEE! I guffawed at Jon's take on this last night. The Daily Show

Because you made some absurd statement about how affairs are OK because they are legal. Doesn't matter that Edwards was found guilty while Cain is target of rumors...you're convinced that he should be able to remember everything that happened 12 years ago.

Wrong. Never said that they were OK because they are legal - learn to read. I said they weren't ILLEGAL, and I'll say it again. EXTRAMARITAL AFFAIRS ARE NOT ILLEGAL. You cannot face criminal sanctions over an extramarital affair. Whatever moral revulsion they illicit (usually from the xtine fundies) they don't create the same furor as does a sexual harassment charge.

Sexual harassment IS illegal.

And regarding Cain's inability to remember something from 12 years ago - well, looks like Cain contradicted himself again there, now he's claiming he briefed his campaign staff back in 2004 on his sexual harassment charges - that was only 7 years ago. Which story is true this time, Cain? 12 years ago or did you mean 7 years ago?

And here he goes, ladies and gentlemen, attempting to derail the issue by bringing Newt Gingrich into the talk... notice the partisanship at play here...

I bring up Gingrich to refute your argument about Edwards. Both engaged in extramarital affairs, and only one of those (Edwards) is out of politics over it. I could care less how many affairs Gingrich has or had, or WHAT his lifestyle is, and it's not an issue in the media. There's a big difference between affairs like those by had by Edwards and Gingrich, and potentially criminal behavior like sexual harassment. Cain PAID his accusers to go away and had them sign NDA's to keep them quiet about it.

Huh??

Who's talking taxes? You're skipping tracks here, bunky.

edit on 3-11-2011 by mishigas because: (no reason given)

Right here

This tiny speed bump will fall behind Herman Cain in a few days.

Then it will be time to talk about his new economic plan. I think it's called the 9-9-9 plan.

9% Flat Corporate Tax

9% Flat Income Tax

9% National Sales Tax

Since it was raised, I responded. Or are we no longer allowed to respond to topics raised in this post without your approval?
Like I said, come off your high horse.

reply to post by jibeho

I like Cain, but things are not stacking up well for him right now. It might be best to just let it all air out at this point. Let his accusers come out and tell their tales. THE MSM is certainly doing their job in vetting this particular candidate. Too bad they didn't turn the same screws on vetting Obama back when he was still a candidate. He would have never won the primary against Hillary. No chance. The MSM ignored any and all Obama scoop.

If Cain has the skeletons, get them out and deal with them. Then move on with the campaign if its still viable. Better now than on Election Eve.

Imo, a candidate should announce with words to this effect: "If you're looking for a perfect human being, that's not me. I have made mistakes just like every other human being. But I have never been malicious or deliberately hurtful to any other person".

If he can truthfully say that, then I will still consider him for office.

reply to post by Blackmarketeer

Because you made some absurd statement about how affairs are OK because they are legal. Doesn't matter that Edwards was found guilty while Cain is target of rumors...you're convinced that he should be able to remember everything that happened 12 years ago.

Wrong. Never said that they were OK because they are legal - learn to read. I said they weren't ILLEGAL, and I'll say it again. EXTRAMARITAL AFFAIRS ARE NOT ILLEGAL. You cannot face criminal sanctions over an extramarital affair. Whatever moral revulsion they illicit (usually from the xtine fundies) they don't create the same furor as does a sexual harassment charge.

Same thing. You can mince words and parse sentences but in the end you are still a partisan shill who will defend whoremongers if they are liberal.

And regarding Cain's inability to remember something from 12 years ago - well, looks like Cain contradicted himself again there, now he's claiming he briefed his campaign staff back in 2004 on his sexual harassment charges - that was only 7 years ago. Which story is true this time, Cain? 12 years ago or did you mean 7 years ago?

I'll defer to Mr. Cain, since he lived that life. As should you instead of listening to mockingbirds.

And here he goes, ladies and gentlemen, attempting to derail the issue by bringing Newt Gingrich into the talk... notice the partisanship at play here...

I bring up Gingrich to refute your argument about Edwards. Both engaged in extramarital affairs, and only one of those (Edwards) is out of politics over it. I could care less how many affairs Gingrich has or had, or WHAT his lifestyle is, and it's not an issue in the media. There's a big difference between affairs like those by had by Edwards and Gingrich, and potentially criminal behavior like sexual harassment. Cain PAID his accusers to go away and had them sign NDA's to keep them quiet about it.

As I pointed out, the straw that broke Edward's back was not morality, but illegality. He paid for the bimbo with campaign funds.

Huh?? Who's talking taxes? You're skipping tracks here, bunky.
edit on 3-11-2011 by mishigas because: (no reason given)

Right here

This tiny speed bump will fall behind Herman Cain in a few days.

Then it will be time to talk about his new economic plan. I think it's called the 9-9-9 plan.

9% Flat Corporate Tax

9% Flat Income Tax

9% National Sales Tax


Since it was raised, I responded. Or are we no longer allowed to respond to topics raised in this post without your approval?

No, you can respond at will. Just respond to the correct post. I never made that post, bunky.

Originally posted by jibeho
The MSM ignored any and all Obama scoop.

What Obama scoop did the MSM ignore? The rumors about him being everything from a terrorist sympathizer to gay to a foreigner? Those are RUMORS. And they weren't ignored. The MSM reported on the RUMORS.

This Cain story is actual fact. Cain was accused of sexual harassment twice at least. that's a fact. His company paid off at least two women. These are facts that Cain himself has shared with us. These are not rumors.

reply to post by mishigas


I'm waiting for your response. What am I convicting Cain of?

reply to post by mishigas


It feels like I'm arguing with someone with a serious attention deficit disorder, at best reading comprehension issues.

You raise a point then mock someone for replying to it. You raised the Edwards issue but then went into hysterics when I mention Gingrich. You state that dems get an automatic pass on such scandals then hurl epithets and labels at anyone who points out the falsity of such claims.

No, you can respond at will. Just respond to the correct post. I never made that post, bunky.

And you'll notice my reply did not state "Reply to". Quit making assumptions and trying to derail the thread with personal attacks. I believe members of this site can still address the board in general without having Mishigas go into meltdown over it.

Back on topic;
Cain singled out Curt Anderson as the only one he ever confided in his scandal. Turns out Cain got that wrong too. Now three former Cain campaign staffers are working for Perry, and all 3 had been briefed on the potential scandal.

But Anderson may not be the only possible leak. Perry's newly hired pollster Tony Fabrizio also worked on Cain's Senate campaign, and may have also known about the accusations. And Perry backer Chris Wilson was a pollster for the National Restaurant Association at the time of the allegations, and claims to have witnessed the incidents.

Source

reply to post by Blackmarketeer

reply to post by mishigas


It feels like I'm arguing with someone with a serious attention deficit disorder, at best reading comprehension issues.

You raise a point then mock someone for replying to it. You raised the Edwards issue but then went into hysterics when I mention Gingrich. You state that dems get an automatic pass on such scandals then hurl epithets and labels at anyone who points out the falsity of such claims.

No, you can respond at will. Just respond to the correct post. I never made that post, bunky.


And you'll notice my reply did not state "Reply to". Quit making assumptions and trying to derail the thread with personal attacks. I believe members of this site can still address the board in general without having Mishigas go into meltdown over it.

You're the one that woke up from his nap all cranky and stuff. Nobody is 'going into hysterics' -- you just take this stuff too seriously Go back to sleep. Don't wake up until you've chilled out. You have your posts all mixed up.

Cain Accuser May Issue Statement Today

One of the Cain accusers, a Maryland woman who works for the federal government, wants to release a written statement via her lawyer to dispute Cain's strong denials of the allegations about his tenure at the National Restaurant Association.
...
But both of the women who accused Cain of sexual harassment and received settlements are said to fear the consequences of going public.

"There's good reason for them to be afraid," said Ricki Seidman, the political operative who persuaded Anita Hill to go public during Clarence Thomas's confirmation hearings.

I hope these women are brave enough to come out. I'd really like to hear their side of the story. We've heard Cain's changing story, let's hear theirs.

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


I have bad news for you.
-------------
The - smear Herman Cain campaign - has failed miserably.

It looks like we have an intelligent population here in the USA. Recent polling data
shows Americans see the MSM scoop on Cain to be - just another smear campaign-
---- yawn ---.

Nice try.
----------
Cash is pouring into the Herman Cain bank account.

Hop on the Cain Train today!

Originally posted by Eurisko2012
I have bad news for you.
-------------
The - smear Herman Cain campaign - has failed miserably.

This is neither bad or good news and it's not even news at all. It's your opinion... Your assumption that reporting on possible criminal behavior of a presidential candidate is a "smear campaign" is another of your opinions.

I am patient enough to see what comes out in the next week so I can form my opinions based on the whole story, not just one side.

I admit, I thought Cain was innocent and I even said so. I thought this would be old news today. But new developments have made me reconsider.

Cash is pouring into the Herman Cain bank account.

I don't doubt that angry, rich Republicans are pouring their support behind Cain in his time of need... They don't care about the truth. They just want their guy to win. So, this isn't a surprise. Give it time. We'll see where it all comes down.