Herman Cain accused of 'sexually suggestive behaviour'

@TheLeapist,

Now, that could be very significant, Leapist. To what article are you referring - you know, give a source, post a link, let us judge.

2 Replies

@roger,

Thanks Hawkeye. I guess we crossposted.

0 Replies

@roger,

Quote:

“She was fired from her job, and her boyfriend suggested she contact Cain in hopes he could help her find employment.”.

In this particular incident she was fired for falsely accusing her boss of sexual harassment, a charge denied by co-workers, as well as being pretty much a pain in the ass to work with.

“I remember her as a time-waster, and rabble-rouser. If she didn’t get her way she cried about sexual harassment”. A former co-worker, a female no less, emailed me. “She was trouble with a capital “T”. The fact that she waited 13 years and never said a word not even during Cain’s earlier forays into politics. She only now magically appears because Cain is leading in some polls and proving a threat to Barack Obama?

http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2011/11/08/sharon-baileks-credibility-begins-to-unravel/

Hijacked from other thread. This is even different than what hawkeye posted.

1 Reply

@TheLeapist,

TheLeapist wrote:

Quote:
“She was fired from her job, and her boyfriend suggested she contact Cain in hopes he could help her find employment.”.

In this particular incident she was fired for falsely accusing her boss of sexual harassment, a charge denied by co-workers, as well as being pretty much a pain in the ass to work with.

“I remember her as a time-waster, and rabble-rouser. If she didn’t get her way she cried about sexual harassment”. A former co-worker, a female no less, emailed me. “She was trouble with a capital “T”. The fact that she waited 13 years and never said a word not even during Cain’s earlier forays into politics. She only now magically appears because Cain is leading in some polls and proving a threat to Barack Obama?

http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2011/11/08/sharon-baileks-credibility-begins-to-unravel/

Hijacked from other thread. This is even different than what hawkeye posted.

Um, there's no sourcing on that whatsoever. If you follow the links back, it's presented (without attribution) at some far-right wing websites who are linking to each other.

Not exactly convincing.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

Well it's their word against hers. You're just picking sides. Furthermore it would make sense, especially in combination with hawkeye's post.

I'm no supporter of Hermain Cain, in fact I want him to disappear as fast as possible so we can refocus on candidates that actually have a chance to be the GOP candidate. I just don't think anyone should be too quick to believe these people.

5 Replies

@TheLeapist,

and yet you are johnny on the spot to believe the other people. (and hawkeyes)

hmmmm.

1 Reply

@TheLeapist,

Quote:

I just don't think anyone should be too quick to believe these people.

Those people should be Republicans as no democrat in his or her right mind would wish to knock this fool out of the running.

0 Replies

@Rockhead,

I was 100% sure that the allegations against Cain were true until this morning when I read the article I posted. Even if it isn't true it still made me realize that I wanted Cain out so bad that I was ready to believe anything negative thrown at him and that's not a fair, logical nor responsible way to go about anything, politics included.

2 Replies

@TheLeapist,

TheLeapist wrote:

.

I'm no supporter of Hermain Cain, in fact I want him to disappear as fast as possible so we can refocus on candidates that actually have a chance to be the GOP candidate. I just don't think anyone should be too quick to believe these people.

This is wild west justice, where a man is destroyed professionally if just one woman makes unsupported claims of sexual misconduct against him. Furthermore, even a small posse of woman claiming that a man is a **** does not mean that he is, and certainly does not mean that we should disown him.

0 Replies

@TheLeapist,

TheLeapist wrote:

Well it's their word against hers.

Who is 'their?' Why do they have any credibility at all?

The truth is that you don't know who 'they' are, and they have none whatsoever. The sites you linked to regularly print the wildest of lies, trash and conspiracy theories. So, no - it's not a matter of simply 'picking sides.'

Quote:

I'm no supporter of Hermain Cain, in fact I want him to disappear as fast as possible so we can refocus on candidates that actually have a chance to be the GOP candidate. I just don't think anyone should be too quick to believe these people.

Why not? What do ANY of them have to gain? Nothing at all. That's the part you don't seem to understand. Why would anyone bring things from more than a decade ago up, with nothing to gain, if they didn't have some truth to them? Your attempt to tar these ladies as liars is a little ridiculous.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@TheLeapist,

Cain entered the race knowing that these settlements were out there.

I don't care about Bialek...

1 Reply

@TheLeapist,

Those charges and his crying about them as a victim is likely the only thing that is keeping him in the race.

Every time he open his mouth on a serous subject he make Palin look like a member of Mensa.

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Quote:

Why not? What do ANY of them have to gain? Nothing at all. That's the part you don't seem to understand. Why would anyone bring things from more than a decade ago up, with nothing to gain, if they didn't have some truth to them? Your attempt to tar these ladies as liars is a little ridiculous.

For the sole purpose of bringing him down? Maybe some opponent, be it rep or dem, put them up to it? Or maybe they personally didn't want to see him as a candidate? Bialek, especially if she's really like how that article claims she is, would probably do something like this merely for the 15 minutes of fame.

I dunno. But I do know that the only woman I called out as a liar was Bialek. Not all the others. You put those words in my mouth. I'm personally, as of current, undecided about this whole thing. Doesn't, though, change the fact that Cain, sexual harasser or not, does not belong in this race and is an embarrassment. And in the midst of these terrible candidates that is saying A LOT.

@Rockhead
100% agree. He was an idiot for ever running in the beginning. But I genuinely believe he never thought he'd make it this far.

1 Reply

@Rockhead,

Rockhead wrote:

Cain entered the race knowing that these settlements were out there.

Says who? And I am not sure that it matters if he did, Auto insurance companies pay out an estimated $14 billion a year in fraudulent claims because paying is cheaper that doing the right thing....in an era where the bottom line matter most legal and financial stewards of organizations are going to demand that oft times settlements be arrived at that never would have gotten a dime if all was right with the world. Settlements have not implied guilt in America for a long time.

0 Replies

@engineer,

First of all I should retract the word "proven" from my prior post because to use it is be inaccurate. To my knowledge, none of the charges against Clinton were ever actually proven in a court of law.

[He was, however, cited for contempt of court by Judge Susan Webber Wright for "giving false, misleading and evasive answers that were designed to obstruct the judicial process."]

As for accusations, there need not be an accusation for sexual harassment to have occurred, but there were still plenty of accusations.

Paula Jones sued Clinton for sexual harassment and Clinton settled the case for $850,000 (Quite a bit more than what we've heard concerning the Cain case)

The Clinton-Lewinsky affair is a classic case of disparity in station and while Jones was suing Clinton, Clinton's long time friend Vernon Jordan was helping Lewinsky get a job.

Juanita Broaddrick didn't accuse Clinton of sexual harassment, just rape.

Gennifer Flowers had, by all accounts, consensual sex with Clinton but sued Stephanopolous, Carville and Hillary Clinton of defamation for a smear campaign launched after she went public with her affair with Clinton.

Kathleen Willey (not previously mentioned) was a White House volunteer aide who alleged on television that Clinton sexually assaulted her during his first term.

To my knowledge, none of these women other than Flowers actually sued for defamation, but all were subjects of Clinton & Co smear campaigns

1 Reply

@Finn dAbuzz,

Quote:

Paula Jones sued Clinton for sexual harassment and Clinton settled the case for $850,000

That is an understatement as the Cain settlements were for less that $40K... IE they were in the go away nuisance settlement price range, which is what the those who collected them apparently felt that they were worth.

1 Reply

@DrewDad,

I find his comments objectionable as well, but then I also found these comments objectionable:

Newsweek editor Evan Thomas referring to Paula Jones as "some sleazy woman with big hair"

ABC anchor Charlie Gibson: "Why does anyone care what this woman (Paula Jones) has to say?"

Clinton aide Sidney Blumenthal describing Monica Lewinsky to Christopher Hitchens as a "stalker" (Hitchens, by the way, believed all of these women told the truth about Clinton.)

Bob Bennett, Clinton's lawyer comparing Paula Jones to a a dog who wanted to catch cars and eventually did and died.

James Carville calling Jones "trailer trash" and all of the other defaming comments pointed at any women who dared to make public the sexual escapades of Bill Clinton

If you deny ever reading or hearing any of the comments, I'm not going to call
you a liar, but I'm going to suggest you were in a coma during that period of time.

If you didn't feel and express outrage over such comments then you can point to now as one of the times in your life when you were hypocritical.

1 Reply

@TheLeapist,

TheLeapist wrote:

I was 100% sure that the allegations against Cain were true until this morning when I read the article I posted. Even if it isn't true it still made me realize that I wanted Cain out so bad that I was ready to believe anything negative thrown at him and that's not a fair, logical nor responsible way to go about anything, politics included.

Kudos

0 Replies

@hawkeye10,

hawkeye10 wrote:

Quote:
Paula Jones sued Clinton for sexual harassment and Clinton settled the case for $850,000
That is an understatement as the Cain settlements were for less that $40K... IE they were in the go away nuisance settlement price range, which is what the those who collected them apparently felt that they were worth.

I think you quoted the wrong line from my comment. The line quoted is a factual statement and neither over or under stated.

My comment that Clinton paid a bit more than Cain is said to have was, indeed, a deliberate under statement.

1 Reply

@Finn dAbuzz,

Quote:

Paula Jones sued Clinton for sexual harassment and Clinton settled the case for $850,000 (Quite a bit more than what we've heard concerning the Cain case)

I did not get the full quote I wanted...

I have seen over an over again in the media talk of these settlements,insinuating that it is a big deal, but never once have I seen someone point out that this is for so little money that we cant read much of anything into it re quilt.

0 Replies

Herman Cain accused of 'sexually suggestive behaviour'

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know