Because he also noted that it wasn’t important enough to bring to that level of the company. One would think provable sexual harassment would rise to that higher level. And then there’s the lawyer. Sexual Harassment is a career maker and said lawyer also stands to get quite a percentage with provable evidence. Sorry this stinks to high heaven.
Cindie
Who here thinks this was "provable sexual harassment"? Certainly not me -- the facts are that the charges were reviewed, and Cain says they were found to be without merit. They settled because it is easier than fighting; probably means there was enough there that the women could plausibly argue their reaction was a valid one, even though normal people wouldn't think what happened was a problem. So you settle, and move on.
I certainly have never thought the charges were serious. I have no interest in the charges, or all the discussions of the details.
I'm just saying that I was drawn to this article because it seemed to be breaking confidentiality, but having read the article it became clear he wasn't saying anything about the facts of the case because he knew nothing about the actual case. Which means that while his opinion is interesting, it is just an opinion, not an evaluation of the case.
I agree that the fact the board doesn't know about this is more evidence that people didn't take the charges as serious ones. And if Cain had just treated it that way, I think we wouldn't still be talking about it going into the weekend. And Cain wouldn't be falsely accusing a former campaign aide and admirer of Cain's with leaking the story.