Posted on 11/04/2011 2:14:11 PM PDT by Da Bilge Troll
Joel Bennett held a press conference moments ago on behalf of his client who alleged sexual harassment charges against Herman Cain, and it amounted to a big fat zero of any relevant information to this. The woman doesn’t want to reveal her identity or her side of the story. What’s interesting is that the NRA, according to their statement below, would have released her from the confidentiality portion of the agreement to allow her to vocalize her side of the story. But they still opted not to. So, end of story.
Here is the NRA’s statement:
“We have seen the statement Joel Bennett released earlier today on behalf of his client, a former employee of the Association. The Association consented to the release of that statement, at the request of Mr. Bennett’s client.
“Based upon the information currently available, we can confirm that more than a decade ago, in July 1999, Mr. Bennett’s client filed a formal internal complaint, in accordance with the Association’s existing policies prohibiting discrimination and harassment. Mr. Herman Cain disputed the allegations in the complaint. The Association and Mr. Bennett’s client subsequently entered into an agreement to resolve the matter, without any admission of liability. Mr. Cain was not a party to that agreement. The agreement contains mutual confidentiality obligations. Notwithstanding the Association’s ongoing policy of maintaining the privacy of all personnel matters, we have advised Mr. Bennett that we are willing to waive the confidentiality of this matter and permit Mr. Bennett’s client to comment. As indicated in Mr. Bennett’s statement, his client prefers not to be further involved with this matter and we will respect her decision.
“The Association has robust policies designed to ensure that employees with concerns may bring them forward for prompt investigation and resolution, without risk of retaliation. The Association is fully committed to equal employment opportunity and to an environment that is free from any discrimination or harassment.”
The agreement was made between the NRA and the client with no admission of liability. And Cain, just as he said, wasn’t a party to the agreement.
Also, remember how the press wanted to make a big deal out of the fact that Herman Cain used the word “agreement”? Just to point out, that’s exactly the word used in this statement. What does it matter? Not much at this point.
So, all in all, this is over and there is nothing to indicate that Cain did anything wrong. Let the Cain Train keep rollin’ on!
It’s the seriousness of the charge that matters. /s
This means that the OTHER accuser is free from the confidentiality agreement as well and can speak freely if she wants.
Protected victim class; women who make stuff up;)
This bodes well for Cain.
An anonymous accusation by an unknown person is not enough to derail the Cain campaign.
Politico should be sued for running with an unsubstantiated story.
This is and has always been about a book deal contract. Expect a big announcement within the next two weeks as the mask comes off the alleged victim and an agreement is announced with a lefty book publisher.
If there really was more than one woman??? Which seems doubtful.
We still need to see a pic from ~12 yr ago to see if there is ANY substance to this charge.
Bappy Hirthday, Jim!
Er...ah...um....my specious, anonymous allegations couldn’t derail the Cain Train.
Well, nevermind, then.
OK now can we all agree there was no “there” there and quit all this “where’s the smoke, there’s fire” nonsense?
Kaythanxbye!
Ping!
Check this out. NRA was willing to release the claimant and her attorney from the confidentiality agreement. They decided not to go forth. Herman Cain disputed the allegations. The claimant and the NRA entered into an agreement without any admission of liability. Herman Cain wasn’t a party to it.
IOW, all these people complaining about how Herman Cain handled himself, Herman Cain was not a party to what was agreed and had no knowledge of it with which to defend himself. Herman Cain disputed the allegations and it was the NRA, not Herman Cain, who entered into an agreement.
Herman Cain is vindidated on his handling of this fiasco. Herman Cain was telling the truth. This puts the ‘Done Stamp’ to this, and further allegations against him will surely be seen in the light of this absurd situation. Big mistake on whoever started this.
This news is going to break some hearts, right here on FR!
An “agreement” doesn’t necessarily imply a “settlement”. In this case a settlement was made.
Exactly what I was thinking. Publication date will conveniently be early November 2012.
1. Smoking Ad
2. Nebulous sexual harrasment charges
3. Rosebud
Sure beats the MSM’s defense of Krinton’s numerous sexual adventures. That barrage ranged from “she’s a slut” to “it’s all a conspiracy” to “he’s Mr. Wonderful, so it doesn’t matter that he probably did it”.
One was paid $35,000 and the other was paid $45,000.
“employees with concerns” ——> Wackos with “issues”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.