Posted on 11/07/2011 6:58:37 PM PST by Qbert
After reading the news and watching the videos of Sharon Bialek, the Herman Cain accuser, I noticed that many of the articles mentioned that Bialek was fired or let go ” from the NRA’s educational foundation.” However, none of them mentioned why. Being let go or fired is more serious than simply being laid off. I wonder why there is no mention of the reason she was fired? This might give more insight into her character and whether she is a trustworthy person or not. Why was she fired? Does anyone know or has anyone seen a report as to what happened with her job in the summer of 1997? Here is more from the New York Times:
Ms. Bialek said she first met Mr. Cain during her time at the association’s Chicago office, when he sat next to her at a dinner during one of the group’s conventions. He later invited her and her boyfriend to an after-party in his hotel suite, she said.
But the alleged harassment did not occur until after she was fired, she said. Sue Hensley, a spokeswoman with the restaurant association confirmed that “Sharon Bialek was employed by the National Restaurant Association Educational Foundation from 12/30/96 – 6/20/97.”
She didn’t work there long, I wonder what happened?
Clinton and Broderick, LSM, Juanita who?
Interestingly, she has a porn star listed as one of her “friends” on facebook. Looks like a newbie to this social media with just a few friends, but posted her photo from Allred’s news conference today.
I heard she let go because she could not control her nymphomanical urges during the work day.
She looks like the classic cougar to me!!
I know where I’ve seen her... she’s Stifler’s Mom!
Not every woman files suit. She did not at that time and she probably would never have spoken of it except for the fact he is RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES. She’s coming forth to corroborate the stories that Cain has a problem. Again, to blindly defend Cain is just as bad as blindly believing all these women.
I said on another thread that I was sexually harrassed by an important man in my industry. I chose to leave, I didn’t file anything. This was 20 years ago. If that man was now running for President, and women were coming out of the woodwork about sexual harrassment and were being trashed, I would probably come out to back up their stories. That’s what I see this woman is doing and I understand it.
She was terminated because she was no meeting the goals she was hired to achieve.
The most curious thing about her “supposed” trip to meet with Cain is that she went from Chicago to DC. I find this extremely curious.
“I WOULD NOT HAVE HAD TO KEEP LOOKING DOWN READING IN ORDER TO SAY WHAT HAD HAPPENED.”
That is exactly what I thought when I finally saw the video.
Oh how wrong you are in your “analysis”.
1. Wiener virtually hibernated only to surface when he found it advantageous.
2. More people came out? Excuse me if I missed something terribly important, but the only thing coming out over and over was the wiener himself/itself. (What pun?)
3. The ONLY thing he has ever done politically before was to run for Senator in 2004.
4. The only problem Cain has right now is people like you who just can’t help themselves but to spread hyperbole and willful misinformation.
and, on top of that, I also can not believe a woman in that situation would remain in car, and calmly ask him to drive her back to her hotel. They don't have taxis in DC?
She be lying.
As to the two "affidavits", somebody better start checking the local Kinkos.
I’m sorry but there are some parallels in the “Weiner” analogy. The main one is that as the first part came out, everyone on their side defended him. Then another woman showed up, then another. After 10 days it got impossible to defend him.
I don’t know where this Cain thing ends. But the bottom line is that I absolutely don’t buy into the notion that somehow this was an elaborate plot by Obama, the DNC or Romney or Perry to find multiple women to lie about incidents with Cain. And that they’d all come forward in rehearsed sequence.
Common sense and an understanding of human nature and personality types would say that at this point it appears that Cain maybe does have a bit of a zipper problem. Maybe this ends at four women and all are discredited. I have a hard time believing that will happen though based on the woman yesterday. Too much smoke right now.
>>When Cain was running for Senate the Dems were not offering this chick payola to smear him.
Bingo.
If keeping him out of high public office is important, why wouldn’t she have come out with this in 2004?
I still have my Cain/2004 lapel pin, BTW.
Name the four.
I don't support Cain BTW. I support truth documented by verifiable facts and hard evidence.
The fact he is RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES and I do not want a potentially good man smeared and driven from the race by unsubstantiated accusations.
Smears and hit pieces come with the territory of a Presidential candidate so a skepticism is warranted and a high standard of proof should be used. Anyone can say the moon is made of blue cheese but that does not make it true. About 3 BILLION dollars are going to spent in this election so the stakes are about as high as they get and there is a long history of dirty tricks in politics.
You simply can't come out and make 15 year old accusations after the fact. If there was misconduct and proof it should have been dealt with at the time.
You can find scores of women who are willing to “come forward with serious allegations” from 15 years ago that are BS and can neither be proven or disproven.
What I don't see are credible disinterested third parties stepping up to the plate to confirm that this is characteristic of Cain's behavior. I do see credible disinterested third parties stepping up to the plate to confirm that Bialek is a real piece of work.
Time will tell - this is one reason why we have primaries.
FWIW, about the same time these events occurred, I was retained by a company to sort out some problems in one of their remote business sites.
Although my focus and scope was primarily technical in nature, I quickly discovered that an abusive culture was a big part of the problem.
I took a stand on this and did much to change the situation and solve both the technical and cultural issues.
I took a serious career hit in the process, but I did the right thing and improved the work lives of more than a few people along with successfully dealing with the technical issues.
Perhaps you should have done the same thing years ago if you were truly faced with serious misconduct. It could have saved many people a lot of heart ache.
"Verifying" something actionable that happened 15 years earlier when memories have faded and become unreliable and where there is no credible evidence just does not cut it.
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.