I haven't watched the video, just read the article, quick-read most of the comments here. Isn't it possible that Politico chose to not name Anderson, even if they could? I certainly don't trust them, why would I trust their representation of sourses?
Am I missing something?
This would be the witness Chris Wilson who says he can't legally tell what he says he witnessed even though he is certainly NOT restrained by a non-disclosure doc.
This would be the same witness Chris Wilson who has previously worked with Karl Tokyo Rove who has been campaigning against Cain as soon as Cain got a little traction. (Wilson worked with Rove on Bush's campaign.)
This is the same witness Chris Wilson who can't talk about what he says he saw and heard, but who insists that if the woman (who has so far refused) comes forward, it will end Cain's campaign.
I believe that Anderson has issued positive accounts of Cain's character and integrity publicly in the past. That doesn't prove that he is not the source of this scummy attack on Cain, but it makes it somewhat questionable. The fact that he has links to Romney and his campaign doesn't look good, but it's not conclusive that he would back stab a friend.
Chris Wilson sure looks to me like a major liar with his BS excuse that he can't talk about “it”—right after talking about “it” publicly and emphatically and knowing that he works with one of the biggest and most destructive Republican backstabbers Karl Rove.
I think we need to focus HARD on Chris Wilson.