Cain has confirmed most of the initial allegations. There is nothing here to sue for. If he files suit, his campaign is dead in the water, if it isn’t already. Jeez, this guy is lame.
The dumb womans attorney, admits he has no records and it was handled by phone and fax. He does not even know what was agreed to and for what. And it was reported on Rush she, the client, had told her attorney to sit down and shut up.
Mark levin called him to see if he would talk about it. He has not showed up yet. Maybe you should call and tell him your inside knowledge.
Cain has confirmed most of the initial allegations. There is nothing here to sue for. If he files suit, his campaign is dead in the water, if it isn’t already. Jeez, this guy is lame.Don't worry. If this campaign sticks to pattern, it will be "sue" today and walk-it-back tomorrow.
And yet so many people cheer this as some sort of clever strategy. This is simply more evidence the Cain campaign folks are bunch of novices that have no idea what they are doing.
The story as Politico reported it has been largely confirmed by Cain himself. We now know there were at least 2 sexual harassment suits against Cain which were settled by the NRA for cash payouts. Any dopey lawsuit will just keep the story in the news longer.
And in this article Cain contradicts his own campaign manager by continuing to attack the Perry campaign, even though the "source" Cain alleges did the leaking has flat out denied it and released any journalist from confidentiality and allowed them to finger him. Levin was just on the radio tonight making clear he no longer even believes Curt Anderson is the source. The Cain campaign is the gang that can't shoot straight and would be annihilated in a general election campaign against Hussein.
You’re full of it, Mr. Cain has never confirmed “most of the initial allegations”. You’re the one who is lame.
Good grief, if you're going to make statements such as this, make sure you are speaking precisely.
What, exactly, do you mean by the "initial allegations"?
The initial allegations against him were that a complaint had been filed against him for sexual harassment. He immediately confirmed this allegation and was never inconsistent on the point that this incident, the COMPLAINTS, had occurred.
However, some people, who don't think well or who fall for media spin, took the initial allegation -- that complaints had been made -- as an allegation, all over again, that Cain had engaged in sexual harassment. That Cain immediately denied and was never inconsistent on.
So, what is it that you are talking about?
The allegation that complaints were made (which Cain immediately confirmed)?
Or the innuendo-allegation that Cain -- despite the fact that the complaints had been investigated, found unsubstantiated, no disciplinary action was taken against Cain (he was exonerated), and the accusers were terminated and given the USUAL severance pay and entered into the USUAL confidentiality agreements -- actually engaged in sexual harassment (which Cain immediately denied)?
This is too important for sloppy talk on our side.