Sue.
SO - who was the scumbag behind this and how do we handle this as a civilized people? I mean, civilized people dealing with a diseased cockroach crawling towards an innocent infant's crib?
OK, this settles it. It was a lie 15 or 20 years ago and it still is.
"Attorney Joel Bennett, who represents one of the two women who filed complaints while Cain was the association’s CEO, said that the presidential candidate engaged in a “series of inappropriate behaviors,” but that his client “has chosen to not relive the details.”
Translation: The allegations were laughable and would subject my clients to immense ridicule if they said what they actually were, but I'm going to make one last desperate attempt to imply that there was something serious and emotionally unbearable, and that there were "sexual harrassment" settlements, even though they received severance pay and the NRA admitted no liability...
With No Specifics to the Accusations, Herman Cain Wins This Fight
Jim Geraghty November 4, 2011 NRO
http://www.nationalreview.com/campaign-spot/282341/no-specifics-accusations-herman-cain-wins-fight
Joel Bennett, the lawyer for one of the former employees of the National Restaurant Association who accused Herman Cain of sexual harassment, spoke to Wolf Blitzer live on CNN moments ago.
Bennett said that in his legal opinion, what occurred between Cain and his client met the legal definition of sexual harassment. But despite repeated questions from Blitzer, he refused to specify what the alleged actions were, and he said his client would not be appearing to shed any further light on the matter.
When Blitzer pointed out Cain’s vehement, blanket denial, Bennett replied, “In all my years of lawyering, I’ve never seen anyone accused of sexual harassment say, ‘I did it.’”
In short, Mr. Bennett is arguing, ’I won’t say what he did, but trust me, he’s guilty of wrongdoing.’ This is ridiculous. To Politico, the public is supposed to take this into account in their assessment of Cain but we can’t even get any sense of what triggered the original complaint, and whether this was much ado about nothing or whether Cain actually did something wrong.
Without the basic details, the public cannot take this into account in their assessment of Cain, or ought not to. Despite all the drama of the week, we know about as much as we did Monday. Two employees made complaints, but we don’t really know much about what the complaints were. Was there some bad behavior on Cain’s part? Were the NRA payments just designed to avoid the cost of litigating the claims? Who knows?
“It’s over, from our perspective,” Bennett said of the controversy.
Yes, this story ought to be over. While this story does not reassure much about Herman Cain and his campaign – i.e., blaming Perry, walking back the accusation, then having Cain seem to walk back the walk back – he’s been wronged by having a politically damaging accusation widely aired but never being able to cross-examine his accuser or refute the charges.
Also posted here: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2802694/posts
The absolute, perfect example of why Rush labelled the MSM as the “Drive By” Media. They sprayed their bullets and now look for them to move on that fast.
I do have a guess
The woman who slept over his house was white
She was accused by her co-workers of sleeping with the boss and with a black man
she sued to clear her name because she was embarrassed, it was how she covered herself
Cain might have joked about her sleepign over, a fact, but not knowing she was hearing accusations
just a hunch
Well, that's ONE accuser, what about the second?
Top of the hour, I noticed ABCNews is reporting the story as breathlessly and salaciously as possible, as if details of the multiple sexual harassment claims are known or even that her identity is known.