Posted on 12/01/2011 4:39:34 PM PST by Fred
UPDATE -Mayor Emanuel is denying he is involved in anyway with the exchange of information regarding Cain's sexual harassment accusers.
Herman Cain's campaign is revealing suspicions about who is behind the story regarding the former unidentified employees who accused Mr. Cain of sexual harassment in the late 1990's.
According to a source who is friends with the Cain campaign, not only is the Rick Perry campaign involved but also the Mayor of Chicago and former Obama White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel is likely involved with the sexual harassment accuser attacks. A friend of the Cain campaign believes a National Restaurant Association (NRA) employee out of the Chicago office leaked the story to the Perry campaign via information and influence from Mayor Rahm Emanuel's office.
According to Politico's Jonathan Martin, Curt Anderson, the Perry advisor who the Cain campaign is accusing of leaking the damaging information, is denying the charges:
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
Remember that Cain claimed he only knew of one claim. Remember that Cain said he told the advisor of only that one claim when Cain ran for Senate.
So is it that that guy, who was never at the National Restaurant Association, was the only person in the world that could have leaked both settlements?
And why does everyone say all of this was set up by Obama and his Chicago machine? In 1998 and 1999, did the unknown Barack Obama fear that the unknown President of the National Restaurant Association, Herman Cain, would one day run in the primaries to run against Obama for President? And coerce two women to make claims against Cain back in 1999?
None of that is logical.
Why wouldn’t Hillary be involved? As long as we are speculating............
The date of the source Washington Times article is November 2, 2011, 06:59PM. Hardly breaking news.
I’m confused. Is this article a month old?
How about we take that statement and turn it around a little?
Doesnt the Cain campaign THE MEDIA understand that it needs to present credible facts? Not guilt by alleged association, not hunches, but cold hard facts.
I wish the same courtesy was extended to Mr. Cain.
who cares at this point who did what. whomever did shine a light on this weakness in Cain saved us all a lot of heartache and embarrassment in the general election. Cain’s poor wife is all I can say. She came out publicly to defend her man and got knifed.
Rahm and Rick in a conspiracy to take down Cain? This makes as much sense as the Moon landing being faked. Maybe there was CIA involvement in this as well.
On what grounds? Should Cain and Block turn over their call records and text messages too? We know they've been chatting about these accusations. We don't know that Rahm or Stephanopoulos had anything to do with it. As those who continue to deny that Cain could possibly have done anything wrong call them . . . those are just unfounded allegations.
The Chicago mafia — gee, who’d a thunk it? I don’t care what office they get appointed or elected to - Rahm Emanuel and David Axelrod have never been and never will be anything more than professional sheet sniffers for the democrats.
paying some woman’s monthly bills without the wife’s notice doesn’t smell so righteous to me. Thank God we didn’t find out about this stuff after he was representing us in the general election. then we’d be screwed like his poor wife was. she trusted him and found out he is taking care of a second woman’s pills. men don’t just take of women’s bills behind their wives back.
According to Politico's Jonathan Martin, Curt Anderson, the Perry advisor who the Cain campaign is accusing of leaking the damaging information, is denying the charges...
mooch buddys suck, never get one any ever. No good deed goes unpunished.
Paranoia goes hand in hand with delusions of grandeur.
Hey, hey, ho, ho
Ole Rick Perry has to go!
:-)
The cold hard facts are that the National Restaurant Association settled two harassment claims against Cain in 1999. It was *not* normal for a CEO to have a harassment claim filed against them during that period, much less two.
The NRA settled both claims, although in 1998 even the EEOC only found cause to investigate harassment claims in 60% of claims. And that was just to investigate them.
The NRA settled them for $35K and $45K, which was *way* more than nuisance claims were settled for in 1999. A 1998 study showed that the average settlement of a harassment *lawsuit* (which settles for a much greater amount than a mere claim) was $38.5K, which includes those settlements in the hundreds of thousands of dollars for serial and institutional harassment, and the truly obscene harassment cases. Nuisance lawsuits (if you know your math) were therefore settled for much, much less than $38.5K. Nuisance claims that never went to suit would have settled for less than that. I've posted the link to the study several times and Cain supporters say, "well, I don't need a scientific study, my friend said those are nuisance amounts."
$35K and $45K say they were not nuisance claims. Two of them say the NRA had a problem with Cain in 1998-1999.
Those are cold, hard facts.
As for other women, I have no cold, hard facts - other than Ginger White and what Cain said today about giving her money and not telling his wife. But not everything about Cain is without cold, hard facts.
I am real sorry about Perry, but he is not well, he needs pain management for his back. He is making mistakes that are coming from a physical aliment. the vote age...
Sorry, Esther Ruth, I'm not following you. I apologize for being dimwitted tonight.
ping
Those of us who supported Cain dropped him because of his poor performance, not these alleged scandals. If he had done better, we’d be demanding investigations and the truth. But what for at this point?
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.