Posted on 11/02/2011 3:09:32 PM PDT by smoothsailing
Kerry Pickett
November 2, 2011
Herman Cain's campaign are revealing their own 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 Cain campaign source, not only is the Rick Perry campaign involved but also the Mayor of Chicago and former Obama White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel. 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...
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
Chris Wallace works for FoxNews.....
You must mean Chris Wilson.
Chris Wilson, an Oklahoma-based political consultant who on Wednesday said that he witnessed Cain behaving inappropriately toward women, is not affiliated with the Perry campaign in any formal or informal way.
Wilson works for a PAC committee, but federal election law requires such groups to remain independent of the candidates they support.
So, if I understand you correctly, Wilson works for a PAC that raises money for and supports Rick Perry, but he is not affiliated with the Perry campaign even in an “informal” way. Is that about right?
Anyway now Cain is saying that Rahm Emmanuel is behind the leak.....whose next Anthony Weiner?
Looks to me that Cain is trying to make the ‘leak’ more important than the harassment story.
What harassment story? Has someone finally produced some evidence of harassment that I missed?
Cain's desperate to balme someone else other then himself and he proves it in every single interview he has had since this story broke.
Perry is such a good man and the BEST candidate. He does not deserve the constant attacks from Cain.
Grow up Cain and be a man and stop blaming others for whatever you might be in trouble for.
I've been wondering about this too. But, while I'm not a Cain supporter, would this not be like double jeapordy? All of these matters have been settled or resolved in the past. The accusers had their day in the sun and agreed to a settlement. Why should we listen to their story now? How does it change things?
I think all this would do is throw a bunch of dirty laundry out to the media and public. We don't need that from parties to a suit that has been settled. Maybe from the 3rd accuser who never filed anything, maybe so. She has a story that nobody has heard. If any of them deserve a microphone, it might be her. But even that could be debated.
my .02
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.