Posted on 11/03/2011 10:04:50 AM PDT by bbernard
Adding to the ongoing Herman Cain sexual harassment controversy, two sources have now confirmed to PJ Media that a female employee of the National Restaurant Association told associates she had been brought by Mr. Cain to his Crystal City, Virginia residence where she alleged “he had taken advantage of me.”
One source, a male, told PJ Media:
Herman took advantage of seniority and power with a young woman. It was an abuse of power.
Implying that coming forward with the accusations was an ordeal for the young woman, the source also said:
Who do you believe, a CEO or a mid-level staffer? It was unsettling for her to make charges.
The name of the woman — who was in her early twenties at the time of the alleged incident — has been confirmed by PJ Media. We have chosen not to reveal her identity for reasons of discretion.
Both sources, one male and one female, worked at the time — mid-1990s — for the governmental affairs department of the National Restaurant Association, as did the woman.
(Excerpt) Read more at pjmedia.com ...
So, if we copied this thread and switched all the Cain references to Clinton, would it look anything similar to one of the left wing forums during the Clinton/Jones/Lewinsky scandals?
The twisting that some of us will do to defend our guy is incredible.
And we used to laugh at them for that.
First, at least one of these women is not anonymous, and I think it is bad PR to keep calling someone anonymous when you've fairly well described her before millions on national TV. Use the word “confidential” in her case. But, she is not anonymous.
Second, asking Cain to deny any physical contact is getting ahead of the pajama's media story about the woman who allegedly spent the night at his room. He has denied sexual harassment, but sexual harassment does not cover a consensual encounter. Consensual is not harassment. That doesn't mean she could report it and claim it to have been harassment, but that's the point. If he denies any physical contact of any form, then that covers any claim she might make.
Maybe I missed it, but has anyone reported where Mrs. Cain was during the alleged fun and games in DC?
“What makes you think that it isn’t an open marriage?”
Personally, I assume marriages are closed unless told otherwise, as that’s the standard meaning of marriage.
“In any case, that is a personal matter between them IMHO.”
Not in mine. There’s the character issue, but nevermind that. With all the talk about privacy and do your own thing and blah, blah, blah the last few decades, we tend to forget that marriage is a very public thing. Perhaps the most public thing about most people. If you don’t want people to judge you for your sexual proclivities, you can have as much privacy as you can muster. But should they be discovered, don’t plead “Who cares?” after standing up in front of the community and pledging yourself to another.
Again, marriage doesn’t necessarily mean that. But most everyone thinks it does, and you should know that going in.
So she took her own taxi to Cain's apartment? Why?
“Unless he inserted a cigar while under the desk in the oval office I don’t care! Clinton set a new standard whether the MSM wants to acknowledge it or not.”
Or unless he saw Paula Jones, dropped his drawers, and ordered her to “kiss it” (as Ann Coulter reminds us).
It’s almost hilarious that the MSM is so prudish when it comes to GOP candidates. Sexual indiscretion is a badge of honor within the Dem party, but they go all Church Lady when a conservative might have done something off color.
And if there are, my suspicion is that they are merely golddiggers.
btw, Rush is now talking about how shoddy and ridiculous this story is.
Be wary of believing anything you read or hear about Cain right now. This is classic character assassination.
he certainly can....my question is, how truthful is he being TODAY?
The accusations thrown at Perry were irresponsible.
He’s upset about character assassination? While he assassinates someone’s character?
They took out the word bed? Interesting.
Yeah, that's right, it's not harrassment, it's "just" adultry and why should conservatives care about a guy getting a little on the side when his wife isn't looking, right guy?
All I care about is an honest answer, not the gory details.
In case someone else hasn’t already posted it. The article has added corrections, which negate key portions of the story. Corrections from PJM are below:
(CORRECTIONS: A previous version of this story mentioned that a source witnessed Cain and the woman entering a taxi together. This was incorrect.
The previous version also mentioned that the woman awoke in Cain’s bed — the source only claimed that the woman awoke in Cain’s apartment.
The previous version incorrectly attributed comments from one source to the other source.)
He’s guilty!!! I know because you just told me, and we all know that you are the soul of truthfulness.
Thanks- good work.
There is no evidence of harrassment. There is no evidence of adultery. There is no evidence of any wrongdoing of any nature.
Period.
I agree that a conservative republican's chances of getting nominated over a scandal like this drop significantly, if true and so far thats a big if. However, the math on this is somewhat different because of his race. If he starts looking like a victim, even if he is guilty, the minority is going to identify with him and make him more likely to win and make Obama less likely. It could give the minority and excuse to abandon Obama. We could get the OJ Simpson jury effect.
—Also, with Cain’s serial lies I find it hard to believe anything about his account at this point.—
That is an odd statement.
—With the rate that it is going and the second woman asking to be released from the nondisclosure...—
Is she? Really? Or is even that statement just a ploy to give her story more credibility? I’ve seen amazing deception done in just such a way. There is all sorts of feigning of that sort in a courtroom.
And you have no idea how many people get drunk, wreck their cars, take off and then report them stolen. I saw it happen before my very eyes once. The cops have been on to it though, for many decades.
Same thing here. What sounds completely believable to us is approached by cops with rolling eyes.
The way this is playing out absolutely stinks of a smear not backed by evidence.
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.