What evidence is there that Anderson knew? Because Cain said so? The women said they were harrassed, and that’s not evidence, so why is Cain saying something “evidence”?
Cain is the one who made the charge. The charge isn’t evidence. Does Cain have any proof Anderson knew? Lets ask the other people on the 2003 campaign if Cain told them, or if they remember Cain telling Anderson.
Next, is there any evidence that Anderson told Politico? Anderson has released Politico to name him if he is the source — but they haven’t. So it appears he wasn’t their source. But what evidence did Cain have to claim Anderson was their source? None that he presented.
There is no evidence. Your “evidence” is merely circumstance. Anderson does work for a company that does have ties to the Perry campaign (that isn’t the same as saying Anderson works for the Perry campaign, but I understand what you are saying). Anderson was on Cain’s 2004 campaign, which means he liked Cain and wanted him to get elected to the Senate. That seems to suggest he wouldn’t be the leaker, not the other way around.
Why Anderson, and not the two women, or the friends of the women, or any of the employees who knew of the complaint? Why not one of the current staff? Why not Block, through an intermediary, doing so in the hopes they could play the victim card as they have and get a bump in the polls?
I mean, if you are speculating with no evidence, there are all sorts of speculation. Wilson knew about it, as did apparently a bunch of people at a restaurant. Another report says the woman talked to others at work, so they would know.
The woman worked for the NRA, and then left during Cain’s term. The records of the organization are public, they are a lobbying group and have disclosure requirements. It would be easy for politico to find a list of employees who left, and interview them to see if they could find a “disgruntled” employee. NOBODY would have to leak anything. One employee might mention the harrassment complaint — and from there the rest is easy.