Why are you rushing to defend a fraudulent accuser? An accuser with a documented Court record history of fraud?
Have you no shame?
No sense of decency?
Have you fallen so far you would rather cling to a transparent smear attack in the vain notion it helps your candidate of choice rather then defend truth?
Cain was accused. He refuted. NOW more accusations, with not a single shred of proof, are being trotted out.
A rational ADULT would say "hmm, before we hear any more accusations, I think I need to see some proof'
However YOU would rather ignore the proof and cling to the accusation so you attack those documenting the questions about the accuser's veracity and motivations. Shameful and childish are the nicest things that can be said about your conduct.
Okay, Mr. Rational Adult: What is Mr. Cain's "PROOF"? Can't just go with what he says, now can we?
Because you won't go with what someone ELSE says...right? I mean, if it's just "he said this" and "she said that"...the "proof", the "facts" are exactly the same in weight.
So this is a good place for you to provide your "proof".
All I've been saying is that folks on here are attacking the "accusers" with exactly the same moral equivalency that the "accusers" have been attacking Cain.
How do you translate that into attacking me Cain or giving them credibility?
Which is it? Does Cain just "saying so" make it a fact? Or does ANYONE just "saying so" need a little more digging?