Posted on 11/14/2011 12:44:32 PM PST by SeekAndFind
Groping a flaky ho-bag like that is very appropriate even if you find her unappetizing. She expects it and will spread malicious gossip otherwise
You can’t put it to rest, and the trouble with politics is sometimes you need to ignore it, and other times you need to counter attack, but the devil is figuring out which. I would shut any reporter that mentioned it down by saying, I’ve already covered this and I refuse to be tried and convicted in the court of public opinion by those who have a motivation to do me harm. But you have to refuse to entertain questions about it or you’ll never be allowed to answer any other kind of question at all.
Exactly. People, this is war without the bullets (at least for now). The other side realizes it. Our folks, I doubt it.
This guy is not a witness, he’s a heresay purveyor.
At some point and I would say now Herman has got to stop addressing this crapola and just continue to push his message. If he is asked about it he needs to address it in one sentence and move on. Otherwise there will be some new deal every other day.
Does anybody here remember what happened 14 years ago?
Oh yeah that was the day that he, no no no, that was after Y2K, no that’s right it was 14 years ago when he met me, no, no, no I remember it now. I was standing there and no wait a minute. I was sitting there and no, come to think of it I was standing next to him and he touched my uh...hand. That’s right, I remember now, he touched my hand. That’s it now I remember like it was yesterday. He shook my hand on ... what day was that...
It still does not make it true. Bialick could have been upset that she did not come home with a job and decided to get revenge. Besides, this was at the forefront of a huge push nationwide to make workplace innuendos and flirting legally harassment. My sons were going off to college. I sat both down and told them that they need not flirt with any girl that they did not intend to ask on a date, and to be careful how they rejected offers from girls, that the atmosphere had changed so much that a girl could claim sexual harassment, even if no words or action was exchanged, but she was not getting attention from them like she wanted. I was worried, as they were both very popular in HS. They made it through okay. Being a school nurse, I always warn the boys in my abstinace-based SE classes that fooling around with no intent of dating the girl can get them in as much trouble as going too far in some cases. This is an age where men can be accused of anything falsely and they are considered guilty until proven otherwise. Shame!
RE: Bialick could have been upset that she did not come home with a job and decided to get revenge.
__________________
Unless Herman Cain is lying, He says he does not know Bialek and the incident NEVER happened ( which means the entire story is made up ).
I have been somewhat amazed that investigative reporters from the MSM ( with their money ) cannot even come up with simple fact checking to determine whether Bialiek’s story coheres. Evidence can be gathered to :
1) Determine whether he claim that her Hotel room was upgraded to a suite is true — HOTEL LOGS from the Hotel dating back 14 years ago, can tell us.
2) Until now we don’t know the name of the hotel she said she checked in to.
3) Until now we don’t know the name of the restaurant where she said she had dinner with Cain.
4) If we can determine the name of the restaurant, can we check how the dinner was paid? If by credit card, can we check the credit card logs from 14 years back to see if Herman Cain paid for it that night.
Also, there was NO MENTION of the DATE and TIME the alleged incident occurred. We don’t even know exactly WHEN the alleged incident occurred.
These are BASIC information any careful reporter can at least check to see if she is lying or not. Yet, we don’t get any of these at all.
If I understand correctly, Bialek has lost several court cases. I doubt that she would have pursued the cases at all, if the only evidence presented was consistent with her opponent's claims.
Assuming that Bialek did introduce evidence to support her side of these cases, then it must be that the jury decided to believe her opponent and not her. This is just another way of saying, the jury thought she was lying.
It's interesting that Bialek and Zuckerman have little in common evidently, except for having filed bankruptcy.
My guess is that there is some link between them involving these bankruptcies and it just might be the lawyer or law firm which helped them to avoid paying their debts.
Thanks sickoflibs.
from the comments in your link -
greatvikingone, hope you don’t mind me cross-posting this:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2807282/posts?page=4#4
To: struggle
“In May 2010 (after the bench trial, but before the judgment was entered) Stratford Pediatric sold its assets to Central DuPage Hospital for $333,000.00 in cash. This money was mostly transferred to Zuckerman’s personal accounts. He soon went on a gambling and day trading spree and lost all of the money. In July 2010, Zuckerman moved to Louisiana. On September 15, 2010, Zuckerman filed a chapter 11 petition in the Western District of Louisiana. His creditors include, among others, Stratford Center (with claims of $675,000.00), his ex-wife (with claims of $89,000.00), and the IRS (with claims of $50,000.00).”
Wow.
4 posted on Tuesday, 15 November 2011 5:32:42 AM by greatvikingone
Victor Zuckerman, Bialek’s “witness” and his fun lawsuit escapades
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.