I’m not posting this because I believe it. In fact, I don’t, at least not yet. We haven’t seen the accuser, nor have we heard any details that might prove or disprove what she is saying. His previous two accusers turned out to be weak on credibility, and provided no solid evidence to back up their accusations. But the story of the affair is coming out on an Atlanta TV station tonight, and here’s a preview.
Oddly, Cain seems to have been the first to break the story during an appearance on CNN today. But he denied sexually harassing the woman, not the affair. That may not mean much — Cain may have expected the accusation to be like the previous ones that have hit him, which have concerned harassment. This accusation is not about harassment.
Or are we looking at two allegations coming out at once, and Cain only knew to respond to the one and didn’t see the other coming?
Update: Watching the video, it’s clear that there’s only one new accuser and Cain is responding to what he thinks will be in the story.
Update: About four minutes into the video, Wolf Blitzer spells out that the accusation is not harassment, but an affair. Mediaite’s headline was misleading.
Update: Here’s the story about Cain’s accuser. She is an Atlanta businesswoman, named Ginger White. And here’s Cain’s response:
“Mr. Cain has been informed today that your television station plans to broadcast a story this evening in which a female will make an accusation that she engaged in a 13-year long physical relationship with Mr. Cain. This is not an accusation of harassment in the workplace – this is not an accusation of an assault – which are subject matters of legitimate inquiry to a political candidate.
Rather, this appears to be an accusation of private, alleged consensual conduct between adults – a subject matter which is not a proper subject of inquiry by the media or the public. No individual, whether a private citizen, a candidate for public office or a public official, should be questioned about his or her private sexual life. The public’s right to know and the media’s right to report has boundaries and most certainly those boundaries end outside of one’s bedroom door.
Mr. Cain has alerted his wife to this new accusation and discussed it with her. He has no obligation to discuss these types of accusations publicly with the media and he will not do so even if his principled position is viewed unfavorably by members of the media.”
That’s not a denial.
Update: The first statement, which contained no denial, may have exhibited bad lawyering. The second, which came from his campaign, exhibits bad politicking.
Detractors are trying once again to derail the Cain Train with more accusations of past events that never happened. The Cain Campaign is not surprised that another female accuser has come forward due to the fact that earlier allegations were unable to force Herman Cain to drop his presidential bid to renew America.
“The American public is tired of dirty politics and smear tactics as evident of their tremendous outpouring of support for me, my family and my campaign this past month. I am running for President of the United States of America and the reality is that there are individuals out there that favor the status quo of higher taxes, more government and political cronyism and they are afraid of a Cain Presidency,” said Mr. Cain.“I have spoken directly to the American people and have been 100% honest with them. My plan is to continue to spread my vision on how I would renew America and keep her safe. I will not fight false claims as it is not what America needs or wants,” continued Mr. Cain.Mr. Cain has spent four decades climbing the corporate ladder rising to the level of CEO at multiple successful business enterprises. Mr. Cain is a proven leader and the type of leader America badly needs at this time in her history.
At least this statement does seem to be a denial, of “past events that never happened.”
Lemme guess, her name is Ophelia and she was retained by the Dukes.
Who.
Cares.
Where does it stop? I have no idea whether Herman Cain had an affair or not, and if he did, that’s something for him and his wife to deal with. I just think it is strange that people seem willing today to use the most private information to harm somebody who they disagree with politically. That is something that I care about a lot more than an affair.
But if it turns out that the woman is credible and that she had a long affair with Mr. Cain, then it is another reason to question his judgement, because why wouldn’t he think that it would be revealed in today’s politically poisoned environment; on top of the two harrassment settlements, which he also seems to have overlooked or chosen to minimize.
Cain is saying the relationship wasn’t sexual. She says it was. The woman has records of 61 cell phone calls and text messages. Cain says he was trying to help her.
Who knows, but isn’t it at least possible for a man to have a friendship with a woman with no sex involved? Seems like it to me. 61 private calls is something, but platonic friends can call a lot more times than that in 13 years. If what he is saying is true, he would have had no cause to disclose it, but he might have been smarter to give her a call and find out whether she would try to cause touble.
So far, this allegation has a more credible accuser than the others, although you never know, she might be trying to make a few bucks or be a bitter partisan.
This isn’t quite a smoking gun either, at least not yet. And of course, Mr Cain, if he is misrepresenting the relationship, wouldn’t be the only politician or regular person to have had a consensual extra-marital affair either. It does seem kind of strange that with so many accusers, there is no smoking gun. If she comes up with a hand-written love note or an incriminating email, that might be what it takes.
Herman Cain’s detractors thought that surely the previous false accusations would be enough to take him down. When he held onto a third place position in most national polls, “someone” got nervous, and Voila! we now have a charge of immorality and infidelity! My prediction? This won’t stick. If we could follow the money, we’d be able to see why this woman has decided to take part in an attempt at character asassination. I do wish that his attourney would have worded his response a bit differently. Cain’s response on CNN was much more forceful: he has done nothing wrong. I, for one, believe him.
If I were Mr. Cain, I’d be advising my lawyer to look into a libel suit – I’d sue the woman who have made these false allegations. It is a pity that anyone can be a target. You don’t have to have any proof to accuse someone, and the resultant damage is almost a bad as if the accusations were true. It could happen to any of us, if we step forward and try to change the political atmosphere in this country. In fact, if you are a conservative, and try to stand for your standards and principles, LOOK OUT! You just put a target on your back! … darkness hates light.
Story I hear is Cain isn’t even soliciting the funds to run. He’s not a serious candidate.
“Who. Cares.”
It clarifies things to see that so many conservatives didn’t mean anything they said about Clinton and are total hypocrites. Apparently the definition of sexual immorality is that it only applies to opponents. By that definition, no one is virtuous.
Nice dodge. Your own hypocrisy in defending the situation is what’s front and center here. It’s okay for Willy to play with girls in the White House, according to how the media let it slide. But when it’s a GOP candidate, the media is all over it. That you would take the tone you did proves you approve of this double standard.
I also find it entertaining that people who use handles implying intelligence usually display how they are simply covering for self-perceived shortcomings.
You said: “Story I hear is Cain isn’t even soliciting the funds to run. He’s not a serious candidate.”
You made up that story. Your credibility just took a hit comparable to Cain’s accusers. Better check out Open Secrets. Cain has raised over $5M.
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres12/candidate.php?id=N00009852
I would recommend that you take a deep breath, do some research, and write something that adds to the conversation. When you simply come on with the castigation, be prepared to be vetted.
Naw I read or heard the “not soliciting enough funds” story on the NEWS.
I didn’t make it up.
It could be wrong, but I certainly didn’t make it up.
I am still amazed at the level of denial about the seriousness of Cain’s problem, along with denial of other things. Is the party about running away from unpleasant realities now?
Ya sure, ye betcha. If you were truly a scholar, you would post a citation. So far, you posted uncorroborated rumor. The onus remains upon you to offer some evidence of scholarliness. Snark doesn’t count, as you tried in most of your posts. Perhaps you would be happier returning to HufPo or Media Matters.
I am amazed at your level of denial in addressing the points laid out in rebuttal to your graffiti.
He solicits me every day through e-mail for funds so you are getting bad info.
“It clarifies things to see that so many conservatives didn’t mean anything they said about Clinton and are total hypocrites.”
I was unaware that Cain committed and suborned perjury.
Or are you so ignorant as to not understand what Clinton’s real crime was?
A. M. your paranoia is misplaced. Democrats would LOVE Herman Cain to be the front runner.
Democrats say that about EVERY candidate (except Romney, considering that he is the only one Obama has a chance of beating). Truth is,they are scared to death of all the GOP candidates, hence why they are so relentless with this smear campaign. Say what you want about these candidates, but none of that is going to distract the America people from Obama’s dismal record.
Ha ha ha ha, wipes tears from eyes.
Fanatics (left and right) always think that if only they run a more fanatical candidate the whole country will be as excited as they are and rally.
The truth is the opposite.
It’s always the swing voters who decide elections. The middle of the road.
You may hate the truth, but that doesn’t change the fact that it IS the truth.
Bauchmann is as unelectable as Kusinich. Chew on that thought for a while.
I’d be more inclined to believe your analysis if you could properly spell “Bachmann” and “Kucinich.”
Someone who truly follows politics–as opposed to just taking instructions from a seminar–would either know the spellings (as I did) or would know where to find the proper spelling; and would also know that misspelling the names of people like this, well-known within the world of politics, would clearly indicate a lack of familiarity with politics.
I recommend a lot more study before your next comment. However, I predict that you won’t take my advice.
just taking instructions from a seminar
Stupid paranoids. You think someone needs a seminar to call you on your hypocrisy? God, you’re stupid.
just taking instructions from a seminar
That has to be the dumbest thing I ever read.
No one has to take a class to call you hypocrite. …. You have an unbelievable inflated sense of importance.
Oh boy. Another “scholarly” addition to the discussion. I see that instead of responding to the replies to your graffiti above, you instead opted for more graffiti. Are you by any chance related to “physicist”?
This is getting stupid. *Every* single one of the Republican candidates has had a hit in some fashion (Perry’s rock, Cain’s supposed harrassment, Bachman’s husband, and of course Gingrich’s skeletons). It’s pretty obvious what’s going on. Romney’s campaign, and the Mittster himself, don’t have this sort of pull with the media. Only Obama does. And of course Obama and his staff would like nothing better than for the Republican candidate to be a white Mormon trust fund baby from New England, with a record that would make him a Democrat in much of the rest of the country. This would mean that the campaign wouldn’t be about issues, it would be about personalities (they already are about personalities a lot, but this would clinch it) and of course the stuffy rich white guy would be a lot easier to beat than a tough-talking Texan, a scrappy businessman with a great deal of entreprenureal success behind him (who just happens to be the same color as the President) or a college professor who can run rings around the President in a debate. It’s so obvious they’re trying to use their surrogates in the media to weed out the real challengers in favor of Romney, who they perceive as easy to beat.
At least one other commentator has called it “a game of whack-a-mole with whatever candidate pops his head above the rest.”
It does, however, have the virtue of compelling us to pre-vet our candidates thoroughly. We know the Democrats (and their media annex) and their tactics too well to be blind to the necessity. The recent flurry of attacks on whoever appears to be leading the pack is a good reminder.
It is getting quite obvious about how Mr. Romney is not getting any heat, isn’t it?
As for me, it is obvious that Mr. Cain is being railroaded because he is an open target, what with being a real person and all, not at all phony like the rest of the field. I think the Democrats are screaming at us who they DON’T want to run against.
And, frankly, the rest of you enlightened ones who are questioning Mr. Cain’s morals as a result of these lies can just go to some place that deserves you.
The Clinton campaign (Betsey White, to be precise) coined the term ‘bimbo eruption’ to cover a series of accusations such as this. Cain’s campaign, rightly or wrongly, is giving new life to the description.
I personally don’t believe the first two instances, from serial & professional (someone who derives a living) sexual harassment indignants. But I agree that this story is a different take (though I still withhold judgment as to its accuracy), but this could help explain the Cain campaign’s initial time lapse about responding to the original story with Bialek, as in ‘Which accuser is this, before we make a response?’ The campaign hasn’t served Cain well in these matters.
– Barack wants to run against Mitt, the way Rove wanted Kerry. Any remaining ember for Cain has to be stubbed out. Newt is next except his personal life is already known so it will have to be issue about his earnings.
Don’t ask, don’t tell.
“…a subject matter which is not a proper subject of inquiry by the media or the public.”
Feeling guilty yet? Herman is saying you should unless you’re comfortable being morally deficient. You should also feel dirty about peering into his bedroom.
Just mind your own business and let Cain be Cain with his hands-on approach to leadership.
But… but… but… Herman is The One, He who will lead us, through the miraculous power of Hope and Change, into the post-Obama era, where we’ll be governed by unelected czars… oops… experts that won’t have to be vetted by the Senate!
Full disclosure: I’m an “anybody BUT Romney” guy…though I’d have a seriously hard time supporting Paul.
This is a new twist on the previous meme. To which I say – What bimbo is crying wolf now?
(“scare quote alert”)
So far, as Bryan has said, we have two credibility challenged accusers of “sexual harrassment” and now we have the escalation of “affair” (I withhold my final judgement on this one, show me some proof, but my instincts say it’s BS). Next will have to be something akin to Edward’s (completely unreported) “love child”…or an “un-American preacher”…or some other “un-GAWDly” horrible thing(s).
All of this wolf-crying is DESIGNED to do one thing – turn Mr. Cain into the Little Dutch Boy with his finger in the dike.
Simple multiple-choice question – who benefits from this?
1) Romney
2) Obama
3) The GOP establishment
4) The DEM establishment
5) The political class
6) Someone/something else
(pick your favorite…or add your own)
How has Romney benefitted from this at all?
With Cain’s fade, Newt has emerged as the non-Romney and Newt was always more dangerous to Romney than Cain. Romney would have loved to go up against Cain. He had no motive for leaking any of this stuff. He benefits not a lick.
Instead of his main competition being a guy with zero political experience and no real history in the party or the conservative movement, not to mention very little knowledge of the issues especially in regards to foreign policy and defense…his main competition is now a guy who spent 20 yrs in Congress as a party and conservative leader, a guy who was party whip and speaker and personally responsible for leading the party to the majority, a guy who can say he balanced the budget, cut spending, reformed entitlements, a guy who literally trained hundreds if not thousands of GOP and conservative candidates through GOPAC, a guy who is a walking one man think tank, a guy who has a longstanding personal connection to the party and to the conservative movement and media and to all the important players, etc… I could go on.
Romney is in real trouble now, and he knows it.
So it definitely wasn’t him.
It wasn’t the dems and Obama for the same reason. If they had this they’d lock it away in Al Gore’s lockbox and let Cain get the nomination, then they’d release it at the right time and cruise to victory.
jack –
I don’t disputing you analysis one bit. The multiple choice question I asked was who does this BENEFIT…not who it doesn’t.
I’m of the mind that it’s the ubiquitously unliested one of ‘all of the above’ with a caveat on ‘other’. I’d lean mostly to #5 if pressed. Romney is the GOP political establishment’s “inevitable candidate” and he’s a RINO at best.
Correction – “I don’t disputing…” s/b “I don’t dispute…” (blame it on late commenting and failure to rewrite/reproof)
Oh, another bimbo eruption! How sweet. I think all of this is the revenge of the Clinton’s. Mr. Bill was the first black president to be impeached for perjury over messy affairs with multiple bimbo eruptions, so obviously it’s just a racial payback thing with Cain. Of course, with Cain out of the way it does leave the Obama camp clear to play the race card during the coming campaign.
I mean really! We have the most corrupt, most deceitful, most anti-American president EVER–NOTHING can touch the caliber of Obama’s malfeasance. So, count me a little underwhelmed by all this hoopla, regardless of whether its true or not. It’s too bad too many others won’t see it that way and will let the leftist media win again. This is the election to throw it back in their face with a smile and shrug. I swear, I want Cain to be the nominee just to shove it in their faces. This election is as much about defeating the liberal media as it is about turning the country around.
Partisans have said the same thing about every single president in my lifetime (with the exception of Jimmie Carter who was just called incompetent).
There isn’t a single president who wasn’t the worst in history, not a single one who didn’t have hoards of idiots claiming he was going to impose martial law and suspend the constitution, not a single one who wasn’t called a mass murderer, drug lord. Ok, Clinton was pretty much alone in being called a rapists but I’m sure Cain will get that treatment if he’s elected.
Can’t you fanaticsjust debate policy like sane adults? Is that so damn hard?
Duh! It is Obama’s policies that are the most corrupt, most deceitful and most anti-American in history! You’ve got blatant pay-offs to donors with billions of taxpayer dollars without any accountability. He turned his back on a democratic uprising in Iran and then turned around and supported the terrorist Muslim Brotherhood as a viable political party in Egypt and Libya. His DOJ allowed American guns to be sold to Mexican drug cartels under the guise of “following the trail to the inside of the cartels” but didn’t do much tracking and instead, was intent on using evidence of increased gun violence on the border as evidence for the need of more U.S. gun control. Obama shut down NASA while Russia and China use our technology to advance their space research and we must rely upon them for info from some important satellites. Obama has the gall to talk about the unfairness of the 1% while being the largest recipient in history of donor funds from Wall Street and then allowing a fraud of a bill (Dodd-Frank) that does NOTHING to cull the excesses within the banking system that is responsible for the financial crash of 08.
This is but a few items I can muster off the top of my head. And even those have barely been covered by the media that is busy digging up salacious lies about Herman Cain. The many books out there about the most corrupt president ever can fill you in with more details so get over yourself.
But wait, there’s more!
According to the Atlanta Fox affiliate, she even had Cain’s private cell number. They confirmed it themselves:
Proof, CW? Her word versus his and vice versa. With all due respect, my friend, repeating the MSM meme is beneath you.
PS – I’ll happily retract my doubts IF proof is shown. What the proof may be is the question and with the credibility of the previous charges in serious doubt my demands of proof will be quite stringent – love child…stained blue dress…etc :p
Looks like it may be time to stick a fork in Herman.
Something stinks here and it’s not Herman Cain. The timing is suspicious to say the least, and the various unusual things going on around Cain lead me to suspect he can’t even trust his advisers. That statement was written by a lawyer, not by Cain.
Whether you support Mr. Cain, or not, this is transparently political in motivation, and lacks serious credibility.
Remember all the serial allegations of ethics violations against a certain Alaskan Governor?
Didn’t matter that none of them ended up having any merit. That barrage of false accusations did the job, and achieved the result of rendering Sarah Palin incapable of effectively performing her duties as a public official.
This is no different. The Left has selected their angle of attack, and these accusations will continue until (and probably cease immediately when) Herman Cain is no longer a candidate. None of the allegations has had any supporting evidence, or even credible corroboration, merely a strident screech of opportunistically-timed innuendo against a man who more credible character witnesses affirm does not behave in that way.
/I/ could accuse Mr. Cain of sexual shenanigans (he emails and sends me letters in the mail constantly) as credibly as most any of his accusers, and with about as much evidence. The fact that these women choose this time to come forth with these attacks makes it pretty clear that they didn’t have much to talk about before he began his ascent in the polls.
The saddest thing is how effective this campaign against him has been, particularly in the female demographic. The sort of suspicions raised against him are of the darkest kind, and leave marks on a man’s record which can haunt him forever. =’[.]‘=
– please release all your records.