Woman gives details of what she says Herman Cain said and did to her

[Little-Acorn]

Lawyer Gloria Allred just had a public press conference where a woman who accompanied her, stepped to the microphone and said that in 1997, Herman Cain put a hand on her leg and slipped it up under her skirt, and also pulled her head down toward his crotch. He said she was very surprised, and asked him to stop. He stopped immediately, and she sais that he asked, "You want a job, don't you?" He then let her go back to her hotel room and did not pursue anything further. She did not see him again for fourteen years.

If this is true, is it "inappropriate"? Hell yes.

If true, is it "sexual harassment"? Maybe, maybe not, since he did it once and then backed off immediately when she objected, and did not try to do anything again. But if he did say, "You want a job, don't you?", then that moves it a long way toward genuine "sexual harassment".

If she's telling the truth, he's toast. And maybe deserves to be.

Allred said that the woman has sworn out and signed statements to this effect, under full knowledge that if any part of it is not true, she can be convicted and punished for perjury. Allred said the woman signed them freely and knowingly.

An article in the National Journal, updated 50 minutes after the start of Allred's press conference, says that Cain's campaign flatly denies the woman's charges.

"In a statement, the Cain campaign denied Bialek's assertions. "All allegations of harassment against Mr. Cain are completely false. Mr. Cain has never harassed anyone." - http://www.nationaljournal.com/politics/fourth-woman-accuses-cain-of-sexual-harassment-20111107?mrefid=election2012

[Noir]

Merp, well, innocent until proven otherwise. If its just her word aginst his I can't see this going any further, be it true or not.

[jimnyc]

Allred said that the woman has sworn out and signed statements to this effect, under full knowledge that if any part of it is not true, she can be convicted and punished for perjury. Allred said the woman signed them freely and knowingly.

Sounds dramatic, but I would be willing to make the same claim and sign the same statement. He can't prove otherwise.

I don't believe any of these women, during campaign season, unless there is verifiable proof.

[Little-Acorn]

Sounds dramatic, but I would be willing to make the same claim and sign the same statement. He can't prove otherwise.

I don't believe any of these women, during campaign season, unless there is verifiable proof.

If these women are lying, then they must have had help. Not from Allred, but from others who would have set up their stories, made them "unproveable but unrefuteable", etc.

With that many players involved, what are the chances that one of them, someplace, might not eventually get persuaded by a $1,000,000 payment from National Inquirer or whomever, and let the cat out of the bag?

[ConHog]

IF this is true, Cain should be immediately sentenced to serve in Congress for 8 years. He'd fit right in.

I hope it's untrue, not because I support Cain, but because it disgusts me to think that some dude would so brazenly offer to trade a job for sex.


I kinda doubt it's the complete truth though, one would think that Cain had at least some form of sexual harassment training somewhere along the way and realized something like that could cost him huge.

[Little-Acorn]

IF this is true, Cain should be immediately sentenced to serve in Congress for 8 years. He'd fit right in.


Actually, sentenced to serve as President for 8 years, specifically 1993 thru 2000. He'd fit right in there.

Man's got a lot to learn. If only he'd told her to "kiss it", he'd get elected. There is precedent.

And if he'd just get creative with a cigar four years later, he'd get re-elected. Precedent again.

...sigh... missed opportunities....

[avatar4321]

I don't believe it at all. Too convenient. I'm sure it's a complete coincidence that a 4th accusor just happens to show up after the NRA let the others out of their confidentiality clause and they decided not to say anything. And she just happens to appear with Gloria Allred of all people. Yeah, that's not making her uncredible right there.

im just not buying it.

[jimnyc]

If these women are lying, then they must have had help. Not from Allred, but from others who would have set up their stories, made them "unproveable but unrefuteable", etc.

With that many players involved, what are the chances that one of them, someplace, might not eventually get persuaded by a $1,000,000 payment from National Inquirer or whomever, and let the cat out of the bag?

Yeah, Allred is just a famewhore, but I highly doubt she'd be involved, "if" there is anything to be involved in. It just seems awfully weird that the only proof is "supposedly" a out of court settlement with women that want to remain anonymous and not tell their story, then a woman who apparently waited 10 years and until this man was running for office before speaking out?

If you're a woman and you claim you have been harassed/assaulted or any of the above - don't you speak up? See a lawyer? Call the cops? Just all too fishy for me. I'd be happy to change my mind, as I don't give a crap about Cain anyway, but I just don't see any proof at all. And I believe with something SO important, we should DEMAND proof before finding someone guilty and ruining their career and/or political office.

[ConHog]

Yeah, Allred is just a famewhore, but I highly doubt she'd be involved, "if" there is anything to be involved in. It just seems awfully weird that the only proof is "supposedly" a out of court settlement with women that want to remain anonymous and not tell their story, then a woman who apparently waited 10 years and until this man was running for office before speaking out?

If you're a woman and you claim you have been harassed/assaulted or any of the above - don't you speak up? See a lawyer? Call the cops? Just all too fishy for me. I'd be happy to change my mind, as I don't give a crap about Cain anyway, but I just don't see any proof at all. And I believe with something SO important, we should DEMAND proof before finding someone guilty and ruining their career and/or political office.


All true, but I also believe that where there is smoke there is fire. Meaning I'm sure Cain did SOMETHING inappropriate. I DOUBT it was the blatant sexual harassment that has been claimed.

Like you though, I find it disturbing that someone is able to just throw such vile disgusting charges out there with NO evidence.

[logroller]

This woman was fired for lackluster fundraising in a position which required her to do so-- that's OK, right? Offered a chance at another job, allegedly in return for sexual favors (assuming, of course, that's not part of job description)-- that's not OK. But really, if we are to look at this from a political standpoint-- would it be Ok to give someone a job in the white house for being a good fundraiser???

see also the Pendleton Civil Service Reform Act (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pendleton_Civil_Service_Reform_Act)

[SassyLady]

I don't believe it at all. Too convenient. I'm sure it's a complete coincidence that a 4th accusor just happens to show up after the NRA let the others out of their confidentiality clause and they decided not to say anything. And she just happens to appear with Gloria Allred of all people. Yeah, that's not making her uncredible right there.

im just not buying it.

Yep, the dems used Allred to bring down Meg Whitman....looks like things haven't changed much.

[red states rule]

O'Reilly and Goldberg Agree With NewsBusters Report on CNN's Coverage of Obama's Scandals vs. Cain's



<IFRAME title="MRC TV video player" height=360 src="http://www.mrctv.org/embed/107259" frameBorder=0 width=640 allowfullscreen></IFRAME>

[red states rule]

Over at DNCTV, they played the race card. Nothing new for them of course


<IFRAME height=421 marginHeight=0 src="http://videos.mediaite.com/embed/player/?layout=&playlist_cid=&media_type=video&content=LK7SBG3QCMX2RXT2&read_more=1&widget_type_cid=svp" frameBorder=0 width=420 allowTransparency marginWidth=0 scrolling=no></IFRAME>

[red states rule]

Lawyer Gloria Allred just had a public press conference where a woman who accompanied her, stepped to the microphone and said that in 1997, Herman Cain put a hand on her leg and slipped it up under her skirt, and also pulled her head down toward his crotch. He said she was very surprised, and asked him to stop. He stopped immediately, and she sais that he asked, "You want a job, don't you?" He then let her go back to her hotel room and did not pursue anything further. She did not see him again for fourteen years.

If this is true, is it "inappropriate"? Hell yes.

If true, is it "sexual harassment"? Maybe, maybe not, since he did it once and then backed off immediately when she objected, and did not try to do anything again. But if he did say, "You want a job, don't you?", then that moves it a long way toward genuine "sexual harassment".

If she's telling the truth, he's toast. And maybe deserves to be.

Allred said that the woman has sworn out and signed statements to this effect, under full knowledge that if any part of it is not true, she can be convicted and punished for perjury. Allred said the woman signed them freely and knowingly.

An article in the National Journal, updated 50 minutes after the start of Allred's press conference, says that Cain's campaign flatly denies the woman's charges.

"In a statement, the Cain campaign denied Bialek's assertions. "All allegations of harassment against Mr. Cain are completely false. Mr. Cain has never harassed anyone." - http://www.nationaljournal.com/politics/fourth-woman-accuses-cain-of-sexual-harassment-20111107?mrefid=election2012


Mark Levin has poked a few holes in her story




Going through the story that was laid out in the press conference today by Sharon Bialek, Levin has found a few ‘problems’ that necessitate more information. He said earlier in the show that he was unable to get Gloria Allred to book her client on his show, so he’s basically left with just questions that need answers. One such question is why, after Cain had already ‘upgraded’ Bialek’s hotel room and then took her out to eat at an Italian restaurant would Cain then ask Bialek why she was meeting with him. Another question would be why he took her to the NRA to show her around if she had already worked there before? And there’s more.

Levin makes clear he’s not suggesting one way or the other the potential outcome of this story, who is guilty and who isn’t, but that he just believes her story doesn’t quite make sense and thus he would like to ask her a few questions.

http://www.therightscoop.com/mark-levin-pokes-holes-in-cain-accusers-story/

[red states rule]

Yeah, Allred is just a famewhore, but I highly doubt she'd be involved, "if" there is anything to be involved in. It just seems awfully weird that the only proof is "supposedly" a out of court settlement with women that want to remain anonymous and not tell their story, then a woman who apparently waited 10 years and until this man was running for office before speaking out?

If you're a woman and you claim you have been harassed/assaulted or any of the above - don't you speak up? See a lawyer? Call the cops? Just all too fishy for me. I'd be happy to change my mind, as I don't give a crap about Cain anyway, but I just don't see any proof at all. And I believe with something SO important, we should DEMAND proof before finding someone guilty and ruining their career and/or political office.


and she just happens to live in the same building as David Axelrod




Martha MacCallum, FOX News: "One of the things is that you lived at a 505 North Lake Shore Drive apartment, right? This is the same building, it happens to be the same building David Axelrod lives in. Do you know David Axelrod? Ever have any interaction with him at all?

Sharon Bialek, Cain accuser: "I saw him in the gym. I mean -- everybody nods to each other. It is friendly building but I never had any interaction with him."

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2011/11/08/cain_accuser_lives_in_same_building_as_david_axelr od.html

[red states rule]

http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/kn110811dAPR20111108024538.jpg

[Gunny]

Lawyer Gloria Allred just had a public press conference where a woman who accompanied her, stepped to the microphone and said that in 1997, Herman Cain put a hand on her leg and slipped it up under her skirt, and also pulled her head down toward his crotch. He said she was very surprised, and asked him to stop. He stopped immediately, and she sais that he asked, "You want a job, don't you?" He then let her go back to her hotel room and did not pursue anything further. She did not see him again for fourteen years.

If this is true, is it "inappropriate"? Hell yes.

If true, is it "sexual harassment"? Maybe, maybe not, since he did it once and then backed off immediately when she objected, and did not try to do anything again. But if he did say, "You want a job, don't you?", then that moves it a long way toward genuine "sexual harassment".

If she's telling the truth, he's toast. And maybe deserves to be.

Allred said that the woman has sworn out and signed statements to this effect, under full knowledge that if any part of it is not true, she can be convicted and punished for perjury. Allred said the woman signed them freely and knowingly.

An article in the National Journal, updated 50 minutes after the start of Allred's press conference, says that Cain's campaign flatly denies the woman's charges.

"In a statement, the Cain campaign denied Bialek's assertions. "All allegations of harassment against Mr. Cain are completely false. Mr. Cain has never harassed anyone." - http://www.nationaljournal.com/politics/fourth-woman-accuses-cain-of-sexual-harassment-20111107?mrefid=election2012

It doesn't really matter whether or not Cain's guilty. That is an aside to the leftist media's desire to turn the GOP primary into a 3 ring circus of personal attacks as a smokescreen for that abysmal failure for a President they have foisted onto us.

[fj1200]

and she just happens to live in the same building as David Axelrod

Someone who apparently has trouble holding a job has enough money to live on North Lake Shore?

[logroller]

Someone who apparently has trouble holding a job has enough money to live on North Lake Shore?

Perhaps she wasn't so repulsed by the landlord's deal.

[Abbey Marie]

Perhaps she wasn't so repulsed by the landlord's deal.

:laugh2:

[red states rule]

Perhaps she wasn't so repulsed by the landlord's deal.

Was she to cheap to pay the $10/month?

I guess James Carville did drag a $100 bill trhu a trailor park and they found her to parade in front of the Obama loving media

[logroller]

Was she to cheap to pay the $10/month?

huh???

[Love Monkey]

I saw that woman on tv. Herman needs new beer goggles.

[red states rule]

It is clear as to why she is coing forward now - she needs MONEY as shown in this random act of journalism by the Chicago Tribune




As newly reviewed records pointed to deeper financial problems for the Chicago-area woman accusing Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain of sexual harassment, he wasted no time Tuesday in suggesting she is motivated by monetary gain.

Sharon Bialek's fiance — who said he is her primary source of financial support — is unemployed and preparing to file for bankruptcy, according to Lake County court documents reviewed Tuesday by the Tribune. And in Cook County, lawsuits show she has been targeted by creditors who claimed she owed them thousands in unpaid rent, personal loans and credit card bills.

In a round of TV interviews, Bialek, 50, said she had no financial reasons for coming forward and had not been promised a job in exchange for accusing Cain of groping her in a parked car 14 years ago. She sought to downplay past financial problems.

"I have had bankruptcy, and it was after the death of my mother, to help my father pay for medical bills, and a custody battle. Like millions of other people out there, I was struggling," she told CNN.

Bialek had two bankruptcies, the first filed in 1991, about a year after her mother died. She declared bankruptcy again in 2001, following a suit in which her son's father agreed to provide financial support and pay her legal bills.

She declined to comment through her lawyer, Gloria Allred. Allred did not respond to Tribune questions about her client's finances.

Bialek told reporters she expected the scrutiny into her background and decided to speak out against Cain anyway because she wanted to give the GOP hopeful a chance to "come clean" and to "tell the truth."

"I'm just doing this because it's the right thing to do," she said in a TV interview.

<!-- Module ends: a-body-first-para-->http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2011-11-08/news/ct-met-herman-cain-accuser-1109-20111109_1_herman-cain-motive-bankruptcy