« | »

The Politico Hits Cain Over ‘Inconsistencies’

From a shameless Politico:

Herman Cain sexual harassment allegations: Damage-control marked by inconsistencies

By: Alexander Burns
November 1, 2011

Herman Cain’s presidential campaign enters Tuesday facing a full-blown political crisis, now that the Republican White House hopeful has struggled for more than 24 hours to respond to allegations of sexual harassment dating to his time as president of the National Restaurant Association.

We haven’t noticed him to be struggling particularly. In fact, he seems to have taken all of this pretty much in his stride. Especially, when compared to some other similarly accused politicians we can recall. Such as John Edwards, who holed up in a public restroom.

Since POLITICO published a story Sunday night revealing that the NRA had reached financial settlements with two women who accused Cain of inappropriate behavior, Cain and his spokesmen have offered a shifting and inconclusive series of responses.

The result is that a story that would have been damaging to Cain under any circumstances now threatens to derail his campaign permanently as the former trade association chief’s honesty comes into question.

Or that is the outcome that the Politico is hoping for, anyway. As for questioning Mr. Cain’s honesty, people who live in glass houses shouldn’t live in glass houses.

Republican super-strategist Karl Rove declared on Fox News Monday night that Cain might only be able to right his campaign if the NRA shares additional facts to confirm his claim that any allegations of sexual harassment against him were dismissed as false.

“I suspect there’s gonna be a demand for the National Restaurant Association to release details of the investigation that was done” into the harassment complaints, said Rove, who dismissed suggestions from the right that Cain had been targeted for his race.

“He should be prepared for things like this because he’s a serious presidential candidate,” the former White House adviser said. “We want our presidents to be as far above reproach as possible.”

So the Politico is leading an article about Mr. Cain’s supposed inconsistencies by citing Karl Rove? When did Mr. Rove become a trustworthy figure for the Politico?

Besides, the Politico claimed in their world shattering ‘exclusive’ that: "In one case, POLITICO has seen documentation describing the allegations and showing that the restaurant association formally resolved the matter. Both women received separation packages that were in the five-figure range."

The NRA has given no indication that it is prepared to share additional information on the subject, releasing only a noncommittal statement Monday calling the story a years-old personnel matter. Cain said Monday that he would not ask the group to break its policy “not to divulge that information” to shed light on his case.

Then why doesn’t the Politico publish its documents? Doesn’t the public have a right to know how the Nationa Restaurant Association resolved the matter? The answer is probably because the documents support Cain’s claim that he was cleared by their investigation.

That’s of a piece with the inconsistent way Cain’s campaign has responded to the POLITICO story since it broke Sunday night.

Not asking for something is an inconsistency? And never mind the Politico’s inconsistencies here.

When the story first posted, Cain’s campaign immediately fired back with a statement blasting the report but not denying its contents. Cain spokesman J.D. Gordon then told the Associated Press that the campaign was denying the report – but refused to speak to the details in an interview with Fox’s Geraldo Rivera.

Except that the Cain camp did deny the report, as we pointed out at the time. In fact, they denied the report within three days of hearing about it. (And not the ten days that we constantly hear.)

Again quoting from the Politico’s first story: "After several days of not responding to the question, Gordon emailed on Oct. 24 that any dispute about Cain’s conduct at the restaurant association “was settled amicably among all parties many years ago.” “These are old and tired allegations that never stood up to the facts,” Gordon said in an email response."

Starting Monday morning, Cain hustled through a series of tightly controlled events in Washington that offered little room for him to fumble in his response message. And yet, he managed to slip up all the same.

Really? A press conference in front of the National Press Club was a "tightly controlled event"? Being interviewed numerous news shows, including an grilling on PBS’s NewsHour by Judy Woodruff were "tightly controlled events"?

In an appearance on Fox News – his first of the day – Cain said that he had been “falsely accused” of sexual harassment and was unaware of financial settlements with any accusers. He repeated that claim in remarks to the National Press Club…

But by the end of the day, Cain had reversed himself on many of the essential facts of the case, telling both PBS’s Judy Woodruff and Fox’s Greta Van Susteren that there had been cash payouts to a woman who accused him “falsely” of harassment.

“I was aware that an agreement was reached,” Cain said on the PBS “NewsHour,” hedging on whether he had ever signed a settlement himself: “My general counsel and the head of human resources had the authority to resolve this thing … If I did – and I don’t think I did – I don’t even remember signing it because it was minimal in terms of what the agreement was.”

How did Cain reverse himself here? This is not a reversal of anything that Cain said. He had said from the start that there had been charges and they had been settled. He did not know whether there was a ‘settlement.’

In his sit-down with Van Susteren, Cain appeared to acknowledge that his story had changed, citing facts that had “come about during the day as I have tried to recall what happened back then.”

Which is what happens in real life. But it did not cause him to change his story.

On Fox, Cain made public new details about the two women whom POLITICO said had complained of Cain’s conduct. POLITICO did not name either woman in its report.

Because they believe in protecting the privacy of the accusers of Republicans.

Cain said that one woman – who he said had filed a formal sexual harassment complaint that resulted in a settlement – had been a writer in the NRA’s communications department in either her late 30s or early 40s. He said he believed she made between $40,000 and $50,000 a year and recalled that her supervisor believed her performance “was not up to par at the time she left the NRA.”

She ultimately settled the harassment claim for a sum of money equivalent to “maybe three months salary,” Cain told Van Susteren.

Cain’s confirmation of a settlement clashed with his earlier comments denying any awareness of a financial agreement with one or more accusers.

Cain was clearly speculating here, probably off of what the Politico had reported, coupled with his knowledge of the business world. It was clear that he still did not know the details of the settlement.

He said again on Fox that he didn’t “recall signing” a settlement document, but emphasized that “doesn’t mean I didn’t sign it” – just that he doesn’t remember signing it.

Again, where is the inconsistency here? Where are the reversals?

Cain said he knew the name of the second woman referenced in POLITICO’s report because the newspaper disclosed it to his campaign. But the former Godfather’s Pizza CEO said he had been unaware, prior to the POLITICO investigation, that the woman had complained about his behavior.

The second woman, he said, was a longer-term employee at the NRA than the first. She “worked in our governmental affairs department and she worked in the function that managed our political action committee,” Cain said.

Neither woman has yet been named in any report on the Cain affair, even as additional news outlets – including the New York Times and NBC News – confirmed parts of POLITICO’s initial story.

Gosh these news outlets are high-minded. When it comes to anonymous accusers of Republicans.

Republican strategists privately speculated Monday that Cain’s campaign could suffer grievous damage if one or both women come forward with new details about the allegations against Cain and put a human face on the other side of the story

Which shows 1) the Politico has not been in contact with them. And 2) that the Politico doesn’t they they have succeeded in destroying Cain’s candidacy. At least not yet.

Hopefully, some fat cat Democrat like George Soros or Larry Flynt will put up enough money to make it worth these women’s while.

This article was posted by Steve on Tuesday, November 1st, 2011. Comments are currently closed.

11 Responses to “The Politico Hits Cain Over ‘Inconsistencies’”

  1. Cain will be fine.

    Locally, a number of folks sending along an extra $25 just to make sure.

  2. jobeth says:

    It can’t be sexual harassment until someone says “NO” and the ‘no’ is not heeded.

    It’s getting more and more clear why these ‘women’s lib’ nazis are always alone…or lesbian.

    Why would any man take a chance with one of them…plus they’re ugly.

  3. Petronius says:

    “We want our presidents to be as far above reproach as possible,” Karl Rove said. Indeed.

    Bill Clinton was the gold standard (so to speak) for presidential sexual harassment.

    For the first time in White House history, female aides came to work wearing lobster bibs and aprons.

    Yet, if memory serves, just about everybody in media said Bill’s shenanigans were OK. Forsooth, they were more than OK … they were just fine and dandy, merely a matter of boys-will-be-boys. “It’s only sex,” they said. Or, “It’s his private business.” And, “It doesn’t matter because it does not effect his performance as president.”

    Clinton set the bar so low that not even the Trinidad national champion limbo dancer could squeeze under it.

    But now the MBM is engaged full time in all this self-righteous, goody-goody, laudy-daudy, hoity-toity, prim and proper, high and mighty, snooty-snotty, excuse me, scout’s honor, toffee-arsed, sun-dried-tomato-eating fannying about. Hunting for supposed inconsistencies. Looking under rocks in the north Texas wilderness, for Pete’s sake.

    How convenient it must be to have such a wonderfully selective indignation, to be capable of wheeling and dealing with the vast range of human frailties, but always with such moral asymmetry. Hairsplitting until the cows come home (“It all depends on what the meaning of ‘is’ is”).

  4. Astravogel says:

    Sounds to me that the ladies’ advances got ignored.
    Didn’t someone refer to ‘smears’ like this as “Palination”
    or some such?

    • The Redneck says:

      Borking, Astravogel, in reference to the witch-hunt directed at Federal Judge nominee Robert Bork.

      In his case it wasn’t an actual sexual-harassment claim, just random inanities about how he’d bring back segregated lunch counters and other usual race-card BS, but he was the one who lent the procedure its name.

  5. canary says:

    Obama loves muslims that beat rape and torture women.

    Obama has women issues. His self-admittance of not being around for his girls or his wife. Absentee. Even said enjoyed his new found bachelorhood when he moved to D.C. without his family. And the only reason he visited his white grandmother for a few moments when she was doing the 3 day in the home hospice death, smack before the election. And only for appearance as he explained he had guilt for not being there for his mother’s cancer and death.

    And we can’t forget Obama pushing that poor little black girl to the ground to impress the white boys, being rude & weird and bossing his half-sister and mother around when they visited him in NY to the point they left and stayed elsewhere.

  6. Mithrandir says:

    Obama’s 2012 slogan:

    “If you can cast doubt on the abilities and skills of others, there is no end to the things you can fail at without being noticed.”

    Give them time, one by one, each candidate will fall. One is crazy, the other can’t debate, the other is a sexual harasser, another has been married/divorced too many times…..No one can stand up to the impossibly high standards democrats have for ……uh……other people.

  7. Melly says:

    Unfortunately, Cain’s intital reaction set this whole distraction into motion. “I’m sorry, normally, I would respond to your questions, but that is a settled matter and I am legally bound to not discuss it further. I welcome future attempts at attacking my character from my enemies; it’s part of politics, good day.” Was that so difficult? And now I hear Mrs. Cain will make a show of support? *shaking head* The person who should be making headlines is that fool Rick Perry and the seemingly allegedly drunk show he put on in NH. Were Perry Mitt Romney he would have been driven away by the GOP. Let’s be honest here. I don’t believe all the candidates will fall. One will rise to the top and defeat Obama. That is the goal after all to defeat Obama or isn’t it? (poking the ultra conservative bear).

    • tranquil.night says:

      His team clearly didn’t have control of the issue right away, which has been a trend for a bit now, and needs to be handled because voter sympathy for these fumbles is waning quick. We all love the man, but the gaffes are sufficiently cringe-worthy.

      But this is now a witch hunt to get him on a process crime because the original impact they were trying to create by breaking the story has backfired.

      Chumpundit has been one of a couple on our side who’ve been more than obvious in opining a belief that Cain’s cloudiness with the facts amounts to the fact that he is lying.. about something. Mark called out Chumpundit already yesterday, but it needs to happen again, because he’s been a bigger moron than usual on this.

      “Neither Tim Scott nor tea-party rock star Allen West has been accused of personal impropriety by the left, as far as I know. If harassment was the sort of blanket smear of black conservatives that Coulter suggests it is, you’d expect them to have been smeared too by now.” http://hotair.com/archives/2011/11/01/ann-coulter-vs-andy-levy-would-politico-have-run-the-cain-story-about-a-white-republican/

      Uh, the Sisterhood of the Screeching Harpies DID EXPLICITLY try to paint Allen West as an angry/sexist Black man when he defended himself against Debbie-Diarrheamouth Schultz.

      EMILY’S List president Stephanie Schriock pointed to West’s comments as an example of the “Republican war on women” – and urged supporters to sign a petition demonstrating their support.

      “Allen West’s angry, hostile tirade to DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz is truly despicable,” Schriock wrote in an email on Tuesday. “If you had any doubt about the Republican war on women, look no further than West’s email — it’s threatening, sexist and demeaning.”


      See what passes for harassment and victimhood among these nags, who’re a collection of the most vicious people in the public forum?

      If I were Chumpundit I would be embarassed on a daily basis for the arrogance I continue to display when I’ve been shown to be so wrong on the political matters I write, so often.

      However, Coulter is also obviously wrong. The MBM would run with this story if it were about a white Republican. They would run any scandal about any Republican, no matter how true. All that matters is if they can get chump pundits on our side to accept their premises and thus give the MBM control of the flow of public chatter.

      There is a right and a wrong. These milquetoast, moderate, non-ideological types on our side who are convinced Cain’s guilty of SOMETHING (God, please, anything!) here will give a moral pass to any Liberal, find any way to rationalize any subversive or anti-social behavior for Liberals (Clinton, Edwards, Weiner, OWS, and on and on?). They’ll buy into any premise from any Leftist and tell us we have to find a way to compromise it, and look for any excuse to keep Conservative solutions from having a chance politically.

      In truth, that’s our problem with Mittoast Romney more than any policy disagreement. Everyone gets it, it’s no secret. He has no core and no spine. Everybody says “non-ideological candidates win.” Okay. First of all, nobody is non-ideological unless they have an empty head (which wouldn’t surprise me with these moderates). But forget that point – why then, if ideas lose and management/competency is all you need to win, does Mittoast have to get on Sean’s show and have to try and convince us he’s a Conservative? It’s laughable. We’d have a sliver of more respect for the guy if he’d just be his moderate self instead of looking to co-opt our brand again with what we know is going to be Bush/Statism Lite.

      He’s got Frum on the team now. Oh yeah, he’s gone full establishment. If the movement is going to head in a third party direction, the Establishment is doing everything they can think of to make sure it is so. Secretly, I wouldn’t doubt in the slightest that they would throw the election to Obama to stop the Conservative Ascendency. I think that’s goal #1 for the Ruling Class in any election. It sure was in 2008.

  8. jobeth says:

    Politico, is following the “script” I mentioned elsewhere, where they are so used to being able to tell the empties what to believe, that if they continue to tell us how Cain is “derailed’ and “hurt” by all the info…(exactly WHAT info?…empty inuendos) we’ll all tuck our tails and say…”oh…well…then he must have lots to hide” and abandon the freshest face we’ve seen in years!

    At a year out from the gen election…they must be truly afraid of Cain. That’s enough for me to stand behind him in this issue. Maybe even more.

    Note they aren’t going after the old “been around..and know the way it works” polititians…like…well, you know the ones…don’t want to offend anyone here. Its early.

    Oh, now that this woman is asking to be released from the gag order (or she has to pay back her $35 thou settlement) I can see all the $$ signs flashing and the wheels turning in her little head on how to turn this into a real money maker for herself.

    A lie is a lie…and I’m expecting to see her spew forth anything she is told to say…with the promise of her ‘gimme’ of some really big bucks for her part in getting Cain out of the way. Hope she falls on her stupid face…gold digger…

  9. Not so fast says:

    EVERYONE knows this is a distraction from the 8 Trillion pound Gorilla in the Kingdom, namely the failed Marxist economic policies of the regime.

« Front Page | To Top
« | »