Of course that’s not the case.  Believe him or not, Herman Cain stood at a podium and addressed the charges and took reporter questions.

Not so Karen Kraushaar, who has multiple (we don’t know how many) employment claims to her credit.  Kraushaar will only reveal details of her still secret claim against Cain if she can do it as part of a group of all accusers, including anonymous accusers whose accusations are unknown and who so far refuse to come forward.

As reported by The NY Times:

Joel P. Bennett, who represents Karen Kraushaar, said his client did not intend to talk to the media, or to authorize him to talk further, until — and unless — the other women agree to come forward together.

“She will have no further comment until that time and she and I will not be granting any interviews to the media before any such press conference,” Mr. Bennett told reporters during a brief news conference outside his Georgetown office.

So here we are as of Day 11 of the Herman Cain accusation scandal, and we know the name and accusations of only one accuser (Sharon Bialek, who was not part of the original Politico reporting) and the name but not accusations of another accuser, Karen Kraushaar (who was part of the original Politico reporting).

Of importance, despite hundreds of Politico stories about Herman Cain’s alleged sexual harassment, we do not know the nature of the accusations, much less the proof, as to any of the two accusers identified in the original Politico reporting.  Nothing.  Not a single fact has been published about the accusations which led Politico on its journalistic rampage.  All we have are characterizations and conclusions drawn based on evidence we cannot see.

One other thing.

I’ve always believed that witnesses who tell the truth don’t need to know what other witnesses will say in order to know which story to tell.  It’s not a law of nature, but it works most of the time.