Image 01 Image 03

Cain accuser – now not willing to talk // Added: Politico and NY Times spin refusal as accuser “confirming” and “standing by” her complaint

Cain accuser – now not willing to talk // Added: Politico and NY Times spin refusal as accuser “confirming” and “standing by” her complaint

That’s the word I’m hearing.  Even though the National Restaurant Association was willing to waive the confidentiality agreement.

Updates:  CNN reports:

Joel Bennett, the attorney for one the women who has accused Herman Cain of sexual harassment, said Friday that his client “made a complaint in good faith about a series of inappropriate behaviors and unwanted advances” from the GOP presidential candidate.

Bennett said his client sees “no value” in revisiting the issue now, but “stands by the complaint that she made.”

Bennett said his client would disagree with Cain’s characterization of the alleged harassment incidents.

He confirmed that the alleged harassment occurred in 1999 over a period of “at least a month or two.” There was “more than one incident,” he said.

The National Restaurant Association confirmed in a statement Friday that a woman working for the organization filed a complaint in 1999 alleging discrimination and harassment by Cain. Cain was president of the association at the time. The association and the woman “subsequently entered into an agreement to resolve the matter, without any admission of liability. Mr. Cain was not a party to that agreement,” the statement from National Restaurant Association President and CEO Dawn Sweeney said

Nice job Politico.  You had second- and third-hand information from which you spun a tail of Herman Cain as an aggressor, you never even spoke to the original source, and now all we ever will know is your spin.

Here is how Politico trumpets the news to excuse it’s own shoddy reporting tactics:

Here’s equivalent spin from The NY Times which pretends that someone refusing to back up her complaint with facts — even anonymously and even when released from a confidentiality agreement — means that she stood by her complaint:

More updates:

Progress made – Ace: “So now I’m thinking her claim was trumped up.”

Robert Stacy McCain: “Lawyer ethics” — Hold a press conference to announce that you don’t want to discuss your smear-job against your client’s former boss.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


like this wasn’t all bull all along.

Sort of like Mark McGwire, during testimony before Congress about past steroid abuse, saying something like “I’m not here to talk about the past.”

    Joy in reply to DougV. | November 4, 2011 at 5:26 pm

    …..or perhaps her attorney has not had the time to explain the definition of the word ‘it’ to her 🙂

Midwest Rhino (not RINO) | November 4, 2011 at 5:02 pm

Her lawyer said she “stands by her complaint”.

Her other option was to admit to making it all up and giving back the money, and being liable?

Shouldn’t headline be … “Cain accuser doesn’t admit to Lying”

    Well, since we don’t know the details of the complaint, maybe she’s not lying. Perhaps her complaint simply was: “I want outta here — gimme some money or I’ll make a stink” and for whatever reason, they did.

    So she could be standing by that, entirely truthfully.

      dmacleo in reply to Owen J. | November 4, 2011 at 5:09 pm

      I was thinking something like that or poor job review and she struck back over it.

      Midwest Rhino (not RINO) in reply to Owen J. | November 4, 2011 at 5:18 pm

      Well she might be lying, and she didn’t admit to it … I wasn’t going for journalistic integrity there 🙂

      I’m guessing he might be just a little raw sometimes, or maybe just average for older guys around younger women. Certainly not in the same league as Clinton.

      SDN in reply to Owen J. | November 4, 2011 at 8:29 pm

      Whatever reason? Because it’s standard operating procedure for an incompetent / Machiavellian member of an Official Victim Group.

      “Pay me or watch me ruin your company’s rep, force you to pay to defend the lawsuits / EEOC complaints / etc. Which is cheaper?

Looks like they shot their wad on this. (No pun intended!)

I fully expect an announcement soon that the anonymous “victim” has signed a book deal contract contingent on Cain becoming the nominee.

Looks more and more like a Rahm-hit

you know this is one of the few places covering this w/o an open agenda.

thank you.

and yes I am a cain supporter.

“I stand by the complaint though I won’t tell you what the actual complaint was and even though Mr. Cain wasn’t party to the settlement agreement and doesn’t know either.” –Anonymous

I hope we are at least approaching the nadir in journalistic standards…

I’ll give her the benefit of the doubt and that at the time she thought she had a valid claim.

SH cases still are so ambiguous as to when a crime has been committed. Which is why so many companies settle to make it go away. Case law is mixed and what laws there are can be interpreted many different ways. Eyes of the beholder and all that.

Still it does say something about the weakness of her case that she has decided not to air it.

I said before that if she was looking to do him damage this was the best way to do it if her complaint was weak.

And so we get another example of the double standard of the Major Media. Clinton can lie in court and it’s ok. Cain has a vague unsubstantiated CLAIM made and he’s guilty.

Although the final nails haven’t finished them off yet, the Major Media has built their coffin, dug the hole and are now putting in the lining before they lie down and get buried.

Since Obama got elected there is NO ONE who doesn’t see/believe that they act with a double standard.

They can NO longer claim objectivity and that they have NO bias.

Watched it. Here’s how it will go.

She’ll be outed within 72 hours by someone other than the MSM, who will let it alone for perhaps 24 more hours. Then, her privacy and honor having been respected by the responsible, honorable, caring MSM, there will be a few harmless interviews by the evening talking heads who will then move on to Herman Cain for the duration. Confidentiality agreements in hand, she’ll do the rounds; morning talk shows, evening news magazines, cable “news” shows, the late-niters.

Not exactly a government job doing the people’s work
(sigh), probably much more stressful but it will pay a lot more.

Meanwhile, the boring stuff back in Washington; I wonder what tonight’s executive order will be?

    Joy in reply to Owego. | November 4, 2011 at 5:42 pm

    Politico says she already has a government job:

    Reading a statement he said he wrote jointly with his client, Bennett noted that she resolved the complaints through a financial settlement with the National Restaurant Association. He declined to say for how much, but POLITICO has reported it was approximately $45,000.

    Bennett indicated that the woman, now a federal employee, enjoys her current post and doesn’t want to publicly recount her experience with Cain

    Read more:

      Owego in reply to Joy. | November 4, 2011 at 6:24 pm

      My point, precisely. Her lawyer said so, but this isn’t going to go away. Don’t lose sight of the goal – Herman Cain. She is simply the path to get there; that cannot be changed. That said, her lawyer said others were harassed (involved?) so the attention may shift if one of them is willing to come forward. The only certainty is that it’s not over.

[…] and others spun that refusal to talk through the JournoList Machine and declared it “confirmation” and the “breaking of silence.”  What were have here is a full-blown feeding […]

[…] basic point I made this morning: “Whiskey Tango Foxtrot, Politico?”UPDATE III (RSM): Professor William Jacobson catches both Politico and the New York Times spinning the lawyer’s ridiculous press conference — at which he announced his client […]

[…] and others spun that refusal to talk through the JournoList Machine and declared it “confirmation” and the “breaking of silence.”  What were have here is a full-blown feeding […]

This is the same woman who sexually harassed me. I remember her harassment, but I don’t want to talk about it. She settled with me for an undisclosed sum. Ask my lawyer, Snidely Whiplash. He can confirm that I don’t want to talk about it.