Image 01 Image 03

Herman Cain News Conference (Update – complete denial)

Herman Cain News Conference (Update – complete denial)

Summary of press conference.  Complete denial.  Doesn’t even remember Bialek.  As to other named accuser, Karen Kraushaar, repeats that only accusation he remembers is about gesturing the height of his wife.  Took plenty of questions from reporters from major networks.


Starts with lawyer Lin Wood, who represented Richard Jewell (wrongly accused in Atlanta Olympics bombing) and Jon Benet Ramsey’s parents for Cain saying that he has represented victims of sexual harassment or assault and serious cases do not settle for nuisancee value.  Says Cain falsely accused.  As to Bialek, says convenient that came forward when too late to obtain records, witnesses and other evidence.

Cain says:  Starts “I am Herman Cain and I am running for President of the United States of America.”  Then says that he has notes to make sure he didn’t miss any points.

Saw Allred and client yesterday in news conference for very first time.  As sat in hotel room with staff members, first reaction was “I don’t even know who this woman is.”  Didn’t recognize name.  As to time period in question, he was CEO with 150 in D.C. plus 150 in Chicago.  Tried to remember if recognized her, and didn’t.  Didn’t remember name.  Charges are “I absolutely reject.  They simply didn’t happen.”

“As far as accustions causing me to back off … ain’t gonna happen because I’m doing this for the American people.”  “I will not be deterred by false, anonymous, inaccurate accusations.”

“The Democrat machine in America has brought forth a troubled woman to make accusations.” “After press conference, I have known you for 46 years… that doesn’t even sound like anything you would ever do to anyone.”

Says takes sexual harassment seriously, and treats women who work for him with respect.

Asks media to leave his family out of it.  Says stalking his family and extended family.

“I will repeat, I have never acted inappropriately with anyone, period.  These accusations that were revealed yesterday simply did not happen.”

Takes questions:

Is he willing to take lie detector test? Yes, but only if have good reason to do it.  (Not sure what that means)

Given drop in polls, how to convince non-supporters to vote for you?  Natural that some voters turned off.  Only needs 51%.

L.A. Times reporter, do you believe sexual harassment is real? Says it’s a very serious charge, takes seriously and always has.

Jonathan Karl ABC – asks about formerly anonymous accuser (Karen Kraushaar) who became public today, recalls her and that she filed a complaint found to be baseless.  No legal settlement, an agreement between her and NRA and treated as a personnel matter.  When she made her accusations found to be baseless, could not find anyone to corroborate story.  Gets into distinction between agreement and settlement.

Wall Street Journal — how to explain how 4 women now accuse him?  Some people don’t want him to get nomination or become President.  I can’t answer what their motivation is other than to stop him.

Local Fox station — re Romney saying accusation disturbing.  Says sexual harassment accusations are disturbing but false.  Didn’t interpret Romney as saying they were true accusations.

Lee Ross Fox News — who is the Democratic machine, who involved?  Can’t say a conspiracy, can only look at coincidences.  Can’t point fingers at anybody at this point.

NBC News — what role do Bialek’s past financial troubles play?  I can’t respond, she denies it.  But from common sense standpoint seems would be relevant.

Why was accuser paid tens of thousands of dollars?  Not sure amount, she got an attorney, NRA probably had outside counsel, not sure.  Ended with separation agreement.

CBS News/National Journal — Is it possible it’s been too many years and you will recall more details later?  Not expert on how brain operates.  Possible but unlikely.  Has watched Bialek yesterday and today, didn’t recognize name, face or voice.  Pretty good at remembering people he has met.

NY Times — What did Karen Kraushaar accuse him of and what really happened.  “I can only recall one thing that I was aware of that was called sexual harassment.”  “One day in my office I was standing next to her and gestured” about being same height as wife.  “That was the one gesture that I remember.”  Other things in accusations I’m not aware of or don’t remember.  “She did not react at the time.”

Via The Right Scoop, live feed (Click on small play button on lower left to stay on page, click on large play button in center to open in new window)

Ended live stream.  Will post video when available.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.



myveryownpointofview | November 8, 2011 at 5:06 pm

No one accused Cain of ASSAULT.

Who is this guy speaking now?

myveryownpointofview | November 8, 2011 at 5:08 pm

A lawyer for Cain – sorry, didn’t catch his name.

myveryownpointofview | November 8, 2011 at 5:12 pm

MOST recent accusations – he never acted inappropriately with anyone.

He says he does not know Sharon B. at all. By sight or name.

myveryownpointofview | November 8, 2011 at 5:13 pm

Charges and accusation he REJECTS? Not denies? But said they simply didn’t happen.

myveryownpointofview | November 8, 2011 at 5:14 pm

LOL, sorry, live commenting.

myveryownpointofview | November 8, 2011 at 5:17 pm

“The fact is these anonymous accusations are false, and the media brought forth a troubled woman to make these accusations”………where is HIS flat out denial? Unequivocal denial?

myveryownpointofview | November 8, 2011 at 5:20 pm

Essh, asked to take lie detector – said he would be willing, but only under certain circumstances.

    Have the accusers passed lie detector tests, or does the media only think Cain is lying?

      Kerrvillian in reply to Andy. | November 8, 2011 at 8:33 pm

      This is the Journolist media.

      Cain is a Republican.

      He will be considered guilty even if utterly and totally proven innocent.

      Truth does not matter to them. Their man winning is all that matters. See for reference: the 2008 Presidential campaign.

But isn’t there a picture of him with her? And there IS a witness who saw HER talking to him at the conference in Chicago.

    VetHusbandFather in reply to Tea Party at Perrysburg. | November 8, 2011 at 5:24 pm

    How many people do you think got pictures with him on the campaign trail? Do you think he knows everybody that asks for a picture with him?

      I understand that. But he should know that and address it before the question comes up. In addition, it was all over talk radio today that she had hugged him at that conference. I like him a great deal and feel that we need to take a stand on the “palinizing” of our candidates.

      But he needs to get out in front of this.

        VetHusbandFather in reply to Tea Party at Perrysburg. | November 8, 2011 at 5:47 pm

        I understand your point about them addressing the ‘hug’ to get out in front of this. But, I also feel like only the most rabid liberals will try to use that as evidence of him ‘knowing her.’ And then when they do, they will also have to confront that sticky situation of why she was seeking out and hugging the man that caused her so much emotional damage over the past 15 years.

      myveryownpointofview in reply to VetHusbandFather. | November 8, 2011 at 5:31 pm

      There was a Breitbart article where a person recalls, in detail, Sharon B. and Cain having a very “close” conversation for several minutes at at Tea event a month or so back.

        VetHusbandFather in reply to myveryownpointofview. | November 8, 2011 at 5:49 pm

        Same story here. Talking to someone (even whispering in their ear at a loud public event) is not proof that you know someone or will remember them.

          The problem with that view is:
          Bialek was at TeaCon and saw Cain = capable of corroboration
          What Cain remembers or doesn’t remember = not capable of corroboration

          Does that mean that she’s telling the truth as to everything? No, but it does look bad for Cain that he couldn’t get out in front of that.

    no, read the caption under the picture. it even gives the womans name there.

    No, I don’t think there is a picture. There is a person who says she saw them meet, but of course one meets so many people on the campaign trail.

myveryownpointofview | November 8, 2011 at 5:37 pm

Closes with, “for the grandkids”. Really?

myveryownpointofview | November 8, 2011 at 5:37 pm

Lynn Wood – attorney’s name.

I was surprised by the solemnity and respect of the press corps in this conference. It seems they are taking it very seriously – maybe the first time someone has actually checked them on their BS – at least in some cases.

It will be interesting to see what happens now.

It’s also notable the command Cain has – he and Gingrich both have that.

    jakee308 in reply to Rose. | November 8, 2011 at 8:24 pm

    They know WE’RE watching how they’re treating him.

    They’ve seen our reaction; we will not be stampeded anymore by allegations and a media created firestorm.

    They know if they had kept treating him like a criminal/suspect, they would get it in the neck if this turns out ok for him. And it’s looking though it might.

    Even though we all seen this movie before by both Dems and Reps, this ‘tastes’ different, smells different and looks different somehow.

    He’s not just bluffing on automatic. I think he expected something LIKE this (a blown up scandal of some sort) but the direction it came from surprised him at first. NOW he’s got a grip and he’s seen what forces and their story are and thinks he’s got them over a barrel and the media will pay if they trash him without doing due diligence.

    BTW we all owe Sarah Palin a big THANK YOU. She set the stage for conservatives to stand up to the media and to refuse to buckle no matter how scurrilous and scandalous the charges.

Did the press ask bialek if she would take a lie detector test? How about simultaneous lie detector tests of both bialek and Cain on live tv. Meanwhile, anytime the conversation is NOT about Obama’s administration, Obama wins.

    Kenshu Ani in reply to logos. | November 8, 2011 at 7:18 pm

    So true. I wonder how many people know that Eric Holder testified recently about Fast and Furious?

    jakee308 in reply to logos. | November 8, 2011 at 8:26 pm

    It’s all good. Better now these things come out for Reps.

    Then in sept oct we can start pointing out what the cryto muslim scoamf has “accomplished” in his few days in office.

    Anyone got a tally of how many days this lazy a$$ has actually spent in the Oval Office doing any “work”?

stupid answer about lie detector. it would be undignified for a presidential candidate to do so. The brilliant Cain has now established the standard for all other candidates. Reporter: “Why, Candidate So-and-So, Mr Cain was willing to take a lie detector test. Why are you refusing one? What do you have to hide?”

Cain’s lawyer, another bottom feeder. Lin Wood of Atlanta, the same man who represented John and Patsy Ramsey in slander cases against most news outlets and who won millions of $$ for the Ramseys.

Also legal representative for another bottom feeder, Howard K. Stern, the lawyer leech who attached himself to Anna Nicole Smith and who, in my opinion, was an accessory to her death (call him an enabler, if you prefer).

Question for all you Cainiacs: why do you agree to give a presser but then have your high dollar lawyer come out first attesting to your wonderful character? Why not just do what John McCain did, stand at the podium, with your wife by your side, and answer questions about the accusations being levied against you?

Of course, no mention by the professor of Cain warning there may be other [false] claims against him? I don’t remember McCain saying “Gee guys, this claim I had an affair with another woman since I have been married to Cindy is false, but expect more of the same claims.”

First, Cain, and Team Cain, tried to blame the “leak” on Rick Perry and Curt Anderson, who went to work for Perry on Oct. 24th, four days after Politico contacted the Cain campaign for a statement on the article they were going to run on Oct. 30th. Now, after a week of accusing Perry, and Anderson, and later Rahm Emanuel, it is a great liberal conspiracy? Team Cain needs to make up their minds who they are going to blame for the leak into Cain’s history.

    IrateNate in reply to retire05. | November 8, 2011 at 9:01 pm

    By now, is should be painfully obvious that truth no longer matters in politics. Smears, outright lies, and negative campaigns have been around for a long time, and only because they are so effective with an uniformed and apathetic electorate.

    Only my humble opinion, but Cain is toast. Done. Finished. In politics, proof is not required, only to get the accusation circulating.

      Juba Doobai! in reply to IrateNate. | November 9, 2011 at 12:14 am

      You and retire05 are weak-spined media suckups who contribute to the media’s devastation of Conservatives by your attitude. At the sound of fire, you both run. Then you add to the conflagration because Cain is not your candidate. Well, cheers to you both because the media doesn’t love your boy either and you have lost Palinistas like me as well as the Cainiacs. Way to go!

I hope people do not get out on a limb defending Cain. A guy who needs to underscore his denial by having his hired lawyer endorse his character and quote his never-seen wife supporting him and suggests there will be more accusers is not a guy whose version of events should be given a lot of credence.

Now that one of the NRA women — who manifestedly is not a flake — has been named publicly, it is certain that the other (or others) will also emerge and there will be more details than most people want to hear.

At this point — almost unbelievably — Cain is still digging himself a deeper hole. It is even too late for him to take the offensive by releasing everything himself. But he still has a bit of time — maybe a day or so — to admit some fault, put the best face on that he can, then go campaign in Iowa. Assuming that the worst one can say about him is that he has a roving eye and gets too frisky, voters may not care. After all, he has not had serial affairs (so far as we know), has not frequented prostitutes or abused children or propositioned teenage boys or fathered a love child. But if he sticks to his present course, folks will not be so forgiving.

    Milhouse in reply to JEBurke. | November 8, 2011 at 7:49 pm

    A guy who needs to underscore his denial by having his hired lawyer endorse his character and quote his never-seen wife supporting him and suggests there will be more accusers is not a guy whose version of events should be given a lot of credence.

    Really? Why? Once someone has gone to the trouble of digging up one woman, why wouldn’t you expect them to dig up two or five or fifteen?

    Now that one of the NRA women — who manifestedly is not a flake — has been named publicly, it is certain that the other (or others) will also emerge and there will be more details than most people want to hear.

    Really? How is this Kraushaar woman “manifestedly” not a flake? Why should we give her any credence at all? She still refuses to say what it is that Cain is supposed to have done, so even if he did whatever it was why should we believe it was bad?

      JEBurke in reply to Milhouse. | November 8, 2011 at 8:02 pm

      It’s sad and a bit pathetic to see people in such denial. Want to hear the details of Kraushaar’s story. Wait a day or two and you will.

        William A. Jacobson in reply to JEBurke. | November 8, 2011 at 8:10 pm

        Why wait? Whatever happened to publishing facts up front before the conclusion?

          Profgessor, Herman Cain has claimed that there was an internal investigation at the National Restaurant Association into the claims of these women and that they were found “baseless.” Where were Cain’s “published” facts before he made that claim?

          Or are you going to tell me that Cain, who has a very high dollar attorney, could not have worked with both the women, their lawyers, the National Restaurant Association to release those documents through his Lin Wood before he made claims of them?

          Why are you demanding of the women what you are not demanding of Herman Cain?

          Look, I defended Cain for a week, including in your comments. Specifically, I agreed with you that Politico’s story was thinly sourced, vague and unfair. I also sent an email to Martin at Politico in which I told him he should be ashamed.

          But we are no longer dealing with vague, anonymous charges and few facts. The NRA complainants and their detailed stories are going to become known. Cain has not simply mishandled this in some PR sense. He gives every sign of being a man with something to hide — and putting his new high-profile lawyer out there is positively bizarre.

          William A. Jacobson in reply to JEBurke. | November 8, 2011 at 9:29 pm

          “are going to become known.” isn’t that the problem? tell me the facts first, not afterwards. I don’t think that’s unreasonable.

          There is no criminal charge here and this is not a court proceeding. As a jury with a witness, we are entitled to judge the demeanor and mannerisms as well as contradictions.

          I defended Cain from the thin Politico story because I don’t believe in anonymous sources other than as second confirmations unless they are at risk of physical danger. But Cain jumped into their trap and began contradicting himself from hour to hour. He exhibited a consciousness of guilt. He was trying to play the old Nixon/Clinton plan of the “modified limited hangout” admitting only what was known or bound to be known and denying everything a centimeter beyond that.

          You want to believe the lying horn-dog? It’s your vote. At least he isn’t a witch, eh?

          Estragon has this exactly right. Cain is not on trial, this is not a courtroom and we are not a jury.

          This is a political campaign and we as voters, prospective supporters, are entitled to render judgments about candidates’ character, abiliities, political prospects, credibility or anything else on whatever basis we choose.

          There are many facts here already. It is a fact that Cain has two more sexual harassment complaints filed against him for whicb complainants were paid in settlemenf agreements than I do and I’m not running for President. It is a fact that at least two more women have also accused him. It is a fact that two Republican political consultants have said in public that they observed similar conduct involving yet other women. It is a fact that two of his accusers are now public and providing details — so it is no longer a matter of vague charges from anonymous sources. It is a fact that Cain and his clownish “chief of staff” have told sequential weasly lies about all this and made baseless accusations against others. It is a fact that this same clown went on Hannity last night only hours after Cain’s big presser and claimed that Kraushaar’s son worked at Politico, a claim based solely on his last name which was withdrawn this morning.

          This is not a campaign. It’s a trainwreck.

          Anyway, every time there is a new fact, Cainiacs swat it aside and demand more.

          The facts might not convict Cain if this were a court, but they are plenty to make him a really lousy candidate.

        Milhouse in reply to JEBurke. | November 8, 2011 at 11:10 pm

        And you know this how? Have you heard it directly from her? Are you perhaps her lawyer? If not, how could you possibly know what she’s going to say?

        Not being psychic, all I can go on is what has been made public so far. And not being psychic, that is all any honest person can go on. If you are neither psychic nor an insider, and yet you make conclusions based on what you guess this woman is going to say, then you are dishonest. And that goes even if your guess turns out to be correct.

        I still want to know why you think she’s “manifestedly” not a flake. In what way has her non-flakiness manifested itself?

          JEBurke in reply to Milhouse. | November 9, 2011 at 3:43 pm

          We shall see who is being dishonest, as it is now inevitable that we will hear all the details.

          Kraushaar is a 55-year-old married woman, a solid citizen who has worked her whole lifetime, a registered Republican, which makes her part of a minority in suburban Maryland, and a career federal employee. She is also a professional communicator. She will not need Gloria Alred or a script to read at her news conference.

          Plus, she is a reluctant testifier. She did not want to go public. Someone outed her to the media.

          She will be both persuasive and highly credible. The only thing Cain can do is try to sully her, as some of Cain’s backers are already trying.

          It won’t wash with the public. Cain has already lost most if his credibility with his constantly changing, weasly responses.

A word about lie detectors, they are all hype. There is no such thing as an objective lie detector. The lie detector is completely subjective to the operator, he alone can determine the results. The machine only measures blood pressure, pulse and maybe peripheral resistance. All of these physiologic parameters can be subverted.

At the end of the day, who really cares about the allegations? Cain is the only candidate that even appears conservative. Newt and Romeny are on record for climate change and socialized medicine. Perry is a nut and just a Bush on steroids, meaning he likewise is a liberal (Bush was most definitely). Paul would be the best if we could get him elected. But this election is for the future of our country and not the typical run for president of the high school.

Where is Cains apology to the Perry campaign, if he is so sure it’s the Democrat machine behind this? For someone who expects us to give him the benefit of the doubt on the allegations against him, he sure isn’t willing to apologize when he’s wrong, or give anyone else the benefit of the doubt.

    Estragon in reply to damocles. | November 9, 2011 at 4:26 am

    Obviously you skipped the line at the door where you get to drink the Black Walnut-flavored Kool Aid. Then it doesn’t matter anymore.

BannedbytheGuardian | November 8, 2011 at 7:27 pm

Ok just now Bertolusci has resigned & there will be no more bumba bumba parties. There are now several hundred experienced attractive young Italian ladies with nothing to do & no hope of getting a state minister’s position.

This interview has disappointed them further. Herman is no Silvio.

Today only I’m in a Very Specific State of Irritation at both the RNC and the ‘so-called’ Conservative Media. I do not count Rove as Conservative.

Today I Really Want To Know Ohio Issue 2 Support [FROM THEM] and Ohio Issue 3 Support [From Them]

Tomorrow, after the Ohio Election, I will be trying with effort to Avoid Yelling “What Kind of Fools Thought a Romney/McCain pre-nomination approach was a “Winning Strategy”?

Particularly after the 2008 election.

The ONLY good thing to come out of the 2008 election.

The ONLY election O’Bama ever lost was when he ran against a real African-American.

It’s my unprovable suspicion that the O’Bama campaign wanted to run against McCain because they both had “Natural Born” issues so McCain was the one candidate with a motive to stay off that issue.

I now know of two ready references for Supreme Court cases: Legal Information Institute and Justia.Com which I just found out about. Days ago I found that Justia references to Minor V Happersett were scrubbed of cross link references before the [2008] Election.

Ultimately it doesn’t matter how this all turns out.

Whether due to his own actions or to enemy action Cain has been knocked out of the race through allegation, innuendo and the intimation of scandal.

He’s done. There is no recovery here. He has been torpedoed and is sinking. Time to man the life boats, this ship is going down.

Perry was done in by his own lack of action and his mouth.

The final, somewhat serious NotRomney, Gingrich, is tainted meat. He has ticked off conservatives by playing “Listen to what I say, not what I do.” He has his own political scandals in the past.

Thus the field resolves into what it was intended to be even before the first primary. Romney in the distant lead.

And it is the worst possible choice for the nation.

    theduchessofkitty in reply to Kerrvillian. | November 8, 2011 at 10:57 pm

    Then Obama has already won. Forget it, hand him the Presidency in a silver platter. It’s going to be His Coronation, anyway.


      You believe we would have a better chance with a flawed candidate whose foibles could be so easily exploited?

      Hie thee to a nunnery, lest the slings and arrows of the world wound thee.

      Kerrvillian in reply to theduchessofkitty. | November 9, 2011 at 8:38 am

      I’m not handing it to Obama. The Republican leadership is.

      Conservatives aren’t going to get a voice in choosing a candidate. We are just expected to vote like sheep for whatever RINO trash they select.

      That’s how we lost in 2008. It’s going to work for Obama again this time around.

      Fight where you can win. Marshall your resources. Don’t waste time/money in fighting a battle that was lost from the start.

    Estragon in reply to Kerrvillian. | November 9, 2011 at 4:31 am

    No, he is out due to his dishonesty. He tried to minimize, to limit the damage.

    The actual allegations as we know them are rather mild – this Bielak lady is the worst by far, and her credibility is fairly questioned. The rest seem like perhaps inappropriate flirtation, not a disqualifying fault for most voters, I expect.

    But as the Watergate wisdom holds, it isn’t the deeds that do you in, it’s trying to cover them. That’s Cain’s fatal weakness as a candidate.

      JEBurke in reply to Estragon. | November 9, 2011 at 7:17 pm

      The thing is, prior to a few weeks ago when he inherited the NotRomney vote due to Perry being sized up as more snook than savior, Cain was on a lark. His was not a serious campaign but a book tour by a salesman clever enough to see that being a candidate took little more than a declaration and a plane ticket. I suspect no one was more surprised than Herman that he was suddenly pulling 25 percent in the polls.

      Of course, this explains why has has a blockhead like Block as his “chief of staff.” And why Cain never took routine steps to innoculate himself against these media exposes (the time-tested way is to leak the story yourself early on to a credible but second- or third-tier news organization so it becomes old news). Now, everything matters but ol’ Herman is not up to the challenges.

“Is he willing to take lie detector test?”

Will they ask the same question of his accusers?

How badly is Team Cain handling this whole scandal?

This badly:

Mark Block tells Hannity that Team Cain has confirmed that Kraushaar’s son works for Politico:

Josh Kraushaar tweets he no longer works at politico and that he is NOT her son.

Will try to get a link to his Twitter account.

Mark Block should be fired, ten days ago.

After reading some of the posts here, I now know why the GOP is called the Stupid Party. It has too many people who, at the first sign of a LSM take-down, turn their guns on their own. The point of Jacobson’s post is FACTS matter. If there are no facts, you can’t hang a man based on public opinion. I guess that’s too hard for many people to understand.

am4constitution | November 9, 2011 at 4:02 am

Interesting comments from a ex-co-worker of Bialek

“veteran journalist and CBS anchor Bill Kurtis on WLS saying that Herman Cain’s accuser, Sharon Bialek, is a former CBS employee with a “track record.” Given her checkered past, a chuckling Kurtis posited that Bialek‘s and Cain’s roles in the alleged car-incident could even have been reversed.”

There are two groups of people who believe these accusations. Liberals and Republicans who want an establishment figure at the top of the ticket. It is no secret the establishment hates Cain. They are terrified of the idea of an outsider. If Cain loses the nomination I will write him in. Nobody I have discussed this with believes the accusers. I do realize I am a sample of one.

[…] press conference held late in the afternoon the usual “he said” refutations were heard. Herman Cain made a strong case for himself. Meanwhile Glenn Beck has helped undermine the significance of the Sharon Bialek Herman Cain […]