Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Herman Cain will not address charges unless in a group of people accused by Karen Kraushaar

Herman Cain will not address charges unless in a group of people accused by Karen Kraushaar

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.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

In case you missed this comment to another article here, it bears repeating:

Sharon Bialek, et al., better think twice before continuing their campaigns to destroy Herman Cain. A private investigator used voice recognition software to analyze both Cain’s and Bialek’s statements, and the results say that Bialek is lying. Law enforcement uses the same software.

No doubt Cain’s powerful attorney, L. Lin Wood (http://bitsy.me/http://www.washingtonpost), will pursue every possible lead to defend his client. Wood has won “eye-popping” damages for clients falsely accused of sexual harassment. Bialek has had numerous financial problems in her life. Those problems may now get even worse.

Investigator: Herman Cain innocent of sexual advances
http://www.cbsatlanta.com/story/16002149/investigator-herman-cain-innocent-of-sexual-advances

You’re really jumping the shark with these increasingly silly and shrill attempts to protect Cain. Cain is running for President, Kraushaar is not. We voters out here expect candidates to answer whatever questions interest us or might factor in our assessment of them. Neither Kraushaar, nor her lawyer, nor Bialek, nor her lawyer, nor the unnamed women, nor the NRA, nor anyone else involved owes us anything.

    William A. Jacobson in reply to JEBurke. | November 10, 2011 at 4:41 pm

    What are her accusations that he should be answering? Forget even proof, what is he alleged to have done? You can’t tell me, so who is shrill and silly?

    Anchovy in reply to JEBurke. | November 10, 2011 at 4:52 pm

    Mr. Cain…. did you ever do something, if so, what?

    malclave in reply to JEBurke. | November 10, 2011 at 7:05 pm

    Gotta wonder, JEBurke… how did you respond to the people criticizing Joe Wurzelbacher back in 2008?

      JEBurke in reply to malclave. | November 10, 2011 at 8:26 pm

      Joe’s experience of Dem pols and media people and liberal bloggers jumping up and down on his head and trying to make HIM the issue and trying to discredit him…for…having the gall to push back to the Presidential candidate’s face! Ought to make you wonder whether it’s nice or fair or reasonable or responsible to try to discredit and belittle and attack a woman who made a complaint about a private employer 15 years ago who happens now to be running for President, so that she has been dragged from her private life.

      Cain and his goofball “chief of staff” had better be awfully well prepared if Kraushaar tells her story in detail.

      Here is one prediction: whatever she says, the Professor will shift from demanding more facts to demanding more witnesses and ratcheting up the attack on Kraushaar.

      Yes, that would be exactly like the effort to destroy Joe the Plumber.

        Mike Giles in reply to JEBurke. | November 11, 2011 at 8:20 am

        Ms. Kraushaar wasn’t “dragged from her private life.” It was HER lawyer who ran out and requested that the agreement that protected her privacy be vacated. Since she wanted her charges publicized, she can have no expectation of privacy after projecting herself into a public controversy. The case of “Joe the Plumber” is different. He didn’t project himself into the campaign. He was standing on HIS FRONT LAWN, when the candidate can up to him. The fact that the candidate answered his question in a manner which reflected badly on the candidate wasn’t his doing.

    SmokeVanThorn in reply to JEBurke. | November 11, 2011 at 11:24 am

    This is a put-on, isn’t it, JE?

    I must have been out-of-country when the right to face your accusers was repealed.

Now we have something to complain about Cain for: He referred to Nancy Pelosi as “Princesss Nancy” and then apologized for it. Has he no spine?

Has this serial accuser taken a lie detector test?

Seems a fair question since reporters asked it of Cain.

BannedbytheGuardian | November 10, 2011 at 9:27 pm

A man only compares a woman’s height to his wife because he is able to use it as a metaphor.

He can’t say -‘Hey little lady -I know exactly how I can fit up you coz I have a wife -you see exactly the same height. ‘

A man like that will persist but at some point he is just not clever enough.

There are A list men such as Obama & Bush (both ) who are not sex driven There are others Clinton Kennedy who are & did not change as presidents. They are risk takers .

Sex & risk are not unrelated. Cain is a risk taker . Not to say he should /not be President .
Not to say risks might be needed or not.

BTe He & Luke speak in the third person . Luke – what is it all about. This I do not understand..

Politico needs to dump or get off the pot.

There are at least two major crisies coming down the pike; we don’t have time for a strip-tease.

Release now.

[…] Jacobson has more here and here. 55.957870 -3.199357 Share […]

I expect she just doesn’t want to associate herself with Bialek, and I wouldn’t blame her for that.

Remember the only source for this alleged second complaint is also anonymous – but identified as the person she complained about. So of course we should accept their anonymous word without question, right? As long as it helps Cain, right?

Someone should slap both your faces.

No one made Cain say the things he did after getting a ten day advance notice of the story. But he seems to be doing pretty well, numbers haven’t changed in the polls and he is raising money better than ever.

The thing is, there isn’t really any evidence of spending in the early states. A few more positions in Iowa, but that’s all I’ve seen reported. What’s the plan?

At InTrade a $4.60 contract earns you $100 if Cain wins the nomination. At low volumes, this isn’t predictive as a market, but it is informative than such long shot contracts haven’t been purchased.

    SmokeVanThorn in reply to Estragon. | November 11, 2011 at 11:32 am

    And why doesn’t she want to associate herself with Bialek? Because there are genuine questions about Bialek’s credibility, questions serious enough that you “don’t blame” Kraushaar for not wanting to appear with her.

    So what is left? The name Karen Kraushaar. And she is unwilling to say what her complaints were.

    Devastating.

    Go slap your own face.

[…] use it for political gain trivialize and hurt the cause of women who suffer genuine threats.P.S. Herman Cain will not address charges unless in a group of people accused by Karen Kraushaar…But three former supervisors say the allegations, which did not include a sexual harassment […]

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend