One of the accusers against Herman Cain apparently has requested that she be relieved of the confidentiality agreement she entered into with the National Restaurant Association to the extent of releasing a statement setting forth her version of what happened over a decade ago, but not her name or any other details:
The draft of the statement given to the association, according to [her attorney] Bennett, is a summary of “what she did and why she did it.” But it will not include specifics about any incidents nor will it include the amount of the settlement.
As I have said before, all the facts should come out, not just the second- and third- hand characterizations we hear from Politico and others.
Identify her; this is not a criminal rape case where there is a rape shield law or where newspapers follow a policy of not identifying the victims of sexual assault. If she wants to go public with her accusations she has no privacy interest behind which to hide. This is particularly so since various news organizations have been touting her professional accomplishments and good standing after leaving the NRA as a way of bolstering her credibility.
Also, the entire file should be released, not just a statement. That is the only way what she says now can be compared to what she and others said then. This should include interview notes and contemporaneous records which will shed light on news accounts that multiple board members got involved even though at least 10 board members at the time have now said that they never heard of any problems with Cain (that info. is buried on page 2 of this Politico story).
If we are going to reach a proper judgment on whether Herman Cain engaged in “sexual harassment” such that he should be precluded from high office, then let the light shed on everything, not just what the accuser or Cain’s political enemies want us to see.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
[…] JACOBSON: NRA should release everything, or nothing. “As I have said before, all the facts should come out, not just the second- and third- hand […]
This is the legal strategy of an accuser who wants to have voice while not being held to account. It also represents a strategy for profiteering (perhaps once again) should the accuser pursue a book deal later on, say, should Cain become the nominee.
That she wants to filter the facts tends to make me question her motives for any statement.
Under the conditions requested, it would be to easy for her to manipulate any facts to conform to whatever her agenda my be.
Though wouldn’t it take both parties to agree to a release?
Her next best option (and worst for Cain) would be to refuse to allow the release at all.
If this is the case then her motives are suspect and therefore the complaint.
Did Anita Hill ever work for the NRA (Nat’l Restaurant Assoc, not the other NRA, the Nat’l Rifle Assoc)?
The draft of the statement given to the association, according to [her attorney] Bennett, is a summary of “what she did and why she did it.” But it will not include specifics about any incidents nor will it include the amount of the settlement.
IOW She wants to accuse him without actually saying what he is supposed to have done because she knows she will be laughed at by 300,000,000 people if that little detail gets out.
If she wants to talk about the events, she is more than able to break the agreement and talk about the events. It’s going to run her a bit of money though….
I wonder how much money Rahm offered her?
Thank you so much. You and Mark Levin for looking at this rationally and with your legal backgrounds. Let’s bring some reason to this fiasco.
BUT Herman needs to get a new campaign director. The problem is not the problem. The problem is the PR problem, unfortunately.
Just read this comment at Hot Air. Here is an excerpt:
If Herman Cain sexually harassed any woman, he sexually harassed dozens of them. That’s the way abusers are. There was a long trail of abuse throughout Clinton’s lifetime. Anthony Weiner’s collapse was littered with his sick desire to show off his parts to women. Abusers don’t stop and they don’t do it once.
That’s why this whole thing is going to collapse. By now we’d be hearing all about Cain’s harassment at Godfathers, at the Federal Reserve Bank, at college when he was getting his master’s degree. Why haven’t we heard anything else? Because Herman Cain doesn’t sexually harass women.
I expect we also would have seen a record while he worked for DOD in Dept of Navy.
What about Steve Deace in Iowa? He claims that Cain made inappropriate comments to his receptionist. Not sure this is the road you want to go down.
Do you really want to put that out there? Deace?
Reallllly?????
I have wondered about the NRA itself here due to the romney connections.
stranger things have happened…
“If we are going to reach a proper judgment on whether Herman Cain engaged in “sexual harrassment” such that he should be precluded from high office”
So we are now moving the goalposts that far? It doesn’t matter that Cain said absolutely nothing happened? Instead it is going to depend, not only on the existence of sexual harassment, but the degree? and if something clearly happened, what then? Cain “misspoke?”
Let’s go ahead and define what will disqualify Herman Cain from the nomination, because those goalposts are now in an entirely different stadium down the road.
[…] had the same thought I did.Insty has a huge new Cain roundup. I agree, btw that the NRA should release everything. The man’s running for president, after all. We should know the story. I want to see if any […]
Absolutely… Release EVERYTHING or NOTHING!
I seem to remotely recall that the accused has a right to face his/her accuser or am I dreamin’ here?
This whole stinkin’ affair created by Politico is beginning to take on the stench of doubt in a big way.
Time to check on those who would love to see Cain off the list of hopefuls and stand to lose the most.
The media is treating her like she’s another Anita Hill.
I tend to disagree with this post.
This public he said/she said anonymous crap will go away. Nothing good can come from a press, especially the Right, second guessing a small settlement made years ago.
Good grief.
We butcher our own. We did it to Romney, Bachman, Perry, and Newt. Now we’re doing it to Cain.
How many of you would want your daughter, wife or sister to put herself out there in public against a high value candidate who has supporters that are going to ravage her publically? Do none of you remember the left wing press going after Monica Lewinsky with adjectives like “slut, groupie, gold digger, etc.?” Do you not remember the treatment that was given to Jennifer Flowers?
And you would want to put your own wife, sister or daughter through that?
This woman was smeared and slandered by Herman Cain when he told Greta Van Sustern the woman was a bad employee. Perhaps the good professor can explain the bench mark for slander and the financial harm requirements. By saying that she was a bad employee, Cain virtually damaged her professional reputation.
I can’t believe the attacks I am reading on line by Cain supporters against this woman. Disgusting.
Yes, the NRA should release the documents of the internal investigation and settlements that Cain claims happened. And they can do this, and protect the women’s identitied by redacting their names. This will either prove Cain is telling the truth, or lying through his teeth. But the one thing remains, Mark Block despicable handling of the entire situtation which Team Cain should have been on top of from the git-go. And if it is true, that Cain told campaign workers (i.e. Curt Anderson) about this in 2003, Cain was stupid if he thought this would not come out, now or in October, 2012.