Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Report: Kraushaar will not do press conf. unless anonymous accusers also participate (Update: confirmed)

Report: Kraushaar will not do press conf. unless anonymous accusers also participate (Update: confirmed)

This is beginning to look more like farce.

Via @DanRiehl, CNN reports that Herman Cain accuser Karen Kraushaar will not do the joint press conference she has been threatening unless the two still anonymous accusers come out and participate:

Herman Cain accuser Karen Kraushaar is “not considering a press conference” if only she and the other named accuser, Sharon Bialek, are willing to participate, according to a source close to Kraushaar.

“She still would like to have a press conference with all four women” who have accused Cain of sexual harassment, the source said, but it has not yet come together.

Thursday morning, Kraushaar’s attorney, Joel Bennett, told reporters that she has called the two anonymous accusers, but they have not returned her calls.

The source told CNN that Kraushaar has not yet decided what she will do, if anything, on her own if the two remaining accusers want to stay private.

Kraushaar demanded that the National Restaurant Association release her from her confidentiality agreement, which it did, but she still refused to reveal the details.  Now she is imposing more conditions.

I don’t know what Kraushaar’s claims and proof are.  But she should put an end to this charade by requesting that the NRA release both her original complaint and the NRA’s entire file on its investigation and severance agreement.

Update:  Confirmed that Kraushaar will not talk unless in a group:

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.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Tags:

Comments

If her complaint against Cain is similar to the one she filed three years later, she has a nothing case. I get the feeling that the dim scheme to brng down Cain is not working out as well as they expected. This is why they want the others to join this woman in a press conference. Harassment is more credible when in large numbers, you know. All this shows how incompetent the obama administration is in bringing down an opponent. They use one of their own instead of a complete stranger like smarter people would do. I am still wondering why all thee cases stem from the NRA and no other organization Cain worked for. Is the NRA a hotbed of sexual intrigue? Or are they in the tank for obama?

Funny this is that it is very easy to prove that Sharon Bialek is not telling the truth.

Sharon Bialek’s story:

“But instead of going into the offices, he suddenly reached over and he put his hand on my leg under my skirt and reached for my genitals. He also grabbed my head and brought it towards his crotch.”

Proposition A: These were simultaneous – not sequential actions.
We know this is true because she rebuffed him right away and
“…asked him to stop, and he did.”

Proposition B: This is impossible to do while sitting in the car with the left hand going for the crotch and the right hand pushing the head.
Map out the logistics. The left arm always blocks the head from going towards his crotch.

Proposition C: This is impossible to do while sitting in the car with the right hand going for the crotch and the left hand pushing the head.
Map out the logistics. Can’t get the left arm up to push on the head with any reasonable way the right hand goes for the crotch.

Proposition D: Cain only has a normal set of two hands. One left, one right.

Proposition E: Since the maneuver can not be done using any combination of normal left and right hands, the story as told is impossible.

Conclusion: Sharon Bialek is not telling the truth.

    William A. Jacobson in reply to jdh. | November 10, 2011 at 1:53 pm

    I was wondering about the logistics as well.

    Jim in reply to jdh. | November 10, 2011 at 2:24 pm

    Agreed. Tried it on my wife. Just to prove a point, of course. All I got for my trouble was an elbow in the side.

    dmacleo in reply to jdh. | November 10, 2011 at 2:30 pm

    not going to get into details here….but it CAN be done. its not comfortable though….

      only if you are double-jointed. Remember this was sitting side by side in a car. Not humanly possible.

        Are you an attorney? There’s so much subjective clutter on the matter that no one has thought to look at the allegation from that angle.

        I think you may actually be the first to call attention to the forensics of Bialek’s story.

        dmacleo in reply to jdh. | November 10, 2011 at 3:26 pm

        yeah in a car. its not at all easy but can be done.

          Not in the front driver and passenger seat with an average dividing median of about a foot. Which also brings up another question. Was she wearing seat belts when it allegedly happened. Bialek’s neck and torso would have to be extended for the simultaneous action to be true.

          I don’t understand your insistence that this can be done.

          1. Reaching up a skirt with the left hand, no matter how its done, the left arm extends across the lap. This completely blocks the pathway for her head to go anywhere near his crotch.
          2. Reaching up a skirt with the right hand is such an unnatural move that any way you try you must bring the right shoulder forward. This severely restricts the ability of the left hand to make it even past the location of the right shoulder. Try it.

          As a matter fact, the only way this seems possible if she had switched the way she was sitting in the front seat to some unnatural way of sitting with her left leg up on the seat or had her skirt completely hiked up. But describing herself as positioned like that would kind of destroy her story.

    dmacleo in reply to igcblogger. | November 10, 2011 at 5:03 pm

    or if you twist your hips towards her and thrust pelvis up. after the hips are twisted the arm is not blocking the groin.
    then as pulling her head down you also push it a bit (basically cause her to bend mid spine to shorten her height) to clear your elbow.

    just because you can’t do it does not mean others can’t.
    they were parked, nothing says they were facing straight fwd.
    stop assuming.

http://www.anncoulter.com/
Ann Coulter connects the dots and, IMHO nails it.

Kraushaar demanded that the National Restaurant Association release her from her confidentiality agreement

Now, is she going to return the settlement distribution ?

I’m still hung up on why this woman has come out with this story fifteen years latr. What’s in it for her or Allred? Even in her words, it would have been just a pass. Does she remember all the passes she had for her, what was it…55 years or just the the ones from famous people? I know I have a nasty suspicious mind but I can’t help wondering if the passes, if there were any, were all on her side and she was rebuffed. Shs is, after all, the one who wanted something for nothing from Cain. From her words, that is. I’m not even sure any of this ever happened. Perhaps, in her quest for favors from men, she forgot entirely which man made this pass or, in my belief, to whom she made a pass.

I have nothing but contempt for anyone, male or female , who bring false charges against someone in the effort to ruin their career if not thier lives. It weakens the cases of women and men, too, who have legitimate greivances. This is all a storm in a teacup and should noteven have been addressed.

The operative parts of this story are that the two unnamed women have not yet weighed in and that Kraushaar has not yet decided what to do if they don’t. So where is the “farce” — other than the clownish way Cain and his ludicrous “team” have responded to all this.

this is off topic, but I thought it was interesting. From the Daily Caller

Ilario Pantano, a former Marine who was wrongly accused of murdering two Iraqis in 2004, is looking to become the first Republican to represent North Carolina’s 7th Congressional District since Reconstruction.

MaggotAtBroadAndWall | November 10, 2011 at 2:56 pm

>> Thursday morning, Kraushaar’s attorney, Joel Bennett, told reporters that she has called the two anonymous accusers, but they have not returned her calls.<<

If they are anonymous, how did Kraushaar learn their names and phone numbers?

On another note, I'm not a lawyer but if I ran the NRA I would think twice before releasing any documents releated to her case, especially if it was a frivolous case that lacked merit. It seems to me that would publicize what the NRA's threshold for settlement is. I'd be worried it could be an invitation to unethical, disgruntled employees to file similarly weak cases just to get a big pay day.

“she should put an end to this charade by requesting that the NRA release both her original complaint and the NRA’s entire file on its investigation and severance agreement.”

This is only true if the truth would hurt Herman Cain. Hurting Herman is the goal, after all. Truth is merely a tool, not an end in itself. /sarcasm

What, Joel Bennett forgot to hire two actresses to portray the aggrieved, anonymous women?

Was Bennett actually representing real women to begin with? Or, was this just Bennett fishing?

You mean she won’t move forward without a posse? I’m shocked, shocked I say.

VetHusbandFather | November 10, 2011 at 4:14 pm

What my mind automatically adds to the end of this headline:

Kraushaar will not do press conf. unless anonymous accusers also participate…

…because her allegations are incredibly weak, and she’s hoping the other women have stronger cases.

Since the confidentiality agreement is now null and void, can Cain demand to see what was in it?

Its his life they are trying to destroy, and he wasn’t even a party to the agreement in the first place. He may not even know what was alleged, he certainly has no idea how the NRA dealt with it. Was there an investigation? What did they find?

In order to figure out what is going on, you have to make some assumptions about goals.

If Ms. K’s goal is to make sure all the facts come out in this case, she would be speaking out in a logical and concise manner, laying out just exactly what happened and who can corroborate her story, now that she is released from the consent decree.

If Ms. K’s goal is to stir up trouble and cause defamatory stories to be written about Mr. Cain, she would be doing…exactly what she is doing.

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

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend