WOW!! We've got a live one here folks! But really, if we really want to smear Cain's character, call him a socialist. The good ol boys that may nominate him could care less about women's rights.
Believe Herman Cain's staff? Which one of their many stories should I believe? They've had so many that I'm not sure which one I believe. Which of the many stories about this do you believe? Do you believe that he didn't know of any settlements and didn't remember them, or that the story he told hours later about the details of the settlements? Do you believe the story his staff told about the allegations stemming from Perry, or the newest story from Cain's staff about the allegations stemming from a Democratic machine? Or one of the other stories that Herman Cain has told but conflict with the conflicting reports I already mentioned? The last thing I'd want to be is gullible. So which of Cain's many stories did you chose to believe, and why did you select the story you believe as the right one? Please tell us how not to be gullible, and accept a politician at his word, even when his story has changed time after time.
It is gullible to think a guy knows who is own mother is? Seem the kind of easily verifiable fact that there little point lying about.
I worked in the civil rights division of a large state agency for over 12 years in my career and conducted many sexual harassment complaints. Some bogus, some not. In all of those investigations, the accused never believed they committed an inappropriate act. No matter how egregious the behavior. Even when they admitted to the behavior they did not believe it was inappropriate. Herman is probably not "lying" when he says he did not ever treat "anyone" inappropriately. His judgment of what is inappropriate is what may be askew.
Hey Mom? I'm trying to destroy this national politician's career by spreading lies about him. Can you help me out and tell the media he tried to make you suck him off? Thanks Mom, you're the best! It could be the NRA counsel knew that if he put Cain on the stand he'd destroy his own credibility, so it was safer to just settle it out of court.
Dude, you're a hoot. Like a dinosaur that looks up in the sky to catch a glimpse of the of the great meteor overhead, and then going back to sucking down muck.
Seems Fox New is unwinding one falsehood at least: Spoiler http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/1111/Fox_will_correct_Block_claim_on_air.html Spoiler http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/11/08/block-falsely-links-cain-accuser-with-reporter/ Spoiler Mwahahahaha!! I mean, Jesus, can Herman Cain get his story straight on ANYTHING?
That's hilarious. It looks like Jopatmc chose the wrong side to believe. Cain's story started unraveling from the beginning. Then the smear campaign against the accusers is now unraveling. Jopatmc was spreading their lies calling us gullible for not buying into it. Sorry I have to spread more rep around before repping you again. OF course he'll probably never come back now.
Nobody but the tinfoil hatters wouldn't think there was fire under this smoke. The Restaurant Association lawyers did. Maybe he's being set up by aliens.
So, when did Glenn Beck become a member of ClutchFans?? Glenn, newsflash- your rally didn't work. Your show didn't work. Your paranoia doesn't work. Please go back to radio and join Levin, Limbaugh, Hannity, and the other crazies.
Except though if the NRA counsel believed the accusations were baseless then they could've gotten them thrown out of court before a trial. Obviously they felt that there was enough there that a judge might be willing to hear the case and it would be better to settle than risk that.
I wouldn't have had an opinion on this either way if Cain had just kept his mouth shut. His conflicting and unconvincing denials makes me think he is hiding something.
That is not really correct. When you have a swearing match lawsuit (she says one thing and he says something different), there is really no chance of the case being resolved by summary judgment because there is a fact issue to be resolved by the jury.
I believe the comparison being made is to the Paula Jones sexual harassment suit, not Monica Lewinsky.
? Do you believe that no baseless charge of sexual harassment has ever gone forward? That every accusation that has ever been allowed by a judge to go to a jury has in fact been real?
