Two women accused Herman Cain of inappropriate behavior

  • Thread starter Thread starter gilliam
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
_Abyssinia said:
Why are you accusing him of being a liar? They are allegations which Herman Cain has dismissed as being false. I just watched the Fox news interview, he was very clear, he said he has never sexually assaulted anybody, and they were baseless accusations.

I remember a story recently where a Catholic Priest was accused of abuse, it went to court, and the claim was found to be false. Just because somebody is accused, does not mean it is true.

Ken Vogel of Politico who wrote the article with the allegations against Herman Cain used to work for the George Soros-funded Center for Public Integrity in Washington and has made numerous attacks against conservatives.
Click to expand...
Why are you accusing me of accusing him of bein a liar? I’ve seen the video where he was being hounded by reporters to comment on this story and he repeatedly told them that he did not want to talk about it. And that’s fine. That is probably not the place to be talking about something so serious when any remark can be misunderstood, twisted and so forth. When someone is constantly being hounded by reporters it is possible that they could get so defensive that they may deny something that is in fact true. I just think that it is better to be honest that to get into a situation where you feel compelled to lie. My post was just a cautionary remark, nothing more.
 
zab said:
Why are you accusing me of accusing him of bein a liar? I’ve seen the video where he was being hounded by reporters to comment on this story and he repeatedly told them that he did not want to talk about it. And that’s fine. That is probably not the place to be talking about something so serious when any remark can be misunderstood, twisted and so forth. When someone is constantly being hounded by reporters it is possible that they could get so defensive that they may deny something that is in fact true. I just think that it is better to be honest that to get into a situation where you feel compelled to lie. My post was just a cautionary remark, nothing more.
Click to expand...
Sorry I must of misunderstood you.
 
A_Catholic said:
Cain is the ultimate insider. He was head of the Federal Reserve in Kansas City and was a lobbyist in Washington, D.C.

Question everything.
Click to expand...
I am.
I had Obama’s number when he was speaking at the DNC for Clinton years ago.

Of the candidates, he has a plan, and a proven record for business.
These are the qualities this country needs in a president right now.

And best of all, he is not a career politician.
 
gilliam said:
Commentary: Cain is getting the Clarence Thomas treatment: t.co/LWuicI93
Click to expand...
Just to put my two cents in here and make a slightly-off-the subject suggestion--------

Can we stop rehashing Clarence Thomas, like somebody else here said? Two different subjects and different context here.
Different subject for a different thread. And yes, others bringing it up in the media is just as wrong.

Sheesh. :(:rolleyes:
 
A_Catholic said:
I have become the worst cynic I know, so take this for what it’s worth. I personally believe all of our candidates have been picked for us. Romney, Obama, Bush, Clinton, Perry - all one and the same person with different variations. How else to explain that Obama, who ran on an anti-war policy, has completely followed in Bush’s footsteps, and in fact, more US soldiers have been killed since Obama took office than in the whole 8 years Bush was in office. We are now on the verge of even more wars, all this from a person who won the Nobel Peace Prize when he hadn’t done a single thing. Think he should give back that prize, or has he only done what he was suppose to do?

I don’t believe Cain was ever meant to be a serious candidate, hence he barely has a campaign put together. This is a way to get him out favor with the public and out of the race.

Don’t believe anything the media tells you.
Click to expand...
Sadly (and very unfortunately) I share a tad of your cynicism. :(😦
 
OrdinaryMelkite said:
Just to put my two cents in here and make a slightly-off-the subject suggestion--------

Can we stop rehashing Clarence Thomas, like somebody else here said? Two different subjects and different context here.
Different subject for a different thread. And yes, others bringing it up in the media is just as wrong.

Sheesh. :(:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
We bring up the Clarence Thomas there because it shows a pattern of how the mainstream media and the Left treat blacks who dare stray off the liberal plantation
 
SamH said:
Big difference between rape and a sexual harassment pay off.
Click to expand...
Not to sound like a great defender of Clinton, but being accused of and NEVER INDICTED for rape does not mean he WAS a rapist. I’ve come to deeply regret voting for the man back in my “New Age Heathen” days and I’ve come to believe he was a lousypresident, but even I am not so prejudiced against him that I tend to prejudge him as a being a rapist just because I dislike him. Now if there was clear, cold hard evidence, maybe. Just because ONE woman accused hinm of that does not make him one. And again, I don’t want to come off as a defender of Clinton, either. Just being fair.

And you make it sound like Spitzer was a rapist, as well, when you know very well that was a different thing altogether.
Paying a high-price call girl for sex is very different than accusations of rape, now. Do not like the man and am glad he is no longer Governor, but he is NOT an accused rapist.

Let’s not have our dislike of people blind us to the FACTS and color our willingness to believe certain things about them without evidence. :rolleyes:🤷
 
SamH said:
Big difference between rape and a sexual harassment pay off.
Click to expand...
Oh I know, but I just liked PT jumped on the Republican examples, when in Thomas’s case, he wasn’t even found guilty of anything. Anyone can accuse anyone of anything.
 
_Abyssinia said:
Why are you accusing him of being a liar? They are allegations which Herman Cain has dismissed as being false. I just watched the Fox news interview, he was very clear, he said he has never sexually assaulted anybody, and they were baseless accusations.

I remember a story recently where a Catholic Priest was accused of abuse, it went to court, and the claim was found to be false. Just because somebody is accused, does not mean it is true.

Ken Vogel of Politico who wrote the article with the allegations against Herman Cain used to work for the George Soros-funded Center for Public Integrity in Washington and has made numerous attacks against conservatives.
Click to expand...
I tend to believe Cain, and I do agree that this was done mostly to derail his campaign, but you said “assaulted.” There never was an accusation of “assault.” Remember, this has to do with “inappropriate comments and behavior.” Big difference form “assault.” Did he deny making “inappropriate comments and gestures?” If not, some questions may continue.

Remember that.
 
OrdinaryMelkite said:
I tend to believe Cain, and I do agree that this was done mostly to derail his campaign, but you said “assaulted.” There never was an accusation of “assault.” remeber, this has to do with “inappropriate comments and behavior.” Big difference form “assault.” Did he deny making “inappropriate comments and gestures?” If not, some questions may continue.

Remember that.
Click to expand...
Heres what he said:

I have never sexually harassed anyone, let’s say that. Secondly, I’ve never sexually harassed anyone, and yes, I was falsely accused while I was at the National Restaurant Association, and I say falsely, because it turned out, after the investigation, to be baseless.
 
estesbob said:
Heres what he said:

I have never sexually harassed anyone, let’s say that. Secondly, I’ve never sexually harassed anyone, and yes, I was falsely accused while I was at the National Restaurant Association, and I say falsely, because it turned out, after the investigation, to be baseless.
Click to expand...
Thank for that, EstesBob. I was simply responding to the term the poster used. He mischaracterized Cain’s words as “assult,” which was not what Cain said.
Again, thank you. 👍👍
 
OrdinaryMelkite said:
I tend to believe Cain, and I do agree that this was done mostly to derail his campaign, but you said “assaulted.” There never was an accusation of “assault.” Remember, this has to do with “inappropriate comments and behavior.” Big difference form “assault.” Did he deny making “inappropriate comments and gestures?” If not, some questions may continue.

Remember that.
Click to expand...
That is correct, I used the wrong word.
 
OrdinaryMelkite said:
Thank for that, EstesBob. I was simply responding to the term the poster used. He mischaracterized Cain’s words as “assult,” which was not what Cain said.
Again, thank you. 👍👍
Click to expand...
. He has categorically denied it so now we can sit back and see what happens.
 
Ridgerunner said:
A “five figure settlement” which also included their resignations? Chump change as such things go, possibly reflective of the believability of the charges. I have seen bigger settlements for resignation of dissenters alone, where there was no additional charge of misconduct at all.
Click to expand...
If a person has done nothing wrong, then why pay any money at all?
 
gamewell45 said:
If a person has done nothing wrong, then why pay any money at all?
Click to expand...
Because the scandal created by the accusation, as well as cost to defend and win are higher then the price of this silence.

That is the first thing our corporate attorney advises of, if the cost to legally shut up a problem is lower then the cost of court, pay them off.
It does not matter if they are right or wrong, the payoff is the most economical solution.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top