Monday, November 7, 2011

Anatomy Of A Smear (redux)

It’s been interesting watching the MSM bloviate itself to near-orgasm in their attempts to destroy the uppity-black man named Herman Cain. But now the scandal appears dead, and the MSM is left with mud on its hands.

Item One: Called Bluffs and Smears. As pointed out last week (LINK), this was always a smear. The accusers remained anonymous to avoid questions, and they refuse to say what Cain supposedly did, so the public can’t see how ridiculous their allegations really are. And they’ve lied to get around the problems with their stories:

● First, how many accusers are there? We're told three, but there's only evidence of one.

● The only known accuser claimed she can’t come forward because the confidentiality agreement prevented her. But she violated that agreement when it suited her, so hiding behind it was disingenuous. When this was pointed out, she suddenly claimed she couldn't come forward because she “feared” for her current job. But she works for the federal government and it is literally impossible for her to be fired or punished for coming forward.

● On Friday, the Restaurant Association (NRA) released her from the confidentiality provision. In effect, the NRA called her bluff. And bluff it was. Rather than come forward, she sent her lawyer to claim the allegations were suddenly “too painful to relive.” Yeah, right. Apparently it wasn’t painful to offer the allegations to the media, it's just painful to defend them. The other supposed accuser has since vanished. The third accuser never existed -- she was a creation of Rick Perry’s pollster.

● We now know more of what is really alleged. The woman claims Cain approached her at a function and made a single suggestive comment or invite. She claims she immediately went to the NRA and complained. However, as the NRA timeline revealed, she didn't make the allegation until after Cain left the job.

● Meanwhile, her lawyer tried to smear Cain on the way out. At his press conference, he implied that something physical happened between Cain and the accuser -- something no one has said before -- and he tried to verbally turn a single incident into a series of incidents. He did this by using hypothetical verbiage: “whatever happened, physical or verbal or otherwise.” That's slander.
Item Two: The Evolution of Rape-Rape. Mid-week an allegation arose that Cain raped one of these women (assuming there is more than one). The story started with the claim that a witness saw Cain take a drunken employ to his apartment, from which she emerged and claimed he had molested her. Then the witness denied seeing anything. Then the story changed to “drunken woman wakes up at Cain’s apartment and felt uncomfortable” before it changed to “Cain invited woman to his apartment and she declined.” Each of these revisions was reported as true without confirmation or mention that the story kept evolving. No witness to this has ever come forward.

Item Three: Media Smears. The media has been in full-on smear mode. Politico ran an incredible 95 stories in the first five days. The networks ran 50 stories on this in the same time. By comparison, during the same time period of the Clinton/Lewinsky scandal, the networks ran a grand total of 3 stories. Moreover, they reported every rumor as true, inserted every rumor into each article, and omitted key facts. For example, Politico:
● Never mentioned that no one admitted liability in the settlements.

● Never mentioned that these claims were made after Cain left. To the contrary, they actually accused him of lying when he said he wasn’t there when the allegations were made.

● They attacked Cain for refusing to release the woman from the confidentiality provision even though they knew Cain wasn’t a party to the release and had no such powers.

● They never questioned other NRA employees, who have since come forward and said they don't believe the woman.
They also skewed their coverage to boost the allegations:
● They ran headlines saying “The Accuser Speaks” and included this line in all stories starting Friday, even though the accuser refused to speak, and they attributed quotes from her attorney to her as if she said them.

● They attacked Cain for refusing to answer questions, even as he answered questions. And Politico never reported his threat to sue them. They also kept saying Cain never denied the allegations, even after he emphatically denied them.
Now they're attacking his wife to try to keep the scandal alive.

Item Four: Dirty Polling. Reuters reporter Steve Holland has been running his own smear campaign. He’s written dozens of stories on this and repeatedly makes distortions. For example, he describes the number of accusers as “at least three” and describes the allegations as both “physical and verbal” and as a “series” or pattern of behavior -- none of which is true.

Saturday, he wrote an article about a poll which claims “Cain has lost 9% support due to the harassment.” But.... this wasn't a scientific poll, it was an internet poll. That makes it pure junk. Yet, Holland incredibly writes that had it been a scientific poll, it would have had a margin of error of +/- 4%. This is statistical bullsh*t.

Also, there’s a huge problem with his numbers. Cain loses 9% among Republicans in his poll (down from 66% to 57%). But his total support only goes down 4%. If we assume that’s true, then somehow Cain’s support among Democrats and Independents WENT UP during this period! Does that make sense to you? The poll and the accompanying story are lies. Multiple real polls show Cain's support actually went up last week. Somehow, neither Holland nor Politico mention those polls, but they DO mention the fake internet poll and treat it like it's real.

Item Five: Handling. Finally, a word on how Cain has handled this issue. A lot of people are upset that his handling hasn’t been slick and perfect. But let me point out a few things:
● There is no slick way to respond to ephemeral, evolving anonymous allegations that have never been detailed. It's a trap no matter how you respond or don't.

● Cain is a businessman, not a politician, and having a slick Bill Clinton-like response would be disconcerting to his image. In fact, articles are now being written that the MSM overplayed their hand and Cain's "amateurishness became almost endearing" by comparison.

● Barring something real, the scandal appears dead. For Cain to kill this off in five days is truly a phenomenal performance. Give the man credit.

84 comments:

Tennessee Jed said...

I really would like to see the so called right wing media (e.g. Fox, Krauthammer, etc. really lay it to these people. Clearly Politico needs to be forever as a left wing fringe internet site, no more objective than Breitbart.

The good news in this is that it seems to have failed, Cain emerges that much stronger, and the left wing smear machine weakened yet again.

If one thinks about it, anybody outside the N.O.W. can see the unfairness of what happened here. 20 year old allegations unleashed as political ambush, inability to prove anything, inability to stand up and identify oneself and subject oneself to cross examination so to speak. The fact that women who accused Bill Clinton were subject to personal destruction while here nobody wants to go down that road speaks volumes.

All that is left is "who dredged this up?" In one sense it doesn't matter. Still, Perry looks awfully guilty. I have not like Perry from nearly the get go when I saw how painfully lame and unprepared he was for this campaign. Whether he is behind this or Barrack's minions, either way I don't much care for either.

StanH said...

I must say I was less than impressed with Herman’s defense of these false allegations, but one can’t argue with the net result. He’s a great guy, and as you say his political naiveté is perhaps what saved him. That being said, he needs to beef up his quick response team and remember forewarned is forearmed, he must allow a complete internal vetting, because you can bet opposition research is burning the midnight oil, and Mr. Cain has acknowledged such. I don’t believe there will be anymore bimbo eruptions, however you can bet your sweet bippy the left will roll this canard out again, and again the truth be damned, and like Anita Hill roll her out just in time for an October surprise. She’ll come out and say with good conscience, I could not allow this evil man become president, and MSM media including FOX will go 24/7.

Also remember Mr. Cain was a fixer in business, he has scorched many a tail feather, too save a company. So you can bet there are some disgruntled ex-employees. That being said, he’s my guy right now. I want him to bring that business acumen to the fore, and be proactive as opposed to reactive. Give’em Hell Herman!

T-Rav said...

Oh, Internet polls. Typical. Although, who knows--is it really so hard to believe that Democratic approval of someone involved in a sex scandal would go up? ;-)

Meanwhile, an actual scientific poll of Iowa caucus voters taken late last week has Cain up 15 points, at about 30 percent. Romney has 15 and Gingrich 12. That should tell you all you need to know.

Joel Farnham said...

Andrew,

As I read around the internet, most people who generally just comment on blogs, not run them, are defending Cain. They are called Cainiacs if they are effective at defending him. Sort of dismissive and derisive.

People for Perry, or Romney are doing their level best to ignore Cain's accomplishment. Over at RedState, some cite that internet poll you mentioned, but fail to include that it was conducted on the internet.

Dan Riehl is going the extra mile to point out Cain's negatives. Not too many people are buying it.

Ace of Spades finally figured it out when the woman or women stood down and wouldn't go public. Ace still hasn't apologized for his "Borking" efforts.

With Perry's camp, I don't know. Also, I don't know if Romney's camp didn't do it either. Both have hired questionable people.

Some people who are smarting because Cain is getting popular are trying to make the case that this candidate needs anger management training. This is the video they have. In it Cain, does raise his voice. I have seen worse from Hillary.

Still, it is gratifying that finally there is a conservative not afraid to fight back with the press and stand his ground.

Writer X said...

I think the biggest loser in all of this is Politico, not to mention people with legitimate sexual harassment claims.

AndrewPrice said...

Writer X, I agree. Politico is the big loser here and I think that's why they became increasingly more desperate as this continued and Cain didn't fall apart. They've gotten to the point now that they look like an obsessed jilted lover who will say anything to destroy Cain and hide any facts that don't help them. It's really pathetic. And it really exposes them as "not journalists" but as advocates.

I also agree this further hurts people with legitimate claims. Once again, the MSM has made the entire issue seem illegitimate -- first by defending Clinton's against true sexual harassment and then trying to destroy his accusers, and now by taking something that doesn't even sound like qualifies as crude (much less harassment) and trying to use that to destroy someone they don't like.

AndrewPrice said...

Jed, I'd like to see that too. I think it hurts the party to let the left get away with making these undefined anonymous allegations and then turning on our own people because of that. I don't care if this was said about Romney, Cain, Perry or even one of our RINOS like Olympia Snow -- we can't let the left keep smearing our people.

If there are real allegations, then fine, we can examine those. But this anonymous smear from the dark without even saying what supposedly happened is unacceptable.

In terms of who is behind it, I don't know if Perry is or isn't (though it's likely), but when Perry's pollster came out and tried to make this worse, Perry should have stood up right there and said "whoa, we don't play that game." His failure to do that was a disgrace.

AndrewPrice said...

Stan, I agree. I would have liked a stronger, clearer response initially. But it is hard to argue with the results.

I also agree that I'd like to see him beef up his team and be better prepared for how to respond to future scandals whatever they may be. I guess we'll see how well he learned his lesson the next time?

In terms of his popularity, I agree entirely. There are probably dozens of people out there with axes to grind and I expected many of them will try to get even with him before this election is over. I also expect these allegations will come back. My guess is they will try to repackage them to sound better and then this woman(en) will have a sudden change of heart around October 2012 and decide they need to talk about how he raped and pillaged his way through the company.

AndrewPrice said...

T-Rav, I've seen about a dozen polls now and every one of them shows Cain going up, not down. Also, follow the money.... Cain's fundraising is booming. People are voting with their wallets.

This poll Holland talks about is a total fraud. It's an unscientific self-selected poll. And the idea that somehow this can be considered "sort of" scientific is so stupid that even a Reuters reporter should know that's misleading. I could use his logic to say that our Commentarama polls are representative of the public at large. What's worse, you have to read all the way to the bottom of about 3 pages before you even see a mention of what kind of poll it is.

Naturally, this is the only poll Politico mentions. Interesting, isn't it?

The Washington Post also just did a poll which found that 73% of Republicans don't even believe the allegations... vague though they are. So this "scandal" isn't taking with the public.

In fact, what I've found really interesting is how little you've seen this mentioned in the popular culture. And even Howard Stern came out yesterday and said this was a smear.

rlaWTX said...

the whole thing makes my blood boil...

AndrewPrice said...

Joel, It does feel good to have a conservative who doesn't go all weak-kneed and start begging forgiveness from the left.

On Perry, whether he did it or not, the real problem I have is that his pollster went out there and tried to stir this up with additional unsupported claims that he also wouldn't detail, and Perry said nothing. He should have shown a little bit of honor on this and stood up and said this was unacceptable and fired the guy. It's just more evidence the guy is a sleazeball.

I don't know if Romney is involved or not, but I've seen no evidence of it, so I won't accuse him. Though I also think he should have said what Gingrich said -- which is that this was a media smear.

On the net, I've noticed a lot of conservatives used this to try to bring down Cain and help their own guy. That really tells you something about those people. I honestly would be as outraged if this was any other Republican candidate because this is an unacceptable smear and it's not the kind of thing we should ever allow the left to get away with it. To let them do this just because we prefer another candidate is flat out wrong.

Moreover, them using the internet poll without mentioning what it is really calls into question how much you can trust what they tell you. What else are they hiding or mis-stating when they tell you something?

Finally, this whole thing really casts the light on our establishment again as well. Karl Rove, Fox News, Huntsman, National Review, Washington Examiner, Byron York, etc., these guys bought into this and blasted Cain over and over, the whole time pretending they were just giving advice... and the advice was "surrender."

AndrewPrice said...

rlaWTX, Mine too.

LawHawkRFD said...

I think Cain's people could have done better, earlier, but he did stand his ground and dare them to prove the charges. That means Cain can't be bullied, and that's a very good thing to have in a potential president.

DUQ said...

Andrew, Thanks for the information on the internet poll! I saw that at some other sites and didn't know what to make of it because they never said what it was, they just gave the results.

AndrewPrice said...

Lawhawk, I would have liked to see a stronger response personally, but you can't argue with the results. I think the biggest problem he had was not being prepared with a clear response, which left him open to the charge that he was giving conflicting stories. But it's also not clear how conflicting his stories really were and how much they were the MSM parsing his words.

AndrewPrice said...

DUQ, You're welcome. That's a really misleading poll. As I say above, I could use the same logic and arguments to suggest that a Commentarama poll represents the public at large and even assign it a scientific error margin (probably around 6%). Do you think Holland would buy that one? I doubt it.

AndrewPrice said...

UPDATE: Leftist turd Gloria Allred is now claiming she will represent another Cain accuser and plans to give a press conference today.

You know you've sunk to the bottom of the bog when Allred gets involved.

Stay tuned.

LawHawkRFD said...

Andrew: Gloria Allred getting into this actually worries me a little bit. Not because I think there's any validity to the charges, and not because I think she's anything more than the worst kind of publicity-hound ambulance-chaser. But it's the kind of distraction that Cain doesn't need, and it sure didn't do Meg Whitman any good.

AndrewPrice said...

Lawhawk, I agree with that. And I hope that our side finally wakes up and destroys this evil troll.

StanH said...

With one distinction Lawhawk, Gloria is talking to sane America. It will play well with the chattering class, blue states, etc, but free America is hip to the horse twaddle…we’ll see.

Ed said...

Gloria Allred is a piece of crap. Robin Given today said that Cain wearing double breasted suits is harassment. This whole thing has become a sick joke, that's about it.

AndrewPrice said...

Stan, I hope that's right. I think that the sheer amount of known-liberals piling on is killing whatever credibility there may be to this. Allred is a turd. She is the kind of attorney who lies and distorts and helps her clients tell better lies. I hope the public sees through this.

AndrewPrice said...

Ed, It doesn't surprise me. I think everyone on the left is going to run with this meme because they need to destroy Herman: he shatters liberalism's basic assumptions about race, prosperity, and how you succeed in this country.

AndrewPrice said...

Well, we're right back at it....

1. The woman is Sharon Bialek.

2. Her story is entirely inconsistent with everything we know about Cain.

3. She was fired by the NRA before this supposedly happened.

4. She claims she went to see Cain to ask for her job back. She claims Cain paid for a huge hotel for her, met with her, put his hand on his leg and forced her head toward his crotch and said "Don't you want your job back."

None of that sounds realistic. What kind of CEO puts someone they want to harass into a hotel? What kind of employee would accept the hotel and agree to meet the CEO there? Why no receipts from her trip? Why no complaint -- she is alleging felony sexual assault after all and she would have had nothing to lose by going to the cops or the NRA and complaining?

Also, interesting connection, the first accuser's lawyer (the one whose been desperately trying to make this story go somewhere) admits he spoke with "a woman in the Chicago area" (i.e. her), though he won't say for sure if it was her.

This reeks.

Naturally, she finished her press conference by demanding that Cain provide the details.

Cain has denied this entirely.

CrispyRice said...

This new woman is so full of it. I don't believe a word. It seriously sounds like something completely made up. I agree, Andrew - there's no reasonable CEO would do this, and no way do I believe someone like Cain would do this.

AndrewPrice said...

Crispy, What she describes is entirely inconsistent with everything we know about Cain. What she describes is the Hollywood version of villainy.

And it really kills her credibility that she never made these allegations until now. Are we really supposed to believe Herman Cain basically tried to rape her and she never thought to raise this until now? Bull.

I suspect this will backfire on this Anti-Cain cabal. She's way overplayed her hand. I don't think anyone will believe this allegation because it's so far out of line with what's been said. I think this will only cement the idea this is an orchestrated smear and that they are just making it up as they go in the hopes this finally sticks.

CrispyRice said...

I hope you're right, Andrew. I'm heading over to make another donation. Grrr, this makes me angry.

And quesiton, Andrew, if this really isn't true, can Cain sue her for slander? (Not that he would, I'm sure, because it would be bad for him as a candidate and as a gentleman.) What about the others? What if he doesn't get the nomination? Can he / might he sue then?

AndrewPrice said...

Crispy, He can sue for slander. The problem with that is that it opens the door to them digging into his life, i.e. they can ask him for credit receipts, statements of where he's been, etc. That gets messy and intrusive.

But unless she has proof (and I see none) then she could be in serious trouble, especially if she does have some income or assets.

Her allegation about the hotel could be the real problem for her because they keep records of guests. Plus, she will have to explain how she got there, etc., and that almost has to be using a credit card in some fashion. So the absence of proof could be a serious problem for her.

The attorneys probably can't be sued unless Cain can show that they knowing presented false claims to the public. Proving that would be hard though, unless the accusers turn on their attorneys in a deposition.

CrispyRice said...

Thanks, Andrew. I'm sure he wouldn't sue, because it would just look bad overall, but I was curious. He's a "public figure" I suppose, and I know rules are different for them.

AndrewPrice said...

Crispy, He is a public figure, but that's not relevant here because the things they've said involve direct statements about his conduct which they claim to have witnessed. That's either true or it's not. If it's not, then they can be held liable.

Being a public figure would only matter if they had said something like: "He looks like a molester to me." But when they crossed that line and made specific allegations of conduct they claim to have witnessed, they opened themselves up to a slander/liable charge.

AndrewPrice said...

Correction: She now claims the actual harassment happened in her car after they went to dinner.

T-Rav said...

I'm basically just not paying attention anymore. There's nothing of substance here and I'm tired of it being a distraction. Allred and this accuser need to have the pants sued off of them, if possible.

LawHawkRFD said...

This is the typical trap set by the "slick, butch lawyeress" (as California Representative Charles Schmitz called Allred back in 1981). Cain's damned if he does, and damned if he doesn't. If he sues for defamation, he's tied up in court for years (long past the elections). If he doesn't, they'll use the "why doesn't he sue her?" attack throughout the nomination process and into the election if Cain wins, knowing how immensely difficult it is to prove that one didn't do something.

New York Times v. Sullivan and the protection given to defamers of public figures has its limits. Remember that Carol Burnett won a big defamation judgment against the National Enquirer. But she wasn't in the middle of running for the nomination for President of the United States. Allred knows all of this. "Reprehensible" doesn't even come close to describing her vile tactic of using her legal skills to gain a political end.

AndrewPrice said...

T-Rav, I would ignore this except it pisses me off that the left is getting away with this... for decades now. We saw it with Bork, Ginsburg, Thomas, John Tower, Bush I, Bush II, McCain, Palin, etc. And I'm sick of it.

AndrewPrice said...

Lawhawk, I think Allred can't be sued unless it's proven that she knowing passed along false statements. But her clients can because this falls right into the area where the Supreme Court has said public figures are protected.

Personally, if I were Cain, I'd sue her. In fact, I'd sue her tomorrow. You get the benefit of showing the public you won't take this lying down, plus you will expose them for having NO evidence to back this up, plus it will completely freak out the accusers - who think they can get away with this untouched. Plus, Allred sucks in court.

LawHawkRFD said...

Andrew: I agree on the ability to sue (which is why I mentioned the Carol Burnett case). My gut instincts also say "sue the bastards." As I mentioned earlier, it's the distraction that concerns me. Suing may be the right course. I'm just thinking purely politically, and I'm tossed on which is the better course of action. Either way, I don't want to give Allred a cheap victory. As always, she will walk away unscathed, leaving bodies on both sides in her wake. She is a disgrace to the legal profession, and that's a profession which is already doing a pretty good job of disgracing itself.

AndrewPrice said...

Lawhawk, I agree. Allred is a destruction piece of garbage who only hurts people.... including her own clients. That's what happens when your primary goal is fame.

I agree about the distraction, but my gut says he should sue and then hand it off to the lawyers, and making sure to disclose their inability to provide any evidence the whole way.

DUQ said...

Quote from my mother about the new accuser: "Doesn't she look like a hooker."

Joel Farnham said...

This new loser claims she is a Tea Party Republican. If so, where are the Tea Party people who can confirm that? She must have gone to the meetings. Also, uh, this is a date claim and there is NO corroborating evidence.

Also, this is "the fourth woman" to come forward. Actually this is "the first woman" that I know actually exists. I can actually physically see this woman. Actually hear her words and they are no better than he said she said. To be credible and actionable, she must have evidence that she perpetuated for 14 years.

If Cain is a serial molester, he really hasn't scored with any of these women. Are only the women that he hasn't scored with going to come forward?

Serial molesters, like Bill Clinton, try to hit on any thing that moves. Why is it always over ten years ago? There must be new so-called victims who have been molested recently as in the last two years. Where are they?

Joel Farnham said...

One other thing, Cain got my cat pregnant. Can I sue?

AndrewPrice said...

Joel, Those are all excellent points.

First, staying at a hotel room someone got for you and then going out to dinner with them is called "a date," it's not called "a meeting where I went to ask for my job back."

Secondly, as you say, if he is a serial harasser as they are making him out to be -- why was it only for a couple months in 1997? Where are the rest from his other jobs?

Third, now that we have a face, we can also look into her past. I find it interesting that she somehow manages to cure the deficiencies raised in each of the other stories.

1. They are Democrats, she claims to be a Republican.
2. They never alleged actual contact, she does.
3. They failed to make any connection to actual threats against their jobs, she very clearly says he demanded sex for a job.... though somehow, he seems to give up pretty quickly when she said no -- which is also odd behavior for a serial harasser.

I think it will be very interesting to see if any Tea Party people in Chicago (if there is such a thing) have any idea who this woman is? Or if her recent employers have anything to say about her -- like a history of false allegations. It will also be interesting to see what the NRA says and what connections there are between her and the other accusers. It's sounding like a "get even with the new boss who fired our lazy asses" claim.

StanH said...

Nolte has confirmed over at Big Government that she did attend “Teacon” in Chicago, were Herman Cain was a guest speaker. Doesn’t mean a thing.

LawHawkRFD said...

It just keeps getting sillier and dirtier. Fox News reports that the accuser isn't alone on this. Allred says she has "sworn affidavits" that the accuser told them about the alleged sexual advances. I'm not sure, but I suspect that Allred has forgotten that there is this little thing called "hearsay."

Back in the good old days, before lawyers started putting up billboards and running testimonials to themselves on TV, there was a disbarrable offense called "common barratry." That meant you couldn't "excite groundless judicial proceedings," or be "overly officious in instigating or encouraging litigation." Sound like anyone we know?

AndrewPrice said...

Stan, True. In fact, I would ask why she attended that if Cain is such an evil man?


Lawhawk, I'm guessing it's just a sworn statement before a notary, which isn't worth the paper it's written on. Allred either doesn't know the difference or she's trying to mislead people. In any event, who cares? I can friends to swear I told them about all kinds of things.

T-Rav said...

DUQ, your mother is a very perceptive woman.

Joel Farnham said...

Andrew,

Again, this week, the Usual Suspects are going nuts. Ace, Erick, AllahPundit, and a few others. They are sensing blood in the water and are circling using faulty logic to come to a predetermined Democrat Outcome.

Cain is a Black man who is off the plantation and sex fiend. Protect your women. ABOVE ALL. DON'T VOTE FOR THIS MAN. Remember. The Democrats always have your welfare in mind.

It just confirms to me that the Usual Suspects are not to be trusted.

AndrewPrice said...

T-Rav and DUQ, I don't really see her as a trustworthy individual either. She's too well coached, too fake, and her her choice in lawyers is highly suspect.

Also, she as far as I can tell, she's claiming she went on a date with Cain and now she's upset that he put a move on her. This sounds ridiculous to me.

AndrewPrice said...

Joel, I'm not surprised. Not only haven't their agendas changed, but they now need to add "face saving" to the mix. They went out on a limp to join the smear, so they have a vested interest in seeing it bring Cain down.

I don't think it will work. I can't say that for sure, but I suspect this will ultimately not hurt Cain. And it certainly won't help their candidates. There are only three people who could benefit from this -- Romney, Gingrich and Obama.

AndrewPrice said...

P.S. Joel, I don't really keep up with the other blogs because I just don't have the time these days, so I can't say who is doing this right and who isn't. But the little I've seen at the other places tends to be fairly obvious if they are being honest or not.

T-Rav said...

Joel, I would give two caveats: 1) I think HotAir is being rather even-handed in its coverage of this "story," and 2) I don't believe the plantation has anything to do with it, at least not in their case. As I've said before, I think they're still so mad that Cain has stolen support from the deflated Perry that they're bent on revenge.

That said, I agree that the behavior of Ace and RedState in particular has crossed the line into reprehensible, at least so far as this is concerned. Maybe it's not fair to Perry, but I'm at the point where I actively want him to lose just for these "supporters" of his.

AndrewPrice said...

More details on the accuser:

9 jobs in 17 years
2 personal bankruptcies (one to wipe out "sizable legal bills")
1 paternity suit

LINK

Joel Farnham said...

Andrew,

It isn't hard to keep up. All you need to do is check to see if their blog or website is owned by a corporation. So far, the Blogs who are going after Cain are owned by a corporations. It makes them vulnerable to employer requests. If the Employer wants them to promote a certain candidate, they do. It is what they are paid to do.

T-Rav,

AllahPundit is in the tank for this. He is just a better writer than Ace and can hide it better.

AndrewPrice said...

Joel, Commentarama is owned by a corporation:

The Happy Bunny Munitions Company

"If it's from Happy Bunny, it will probably blow up!"

;)

T-Rav said...

Andrew, where do the Boiler Elves fit in this arrangement? I always thought they were sort of free-lancing. Also, if I get brought up on animal cruelty charges (those kittens are learning how to lawyer up, and I am none too pleased) will the Happy Bunny people provide me with counsel? Because if not, I'm not sure I can afford to keep blogging here.

AndrewPrice said...

T-Rav, The Boiler Elves are free-lance union thugs. We hired them to keep the internet running around here. Without them, the net would be really slow around here. Or as they put it, "it'd be a real shame is something happened to your internet."

As for promising to cover your legal costs, sure, the Happy Bunny Company can promise anything. . . delivering might be a problem. But we can definitely make the promise! :)

Joel Farnham said...

Guys,

Despite Cain stating emphatically and definitively that he has never sexually harassed any woman, Ace, AllahPundit, and Erick continue to misunderstand English as it is spoken in the United States. They still want Cain to answer these new charges. Maybe Cain should have added to his statement, "This includes any new women you Democrat Operatives can dredge up for your Republican Elite Operatives to comment on. Oh, and be aware that I will sue the press for defamation of character."

AndrewPrice said...

Joel, That's the same fake line Rove and Huntsman (and now Haley Barbour, who I believe endorsed Perry) have been using. It's a way of misleading people into thinking Cain hasn't answered when he really has.

All I can say is that I don't think this is working and we should remember the names of these people who decided to hold the rope for the MSM's lynching.

USS Ben USN (Ret) said...

If internet polls were even remotely accurate, Ron Paul would've won the GOP 2008 primary and presidency in a landslide, LOL.

I concur these are baseless smears, including this new self-described tea partier who inexplicably takes on a well known lefty (and sleazy) (and well known liar) (and a faux feminist) lawyer and who can't hold a job (which is yet another red flag).

I also consur Cain should sue her and use this new smear to keep pointing out how leftist journalists and the washington establishment try to assassinate the good character of anyone who don't play their game with their lies as a matter of routine.

And how they never go after democrats without hard evidence of a crime, and even then they do so reluctantly (Clinton, Edwards, Kennedy, Rangel, Obama, etc.).

I like the fact that Cain challenges these lowlife, bottomfeeder scumbags to put up the evidence of any crimes or proof of these allegations or shut up.

I'm not a big conspiracy nut, but those on the left have proven time and again they have no qualms about telling lies (in collusion) to further their cause (AGW, AGC, overpopulation, etc.).

Even if those telling the lies are discredited, they hope that enough of them will help to defeat the Herm.

Besides, even after being discredited they will trot out the same lies before the election (if Hermain wins the primary).

As for those conservative bloggers who have no problem joining the lefty bandwagon in order to hurt Cain I say this:
Whether your despicable tactics work or not, you are gonna lose a lot of readers, including me.
You are no longer credible nor honorable I'm sad to say.

Thankfully, there's plenty of outstanding conservative blogs (like Commentarama...shameless plug!) that not only consider conservative values and principles to be important but actual practice them.

Obejectivity, honor, a sense of justice and honesty ain't just words around here. :^)

AndrewPrice said...

Ben, Thanks! We do our best around here to be as fair as possible and call it like we see it.

I'm not a believer of conspiracy theories either, but you don't really need to believe in conspiracy theories here. Leftists have been caught again and again and again lying, faking evidence, applying hypocritical arguments, covering up their own crimes and the crimes of people they like, smearing those they don't like, etc. And they've been caught coordinating these activities. It is what they do. There's no conspiracy to it.

USS Ben USN (Ret) said...

Well said, Andrew!

One MSBSNBC headline I read recently said Reublicans Not Bothered By Cain Sexual Harassment Scandal.

Call me old fashioned but I don't consider nebulous and ever changing allegations from anonymous person(s) without a shred of evidence to be a scandal.

A real scandal is the Obama administration forcing American gun dealers to sell guns to the Mexican Mob, or the Solyndra bamboozle, to name just a few.
Stuff where there is actual evidence and a coordinated effort by Obama and his cronies to cover it up.

AndrewPrice said...

Thanks Ben! I agree. It's not a scandal just because media says it is and it's certainly not a scandal when it's all anonymous, undetailed garbage from leftist sources. Sorry, no sale.

And you're right, it's fascinating how the same people who have completely ignored Fast and Furious and Solyndra can't stop foaming at the mouth about Cain.

Joel Farnham said...

Andrew,

Mark Levin blew gaping wide holes through B's attack through the press.

Also, I do believe that Ace, AllahPundit, Erick, Rove and a few others actually represent the Crony Capitalists/RINOs that we have been having a hard time getting rid of. I think they have been exposed by jumping on to this left-wing smear campaign. They all have the SAME argument. "Every new allegation has to be answered to their satisfaction." Not once has anyone of them asked to check out the bona fides of the alleged victims. There is a Republican journolist-style organization!

Tam said...

Cain is holding a presser tomorrow to address this. Good luck to him. I like to see him attacking. Did you see his team's tweet, "Welcome to the campaign, Gloria. What took you so long?" I hope he kills this quickly.

AndrewPrice said...

Joel, That's good to know about Barbour because it really struck me as incredibly dishonorable to try to revive this scandal this morning, like he was trying to do.

On the blogs, I honestly don't know the authors enough to say anything definitive. But part of that is because I never really saw anything at those sites that held my interest -- i.e., nothing that struck me as anything particularly insightful or unique.

T-Rav said...

That's a good point. How is it that the media couldn't find the time to investigate everything the Obama administration has had its hand in, yet suddenly it has all the time in the world to vet this guy? Whether you're a Cain supporter or not, that should strike you as troubling. I don't get it.

AndrewPrice said...

Tam, That's funny. It sounds like he's in good spirits and isn't take Allred all that seriously. That's a good sign. I hope he's got something good tomorrow because it would be best if he could blow this whole thing up fast.

I have to say, by the way, that this whole thing really has me furious. Cain strikes me at THE guy who is actually representing all of us, and this is the establishment trying to kill him off and that really, really bothers me -- especially when you know that if Cain was a liberal, the media would have smeared these women and probably wouldn't even have bothered reporting any of this.

AndrewPrice said...

T-Rav, Because they don't want to hurt Obama, but they want to hurt Cain. That's the ONLY answer. There is no other answer.

And Gingrich made a great point today too. He said, "I go all over the country and meet people and none of them are asking me about this, so why is this all the media can talk about?" Good question.

Joel Farnham said...

Andrew,

As to why Cain is in good spirits? That is easy. He beat Cancer. This group yapping at his heels are nothing compared to that.

As to the predictions that Cain is through? These people don't know what fortitude is until they face down Cancer and live to tell about it.

AndrewPrice said...

Joel, That's probably true. Plus, he's generally good-natured in any event.

Still, that's not the response of someone who thinks he's in serious trouble. But we'll see. He's got a real challenge before him because he needs to debunk something which doesn't exist -- which is very hard. And he has to do it without coming across as nasty. And he has to do it with a lot of supposed allies stabbing him in the back the whole time.

I hope he pulls it off.

And then I hope Allred falls into a manhole... or is it a personhole now? In her case, maybe it's just an a~~hole? ;)

USS Ben USN (Ret) said...

I like these tweets by Adam Baldwin irt the Herman Cain allegations:

adamsbaldwinAdam Baldwin
@AceofSpadesHQ They are unprovable charges, IAC. Why do you entertain a presumption of guilt?

adamsbaldwinAdam Baldwin
@DanRiehl Why smear mud that liars throw on your shirt, when you can wait until it dries and brush it off? ~ @toddstarnes

adamsbaldwinAdam Baldwin
@corrcomm The burden of proof is upon the accuser, unless you've surrendered to totalitarian Leftist rule.

adamsbaldwinAdam Baldwin
Dear conservatives who insist on playing defense: #KNOCKITOFF!!!

I like the cut of his jib!

AndrewPrice said...

Ben, Thanks for those! I like those too. He's right and I'm glad he's saying it to the very people who need to hear it. :)

Joel Farnham said...

Andrew,

Oh, I hope Allred doesn't fall into an a~~hole. That would make her smell too nice. ;-)

I think Cain can pull it off. I also hope that we get to see the raw footage and not the parts where the media have decided we need to see.

Look for the total characterization of what he says. Or should I say mischaracterization? Then look to the Usual Suspects for the repeat.

Adam Baldwin, not a Baldwin brother, is a hero. I have never seen in a bad performance from him. I am glad he jumped in. No one messes with "Jayne" and comes away unscathed. :-)

AndrewPrice said...

Joel, Plus then we'd need a superfund clean up. ;)

I also think Cain will come through this well, but he does face a difficult challenge, made all the worse because too many of his supposed friends are trying to hurt him.

I agree about Baldwin -- he's been great in everything I've seen him in and I really loved him in Firefly/Serenity. What a great role!

USS Ben USN (Ret) said...

Of course, no retweeting on blogs is complete without the great Iowahawk, LOL!

iowahawkblogDavid Burge
I can't imagine the horror of Unnamed Source, living through the nightmare of the unspecified things that led to out-of-court settllement.

T-Rav said...

Hmm. Apparently Ms. Bielak or whatever her hooker face is wasn't that emotionally scarred by her encounter with that rapist, Mr. Cain.

http://www.suntimes.com/8592168-417/sneed-witness-says-cain-accuser-hugged-him-during-tea-party-meeting-a-month-ago.html

AndrewPrice said...

More interesting news about her this morning. We can add the following:

Declared bankruptcy twice in 1999 and 2001, yet lives in an expensive Chicago suburb.

She has a summary judgment against her for $3,000 and her assets were ordered to be seized. The IRS is after her. She has a lien against her property.

She said her boyfriend booked the hotel room where she met Cain.

That last bit is very interesting. Does this make her a hooker or a blackmailer or a liar?

AndrewPrice said...

T-Rav, THANKS! Great link!

AndrewPrice said...

USS Ben, He's definitely got a way with words.

Tam said...

Andrew, is she a hooker, blackmailer, or liar? I'd say all three, based on what we now know.

AndrewPrice said...

Tam, That's the image that's coming across. I'm doing an update right now for the afternoon because there's suddenly a lot of information on her and it's ALL bad for her.

CrispyRice said...

Wow, this is very interesting what is all coming out. Don't think her credibility is going to go real far with all this. Sounds like she needs the money from a book deal.

Cain is also going to be having a presser this afternoon to address it.

T-Rav said...

Tam: "Is she a hooker, blackmailer, or liar?"

Yes.

Meanwhile, Karl Rove this morning finally and irrevocably jumped the shark on Fox News:

http://gop12.thehill.com/2011/11/rove-allred-adds-credibility-to.html

CrispyRice said...

T-Rav, I used to listen to Rove and thought he really had his finger on the pulse, so to speak. But I gave that up, and this just proves it. One of the commenters on that article had it right - Rove has picked his candidate and Cain ain't it, so he's going to destroy him, too.

AndrewPrice said...

Crispy and T-Rav, I have finished my update, pushing my OWS post off until tomorrow. :(

I have really come to despise Karl Rove. I was never a fan to begin with, but he's really gotten tot he point I want to see him fired. He's a total P.O.S.

Post a Comment