Sharon Bialek, the first woman to step forward publicly with sexual harassment charges against Herman Cain, suggested Wednesday the presidential contender was lying yesterday when he said he doesn't remember Bialek.

On MSNBC Wednesday, Bialek recounted an incident, which others have said they witnessed, in which she approached Cain at a Tea Party rally.

"I simply grasped his elbow and leaned in towards him to acknowledge he knew exactly who I was," she said. "He acknowledged who I was."

Bialek declined to reveal what she said to Cain at the event, but she said, "It was simply a few statements to jar his memory ... That was only a month ago."

At a press conference on Tuesday, Cain said he did not recall ever seeing Bialek before she came forward with her allegations on Monday. "I tried to remember if I recognized her, and I didn't. I tried to remember if I remembered that name, and I didn't," he said.
Bialek said she was "very disappointed but not surprised" by Cain's response, which she said "disrespected me and millions of other women across the country who are violated in the same way in the workplace."

Bialek earlier this week charged that, after a dinner meeting with Cain in 1997, Cain attempted to fondle her. Bialek had arranged the meeting to seek employment help from Cain, who was at the time head of the National Restaurant Association.

Before Bialek came forward, it was reported that two unidentified women had filed sexual harassment complaints against Cain at the NRA in the 1990's. Then, a third unidentified woman alleged she was also harassed by Cain more than a decade ago. Bialek's public statements prompted one unidentified women who file a complaint to also reveal her identity -- Karen Kraushaar.

Kraushaar said she was interested in holding a joint press conference with all the women who say they were harassed by Cain.

Bialek said on MSNBC that she would be "all for" the joint press conference as long as her attorney Gloria Allred is also on board. Bialek added she is "proud" of Kraushaar for coming forward.

"If [my statements] just made one person come forward, it was worth it," she said.

Joel Bennett, the lawyer for Cain accuser Karen Kraushaar, said today that a joint press conference with women who have complained of harassment by Cain could be as early as tomorrow or Friday. He said Kraushaar is reaching out to the other woman who filed a complaint with the restaurant group.

"As of this time, we have not heard from the other women who have stated that they were sexually harassed," Kraushaar said in a statement. "We are still hopeful that they will have the courage to come forward, but we completely understand if they choose not to."


Cain's campaign yesterday sent an email to Cain's supporters aggressively attacking Bialek and calling into questions her motives. By citing her history in other lawsuits and her troubled financial history, Cain's campaign suggested she was seeking a financial payoff.

Bialek maintained today, "I'm doing this because it's the right thing to do," not for financial reasons.

Allred, who appeared on MSNBC with Bialek, said Cain's motives for attacking Bialek need to be questioned.

"He has a financial and a political motivation," Allred said -- namely to "be able to raise more money for his campaign [and] also to sell his book. His political motivation is to... stay on top" of the Republican presidential field.

While some have suggested Allred has a partisan motive (she donates to the Democratic party), Allred pointed out that she also represented a woman who came forward with complaints of sexual misconduct against disgraced Democratic Rep. Anthony Weiner.

Allred pointed out that Weiner resigned a day after her famous press conference with her client.

All eyes will be on Cain tonight in Michigan Herman Cain: I'd take lie detector test to rebut Sharon Bialek claims Herman Cain fires back at accuser Sharon Bialek Gingrich: Cain owes woman and public explanation Santorum: Up to public to decide if Cain charges are true

Sex and pizzas
What Do You Do For Money Honey

Sounds like the title for a reality show!

I've never met a woman who was sexually assaulted and smirked at jokes about her being sexually assaulted. Sharon Bialek did smirk at the press conference when Gloria Alred made the "his idea of a stimulus package" joke. I think she's lying. She's talking about an incident that happened 14 years ago, supposedly in Herman Cain's car, while she was asking for his help in finding a job and he stopped when she said "stop". At worst, it sounds like he was a bit too aggressive or misread her signals. I'm open to any new evidence she brings forth, but so far it sounds like shes lying in an attempt to sell her story to make some cash.

The misdirection on this issue is AMAZING!

It shouldn't be about "he said, she said", it SHOULD be investigated, for if it is true, it is a character flaw that could effect his ability to lead without corrupt influence!

My biggest issue is Cain's handling of the matter! This man has an EXPLOSIVE attitude problem! He is TOO quick to cast blame before getting details! When there are no details, he then BLAMES SOMEONE ELSE!

Are people blind?! This man is a hairball, a former chairman of a corrupt cartel (the Federal Reserve) branch, talks policy and makes choices BEFORE getting facts, and, in my opinion, with his background, will wholesale AMERICA out to the bankers at a faster rate than Obummer (hard to believe I know...but he is one of them) could even imagine!

You think things are bad now? Best stock up on guns and food if this idiot should be elected.... YOU WILL NEED THEM TO PROTECT YOUR PROPERTY AND RIGHTS!

If Herman Cain is accused of doing this and he knows he didn't do it, then what "details" does he need to wait for?

Ask American courts that same question for all who are wrongfully accused and the many who spend years in jail even after it has been proven there was grounds for a retrial.

Saying "I didn't do it!" wasn't good enough for them! AND THEY WEREN'T RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT!

What are the odds?


One of Herman Cain's accusers of Sexual harassment lives in the same building with a MAJOR DEMOCRAT OPERATIVE, David Axelrod.

A second accuser works in the Obama Administration.


What would be the random chance that 40% of Herman Cain's accusers would have very close political ties to a democrat administration?

Again, it's misdirection!

Look at the mans actions and reactions to the charges and the issue is mute!

He's volitile! Gets frustrated and acts out on suspicions, not facts or truths! When the blame doesn't land right, he picks it up and throws it at someone else!

Sorry China! I meant to nuke Iran!

When you tell the truth, accusers have nowhere to go with further aggression on the matter.

I can better forgive someone who admits a fault than someone who 1st tries to hide it.

It's been proven there were payouts, and he knew it, and chose to deny and lie about it.... to me, that's a deceiver!

What else of REAL importance might he try to hide/deny in the future

Accusations SHOULD NEVER be taken at face value by themselves. There has to be EVIDENCE. Since there is no evidence, it's her word against his and in a criminal case, if there is no evidence, the defendant wins.

Didn't they pay her off? I dunno, I've not been keeping up with the Cain scandal. But if they did there will be records somewhere, if not, then there is no worry. But on a personal note, seeing Cain's venomous reaction to this tells me there is something he's not saying.

You might be onto something...I mean what married man would get upset if a woman falsely accused him of sexual harassment, putting at risk his marriage and career?

Get REAL! There have been payouts proven, Cain admitted he knew of them after 1st denying them!

He's like Faux Networks.... "only address what's been made public, shut up about the rest, and get back to business as usual!"

The issue, as I said before, is mute. He's caused payouts to be made to cover his actions on this.

It's his NATURE to be a lying, denying, sleezeball! Pardon me if I require better qualities in someone who wants to be the leader of my nation!

GEEZ!

Out of court settlements are common in this sort of case, just to avoid negative publicity and high legal fees, the settlements don't indicate guilt.

I find that mocking one's political opponents names is a bit school yardish. I prefer to comment on what policies and practices I disagree with, it's a more effective debating tactic.

The issue cannot be mute. Mute means "Deaden, muffle, or soften the sound of." You mean "Moot: of little or no practical value or meaning; purely academic.".

From where does your knowledge of his "NATURE" come?

WHAT DON'T YOU GET!?!?

THE ISSUE IS NOT WHETHER HE DID IT OR NOT!

He LIED about ANY of it! Even the payouts! Said he knew NOTHING about it, then when caught .... oh yeah, well that.... then admitted he knew, the BLEW UP and accused Perry, when that didn't work he accused, someone else, then the media, then he played the RACE card, then the Dem card, and on and on and on!

He is VOLITILE! An ANGRY man who casts blame on everyone but himself, talks points and policy without knowing the facts, doesn't even know the importance of some countries (isbeccy...backy... ickystan [or whatever]).

As President, you need brains and character, of which HE HAS NONE!

A LITTLE SELF CONTROL AND PATIENCE WOULDN'T HURT EITHER!

He's a broken record stuck on "9-9-9" when anyone with brains knows, and it's been shown, a flat tax is not GOOD for all classes, ONLY the rich!

Lied indicates intentional misleading. Why don't you even entertain the possibility that he simply forgot about the payouts?



Accused? Yes. Blew up? Hardly.

The MSM sat on the Bill Clinton story. They sat on the John Edward's story. They called Breitbart a liar over the Weiner story. But when someone accused the GOP front runner, the MSM jumped right on it. I don't think it's race, but it's without a doubt based on his party affiliation.



To what do you ascribe his success as a business man?

Who has shown that?

The MSM has ignored the fact that the plan would be 909 for poor people. The MSM has also ignored the fact that corporations would pay 26% less corporate tax, allowing for a reduction in prices. Altogether, this plan would benefit everyone, while still taxing the rich more than the poor. The poor are more likely to buy a used car, used furniture, used home, etc, which wouldn't be taxed.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/obery-m-hendricks-jr-phd/the-real-and-present-dang_b_1073751.html

I'm not sure yet what to make of the sexual harassment charges against Herman Cain. If it is true that Cain used his position of authority to sexually harass subordinates, that raises real questions about his moral and ethical character that must be answered. Whether the allegations are true or not, however, even a casual perusal of Herman Cain's public pronouncements reveals that he has a striking shallowness of mind and a woefully underdeveloped critical intellect that render him unable to fully fathom the complexities of social and political life in America.

For instance, early in his campaign for the Republican presidential nomination, Cain loudly railed against what he portrayed as a major threat to America by Islamic Sharia jurisprudence, despite the impossibility of Sharia or any other foreign law code supplanting the U.S. Constitution. And this despite the further fact that Sharia Law has even failed to take hold in many Muslim countries. (Cain ceased his attacks after a little publicized meeting with Muslim clerics made it embarrassingly clear that he had no idea what he was talking about.)

Furthermore, judging by his claims that black Democrats are "brainwashed" because of their party affiliation, Cain seems unable to comprehend the easily comprehensible: that blacks' preference for Democrats is almost certainly a response to years of Republicans' coded appeals to white racial animosities (remember Richard Nixon's "southern strategy" and Ronald Reagan's mythical "welfare queens"?) and Republicans' ongoing efforts to dismantle governmental programs and protections designed to level America's social, educational and economic playing fields. In spite of unimpeachable statistical and other evidence that blacks still face substantial race-based challenges in America, Cain preaches a "see-no-hear-no-speak-no-(racial)-evil" approach to our nation's struggle with racism that has little basis in fact and no basis in reality, yet is totally consistent with the right-wing's continual attempts to obfuscate the racism that has always informed it.

Worse, Mr. Cain exhibits an astounding lack of knowledge about -- of all things -- America's political landscape. Neo-conservatism is one of the most important political developments of the last several decades and now dominates the foreign policy perspective of his own political party, yet Herman Cain admitted on Meet the Press that he'd never heard of neo-conservatism. He also made the curious statement to the Christian Broadcasting Network that he would sign a constitutional amendment banning abortion "as soon as it came across my desk," apparently unaware that presidents play no such role in the constitutional amendment process.

Such an appalling level of ignorance of the most basic social and political realities in Herman Cain or in anyone else with the ear of the public is dangerous for the half-truths, the untruths and the unhealthy social and political prescriptions they can purvey. But what is more dangerous, at least in Herman Cain's case, is not what he does not know, but what he does know. And what he does know is how to make palatable for average Americans the economic agenda of a coterie of ultra-wealthy Americans who want to control whatever wealth in America -- and whichever policy makers -- they do not already own.

Today the chasm between America's ultra-wealthy haves and its struggling have-nots is greater than at any other time in this nation's history. Yet Herman Cain proposes to make the chasm even greater. Numerous reputable independent analysts, including Bloomberg Businessweek, the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center and Bruce Bartlett, a senior economic advisor to Ronald Reagan, have concluded that Cain's "9-9-9" economic plan will tax the rich less while taxing the poor and middle-classes substantially more. In fact, the Tax Policy Center estimates that the only taxpayers who would actually receive savings under Cain's plan are those with annual incomes of more than $200,000. Some analysts have concluded that if enacted into law, Cain's 9-9-9 plan would result in the largest shift in tax burden from the wealthy to the non-wealthy that this nation has ever seen.

Unlike Cain's ill-conceived social pronouncements, however, his economic plan represents not ignorance, but well-conceived intentionality. He plainly is aware of his plan's profoundly economic elitist implications. Indeed, when at the Nevada Republican debate he was given the opportunity to walk back his infamous declaration that "if you are unemployed and not rich, it is your own fault," he instead reiterated it.

No doubt it was for Cain's willingness to publicly take such economically vicious positions that he was invited into the elitist right-wing fold of Charles and David Koch, the ultra-wealthy anti-tax zealots and bank rollers of the right-wing Americans for Prosperity (AFP) and various Tea Party activities, including the 2011 Wisconsin anti-union offensive and various voter suppression activities around the country. It is a fold that apparently Cain has never left. His campaign manager, his recently departed campaign spokesperson, even the "economist" who helped Cain contrive his 9-9-9 plan are all former AFP -- thus presumably Koch-approved -- operatives. And Cain is still engaging in the kind of combativeness disdainful elitist economic rhetoric he used as a primary AFP public spokesman at dozens of AFP rallies and events. In fact, while several other candidates will be at an Iowa Republican Party dinner later this week, Cain is scheduled to be in Washington, DC, at an AFP summit.

Herman Cain certainly is not the smartest or most able Republican candidate in this election. Then why has he excited such interest from ultra-wealthy conservatives and Republican fat-cats like the Koch brothers and those in their wealthy sphere of interest? It can only be because they believe he can seduce the non-rich masses of America to accept the interests of the very rich as their own. Think about it: who else but Herman Cain has given voice to their secret thoughts ("if you are unemployed and not rich, it is your own fault") and not only not been widely attacked by everyday Americans for voicing the cold-hearted ideology of the callously rich, but actually cheered for it? Clearly, the ultra-wealthy supporters of Herman Cain are betting that his folksy, affable, up-by-your-own-bootstraps, hymn singing, seemingly well-informed, self-proclaimed "authentically black" racial counterweight to Barack Obama can deliver the power of the presidency into their clutches.

The real and present danger of Herman Cain is that they just might be right.
*********************************************

If he was good at selling pizza, and can keep his hands off the female employees, perhaps he should go back to it (if they'll have him), and leave running a nation to someone with the ABILITY to do so!

We sure don't want him back working for the FED!

He is not QUALIFIED for the Presidential seat!