L. Lin Wood, the lawyer hired by the Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain to fend off sexual harassment accusations, has warned that any other women who might be considering coming forward with similar allegations “should think twice.”
THIS IS AN ADMISSION THAT CAIN KNOWS THERE ARE OTHER WOMEN HE HARASSED.
CAIN SHOULD QUIT THE RACE.
NOW.
11 comments:
http://www.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cbsatlanta.com%2Fvideo%3FautoStart%3Dtrue%26topVideoCatNo%3Ddefault%26clipId%3D6436372&h=xAQG0tTiLAQEODX-z9Sf1IE3r4MrX9OtdvX-Dlg6mod8ywQ
Volume does not equal quality.
I do believe you have a bit of tunnel vision or contracted understanding.
You suppose that the women that have come forward with allegations are legitimate accusers.
I find it easy to read "similar allegations" as "falsehoods and lies."
I still like Newt.
krashuhaaaaaar made her allegations over a decade ago. they could hardly be construed as political.
i believe her and bialek and there are 2 more.
lewinsky never wouldve never come forward. there are prob more like that in herms closet.
i beleieved broaddrick and paula jones.
iu see no reason to disbeleievc cain's accusers.
dragging them thru the mud and trying to intimidate them strikes me a more evidence of cain's guilt.
ABO!
I was only addressing your take on the comment and offering a reasonable alternate view.
Herman's mouthpiece may believe these women are lying (what is his source of information?) and other "liars" are in for a thumping (if they are liars...).
Is this intimidation?
Is this a warning to false witness?
Is this misinformed bluster?
We shall see.
Any way this goes, H.C. has not shown to have much presidential demeanor.
HMMM TD...
WHAT MAKES CAIN THINK THERE ARE OTHER WOMEN OUT THERE???...
SURELY NO ONE CAN GO BACK IN TIME. SO NO ONE CAN GIVE US NOW A DATE AND TIME FOR A BAD EXPEIRENCE.
I have to agree that the attorney's statement was a justifiable warning against false allegations. Again, allegations are not synonymous with guilt and I truly don't understand the rash assumption that they are interchangeable... even in an issue skewed by hyper-political correctness, the burden of the proof of those accusations is on the accuser.he fact that one of the accusers a decade ago still has no bearing...Cain was, at the time, in a position of power in his industry, and accusations of that nature by women with an agenda are not in any way atypical, and the relatively nominal financial settlements are a pragmatic way of reducing the costs of protracted legal proceedings and appeals. It's an ugly fact of legal life...and those settlements are made with the contingency that the settlement is not an admission of guilt.
How about providing some evidence. Just sayin'
How about providing some evidence ...
cain's has refused to answer specific questions about bialek or kraushaar.
that makes me suspcious.
i didnlt like it when the left attacked paula jones and briaddrick.
i donlt like it when the right attacks bialek and kruashaar.
if ypu only beleieve jones and braiddrerick then you are partisan and biased.
That's evidence ? Come on - You can do better than that.
HI ERROLLL;
these cases are often he said she said.
both bialek and kraushaar are more credible than paula jones and broaddrick to me.
sorry.
just mu opinion.
they gave credible testimony, imho.
cain has not.
i say this as a juror might.
cain strikes me as a slippery slimey guy:
fliflopping disgustingly on abortion.
claiming he worked on 9/9/9 for months - making the centerpiece of his campiagn - and then being forced to adapt it within 10 day and turn it into 9//0/9-9/9/9.
because it had a HUGE flaw i saw in 10 seconds.
but he has fast-talked himself out of that wiht a lot of folks.
but not me.
cai is a fast-talking slimeball who is a serial abuser of women IMHO.
:)
Post a Comment