Brietbart’s “Big Government” site just posted an article confirming that she attended TeaCon 2011.
Not sure what that (in itself) means, but thought folks on this thread might find it of interest.
What if she went there in an attempt to meet up with Cain and “ask for help” with her career? And he rebuffed her? Or she went there to meet up with Cain to try to shake him down for something she’d tried to set him up with decades ago?
Attendance at one Tea Party convention doesn’t necessarily say much about one’s intentions or worldview. Especially when she knew Cain would be there and she made an effort and succeeded in approaching Cain personally there.
Big Government has spoken with a source who helped organize Teacon 2011 and who confirmed that Sharon Bialek attended, as did Mr. Cain (who was a featured speaker).Whole post can be read here: HERE. Cain needs to get a handle on this, whether it happened or not.
Our source also remembers Ms. Bialek personally, and therefore can confirm that the woman who attended was not a different woman with the same name.
That does not affirm or deny the substance of Ms. Bialeks allegations, nor her account of her interaction with Mr. Cain at Teacon.
Maybe that's how Brietbart has confirmed she was there?
Simple - to establish her story, her credentials, or "alibi" (take your pick) for use later (i.e. at today's press conference).