Skip to comments.Cain Camp Questions Bialek’s Background (More of Sharon Bialek's litigous past emerges)
Posted on 11/08/2011 10:09:34 AM PST by SeekAndFind
The Cain campaign just sent out this statement:
As Ms. Sharon Bialek has placed herself in the public spotlight through making patently false allegations against Herman Cain, it is only fair to compare her track record alongside Mr. Cain’s.
In stark contrast to Mr. Cain’s four decades spent climbing the corporate ladder rising to the level of CEO at multiple successful business enterprises, Ms. Bialek has taken a far different path.
The fact is that Ms. Bialek has had a long and troubled history, from the courts to personal finances – which may help explain why she has come forward 14 years after an alleged incident with Mr. Cain, powered by celebrity attorney and long term Democrat donor Gloria Allred.
In the courts, Ms. Bialek has had a lengthy record in the Cook County Court system over various civil lawsuits. The following cases on file in Cook County are:
· 2000-M1-707461 Defendant against Broadcare Management
· 2000-M1-714398 Defendant in lawsuit against Broadcare Management
· 2000-M1-701522 Defendant in lawsuit against Broadcare Management
· 2005-M1-111072 Defendant in lawsuit against Mr. Mark Beatovic.
· 2007-M1-189176 Defendant in lawsuit against Midland Funding.
· 2009-M1-158826 Defendant in lawsuit against Illinois Lending.
Ms. Bialek was also sued in 1999 over a paternity matter according to ABC 7 Chicago (WLS-TV). Source: WLS-TV, November 7, 2011
In personal finances, PACER (Federal Court) records show that Ms. Bialek has filed for bankruptcy in the Northern District of Illinois bankruptcy court in 1991 and 2001. The respective case numbers according to the PACER system are 1:01-bk-22664 and 1:91-bk-23273.
Ms. Bialek has worked for nine employers over the last seventeen years. Source: WLS-TV, November 7, 2011
Curiously, if Ms. Bialek had intended to take legal action, the statute of limitations would have passed a decade ago.
Which brings up the question of why she would make such reprehensible statements now?
The questions should be – who is financing her legal team, have any media agreed to pay for her story, and has she been offered employment for taking these actions?
Well, it looks like Cain is fighting fire with fire.
And I can understand why the other women don’t want to come forward publicly and even DETAIl the so called inappropriate behavior they accuse Cain of.
Cain will dig up everything they’ve ever done wrong and it will be on the front page of every newspaper and the lead story on every newscast.
Who wants that aggravation?
But then, who started this ball rolling?
I hope Herman points all this out in his press statement this afternoon.
Herman didn't start the fire.
Put another way, "the right of self defense is never denied."
A good question:
“If somebody sexually assaulted you, how long would it take before you could bring yourself to hug him?”
Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.
White trash lady who has lost the slab under her double wide
Go after the women with all possible efforts!
You can bet your hindmost part that, if this scandal was aimed at a Democrat candidate for President, this would be the only question being asked by the State-Controlled Media. Where is the money coming from? Who's paying the lawyers? It would be the lede of every news story, every top-of-the-hour report on radio, every evening newscast, it would be repeated hundreds of times an hour on every cable channel, every cable chat show. It would be 24-7, nonstop, Where is the money coming from? Are you being paid for your story?
It is all leading back to Obama and Axelrod..The Chicago Way!
Man oh man...hope Cain comes out swinging today and names names.
The DETAILS won’t be on every newscast. Only that Cain is slandering those poor women who only came forward in an effort to save the nation.
On another note, I know someone who went to a Mormon church when he was a kid. He thinks he was harrassed by an older kid. It could have been Romney. And he chooses not to talk about it.
This is like the old trick of saying “Boy, the things I could tell you about that girl.”
I hope he doesn't. If he even gets the slightest error in facts or goes on rumor, the press and the RINOs will eat him alive.
He needs to deny the allegations, call them for the lies that they are and essentially say 'put up or shut up'.
I believe Sharon is the only one who has brought tangible allegations. She is the one he is defensively attacking. The rest merely got “harassment” awards that could have been for something as innacuous as in inapropriat joke in the hall. They are not relevant unless someone makes them so. I suspect that is why those women wish not to speak of the actual claims. They got their money and would like to bow out of this whole thing.
Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.
I think every Cain supporter ought to get a hold of Gloria and tell her that Rove, or Kraut, or Shultz or Blitzer, or Medved or Brit etc. gave us “a look” a couple of years ago and we think it was inappropriate. We need to take this to a new level. Use it against them. Im pissed
I keep reading the cliche “Cain responded badly” as the knee-jerk response and narrative among the swells in the media. Its often repeated elsewhere too ( Heck even here in FR)
If this is the case, it begs the question -— has anyone ever figured out a proper way to respond to an organized attack on one’s character, especially when one doesn’t know where the next attacks will come from?
The Marines always train their officers - when ambushed, attack to the center of the ambush. That’s about the only advice I have ever heard on the subject.
If ANYONE have better advice on how Cain “should have responded” I want to hear it.
Although I’m not on the Cain bandwagon, I’m absolutely thrilled and delighted that he’s fighting back against these disgusting attacks. Whether or not there is any truth to him being a womanizer, I despise politics played this way, in the lowest gutter. The pattern of throwing mud at Republicans and seeing the media make sure it sticks vs. how they routinely either ignore or minimize Dem wrongdoing must stop.
I agree with this comment at NRO:
There seem to be three basic camps in the comments at least:
1) “guilty as charged” This group is willing to overlook any and all inconsistencies and weaknesses in the accounts of the women involved and the motivations of the reporters who initially broke the story. This mostly consists of Liberals who voted for and still think John Edwards is a great guy, and Romney/Perry supporters.
2) “What the Frak?” This group looks at what is being reported and being said, and is saying, “Wait a minute, is anything specific going to be said by the people making the accusations?” Many in group 2 are not natural Cain backers, and often say so, but think there ought to be some sort of evidence presented before we crucify the man. This group also has been pointing out the creeping of the storyline which has now progressed (in a week) to sexual assault. The amplitude has gone up, but not the specifics. Having Gloria Allred yell at her client, “Don’t talk!”, as her client is yukking it up with the reporters just adds to group 2 skepticism. This is phony.
3) “It’s a conspiracy” This group, mostly Cain loyalists, through wisdom born of experience know that this is how you kill a candidate. The whole way this has played out is very formulaic...long on innuendo, short on verifiable/falsifiable facts. (such as remembering what suit they both wore, what you had to drink, and the shoes the hotel bartender was wearing at 6:30pm, but only remembering that Cain sexually assaulted you in “mid July” of 1997 and that you did not go to the cops or tell anyone about it) For this group (the ceiling, as you put it) to sway, you’re going to need to produce a love child.
I pretty much consider myself in the 2 camp, and continue to hope that Perry will have a Gingrich-style resurgence. But, I’m leaning 3 now mostly because of the media stunt by Allred yesterday. That story was so full of holes it was absurd. I was laughing as I watched it. Bad acting, over-the-top hyperbole and righteous-anger by Allred, cue quivering voice at just the right moments bookended by laughter and playtime.
It was also a statement written by lawyers, and loaded with even more innuendo. (note how they suggested twice that the accuser had been fired from her job under suspicious circumstances, then linked her firing and lack of re-hire to Cain) “Aha! See! They fired me, and after my BS story, I did not get my job back! He’s guilty!”
But I have not see a single commenter who regularly posts here say “no big deal, he made a pass, she said “no” and that was that”. And the full commentariat came down very hard on one of your contributor’s patently ridiculous “What if it’s true?” blog posts last week. Nobody is giving Cain a pass if he did it. But I think only a small number of people, mostly John Edwards supporters and Romney/Perry voters, are in group 1.
Odd that she was sued over paternity. My guess is she falsely claimed someone was the father of her child.
I hope this isn’t the total plan. I agree that Bialek is shady and not very credible, but Herman Cain really does need to deny the specifics item by item, not just critique her personally. As in: I did not upgrade this woman’s hotel room, did not put my hand up her skirt, etc., etc. “I did not harass anyone” sounds like a Clintonian evasion.
What else is there to say?
I hope he addresses their meeting at the Tea Party event last month. I’d love to know what she actually said to him.
If I were Herman I'd say that the bitch offered to give me a lewinsky for a job and I told her that I was happily married and to leave.
She then tried to bury her head in my crotch, but I fought her off.
When she was at the TEA party a few weeks ago she wanted a job in the campaign and said that if she didn't get it, she'd call gloria allred and claim sexual assault.
I told her to piss off.
My attorney is filing slander charges as we speak.
It is no rumor that it has been discovered that the original woman accuser now works for the Obama administration!
Now we also find out today that ‘Buy a Lick’(the 2nd and 4th woman accuser..there are not 4 separate women) lives in the same building as David Axelrod. other connections are being made and this is all going to come out. It’s an Obama Chicago Way liberal lynching.
Cain doesn’t have to recount these facts that are coming out but he certainly needs to send his surrogates out to question the media on these emerging and troubling facts!
Given Ms. Bialek’s previous familiarity with the court system and her obvious long-standing financial problems, wouldn’t she have filed a lawsuit against the wealthy Mr. Cain a long time ago for his alleged sexual misdeeds? After all, wouldn’t there have been a better chance to obtain evidence? The fact that she sue then didn’t would strongly indicate that the claimed event never happened.
... 3) Its a conspiracy
No, how about the camp that believes a good man is being slandered. I don't care if it is a global conspiracy or a couple of independent lawyers who see dollar signs.
I like, respect, believe and support Herman Cain, and will not throw him under the bus unless it is PROVEN that he is a liar.
Maybe a TV interview where he can sit down wag a finger at the camera and recite “I did not have sex with that woman”.
That only works for a DEMONRAT!
Someone in the media needs to interview Jack Ryan, Obama’s original opponent in his senate race. I’m sure he could tell them all about the Chicago Way lynching.
I hope he gives these press bastards a 3-hour tongue lashing.
Mention "Broderick" "Rape" "Clinton" and "Press Stonewalling" 50 times.
Herman should do some parady ads like the western one he did. Have women lined up at a mic all wearing Obama buttons and laying out accusations. Then have him do his evil smile.
I don'tget that either....Hugh Hewitt, who learned press management from Nixon's Nest of Liars (where he worked) complains that they "should have gotten their story straight."
What freaking "story?" There IS NO STORY.
Is she one of those fake Republicans dems encouraged to register Republican so they could be used against us? Rush Limbaugh has to deal with that type. So do Republican lawmakers.
She's backed a lot of dems - lived in the same building as Axelrod ... I'd like to know how many moles the dems have - and if she's one. What do her friends have to say about her politics? Who are her friends?
The Cain Camp didn’t try to descredit anyone. They merely cited court cases (in other words, they just told the truth.)
LOLOL. Well, I took a very small part in Ron Paul's first run at elective office (Congressman from TX). He was "walking" our neighborhood, shaking hands on a Sunday afternoon; and I was supposed to provide refreshments for the group when they got to my house.
I cleaned and cooked and decorated my house and laid out a nice spread. Ron Paul refused to eat or drink ANYThiNG and then went on his way. True story. Isn't that RUDE and INsuLTING behavior? I think I'll call the press and tell it to TV. sarc/off
Hewitt is part of the Rovebot “Pimp Romney to Conservative” machine
Like Rove, Hewitt has lost all serious credibility as a commentator.
GOP talkers who mindlessly follow Rove's lead on Fox had better buy a clue.
This may just cost the GOP the election in 2012.
1/3 of the Tea Party does not like or trust the GOP. It will not take a whole lot, such as the GOP helping the Democrat media lynch their candidate Cain, to cause them to bolt away from the GOP to a 3rd party in 2012.
If these people do bolt, they will take other GOP voters with them.
The GOP media machine is playing with fire here.
She filed personal bankruptcy twice, the second time due to outstanding legal bills.
So she stiffed a bunch of attorneys on their fees.
And yet Allred still took her as a client? What does THAT tell ya?
Love the little circular argument the Democrat propaganda bots in the media have set up. If Cain is slandered by a false accuser, why he is obviously guilty because of the nature of the accusations. If he points out the facts that the accuser is a highly suspect making a completely unprovable accusation, why “he is attacking the poor woman”.
Honestly curious...I hear almost everyone, pundits to regular folk saying he should have handled it differently, he should have said X,Y,Z...what would you say if you were in his shoes?
Also, she said her son is with his father. Does she not have custodoy? If so, why not?
Also, she said her son is with his father. Does she not have custody? If so, why not?
I didn’t say sexually harassed either. But isn’t that what he’s doing by showing her character because of past actions? I’m not a man so I’ve never even had to think about these kinds of things. I’ve never had sensitivity training or anything else. And I stayed home and raised our boys so for the most part I’ve been out of the loop when all this “sexual harassment as another tool for destroying the male population” was in vogue.
Notice the media never looked into any of it... no no no they are painting the picture of the angry black man raping the white woman to stir up racial hatred which then they will turn around and accuse conservatives of.... This has got to stop.....
Not one single question by the media to Obama after Larry Sinclair came forward and told of his felony drug use and sexual tryst with Obama in 1999 but a Conservative its guilty as charged we will write the narrative and make the person prove his innocence.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.