Boop His Nose
Diving Tiger Says
Time to Support Free Republic
Donate Monthly
Sponsors will contribute $10 for each New Monthly Donor
Posted on 11/02/2011 3:49:03 PM PDT by Perdogg
A spokesman for Texas Gov. Rick Perry’s campaign is adamantly denying that members of the GOP presidential candidate's staff leaked a story has swamped Herman Cain's campaign this week. Instead, the Perry camp is pointing a finger at the campaign of another rival Republican, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, as a possible source of the report about the sexual-harassment charges levelled a decade ago against Cain by female subordinates at the National Restaurant Association.
(Excerpt) Read more at nationaljournal.com ...
Good point. Cain is the one doing the hit jobs.
Good point. Cain is the one doing the hit jobs.
Now you're just trolling. Perry had no significant role in Texas for Gore's 1988 campaign according to Gore's own campaign people from that year.
Cain pulls the race card at every turn. Couldn’t vote for the guy as it stands right now.
LOL... You can’t do any better than that???
LMAO @ your stupidity.
It certainly is damaging, but it is not the end of the world. Crybabies like you are the very reason we lose.
You’re not man enough to stand and fight... you would rather hurl insults at people you know nothing about. After 11 years on FR, I would expect you to at least act like a conservative.
Your posts are tripe.
I agree. If there were accusations and settlements in the cases mentioned so far, it would have come out. Better now than in the last few days of a general campaign like the GWB DUI story in 2000.
Cain makes the direct accusation, and Block not only makes the accusation, but calls the Perry campaign “dispicable” and says Rick Perry owes Cain an apology.
I think Cain owes Rick Perry an apology, and Block owes several people an apology.
Block by the way offered his “proof” — Anderson started working for the Perry campaign two weeks ago, and Politico started asking questions two weeks ago.
Apparently, Block believes that in order for someone to leak information, they have to first join a campaign. And believes a campaign would grill each person joining the campaign for dirt, and immediately send them over to a newspaper.
The problem Block may have are several. First, what he has is not evidence, it’s speculation. Second, Anderson can ask Politico to confirm that he is not the person they talked to — it is possible that if he did, they would confirm he wasn’t the source, which would prove Block was lying.
My guess is the Cain team’s problem (beyond being amateurish and inexperienced) is that several people associated with the NRA and who would be expected to back Cain are instead backing Perry, even after Perry is “toast” and Cain is the defacto nominee. Why?
And why did Anderson, who was a trusted advisor to Cain in 2003 (we assume, since Cain wants us to believe that Anderson was the ONLY person he confided in about his harrassment charge), decide to join the Perry team two weeks ago (well, I guess we should make sure Block isn’t lying about that as well), when Cain is the defacto nominee and Perry is “toast”?
What is is about Cain that makes these people want to help Perry?
I am somewhat disturbed by the pollster, although the pollster also insists he has not talked about this, and he has a witness who confirms that the pollster never talked about this incident. He is only talking now because the story has already broken. And he is only saying that there were multiple people who saw the incident.
Lastly, he doesn’t appear to be speaking in any way for the campaign. “Joining” a campaign as a pollster isn’t the same as being involved in decision-making. I think it would be classy for Perry to apologize for the comments made by the pollster, and publicly remind his campaign to remain focused.
On the other hand, given that an opposing candidate has directly accused his campaign of leaking something, with no evidence, and the campaign chief has called your campaign “dispicable”, I don’t fault Perry if he decides that “classy” isn’t called for at this point.
I also wish Perry’s staff hadn’t speculated about who leaked things. They should leave speculation to the speculators, and say they are not leaking stuff about Cain, they are focused on defeating Obama and saving our country.
Hyperbole?
What EXACTLY did they do? The "leak" was a simple one, if there even WAS a "leak" -- the exposure of a settlement between two women and the NRA dealing with an allegation of sexual harrassment against Cain.
The settlement is a fact. Cain has said so. The allegation is a fact. Cain has said so. The "speculation", and what is reprehensible, is the CHARGE the women made, if it is false. But the CHARGE was made in the 1990s, and has nothing to do with ANY political campaign.
Let's not confuse the two. The women filed complaints, and got settlements. I have no reason to believe Cain did anything wrong with those women, and at BEST (from the women's perspective) I'm willing to believe that they were overly sensitive and took something the wrong way. Those charges were from long ago, and clearly were not motivated by his presidential run, or encouraged by any political campaign.
The STORY was about FACTS, FACTS that multiple people knew about, and that were clearly "newsworthy". I'm sorry, but I don't buy the argument that a settlement in a harrassment case against a presidential candidate is a non-news-story.
I think it is something that can easily be handled by a competent campaign, and we'll never know if politico would have run the story if Cain had told them what he has finally told us. What they had was FACTS about a settlement, and a campaign which should clearly know about these facts, and was unwilling to discuss them in any way. That's news. Politico can be faulted for giving the women's "story" too much play, but the fact of the allegation and settlement are simple facts, and are fair game.
And if a political opponent knew about a settlement in an harrassment case, and mentioned it to the press so the press could investigate it, that wouldn't be the "most dispicable thing" ever. Realise there is no evidence that any campaign did this, but it's not at all like what was done to Palin.
Palin had false charges directly hurled at her. This story was about facts; the original complaints may have been false, but the story about the complaints wasn't.
Only if you think Cain is a serial liar. And you ignore all the evidence.
In the real world, we have Cain claiming he told people about the harrassment back in 2003, and we have the campaign admitting Politico told them about the story 10 days before the story ran, so it was not "out of the blue".
What WAS out of the blue was the baseless charge against Anderson. This morning Cain was claiming it was a race-based attack, but had no evidence, and a few hours later, he says it was leaked by Anderson, essentially calling Anderson a racist.
Cain is in the spotlight, there's a 3rd woman now, and a talk show host claims he witnessed inappropriate statements this year with two other women. And now Cain and his campaign manager attack Perry for it. Even though most people at FR have been providing evidence and pointing the finger at Romney.
But Cain won't point the finger at Romney. He wants to destroy Perry. Romney wants to destroy Perry. Cain and Romney are working to destroy Perry. Even though Perry is already "toast".
You’re funny. The only people “destroying” Perry are the voters being polled. Whatever happens with thissilly Cain “scandal”, Perry is going nowhere. Deal with it.
THere is nothing to leak, and no evidence ANY campaign leaked it, and no evidence Perry’s campaign had anything to do with it.
Both women knew the settlement, as did apparently other people at the NRA< and people Cain told it to in the past, and apparently people in his current campaign. There were people who observed the incidents, Cain notes that he turned the investigation over to others, and those others had staff, and there were lawyers involved, and lawyers staffs.
Cain has repeatedly used his presidency of the NRA as a campaign point, so of course the news media was going to ask around for anything bad that happened in the NRA during his time there. The question isn’t “how did the story leak”, but rather “how could Cain be so stupid as to believe nobody would ever find out about it”?
I can’t believe intelligent freepers actually think that the media couldn’t learn about this just from asking people in the NRA about it. Clinton couldn’t keep the blue dress from getting out, and it was just him and Monica, and he thought Monica WANTED to stay quiet.
It’s clear the women talked to their friends, and I’m sure their friends remember the stories. And now Cain is national news. THAT is what changed in the past month. And you all think one of those women, or friends of the women, would NEVER think to pick up a phone, call someone, and say “Hey, I see this Cain guy is like going to win the republican nomination. Did you know that he was accused of sexual harrassment? Yea, there was a settlement and everything”.
Really? You think instead that it had to be some political campaign that would dig up the story?
(I don’t mean “you” as in the person I’m replying to, I mean the generic “you”).
Well played, Charles. I really like Cain, what he stands for and yes, his character. However, he seems not ready for Prime Time. If I were running for office, I’d hire the meanest, roughest, most ruthless private investigator out there to examine MY background. Heck, I’d hire Larry Flynt! That way I’d KNOW what could POSSIBLY come out in an election, and how I would deal with any questions that would (inevitably) arise. The dems are masters of sheet sniffing and garbology. The republicans are pikers when it comes to this.
What if nobody leaked it? Last month, a news organization took the time to talk to EVERY person they could find associated with Rick Perry and his family, to the point where they found someone who mentioned a rock at a hunting camp that had a bad word on it painted over.
Think about that. That wasn't "leaked" by a poltical campaign, that was a news organization digging into minute details of the front-runner's life.
And you think that the same level of digging that found a rock in a field from 1981 wouldn't find an actual SETTLEMENT of an harrassment charge in the 1990s?
Why are we so quick to assume that the media wouldn't try to dig up dirt on our candidates, that we assume a political campaign did it? Why do we think a story like this is easier for a political campaign to learn than a news organization?
People know things that happen around them. And when they see a person suddenly famous, and they know something about that person, they talk. There were two women and several of their friends who knew about this, and saw Cain in the news. It makes perfect sense that one of them would talk to the media.
Well, again I called it correctly months ago. Cain is a race-baiter and our own Affirmative Action candidate. He know business but is clueless about EVERYTHING else. Now we see how he blames everyone but himself for his own failures. He can join Watts, Powell, West and the others as fake black conservatives.
Newt is the only competent conservative remaining, unless we come to our senses and support Michelle again.
IMHO, the best approach is to go on offense about what Obama has done as POTUS. Period. It's a VERY easy thing to attack, because the truth is a powerful weapon.
“In the real world, we have Cain claiming he told people about the harrassment back in 2003, and we have the campaign admitting Politico told them about the story 10 days before the story ran, so it was not “out of the blue”. “
I’m sorry, were you there 10 days earlier to hear EXACTLY what Politico said to Cain? If not, then you have NO CLUE as to what he should have done.
To be honest, arguing with mental midgets like you aren’t worth my time.
Campaign staffers are whores. Anderson wouldn’t hesitate for a second to turn on Cain if it meant a pay check.
I am not a Cain supporter, but I don’t care what the man did or didn’t do in the 90s. Probably a tempest in a teapot as these things usually are. I care what all of this is making Republican candidates look like - buffoons. We desperately needed an adult to compare favorably with the spoiled child in the White House, and we haven’t got one. Maybe Newt.
In how many states has the filing deadline passed? Anybody know? One or two? We do have a couple of Mighty Mouse types to “save the day” who need to change their minds about running fast. Who says they can’t? (Yeah, hope springs eternal.)
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.