Posted on 11/07/2011 4:20:54 PM PST by STARWISE
Whaa? I live 15-20 minutes away from Mundelein, IL. This is getting scary. Time for some private investigation possibly?
Wow. The devil is in the details.
Wow. The devil is in the details.
Not that Axelrod.
Exactly.
Looks like 2 hookers to me. Just sayin’. Both slightly over the age to be first team and both desperate for $$.
Oops, didn’t pick up that Axelrod was on the other side. And her bankruptcies were 10 years apart, not 8. My mistake.
Even doing a name search without any other criteria comes up with nothing.
The doc you saw was a financial judgement against her. It wasn’t that David Axelrod and he wasn’t her attorney, he was the attorney for the lending company who was suing her. She doesn’t have an attorney listed on that doc.
(she also had a summary judgment against her and just this past September, had an asset seizure order against her..)
“According to the FEC, she’s a person who has never donated to a Republic candidate or organization.”
And what Republican would have Gloria represent them?
For someone who has held so many communication/ marketing type positions, it seems odd that she reads from notes typed on copy paper stapled together, so that they must be flipped over in an awkward manner.
Same City... However...
No, “David Axelrod” is not “connected” to Sharon Bialek; plus Cook County court records
By Michelle Malkin • November 7, 2011 03:54 PM
And you believe that why? Cain didn't say that, in fact Cain is only attacking the media and not disputing much in the way of specific details at all. So you're just throwing guesses out there with absolutely zilch to back it up.
This woman went on national TV and accused Herman Cain, a married man and successful business person, of trying to have sex with her in exchange for his help with getting her a job. Her claims are very specific and if true, it demonstrates that at minimum Cain isn't very concerned about his wedding vows. Now why exactly can't Cain specifically reject her charges. If none of this happened, why can't Cain go on TV and specifically address these accusations. I know I sure as heck would. I don't know anyone who has been faithful to their wife and was a good upstanding person who wouldn't be outraged enough to very publicly denounce the specifics of what this woman claims. Yet Cain is not doing that at all, instead he is launching into an attack on the media - which looks to me like he is trying to change the subject.
Here is part of Cain's denial statement:
“It’s easy to make accusations when, by virtue of your anonymity, you don’t have to be held accountable for the claims you’re making,”
Yet this new woman isn't anonymous at all. She CAN be held accountable. If it is all BS, Cain shouldn't have much trouble making that point. Was he with her that night? Did he upgrade her hotel room? These are things he should know, and if there is nothing to her story he could squash her like a bug and win such a PR coup that all the other charges would likely be dismissed by the public as well. But Cain isn't doing that, he is trying to change the subject.
I have no idea if this is true, the accusations are probably overblown. But I remember when we got all the allegations against Arnold when he was running in the recall election. Women were coming out of the woodwork claiming he was a serial groper and sex hound. I remember conservatives dismissed the charges as media lies. Now it turns out those weren't lies at all - worse, Arnold even knocked up his freaking maid and has a kid with her. Cain's defense here is weak and he will have to do a lot better.
Different David Axelrod. That’s been determined early on...
Is that a herpe on her lip?
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.