Herman Cain Sexual Harassment Accusation - The Way I See
I have believed Herman Cain right from the start on this sexual
accusation situation, it was nice to hear him speak on the entire
issue in a CNN interview posted online.
view the CNN video, to the right, see if you come away thinking
the way that I do on this.
Twelve years ago
a woman accused Herman Cain of sexual harassment, while they
both worked with the National Restaurant
Association. He headed it up.
There was an internal
investigation that Herman Cain did not handle. The
woman did not prove her case. What she deemed to be
sexual harassment, was not sexual harassment.
was found by the association to be innocent. And the woman left
involuntarily and received severance pay, as an agreement to leave
and to drop her false accusation.
"settlement" that is now being talked about, was the severance pay
from the association. It was not a settlement for sexual harassment,
as hush money.
At the time (in so many
words), Cain was told that the
woman's allegation was found to be unfounded and that an
"agreement" was made with her. The agreement appears to have
been, that she would no longer work there and get several
months of severance pay, something that Cain said was common for
people who left involuntarily to receive upon leaving the
association. So it is quite understandable why he would not
have viewed the money as a sexual harassment "settlement," but
rather an agreement.
Herman Cain really sexually harassed the woman and caused the
association to have had to pay out tons of "hush" money to keep
the woman quiet, it stands to reason that he would have
lost his position there, not her. It also stands to reason that
the association would not just hand such a woman severance pay,
unless she agreed to not harm them with furthering the false
appears from the CNN interview that Cain did not give it much
thought after the agreement was made. One can assume that this
is a fairly big association, which Cain says he was only
at for 2 1/2 years, himself. Then here it is Twelve years
after the situation, close to ten years since Cain
was with the association, he is running for president and he gets
hit with an accusation of two women accusing him. The online news
source, Politico, gave him 10 days to tell his side of the
accusations that Politico said were by two anonymous women.
Does he really have to answer to
anonymous accusations? How does one do
in mind that the situation that proved to be a false accusation
Twelve years ago, ended with an agreement. Cain would have been
wrong to have just assumed that the woman from that situation was
one of the anonymous women accusing him today. It appears to me,
that all he knew was that he had not sexually harassed any
women and said so when asked. Then once it became evident
that one of the women was that woman from Twelve
years ago, he then commented on her. And he commented the best
that he could recall.
In doing so,
Herman Cain did not claim that the details that he
was shown of the complaint, back Twelve years ago did not happen. In
so many words, he said in the CNN interview that the details
did not amount to sexual harassment. Telling a woman that she
is as tall as your wife is not sexual harassment. And that is
the one main thing he can recall the complaint saying. The rest
of the complaint was just as ridiculous, he recalls thinking at
the time. He did not commit the full complaint to
I believe that
letting the woman go with severance pay was a good way for the
association to handle the situation, considering that she was
claiming that things were sexual harassment, when they were not.
--Clearly she was a nut, and they wanted her gone with little to no
incident. That sure seems logical to
If the woman
had such little morals, as to go after a man for money with a claim
of sexual harassment on the grounds of him saying she was the
height of his wife (and other things of such a ridiculous
nature), she clearly would have no problem taking money from someone
wanting to sabotage his run for office. And now she is using
her lawyer to break that agreement that she made for that severance
The woman's Lawyer, Joel P. Bennett, is speaking
out on her behalf. He is saying she wants to tell her story,
and he is trying to make severance pay look like a
settlement. By claiming such, he is implying that it means
I believe Herman Cain, that he did not
do a thing to that woman. And there is not even any
hint as to who the supposed second woman is. I believe that this is
just one giant smear campaign, to hurt his campaign. You view the
CNN video, and see what you think.
Debra J.M. Smith - © 11-02-11