protein wisdom has confirmed that several sources close to at least one woman who filed a harassment complaint against Herman Cain in the 1990s will testify that the woman in question actually did file the claim — and in so doing, provided a rationale for doing so, and details of the events she believes rose to the level of harassment.
protein wisdom has contacted experts in sexual harassment claims, all of whom have confirmed that in the course of filing a sexual harassment claim, nearly every complainant will cite as evidence for her claims encounters or behavior she believes rise to the level of harassment. This information is often written down, though typically once a settlement has been reached and no legal action is taken, these records are sealed.
Developing…
Now that pw has made this disclosure, anyone anywhere is legally free to say anything they like about Herman Cain.
Except Herman Cain.
OMG. Well. it’s over then, right?
It seems that Cain tried to put more in the box than just pizza.
Herman, your 15 minutes of fame are just about up!
The GOP flirted with Trump, danced with Bachmann, swooned for Perry and fell for Cain. What’s the next stop on the “Anybody-But-Romney Tour 2011”?
How about NEWT!?
I’m getting too pissed off to follow this any more, I think. We will never have a decent candidate if we let the left continue to choose them for us.
Why are reporters not out interviewing HR people who make these kinds of settlements, or insurance reps who do the cost/benefit analysis, so we can find out how common or uncommon these settlements are. I would do it myself but I don’t know where to begin.
Sadly, our “reporters” these days are all on Twitter reassuring each other that two settlements seems troubling, then repeating the concerns until that drumbeat reaches its fever pitch. But they haven’t done any research, that I’ve seen. Or talked to anyone who might have insight.
If you have suggestions about who I might talk to, I’ll do this shit myself. Let me know.
[…] take the time to click here and read the rest of this exclusive […]
Professor Jacobsen at legalinsurrection compared this to Rathergate, and almost on cue some commenters jumped in and hacked at Cain for failing to manage the optics.
Which surprised me not at all. Idiots.
Obama had good optics, mostly. When you could see anything at all other than what his handlers meted out to the media. That’s the kind of professionalism you want, right there.
Ginni Thomas has a chat.
Seems like modern journalism has devolved into intellectual incest. They generate “news” by interviewing each other and “reporting” the results. Then the wonks get to tell us what it all means.
MSM=LSM=MBM now=CFM?
If you want a growth investment in media these days, buy stock in a kneepad manufacturer.
I’ll bite. CFM?
You mean they will actually put it in writing!
So let it be written, so let it be done!
cubic feet per minute?
Cousin Fucking Media
Cluster Frel Media, though I was thinking cubic feet per minute as well.
Is that you, Malor?
I used to like Malor, too, even though I disagreed with him often. Now, I’m not sure I like any of those guys over there.
The PJM story is ‘evolving’ or ‘devolving’ depending on your POV. The bed has disappeared as has the woman and the taxi… this stinks.
KlosterFug Media is what I had in mind.
Rush Limbaugh just read the PJMedia story linked at the top of the page. It seems that they’ve had to walk back the most inflammatory allegations (e.g. seen getting in taxi w/ Cain, woke up in his bed).
Shoulda left the stupid bitch to the wolves instead of letting her sleep it off on his couch, I’m thinking.
I’ve made Maylor, and I really do like him. He’s a riot, actually.
Doesn’t mean I don’t disagree with him.
This isn’t about liking or disliking anyone. It’s simply about them being wrong.
met – not made. That sounds dirty.
Who is “Maylor”?
It was dirty. Seek a settlement.
Those guys are fine as long as the topic isn’t a political race. Once it’s a competition with a
resultscore, they all turn into armchair quarterback coaches.sorry, typo. One of many I regularly make, Jeff. I meant Gab.
It was dirty. Seek a settlement.
He’s a lawyer. This could get expensive.
I did think that $35k–wasn’t that a number bandied around a little?–was a mighty thin settlement if harassment occurred.
Sexual Harassment is a pretty heavy thing if you’ve ever seen it. A real case would settle up for a few yards worth of cash. Back when I was a daily reporter, I had a few Wall Street employment attorneys as sources who used base salary multiples as a yardstick. If it was a serious case, where her career got screwed up, you could readily go to five or six times her base salary (almost always $150,000), plus fees (easily $350k, often larger) to get out of it. And that was if she just wanted it done, had gotten a new job and moved on.
Quite a few settlements took into account potential losses as well, so that was millions of dollars right there, if she was a salesman, analyst, or banker.
So $35k is seeming like he farted and then blamed her.
heh, I risks, but then, as Granddad used to say, ya pays ya money, ya takes ya chances.
Ummm, maybe, unless possibly your better half agrees to allow the making for reals, in which case, down and dirty. This sexual harassment business is convoluted as all get out.
Now we have the reason they didn’t want PW around. Not their kind of people.
I am just dying thinking about that correction. Part of me laughs, all of me shudders. That’s about as bad as it gets. The bed….the taxi….oy. Looks like they have moved the story forward about zero percent and are totally disingenuous in not revealing names. If a POTUS candidate engaged in rape-like activity, which is precisely what is alleged here, then there should be a lot more detail (and they are right to protect her name.) Short of that, they are wrong to.
The only worse thing was when the WSJ and NYT ran corrections for stories that were longer than the stories themselves.
Because they’re not in the job of DEBUNKING left-wing hit jobs.
Not always. Sometimes they run a poll and tell us what it means we think. Sometimes they reprint a press release — and if they’re really feeling ambitious, they call a number attached to the bottom of the press release for an “independent comment”.
…if they’re really feeling ambitious, they call a number attached to the bottom of the press release for an “independent comment”.
To be fair, Craw, they usually call the number on the press release so that they can ask the PR Rep for another number, where they can find an “independent commenter.”
See? Completely different!