The plot thickens....




One might be asking themselves why Ms. Bialek was fired from the National Restaurant Association. After all, being fired, quite unlike simply being laid off, is a serious issue with serious ramifications; since leaving the Restuarant Association, Ms. Bialek has been unable to maintain regular employment. So why was this woman let go? Why has it seemingly affected her ability to remain employed for so long? Perhaps it might have something to do with the reason she was fired from the National...


http://patdollard.com/2011/11/bialek-deconstructed-accustations-quickly-erode-under-scrutiny/

Another interesting tidbit.....


Martha MacCallum, FOX News: "One of the things is that you lived at a 505 North Lake Shore Drive apartment, right? This is the same building, it happens to be the same building David Axelrod lives in. Do you know David Axelrod? Ever have any interaction with him at all?

Sharon Bialek, Cain accuser: "I saw him in the gym. I mean -- everybody nods to each other. It is friendly building but I never had any interaction with him."


http://www.realclearpolitics.com/vi...s_in_same_building_as_david_axelrod.html

Busted!! That didn't take long..........lol

The MSM vetted her just like they vetted Obama!

bump

lying bitch...probably been bangin' perry

Gunner

Now if Cain would sue the silicone outta that hoe it would send a message to the other lying tramps.

Gunner

How about her boyfriend at the time of this alleged incident who said he never heard of the problem until 2 weeks ago. The libs are going to make Cain more popular.

backfires gonna kick 'em right in the teeth

Gunner

Never mind that she's got a 13 year old son...from a "relationship"...
In other words, she got pregnant at around age 37 about a year after the alleged excitement with Cain.
Strikes me as pretty much a loose cannon.
Gonna be interesting to see WTF shakes out...looks like it can't hurt Cain after all.

I asked this in the other thread, but it quickly devolved into the normal insult-fest, so I'll ask again:

If THIS report is true, doesn't it contradict Herman Cain's own statements in his press conference two hours ago?

And if she was fired from her job at the NRA, where Cain was the President-elect, how in hell would he not know about it?

One thing that's being used against her, which I think is a valid question, is "why did it take 14 years for her to come forward?" Well, the same thing could be asked of Herman Cain - "Politico" approached Cain about this story ten days before they actually printed it - and yet this is the first we've heard of a woman employed by the NRA during Cain's tenure being fired for making false accusations of sexual harassment?
Something isn't adding up.

If pigs had wings they could fly.

So you don't believe THIS report, or the original accusations, Ringman? You've confused me.

Here's what I think is happening - whether or not this Bialek woman is credible, I think there is something to the OTHER accusations - those which the NRA settled. Bialek might be just another vicim of Herman Cain, or she might be diabolical and smart enough to use those REAL victims as cover for her little scheme. Either way, it's put Cain in a real bind, because he keeps contradicting himself and now he has outside help trying to defend him but also contradicting him. In short, he's in a real [bleep] now. A woman from one of those "settled" cases has now come forward on the record, too, so it might get even more interesting.

Dunno about that. Chickens have wings and they can't.

Gonna repeat myself, again, but his response reminds me of Anthony Weiner's response a few months ago. Weiner knew the picture was his, so he couldn't really deny it without digging the hole deeper, but he also couldn't figure out how the pic got out there into the public domain - so the whole thing turned into one big, confused clusterfark. He knew it was him in the pic, but he knew he didn't send it, at least not intentionally, so his reaction did more harm than good.
To me it looks like Cain is in a very similar situation.

what's not adding up is your apparent hard on for a man who's been accused of something that is obviously questionable.

i don't know what he did or didn't do for sure, and neither do you. yet you have posted all over the place trying to act like you're J. Edgar freaking Hoover trying to catch somebody in a lie. he's been asked a billion questions from a billion different people all trying to goad him into saying something they (and you) can construe as a lie.

the reason it devolves into an "insult-fest" is because most folks here don't give a crap what you think about this issue. especially your smug little habit of trying to slide in what you think as a fact, ie:

"Either way, it's put Cain in a real bind, because he keeps contradicting himself and now he has outside help trying to defend him but also contradicting him. In short, he's in a real [bleep] now."

what are you, the politics god or something? should i just ask you how to vote, and not bother with anything else?

And yet here you are, smalljaw, demonstrating how you "don't give a crap" by making this thread about ME and not Cain or Bialek?

As for me posting "all over the place" - it was in threads initiated by others not by me, so I'm sure your fellow Campfire members appreciate your disdain for free speech, discussion, and open debate.

We're all just thinking out loud here - if you don't like it or can't handle it, why don't you just sit this one out until a topic comes along more to your liking?

Wellllll - a loose something, anyway! Loose lips, too!!
Mark

Is there something annoying buzzing around the fire?

Sharon Bialek, Cain accuser: "I saw him in the gym. I mean -- everybody nods to each other. It is friendly building but I never had any interaction with him."


Bingo - the above is false.

Should be out somewhere tonight or tomorrow, via some media,..........maybe, .

Axelrod equals..........

this particular post is about how the lady's story appears to be shaky, yet you want to turn the attention back to Cain in a negative light.

would you care to refute that you don't have a clue what really happened between CAIN and BIALIEK, or any of the others? (you know, that was the part in my post where i talked about the subject matter at hand, but you conveniently ignored.) Or do you want to just continue running around flailing and acting like you're E.F. Hutton?

And the reasons cited in that link regarding WHY her story appears to be shaky contradicts the assertions Herman Cain just made in his press conference.

According to Rush, Politico told him they had a story but wouldn't tell him what it was. He declined to comment to that. I don't blame him for that.

yeah, we heard you the other 5 times.

the man apparently worked with her (and 300 other people) 14 years ago.

she says she met with him to get him to help get her a job after she was fired for filing a false sexual harassment claim (which she apparently never contested, and was obviously against somebody besides Cain), and in turn he then sexually harassed her.

he says he did not, and doesn't even know who she is.

exactly what part of that contradicts his story? the only part that could possible contradict it is HER story of what happened. nowhere in the link did it say anything that would seem to me to contradict his story. are we reading the same link, or does one of us have an axe to grind? the woman is a PROVEN liar.


JONATHAN KARL: --she's come out, you've heard her accusations. I mean--

HERMAN CAIN: Yes.

JONATHAN KARL: --but let's be clear. You're saying that she is lying about this?

"HERMAN CAIN: Yes. I am sayin' that. You know, in as nice a way as I c-- I don't know any other way to say it. Because I would first have to recognize who she is.

JONATHAN KARL: You-- you don't remember having--

HERMAN CAIN: I-- I--

JONATHAN KARL: --drinks with her back in '97, you don't remember--

HERMAN CAIN: Absolutely not--

JONATHAN KARL: --giving her a ride in your car?

HERMAN CAIN: No. I reject all accusations. I don't remember that. And also, I don't remember knowin' her. Look, the National Restaurant Association had-- has an office in Washington D.C., as it did then, it has the foundation office and the convention office in Chicago, as it does now. We have about 150 employees in the Washington office, and about 150 employees in the-- Chicago office.

There were a lotta people there. Most of the people, some of them I would remember. But remember, I didn't have interaction with the people in Chicago on a regular basis. Only during that part of the year when we had our convention. And so when I first saw-- this lady-- do the press conference with Gloria Allred, I sat there trying to recall who she was and if I knew her. And I am honestly telling you, I can't even recall knowing her back then. "

Cain could've stopped this entire story dead in its tracks had he simply answered "we at the NRA fired a woman for making false accusations of sexual harassment during my time as President" when this story first broke. But he didn't - because he didn't know exactly who was doing the accusing - he had to wait and see WHICH accuser was coming forward, because he knew there was more than one incident perhaps?

Like I said, this woman might be lying, opportunistic scum - but thed fact that there are more than just her pointing fingers gives her cover. When those women who got financial settlements come forward and are released from their confidentiality agreements - that's when we'll know whether or not Herman Cain is full of [bleep].

Doyou know the difference between settlement and severance pay. When I was twenty-nine years old I gave a month's notice because another company hired me. The H.R. left for a moment and came back with a check for a month and told me it was severance pay and I can take the next month off.

The women in question received severance pay, not a settlement. But carry one in your delusional world.

or perhaps he's telling the truth, and simply could not recall something that happened 14 years ago off the top of his head.

and just to be clear, whether or not she's lying this time, she IS lying opportunistic scum, if what is reported about her is accurate.

of course, at least in some people's eyes, she doesn't have to explain her past, unlike Cain.

me? i typically believe the side of the argument that doesn't come from proven liars. i'm funny that way i guess.

Why argue with this piss ant (Cat). Put him on ignore and call it a day. Steve

Interesting and ironic to note the allegations are falling apart when EXAMINED as the MSM should have done with the president we have now....funny how we couldn't question Obama as we were RACISTS, BUT the MSM can lean over backwards to proclaim LYING women as reasons to crucify a REPUBLICAN/CONSERVATIVE black man!

even conservative people i know are already succumbing to this crap, and it pisses me off. it's amazing that all you have to do is say something enough times and it becomes perceived as fact by the very people that should know better.

simply mind boggling.

"A lie told often enough becomes the truth."

Lenin
Russian Communist politician & revolutionary (1870 - 1924)

That's EXACTLY what should be done.. File a defamation lawsuit and take her sorry azz to court..

But until then, you'll just continue to attack him as if he is. Got it.

First, that would be a lie. She wasn't working for the NRA when she was fired for the false accusation of sexual harrassment. That happened prior to her account of her encounter with Cain.

Secondly, the other women were given a settlement from the NRA long after Cain was no longer working there. This is why Cain had no idea about the details or agreement between the NRA and these women. Their claims came after he left.

Third, the women WERE released from their confidentiality agreements by the NRA. They do not wish to speak about the matter.

And finally, Cain has not once contradicted himself. Take his comments in a linear chronological context and there is no condradictions.

Funny though how you like to skew the facts to paint the image of the man the way you wish he was. Have you considered a carreer in the media? You've got the skills!

Add to that, that she also had more than one failed paternity suits to identify the father of that child. It sounds like she doesn't know which tom, dick, or harry she was actually hooking up with back then.

Reasonable doubt? I think so.

If nothing else, there's a lesson here to stay away from the whack jobs...

Turns out she filed a sex harrassment action against her very next employer after the NRA,as well.

==================

It's the last thing a candidate should do while focusing all his energies and monies into a presidential campaign.

A couple questions before I throw out a possibility.

Oruacat,
What do you do for a living? Have you ever been in a high managerial position? Overseeing hundreds of people, or owned your own business where you were responsible for the actions of all your employees?

Exactly, like this matter is more important than getting the GOP nod. GMAB.

I think what their telling you is you have your head up your ass!