Subscribe
Shop Local
Magazine
Gas Prices
Today's Poll!Third worker says Cain harassed; campaign denies
Wednesday, November 2, 2011
WASHINGTON (AP) — A third former employee considered filing a workplace complaint against Herman Cain over what she deemed aggressive and unwanted behavior when she and Cain, now a Republican presidential candidate, worked together during the late 1990s, the woman told The Associated Press on Wednesday. She said the behavior included a private invitation to his corporate apartment.
The woman said he made sexually suggestive remarks or gestures about the same time that two co-workers had settled separate harassment complaints against Cain, who was then the head of the National Restaurant Association.
Cain’s campaign denied anew that he’d done anything wrong, decried a “smear campaign” as he is riding high in opinion polls and accused rival Rick Perry’s operation of being behind the original stories.
Perry’s campaign denied any involvement — and suggested the campaign of yet another candidate, Mitt Romney, might be a source.
A woman interviewed several times by the AP said she did not file a formal complaint against Cain because she began having fewer interactions with him. Later, she learned that a co-worker — one of the two women whose accusations have rocked Cain’s campaign this week — had already done so. She said she would have felt she had to file otherwise.
The woman spoke only on condition of anonymity, saying she feared losing her current job and the possibility of damage to her reputation. She was located and approached by the AP as part of its investigation into harassment complaints against Cain that were disclosed in recent days and have thrown his presidential campaign into turmoil. She said she was reluctant to describe the encounters she had with Cain when they worked together at the Washington-based restaurant trade group.
The employee described in conversations with the AP over several days situations in which she said Cain told her that he had confided to colleagues how attractive she was and invited her to his corporate apartment outside work.
His actions “were inappropriate, and it made me feel uncomfortable,” she said.
The AP confirmed that the employee worked at the restaurant association with Cain during the period in question, that she has no party affiliation in her voter registration in the past decade and is not identified as a donor in federal campaigns or local political campaigns. Records show she was registered as a Democrat at one point previously.
Asked for comment about the accusations, including the most recent, Cain spokesman J.D. Gordon said, “Mr. Cain has said over the past two days at public events that we could see other baseless allegations made against him as this appalling smear campaign continues.” Gordon added, “He has never acted in the way alleged by inside-the-Beltway media, and his distinguished record over 40 years spent climbing the corporate ladder speaks for itself.”
Later campaign manager Mark Block alleged that Texas Gov. Perry’s campaign was behind the original stories on the two women and demanded an apology.
Denying any involvement, Perry spokesman Ray Sullivan says the Texan’s campaign learned of the allegations when Politico first published a story late Sunday evening.
Cain himself, in an interview with Forbes, said he believed a Perry consultant gave information about the allegations to Politico.
Cain said he outlined the allegations of a woman to the consultant, Curt Anderson, when Anderson was helping him on an earlier campaign.
Anderson said in a statement to AP: “I was one of several consultants on his Senate race in 2004 and was proud to help him. I never heard any of these allegations until I read about them in Politico, nor does anything I read in the press change my opinion that Herman is an upstanding man and a gentleman”
Perry’s campaign pointed to former Massachusetts Gov. Romney’s operation as a possible source of the Politico story. “There are real ties between Romney campaign backers and Mr. Cain and the National Restaurant Association,” Sullivan said.
Though trying to project an image of campaign business as usual, Cain appeared frazzled at times Wednesday and couldn’t escape the questions that have dogged him since a published report Sunday night that at least two women had complained about his behavior while at the restaurant association and had been given financial settlements. The controversy has arisen two months before the leadoff Iowa caucuses and as polls show Cain at the head of the GOP field alongside former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney.
As the day began, Cain said, “There are factions that are trying to destroy me personally, as well as this campaign.” He didn’t say to whom he was referring, but he said “the voice of the people” is stronger.
Cain was supposed to take questions after a speech to health care professionals, but he ultimately refused and left the hotel through a back door.
“I’m here to visit with these doctors, and that’s what I’m going to talk about, so don’t even bother asking me all of these other questions that you all are curious about, OK? Don’t even bother,” a testy Cain told a throng of reporters.
When pressed about the week’s previous allegations, Cain raised his voice and said “What did I say? Excuse me. Excuse me!” as hotel security led him through a hallway jammed with journalists in a Washington suburb. “What part of ‘no’ don’t people understand?”
Meanwhile, another of Cain’s accusers appeared increasingly reluctant to speak publicly, though her lawyer took the first steps for her to do so. Attorney Joel P. Bennett contacted the association on Wednesday and asked it to release his client from the confidentiality arrangement she had agreed to so that she could talk openly about her allegations and respond to Cain’s assertion that her complaints were “totally baseless and totally false.”
Cain has declined to say whether he will ask his former employer to terminate confidentiality restrictions on the two women who accused him of sexual harassment in the 1990s while he was head of the trade group. Cain campaign manager Block said the campaign would address that question “when it’s appropriate.”
Sue Hensley, a restaurant association spokeswoman, confirmed that Bennett contacted the trade group and was told to contact its outside counsel. Hensley said Bennett expected to meet with his client and make the request on Thursday.
Confidentiality agreements that commit both sides to silence are common in financial settlements of an employee’s sexual harassment claims, lawyers for management and employees said. Violating such an agreement can lead to a complaint in court and an order to pay damages, or at least the other side’s attorney’s fees, said Sarah Pierce Wimberly, a partner in the Atlanta office of the Ford and Harrison law firm.
But when the silence is broken, it’s often hard to find the source of the leak, said Robert Kelner, a partner in the Covington and Burling firm’s Washington office. He said, “The truth is, when parties enter into these confidentiality agreements around a settlement, they usually understand that there is less than 100 percent certainty that the information is truly going to remain confidential.”
It’s not clear if Cain himself was part of the settlement or whether it just involved the association and the woman. But he almost certainly would be bound by it, as the association’s former president.
Over the past two days, Cain has acknowledged he knew of one agreement between the restaurant association and a woman who accused him of sexual harassment. He has said the woman initially asked for a large financial settlement but ultimately received two to three months’ pay as part of a separation agreement. Cain also acknowledged remembering one of the woman’s accusations against him, saying he stepped close to her to make a reference to her height and told her she was the same height as his wife.
He has said he is not aware of agreements or settlements with any other women, though Politico — which first disclosed the allegations — reported that the trade group had given settlements to at least two female employees who accused him of inappropriate sexual behavior.
In media interviews since the story broke Sunday, Cain has offered conflicting accounts of what happened during his tenure at the trade group in Washington. He later acknowledged knowing about one settlement but said he did not know how much was paid. The New York Times reported Tuesday that one payout was $35,000, equivalent to one year’s salary for one of the women.
The pressure on Cain only increased when a pillar of the GOP establishment suggested that the Georgia businessman should ask the association to waive the confidentiality agreements so that the woman can talk openly about her allegations.
“What are the facts?” asked Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour on MSNBC. “If you have a confidentiality agreement that keeps the public from finding out something that the public is interested in knowing the facts, you ought to go on and get the facts out.”
“Herman Cain’s interest is getting this behind him,” added Barbour, a former Republican National Committee chairman.
A former talk show host, Cain is a self-styled political outsider who has attracted tea party support and, up until now, has weathered a series of stumbles that have many GOP luminaries questioning his ability to run a viable campaign much less win the party’s nomination. Conversely, Romney is running his second national campaign and has spent the past few weeks shoring up support among the GOP establishment for a nomination fight many Republican insiders think is his to lose.
Marry Me
Comments
wow 1 year, 6 months ago
Rattlesnakes eating their young........hey Mr Cain, Evenkeel.....this is what I meant by the Willie Lynch and it is working as intended. Mr. Cain just initially blamed the Dems for this and now Mr. Cain is blaming Republican Rick Perry for leaking the information but the Perry camp is blaming Republican schoolmate Romney for doing the dirty deed. Also...now Mr. Cain says this information was done because of his race.... I bet he wishes those Civil Rights Hooligans who did nothing to help him achieve his current status, had been or were still around to make things a bit better. Hey Herman,. whoever did the WL to you executed it to perfection. The Reps are fighting amongst themselves, the young and old are divided on this issue and Mr. Cain has said this is a racial issue, so now there are different racial groups taking sides.... that's the Willie Lynch tactics. Everyone is fighting and race, class, economics, who did what to who is what they are fighting about and nothing positive is getting done to fix the real problem. This tactic worked then and helped solidify centuries of inequality and as you can see, the Willie Lynch is still clearly working today.
I bet now when Mr. Cain looks in the mirror he see's something he has been running from and trying to deny. Hey Mr. Herman "you left the Democratic Plantation,you did it all by myself, you're not a Black American" Cain, the situation of frustration, the pure anger you're feeling right now are a result of the "Willie Lynch"; however you also have to understand..."No means No" and your own conflicting words are leading people to conclude that you are guilty as accused. Mr. Cain, when you do dirt work, some of the residue often get's blown around and comes back to get you dirty. And although you can shower....some dirt can never be completely washed away. I could care less who Mr. Cain does the " Hoocie Coo" with, but his own statements lead me to believe he isn't my choice for President. Evenkeel I have no racial animus....I simply speak the truth, Mr. Cain is not perfect and like many others is a victim of "the Willie Lynch".
Sequoia 1 year, 6 months ago
Am I the only one who finds it obvious that Cain doesn't care about winning this race? He just wants a Fox News talk show and bigger speaking fees. He's a talk radio host for Pete's sake. He's another Sarah Palin, playing these base voters like violins. Why doesn't the GOP nominate someone who could actually lead, like Huntsman? Why does the base always fall for these entertainers with a good "aw shucks" act? For the GOP base, it seems like the most important quality for a candidate is that he/she annoys everyone who is not the GOP base. It seems like they want shock jocks, not real leaders. Am I wrong about this?
evenkeel 1 year, 6 months ago
I know of a few Democrats that made some headlines enjoying compliant female employees. Gee, we even had a President who enjoyed seeking pleasure from uncompliant females. "Ahhh, you should put some ice on that." Ring a bell?
Sequoia 1 year, 6 months ago
But, simply insisting on ideological purity doesn't accomplish the goals of less government and less spending. Think about the health care debate... the GOP missed an opportunity to put a conservative stamp* on health care reform, because all they did was call it "socialism" and say no. Read your David Frum on this issue. It just seems like the base prefers fiery talk and antics to actually getting things done.
evenkeel 1 year, 6 months ago
Bob Dole? Bob Dole was not a conservative -not much of one that is. You are conflating the terms republican and conservative.
asb 1 year, 6 months ago
That particular base is too small for anything but armed and failed insurrection. Bush, Dole & McCain are about as far right as America is going to go, and not ofter at that. Healthcare reform was and is a critical part of any modern society, no matter what you call it, and is not failing anywhere. Governments teeter out of financial greed, but universal health care is just that, universal, and essential.
Sequoia 1 year, 6 months ago
What do I suggest? Compromise. Pragmatism. For example, in the Iowa debate, every single candidate said they would walk away from a deal that included $10 of spending cuts for every $1 of tax revenue. That's insane. That's a great deal that cuts government, but it is not "pure" enough for the base, and that's the problem the GOP is in right now. They are playing to a base that doesn't understand compromise, while at the same time trying to appeal to a general majority that wants the parties to cut a deal and move on.
Evenkeel, can you define "conservative" for me? I'm confused about this. The dictionary defines "conservative" as "favoring preservation of the existing order." But the people Graceful calls "conservative" are actually favoring radical change to the existing order. I always kind of thought "conservative" meant "less government," but I see so many conservatives who favor government regulation in personal lives (ie, government defining when life begins, Constitutional amendments to prevent gay marriage, etc.). If "government is the problem," then how can you then trust government to define life... something philosophers and theologians have been arguing about for centuries? I'm not sure why the base thinks Cain and Perry are conservatives while Huntsman and Romney are not. If liberals have faith that big government can solve the world's problems, then the Iraq War was "liberal," right?
On an earlier topic, I argued that a school should not be allowed to take action to shut down a gay student group... that's less government. That's conservative, right?
Somebody straighten me out.
I must admit, I'm very confused in how these terms are used.
evenkeel 1 year, 6 months ago
Sequoia, yes I agree, you are confused. The first post that I read from you said you liked reading Andrew Sullivans' commentary, who you mistakenly thought was a conservative. I believe you also referenced theHuffingtonPost. Now Bob Dole. Yipes! Who next, Joe Scarborough?
I suggest you read the best conservative news and opinion site NationalReview.com. You'll learn, you'll laugh, you'll cry, you'll grow as a person and you will wonder how you ever could face the world without NationalReview.com. Mark Steyn is my favorite. He is a conservative, he is witty and funny and he is absolutely convinced we are racing towards a cliff fiscally. He makes a compelling case.
Sequoia 1 year, 6 months ago
I most certainly did NOT reference the Huffington Post.
Sequoia 1 year, 6 months ago
A little bit of the Google on Steyn brough up this: nationalreview.com/corner/168552/hostess-moosest/mark-steyn
Anyone who bought into the Sarah Palin grift is either a huge sucker or intellectually dishonest. Anyone who thought Sarah Palin was about anything other than separating rubes from their money is not what I'd call an intellectual heavyweight. Thanks but no thanks. I'll stick to good ol' William F. Buckley if you don't mind.
Sequoia 1 year, 6 months ago
I didn't quote anything. A quote is a phrase in quotation marks. The link is to an article where he takes Sarah Palin at face value, and endorses her. I did not provide a quote from the article.
Sequoia 1 year, 6 months ago
Ah, I see where you got confused. The stuff about Sarah Palin being a grifter is my words, not Steyn's. He bought into Sarah Palin, which makes him seem like a fool to me. I always thought Sarah Palin was just a con artist. I think anyone who took her seriously is a rube.
Sequoia 1 year, 6 months ago
What's with all this "enemy of the people" and "existing order not worth saving" stuff? Are you an anarchist? Do you go through the whole day with these kind of thoughts in your head? What a terrible way to think about your fellow citizens. That's not conservative. It's garbage, and it is sad, frankly. God forbid anyone who thinks like that actually become our leader.
We need liberals to think about the future and come up with new ideas, who aren't afraid to try something new. This is the role of liberals. We need conservatives to look to the past and preserve what works in the face of change. We need conservatives to tell liberals: "Great idea, but how much is that going to cost?" A healthy society needs both conservatives and liberals. We can't have just one or the other. This seems like common sense to me.
Isn't that true of normal life? In a household or a business, sometimes you have to try something new. Sometimes you have to hold back. Sometimes we invest. Sometimes we save. We need both. Don't you agree?
I refuse to accept that I must fit myself into either the OWS types on one side and the Tea Party on the other. I try to move through life by making the best decision with the facts I have, regardless of the ideological label that may be applied to my action. If I'm in conflict with another, I want to compromise and get on with my business. I want my politicians to do the same. Trying to lead a decent life is enough of a political statement for me. Isn't that conservative?
JMO 1 year, 6 months ago
Sequoia, you sound like me. I'm not liberal or conservative, democrat or republican. I think what you said is spot-on. You can't have just one ideology running things. That's what the Taliban wants. That's what the Nazi's wanted. That's not the American way.
Graceful loves her labels, and unless you agree with her, or if you show any desire to see both sides just compromise and get along, you are a power-hungry, left-wing, liberal bent world domination and destroying the country by leading it into depravity and economic ruin. (Maybe I exaggerate - but not much.)
JMO 1 year, 6 months ago
I think it's pretty simple really - IF YOU HAVE SKELETONS IN YOUR CLOSET, DON'T RUN FOR PRESIDENT! Or at least be smart enough to either, 1) own up to them right away and get past it early - or 2) if you don't believe you did anything wrong, say so and stick to that! don't give details, don't embellish, don't point fingers, just say, "I never did what that of which I was accused."
Really, if you aren't smart enough to do one of those three things, you don't belong in the White House and you are nothing but a distraction to the party and the real issues.
Gotigers 1 year, 6 months ago
Doesn't anyone have a problem that all of these are "anonymous' sources. Democrat or Republican--I think it is wrong that the press is running with this. Shoudn't the NAACP be up in arms about this treatment? I wonder what the reaction would have been if it was an anonymous source threatening Obama?
JMO 1 year, 6 months ago
I agree. If you're going to make accusations that affect a man's life, own up to it or keep your mouth shut. But most people are afraid to stand up and possibly face ridicule or worse. I suppose there is good reason for that. But if you are "anonymous" I think your credibility is suspect.
The NAACP shouldn't have anything to say about this because it isn't about him being black. It's about him being a dog. :) He may well have been innocent, but if not, it wasn't sexual harrassment for a black man to make advances to the woman (women?), it was sexual harassment for a MAN to make advances to the woman. His race has nothing to do with it.
JMO 1 year, 6 months ago
You know, I need to rephrase that. I should have said, "it was sexual harassment to make advances to the woman, period." Because at some point someone here will point out you can harass the same sex. (Rolling my eyes.) Either way, his race has nothing to do with it.
asb 1 year, 6 months ago
Except that you may not be free to give negative feedback to a higherup, you're out the door.
JMO 1 year, 6 months ago
Oh good grief. Pick it to pieces why don't you? That's what I get for trying to be more precise and pc. I was only trying to clairify that it was the making of unwanted advances that was the problem. (Again, assuming it happened.) And not that he was black. (Or even that he was a he.)
I had no intention to define sexual harassment BUT according to the EEOC, sexual harassment is:
Unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature constitute sexual harassment when
Better now? :)
asb 1 year, 6 months ago
Mr. Cain will now join Ms Bachman on the warming tray, they both being completely done.
evenkeel 1 year, 6 months ago
wow, you write that Mr. Cain is not perfect. Yes indeed. Who is perfect?
wow, You use many words to say very little. Further, I can not really follow what you are trying to say most of the time.
One thing I am certain of, this entire problem: Bushs' fault.
JMO 1 year, 6 months ago
Don't be silly. Cain's a Republican. That makes it Obama's fault.
evenkeel 1 year, 6 months ago
Graceful is correct. Conservatives want smaller government, less spending. Romney hits a ceiling at about 25% of Republican primary support because he is perceived as not conservative or not authentically conservative. If he really was authentically conservative this primary season would be over before it really begins. Romney would be the nominee. He probably will be anyway, but conservatives are uneasy with Romney. Conservatives will need to hold their noses and support Romney because Obama needs to be defeated.
Why is it evenkeel that you say that Obama needs to be defeated?
Oh, I don't know, could it be because 8% of Americans are now on foodstamps? That is 45.8 million people. (Yawn.) Or, by the by, did you notice that we borrowed $203 billion in October? (Ho hum.) Gosh, are you aware that unemployment is 9.1%? (Gee, that evenkeel is a bore.)
asb 1 year, 6 months ago
Stating the obvious isn't "correct," it's stating the obvious. Yes, conservatives want smaller government. The "less spending" part is redundant. "Conservatives want lower taxes and the freedom to do what they want to make as much money as possible" would also be "correct" but obvious. It also isn't complete; don't forget that conservatives want everybody to be Christian, moral, straight, white, etc. Oh? maybe not all conservatives want all those things? Duh! The freedom to trade, lie, steal, cheat, dodge responsibility; all through gutted regulations on our financial warriors, got us the 8%, and a large part of the $203B october indebtedness, with a little help from un-needed military adventures. Sorry, the economy may run Obama out of office, but it won't be because he is much at fault. The greatest concentrating of wealth in American history is happening because business and religion got together to convince everybody that government is evil and we can all be rich if the government would just go away. Yawn indeed!
evenkeel 1 year, 6 months ago
asb, I suggest you read some reviews of, or even read the book, "Reckless Endangerment: How Outsized Ambition, Greed, and Corruption Led to Economic Armageddon" By Gretchen Morgenson, Joshua Rosner. It is a great report of what happened to the financial meltdown. I must admit, I have not yet read it, but I intend to.
Other than that I enjoyed your strawman argument. It got me in the mood to engage in some typical conservative action. So right now I am going to go stone somebody for being a witch and then lie to an elderly person to steal their retirement money, pollute some pristine waterway with toxic sludge just because I am feeling kinda cheeky and then I will probably fall asleep tonight counting my money. I am going to get away with it too. All because our federal government is too tiny to stop me. Conservatives' intentions are always bad to the bone.
Oh and tomorrow morning, when America wakes up, we will be $4 billion deeper in debt. My how it piles up!
wcywing 1 year, 6 months ago
i'm not voting for Cain, but i find it strange that all these stories are popping out when Cain is becoming a front runner. a coincedence?
tonto 1 year, 6 months ago
Only if he was backed by a dozen thugs and a lot of SuperPAC money. The money is there, but then there's the secret service for the thugs to deal with.
evenkeel 1 year, 6 months ago
It is irrelevant to me who is responsible for the story surfacing. Whoever brought the story out is doing Cain, the Republican primary field, Republican primary voters and the entire electorate a favor. This is part of the vetting process.
I am going to reserve my judgement until the facts are out. I am glad this is not an October 2012 surprise.
How bad is it, whatever Herman Cain did? I hope we find out.
The severance payout was $35,000 for 1 woman and $45,000 for another. I compare that to $850,000 for the Bill Clinton-Paula Jones case then I extrapolate that whatever Herman Cain did twice was about 1/10 as bad as what Clinton did to Paula Jones.
Of course, that does not include the Juanita Broaderick case or the Gennifer Flowers case or the Monica Lewinski case or the Katherine Wiley case. I do not know how to include those data points into the extrapolation process. This sexual math is difficult.
Sequoia 1 year, 6 months ago
Or, you could extrapolate that Paula Jones had 10 times as many lawyers. Not to minimize Clinton's crimes against women in any way, but I doubt Cain's victims had the Rutherford Institute on their side.
evenkeel 1 year, 6 months ago
Let's make certain not to maximize Herman Cains undisclosed and therefore unknown transgressions in any way. So let's all agree to this: feeling uncomfortable is not rape, feeling uncomfortable is not oral sex performed by an intern in the Oval Office, feeling uncomfortable is not a 12 year affair, feeling uncomfortable is not groping a distraught woman and feeling uncomfortable is not exposing yourself to a young lady and asking her to kiss it. Surely we can agree to that. We are all reasonable people, are we not?
evenkeel 1 year, 6 months ago
hkchas, yet another silly path you take! I will try to talk to you as if you are a grown-up, though I am starting to have serious doubts. You seem to struggle to rise to the "I know you are but what am I" level of discussion.
What were Herman Cain's actions? Were his actions rape or molestation or adultry or indecent exposure? I do not know. Neither do you. We know nothing about it. Harassment is vague, is it not? So is "uncomfortable"-ness. Was it a dirty joke? A leer? An inappropriate suggestion? A gesture?
I think it is important to find out. Until I know some details I will not make a judgement about Herman Cain. Is this difficult to understand?
spelchek 1 year, 6 months ago
Come on Cain, haven't you learned anything from the first black president of the United States.....Bill Clinton. Look into the cameras, lie, get caught lying, change the definition of sexual harassment, and ride off into the sunset like you're a rock star. It's that easy.
evenkeel 1 year, 6 months ago
So hkchas, you are a Romney supporter?
evenkeel 1 year, 6 months ago
When you say you favor Huntsman, are you planning on voting in the Missouri Republican primary?
Please review our Policies and Procedures before registering or commenting
Or login with:
OpenID