I did not know what David Plouffe looked like and had to look it up. He has a widow's peak. I get the Dracula reference now.
If you missed it, yesterday POLITICO began reporting that Herman Cain was accused in the nineties of sexual harassment by two women. Jonathan Martin, Maggie Haberman, Anna Palmer and Kenneth P. Vogel's latest article is here.
I have no idea what happened. My natural reaction is to believe a victim.
However, POLITICO has no victim. My own gut reaction is that the two women have contacted POLITICO and POLITICO is hiding that. The women, if they exist and if there were charges, allegedly received financial pay outs and signed non-disclosure agreements.
If the women broke those agreements, they would be legally liable.
And if they broke them what do I think? I think they should be prosecuted. I have no sympathy for them. If we are supposed to believe that Herman Cain is a sexual harasser (and he may be) then why are these women coming forward?
To help other women?
I am sorry. If the charges are true, this was over 14 years ago. If he sexually harassed two women, those two women should have been concerned about the other women who could be sexually harassed over the last 14 years. They were silent that whole time. And they were happy to take money and be silent, they were happy to sell their silence for money. I really think this is a story that should have been handled better.
At present, he is saying that they need to produce his accusers and I happen to agree with that. Sorry. If it is the two women, they need to come forward right now. They will lose their money? They should have stuck to what they agreed to in the 90s. If it is not the two women, if it was someone over negotiations, they need to come forward as well.
These are charges that are over a decade old and I have never known someone to be able to make a charge like this without coming forward. This really is ridiculous.
This morning, I heard about the story on Morning Edition (NPR) and grew interested in mainly when the POLITICO reporter Jonathan Martin insisted that Herman Cain refused to answer questions and then, as the interview concluded, Mr. Marting did the same. Excerpt:
INSKEEEP: Have there been stories surrounding Herman Cain, of this sort, for while? Is that what got you going on in?
MARTIN: I think interesting question, Steve. You know, in the campaign's response to us - their first response to us - they said that these were old and tired allegations. That was just actually news to me, because I hadn't heard them before, you know, until the last few weeks when we started working on this story. So, you know, I think if you talk to some folks in and around the Restaurant Association, they've heard so much before, but it was news to me.
INSKEEEP: Jonathan Martin is a reporter for Politico. Thanks very much.Did you notice that Mr. Inskeep's question was not answered? Mr. Martin insisted it was "interesting" and then proceeded to basically ignore it.
And click here for Cain offering his version of events.
This is C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot" for today: