have a listen herebytchearseNovember 3 2011, 13:05:47 UTC
www.marklevinshow.com, last night's show. S. calls him "the angry guy" because he get passionate and raises his voice. But then, he's a lawyer in his day job, so...
Anyhow, he gave a pretty good analysis from a legal standpoint, including many facts that "reporters" haven't seemed to locate yet, like how Cain *can't* "waive his right to" whatever of something he's not a party to: The legal case in question was between women claiming harassment and the Nat'l. Restaurant Ass'n. not Herman Cain personally. Little "details" like that make this whole thing fishy.
Of course, I've been saying that Romney leaked all this via "ananymous" sources, but it appears that Cain's campaign has reason to believe otherwise since they'ce publicly called on Perry to apologize!
Agreed: Cain is the pick of a shitty lot but it says how scared both R and D are of him with the lengths being taken to discredit him...
I seem to remember (and went back and did a little research) that most folks in his "base" went pretty light on the castigation. Hell, you can still dig up old NOW pronouncements on it. And while there are some "pro-forma" statements about how inappropriate it was (is) for that kind of thing, they went much lighter on him than they would have (and did) in other instances.
I'm not defending Cain; the anecdotal evidence at the moment seems pretty damning. If it was just one assertion, I'd be more likely to believe it's jut a political attack. But it's pretty clear there was something to be upset over if there were legal agreements and severance packages attached.
Maybe my closing sentence is more to the point...what do we expect from our politicians? If we want saints, it's going to be a long wait. (And frankly, isn't a fair standard.)
Comments 3
Anyhow, he gave a pretty good analysis from a legal standpoint, including many facts that "reporters" haven't seemed to locate yet, like how Cain *can't* "waive his right to" whatever of something he's not a party to: The legal case in question was between women claiming harassment and the Nat'l. Restaurant Ass'n. not Herman Cain personally. Little "details" like that make this whole thing fishy.
Of course, I've been saying that Romney leaked all this via "ananymous" sources, but it appears that Cain's campaign has reason to believe otherwise since they'ce publicly called on Perry to apologize!
Agreed: Cain is the pick of a shitty lot but it says how scared both R and D are of him with the lengths being taken to discredit him...
Reply
Reply
I'm not defending Cain; the anecdotal evidence at the moment seems pretty damning. If it was just one assertion, I'd be more likely to believe it's jut a political attack. But it's pretty clear there was something to be upset over if there were legal agreements and severance packages attached.
Maybe my closing sentence is more to the point...what do we expect from our politicians? If we want saints, it's going to be a long wait. (And frankly, isn't a fair standard.)
Reply
Leave a comment