Oh boy.
This is a pattern of denial I’ve seen before with Cain. He misspeaks, and when called on it, he refuses to admit it, and digs himself into a deeper hole by changing his story. I don’t enjoy having to report this:
Via USA Today:
Presidential candidate Herman Cain said Tuesday that he never changed his story about sexual harassment allegations against him in the 1990s while he was the head of the National Restaurant Association, despite giving a series of conflicting statements in the two days since the accusations were disclosed.
A day earlier, Cain had said he was unaware of a financial settlement given a female employee in connection with allegations Cain had engaged in inappropriate sexual behavior. He later acknowledged he was aware of an “agreement” but not a settlement.
“It was an agreement. So it looked like I had changed my story. I didn’t change my story,” Cain told CNN’s Headline News. “The difference between settlement and agreement, it makes a difference to me.”
No, in his Fox News interview with Jenna Lee, yesterday morning, Cain said:
When Jenna Lee asked whether there was any sort of settlement, Cain stressed that if there were, he was not aware of it. If the Restaurant Association made a settlement, Cain said, “I wasn’t even aware of it and I hope it wasn’t for much because nothing happened.”
Later on The Greta Van Susteren Show, he said:
The charge was filed. They did investigate. It was found to be baseless. And yes, there was some sort of settlement or termination, and I don’t even know what the contents of that was. Since it was found baseless, there was no big settlement or it would have had to have come to me.
He says, “keep your seatbelts fastened and your tray back tables in the full upright position, because this ride is still far from over”:
In a very short period of time, Herman Cain did what can only fairly be called a complete reversal in his story, contrary to the well intentioned protests from his supporters. The candidate went from saying that he had no knowledge of any such settlement, and he “hoped” that the payout wasn’t very large, to saying that he was aware of some sort of payment, to providing details of what he thought the payment might have been. (This was all in the same day after he’d been given ten days notice to prepare, but more on that below.) This culminated on Tuesday morning with an interview with Robin Meade on CNN Headline News Morning Express where he made a truly floundering attempt to claim that he was answering the questions correctly based on the difference between a “settlement” and an “agreement.”
This was one of the most transparently evasive moments of the entire saga. Even for those of you claiming that Cain is such a keen legal eagle that he was drawing a proper legal distinction between the terms, (and it’s already starting) the problem should be clear. Were that the case, Cain knew that he was talking to reporters feeding a general audience, not grading somebody’s LSAT essay. Even under those circumstances, the proper answer might have been, “There was no settlement that I know of, but there was an agreement by the board which resulted in a payment to end this matter, even though the complaint had no merit.”
Nice Deb 
Cain has been consistant, categorically denying any sexual harassment allegations. He tries to give totally honest accounts of events and correct any statements he made where he made a mistake, or had not accurately remembered events when answering questions. The difference between Herman Cain and the average smooth-talking politician: the politician will not make an effort to correct their mistakes and will not discuss an issue where their words or actions are under scrutiny until they have a well-crafted answer that does not (in some cases) even address the actual issue or their previous statements and mistakes. Herman Cain is not an attorney and does not speak evasively as an attorney or life-long politician. The majority of politicians are attorneys and when answering difficult questions or addressing issues they are not comfortable with, they will often provide a well-crafted statement indicative of a lawyer who does not wish to discuss the topic. This is not an indictment of lawyers or politicians; both groups are made up of individuals, with individual personalities, values, and experiences.
The gist is this: Herman Cain is a down-to-earth, decent, man of faith, and an honest and real person.
LikeLike
Pingback: Herman Cain Admits to Sexual Harassment Settlements | One Blue Stocking
Since this saga began the hair on the back of my neck has been standing at attention. My spidey sense told me that this was an attempt to throw something against the wall hoping something might stick in order to stain his reputation enough to hurt him and his candidacy sufficiently to make some people re-think their support and deflate supporters. Although I was happy that he directly answered questions about it I cringed when he mentioned he didn’t know the details of the settlement. I cringed because an “average Joe” like me would know every detail about every false allegation that had been made against me and he had ten days to find out if he didn’t remember the specifics which is possible for someone in his position back in the nineties who probably had to deal with this kind of stuff almost as much as signing a payroll. He’s a conservative black man running for the Republican nomination for President. His staff MUST know that he won’t get a pass on anything and on the contrary the media will have a feeding frenzy on anything they can get their hands on and their goal would be to concentrate on his reaction to bullshit as opposed to the fact that he didn’t do it or the truth. And that’s what’s happening. My advice would be to get every conceivable fact on the situations, make a statement, answer questions to the best of your ability without parsing words and then drop it. The increase in contributions after the story broke is nothing more than your supporters showing support, loyalty, and a way to say “screw you” to the liberal media. They’re not the ones this whole thing was supposed to affect and the reality of the situation is that if it is not handled properly the media’s goal to sour prospective supporters of a minority candidate who dispels their myths about self-reliance will have been accomplished.
LikeLike