plane:
<<First of all Clinton was not accused of giving women what they asked for, he was accused of lewdly exposing himself and lewd harrassment. His trial that "aquitted " him is where he admittedly committed purjury, which in my estimation puts a rotten spot on the aquittal.>>
The topic is Herman Cain and his fitness to be the GOP's Presidential candidate in 2012. Can you explain how Clinton's past actions (two of which the House didn't even pass on to the Senate and two of which the Senate found him guilty of nothing) relate in any way to Cain's fitness to hold office?
All four allegations against Clinton were submitted to the proper fora and dismissed. NONE of Cain's actions were submitted to any forum and the only investigation of them remains buried. Common sense applied to what facts are available, tells us that he was in fact guilty as charged - - he was gone from office within two or maximum three months of the first claim being filed, there were two separate complainants and a third who did not file formally, his story about the events has changed several times since the matter came up and, contrary to his earlier claims, the total settlement value was about 80K, a fairly hefty settlement where no physical contact occurred and no substantial harm was alleged. On the settlement that Bennett's client obtained, TWO lawyers for the Association signed, in addition to Bennett and his client. The inclusion of a non-disparagement clause indicates that the Association did in fact undertake to look after the old Hermster's interests, which makes it all but impossible for Herm the Perv NOT to have signed some kind of authorization approving the settlement, lodged either with the Association or its insurers, depending on who assumed responsibility for dealing with the claim in the first place.
Contrary to what you have written, Clinton has NEVER admitted to perjury, nor has any legal representative authorized to represent him at any time.
<<Herman Cain is not even accused of half so much , and not by half so many.>>
Clinton's impeachment arose out of litigation dealing with the Paula Jones accusations, in which Clinton made statements regarding his affair with Monica. I count two accusers. Cain was formally charged by two female employees and a third had also alleged sexual harassment without formally filing a complaint. That makes three. Cain's three accusers cover a relatively short period of time within which he served as the NRA's CEO. The accusations against Clinton span a much wider time frame, from his Governorship of Arkansas to the end of his second Presidential term of office.
<<Most of what you wrote depends on assumptions on the competance, professionalism , honesty and common sense of the US business class , which I just don't share with you.>>
How ironic. In all your other posts, you praise to the skies the expertise of private enterprise and exalt its vast superiority in doing anything that government can do. According to your cockamamie theorizing, the investigation of a private-enterprise entity like the NRA ought to be vastly superior to any effort made by the FBI, CIA, DC District Police, Homeland Security or any other arm of the government. But here you are, wracked with doubt over the ability of the ability of private enterprise to conduct a simple he-said-she-said investigation and come to any sensible conclusions about it.
plane, let me reassure you. The investigation of these claims is not rocket science. They are more common than you would like to think. There is no physical evidence to be examined and analyzed, no stains on blue dresses. There are no documents to be authenticated and then interpreted and explained. It is a simple he-says-she-says kind of case - - videotaped interviews, signed statements to be obtained, maybe some photos of the locations, polygraphs perhaps and a little background investigation of the principal parties. Something that any half-assed PI agency does every fucking day. In all probability the old Hermster himself authorized the settlement for reasons previously given, two lawyers acting for the employer signed it, and to this day to my knowledge the employer has never repudiated the settlement or attacked its lawyers for incompetence, negligence, corruption or any other wrongful representation. Herm the Perv's ass was out the door within two to three months (max) of the first claim being filed.
In his later explanations of these events, the Perv first denied that any settlement had been reached, THEN acknowledged that he had known about an AGREEEEEEMENT, but not about any SETTLEMENT (and attempted to edify us on the tiny but apparently significant differences in meaning) then estimated the total amount at a few thousand bucks representing a few months' wages as severance pay and then conceded that the actual settlement had been about 80K for TWO claims.
Now, plane, there are only two ways that all this could have happened:
1. Herm the Perv, though pure and innocent as the driven snow, had had the incredible bad luck to be accused, not just by one, but by TWO evil lying whores, by some unfortunate coincidence found on his company's payroll, backed up by a third evil lying whore, who had also found her way onto the payroll, of sexual harassment which was followed by the additional bad luck of an incredibly botched investigation perhaps undertaken by the boss's teenage nephew on summer vacation and overseen by at least TWO corporate counsel who were also total incompetents, morons or paid off by plaintiff's attorney Bennett, all of which resulted in an 80K settlement which the executives of the Association were just too evil or incompetent or stupid to see was a travesty, and he also lost his job as a result of this forest of evil, lies and incompetence that surrounded him. OR
2. The system functioned pretty much as intended, the women who courageously came forward and complained were honestly motivated by insult and resentment at Herm the Perv's persistent unwanted advances, an investigation was made by reasonably competent investigators, reviewed by two reasonably competent corporate counsel who made recommendations to the Association's board, which reviewed and with or without changes, approved the settlement in its final form, bit the bullet and paid the 80K and told The Perv to get his ass in gear and remove himself and his overheated pecker from their premises ASAP.
Now plane, nobody but God knows what really happened, but we mortals have to draw our conclusions as best we can from the known facts. I tend to believe that whatever minor errors could have been committed along the way, and certainly in a human process one will find human error, that Scenario 2 is just a lot more probable than Scenario 1. If I were to be shown any particular evidence pointing to major incompetence on the part of the Association's investigators, or its counsel, or its Board, then I might lean more towards Scenario 1. If I had reason to believe that the complainants were women of bad character, money-driven lying whores, then I might be moved more towards Scenario 1. If Cain had told one straight, consistent, accurate story from the beginning, I might be less attracted to Scenario 2. But given all the known facts, Scenario 2 seems to be the only logical conclusion that would occur to sane, logical folk who are not ideologically driven right-wing fanatics.
Is Scenario 1 impossible? Theoretically not, but to believe in it, one has to accept one improbability piled on another, piled on another, piled on another. Everybody involved, except Herm the Perv, has to be lying, incompetent, stupid or corrupt. Everybody. The perfect storm. But for Scenario 2 to occur, we only need ONE person to stand off the beaten path, and that's the old Hermster. I'm not going to use the Occam's Razor argument here, though it might apply - - but all I am saying is that plane's theory of what happened just seems to require a "perfect storm" of evil, incompetence, ignorance and/or corruption that just makes it a million-to-one shot.
<< I think highly placed professional businessmen are just as liable to be craven and foolish as anyone elese, what they chose to do might be quite diffrent than a good decdision and might also be diffrent than what Herman Cain would do.>>
Don't you realize HOW MANY people would have to be "craven and foolish" as well as lying and dishonest in order for all this to add up to a sequence of complaints (by three victims,) investigation, review, deliberation and payment? It's NOT a one-man snap decision, you know.
Besides, don't you also think that "highly placed professional businessmen" (Cain for example) are just as liable to be horny and obnoxious as anyone else?
What's interesting to me is that, as a committed conservative ideologue, you can cling to the illusion of The Perv's innocence in the face of all known fact, logic and common sense. It's like, "Don't confuse me with the facts, my mind's already made up." Fact and logic really DO mean nothing at all to you people. You'll go down with the ship.
Fortunately the American people seem to have a lot more common sense than you guys do, and the sexual harassment disclosures are already starting to push down the Perv's numbers considerably. In here, I really do get the sense that the inmates have taken over the asylum, while back in the real world, it doesn't seem all that bad.
