The Media Can Destroy Anyone If They Really Want To

[Sallow]

On the face of it, even if true, it was settled business. And it really has nothing to do with Cain's ability to govern.

It has plenty to do with his ability to get elected.

But whatcha gonna do?

And why is that? If true, apparently the woman didn't think this was bad enough to pursue, until now. I can understand the bit about Anita Hill and Clarence Thomas, because, he was going to be actually dealing with laws pertaining to sexual harrassment. And she actually testified.

In any case, "famous" people are subject to this kind of nonsense quite a bit.

 

[mudwhistle]

The people in this country should be VERY upset at what OUR MEDIA is doing to Herman Cain to DESTROY HIM..

they are using UNNAMED accusers against him from 20 years ago...He doesn't STAND a chance to confront this story BECAUSE of a confidentiality clause.

People should cancel their subscriptions of the WashingtonCompost and BOYCOTT Politico..Let them know we are TIRED OF this shit.

You're in luck! Apparently he himself has already broken the confidentially clause so that will mean the women will be free to speak.

Bring it on!

In what way did he break the clause??

By saying the charges are baseless????

 

[Truthmatters]

By talking about the women and the case.

If they are not allowed to talk do you think he is?

 

[Ravi]

The people in this country should be VERY upset at what OUR MEDIA is doing to Herman Cain to DESTROY HIM..

they are using UNNAMED accusers against him from 20 years ago...He doesn't STAND a chance to confront this story BECAUSE of a confidentiality clause.

People should cancel their subscriptions of the WashingtonCompost and BOYCOTT Politico..Let them know we are TIRED OF this shit.

You're in luck! Apparently he himself has already broken the confidentially clause so that will mean the women will be free to speak.

Bring it on!

In what way did he break the clause??

By saying the charges are baseless????

By discussing a portion of the claim and by making disparaging remarks.

Remember, he said that part of the complaint was that he stood close to a woman and told her she was physically similar to his wife....that is discussing the details of the claim.

 

[mudwhistle]

By talking about the women and the case.

If they are not allowed to talk do you think he is?

He is not calling them out by name.

They have called him out by name however.

Who broke the agreement?

 

[mudwhistle]

You're in luck! Apparently he himself has already broken the confidentially clause so that will mean the women will be free to speak.

Bring it on!

In what way did he break the clause??

By saying the charges are baseless????

By discussing a portion of the claim and by making disparaging remarks.

Remember, he said that part of the complaint was that he stood close to a woman and told her she was physically similar to his wife....that is discussing the details of the claim.

Cause and reaction.

A claim was made and he has the right to respond in his defense.

Once again, the fact that someone leaked his name is the issue here. You can't do that and then expect him to STFU and take it.

 

[mudwhistle]

Something has to be done about the media.

They can pull any stunt, ruin people's lives, make shit up and still get away with it.

 

[whitehall]

It used to be that way before the internet and before talk radio and a fair and balanced viewpoint on TV. Think about how it was when Cronkite was king and a couple of reporters on the Washington Post could write fiction and bring down the president. How could people trust stories based on an unidentified source alleged to be within the White House the media jokingly called "deep throat"? People believed anything in print. If you want to go back even further you could understand how the president of the United States could get away with issuing an order for the Army to round up innocent US citizens of Japanese descent and place them behind barbed wire. The biased media controlled information and opinion and they said it was OK..

 

[mudwhistle]

It used to be that way before the internet and before talk radio and a fair and balanced viewpoint on TV. Think about how it was when Cronkite was king and a couple of reporters on the Washington Post could write fiction and bring down the president. How could people trust stories based on an unidentified source alleged to be within the White House the media jokingly called "deep throat"? People believed anything in print. If you want to go back even further you could understand how the president of the United States could get away with issuing an order for the Army to round up innocent US citizens of Japanese descent and place them behind barbed wire. The biased media controlled information and opinion and they said it was OK..

As long as you need a degree to be a member of the Drivebys you will always get a liberal slant.

Our colleges and universities are the source of Liberalism.

 

[manifold]

Mudmissile is partly correct and speaks from experience. The media long ago destroyed his ability to think for himself.

Sad.

But whatcha gonna do?

 

[Ravi]

Something has to be done about the media.

They can pull any stunt, ruin people's lives, make shit up and still get away with it.

Yeah, maybe we should repeal the first amendment.

They haven't made anything up. Cain had sexual harassment claims brought against him.

 

[Truthmatters]

All this concern from the right about the media smearing candidates,

They love it when Fox spreads lies about our president though

 

[mudwhistle]

All this concern from the right about the media smearing candidates,

They love it when Fox spreads lies about our president though

Actually the media is smearing them too....at the behest of the President.

He's been at war with Fox from Day One.

I wish he would work that hard to bring the jobs back.

 

[Leweman]

Who cares about this? We have precedent for presidents who sexualy harrass women. It's not a disqualification by any strectch of the imagination.

 

[mudwhistle]

Who cares about this? We have precedent for presidents who sexualy harrass women. It's not a disqualification by any strectch of the imagination.

It's all about suppressing the GOP vote.