So we have an accusation against Herman Cain that is vague at best, if not deliberately obfuscatory. Here’s the accusation. Or, more precisely, the accusation of an accusation:
During Herman Cainâ€™s tenure as the head of the National Restaurant Association in the 1990s, at least two female employees complained to colleagues and senior association officials about inappropriate behavior by Cain, ultimately leaving their jobs at the trade group, multiple sources confirm to POLITICO.
The women complained of sexually suggestive behavior by Cain that made them angry and uncomfortable, the sources said, and they signed agreements with the restaurant group that gave them financial payouts to leave the association. The agreements also included language that bars the women from talking about their departures.
POLITICO has confirmed the identities of the two female restaurant association employees who complained about Cain but, for privacy concerns, is not publishing their names.
Okay then. Not only are these allegations important enough for Politico to publish, but they’re too important to allow anyone else to verify.
The story has four credited reporters, but the lead is Jonathan Martin. Courtesy of Newsbusters, here’s Martin on Morning Joe today, utterly refusing to make his case:
“We’re just not going to get into the details of exactly what happened with these women beside what’s in the story.”
Um… except there are no details in the story. Unless “a couple of women we won’t name have made accusations we’re not going to get into” is now considered a detail. Would that even pass muster in a gossip column? A blog, maybe…
So we don’t know specifically what Herman Cain stands accused of doing wrong, who’s accusing him, or how to verify any of it. Other than that, this is some solid reporting from Politico.
P.S. Here it is: THE BIG HERMAN CAIN BOMBSHELL. Wow, no wonder Jonathan Martin wanted to keep it a secret.