I haven't had a chance to jot down my thoughts on the Politico-Cain story, where Politico and the LSM have attempted to create a storm out of a non-issue or minor issue at best.
Articles based solely on anonymous sources are almost never credible, and almost always at least partly false. Add to that, that the details given are vague, that the settlements were in the five-digit figure which in the 90's was considered a very low settlement, and you find yourself wondering why they are attempting to make a mountain out of a molehill.
Doug at C4P wrote an excellent piece explaining amongst other points, the importance of having all conservatives to defend Cain even if one isn't supporting him for the general election. Which is the exact scenario I'm in as I'm still undecided, and I agree wholeheartedly with his viewpoint. He also explains the racist aspect and the possible sources behind the leak.
John R. Guardiano of ResCon1 has written a great article, loaded with links, expressing the sentiments many of us feel regarding the baseless attempt at character assassination, and much much more. Here's a sneak preview, and make sure to click on his name for the entire article!
I say this because, as Robert Stacy McCain has observed, Politico has presented no real and discernable evidence against Cain. The charges, such as they are, are so vague and lacking in specificity that they could include even innocuous behavior which no reasonable person would find objectionable.
And of course, we have no way of knowing whether the charges are credible because Cain’s accusers are being protected by a cloak of anonymity.
This may be standard journalistic practice, but it’s also highly unethical in my opinion: Concealing the identities of the accusers allows them to level ruinous charges against high-profile figures, but without ever having to subject themselves and their allegations to critical scrutiny.
Yet, it’s a basic principle of American justice (enshrined in the Sixth Amendment) that the accused has a right to confront his accuser.
Then, too, there is something called the statute of limitations: The charges against Cain date back at least a dozen years, Stacy notes. And the passage of time and distance make it increasingly difficult to gauge whether these charges were and are legitimate.
In addition to the statue of limitations, another point to ponder is that he isn't even being accused of actually committing or even attempting to commit a sexual crime. His one-time gesture simply made the accuser feel uncomfortable and harassed.