There's a third woman. A radio show host says Cain made awkward comments to his staff. PJ Media released details and added corrections. The lawyer comes out and then shuts up. Cain's staff starts firing indiscriminately--blaming Rick Perry and people associated with him, then walks it back, as well as playing the race card.
So, my $0.02 on where we're at now, and how we got here.
This was "gotcha" journalism at its worst, done by Politico. Cain's team knew this story was coming for 10 days, a legitimate criticism in how they handled it. But, how can you respond to someone when they only give you bits and pieces of details? No one has been named, due to the confidentiality agreement, and apparently Cain doesn't even have a copy of it. My observation? Politico tried to trickle out details, hoping Cain's team would take the bait, then follow that up with "well, that's not what we have, because here's more details."
Racism behind the allegations? To a certain extent. It is fair to assume that liberals and their media lapdogs do not want successful conservative minorities and women. Evidence? Ask Clarence Thomas, Condoleezza Rice, Sarah Palin, Marco Rubio, for starters. If this is a smear job and there is no proof to back up the claims, you can assume there may be some racial motivation, in a form of another "high tech lynching." However, if there is any truth to the allegations, that is not racism, and playing the race card is not a defense for bad behavior.
Cain's team has not handled this well, as the story changed several times on the first day, then it was blaming Rick Perry and some consultants linked to him. The way they've handled these claims alone wouldn't hurt him, but when you add it to the mistakes mistteps Cain has made almost every other day on the campaign trail, it can raise doubts in one's mind as to if the campaign and candidate have a disciplined, consistent message.
Who's behind it? Since the other night, I've heard the names Rick Perry, Rahm "Dead Fish" Emmanuel, and Karl Rove come up. I could be wrong, but I still don't think it would be Perry. If I were a betting person, I would bet this was leaked to Politico from establishment, Country Club Republican types who look down on conservatives and the Tea Party. They are pushing and have anointed a candidate who would alienate the conservative vote, should he become the nominee. Does that narrow it down?
Professor Jacobson at Legal Insurrection writes that the National Restaurant Association should release everything or nothing at all. I agree. Something this serious shouldn't be a death by 1,000 paper cuts, and it would give Cain a chance to know the allegations against him and respond. If he cannot make his case, then the voters should decide if they need to move on.
Bob Owens also has more:
After the “high-tech lynching” of Clarence Thomas and the Rathergate memo debacle, the public is less forgiving of the MSM and Democratic Party, which have both seen their credibility take a string of significant hits in recent years as their alignment and agenda-sharing has become more transparent. It appears that Republican voters are taking a wait-and-see approach to see if the charges against Cain seem to have merit.
Plus, it seems the media is more interested in reporting these details in a slow manner, thus to distract from the rapes and rioting at the Obama-endorsed OccupyWallStreet, as well as the Regime's scandals called Operation Fast & Furious and Solyndra.