Cain changes his story

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guns Guns Guns
  • Start date Start date
G

Guns Guns Guns

Guest
herman_cain25_1306704600.jpg



“As I thought about it and thought about it, I did recall an agreement with the lady who left who made the false accusations,” Mr. Cain said, speaking in an interview with the Laura Ingraham radio program. “When I was initially hit with this and trying to stay focused on my day, I didn’t recall that. So yes, there was an agreement that I later added to my explanation.”



http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/11/01/cain-accuser-wants-to-come-forward/
 
He said this today:

“I didn't change my story,” Cain said. “I just simply got the wording right.”


I HAZ TEH LOLZ
 
tinfoil said:
He said this today:

“I didn't change my story,” Cain said. “I just simply got the wording right.”


I HAZ TEH LOLZ
Click to expand...

In an interview, just now, about the matter with Ken Blackwell and Roland Martin, on Anderson Cooper 360, they both agreed that this whole incident is not about race, racism, or the playing of "race cards", but of how Cain bungled his initial response, instead of admitting, up front, that the allegation, though untrue in his eyes, was real and that a settlement, which he knew about, had been made. Counter to what Herman Cain said on Fox News tonight, that the hits he's taking is due to racism, from sources on the left or perhaps even on the right.
 
Yurt said:
he didn't change his story
Click to expand...


Sure he did. First, he wasn't aware of any settlement. Then he was. Then the settlement was just an agreement. And today her attorney has come forward and said that yes, there as a settlement, but that she cannot tell her side of the story due to a confidentiality provision that she has requested the NRA formally waive so she can tell her side of the story without the threat of litigation.

And first he didn't remember anything, and then he remembered only the thing about the woman's height and then he remembered the thing about the woman's height and some other non-specific "ridiculous" allegations.

He has changed his story. You can chalk it up to recovered memory if you want to be charitable, but pretending he didn't change his story is ridiculous.
 
Cornholio said:
Sure he did. First, he wasn't aware of any settlement. Then he was. Then the settlement was just an agreement. And today her attorney has come forward and said that yes, there as a settlement, but that she cannot tell her side of the story due to a confidentiality provision that she has requested the NRA formally waive so she can tell her side of the story without the threat of litigation.

And first he didn't remember anything, and then he remembered only the thing about the woman's height and then he remembered the thing about the woman's height and some other non-specific "ridiculous" allegations.

He has changed his story. You can chalk it up to recovered memory if you want to be charitable, but pretending he didn't change his story is ridiculous.
Click to expand...

right.....so now not remembering and then remembering is "changing" your story

you need more than TP for your bunghole dungheap
 
Yurt said:
right.....so now not remembering and then remembering is "changing" your story

you need more than TP for your bunghole dungheap
Click to expand...


Yes, it is. You're, like, a lawyer or something, aren't you. Let's say you take a deposition of someone and as to a question critical to your case, the witness testifes that he doesn't remember. Then, many months later at trial the same witness suddenly has a memory and testifies at length about the very thing that previously he didn't remember. Is it your position that the person hasn't changed his story? If so, I hope you aren't a trial lawyer.
 
Yurt said:
he didn't change his story
Click to expand...

he revised it a few times as he recalled past actions

this goes to show how unprepared he was and how unprofessional his staff is

politico tried for a week and a half to get a response from cain or his staff and received no response

this error or unprofessionalism by his staff may seriously undermine cain's campaign

cain needs a staff that will prepare him for things like this and make sure that he is thoroughly vetted
 
Cornholio said:
Sure he did. First, he wasn't aware of any settlement. Then he was. Then the settlement was just an agreement. And today her attorney has come forward and said that yes, there as a settlement, but that she cannot tell her side of the story due to a confidentiality provision that she has requested the NRA formally waive so she can tell her side of the story without the threat of litigation.

And first he didn't remember anything, and then he remembered only the thing about the woman's height and then he remembered the thing about the woman's height and some other non-specific "ridiculous" allegations.

He has changed his story. You can chalk it up to recovered memory if you want to be charitable, but pretending he didn't change his story is ridiculous.
Click to expand...

Recalling details of a 12 yr. old happening surprises you ?....Add those details to a story is "changing" the story....?


Whatever the details...there was no "settlement" as there would be in court ordered payment.....there was an agreement with the women and the NRA about money which could called a termination payment or termination settlement.....or ....... a resignation payment or settlement....

call it whatever you want....whatever floats you boat....no big deal...
 
Cornholio said:
Yes, it is. You're, like, a lawyer or something, aren't you. Let's say you take a deposition of someone and as to a question critical to your case, the witness testifes that he doesn't remember. Then, many months later at trial the same witness suddenly has a memory and testifies at length about the very thing that previously he didn't remember. Is it your position that the person hasn't changed his story? If so, I hope you aren't a trial lawyer.
Click to expand...

no. you obviously no zero about testimony. it is called refreshing your memory. it is not called changing your story.

that someone doesn't remember something from YEARS prior and then has their memory refreshed happens all the time.

go find a single trial lawyer that says when they had to refresh a witness who said they couldn't remember, that they changed their testimony. the testimony is the same, the only difference is, the memory is refreshed. stated a simpler way for you, if i claim i don't remember something now, say a claim i made, and then you cite where i made that claim, that does not change the fact or story that at the time i did not remember making that claim.

good lord, this is basic logic. you don't need a law degree to understand this stuff dung.
 
Yurt said:
no. you obviously no zero about testimony. it is called refreshing your memory. it is not called changing your story.

that someone doesn't remember something from YEARS prior and then has their memory refreshed happens all the time.

go find a single trial lawyer that says when they had to refresh a witness who said they couldn't remember, that they changed their testimony. the testimony is the same, the only difference is, the memory is refreshed. stated a simpler way for you, if i claim i don't remember something now, say a claim i made, and then you cite where i made that claim, that does not change the fact or story that at the time i did not remember making that claim.

good lord, this is basic logic. you don't need a law degree to understand this stuff dung.
Click to expand...


Of course it happens all the time, but it doesn't mean that the story hasn't changed and that the change in story doesn't affect credibility.
 
bravo said:
Recalling details of a 12 yr. old happening surprises you ?....Add those details to a story is "changing" the story....?


Whatever the details...there was no "settlement" as there would be in court ordered payment.....there was an agreement with the women and the NRA about money which could called a termination payment or termination settlement.....or ....... a resignation payment or settlement....

call it whatever you want....whatever floats you boat....no big deal...
Click to expand...


A settlement is not a court ordered payment. And one year of salary for a relatively low-level employee sure sounds like a settlement as opposed to severance.
 
Cornholio said:
Of course it happens all the time, but it doesn't mean that the story hasn't changed and that the change in story doesn't affect credibility.
Click to expand...

reread what i posted

tell me...how is it not remembering something and then getting refreshed....changing your story.
 
Schadenfreude said:
he revised it a few times as he recalled past actions

this goes to show how unprepared he was and how unprofessional his staff is

politico tried for a week and a half to get a response from cain or his staff and received no response

this error or unprofessionalism by his staff may seriously undermine cain's campaign

cain needs a staff that will prepare him for things like this and make sure that he is thoroughly vetted
Click to expand...

Or how bogus and unimportant the allegations are.........
 
Cornholio said:
A settlement is not a court ordered payment. And one year of salary for a relatively low-level employee sure sounds like a settlement as opposed to severance.
Click to expand...


Its quite irrelevant what it "sounds" like to you.....

I've seen "low level" employees get more than 2 years severance................. it depends on the length of service rather than the level of employment
 
Yurt said:
reread what i posted

tell me...how is it not remembering something and then getting refreshed....changing your story.
Click to expand...


Look, it's fine for you to think he didn't change his story. I'm OK with that. It seems quite obvious to me that he did.
 
poet said:
In an interview, just now, about the matter with Ken Blackwell and Roland Martin, on Anderson Cooper 360, they both agreed that this whole incident is not about race, racism, or the playing of "race cards", but of how Cain bungled his initial response, instead of admitting, up front, that the allegation, though untrue in his eyes, was real and that a settlement, which he knew about, had been made. Counter to what Herman Cain said on Fox News tonight, that the hits he's taking is due to racism, from sources on the left or perhaps even on the right.
Click to expand...

So "severence pay" is now considered to be a "settlement".
Nice to see how the Liberals want to rewrite definitions.
 
I think you're all being somewhat harsh on Herman Caines.

Who here can put hand on heart and say we haven't forgotten some sexual harassment allegations in our past? We busy chaps can't be expected to remember everything, you know? Birthdays, anniversaries, payments and confidentiality clauses made to silence a damaging sexual slur. Anyway, since the advent of political correctness one can't do anything without being accused of something or other. It's all "don't put your hands there" and "stop touching those". Some fancy lawyer once tried to tell me it was 'illegal' to put cameras in the women's toilets. Madness.

Give the man a break people. If Herman Caines says the allegations were ridiculous then i am inclined to believe him, at least until he remembers something else.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top