Herman Cain Faces Allegations of Sexual Harassment and "Hush Money"

Herman Cain, who has surged into one of the top spots for Republican presidential nominee since September, has recently had some potentially campaign-ending allegations levied against him. Two women, members of the National Association of Restaurants in the 1990’s, alleged that Herman Cain sexually harassed them using “sexually suggestive behavior” that made them angry and uncomfortable. The women signed a deal with the association in which they accepted separation packages to leave the association that apparently included a gag order that they never speak of the incidents.

POLITICO, who initially broke the story and has been investigating leads since, has repeatedly attempted to get the Cain Campaign’s response to the allegations of either sexual misconduct or the association’s financial settlement packages. The campaign has, thus far, refused to either deny or confirm the truth of the allegations. Instead, campaign spokesperson J.D. Gordon reported to POLITICO that the situations was resolved “amicably” by the association “many years ago”. “These are old and tired allegations that never stood up to the facts,” Gordon wrote in an email response.

 A tense confrontation with the candidate outside of CBS News yielded no new information but showed a clearly defensive Herman Cain. He evaded a number of questions about the allegations until the interviewer asked Cain, “Have you ever been accused, sir, in your life of harassment by a woman?” According to POLITICO, here was his response:

He breathed audibly, glared at the reporter and stayed silent for several seconds. After the question was repeated three times, he responded by asking the reporter, “Have you ever been accused of sexual harassment?”

Much of POLITICO’s information comes from a number of anonymous sources that were affiliated with the association in the 90’s. One former board member, on the subject of the financial separation packages, said, “She was offered a financial package to leave the association, and she did,” said the former board member. “What I took offense at was that it was clear that rather than deal with the issue, there was an effort to hush it up. She was offered a way out to keep quiet.”

The implications for Cain’s campaign are dire. Even allegations could discredit him with some social conservatives, and as the story continues to develop precious time a resources will be diverted to managing the message. Gordon accused Cain’s opponents of “dredging this up as part of a smear campaign meant to discredit a true patriot who is shaking up the political status quo.” Dismissing the allegations as political posturing may work in the short term, but very soon Cain’s campaign will need to come forward with a substantial address of the issues.