In the court of public opinion, the burden of proof is extremely low. Herman Cain’s accuser, Sharon Bialek, claims he grabbed her inappropriately more than a decade ago – and her story is convincing. But is she a trustworthy source?
Information is already coming out that could potentially raise questions about her motives. For example, she has a history of financial troubles and legal accusations:
Records show she twice has filed for personal bankruptcy, first in 1991 and then again in 2001. In the latter case, she claimed $5,700 in assets and more than $36,000 in liabilities. Among the creditors seeking payment was a management firm demanding back rent of $4,500, four credit card companies and a lawyer asking for his legal fees.
After the case was discharged, she accused a former boyfriend of harassing her for repayment of a loan, court records in the bankruptcy case show.
Bialek says she wasn’t paid to come forward, but of course there could be other financial benefits of doing so, including compensation for interviews. But so far that doesn’t seem to be Bialek’s goal. She’s told the entire story, all for free during a press conference, and has been making the rounds on daytime news programs that don’t pay for interviews.
A radio host who met Bialek at a Tea Party rally that Cain spoke at recently also recalled Bialek hugging the presidential candidate:
The encounter: “It looked sort of flirtatious,” said [WIND radio co-host] Amy Jacobson. “I mean they were hugging. But she could have been giving him the kiss of death for all I know. I had no idea what they were talking about, but she was inches from his ear.”
The rendezvous: Sharon also said she was anxious to meet Cain again and had once gone to an afterparty with him and her boyfriend years ago. “But she never mentioned he had sexually harassed her.”
The hugging detail is strange, but then again, Bialek has seemed more upset about Cain allegedly lying than she has about the actual sexual harassment allegations – she even said earlier today that she might consider voting for him if he came clean.
Beyond that, these reports are an example of legitimate inquiries into Bialek’s past. She deserves to be vetted. Whatever happened between Bialek and Cain, waiting 14 years to come out with the charges – during a presidential election – was her decision.
Unfortunately, some Cain supporters have taken the criticism of Bialek to another level entirely by engaging in personal, sexist attacks. This was deplorable when Clinton’s supporters did it to his accusers, and it shouldn’t be tolerated by conservatives today.
