Yes, the three stories on ABC, NBC and CBS were broadcast after the breaking news story appeared in the Wall Street Journal.
No.
What it proves is that contrary to the claims that those incidents broke before the Internet and then, after the goalposts moved, before there was much of an Internet, that there was indeed a significant Internet. Otherwise, how could Drudge have broken the Lewinsky scandal which happened during the same time period. While you claim you worked in the computer field and can vouch that there was not much of an Internet, many of the rest of us were using the Internet daily during that same time. Good try, but fail on your part. The OP makes a significant observation and the idea that the Internet was not available to break those storeies has been debunked, thanks to Matt Drudge's journalistic contribution during that time period.Drudge had nothing to do with any of the scandals in the OP. Your failure is complete. I have had enough of this nonsense, and I hope others just simply ignore your semantic games. tootles
APPLE:
BILL CLINTON: "I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky ..."
ORANGE:
HERMAN CAIN: "The charge was filed. They did investigate. It was found to be baseless. And yes, there was some sort of settlement or termination, and I don't even know what the contents of that was. Since it was found baseless, there was no big settlement or it would have had to have come to me."
.
TerranceL said:
Cain has used the term "recused". I found it curious and am not even sure it's applicable to the situation. Still, it seems to capture the essence of Cain's assertion that he stayed out of it. Sounds like good business practice to me ... after all, he couldn't objectively adjudicate himself.
What I read it that at least one settlement occurred after he had stepped down as CEO of the National Restaurant Association.
But he wasn't part of the settlement. It sounds as though the suit was brought against him as a representative of the company rather than him personally (it is not illegal for a person to sexually harass someone in the same way as it is illegal for a company or a company's representative to do so). Since he was a high-ranking officer, the lawyers may have deliberately shielded him from having knowledge. Plus, as he was no longer with the company at settlement time, he wouldn't have access to the legal documents which were sealed with the participants barred from public disclosure.
Yes, that's what it means. Also if she ever had a traffic ticket that means she's a dirty liar not to be trusted.
