Cain Campaign Asks ‘Who is Sharon Bialek?’

sharon Cain Campaign Asks Who is Sharon Bialek?As a fifth woman emerged this morning accusing Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain of sexual harassment, the Cain Campaign is going into serious damage control mode over Woman #4–Sharon Bialek, who held forth at a crowded press conference at the Friars Club yesterday afternoon.

And by “damage control” we mean “question the motives of.”

“The fact is that Ms. Bialek has had a long and troubled history, from the courts to personal finances,” the Cain Campaign writes. “Which may help explain why she has come forward 14 years after an alleged incident with Mr. Cain, powered by celebrity attorney and long term Democrat donor Gloria Allred.”

They dig up seven separate lawsuits brought forth in Cook County by Ms. Bialek, and twice filed for personal bankruptcy.

And in an earlier email to The Politicker, Cain campaign spokesman JD Gordon tried to pin the blame on Gloria Allred, the “celebrity lawyer who specializes in generating publicity for herself and her clients.”

He notes that “Ms. Allred is a high-profile Democrat Party donor and activist who has given over ten thousand dollars to liberal Democrats like Barack Obama, Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer.”

Neither of these statements seem likely to endear Mr. Cain much to female voters, but they are posted below:

 

It is noteworthy that Gloria Allred is a celebrity lawyer who specializes in generating publicity for herself and her clients.

Ms. Allred is a high-profile Democrat Party donor and activist who has given over ten thousand dollars to liberal Democrats like Barack Obama, Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer.

The questions the media should be asking are who’s paying for Gloria Allred’s fee, how did Ms. Bialek get introduced to Ms. Allred, and was she paid to come forward with these false accusations or was she promised employment?

After attacking Herman Cain through anonymous accusers for a week, his opponents have now convinced a woman with a long history of severe financial difficulties, including personal bankruptcy, to falsely accuse the Republican frontrunner of events allegedly occurring well over a decade ago for which there is no record, nor even a complaint filed.

——————————————————————————————————————————–

 

As Ms. Sharon Bialek has placed herself in the public spotlight through making patently false allegations against Herman Cain, it is only fair to compare her track record alongside Mr. Cain’s.

In stark contrast to Mr. Cain’s four decades spent climbing the corporate ladder rising to the level of CEO at multiple successful business enterprises, Ms. Bialek has taken a far different path.

The fact is that Ms. Bialek has had a long and troubled history, from the courts to personal finances – which may help explain why she has come forward 14 years after an alleged incident with Mr. Cain, powered by celebrity attorney and long term Democrat donor Gloria Allred.

In the courts, Ms. Bialek has had a lengthy record in the Cook County Court system over various civil lawsuits. The following cases on file in Cook County are:

·         2000-M1-707461 Defendant against Broadcare Management

·         2000-M1-714398 Defendant in lawsuit against Broadcare Management

·         2000-M1-701522 Defendant in lawsuit against Broadcare Management

·         2005-M1-111072 Defendant in lawsuit against Mr. Mark Beatovic.

·         2007-M1-189176 Defendant in lawsuit against Midland Funding.

·         2009-M1-158826 Defendant in lawsuit against Illinois Lending.

Ms. Bialek was also sued in 1999 over a paternity matter according to ABC 7 Chicago (WLS-TV).  Source: WLS-TV, November 7, 2011

In personal finances, PACER (Federal Court) records show that Ms. Bialek has filed for bankruptcy in the Northern District of Illinois bankruptcy court in 1991 and 2001. The respective case numbers according to the PACER system are 1:01-bk-22664 and 1:91-bk-23273.

Ms. Bialek has worked for nine employers over the last seventeen years. Source: WLS-TV, November 7, 2011

Curiously, if Ms. Bialek had intended to take legal action, the statute of limitations would have passed a decade ago.

Which brings up the question of why she would make such reprehensible statements now?

The questions should be – who is financing her legal team, have any media agreed to pay for her story, and has she been offered employment for taking these actions?