I smell a skunk. I will admit I’m not always right – but, I smell a skunk. There is something wrong with the woman who was trotted out to face TV cameras this morning by Gloria Allred, as the 4^th woman to level accusations against Herman Cain.

Yep, I smell a skunk.

Forget for a moment that Allred is a shameless self promoter and an attorney who has chased more celebrity cases than the paparazzi. Just forget that for a moment.

Forget also, just for a moment that Allred did this in the 2010 California election but with an illegal alien.

I smell a skunk.

Focus on THIS woman, Sharon Bialek, and on her press conference.

She is telling her story. She is describing how, she claims, Herman Cain sexually harassed her. She is telling her own story of what SHE claims happened to HER.

Right?

Not so darn fast…

If her claims are to be believed, then one thing is certain:  She was there when it happened. Correct? If she was there, then I have a very simple question.

Why is she reading a narrative?

Not only is she reading it, she seems to be reading it cold.

Cold reading is a term from my old broadcasting days. That’s when someone hands you a fresh breaking news story and you open a mic and read that story for the first time live on the air. This woman, Sharon Bialek, seems to be cold reading the piece – and make no mistake, she is reading…She has the text all written out in her hands.

It may not be the first time she’s read it, but one thing is clear in watching the 7.5-minute video, she is not familiar enough with it to glide through the turning of a page.

She is also flubbing the lines in places.

The text is written 1^st person so it would appear that this IS…HER…story but she pauses awkwardly while flipping from one page to another and looks up grinning or giggling when she flubs a line of a few words.

Sure, some may say this is nervous giggling but, I know a nervous giggle and folks, this is not a nervous giggle.

Starting to smell the same skunk I’m smelling?

At the 3:50 mark in the video, Bialek describes, in detail, what both she and Mr. Cain were wearing. In DETAIL. She remembers the colors, styles and even that his shirt was open. While to a casual observer, this may tend to ADD credibility to her story, to me, it does the opposite. Here is that video.

Think about it.

Think of the most traumatizing even in your life…from 14 years ago…and describe, in detail, what you and the person next to you were wearing.

Her allegation is 14 years old, she’s reading text printed on paper, she’s flubbing lines, and she remembers exactly what they were wearing.

According to Bialek, Cain, while seated in the driver’s seat of his car, reached under her skirt and tried to touch her genitals as well as trying to pull her head down towards his lap.

Think about THAT for a moment.

Would it not be very difficult, with your right hand, while in the driver’s seat of a car, to reach up someone’s skirt? It would be easier with the left hand and while Bialek does not specify which hand was used, although she clearly remembers what they were both wearing, to use the left hand one must turn to face the passenger and the steering wheel would be in the way. To use the right hand one would have to reach backwards and the bend of the elbow does not happen in that direction. Also note that Bailek states both actions, the hand and the head pull happened at the same time. Therefore he would have had to use both hands…Right?

And what exactly, according to Bailek, was her reaction?

“What are you doing? You know I have a boyfriend.”

She doesn’t say she pushed him away. She doesn’t say she slapped him. She doesn’t say she recoiled. She said,  “What are you doing? You know I have a boyfriend.”

This is significant because what she describes is an assault but the way in which she claims to have responded was the way one would respond to a question over drinks.

It would not be impossible but clearly an awkward move, reaching with his right hand and arm, telegraphed in such a way as to have given her more than enough time to react a push his hand away but apparently there was no push, was there?

Could she have been looking out the passenger window at that very moment so as not to see it coming? I suppose but considering the detail she describes in the rest of her narrative, that would be something, were it the case, she would have had written down don’t you think?

Okay, yes, there are those will claim, and I am certain Gloria Allred would be one of them, that the reason this was all written out was so that Bialek would cover each and every detail of what happened 14 years ago. I can understand that. What I cannot understand is what happens at the 6:29 mark in the video. That is the point where Bialek explains why she is coming forward now, in public, with her allegation.

Her reason for coming forward now, is recent, less than a week old, not 14 years old as is her allegation of harassment and yet, even her reason for coming forward has been written down for her to read.

She stumbles and awkwardly pauses her way through even that part of the written text.

There is absolutely no way for Bialek to prove what she says happened actually happened. According to her, there were no witnesses but she and Herman Cain. She claims she told her then boyfriend and a mentor when it happened 14 years ago but admits to not telling them any details.

She did not file any charges, there is, as far as we know, no written record or evidence to back her claims. Allred claims to have sworn affidavits from the boyfriend and the mentor but declined to show them to the press.

Is this woman, Bailek telling the truth? I don’t know.

Is Bailek lying? I don’t know.

Does Allred believe her? She doesn’t have to in order to represent her.

Has Allred created this woman out of thin air? Who knows?

Do I smell a skunk?

I sure do.