If Herman Cain was indeed guilty, why won't any of these so-called victims provide black and white proof?

Because they signed a confidentially agreement and could be sued for thousands if they break that agreement, plus the cost of lawyers, paying back everything they got at their first settlement, etc. If Cain contacted The Restaurant Association and gave his permission to talk, they could do so but obviously he does not want them to.

Let's no forget that a "Conservative" radio host in Iowa also said when Cain recently visited his radio station, that HIS female staff were also talked to inappropriately by Cain. Can everyone BUT Cain be lying?

Whether he is guilty or not, the main point is that by his handling of this, since he knew that the settlement happened, and Politico did not engage in ambush, rather they gave him ten days to prepare before thay went to press, is that he is too stupid to be President.

A smart guilty candidate could have come up with decent damage control in ten days; A smart innocent candidate would have been able to get Politico to change their story. But Cain had more than ten days, he had decades to figure out how to explain this.

The smear campaign on Mr. Cain is very suspicious. If he indeed committed the crimes of which he has been accused, why did the "victims" not step forward long ago?

What do make of large payouts tied to confidentiality agreements?

Proof only exists in math.