candidate for the republican nomination for the president, has been kind enough to join us in our studios in washington, d.c., and he's joining us live this morning after what was surely a very stressful and busy day yesterday. i do hope you got some sleep, and thank you for being with us. our viewers do thank you, too. >> thank you, robin, and it was a busy day but i survived. >> this is why it was a busy day, and we're going to talk about many issues, but let's start with what's at the top of the news. many people are asking, did you say something early yesterday about sexual allegations against you but something completely different hours later? let's watch as things happened yesterday. >> if the restaurant association did a settlement, i am -- i wasn't even aware of it and i hope it wasn't for much because nothing happened. so if there was a settlement, it was handled by some of the other officers that worked for me at the association, so the answer is absolutely not. i am unaware of any sort of settlement. i hope it wasn't for much because i didn't do anything. the fact of the matter is, i'm not aware of a settlement that came out of that accusation. i was aware that an agreement was reached. the word "settlement" versus the word "agreement," you know, i'm not sure what they called it. i know that there was some sort of agreement because . because it ended up being minimal, they didn't have to bring it to me. there is a memory i recall as the day has gone on. she was in the office one day, and i made a gesture saying -- i was standing close to her, and i made a gesture, you're the same height as my wife. >> i'm confused a little bit, mr. cain. you do sell yourself as a straight shooter, so what's with what sounded like inconsistencies? were there inconsistencies or no through yesterday? >> robin, thank you for giving me this chance to clear the air. this was 12 years ago. i was falsely accused, and secondly, the word "settlement" suggested to me some sort of legal settlement. and as i recalled what happened 12 years ago, i recalled an agreement. i wasn't thinking legal settlement. and so the words have been suspect, and i do recall an agreement. i recalled, as my thoughts went through the day, that there was an agreement with this lady who made these charges and they were found to be false. i have never committed sexual harassment in my entire career, period. and it was found that nothing took place in terms of sexual harassment in this particular case. >> and you had said all along that they were false accusations, they were not found to be valid enough, that the accusations stood. but as the day went on, you seemed to recall a little bit more about the different cases. is there anything new now that we're a full 24, 48 hours into this that you're remembering more about what happened, mr. cain? >> that is it. the best account is the one i gave last night on another station, and the only thing that i added as -- remember, this was 12 years ago, and i was trying to recollect this in the middle of an already busy day. so the only thing i could remember when i was asked about any specific things that were in the allegation, i came up with the fact that i made a gesture by putting my hand under my chin, standing near this lady, saying, oh, you're the same height as my wife. my wife is five feet tall, she comes up to my chin, and i was simply making that comparison. we were in my office, the door was wide open and my assistant was standing right outside. >> why is it all of a sudden you remembered things about it yesterday? were you informed or were you told more about the case yesterday? >> no. i just started to remember more. remember, in 12 years, a lot of stuff can go through your head. this wasn't exactly something that i had top of mind where i was trying to recall every little detail that went on 12 years ago. but as the day went on in the middle of all these other things we had planned -- and by the way, we did not let this distraction stop me from making all the appointments that i had made in order to get my campaign message out. >> now, at the same time, the story -- where this all started was from politico, and it had mentioned that there were two cases, two accusations of sexual harassment. do you remember anything now about the other case? >> absolutely not. i wasn't even aware of the second case until we saw the politico article. the first one i was aware of, but the second one, and i still haven't recalled. i didn't even know the second one existed if it exists. remember, the article said two anonymous sources. >> you said regarding the first one that you do remember a little about now, that you turned the complaint over to the hr person and the general counsel and that you didn't know what happened to the complaint. did you ever ask, hey, what's she accusing me of, or how did this turn out? >> i did, but when he said the gesture with the height thing, and there was a couple other things in there that i found absolutely ridiculous -- >> what were those? >> i don't even remember. they were so ridiculous, i don't remember who they are. >> you remember they were ridiculous, but you don't remember what those other things were? >> the reason i forgot them, robin, is because they were ridiculous. i dismissed them out of my mind. i said, if she can make that stick and call it sexual harassment, fine. she didn't make them stick. the only thing i remember was the one gesture i made talking about the height. >> why did you never go back to hr to find out what their review had found. >> because it started out as -- it started out where she was making some huge claims about sexual harassment. i do recall that she was asking for a large sum of money. i don't remember what that sum of money was. but as the review of this moved forward, that sum of money, negotiating with my attorney, negotiating with her attorney, got less and less and less because her attorney started to figure out she didn't have a valid claim. she couldn't find people to corroborate some of these things that she was saying, and so as it got smaller and smaller and smaller, it turned out to be, from my perspective, which is why i didn't go back and ask about it, more of a separation agreement rather than some sort of legal settlement. this is why the word changed from "settlement" -- because the word "settlement" was in the political article. i remember an agreement. and in many companies and organizations, sometimes you call them separation agreements. you don't call them legal settlements. so this is why later the idea of an agreement came back to memory. >> i think what's puzzling is politico reported it gave your campaign like ten days to come back with some reaction, and i believe we have that tape. i want to play that tape where the reporter asked if you had been accused of sexual harassment but you didn't answer. hold on. >> last question, last question. >> sirks have you? have you? have you ever been accused, sir, of sexual harassment? >> i remember the first time i saw this, oh, my gosh, he asked this back to the reporter. the politico said your campaign had it for ten days. >> we had it for ten days, ro n robin. we made a conscious decision with my sign-off, i'm not going to go out and start chasing two anonymous accusations, so that was a conscious decision. we didn't know what the article was going to include, we didn't know what the accusations were going to be, so for me to even answer the question was totally inappropriate. you don't do business like that. >> well, do you have -- aren't there other accusations against you that you wouldn't know what two accusations he was talking about when he said sexual harassment? >> all we know is that they contacted my office and said that they had two anonymous sources accusing me of sexual harassment, and we said, what details can you give us? they couldn't give us any other than it occurred when i was at the national restaurant association. i immediately recall one, and that was the one we talked about earlier. i couldn't recall the other one. and the reason that i wasn't going to answer ms. question standi -- his question stand ing on the street after i had done another interview, that could have been taken totally out of context. i wanted to do then what i am doing now. >> if either of these two women, one you remember, the other you don't remember the case, you're saying, if they were watching now, what do you say to them regarding their case? you say they were false and they were found to be false. >> i would say, why are you bringing it up now? obviously someone is encouraging them to bring it up now because i'm doing so well in this republican nomination. that's all i would say. why are you bringing it up now? secondly, are you being used to try and help paint a cloud and help sabotage my candidacy? that's all i would say. i would just simply ask the question as to why they would do that now. you and i both know why they're doing it, because someone does not like the fact that we're doing so well in this campaign and that i'm at or near the top of the polls consistently. >> so you feel like this is a smear campaign? from whom, do you think? >> i absolutely believe this is an intended smear campaign using these two cases -- like i said, i'm not even aware of the second one. it is a smear campaign. when they cannot -- >> by whom? do you know by whom? >> we don't know. we have no idea. when they cannot kill my ideals like 9-9-9, they come after me personally. and someone asked me yesterday in one of the many interviews i did, clearing the air on this, is there anything else? not that i know of. i knew about that one case at the restaurant association. i've been in business, i was in business before i ran for president over 40 years, and that was the only instance of accused sexual abuse, sexual harassment, only one. so what i'm saying is -- and then in the rest of the political article, chfwhich was near the end, the last two paragraphs, two people on the association, members of the board of director, attested to my character and integrity. but not a lot of people are paying attention to that. >> i do want to say that's true, that political article did say most people did remember your tenure fondly there and was happy to have you there. but after what appears to be missteps in the way you handled this yesterday, if you could do yesterday differently in the way you answered the questions, agreements, settlements, did know, didn't know? >> if i could do it over, robin, i would start with the last interview i did last night and make that the first interview of the day. because after 12 hours during the day, many events, many interviews, i was able to gradually recall more and more details about what happened 12 years ago. so that's what i would do differently. but, you know, i wasn't given the opportunity to think about it for a day before i had to start answering questions. that's what i would do differently. i would take the very last interview of the day and make it the first interview of the day, because the last interview i made it real clear. i was falsely accused and it was demonstrated to be false. i wasn't aware of the second accusation. i never committed to sexual harassment to anybody. in my 40 years, this is the only case i know about, and if there are others there, they would probably have to make it up because i am totally not aware and i'm not trying to hide anything. i'm trying to put it all out there for people to see. >> the women reportedly were paid a pretty good amount settlement when they left the restaurant association, so based on that, i mean, what do you think the viewers and the voters should make about the legitimacy of the claims, how big this was to you -- if someone falsely accused me, that would be big and i would remember, i think. >> here's what i recall, that the settlement with the one that i remember and am aware of and was a financial settlement and it was somewhere in the vicinity of three to six months severance pay, something of that nature, which meant it wasn't outside the guidelines of employees who left. as i recall, this first lady left the restaurant association before i did. i was only there two and a half years, and the case, the accusation, didn't come up until she left the national restaurant association. i remember that there was a financial settlement, but it was not outside our guidelines for what people get settlement for when they leave the restaurant association involuntarily. >> okay. now, you've been married for more than 40 years. you've been really happy and proud to say that. i'm wondering, what does your wife, if we may ask, have to say about all of this and these things surfacing? was she told initially all those years ago about it? >> yes, she was. when this happened years ago, i told my wife about it because it was found to be baseless. and the hardest part on my wife, quite frankly, is all the innuendos from all the news reports that haven't been presenting the facts. the fact that, yes, the word settlement, i said i don't recall a settlement earlier in the day. that's because i considered what happened an agreement. but because of, like i said, the detail at which every word was scrutinized, it was an agreement so it looked like i changed my story. i didn't change my story. i simply got the wording right and the difference between settlement and agreement, there is a difference to me. >> a lot of campaign watchers are saying, whoo, this is a misstep by his campaign. do you have any fears about how this is going to play into your poll numbers? >> first of all, it may affect my poll numbers, but most of our supporters have not been shaken by this whatsoever. in fact, many of the people that have been in organizations that i have run, i've been president and ceo, have called and asked, would we like for them to do a testimonial, and this is ridiculous because they're attest to go my honesty and integrity. other people find this an attempt to cloud. robin, yesterday on line, we had one of our highest fundraising days in the campaign, one of the highest ever. >> wow. >> so what it has done, i believe it has backfired on those that are trying to put a cloud over my campaign because they can't shoot down my ideals. they can criticize 9-9-9, they will criticize the energy independence strategy we're going to unveil in the next couple of weeks, but they can't shoot down the ideas. and here's another thing that has all my critics upset. the people, the voters, the ones that matter, they like these ideals because they are specific, they're common sense, and they can understand it. and this is what they can't defeat because i don't give generic responses, i give direct responses, and i've had people tell me over and over and over again as i'm speaking around the country, don't change, tell it like it is. >> joining me now is hln's robin meade and wolf blitzer from washington. robin, first of all, excellent interview. i loved the interview, and there are a lot of folks, of course, who would love to sit down 20 minutes, 25 minutes with her man cain. how did you make that happen, first of all? >> i was really -- i was impressed that he staill came o the show and was willing to talk so long. like you said, that was almost a half hour's worth of a news broadcast. we had booked him ahead of time for something else. it was for the 100th birthday -- the 100th birthday of what would have been ronald reagan's birthday. you know what i'm saying, anyway. if ronald reagan were alive, it was 100 years ago he was born. so he was supposed to come to atlanta for that and actually be in our studio. it just so happened he wasn't coming to atlanta, but he kept the date with us. even after all the allegations and the news was coming across, we respected him that he still kept the appointment and came in and talked with us. >> you pressed him because he stayed in that seat. a lot of times, they take off the mikes and they're done. you really pressed him on a lot of these issues. you and i have talked about this, there still seems to be some unanswered questions there, right? i thought it was very telling when you asked him, if you had that day to do over again, what would you do differently? >> and what did he say, he said, i would do yesterday over, i would do the last interview first. what happened in that interview with fox? that's where he gave the most information. it's almost like he realizes, and i can't put words in his mouth, but it's almost like he realizes if he gave that much information at the start, it wouldn't become such a big issue. to his point, he says that's when he started to remember cases about the one point where he remembers details of accusations where they were found to be false. throughout the day it was settlement, agreement, settlement, and i felt we were really splitting hairs over what does the word settlement mean and what does the word agreement mean? >> was there anything that surprised you? >> many things. for one, i was surprised to hear that after everything that's been in the news cycle, he said that had been the best fundraising day for their campaign yesterday even with everything going on. i did notice -- do you remember what he said, my wife was told. but then he said he didn't remember the first allegations and some of the allegations were so ludicrous that i didn't remember it. people can make ludicrous accusations. for example, if someone said, robin, u pink hair. that's ludicrous because of how crazy it is. he said he can't remember, yet he told wife at the time because those accusations are false. >> i want to bring in wolf bliter here, because wolf, robin brings up a really good point. this is one of the best days for if you understandraising. do we think this is going to back fire as he blooeflz or is he just doing damage control and he's out. >> pink among certain activists and others, this will help him. he's probably going to generate rig to smear him, trying to hurt him. so he probably will. i thought it was really telling and i thought robin did a really good job in bringing out more information than we had gotten, including in that fox interview with greta van susteran last night. he did disclose my personal lawyer was negotiating with this woman, the woman who was accusing him of sexual harassment, with her lawyer, and they started off, the woman's lawyer, with a high amount of money they wanted for a settlement, but then in the course of negotiations, it came down, he says, because there was little of a corroborating evidence and the money went down, and they finally settled in what he described as three to six months of sher salary, whic is a normseverance package of someone who is being dismissed. remember just the other day, yesterday he was saying that he recused himself. the general counsel for the national restaurant association got involved together with other executives at the national restaurant association, and he simply walked away from it. but today he did disclose -- i guess he had been thinking a lot about it, remembering all his own details. i think he said my lawyer was negotiating with her lawyer, and the settlement money went down, down, down. so he's getting more information. more is coming up. and now all of a sudden, we're learning one of those lawyers was directly involved in trying to reach some sort of agreement with this woman. is that your reading, robin, as well? >> you could read that two ways because my lawyer and her lawyer, i would consider people at my company to be my lawyer, too. do you know what i mean? so did he mean that or did he mean what he said? we could ask that about the whole situation. did he mean what lawyer. but even if he recused himself, he had to walk a. the amount of money this woman was speaking was going down, down, down, and h