MDE EXCLUSIVE: MAYBE THEY WANT TO SAVE ON TAXI EXPENSES
Click on the picture above to view Betty McCollum's property tax statement.
Click on the picture above to view Bill Harper's property tax statement.
According to public records available on Ramsey County's website, Congresswoman Betty McCollum's chief of staff Bill Harper, owns the condo (unit) next door to McCollum in St. Paul.
McCollum was elected to Congress in 2000 and according to my search, Harper has been her only chief of staff.
McCollum was divorced soon after she was elected to Congress:
"Betty McCollum had been married 25 years when she was elected to Congress. But less than a year into her first term, she got divorced." Source: Saint Paul Pioneer Press, October 13, 2002
I understand the negative reaction this post will generate from some, but I am curious why a single-man would buy the condo next-door to his divorced female boss.
The proximaty does raise questions.
30 Comments:
2 things.
1. - You idiot, unless you have more details and a really big smoking gun this only undermines your credibility and the credibility of Republican bloggers everywhere.
2. - Wow, that's a hell of an appreciation over the last few years! My condo won't be finished until fall of 2006 but I hope it makes gains like that! Lordy! Also, since I'm a renter I don't directly pay property taxes, so I didn't know how large an impact the Limited Market Value program has. If lawmakers ever allow it to expier (they extended it two more years) it will be a real kick in the pants for a lot of folks.
I am not making any diffinative statement about the proximaty of their condos.
I am only posting legally available public information.
I like how you shift the burden of proof on her to prove she is not in a relationship with her chief of staff.
I'd like to see your posts proving that Norm Coleman is not doing anything unsavory with his young attractive female staffers. That or whenever he is seen at a bar at 1 am with an attractive young woman that is his "cousin."
I am not saying there is a relationship. I am just pointing out that her chief of staff lives next-door.
This, then, begs the question. Why are you pointing this out?
My blog is called Minnesota Democrats Exposed.
You two DFLers come into his house with rumors and hearsay that you couldn’t prove if your life depended on it. MDE has not said if there is or isn’t a relationship, just that these two individuals live next door to each other. If there is no impropriety, then why do you two quickly try to shift the debate to Sen. Coleman? Shouldn’t the facts speak for themselves?
Republican Minnesota:
Here are the facts then.
Fact: McCollum, who is not married, lives next door to her chief of staff, who is also unmarried.
Fact: Norm Coleman, who is married, has some of the hottest female staffers in the Senate.
Fact: Coleman has been spotted at a bar with an attractive younger woman that he says is his cousin.
The point is when MDE says things like "I am curious why a single-man would buy the condo next-door to his divorced female boss" implies impropriety.
For all I know, Coleman likes working around hot Republican women. McCollum my like living next to her coworker.
Just because Coleman's wife lives in Los Angeles, pursuing a failed acting career, does not mean that I outright say that Norm is not faithful to his wife. I imply it based on evidence that I put into my own context.
Do you have a picture of Sen. Coleman and this girl and/or a sworn affidavit from the Senator claiming that the girl is her cousin? No, because what you are saying is only rumor. Why don't you focus on the issue at hand?
I have no sworn affidavit, but he did say it in an MPR interview:
"A caller on Minnesota Public Radio's Midday program reports seeing Coleman hit on a "very young, attractive woman" at a restaurant. The mayor speculates that perhaps it was a cousin."
Fine, focusing on the issue. Would it be wrong if they were seeing each other? Look at Rod Grams and Christine Gunhus, the woman he was seeing before he lost in 2000. They got married after the election. She was on his campaign staff and even committed election fraud for the man.
Rod Grams was a disgrace to the Republican Party and the activists soundly rejected in during his brief Senate bid.
As for as Norm is concerned, that in no way proves anything other than Norm was at a bar.
Typical liberals, ignore the facts and change the subject.
Let's see: The blogger merely raises a query about the close proximity between Betty McCollum's Minnesota residence and that of her Chief of Staff.
Suddenly, the McCollum apologists jump into the mix; huffing, puffing and pontificating their magic spin, and the topic at hand is deflected.
It makes me wonder if MDE isn't on to something here?
This post has been removed by the author.
You are a very wise individual.
What facts am I ignoring?
I was talking about Grams in 2000! Do you know nothing about Minnesota politics? The GOP activists had nothing to do with anointing Kennedy as the nominee. That was all Rove/Pawlenty/Coleman/the heads of MNGOP.
You're right, as a typical liberal, I do ignore the facts. Clearly I am waaay off-base: he did not hit on an attractive woman in a bar, it was a restaurant!!! Note how he did not dispute what the woman was saying about him hitting on an attractive woman. He just deflected it.
Sorry for that tangent, back to the topic.
The point was that there is nothing wrong at all with what McCollum may or may not be doing. Grams actually did what MDE is implying. I have no problem with that. I know that for Republicans, sex must be boring and within the confines of "traditional marriage."
So what if she is banging him? Who cares.
So what if she is banging him? Who cares.
Actually, I agree with dfl governor. I could care less what they do in the privacy of their "homes." I just find it amusing that one merely raises the question of the lovely couple's housing arrangments and the lefties bounce like Tigger to make the discussion melt away. (Notice, for instance, Micah raising the issue of "traditional marriage" to offer a deflection point?)
Methinks they all doth protest too much.
Since it's in St. Paul and all, wouldn't it be convienient to work? I'm married and looking for a house, and the first people I asked about finding a good deal vaguely close to work is my coworkers.
Betty McCollum is a United States Congresswoman. Bill Harper is her Chief of Staff. They both live somewhere in Washington, D.C. most of the year.
Try again.
OK Micah, you obvisouly don't know how Republican politics work. There is no puppet master pulling the strings, albeit this mythical figure is the perfect scapegoat for your party's incompetence.
I have said what Grams did was wrong. I was against it then and I'm against it now. Maybe you forgot to read for a brief moment when I said that.
All MDE did was present an interesting fact and you guys jumped on him like it was going out of style. Maybe if you could devote this sort of energy to campaigning, Kerry would've won.
Wait, you think Rod Grams was wrong to get remarried? What did you say he did that was wrong, run for Senate?
I have not said that a single thing that Grams has done was wrong, just pointing out that the situation is very similar to McCollum's, if in fact there is any situation with McCollum.
The GOP in Minnesota for the office of Senate and Governor works this way, and this is crystal clear:
Some GOP candidate decides they want to run for Senate, say Tim Pawlenty, and another wants to run for Governor again, say Norm Coleman. Do the voters, activists, or candidates get to decide who the nominee should be? Nope, a call from Karl Rove fixes that. It is a similar situation with Kennedy. Grams, among other qualified candidates for the U.S. Senate, wanted to run for the open 2006 seat. Along comes the MN and national GOP kingmakers to join together and pick Kennedy to be the nominee, shutting out other GOP candidates. While politically this is the smart thing to do -- it eliminates bloody primaries and then Dick Cheney can come to town to raise money for just one guy early in the cycle -- it really reflects poorly on your party. Since when does a chair of the party endorse a candidate before the convention?? You cannot tell me that there was a consensus among GOP activists that Kennedy is the guy to run, I know it isn't true.
Republican Minnesota, do you think it is possible for you to be more partisan?
I've known Bill Harper since before he was her Chief of Staff. I have a hard time believing there's anything here.
John Jordan:
If you know Harper, let him know I will publish a response from him.
This issue isn't going away.
This "issue" doesn't exist in the first place.
I doubt Bill would respond to something like this. Nothing personal, but neither would I.
Nor would most reasonable people. MDE is raising baseless accusations of a somehow improper relationship without a shred of evidence. What is there to comment about or respond to?
If I asked any of you right-wing commenters about prior or continuing relationships with your co-workers, would you respond?
Once again: come on.
While twirling my plump and spicy spaghetti,
I dreamed that I was Donald Segretti.
But my simpering fevered brain
Could no simple scandal frame.
So I frothed o'er nothing much,
raved and blathered, screamed and such.
I didn't know that I was sad
Nor, in fact, my breath was bad.
Pathetic is my blackened blog,
My best friend's a stuffed toy dog.
you post your information, snidely suggesting he may be banging her. then you unequivocally state that you were making no such insinuation. then you say the man should offer up a defense to your insinuation. what a piece of shit you are. by the way, george bush spends a lot of time alone with condi rice. condi rice is single. george bush is married, but has no morals. george bush is from the northeast, where them uppity white boys like to bed themselves a colored woman. and as i mentioned, george and are frequently alone together. these meetings are not open to the public, so we can guess what they aredoing together, alone, two people in high-pressure jobs, understanding each other, seeing an outlet to relieve stress in each other... i bet bush showers within 24 hours of his secret meetings with condi... and condi wears lipstick... so why would a man who meets privately with a single woman need to shower after every meeting? possibly to remove lipstick from parts of himself, places where he would not want his wife to see condi's lipstick? also, bush spends time alone with his daughters. he has done so since they were very little girls, alone with them in their bedrooms...
you see, moron, all you are doing is throwing out facts and then spinning your words to make it look like there is some impropriety there. yo must worship at the feet of hannity and limbaugh, the two most vile pieces of shit on the radio. oh, i see you are moderating, and must approve this comment. i know it's an old thread, so you can justify it to yourself why you won't let this go up. good day, republican shill.
Post a Comment
<< Home