Green Room

Sharon Bialek’s Fiancé Belatedly Remembers He’s Not Her Fiancé

posted at 10:56 am on November 12, 2011 by

Things that make you go “hmmmm.”

A northwest suburban man says he needs to clear the air after coming to the support of his fiancee, who accuses GOP presidential candidate Herman Cain of making a sexual play for her.
For starters, Sharon Bialek isn’t his fiancee, said Mark Harwood in an exclusive interview on Wednesday night.
“We were engaged last year in June but I think there have been some assumptions that Sharon still lives here in Mundelein with me” Harwood told the I-Team. “Sharon and her son moved out in February of this year and now live in their own home … so effectively we’re no longer engaged.”
On Monday, when Ms. Bialek was the first of Cain’s alleged groping victim’s to go public, Harwood was contacted by news organizations trying to find out information about her. He did numerous interviews during which he was referred to as her fiancé. “I made reference to the fact that we were engaged and got engaged last June, 2010 and I think the assumption then-we were still engaged. I think most people seemed to be under the belief that Sharon lived [in my house] but she’s not here.”

Here’s video of the interview:

I don’t know if this has any particular significance, but for several days the media wanted the world to think Sharon Bialek was engaged to this guy, because that seemed to undercut suggestions she might be in it for money, e.g., Ben Smith at Politico:

In fact, per the Tribune, she’s living with her fiance, described as an executive in the medical equipment industry, in “a large, five-bedroom home… in north suburban Mundelein.”

He was described as her fiancé in the lead of an Associated Press article citing him as corroboration of Bialek’s account (although he didn’t know her in 1997 and says she never told him about it until Nov. 4). It was Thursday before WLS-TV got this interview, so that little bit of misinformation got corrected by the local ABC station in Chicago, three crucial days after it had been widely reported and woven into the media narrative as evidence of Bialek’s credibility.

Like I said: Things that make you go “hmmmm.”

(Cross-posted at The Other McCain.)

Recently in the Green Room:

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Gold digging wench.

AH_C on November 12, 2011 at 11:28 AM

I’m not going “Hmmmm”, but I am saying “Told ya so”. Another nail in the coffin for Karl Rove, George Will, David Frum, Charles Krauthammer, Bill Kristol, et.al.

SouthernGent on November 12, 2011 at 11:43 AM

So will this go mainstream in an effort to restore Mr. Cain’s credibility?? I doubt it.

kringeesmom on November 12, 2011 at 1:19 PM

Is this going to stay hidden in the dark of the Green Room or will it see daylight on the main page for all to see?

Knucklehead on November 12, 2011 at 1:28 PM

for several days the media wanted the world to think Sharon Bialek was engaged to this guy, because that seemed to undercut suggestions she might be in it for money

.
Isn’t there a kind of deception known as “lying by omission?” Yes, I think there is and it most effective when you get buffoons to react to assertions and allegations without knowing all the facts before their “public consumption statements.”
.
You know who does this kind of lying frequently? Politicians and media do it, especially media that is “in the tank” for a particular party or candidate. The media that do this are scum.

ExpressoBold on November 12, 2011 at 3:04 PM

How reliable is this guy? Is he current on his property taxes? And what is the controlling authority for verifying fiance-hood?

Shouldn’t Cain come clean on what he knows about this guy’s relationship to Bialek?

J.E. Dyer on November 12, 2011 at 4:23 PM

So, she is in it for the money after all.

Kissmygrits on November 12, 2011 at 4:30 PM

If you lie before a camera, there is no consequence. If you lie in court, they can throw you in jail. Guess which setting people who want to smear you choose.

AnotherOpinion on November 12, 2011 at 7:38 PM

Ha. I knew this ‘fiance’ claim was nonsense. First was the length of the so-called engagement. Who gets “engaged” at their age and isn’t married within a year of the engagement? What would they be waiting for? Second was the fact that she contacted both her ex-boyfriend and Gloria Allred and didn’t confide this with her “fiance’ beforehand.

I’m not going “Hmmmm”, but I am saying “Told ya so”. Another nail in the coffin for Karl Rove, George Will, David Frum, Charles Krauthammer, Bill Kristol, et.al.
SouthernGent on November 12, 2011 at 11:43 AM

Why? Because Bialek and her associates are unreliable producers of fact (at best) and grifters (at worse) does not absolve Cain from mishandling this entire episode. Don’t shoot the messenger(s) and all that.

Buy Danish on November 13, 2011 at 2:33 PM

Why? Because Bialek and her associates are unreliable producers of fact (at best) and grifters (at worse) does not absolve Cain from mishandling this entire episode. Don’t shoot the messenger(s) and all that.

Buy Danish on November 13, 2011 at 2:33 PM

“Mishandling a presidential campaign” isn’t an actionable tort. We ought to be able to get back to criticizing Cain on the basis of his policy and poor campaigning skills, neh?

gryphon202 on November 14, 2011 at 12:14 AM