ShareThis Page
Ex-city GOP head accuses party chief |

Ex-city GOP head accuses party chief

| Saturday, February 11, 2006 12:00 a.m

Former Pittsburgh Republican Committee Chairman Bob Hillen is accusing Allegheny County Republican Committee Chairman Bob Glancy of demanding money in return for a political favor.

The Allegheny County District Attorney’s Office has approved a private criminal complaint filed by Hillen, clearing it for a Municipal Court hearing March 1.

Glancy denied accusations of wrongdoing Friday. “It’s totally baseless,” he said.

The dispute arose after Glancy ousted Hillen from the city Republican committee’s top spot for endorsing four Democrats who cross-filed as Republicans in last year’s Court of Common Pleas primary election.

Hillen, 48, of Beechview, said Glancy sent him a letter dated Aug. 29 that offered to let him keep his post if he met five requirements. Hillen provided a copy of the letter to the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review. One of the demands was that Hillen or the city Republican committee give money it collected before the May 17 primary to Republican Joe Weinroth’s mayoral campaign against the eventual winner, Democrat Bob O’Connor.

The GOP committee had raised $5,125 by charging primary candidates fees of up to $750 to be considered for its endorsement. About 20 candidates — including judicial candidate and former Allegheny County Democratic Party Chairman Tom Flaherty — paid the fees.

Hillen said Glancy’s demand for cash in return for a political favor violates Pennsylvania’s election code.

The letter also demanded an apology to county Republicans and asked Hillen not to speak to media outlets.

Hillen insisted he’s still chairman of Pittsburgh’s Republican committee because Glancy did not have the power to remove him.

“I’m hoping he gets punished for what he did,” Hillen said. “What he did is wrong.”

Categories: News
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.