Thursday, January 28, 2016

Martin Paredes Confesses to Collaboration with Carrasco on Ordaz Complaint

As I mentioned yesterday Martin Paredes made a deliberate attempt to try to mislead readers as to the details of what appears to be a baseless ethics complaint against City Rep Claudia Ordaz.

And even more interestingly, he actually admitted collaborating with Barbara Carrasco on the effort.

But he had to admit it, he had already been exposed. Yesterday I wrote about how he had been very obviously supplied with details of the complaint long before anyone else and long before Rep Ordaz had even been given a copy of the complaint by city officials.

As you can see in this screen shot of his post Paredes had been exposed and had to admit that he had been fed information by Carrasco, which normally wouldn't have been a big deal except for the fact that he regularly is critical of information being fed by sources to other bloggers.


What is even more interesting is the fact that Paredes used a graphic image that I wrote about yesterday that contained the phrase "2nd degree misdemeanor" and the word "corruption" in the background.

As you can see in this screen shot, I not only let him know what he did was factually inaccurate, but he even doubled-down on it and actually quoted the correct information by mistake.



I know what you're thinking. But Jaime, everyone knows Martin doesn't know what he's talking about and never met a conspiracy theory he didn't like, he probably just made a mistake. 

 And you're right, its hard to argue against Martin's stupidity.

However the fact that he still included the information AFTER he knew it was inaccurate shows he had deliberate intent to mislead his readers and smear Rep Ordaz. That is, oh what is the phrase I'm looking for here, oh yeah - "grossly negligent".

This is part of a pattern of behavior from Paredes where he constantly tries to smear elected officials he doesn't agree with through innuendo, half-truth, flat-out lies and conspiracy theories. All you have to do is skim through is incredibly boring posts and look for the names in bold print and you'll find the pattern of elected officials and politicos he's been obsessed with smearing using his tactics and having the nerve to act like he's a legitimate news source.

He did so again in his most recent piece on more than one occasion. By including "2nd degree misdemeanor" which doesn't exist, he is trying to give the impression that Ordaz committed a crime, of which she has never been accused. And he tries to make it sound like its a felony.

But he doesn't stop there.

He deliberately tries to create a narrative that is inconsistent with the statute he and Carrasco targeted. Here's an example in this screen shot:



Parades very clearly says that "unlawful disclosure of executive session information, without authority is a Class B misdemeanor (551.146b) in Texas".

First I make note that he uses the correct term in the text of the post, but the graphic image which he has been distributing through social media and is the first image you see of the post clearly says the mythical 2nd degree felony.

But more deceptively than that, he's lying about the disclosure of executive session information. That statute doesn't say disclosure of executive session information, which is where he and Carrasco are wrong. It very clearly refers to disclosure of recordings or a certified agenda of executive session.

Don't believe me? Here's Carrasco's own exhibit where she herself highlights it in red:



Point blank, Paredes is lying to his readers in an effort to convince them that Ordaz, someone he has repeatedly targeted, committed a crime or at the very least trying to push forward a narrative of corruption.

Yet Ordaz has been by far the most open and transparent member of council. Something Paredes repeatedly tries to give the impression he supports.

The way you can tell this is part of a deliberate effort on his part to be deceptive with his readers is the fact that he continues to try to pound the narrative into the head of his readers. Here's another example in the same post where he tries that little trick of saying something that isn't true and then attempting to deceive people that it is true by citing a code.


As it is pointed out in a story by the El Paso Times, disclosure of executive session information in and of itself is not a crime.

This isn't just a sloppy mistake on the part of Paredes.

This is a deliberate effort of defamation of multiple elected officials.

But more than that, its a deceptive lie.

******************************
Timing

Am I the only one that notices that every time Representative Ordaz is attempting to hold City Manager Tommy Gonzalez accountable that something like this pops up?

It happened when she raised the issue a few months back about his raise and asking questions about the MPO. Next thing you know, Textghazi.

Now several months later after grilling him on Monday there is yet another episode of Textghazi, almost 6 months later, that just coincidentally pops up out of nowhere?

Its hard to think they aren't deliberate efforts meant to intimidate Ordaz.

And thats not the only thing I noticed. When Rep Niland was running for re-election she had all the soccer moms of the pool helping her out. She pushed through pool stuff but the construction has been stalled. There's an agenda item to discuss it and poof, all of a sudden there's a bunch of swim moms at city council singing Tommy's praises and pissed at Niland?

No wonder she put Gonzalez on the spot and demanded answers.

Thats an interesting pattern developing.

*******************************
Carrasco's Media Blitz

You know how you know that part of Carrasco's intent for the ethics complaint is publicity? Because of the steps she's taken to make it a public spectacle.

Take Jim Tolbert for example. Tolbert didn't go to the podium and make a public declaration of his filing. It was filed and once media found out they looked for him and I think he gave a couple of interviews.

By sharp contrast Carrasco coordinated with Martin Paredes beforehand, then made a public declaration during public comment which was unnecessary in terms of process but done so for attention, then made copies of all her documents and exhibits and distributed them to any media outlet that would listen. She then proceeded to go on almost every single TV news outlet in town.

However when the El Paso Times tried to get an interview, she was no where to be found?

But here is where things get really interesting. In this interview on KTSM, Carrasco says, "It would be irresponsible of me not to bring it to the attention of the citizens of El Paso".

Actually Ms. Carrasco, you are accusing Rep Ordaz of committing a crime. Its actually irresponsible of you not to bring it to the attention of law enforcement. 

Carrasco has run for office before. It appears she's making a public spectacle in order to gear up for a possible run for another office, perhaps one of the westside city council seats in the future.

This kind of crap undermines the real legitimate ethics complaints when they get filed.

2 comments:

Manny said...

“Yes, Just wondering about those incentives for medical facilities on the east and west side that are on your AGENDA,” Escobar responded 19 minutes later.

At 10:40 a.m. on June 1, Ordaz texted Escobar, saying “Hospital ITEM dead :) sold the idea about not offering charity/unfunded care and council agree. Also (City Rep. Michiel) Noe compared these like casinos.”

“We spoke about the EXEC ITEM IN AGENDA review today,” Ordaz added.

Those quotes were pulled from the EPT article you linked. Now, I don't know if the ITEMS she is referring to were part of a "Certified Agenda" of an executive session, but if they are, it would certainly seem likely that she "...without lawful authority knowingly disclosed to a member of the public the certified AGENDA."

The Lion Star said...

The law very clearly states recordings or certified agenda. And its part of an AG opinion dating back to the 80's.

It says nothing of individual items.

You don't like her and Vince, you've made that clear many times. But it doesn't apply to Ordaz's text and she is the ONLY member of council who's been transparent about text messages.

I'm not going to convince you to like them. But this is a matter of law and she is clearly on firm ground.