I knew an article on the subject of Cortney Niland's completely legal in-kind donation from Adam Frank would show up sooner or later. A chat with Niland a week or two ago gave me the impression that Schladen was seeing red and looking for some revenge. You can see Schladen's little tantrum in print HERE.
You may remember that Schladen originally slandered Niland, Adam Frank and River Oaks just before election day back in May. I wrote about Schladen's lack of ethics for starting his original article with a statement of fact that all three parties were in fact in violation of the law. The rest of the article went on to show a hypothetical scenario where a law could have been broken if things had been done a certain way - a way they weren't done and the campaign finance reports prove that. During that time Schladen refused to look into the campaign finance reports of at least two other candidates where corporate donations weren't implied through hypothetical scenarios - THEY WERE LISTED DIRECTLY ON THEIR REPORTS!
The aftermath of the original article as quite bad for Schladen and the EP Times. From what I hear, Niland and Frank got a hold of management and they quickly backed away from the story realizing that they had let a reporter slander two people and one company. Proof of this lies with the EP Times quickly taking down their comments forum connected to the article. Part of proving slander is proving that the words written damaged the reputation of the subject/subjects. Well, there was no better evidence of damaged reputations than the comments on the EP Times own comment section. That disappeared before lawyers from each party could seize the information for lawsuit purposes. It can be recovered, however.
A few weeks after the slanderous article was written the EP Times did a huge spread on Gerald Rubin - Adam Frank's father-in-law and the guy who wears the big hat at River Oaks. Don't think for a minute that the big spread wasn't a mea culpa for Schladen's original slanderous article.
In a conversation with Cortney NIland a week ago on subjects ranging from the city's A&E selection and construction bidding process to hiring a legislative assistant, Niland and I got on the subject of the article. I asked if she was going to sue and she told me that steps were taken by the newspaper at that time to keep her at bay. She told me that she had the lease and checks in hand and if anyone wanted to file a complaint with the TEC, she would provide the backup for them. I agreed that she shouldn't be participating in the EP Times' investigation of her campaign since they have no authority on the matter. What she told me next was funny, sad and shocking all at the same time.
Niland told me that Marty Schladen had been calling her repeatedly demanding "answers" and the lease. Niland said that she didn't feel Schladen was fair to her to begin with and simply told Schladen that she'd answered all the questions on that subject. She told him that her campaign finance report speaks for itself. This enraged Schladen who then started yelling and screaming over the phone at Niland saying that she had to "ANSWER MY QUESTIONS!" She was quite shocked at how angry and demanding Schladen became over the course of a few phone calls. Niland also told me that he was threatening to write the piece as if it was being used as some kind of mark against her personally. Schladen even left voice mail messages that sounded desperate and insane.
I told Nland that I would not participate in any investigation that was instigated by a reporter who had already slandered her and had his own conclusions based on zero evidence. She agreed and said something about wanting to "only work with Bracomontes" in the future. I advised her that most news outlets don't let you pick your reporter, but they would probably take it under consideration.
Shortly after that article was written I prepared a blog post showing the may questionable contributions received by Mayela Mejia and laid out her in-kind donation of a campaign office provided by a guy whose name was associated with Lyda Ness' own troubles with the TEC. No article, no presumption of a crime committed - nothing came from Marty Schladen or the EP Times on those facts. Remember, Mejia took a donation from a proper noun followed by "Inc." - YOU CAN NOT TAKE A DONATION FROM AN "INC." Where's the fairness? Where's Schladen's request for production from the other candidates? There are none.
That brings us to today and the article written by Schladen.
I guess my first question for the EP Times is this: Since when does a citizen have to prove their innocence to you? I thought the people had to be proved guilty, not proved innocent. The EP Times shouldn't have a reporter taking the stance that you're guilty of the crime he invented in his head until you prove otherwise. Can you imagine if the paper walked into Mayor Cook's office and said "we think you are laundering money for the BBQ cartel and will print articles stating that allegation as fact until you can prove to us that you aren't committing the crime we suggest you are committing." That's basically what happened in today's article and it's so unethical from a journalism standpoint that I have serious doubts anyone at the EP Times read the piece before it went out. Somebody over there knows about ethics, I'm sure... right?
Think about convicted murderer David Marmalejo - nobody at the EP Times required that he prove himself innocent of killing his mother. In fact, the paper was very cautious (as it should be) when reporting on the story not to push public opinion in either direction - guilty or innocent. Why wouldn't they do that in this case?
The there's Ernesto Villanueva...
Poor Villanueva was used by Schladen and further proved what a complete moron he actually is. Schladen had threatened to write the article for weeks, but couldn't get Niland or Frank to go on the record. To get your story printed at any paper, you always need more than one quote from one souce. Without Nland and Frank saying anything, Schladen didn't have an article. Schladen had to find his second source - his frist being hypothetical questions posed to, and answered by, representatives of the TEC. Schladen needed one of Niland's opponents to cry foul weeks after the issue was first brought up. Enter crybaby, sore loser Ernesto Villanueva - his machismo wouldn't let him pass on Schladen's invitation to throw a public temper tantrum over his loss to Niland.
It's obvious that Schladen tried to get Villanueva to file a complaint against Niland, which would have compelled her to produce the documents. Villanueva is so dense that he couldn't even figure out how to file complaint and through coaxing from Schladen almost got himself sued! Let me explain.
Genius boy Villanueva figured he could just call the TEC and tell them he thinks something stinks with Niland's campaign donations and they'd open up an investigation to the matter. What Villanueva doesn't realize, or is stupid to know, is that literally thousands of candidates run for office each year and 99 percent of them feature candidates throwing allegations of campaign finance rule breaking at each other. If the TEC investigated every matter that was phoned into them, they'd need an army of investigators and a $100,000,000 budget. It's impractical to think you can just pick up the phone and tell someone "hey, I've got a funny feeling this person isn't doing everything right," and expect them to drop everything they are doing to go prove your hunch. There's a reason there is clear complaint filing process. Although it should be noted... Lawyer Lyda Ness couldn't even properly initiate that process and she's head and shoulders above Villanueva when it comes to brain power.
Because Villanueva is both stupid and lazy, he didn't even bother to follow the directions given to him by the person he talked on the phone with at the TEC when they told him how to file a complaint. I know that they always inform you of exactly how to file a complaint when you call because I've called them a 100 times if not more - I'm familiar with how that whole process goes. I also know that Villanueva can't claim he doesn't have access to the TEC page via the internet, because I've seen evidence that he often uses the internet to post pictures of him drinking beer and flipping people the bird (how proud UTEP must be of their graduates!).
Schladen also told Villanueva that he could complain locally to the DA - who would refer it to the police department. Or, in plain words - Villanueva could file a criminal complaint against Niland and really make this a great revenge story for Schladen. Stupid Villanueva couldn't execute this task either and let himself be bounced around between bureaucratic departments like somebody who doesn't know how local government works... funny - he ran for office, but can't file a simple criminal complaint? Wow.
What Villanueva doesn't understand is that if were to actually file a criminal complaint against Niland and he knew there was nothing to it - which he does - he would be on the hook for criminal and civil penalties. The DA would hand down the criminal charges and Niland would sue him for slander - you see, when you accuse someone of a crime you know they didn't commit you are in the purest form slandering/libeling/defaming them. Why do you think Lyda didn't file a criminal complaint against Lilly? Because she knew the ramifications.
Villanueva's own severe incompetence saved him from a costly lawsuit... which isn't usually the case with stupid people. Usually their idiocy hurts them more than helps them.
It should be noted that Villanueva's shock at the fact that the TEC needs a "smoking gun" is also required when you file a criminal complaint. You can't call the cops and say "I think my neighbor is laundering money for the BBQ cartel" and then expect them to start investigating your neighbor. They need a lot more than your "thoughts" or "hunch" about a crime being committed to start an investigation. Our laws have been specifically written to avoid that very scenario.
Bottom line - Villanueva was suckered out by his bruised ego and immaturity to almost get himself sued or worse. Schladen gets his second source and writes another ethically challenged piece.
The aftermath? There's going to be the normal righteous indignation at the mere suggestion that a politician might have, maybe, could've done something wrong even though there's no evidence to back up the allegations. And nobody will let the facts get in the way their prejudiced rants about how crooked Niland is and how she's been behind the scenes pulling the strings in El Paso politics for years now. However, four years from now when she's running for office again... nobody will care or remember. Although, we'll still know that Schladen is spineless little snit four years from now and treat his work accordingly.
Oh yeah - what about the "transparency" issue? Well, Niland put every one of her donors and their address on her campaign finance report, what more do you want? The sign contract? The catering contract with a copy of the checks? At what point do you understand that she's been as transparent as any other candidate. Plus, her transparency pledge has to deal with transparency in city government. If you didn't get that, you're a moron - and we've proven quite easily that Villanueva is a moron and that's what he thought she was talking about.
Recent Comments