REPUBLICAN COUNTY CHAIR MORGAN CISNEROS GRAHAM GRACES OUR BLOG YET AGAIN

From the editor:  Morgan Cisneros Graham, the Cameron County Republican Chair, is a nice young woman, gracious to me, in all our interactions, as well as to my wife, Nena, when she was alive.

Morgan has a difficult job, presiding over a party that includes elderly Anglos, who are fervent Trumpites, a couple of goofy eccentrics, who, at times, need monitoring as they can be "loose cannons," and a few candidates whose campaign vessels hoist the Republican flag.

James Zavaleta, Morgan Cisneros Graham

Just a heartbeat away from the chairmanship sits Morgan's able assistant, James Zavaleta, who, as a kid, interned with the City of Brownsville, working inside Tad Hasse's ITT office.  At that time, young James was noted for his graphic work on the "Brownsville Noise," with examples of his clever work posted on Hasse's office walls.

Since Zavaleta's departure from employment with the City of Brownsville several years ago, his position has remained unfilled, with the able Hasse working calls for computer and/or intercom repair all by his lonesome.

In the past, this blog has offered Morgan free space to state her party's vision for Cameron County and more recently to answer questions about the Spazgate affair.  

We admit to not totally reading either of Ms. Grahams's editorials, simply scanning them for anything potentially libelous, running them "as is," without editing or commentary.

This morning we awoke to a rather lengthy piece from Morgan on our Facebook page.  seemingly rebutting our Spazgate reporting.  We will handle this "term paper" length offering differently, quoting a section and then, in bold print below that section, analyzing that section for logic and accuracy.  Arbitrarily, we will award 0-5 points for such logic and/or accuracy.

Morgan Cisneros Graham and her Father, Bill Young

Morgan:  "It appears that any effort substantiating that your coverage is flawed and this theory false is going to be attributed to a Trump narrative. What else can one do when it IS false? You’ve criticized those for not answering and then criticized me for denying it and saying the theory is wrong. It’s heads you win, tails I lose. A fixed deck."

Pulling a page from Trump's playbook is EXACTLY how you began your response to Spazgate.  Here is your opening statement:  

From My San Antonio on June 2012:
“Such as the approximately $2,000 he pocketed from lawyer and former Brownsville Mayor Eddie Treviño. It was fundraising time for Limas' re-election campaign. Treviño was passing it on as a donation from another lawyer."

See.  Your opening argument was: But, what about what Eddie did?  That's EXACTLY the way Trump responds to charges, only he says "What about Hillary or Obama or the Dems? 
0 points, Morgan.

"I stated to Duardo this is false and why. It was not published which allows for this to be used for content and views repeatedly.  Carlos answered your question and dodged nothing. Your accusation is conjecture based on unreliable and conflicting statements that have changed over and over again."

Why would it concern me what you told Duardo?  That's irrelevant.  Your next sentence makes no sense forwards or backwards.  Carlos has not responded about Spazgate, not on Facebook, not in a comment to the blog, not in response to my "Open Letter" blog article.  Just saying he responded doesn't make it true.

0 points, Morgan.

Sanchez’s quote in your article dated Sept. 14th says Tad was being a friend to him and that there was no maliciousness in our parts. Then you wrote the following discounting his statement and guiding readers to the conclusion you want:

“To understand why Republican operatives would think it a good idea to run a candidate against Eddie Trevino...It was during that election that the seed was planted for throwing a candidate in against Eddie Trevino in 2018.”

Robert did say that Tad and his sister had been "friends for decades."  He may not have understood exactly what was happening.  As for the last paragraph, I stand by it.  The success of Rebecca Gomez splitting votes in the 2010 primary for county judge did contribute to Eddie losing.  1 point, Morgan, for Robert viewing Tad as a friend.

So please do not insult me and obfuscate and say you’re “cut and past[ing]” and not being conjectural. Your narrative is contradictory to Sanchez’s statements. When I spoke with him he stated he does not believe there was any conspiracy. What more does it take, Jim?

OK, Morgan.  You say my "narrative" is contradicted by "Sanchez's statements, but earlier in your piece YOU described his statements as "unreliable and conflicting statements that have changed over and over again."

So, which is it?  0 points, again Morgan.

Ms. Gomez went from not concluding we were behind it to saying “based on what I read on the blogs, they were behind it” and that it’s “obvious.” You lead (past tense) some sources, hopefully inadvertently, who at this point have changed statements over and over admittedly to adapt to your story. You wrote what became her statements and per her own words they were the basis on which she made her claims . That’s why attorneys can’t lead witnesses on the stand. It destroys truth.

Rebecca Gomez needed to read nothing from "the blogs" to know what happened.  She was there.  If something she read contradicted known facts and changed her story, that's beyond belief.  Is that what you're trying to say, Morgan?

I will assume your Gomez quote is accurate and assign 1-1/2 points to this section.

"Tad’s generosity has been twisted and dishonored. It’s wrong. He doesn’t want to dignify this ridiculousness which is why he has been coy with you. He knows Roman is behind it which he discussed with you. And why in the world would I concoct a plan I know assists an opponent in fundraising with a contested primary he’ll easily win???"

No one has publicized Tad's generosity more than me.  As for Tad being coy, no.  The loquacious Mr. Hasse is never coy.  He simply has tape over his mouth.  As for the "why?" question, I asked it well before you did, saying Tad and Chris were dumb as rocks for doing something as unnecessary as the Watergate burglary.  No one ever accused you, Morgan, of "concocting" anything.  The whole thing made zero sense and you, Morgan, get 0 points for this round.

Oh, as for Roman's "involvement."  His opinion about you guys means nothing to me.  That's why I went straight to Tad, then Robert, then Rebecca.

The reason I cited that article is to show you that the unethical behavior you’re painting Cascos with, is rightly the color his opponent should be. But it won’t happen. He’s not the target. Roman wants Treviño to win because his hatred of me is greater than his commitment to truth and what is best for the community. God help us all if he is ever elected to even dog catcher as his pastime is cruelly damaging people.

I believe you are overcompensating for accepting that ticket. You did nothing wrong by attending- I’ve seen reputable national press comped for private and expensive political events many times because that’s the way to ensure there is coverage and an insider view that otherwise wouldn’t be available. I thought it was a nice gesture. For both Tad and myself, no good deed goes unpunished is a wise adage indeed.

For the final time: we did not manipulate or exploit Sanchez in any way and Tad is being exploited when all he did was help a friend. He let me know as a courtesy so I would not be blindsighted that he helped him in this way, and advised Ms. Gomez that it needs to be reported. The only people who have committed an error are those who didn’t disclose the contribution per the Texas Ethics Commission, and Tad spent a good amount of time advising Ms. Gomez on how to do it because he is a friend of Mr. Sanchez of many years and wanted to prevent him being hurt by a negligent treasurer who has a track record of not abiding by the statutes requiring financial transparency by candidates.

According to Mr. Sanchez per our brief and courteous conversation, Ms Gomez advised Mr. Sanchez she would “handle the scandal” and to let her do all interviews and the talking. She has motive to damage Judge Cascos- she’s a Treviño supporter.

This conspiracy has been manufactured and started on Duardo’s blog and you jumped on it. Others moved on and you are attempting to breath new life into it again. It is fiction. Imagination. False. Reputations are being damaged with lies. It needs to stop. To continue in spite of me repeatedly explaining to bloggers how it’s false spells an agenda.

I have much respect for you and do not want to see Roman’s vindictiveness (he’s bragged that he is doing this to harm Cascos and Tad) damage your credibility to the point that his is. That’s why he has to hide behind others and anonymous comments - he lacks credibility and people would have, as you say, discernment when considering the source.

This section is mostly editorializing. Since you used a court analogy earlier, we'll view this as your closing arguments.  3 points given.

Have a good day Mr Barton and I hope the truth will finally prevail.

MG

5 points.