Editor’s note: This is an e-mail I sent to Bob Moore, editor of the El Paso Times, regarding today’s story on Mayor Cook’s legal fees. The reporter, Marty Schladen, refuses to ask Mayor Cook who is paying his legal fees and why he has not reported this on his campaign finance report.
Dear Bob,
Today Marty Schladen reported that Stuart Leeds and I have contended that Mayor Cook has “secretly” received money. That is not true. We have never said that and you will find that no where in any statement, record, etc.
What we have said over and over is that we believe that someone, other than the Mayor, is paying the Mayor’s legal fees. The Mayor “secretly” receiving money to pay his legal bills is entirely different from the law firm receiving money from a third party or the law firm donating its services.
We would like a correction.
Also Mayor Cook testified under oath a few months ago to having incurred approximately $85,000 in legal fees. Up to that date, the mayor had not paid those fees. He has now incurred more.
The Mayor’s campaign finance report indicates that he used $2000.00 of campaign money to pay legal fees. The other $83,000 plus of those legal fees are unaccounted for. If the firm is doing the work pro-bono, then Cook did not claim those services as a campaign contribution as he is required to do. If someone else paid the firm, then Cook again needs to report that as a campaign contribution. (Note, Susie Byrd correctly claimed legal services Steve Ortega performed for her as a campaign contribution).
Why was this most obvious point not in your story?
Sincerely,
TCaballero
Today Marty Schladen reported that Stuart Leeds and I have contended that Mayor Cook has “secretly” received money. That is not true. We have never said that and you will find that no where in any statement, record, etc.
What we have said over and over is that we believe that someone, other than the Mayor, is paying the Mayor’s legal fees. The Mayor “secretly” receiving money to pay his legal bills is entirely different from the law firm receiving money from a third party or the law firm donating its services.
We would like a correction.
Also Mayor Cook testified under oath a few months ago to having incurred approximately $85,000 in legal fees. Up to that date, the mayor had not paid those fees. He has now incurred more.
The Mayor’s campaign finance report indicates that he used $2000.00 of campaign money to pay legal fees. The other $83,000 plus of those legal fees are unaccounted for. If the firm is doing the work pro-bono, then Cook did not claim those services as a campaign contribution as he is required to do. If someone else paid the firm, then Cook again needs to report that as a campaign contribution. (Note, Susie Byrd correctly claimed legal services Steve Ortega performed for her as a campaign contribution).
Why was this most obvious point not in your story?
Sincerely,
TCaballero
February 3, 2012 at 1:33 am
Could it be that the Mayor wants to continue the appeal in order to get a win to get the other side to pay for all his legal fees. He is clearly not doing this in the best interest of the city or the citizens of El Paso. The philosophy and belief by the mayor is twisted though. He said on Extra on 1-29-12 to the effect that one can say anything that is opposed to government, but basically cannot legally act upon it. That is something a dictator would say.
February 20, 2012 at 1:13 am
I was watching Extra on the government-controlled station ABC, and Darren Hunt claimed he couldn’t find anyone from the other side of the recall in favor of the recall to be on the show; so, he had a well-balanced show of Steve Ortega, one that was recalled, and David Crowder, reporter, usually empowering government decisions. On that show, most of it was about how the law was followed and that those on the recall are hateful and should have allowed the City Council to make a decision in favor of certain groups, which were categorized by the City of El Paso, whom were supposed to receive benefits. Steve Ortega did not say anything about this being a constitutional decision and neither did Crowder. What’s more, an appeals court of hack justices are using their authority to deny my vote in a recall decision on an election and deny my vote on a petition. These justices are violating my right to have a vote that counts and should be severely reprimanded. The council is that I see that part of government which developed right before Stalin or Hitler became in power, and the people who support this decision of violating the votes of many are the brainwashed lap dogs for government and who spread their hatred toward anyone opposing the worship of government.