Wednesday, December 17, 2008

HODGEPODGE ON CHIEF GARCIA AND THE LATEST SANCHEZ SUIT

CHIEF GARCIA:

Yesterday he submitted written answers to questions submitted to him by fellow blogger, MZ. You can check it out for yourself here.

http://blogginallthingsbrownsville.blogspot.com/2008/12/chief-garcia-responds-to-questions.html

I am concerned with two answers. 6. Has the money been returned to the City of Brownsville ?To my knowledge, as of this date, no. Check with Mr. Pete Gonzalez’

His response on December 17, 2008, is interesting because on December 3, 2008, Mayor Ahumada stated to the Herald ""He (Ahumada) said the bank teller didn't catch that the payee's name differed from the endorsement. Bank staff subsequently called him. The money was immediately returned to the city, he said."

http://www.brownsvilleherald.com/news/check_92397___article

Are we to believe that 14 days after Mayor Ahumada informed the Herald the money was returned that the Chief of Police is unaware of this? Please people - when are you going to get it - they play us for fools. The fool is a Chief of Police too stupid to not talk or at least to keep the story the straight.

The next conflict in statements might be explained with timing. An hour after telling the Herald he had not seen the video or discussed it with anyone, nearly two months after the event, he could have told MZ "4. Is there a video that clearly shows who made the deposit and signed the check?Yes, there is, however it is not clear as to a person, only a vehicle."

Okay chief, so now you know the kind of vehicle - does the Mayor have such a vehicle yes or no? This case smells more by the minute.

COLUNGA’S LAWSUIT AGAINST SANCHEZ

And there is a forth one on the way to be filed on January 2, 2009. What Sanchez does not get is, it is his blog and he is liable for what is published. I personally think the statement which got him in trouble was "As far as anyone in the administration, or legal counsel can determine, no such compensatory obligations exist." This was referring to whether Colunga's son should continue receiving services. The implication is, no one in the administration or legal can find a basis for the services, and the Sanchez and Montoya verified this. In the lawsuit Colunga states the services are based on a properly conducted ARD (it is a meeting of experts and teachers to decide the needs of the student). This would presumptively make Colunga son's continued attendance at BISD legal.

If there was an ARD then the Administration knew of a basis for the services which therefore make the Sanchez/Montoya statement false. Further as to legal - there is a big difference between me saying to some one I am not aware of the basis for the services, versus - I researched it and can find no legal basis for the services. Sanchez/Montoya do not seem to know the difference.

Just last week Montoya was warned that Sanchez told me I should sue Montoya for his published statements against me which in law are black and white defamation per se. I am not HIV +, I am not a child molester, and I do not have sex at my gym. Montoya kept on working for Sanchez anyway - some people never learn. For the record, I have no idea who authorized the statements. Sanchez wants me to believe it was Montoya - some friend, huh?

What the story also does not tell you is, everyone knew about this long ago. We understood no moral person goes after a disabled person. We assumed that the law was being met. The pride Sanchez must feel in going after a disabled young adult for personal political gain. He wants to be able to say "see make me Mayor and I will go after the corruption, even if it means denying an education to a disabled young adult."

Colunga was being punished because he did not play Lehmann's game in the election and Lehmann lost. Of course Sanchez and Montoya were publically pulling for Lehmann.

What the story does not tell you is the blog 2011 is in reference to Sanchez announcement that he will run for Mayor in 2011. The only blog to endorse him to date is mostly known for its porn, anti-gay statements, and guest articles demeaning Latinas and Jews. It is the company we keep which should inform people who we are in real life. Oh, the blogger is an English teacher at Rivera. Ask your kids they know about the blog and where they can get easy access to porn. Every member on the BISD Board is fully aware of it.

I feel sorry for Sanchez’s wife and kids because they have to face the community every day and defend this man. The porn blogger has posted pictures of naked women claiming to love Sanchez. This same blogger has encouraged the sexualizing of Sanchez’s wife. How has Sanchez responded to these attacks on his wife and marriage - not a word. What a stand-up guy.

And yes, McHale I am an irritable cuss. You cannot deal with the fact that I was the first and to date the only one to take on your contempt for Brownsville and its hard working people. You needed a town jester to make your game work - you found him in Robert Sanchez - if Sanchez finally smartens up, who will you choose as your next town jester? And remember McHale, Sanchez is squealing like a pig going to slaughter. I wonder what he will give up to Sossi to save his own butt. He already gave up Montoya to me and Sossi. He is demanding I sue Eduaaaardo. Maybe you are next.

19 comments:

Anonymous said...

Thank you, Bobby, for taking on those scumlords. Everyone else in town is too afraid of the political repercussions and what might be said about them on the blogs. It is incredible that BISD tolerates McHale's online filth. But BISD is known for its fear of lawsuits, so I guess McHale feels safe. The whole thing is disgusting (and I am by no means a right-wing prude!)

Anonymous said...

"The only blog to endorse him to date is mostly known for its porn, anti-gay statements, and guest articles demeaning Latinas and Jews"

That is not the only thing ER is known for, and even though I do not condone what the blog has become, it was the very first blog in Brownsville and used to denounce corruption - sort of like what you and MZ do now.
The editor has FUN at doing this. You are right when you say he found the jester. In the words of Forest Gump: Stupid is as stupid does.
By the way, do not take ER articles demeaning Latinas seriously. All his wives are Latinas. He and I have the same taste in women. Don't take him seriously and don't try to sue him. He can't pay! As far as Sanchez squealing, ER editor knows MORE. Do you not know that he has already answered to TEA and came out clean, with a slap in the hand?

Dick Long

Anonymous said...

Sorry but this is not about McHale.

BobbyWC said...

It is about Sanchez's judgment which includes the company he keeps. This includes McHale Remeber he wants to be mayor.

Bobby WC

BobbyWC said...

For the record - I have not indicated I have any desire to sue McHale. It is Sanchez trying to encourage people to sue Montoya and company.

If McHale gets brought into this it will because Sanchez files a crossclaim accusing McHale and Montoya of conspiring to destroy him. Whether he can prove this is unclear to me.

Now I will say this, I expect Mchale will be sitting for an 8 hour deposition.

As to him liking Latinas - does not matter - there are a lot of ignorant people who read the garbage and act on it, and believe it - there are young latina girls who every day suffer abuses because of views like those expressed on his page.

parents have a right to insure their children's teachers are promoting a healthy environment for their daughters. When high school boys read this garbage they tend to act on the false beliefs. The girls suffer. The biggots act on the claims. His intent is meaningless - the community has a right to be offended and to speak out against it. The community has the same free speech rights as McHale. The Texas constitution provides we are free to speak our mind, but we are also free to be held accountable for our speech when it injures.

Bobby Wc

Anonymous said...

"When high school boys read this garbage they tend to act on the false beliefs. "
Are you talking about this garbage?

"Without it being a gay thing, straight men love to have their anus massaged either with your finger (use lube) or tongue. Try this while manipulating him with your hand or mouth. Ladies, when you are done - demand what ever you want for Christmas - do not be surprised if he robs a bank so he can afford to buy what ever you demanded. " Intimacy is not about genitalia BV. BWC


I don't know if you will post this but remember:

you like to be challenged!

Calling the kettle black? I know it is not exactly the same sin but sin it is.

Dick

Anonymous said...

"In the lawsuit Colunga states the services are based on a properly conducted ARD (it is a meeting of experts and teachers to decide the needs of the student). This would presumptively make Colunga son's continued attendance at BISD legal.

"If there was an ARD then the Administration knew of a basis for the services which therefore make the Sanchez/Montoya statement false."

This seems to say that ARDs are infallible. If that were the case, why would we need laws? ARDs would decide everything and there would be no path to dispute them. But that can't be the case. ARDs only apply the law, and thus must follow it. Law trumps ARD. Here, almost certainly, the staff conducting the ARD were pressured to reach a decision favorable to an influential politician. So, by bringing the lawsuit is Colunga going to expose himself to this kind scrutiny -- a public examination into how that ARD decision was achieved? And I question why he is bringing the suit. The pride of a parent? Anger? A mother's anger? Has Colunga been solicited by an attorney with an anti-Sanchez agenda? Colunga is just wrong ans he's been caught. The school district is not the property of an elite few in Brownsville, no matter how strongly they believe it is. I fear Joe Colunga is going to learn a very public lesson.

BobbyWC said...

I will not comment on your factually unsupported speculation.

The sanchez article stated the "As far as anyone in the administration, or legal counsel can determine, no such compensatory obligations exist." If there was an ARD this is then a false statement.

You are right- maybe the ARD committee made a mistake, but the it will be for Sanchez to prove that. he will have to hire an expert. The school district will then have their expert dispute the findings. Sanchez looses, unless someone specifically tesifties that they were ordered to ignore the law by COlunga - good luck with that -

Right now all you have is totally unsubstantiated claims with no proof - in a court of law that will get you no where-

Sounds like you have a beef with Colunga and favor Sanchez. you know bias goes both ways - in the middle is the law - Sanchez has to prove the ARD committee did not follow the law, and with disputing experts, the jury will rule for Colunga's son

Bobby WC

Anonymous said...

Mr WC - after rereading these posts I have to say I -belatedly - understand how you have been very unfairly attacked. The things said about you have been outrageous. You do not deserve that.
I wrote earlier, and while I think I was right in a general sense, or about a certain part of this issue, I would have done better to focus on the more important issue: Underlying the attack on Colunga is a political power play. That's the story that should be told.
And please continue to speak up for the special needs people --people who need others to speak up for them. I'm sorry what I wrote appeared to be taking the side of those attacking you. I don't approve of their conduct or share their goals.

BobbyWC said...

This was posted by Dick at 11:49 am yesterday. I have no idea why it did not come through, but when I went to post this mornings comments I saw it as an unpublished comment. I am coping it here so it does not come across as buried, which is how it appears now.

'Anonymous said...
"When high school boys read this garbage they tend to act on the false beliefs. "
Are you talking about this garbage?

"Without it being a gay thing, straight men love to have their anus massaged either with your finger (use lube) or tongue. Try this while manipulating him with your hand or mouth. Ladies, when you are done - demand what ever you want for Christmas - do not be surprised if he robs a bank so he can afford to buy what ever you demanded. " Intimacy is not about genitalia BV. BWC


I don't know if you will post this but remember:

you like to be challenged!

Calling the kettle black? I know it is not exactly the same sin but sin it is.

Dick

December 18, 2008 11:49 AM"

All I can say is, if you can equate the vulgar garbage on the other blog, with a some what sterile discussion on sexuality and intimacy then I have no response. This is obviously something personal, and my readers can decide for themselves.

BTW, a sin by whose standards? - if you know the teachings of Joshua (aka Jesus) gentiles were excused from old Jewish law - read the passage in Romans about foreskin. Joshua never commented on these issues. So the world is to live by your definition of sin. When do we start stoning women who cheat on their spouses?

My greater point was to take genitalia out of the picture and focus on non-genitalia intimacy. I then went on to describe what reseach shows is happening with happy and successful couples.

A general discussion on sexuality without use of vulgar street language is in your mind the same as demeaning women. My readers will decide.

We teach sexuality in school. We know it is an issue in divorce. It appears to be your position that an open and frank discussion of the issue without use of vulgar street language will be a bad influence on the children in the same way as demeaning women is. Again I will defer to my readers.

Bobby WC

sorry for the late approval of your comment, but as you can see - I did not leave it buried above where no one would see it.

Bobby WC

Anonymous said...

"Ladies, when you are done - demand what ever you want for Christmas - do not be surprised if he robs a bank so he can afford to buy what ever you demanded"

Then again by your standards prostitution may not be a sin.

Marisa Zapata

BobbyWC said...

Marisa, you know as well as I do what I was saying, he will be so pleased with you he will want to buy you a great gift.

Since you want to play the sin game - Christians like you are cuando me conviene - "judge not" he who is without sin can throw the first stone. Turn the other cheek" and on and on -

I am not a Christian, I am a student of Joshua, aka Jesus, who was not a Christian, thank god.

The endless double standards of Christianity the faith of cuando me conviene is your game not mine.

Now I care about people. I would never tell you what to teach your children about morality. You have no business telling people what is moral and immoral - you can argue your position without imposing it on others.

Now prostitution - I support it 100% - but only if it is under a health license and proof the men or women who are partaking in the business are drug free and truly mentally competent to consent.

you madam would prefer men continue to bring HIV and other STD's to their wifes. You think this is moral? - I think it is a sin for a society to have laws which promote HIV and STD's. I know an 11 year old girl who will have multiple surgeries on her back for the rest of her life, because her pig father gave the mother an STD during the pregnancy. This madam is a sin a sin promoted by you.

What is the difference between a lawyer and a prostitute? there are two, one is legal and one is not. Second, prostitutes have the integrity to admit to who they are and they do it to make a living.

I have a lot more respect for prostitutes than lawyers, Christians, journalists, car sales people, you name it.

If I love sex, and someone will pay me for it in a responsible health protected setting, why not? It is a job.

Bobby WC

Anonymous said...

"I have a lot more respect for prostitutes than lawyers, Christians, journalists, car sales people, you name it. "
BWC

So where do you put your self respect? Are you a lawyer, a "blog" journalist, or a prostitute?

If you keep your mouth shut you will never put your foot in it.

El Caballo de Don Quijote

BobbyWC said...

Anony, what in my post lead you to believe I was not including myself in the comment? I intended to say what I said - my point was prostitutes tend to me more honest than the rest of us, including me.

Now like a little pathetic weasal copy my words and save them for that day when it will give you a half ass woody to post it somewhere as an "I told you so." Consider this my personal xmas gift to you.

Bobby WC

Anonymous said...

Please be careful with your language, Bobby (and I mean this sincerely); you're veering into McHale Territory. I do understand your anger toward and disdain for some of the comments directed your way, but rise above the fray and set the example for the others!

Anonymous said...

p.s. Art Rendon will be absolutely useless in whatever happens. He will suck up to whichever party can offer the most.

BobbyWC said...

Just curious, lets say an investigation shows Colunga's son received special privileges - should not Montoya have demanded Gonzales and Rendon's resignations for their supportive role in the matter? Oh wait - both are flunkies fo Lehmann, which mean the are off limits when it comes to Montoya and Sanchez.

Further, if it turns out that Colunga's son is receiving special privileges, is not what should bother people how Colunga has turned a blind eye to Rendon's and Gonzales' incompetence on the issue of special needs children, and not that this disabled young man is receiving services?

Oh wait again, Gonzales and Rendon are off limits because they are Lehmann's flunkies - you see it was about dirty politics.

This story could have been done in a way which got out the point, why is Colunga's son getting such top notch services, while Colunga remains silent about the incompetence of Art Rendon?

This is a very valid question which Sanchez's attorney needs to pose to Colunga.

This question would have been useful and exposed the story without the need for potentially false statements. The intent was not to protect the interests of special needs students, but to settle a political score. The funny thing is, it could be Gonzales' and Rendon's deposition testimoney which sinks Sanchez.

If Sanchez were smart he will quietly settle for a token sum with Colunga and publically state while he is concerned with the special services Colunga's son is receiving while others are neglected and the district is actually being sanction by the TEA on the issue, he in fact did not have the evidence to support the primary claim.

Bobby WC

BobbyWC said...

Anony, well stated, you could have chimed in a couple of hours ago and saved me the typing - well stated and heard loud and clear

Thank you.

Bobby Wc

Anonymous said...

Nice interview with ER.

I told you so!