McAllen – The Monitor was accused today of assisting incumbent Mayor Jim Darling by providing questions in advance during a MonitiorLive Q & A Session.
Below is the closing moments of Jim Darlings Q & A Session with The Monitor Staff Writer, Mitchell Ferman. Ferman has covered much of the McAllen Mayoral race since all three candidates announced their intentions to run.
Video provided by Scott Casey of anonymousrgv.com
It would appear based on the clip, that Jim Darling makes the statement in jest, which spurs Mr. Mitchell, though nervously to quickly clarify that he did not provide questions in advance, and Darling reaffirms by agreeing.
Casey’s story was met with a sharp rebuke from The Monitor’s own editor, Carlos Sanchez, who chastised Casey for reporting inaccurate information. Casey maintains his position that The Monitor and Jim Darling were simply caught red handed.
This comes at the heels of a well publicized incident in which CNN was caught feeding debate questions to Hillary Clinton during the 2016 Democratic Presidential Debates. Donna Brazile, of CNN was used to relay debate questions to the Clinton camp.
CNN later parted ways with Brazile, amidst the scandal.
Due impart to the effects of Wikileaks and the rise of independent news organizations, it should come as no surprise to The Monitor that trust in mass media is at an all time low, according to Gallup research.
Othal Brand Jr, ultimately, did not participate in todays Q & A session. The Brand campaign did not leave a reason as to why, however, supporters of Mr. Brand believe it was due to Mitchell Fermans unfavorable coverage of his campaign, and preferential coverage of Jim Darling.
Here are two excerpts of Mr. Ferman’s coverage of the McAllen Mayoral race. Is there hint of bias? You decide.
The above statement is from Mr. Brand’s campaign kick-off. Mr. Furman was sure to include that Brand didn’t bring anything new to the table.
Here’s an other piece written by Furman during coverage of first Mayoral Forum.
I guess everyone except Jim Darling left their notes at home.
There’s no doubt that The Monitor’s editorial takes sides during many high profile issues. They foolishly picked the wrong horse during Proposition 1, and paid a heavy price. They later waved a white flag, finally trying to seek common ground with the readers of Hidalgo County, after Prop 1 was disastrously defeated last November. They continue to be on the wrong side of history on illegal immigration.
Do they have a preferential candidate for the McAllen race? Perhaps, but I’m positive that they like to assure us that they are neutral on the race, and will report the proceedings objectively. But it’s hard to take them at their word, when their own editor, Carlos Sanchez, proudly wines and dines with Jim Darlings campaign treasurer.