Brito's attack apology lame

We need to get out of here for another hot scoop on a state rep race but must post this first:

After Ladra noted earlier today that Miami Voice PAC chair Vanessa Brito, who led the recall against former commissioner Natacha Seijas, had allegedly denied her involvement in another PAC's negative attack ad against Commissioner and mayoral candidate Carlos Gimenez, Brito has apparently made those denials public.

And she quit her post as "media director" of The Accountability Project, formed by political consultant Keith Donner and funded, in part, by yet another PAC supporting Hialeah Mayor and county mayoral candidate Julio Robaina.

Brito did not return several calls from Ladra, but we got her statement from the other blog:

"Sometimes, people like myself who are relatively new to the 'scene' do not realize the background or baggage that comes with a professional request. I believe in transparency and accountability, one of the reasons I agreed to serve as a media contact for the Accountability Project. I did not form the PAC and I apparently did not do my due diligence on their motive for bringing me on board," she said. But she does not say that she, indeed, knows Donner. They have talked about campaigns before. She also knew Donner was working with Dario Moreno on a Gables candidate campaign and had used the [Non]Accountability PAC to smear an opponent in that race. And she forgot to mention that Moreno, who was her boss at FIU's Metropolitan Center, was her mentor and friend.

"I never thought the attacks emanating from this PAC would be so out of line and targeted at one candidate. I never thought my quotes would be misconstrued to an attack on one candidate for mayor."

Really? Okay, Vanessa (she always says I misconstrue her quotes also, very convenient), please explain exactly how they misconstrued this quote or what in it is misconstrued: "Commissioner Gimenez just doesn't get it. He's simply ignoring the will of the people." Or this quote: "Commissioner Gimenez is a career politician and bureaucrat with a long record of voting to raise his pay and benefits at voters' expense. He's the poster child for what's wrong with county government." (She loves that poster child quote, it is classic Vanessa). Or this quote: "We hope that the radio spot and website will allow voters to learn more about Commissioner Gimenez so they can make an informed decision about the candidates running for Miami-Dade mayor."

These are all from the press release and indicate that she knew about the radio piece and the website and that she knew it was geared against Gimenez. So is she lying yet again? I am willing to hear her out, but she won't speak up. She won't call me back. She just issues this non-apology that takes no responsibility for her mistake but places the blame, yet again, on everybody else.

"Political Action Committees serve a purpose in a community," she said, because she knows this whole episode helped Ladra show just how dangerous PACs and EOCs can be. "I am sorry I got involved with this PAC as I feel my name was sullied by the actions of the PAC. At this time, I only wish to be associated with my own PAC - Miami Voice, where I have control of the message." Wait a minute... isn't it the "voice of the people." Yeah, riiiiiight.

"As stated several times before, Miami Voice PAC will not endorse in the Mayoral or District 13 Commission races, but will provide a voter guide to voters with relevant issues to help them decide who will be the best candidate - for them, the people." Can't wait to see these "voter guides" and just how transparent they are going to be. Yeah, riiiiiight.

"As always, my professional private work will remain as such," (which could be another way of saying she got caught and will be more careful next time, but don't worry, dear readers, Ladra is good at finding the trail). "This specific case, however, is one I wish to clarify and to apologize to County Commissioner Carlos Gimenez for any statements attributed to me released by Accountability Project."

Gimenez told me this morning that she had texted him apologizing for the comments just before we spoke around 9:30 a.m. "But if she doesn't make that apology public..." he didn't finish the thought, but he didn't have to. It would mean nothing if she did not doing it publicly. And this self-serving justification is not even close. Please, commissioner Gimenez, don't buy it.

And start separating yourself from these Bramanite spin doctors who might be sabotaging your race.

Brito's love/hate with Gimenez

Miami-Dade Commissioner and mayoral candidate Carlos Gimenez has learned the hard way, like Ladra did, that you just can't trust Vanessa Brito, chair of the Miami Voice PAC that led the recall effort against former commissioner Natacha Seijas.

Less than two weeks ago, Brito (photographed here at a 2009 event picking names for a door prize out of a bucket, much like Ladra supposes she picks names of who to support next) lauded Gimenez publicly. She was either working or volunteering for the Gimenez campaign along with pollster/consultant Dario Moreno, who worked at FIU and is Brito's mentor and political father. "Not anymore," said a campaign insider, confirmed by another Gimenez supporter.

That's because Brito seems to have switched sides and gone on attack.

Brito, who told Ladra Monday that she was doing voter data research for Norman Braman through an Arizona company called Silver Bullet that Braman has paid thousands to through his three PACs (more on that later), is named in an April 5 press release as the head of The Accountability Project, another PAC ("electioneering organization is a different way to say PAC) formed by political junkmail guru-turned-consultant Keith Donner. Both have said they are not working for any mayoral candidate, but the [Non]Accountability Project has received $10,000 from another PAC (it's a plague) chaired by Julio Ponce, director of the Hialeah Housing Authority (which is always good for a few thousand votes) and a close ally of the Mayor Julio Robaina, also running for county mayor. Donner, who also used the PAC to smear a Coral Gables commission candidate, formed several PACs in Miami Beach while he worked a candidate's campaign there and Brito dreamt up the TaxPayer Coalition PAC when she ran Mimi Planas commission bid in district 10 and was helping Johnny Farias in a state house race, so they share this strategy.

Ladra was not terribly surprised to find Brito -- who earlier said that Gimenez was on the ball -- switch sides and call him "the poster child for what is wrong with Miami-Dade" in a press release from the PAC announcing a "public education campaign aimed at exposing the truth about" Gimenez. Truth? Brito's truth depends on who is writing her check. In addition to the 60-second radio spot aired on Cuban AM radio, the campaign also has a website, www.gimenez-truth.com, with the possibly PBA-funded jingles poking fun at the commissioner and a tabloid like graphic similar to other smear mailers from Donner's templates with exclamation points, quotes taken out of context, and criticism on his pension and 25 years as a public employee. The release notes that Gimenez has two pensions, but fails to say that he contributed to them for over 25 years and says that "Brito also noted" Gimenez voted against term limits but failed to mention he voted against 12-year term limits because he favored 8-year limits. That's just disingenuous, Vanessa. You were there at the meeting. Gimenez also wanted to put the $95,000 salary and no outside employment provisions to be as separate measures. (Ladra is voting against limits with a salary and the language currently written, which we think was intentional sabotage).

Brito, who has been seen with charter committee chairman and Bramanite Victor Diaz, did not mention that Gimenez put all the 2008 charter review reform recommendations on the agenda and has brought up term limits four times in six years on the dais.

Truth? How can we tell when Vanessa Brito is telling the truth?

Is it when she thanks Gimenez on his profile page a day after the vote for [non]reform? Or when she posts this on her page later on March 25? "Thank you Commissioner Rebeca Sosa and Carlos Gimenez for recognizing what the people of Miami-Dade really want."

Now, 11 days later: "Commissioner Gimenez just doesn't get it. He's simply ignoring the will of the people."

Well, first he recognized what the people want. Now he ignores those people. What is going to be the "truth" tomorrow?

"We hope that the radio spot and website will allow voters to learn more about Commissioner Gimenez so they can make an informed decision about the candidates running for Miami-Dade mayor," Brito said to end the press release she probably wrote herself.

Informed? Don't you mean manipulated? Why don't you inform the voters that your PAC is being funded by Robaina?

Ladra also learned the hard way that Brito will say what is convenient to her and has not two but three sides to her mouth. And we are sure that, like Gimenez and his people, others Vanessicans will see Brito's true colors and begin to jump ship.

Maybe then they'll recall her.

PAC Chair's police call detailed

Here's a fine example of how the Miami Voice PAC, who used the property tax increase to sway voters to recall a veteran county commissioner and mayor, use taxpayer dollars: making false police calls, tying up patrol officers for kicks.

Ladra finally got the Miami-Dade Police incident report from the dispatch call to the Miami Lakes library last month on an early voting Saturday. Oh, didn't we mention that PAC Chair Vanessa Brito had called the police on us? It's a bit of a disappointment, however, that we are not actually named in the report (which might have made this actionable, gosh darn it!). But we know it's Ladra.

Brito told me that March 3 morning -- no, warned me is better -- after refusing to answer why she still had not filed financial disclosures that were more than a week late. She yelled something and then said she was "calling the police" and whipped out a cell phone. Wonder if she dialed 911. (And if I can get that tape.)

From the "offense-incident report," obtained through the police department via a public records request: "This unit responded to the listed location reference a complainant, "Vanesa" [sic], saying that a white female reporter was harassing voters. Upon arrival, complainant was GOA [gone on arrival]. All appeared to be under control. No one was breaching the peace."

That's cop speak for false call, basically. And at least 30 wasted minutes for at least two officers, S. Walker and the officer who wrote the report, Officer R. Viera. The call was made at 9:59 a.m. according to the report and dispatched as a "dispute" at 10:04. Officers arrived at 10:12 and cleared the scene at 10:42. (I wanted to post the pdf of the report, but couldn't here. Contact me if you want it and I will forward it to you.) The "vic" was named only as "Vanesa," but Ladra did not recognize the phone number as the PAC contact number. So I dialed. Miami Vice Head of Insecurity Ivette Lisa Taylor answered the phone and said that the organization stands by the report. I asked how many other times PACkers had called police during the recall election. Taylor's first answer: "That is information that you don't need to know." When I started reading back her quote from my notebook as I wrote it down, she balked and said Ladra put words in her mouth. (Really? Those words are the best words Ladra can think of to put in your mouth? 'That is information that you don't need to know.'? Am I a Russian spy?). Anyway, I said, okay, let me ask again. Her second answer was: "That's none of your business." I didn't put those words in her mouth either. Because, basically, she said the same thing twice (albeit the former was more poetic).

Brito offered far more creative and cryptic answers, as usual. "I have not been in the presence of any police report being written," she said, and now that I read it again and type it here, this sounds like maybe it was intentional, rehearsed, like maybe her attorney (and he was present) suggested it. "Don't be here when the cops come." Makes sense. Anyway, when I asked if she or any PACkers called police at any other voting sites during the heavy campaign for the recall in district 13, she specifically said she herself had not. "I don't know if anybody else called the police." Ah, and now perhaps that is why it was Taylor's phone number on the report: Unaccountability. She did say that "yes, several complaints were made" at voting sites during the November elections, when the PAC was still collecting signatures. (Ladra has requested public records on calls made to the voting precincts during the more recent election cycle, as well as the tape and transcript from this March 3 call. We will follow up with any findings.)

Ladra wasn't there at those "incidents" last year, but she is sure I am the "white, female reporter" that "Vanesa" called police on in this report. We had gone to the public library parking lot because Brito would not answer phone calls to ask about the lateness of the financial disclosure, which lists contributions and costs made by the PAC in their campaign to recall former commissioner Natacha Seijas (whose name is spelled wrong in their placards. So they can't do math and they can't spell either?). Not that it's needed (her credibility being what it is, even among those who continue to support her), but I know there are several witnesses, including a police major volunteering to hold an anti-recall campaign sign (with correct spelling), who will tell anybody that I was the one being harassed and heckled by the Vanessicans, including Miami Lakes Mayor Muscles Pizzi. Maybe we should also take an account from Police Officer S. Walker, who is not mentioned in the report but also responded to the call and spoke with me in front of electrical union guys supporting Seijas (I'm an equal opportunity "harasser" I guess). She said someone "over there" [points to the parking lot area where PACkers were] told her I was the one she wanted to talk to. Probably another PACker since "Vanesa" was GOA. Walker asked me what was going on and, identifying myself, I told her why I was there and that she would likely want to speak to a woman "over there" [now I point] named Vanessa Brito who told me she was calling the police because she did not want me there asking uncomfortable questions... oh, wait a minute... could that be why the complainant on the report is only known as "Vanesa"? Because none among the PAC would go on with her criminal false call? I never talked to Walker again, but there were two patrol cars parked next to PACkers area for, apparently, about half an hour. And none of the PAC people had the gumption to speak on behalf of their leader and back up the police call by providing information? I wish I had known. I would have been happy to provide them with the details. I was there for at least an hour after the officers left.

Now, why is this important? What I want to know -- and I bet Brito will say this is more "harassment" -- is how much that call to police cost. And what about the cost of the time that a supervisory officer by the name Pichardo reviewed it and closed it, marking the reason "exceptional." Yes, exceptional, indeed. Exceptionally false. And are there any more such police calls costing how much? And what is the penalty for making a false police call and filing a false report? If I read the state law correctly, it could be a year in jail and a $1,000 fine. According to Florida Statute 817.49, "whoever willfully imparts, conveys or causes to be imparted or conveyed to any law enforcement officer false information or reports concerning the alleged commission of any crime... knowing such information or report to be false, in that no such crime had actually been committed," could be charged with a misdemeanor of the first degree. This means you don't have to be there to see the report being written, "Vanesa". You just have to call to report a crime that you know is not actually being committed. Like, you did March 3.

Maybe there is indeed a crime that needs to be reported now, after all. But Ladra's instinct is to blow it off or wear it proudly as a badge. Unless, of course, the records I requested come back and show more calls to police made from complainants who disappeared from voting precincts from phones that are linked back to the PAC. That might be something Ladra forwards to the state attorney's office.

Or at least writes far too much about in a future post.

Little ridiculous PAC aims anew

The Miami Voice PAC that petitioned the recall of former commission veteran Natacha Seijas may take aim once again at Commissioner Audrey Edmonson because she called the group "little" and "ridiculous." Funny, Ladra thinks it's the smartest thing Edmonson said all night.

Apparently, PAC Chair Vanessa Brito, who had no problem with the fat jokes she and her supporters made about Seijas, took the "most outrageous" comments of the day (Really?!?!) personally and threatened to start the recall process again on Friday. Really? For this? Well, please tell signers and voters this time that the reason for the this costly recall is because Edmonson "dissed Miami Voice by calling them 'little' and ridiculous." Oh, how dare she!!

Of all the other things they said, this was the worst: "This little group thinks they can go around collecting signatures and bully us." Inoffensive enough, though it's a misquote. But before I put it in her words, which give a totally different tone and context, let me just ask what is it so offensive she said? Little? But you said earlier this month when you were more than a week late with campaign finance reports that you were "just one person." That sounds little to me. Could it be that she called you a bully? Well, let's review your own words on facebook after the meeting when the Vanessicans started the inevitable egging on. You wrote, and I quote correctly: "I guess I'm headed back to the clerk of courts tomorrow. She has to fear that 88%." Your head of insecurity (because, really, you are actually more like "only five people," which is still "little"): "Just because we were not successful the first time in recalling Edmonson, does not mean we won't try again. There's still a lot of work to be done." That could be considered a veiled threat against almost anyone. And this post from member number two and former commission candidate Mimi Planas, pictured here with Brito, her campaign manager in a failed her bid to unseat Javier Souto because they thought of the recall idea too late: "wtf... oh realllllyyyyyy...... must have a little talk w/ her." That might be considered bullying. (It's also not the way a wannabe commissioner should talk, so let's hear it for the people of Westchester who rejected her with an 80 percent vote! 80 percent! Remembe?). You know what else is bullying? An email to an activist who doesn't support you that says, and I quote correctly, "David, I will be at Miami Lakes today. I presume you will too. I would LOVE to address the false allegations made in your email IN PUBLIC." (I'm getting another allegedly threatening email allegedly sent to a blogger last summer to defend another one of your failed candidates). You know what else could be bullying? Jokes about Seijas weight and calling her Jabba the Hut. Ask any school counselor.

Here is what Edmonson actuallly said, and a great illustration of how context matters. I'll call it one of the most honest, open, courageous things that anyone up there said Thursday, even though I did not agree with her most of the rest of the time. But while grown men cowered in the wake of the feared "88 percent!!", Edmonson faced the witch hunt and did not have one hair on her tongue (doesn't translate as well but basically, called it as she saw it):

"We should not allow the media... or one person or one small group to tell us what to do because then, the way I would see it, what is the purpose of this commission? Why elect anybody to represent the people and then allow others to bully that particular group? And when I say bully, I mean bully. Because now, its gotten to the point where if someone doesn't agree with a vote on this dais, then 'Okay, go recall them.' Forget about criminal activity. Forget about malfeasance or misfeasance. Forget about all that stuff. 'I don't like you. I don't like how you voted. So let's do a petition drive to get them out.' That's ridiculous. It's ridiculous!"

See? You misquoted again. She actually called you ridiculous twice.

PAC Chair speaks, says nothing

Finally got a response from Vanessa Brito, chairwoman of the Miami Voice PAC trying to oust Miami-Dade Commissioner Natasha Seijas, when I asked for details about LGBT discrimination claims she is making against Seijas' camp and another political enemy of hers.

Or a non-response (this falls under the Bait & Switch Trick type excuse).

"Please cease and desist," Brito wrote today. "Please do not contact my family or myself any further. Any claims made will see the result through appropriate legal means.

"Again, please do not email, call, or correspond with any of my family members, including my partner, our children, or my immediately family," she wrote, ending on a light note: "Best, Vanessa Brito."

Well, first, congratulations. I did not know you had children. But I also think that's a bit inflammatory and disingenuous, if not just silly, because everyone knows I wouldn't ask children about the campaign finance disclosure forms overdue from a rogue PAC. I'm a mom and I know the only PAC my daughter would have interest in is a Vote Bieber PAC.

Secondly, I have never contacted anyone in your family about the PAC and its finances, or anything. I contacted your life partner, Heidy Medina, but only because she is also the treasurer of the PAC. Or at least she was paid $300 for "treasurer compensation" in the only campaign finance report you have filed, which records activity through Dec. 31, which is a long time ago and also reflects your illegal third party $5,000 contribution from your marketing firm on behalf of a "secret" donor (read: special interest). Are you saying that because your treasurer is also your partner she is off limits to the press and unaccountable? Why wouldn't all PAC chairs appoint relatives to get that defacto gag going on? More silliness. If the treasurer had been someone outside the family, I would not have approached Medina in a public parking lot where she was stumping for "yes" votes and ask her about the failure to file the financial disclosures, which I only did after you repeatedly refused to address the issue in an adult, civilized, dignified and transparent way. And which only resulted in her aggressive physical threats. Tsk, tsk.

One more thing, I am not making claims. I am asking questions, reporting on location and from public documents as well as personal knowledge and history and connecting the dots. It's a good thing. I have no ulterior motives. Nobody is paying me under the table. What claims have I made that are untrue? Or, wait, just end it at what claims have I made? Can't say? (read: red herring). I am transparent. Why aren't you?

I can cease today on this one topic but I cannot desist because, you are, indeed, a public figure (even though you keep saying you are not when it is convenient) and I am a journalist who blogs on local political matters that others would want to keep in the dark. As chair of a PAC that is seeking the ouster of a democratically-elected official, and apparently violating state law to do it, you are very much a public figure and I will need to call or email you to ask questions as stories arise or give you an opportunity, as I do for others, to offer a different perspective. I do not participate in sabotage journalism. You can always decline to comment. This is Journalism 101. Many electeds, including your friend Miami Lakes Mayor Michael Pizzi and your foe Seijas, would love to tell journalists to "cease and desist" and make no further contact. (I'm sure that was considered by some when I covered Coral Gables government for the Miami Herald). Though convenient, that's not how it works.

You cannot repeatedly go on TV and radio and social media avenues and say you are the "voice of the people" and then say you are not a public figure that should be held accountable for what that voice says. Your friends and supporters have been urging you to run for office on your facebook wall (or you have been urging people to urge you to run for office; remember, I have sat next to you). You have been promoting yourself as a public figure in the LGBT community for years. You even have a fan page on facebook as a "community activist," but surprisingly only 134 fans. What's up with that? I know, you're busy. Busy being a public figure. And you cannot stick your head in the sand now because it's getting a little uncomfortable out in that public you sought and love so much. That is not how it works.

This time, I will quote you in what you say here as your flippant response to my serious query (it's kind of a colorful "no comment"), even though I am quite adamant about holding people responsible for their words and actions when it involves prejudice. Everyone who knows me knows that I will not tolerate any hate speech or discrimination toward anyone. (Here we are photographed on a happier day as founding members of the SaveDade Women's Committee with fellow Miami Vice member Ivette Lisa Taylor in November or December of 2009 when we once worked together for the LGBT community before I separated myself from you professionally and personally after what I consider several ethical breaches). So if you have specific details, names, witnesses, documentation of any kind -- digital, anecdotal, circumstantial -- about this alleged injustice, please, again, share it with me or other members of the media or LGBT community leaders (who were copied on our email exchange and were also urged to use their judgement and seek independent confirmation of any future claims made).

Otherwise, they look like wild accusations -- the gay card, if you will -- thrown out to intentionally inflame voters for the wrong, false, reasons. It's called scare tactics. And it's a red herring. If you are really concerned about the LGBT community and the alleged discriminatory remarks, why wouldn't you want me and others to have more details so I can go to bat for you (just this once, because, we are on the same side this time). I suspect that you do not follow up on the very serious claims (and you talk so much about defamation of character, eh?) because you know they are either made up or generously exaggerated.

Again, your theme is a lack of transparency. And this is what you want for the residents of Miami Dade? Smoke and mirrors and red herrings? I hope they are spared.

Multiple Choice Quiz: Why is PAC late with disclosure?

Looks like Vanessa Brito, who chairs the PAC recalling Commissioner Natacha Seijas, has a reason for not filing the campaign finance report that tells voters how they get and spend their funds (read: who pulls the strings). Actually, several.

The practiced liar is turning to a few favorites and trying on a few different excuses for size before deciding which to go with.

Let's provide a little assistance. I'll list the multiple excuses Brito has made so far for violating state law and being, to date, nine days late with the reports, which are intended to tell voters -- before they cast their ballots -- who is bankrolling the effort. Here we go:

(A) The Tech Defense, aka, "My computer made me do it": Brito told Miami-Dade Elections Clerk Maria Acosta (in an email) that she could not enter the data into the system, Acosta told me. "I gave them a new password," Acosta then said. And still no report. People who know Brito have heard versions of this before. My favorite was when someone "hijacked" her email, no... wait. It was the sitting state house rep who somehow hacked into the White House phone system to crank call her and also used the same spyware to send inappropriate, text messages with sexual innuendos from to people and make it look like it came from her own phone. (This really happened. There are others who know about it.) What are your favorite Brito tech defenses? Feel free to share in the comments below.

(B) The Medical Emergency Evasion: This time, her uncle is in the hospital, which makes anybody who tries to challenge the group's lack of transparency an unsympathetic bastard. I will try to explain it without sounding like a cold, uncaring bitch, because I am really a warm, caring bitch and do not mean any ill will to Brito's patient, tired and overburdened family. None of this is their fault. But she yelled "My uncle is in the hospital!" as she stood in the parking lot at the Miami Lakes library Saturday morning, stumping for Yes votes. And her uncle was not rushed to ER, according to her facebook posts, until March 3, six days after the report was due. She also has been working on other campaign duties, "running between hospital and [voting] site," as she said on facebook (where she has also logged many hours), commenting on blogs and sending long, rambling and pointless emails to political enemies and Miami Lakes residents. On March 2, five days after the reporting deadline, she challenged Natacha Seijas to a debate. A day earlier, only four days late with the report, she posted "another sunny day at early voting." The night of Feb. 28 after spending a "long and hot day" in Hialeah on the first day of early voting, she stayed up into the wee hours of March 1 "validating" she-doesn't-say-what on facebook (maybe absentee ballot requests?). She also notes that Ivette Lisa Taylor, another Miami Vice founding member and I am going to call her Head of Insecurity, was there and that they both wanted Cuban coffee. But I guess neither of them had enough energy left to finish the report, which was only three days late back then. The day it the report was due, Brito was scheduled to be on Actualidad 1020 AM radio. One week after the report was due, she asked her facebook friends to join her on Saturday at the Lakes library. So I took the opportunity, since she won't return my phone calls, to go and ask her why the report was still not in. "My uncle is in the hospital," she yelled, followed by expletives she does not use with the journalists from GenTV. But she had time in the morning to email an opposing activist and invite him to the library to address her concerns with him "in PUBLIC." (More on that exchange later. There is too much going on behind the scenes to put it all in one post.) And, again, no ill will here, just an observation, but Brito herself or her family seem to have had a lot of close calls and ER runs this year, sometimes around her deadlines. Doesn't anybody else notice? Maybe she needs un despojo? (I truly hope her uncle gets better. Both for his sake and that of the voters.)

(C) The Bait-And-Switch Trick: When Brito is forced into a corner, she answers questions with questions and throws smoke and mirrors out to confuse the issues. In the Saturday morning email sent before heading to the voting sites, she said "every media outlet has a copy of my financial report." Well, state law does not require making it available to the media outlets she finds friendly. It requires the PAC to file the report with a clerk at the Elections Department, which would then make it available to anyone. I didn't get a copy. I've asked my friends at other media outlets to see if they were the lucky ones who got to see the report. Haven't heard back yet from any. But that's irrelevant. It has to be made available to the public at large, by law.

(D) Short-handed subterfuge: Brito commented on another blog, when she could have used the time to finish the report due five days earlier, that she was "only one person." But aren't there legions of people in her organization? How can she represent the "voice of the people" if she is all alone? From one of those emails she apparently had the time to write: "I'm not one to pay people to do my work - if you don't know, my uncle is dying and it's been just a tad difficult to do everything." But, isn't the treasurer of the PAC capable of handling that task? Or is the only criteria for that job prior girlfriend duty. (Note to readers: Brito has said that my identification of PAC treasurer Heidy Medina as her life partner in a previous post is discrimination against the LGBT community. I did it to respect the truth, which diversity seminars have taught me to do as often as possible, "mainstream the community" as it were, and also because it's relevant in this context. I would have noted it as well if the treasurer were a husband instead. And, for the record, I am a member of the LGBT community, so how could it be an insult? ... which leads to...

(E) The Fish Story. Red herrings abound. Try this experiment at home: Ask Brito a straight question and watch her turn it around on you or go off on an irrelevant tangent or simply change subjects. And think about it. The only arguably reasonable motive of any substance the group has for Seijas' ouster is that she was one of a majority who voted for the tax increase, which they take out of context because it is a great emotional button to push in this economic climate. There's a lot of talk about Seijas style, or lack of, and her aggressive demeanor (very often used to describe plus-sized girls). Ok, so I'll agree the woman needs an image consultant at least as much as Charlie Sheen. But that's a red herring. There are undocumented allegations that Seijas and/or supporters made disparaging remarks about the LGBT community (look for this to become a recurring theme) and she posted warning "those in Hialeah commedores about people being swayed," which means absolutely nothing but sounds really bad, right? Red herrings are defined as "something to distract attention from the real problem or matter at hand; a misleading clue." And red herrings abound.

(F) All of the above.

Of course, because I love excess (couldn't you tell by the wordcount?) and have a hard time making such important decisions outside the committee (my sister and our PTA friends), I go with F. But I think it's also a good strategy for Brito. Why stick to one excuse when this kind of lateness looks really intentional already? More excuses can fill up that timeline: First this, then that, then this happened.

In the meantime, while she runs from voting site to voting site, writes long, rambling and off-point red herring emails, gives TV and radio interviews, validates, posts, comments and does everything except file the financial disclosure report, thousands of people cast ballots to decide the fate of a democratically-elected commissioner that nobody has been able to beat for years in a traditional election, and nobody knows who is funding the effort behind this non-traditional stab.

Should that be acceptable?

Maybe Brito will come up with a few more creative cop-outs and won't have time to file until after the election is over completely. I mean, she only has a few days left to stall.