Is LT. Gov. Candidate Linked To City Corruption?

Texas State Senator Leticia Van de Putte has signaled her intention to run for Lt. Governor on the Democratic Party ticket. Her official announcement isn't scheduled to come out until Nov. 23rd. However, the political rumor mill surrounding Wendy Davis's gubernatorial campaign and other left-wing activist PACs in and around San Antonio may have already let that cat out of the bag.


When James Foddrill Sr. worked for the city of San Antonio, he discovered "the variable", a rotating account established originally to consolidate the city's official phone accounts. However, according to several confidential sources, a loophole in the account's design allowed corrupt city officials, such as the mayor, the police chief, and several city council members, to funnel money to no-bid, unannounced contracts to their pet cronies. This has been going on for over 25 years, but has gotten worse since the current mayor won his first election. Foddrill audited "the variable" because it was listed under his department and auspice. But he was told to drop his audit and ignore the account. See this earlier story for more of the background.

During the continued drama surrounding Foddrill, he attempted several avenues to report the suspected corruption for it to be, hopefully, objectively investigated. Among those avenues was Foddrill's state-level Senator, Leticia Van de Putte. She refused to initiate a congressional inquiry. Here was her response:

Van de Putte is known to have endorsed Mayor Castro and his twin brother in their respective elections. This begs the yet unanswered questions concerning Foddrill's whistle-blowing of the allegations regarding "the variable". Did Van de Putte make the claims in this letter as a means of avoiding her duty to conduct a congressional investigation of her political allies? If so, how complicit is she with this and other corruption allegations surrounding her home-town buddies?   

The rumors of de Putte's intentions are most likely part of the media thermometer to gauge public sentiments during a final exploratory while de Putte collects signatures on her petition. Her official announcement is scheduled for Nov. 23rd.

If she is a snowball, the waters are past boiling and have become scalding hot steam. While de Putte may have some pull among left-wing and left-leaning females in more urban areas, Texas contains a wide expanse of those opposed to many of de Putte's core ideology, which she shares with her possible "running mate", Wendy Davis.

Like many other states, the ballots for Governor and Lt. Governor are separate. Should Davis win the election to the Governor's Mansion, either Dan Patrick or Todd Staples, the two strongest Republican candidates for Lt. Governor, could well end up her Lt. Gov. The reverse is also possible. Abbott could win and be saddled with Van de Putte as his Lt. Gov.

As Davis seeks support in order to bolster her campaign, groups such as Unite Blue and Battleground Texas, seek to assist her. Unfortunately, for both Davis and Van de Putte, both groups are connected to cronyism in the so-called "Obamacare Navigators" who are coming under fire for fraud and identity theft, thanks to the investigative reporting by James O'Keefe III's Project Veritas. Furthermore, the atrocious roll-out of Obamacare and the skyrocketing of insurance premiums and deductibles are not going to do either of them any favors. Even the "voter ID is cheating" crowd has lost steam as the Nov. 5th elections proved the allegations unfounded.

As other information is exposed, Van de Putte may prove to be another liability.

Van de Putte, who prides herself on being a pharmacist, supported Davis's filibuster of the Texas Abortion Reform Bills during the 1st Special Session of the Texas 83rd Legislature. The bills passed during the 2nd Special Session without either woman's vote.

Those who have read the bill understand they did not stand against any ban on abortion. They stood against reforms that would guarantee better treatment and facilities for abortive mothers.

One bill prevented the use of an abortive pharmaceutical, used for non-surgical abortions, after a certain deadline. The reasoning is that studies proved use of the drug beyond a certain gestation date stood a reduced result of an abortion and much greater incidence of damage to a surviving child as well as severe side-effects for the mother. The bill also mandated the drugs be taken under direct medical supervision in order to reduce the potential for these dangerous side-effects.

The second bill restricted surgical abortions to within 20 weeks. Some states have had long-standing laws restricting abortions to within 16 weeks, the first trimester. Many other state laws restricting surgical abortions to a period of 20 weeks or less have been upheld by federal courts, to include the US Supreme Court. The recent case against the Texas laws maintained those rulings.

The second bill also reformed policies regarding the licensing of abortion clinics and those who may perform the procedures. It mandates that surgeons performing these elective, ambulatory surgeries comply with the same laws applicable to all other ambulatory surgical procedures at ambulatory surgical clinics in Texas. That means the doctors and staffs must have admissions contracts with emergency care hospitals within 30 miles of  the Ambulatory Surgical Clinic. That measure is designed to save lives.

The measures within the Texas Abortion Reform Acts would prevent monsters such as Douglas Karpen of Houston, TX from killing live-born babies. It would prevent monsters such as Kermit Gosnell from murdering live-born babies birthed into toilets, and killing their mothers through unsanitary operating rooms, drug overdoses, and other forms of willful malpractice.

The acts of monsters such as Karpen and Gosnell are wrong, regardless of which side of the pro-life, pro-abortion debate you stand. Davis and de Putte didn't vote against an abortion ban. They voted against criminalizing the acts of these monsters. They voted in favor of promoting more acts such as these, which deny living humans their choices, their lives, their liberties, and their pursuits of happiness.

In addition, one doesn't have to look far to see Planned Parenthood backing either of these women. Planned Parenthood was established by a racist monster named Margaret Sangster. Her mission was to convince "undesirables" to commit self-inflicted genocide in support of her eugenics ideology. Among those "undesirables" are "blacks, Jews, Asians, Hispanics, and all aliens, legal or illegal". Planned Parenthood continues her mission and grand eugenics experiment even today. They assist in more abortions directed at "minorities" than they do Caucasians. They claim it alleviates poverty and provides "choice".

Before making any choice, adults weigh potential consequences. They weigh the data, pro and con. They think. They collect facts. Human beings are the only creatures granted senses of logic and reason based on empirical evidence. Use them.