News

Vasquez posts bond, pleads no contest after TX authorities execute warrant

In March, police in El Paso, Texas, executed an arrest warrant against New Mexico Democratic congressman Gabe Vasquez, according to court documents obtained by the Washington Free Beacon.

The documents reveal that Vasquez failed to appear in court over two decades ago, in 2002, following charges of driving without a license, driving without insurance, and disregarding an “official traffic control device.” Subsequently, he was cited for failure to appear in court in September 2007, leading to an arrest warrant being issued in April 2008.

An El Paso constable executed the warrant on March 19. Vasquez paid a cash bond of nearly $900, pleaded no contest, and waived his right to a jury trial. According to court filings, Vasquez faces a pre-trial hearing in September and risks a conviction and forfeiture of his bond if he does not appear. A spokesperson for Vasquez described the September hearing as an “administrative mistake” and promised to provide the necessary documentation.

Vasquez’s plea document identifies his employment as “United States Congress.”

Despite the legal issues, Vasquez continued his public duties. On March 19, as his representative paid the bond, Vasquez hosted a “tele-town hall.” The following day, he issued a statement criticizing a “dangerous Supreme Court ruling” that allowed Texas to enforce a law permitting local police to arrest migrants temporarily.

“These traffic fines from over two decades ago when the congressman was 18 years old were paid off and no further action has been requested,” stated Vasquez’s campaign manager, Dylan McArthur.

Born in El Paso, Vasquez now resides in Las Cruces, New Mexico. Before his congressional run in 2022, he spent years criticizing law enforcement. During the summer of 2020, he called for the deconstruction and rebuilding of systems he described as oppressive, including law enforcement and the economy. He stated, “As long as white folks dominate this nation’s wealth and preside over our nation’s governing bodies and judicial systems, the racism, killing, and injustice will continue.”

While serving on the Las Cruces City Council, Vasquez often advocated for cutting police budgets and reforming law enforcement practices. In emails to constituents in 2020, he highlighted his involvement in a “small police-council group” focused on de-escalation guidelines and expressed strong support for police reform and the Black Lives Matter movement. “I wholeheartedly and absolutely support police reform and the #blacklivesmatter movement, and will not be stopping short of transformational reform that brings justice to our city and to people of color in our community,” he wrote.

During his 2022 congressional campaign, Vasquez shifted his public stance, removing social media posts that rationalized rioting after George Floyd’s death. He positioned himself as a law enforcement supporter, telling CNN he did not believe defunding the police was a path to fair criminal justice. In one campaign ad, he featured a retired sheriff affirming Vasquez’s support for law enforcement.

Vasquez narrowly won his congressional seat in 2022, defeating Republican incumbent Yvette Herrell by less than one point. He has launched his reelection campaign and will face Herrell again in a rematch this November.

Vasquez refuses to join vast bipartisan majority against illegal voting

In a major move, the House of Representatives has passed bipartisan legislation to overturn a progressive immigration policy that allows illegal aliens to vote in local elections in Washington, D.C. This legislation garnered widespread support, with over fifty Democrats joining Republicans to endorse the measure. It passed 262 to 143. However, far-left Rep. Gabe Vasquez (D-CD2) voted against it, a decision that has drawn sharp criticism from various quarters, especially since Vasquez represents southern New Mexico, where New Mexico’s entire border with Mexico is located. Vasquez was joined by Rep. Teresa Leger Fernandez (D-CD3) in opposing the bill, while Rep. Melanie Stansbury (D-CD1) was absent from the vote.

The legislation, seen by many as a common-sense approach to ensuring electoral integrity, was supported by a broad coalition in the House, including 52 Democrats. Maureen O’Toole, Regional Press Secretary for the Congressional Leadership Fund, emphasized the bipartisan nature of the vote and criticized Vasquez’s stance. “Preventing noncitizens from voting in American elections is as basic and commonsense as it gets, which is why it passed with a clear bipartisan majority in the House, yet Gabe Vasquez was too extreme to support it,” O’Toole stated. “Today’s vote makes it clear: Gabe Vasquez’s top priority is pushing radical illegal immigration policy, not fighting for New Mexico citizens or protecting the security of our elections.”

The National Congressional Committee’s Spokeswoman, Delanie Bomar, wrote following the vote, “Don’t believe extreme Democrat Gabe Vasquez’s election year posturing, just look at his votes – he is a radical open borders zealot. As long as Vasquez is in office, illegal migrants will get the red carpet treatment while American citizens get the shaft.”

Vasquez’s vote against the legislation is consistent with his history of advocating for progressive immigration policies. He has previously called for defunding U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and has supported shutting down ICE facilities altogether. 

Critics also point out that Vasquez has downplayed the severity of the border crisis, accusing Republicans of politicizing the issue rather than addressing it substantively. He has consistently voted against stricter border security measures despite concerns about an increase in crimes committed by illegal immigrants.

The decision to allow noncitizens to vote in local elections in the nation’s capital has been a flashpoint, with many arguing that voting should be a privilege reserved for citizens. 

Vasquez faces a tough reelection battle against GOP former Congresswoman Yvette Herrell, who has the support of Republican House leadership and many other key voices.

The embarrassing truth about MLG’s so-called ‘zero-emission’ fire truck

Recent reports reveal that the celebrated “all-electric” or “zero emissions” fire trucks, being lauded from San Diego to Portland to Albuquerque, are not as environmentally friendly as advertised. Each of these new fire trucks, purchased with the assistance of federal funding, is equipped with a diesel engine to ensure functionality when the electric battery is depleted. 

This revelation highlights a significant discrepancy between the marketed image of these trucks and their actual operational design.

The report indicates that each of these supposedly zero-emission trucks includes a diesel engine to guarantee that it can still pump water or drive if the electric battery runs out. Furthermore, the cost of these hybrid trucks is significantly higher than their all-diesel counterparts, with a price tag that is 40 to 50 percent more.

“This would be laughable if so much money wasn’t being wasted on such a big lie,” stated Daniel Turner, Founder and Executive Director of Power The Future. Turner expressed his frustration, emphasizing that politicians celebrating these trucks as “all-electric” are either misleading the public or are unaware of the trucks’ true nature. “Over-spending tax dollars on a product and then misleading voters is nothing less than pure fraud,” he added.

One notable example highlighted in the report is the purchase of an “all-electric” fire truck for $1.8 million, of which $400,000 was funded by a federal grant. Despite the truck being touted as a “zero emission” vehicle by Democrat New Mexico Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham, the inclusion of a diesel engine undermines this claim.

The discrepancy between the public portrayal and the reality of these fire trucks raises concerns about the transparency and efficacy of using taxpayer money for such projects. Critics argue that the funds could be better spent on genuinely green technologies rather than on vehicles that still rely on fossil fuels for critical functions.

As cities across the nation strive to meet “environmental” goals and reduce carbon footprints, the debate over the true benefits and costs of these hybrid fire trucks is likely to continue. Turner and others at Power The Future call for greater accountability and honesty from public officials regarding the capabilities and limitations of such high-cost investments.

Hundreds of duplicate ballots cause alarm in Bernalillo County

As the June 4 primary election approaches, some Bernalillo County voters have already begun submitting absentee ballots. However, a few voters were surprised to receive a second ballot in the mail.

According to Bernalillo County Clerk Linda Stover, this mistake does not mean that any votes will be counted twice, per KRQE 13. “The vendor now has made plans to not have that happen, we’re looking at it again,” Stover assured.

As of Monday, the clerk’s office had distributed nearly 16,000 absentee ballots to county residents. Of these, 452 voters received duplicate ballots. “On the 8th, we mailed out ballots,” Stover explained. “On the 9th, we mailed out ballots. Our vendor accidentally, on the 9th, picked up some of the ballots from the 8th.”

Stover mentioned that her team discovered the issue a day after the ballots were delivered. They noticed a discrepancy in the ballot count, which led them to realize that some ballots had been sent out twice. “We noticed a difference in the numbers,” Stover said.

Of the 452 duplicate ballots, 320 were sent to Democrat primary voters, and 132 were sent to Republicans. The county clerk’s office sent out a notification letter to those affected, explaining the error and providing instructions on what to do if they received a duplicate.

“Everybody that we had contact information on, like an email or a telephone number, we tried to contact,” Stover said. “We sent everybody a letter telling them what had happened and asked them to only vote the one ballot and to destroy the other.”

Stover clarified what happens if a voter returns both ballots. Each person has a voter ID and barcode linked to their ballot, ensuring that only one vote per person is counted. Any duplicate ballots that are submitted will be discarded.

“You can go to Berncoclerk.gov and look up your voter file, and you’ll see if your vote has been checked and done,” Stover added. “It’s very easy to do that.”

Stover emphasized that this is the first time such an incident has occurred during her tenure as county clerk. She encouraged anyone with questions about duplicate ballots to contact her office.

Far-left Dem legislator calls MLG’s July special session a sham

In a candidate survey submitted to the Las Cruces Bulletin, far-left Democrat state Rep. Angelica Rubio (D-Las Cruces) blasted far-left Democrat Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham’s plans for a July 18th special session supposedly focused on crime, with additions such as panhandling legislation, and possibly anti-gun measures.

“I have and will always stand by restorative justice as we head to a special session in July (to consider) legislation related to incarcerating those deemed incompetent and individual(s) who are panhandling and increasing penalties for felons with guns. I will not support it,” she said.

She then focused on Lujan Grisham, writing, “This special session is purely for political optics and will not do anything to address any of the issues communities around the state (and nation) are facing.”

The shift in perspective on the governor is interesting, as Lujan Grisham is lining up many Democrat primary challenges to more moderate legislators, but now even her farthest-left allies are breaking from her on the July special session, which is being panned as a political stunt. 

Recently, more moderate state Rep. Marian Matthews (D-Albuquerque) ripped into Lujan Grisham and other far-leftists targeting her seat, calling them “Woke” progressive bullies. Matthews has often put forward legislation that is an alternative to the farthest-left bills, but the fringes of the Democrat Party refuse to pass them.

In contrast, Rubio, who never debates any bills and whose sole focus in the Legislature is to secure herself a salary and kill more babies through abortion, has mostly been a backer of Lujan Grisham’s agenda, including her help in killing many crime bills in committee that could have saved lives. Read Rubio’s full questionnaire here.

You might be surprised by just how close Biden and Trump are polling in NM

According to a poll commissioned by the campaign of independent presidential candidate Robert F. Kenney, Jr., 45th President Donald Trump and Joe Biden are neck-and-neck in New Mexico.

John Zogby Strategies, which did the April 14-21 poll, found that of the 505 voters surveyed, 48.6 percent supported Biden, 41.7 percent supported Trump, and 9.7 percent supported another candidate. That means Biden is leading Trump only by 6.9 points after Biden is said to have won the state in 2020 by a 10.79 percent margin.

National favorability polls show Biden underwater, including in New Mexico, where he is -2 percent favorable. Despite Trump being -18 percent favorable in Democrat-dominated New Mexico, per the Zogby poll, he is still neck-and-neck with Biden.

According to the Kennedy campaign, “This poll surveyed more than 26,000 likely voters across the country and has a margin of error of only 0.6%.” 

“[Joe] Biden cannot beat President Trump. When you actually poll every state, and tally the electoral votes, Biden loses in a head-to-head against Trump and he loses in a three-way too,” the campaign added.

The presidential race is not the only race that could shift the winds of power in New Mexico. All three congressional seats are up in November, as well as the U.S. Senate seat held by far-left Democrat Sen. Martin Heinrich, whose primary residence is in Maryland—not New Mexico. 

He is being challenged by Republican Nella Domenici, the daughter of the late GOP Sen. Pete Domenici, a revered figure in New Mexico politics due to his 36-year tenure in the Senate. 

The state also has many pick-up opportunities for the GOP in the New Mexico Legislature, with key Democrats retiring and the 2024 presidential election set to excite Republicans, who last had a majority in the New Mexico House from 2015-2016 and last ruled the New Mexico Senate in 1931. 

With woefully unpopular far-left Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham running primary challengers to many legislative Democrats, Republicans see pick-up opportunities, such as in 2020 when a far-left Lujan Grisham-backed Democrat knocked off Democrat former state Sen. John Arthur Smith in the primary for District 35 and Republican Crystal Diamond won that seat over the “progressive” Democrat nominee. Smith kept that seat in Democrat hands for 31 year, and Republicans now comfortably hold the district. This same scenario will likely play out if some of the governor’s primary challengers succeed in the June 4, 2024, election.

MLG’s $10M abortion center to service Texans one step closer to being built

Editor’s note: a previous version of this article incorrectly indicated the abortion center would be $10 billion, not $10 million.

A new abortion facility received the green light from the University of New Mexico’s Board of Regents on Wednesday to proceed with its building plans. The organization behind the facility can now purchase land for its construction.

Last year, the Legislature approved $10 million for an abortion center in Doña Ana County after pro-abortion Democrat Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham forced the funds through in the capital outlay bill — resulting in Republicans and even some Democrats voting against the measure because of her proposed $10 million state-run abortion mill. 

Since then, UNM, Planned Parenthood, and fringe dark money groups Bold Futures New Mexico and Strong Families New Mexico have collaborated and engaged other pro-abortion community groups to develop a plan for the center.

Heather Smith of Bold Futures stated, “Our communities have been lacking [abortion] services for decades,” she informed the UNM Board of Regents.

“Source New Mexico” writes that as well as abortions, the state-funded center will offer so-called “gender affirming care.” 

The acquisition of land, located at the Lohman Medical Park campus in Las Cruces, was approved by a 6 to 1 vote. UNM Medical Group will manage the 8,000-square-foot facility.

The contract price for the land is $1,030,630, which will be funded from the state appropriation for the project.

Charlene Bencomo, the executive director of Bold Futures, said the steps taken by the university’s board of regents give the green light to finalize the land deal and begin designing and staffing the facility. The facility is set to be Texas’ back-alley abortion facility for Texas mothers to utilize abortion tourism to visit New Mexico and end their child’s life at the state-funded center.

They also plan to collaborate with UNM to start a training program and work with the New Mexico Doula Association to integrate doula care into the center.

NRA takes MLG to court over New Mexico’s 7-day waiting period law

The National Rifle Association (NRA) has filed a lawsuit in federal district court in New Mexico, challenging the state’s new waiting period law for firearm purchases. The lawsuit, Ortega v. Grisham, was filed in collaboration with the Mountain States Legal Foundation.

New Mexico’s “Unlawful Sale of a Firearm Before Required Waiting Period Ends Act” mandates a seven-day waiting period before a firearm purchaser can take possession of the weapon, even if they pass a background check immediately. While the law exempts concealed carry permit holders, it does not provide exceptions for urgent situations, such as imminent threats to the buyer’s safety.

“The NRA fights every day in Washington, DC, state capitals, and when necessary, the legal arena, to protect the constitutional freedoms of law-abiding Americans and NRA members,” said Randy Kozuch, Executive Director of the NRA Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA). “The State of New Mexico’s waiting period law is a clear violation of its citizens’ Second Amendment rights – needlessly delaying their ability to acquire a firearm for self-defense or sporting purposes. With this legal challenge, NRA is committed to seeing that this unconstitutional law be wiped from the state statutes.”

The NRA is suing New Mexico Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham and Attorney General Raúl Torrez, arguing that the waiting period infringes upon both the Second Amendment and the Fourteenth Amendment, which applies the Second Amendment to the states. The NRA has also requested a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction to prevent the enforcement of the law during litigation.

The lawsuit, filed by plaintiffs Samuel Ortega and Rebecca Scott, details how the waiting period law has impacted their attempts to purchase firearms. Ortega and Scott both passed federal background checks but were unable to take possession of their purchased firearms due to the waiting period requirement. They argue that the law unnecessarily burdens their Second Amendment rights.

According to the lawsuit, “The right to keep and bear arms recognized in the Second Amendment is made applicable to the states by the Fourteenth Amendment. The Waiting Period Act burdens the right of residents of the State of New Mexico, including Plaintiffs, in exercising their right to keep and bear arms, a right which is explicitly protected by the Second Amendment.”

The lawsuit further contends that there is no historical precedent for such a waiting period, stating, “It is impossible for the State to meet this burden because there is no historical tradition of firearms being regulated in this manner either at the time of our founding and the ratification of the Second Amendment, or during the Reconstruction era and the ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment.”

The NRA and the plaintiffs seek a declaratory judgment that the waiting period law is unconstitutional, a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction to halt its enforcement, and other relief as deemed appropriate by the court.

In scathing op-ed, Dem NM legislator rips ‘Woke’ progressive bullies in party

In a defiant op-ed published in the Albuquerque Journal, Democrat State Representative Marian Matthews from New Mexico openly criticized this year’s Senate Bill 3 (SB 3), the failed Paid Family Medical Leave (PFML) bill, marking her firm opposition to what she described as a flawed proposal championed by the far-left progressives within her party. Matthews, who represents District 27, highlighted her commitment to protecting vulnerable populations, a commitment that led her to vote against the bill not once but twice.

Matthews invoked the words of Hubert Humphrey to underline her point, stating, “The moral test of government is how it treats those who are in the dawn of life, the children; those who are in the twilight of life, the aged; and those who are in the shadows of life – the sick, the needy, and the handicapped.” She argued that the New Mexico Legislature frequently fails this moral test, and passing SB 3 would continue that trend by potentially reducing or eliminating services for those most in need.

The crux of Matthews’ argument revolves around the economic strains placed on caregivers, who are legally bound to pay the state minimum wage and provide mandated state benefits. She noted that, unlike other businesses, caregivers cannot simply raise prices to cover increased costs due to slow adjustments in state contracts. This leads to reductions in workforce and services, exacerbating the plight of about 70,000 of New Mexico’s “most vulnerable” citizens.

State Rep. Marian Matthews (D-Albuquerque)

Matthews criticized the formation of the task force designed to develop the PFML, pointing out its lack of representation from caregivers, healthcare providers, and rural areas. She highlighted the unsustainable nature of the bill, questioning its long-term viability and the capability of the state agency assigned to administer it.

Reflecting on her own legislative efforts, Matthews mentioned her support for a more inclusive and sustainable PFML bill that she introduced in 2024. However, she encountered resistance from fellow legislators who believed exempting caregivers from payroll taxes funding the program would lead to its insolvency. “PFML would be paid for on the backs of the most vulnerable,” she lamented.

Matthews also shared personal anecdotes from her career, including threats from a powerful unnamed senator aimed at stifling her opposition to the PFML bill and other legislative efforts. Despite the political pressure and personal attacks, Matthews remains committed to advocating for the most vulnerable populations, stating, “Whether or not I win the election, I do not regret my votes. I don’t apologize for advocating for the most vulnerable New Mexicans.”

The representative concluded her piece with a call to action for more rigorous debate within her party, reminiscent of the Democrat Party’s former historical “Big Tent” approach. However, the Democrat Party of John F. Kennedy appears not only to be on life support, but deceased. 

She expressed hope for a revival of vigorous, contentious debates to achieve better policy outcomes, boldly stating, “I’m up for a raucous debate if the Woke ever wake up!” 

UNM president breaks silence on anti-Israel protesters’ demands

The University of New Mexico released an official statement on May 14 responding to recent protest demands related to the conflict between Israel and Hamas. 

The university responded to calls for a ceasefire and demands for so-called “transparency” regarding its investment activities, specifically concerning ties to Israel.

UNM President Garnett Stokes clarified the university’s stance, emphasizing that as a public institution, UNM will not engage as a political entity in social or geopolitical debates. The statement highlighted the university’s intention to remain neutral on such issues.

Furthermore, the university has made a firm commitment to complete transparency, pledging to disclose its investment portfolio in its entirety by August 2024. 

This response directly addresses the demand for transparency from the university divestment coalition, a group of student leaders. 

The statement also acknowledges and addresses issues at the Duck Pond protest encampment, noting several policy violations, including restricted public access, disruption of university operations, safety concerns due to unsafe structures, and vandalism.

President Stokes has requested the voluntary dismantling of the Duck Pond encampment by 5 p.m. on the same day the statement was issued, warning that the university is prepared to take further actions if necessary. The involved parties have been duly notified about this directive.

Scroll to Top