Molina claims I was paid?

This week’s opinion column is reminiscent of the public figures who have called me over the years, asking if they should respond to a negative news story or just let it go. Don’t say anything?

My typical response has always been, just let it go. If you respond to what’s been said, what’s been written, you’re only going to help keep the story alive. Say nothing, and the story will die on its own. Besides that, the people who like you are still going to like you; and the people who don’t, still won’t. The story will change very little.

In the end, they’re usually happy that they took my advice. For what it’s worth. It’s not that I’m all that bright, but I’ve been in this business now for 43 years. A long time to see a lot of screw-ups, including my own, pass by the public domain.

The Molina Divorce
Edinburg Mayoral Candidate Richard Molina didn’t ask me for my advice, however, and instead, took to his Facebook account where he made a libelous claim against this newspaper, which is why there is now another column written about him on this week’s front page.

Meaning, he should have taken my advice and said nothing. 

He has now stacked one lie on top of another, and for a guy knee deep in a heated election against a formidable foe, that’s not a good look.

This opinion column follows right on the heels of last week’s front-page column about City of Edinburg Mayoral Candidate Richard Molina titled:

“Mayoral Candidate – Divorced, but married online?

As mentioned in last week’s column, the Molina divorce from March 2025 wouldn’t even be a story this election if he wasn’t trying to swindle the voters (my opinion) by including on his campaign website – RichardMolinaForMayor.com – a family photo that dates back to his first mayoral campaign, 2017, painting himself as a caring family guy, when in fact, he’s been divorced since last March. (That photo is included in this column.)

His divorce was final in March 2025, which was three months after his ex-wife filed a temporary restraining order (TRO) against him the previous December (2024), claiming too much abuse inside the home.

That is why it is a story today. It’s pertinent to this election. And it’s why I wrote about it last week.

What was Molina’s response?

According to a post that he made to his Facebook page early this week, he makes the claim that his chief opponent in this mayoral race, Omar Ochoa, paid me to write last week’s column:

“Now he’s (Ochoa) gone as far as paying reporters to write stories about my personal life…”

He tries to provide cover for himself by writing “reporters,” knowing well that The Advance News Journal was the only news outlet that published anything about his messy divorce with the claims made against him of infidelity, bullying behavior. But it still won't define libel because he doesn't explicitly name me. 

Still, for a guy who wants a second term as the mayor of Edinburg, the county seat, he should choose carefully what words escape from his lips.

“Libel” Comes into Play
By any definition of the legal term, what Molina wrote is “libel.”

If he says it instead of writing it, it’s “slander.”

Both words, in a legal sense, focus on defamation of character, meaning a false statement that harms someone’s reputation.

Now if Molina had posed his statement differently, “Is the writer getting paid by the Ochoa campaign?” that wouldn’t be libelous because he’s simply asking the question.

Also, it wouldn't be libelous because he doesn't name me in his Facebook post. Only describes me as "reporters."

The fact that Molina wrote outright that Edinburg Mayoral Candidate Omar Ochoa is “paying reporters to write stories about my personal life…” is both untrue and libelous.

No one paid me a dime to write last week’s column.

Not only that, but I turned down an ad from the Ochoa campaign last week simply because I didn’t want it to look as if there is any connection between writing a column about Molina and a paid ad.

So I turned down money, Richard. Can you say the same? Ever?

In fact, I almost turned down an ad this week from the Ochoa campaign, but I thought, why? Because Molina wants to make the claim that the Ochoa campaign is paying me to write about the former mayor’s personal life when none of it is true?

He owns that divorce story, not me.

It wasn’t me who (allegedly) screwed around on my wife, the woman who had helped me build a business, stood loyally by me amid charges of voter fraud, raised our children.

It wasn’t me who (allegedly) yelled at my wife, according to her December 2024 affidavit, bullied her to the point of both physical and emotional exhaustion.

It wasn’t me who (allegedly) kicked the family dog.

It wasn’t me who was (allegedly) so much a bully at home, behind closed doors, that my wife was constantly walking on eggshells, scared at what might set you off into another bullying rant. (Source: December 2024 signed affidavit.)

It isn’t me who is still posting a 2017 family photo on my election website, still portraying myself as a caring “family man,” when I’m no longer living with my family.

As I mentioned in last week’s column, the Richard Molina March 2025 divorce wouldn’t even be a story this election, not seven months after it was finalized, if he wasn’t trying to use his former marriage to elicit votes by continuing to paint himself as something he no longer is — a happily married man who places family above all else.

His campaign website — RichardMolinaForMayor.com — is where the scam begins. There sits a family photo taken from his 2017 election, but no mention of the divorce.

That’s what made last week’s opinion column (Observations) a story, if you will.

Richard Molina is trying to scam voters (my opinion) with this fake “happily married guy” narrative that flies in the face of his official divorce decree dated March 2025.

I only found that out by paying a visit to his campaign website — RichardMolinaForMayor.com — where I saw his family photo dating from 2017.

By the way, no one steered me there. One day I just decided to do an online search for Molina’s campaign, curious as to what he had online, saw his website, went there, and saw the family photo, and said, wait a minute, the guy is divorced, and this family photo is eight years old.

That’s what set off the chain of events, culminating in last week’s column. It didn’t come from the Omar Ochoa campaign.

In fact, I just looked at his website this morning and the 2017 family photo is still there.

“Champaign” Info
One other problem, besides needing legal counsel to vet what he posts, making sure what Molina writes isn’t libelous, he needs a proofreader.

At the bottom of his campaign page (RichardMolinaForMayor.com), just beneath the family photo, right above the phone number you can call to donate, time or money, he has written: “Champaign Information.”

Which makes you wonder, if you contribute to the Molina 2025 mayoral campaign, is free champaign (refer to photo) part of the deal?