To the contrary, Hidalgo was involved up to her neck from the outset in the conspiracy to steer the contract to Pereyra. She did not suddenly discover that Pereyra had previously worked on the census outreach project when she was picked for the vaccine contract as she claimed in Court. She had personally used the census contract as a basis for crafting the scope of work for Pereyra.
Second, while the phrase “good for campaign purposes” might have referred to a “campaign” to vaccinate people, it seems much more likely that it was referring to Hidalgo’s upcoming campaign for re-election, especially considering that political campaigns were Pereyra’s principal background. If it is ultimately proven that Hidalgo and her staff were in fact planning to use data generated by Pereyra for her re-election campaign, some people are going to be serving jail time.
The Ranger’s affidavit goes on to describe how the unexpected bid from UT Health Science Center nearly upset Hidalgo’s plans to steer the contract to Pereyra and the lengths that Hidalgo’s staff went to torpedo their bid. At one point, Triantaphyllis texted another staff saying, “We need to slam the door shut on UT and move on.” Again, all this shows that the purpose was to get a contract to Pereyra, not to get people vaccinated.
It remains to be seen exactly what the legal fallout from this will be. Now that Hidalgo has been caught red-handed rigging the bid, her legal defense seems to be shifting to the argument that it does not really matter because she had the authority under her emergency powers to award the contract without a bid process in the first place. I have some serious doubts about whether that is correct, especially considering that the County intended to use federal funds for this project.
It is quite easy to see how some of Hidalgo’s staff could be indicted for process crimes. The subpoena application specifically refers to “Tampering with a Governmental Document” (Tex.Pen. Code §37.10) and “Misuse of Official Information” (Tex.Pen. Code §39.06), both of which can be felony offenses. Whether those crimes can be imputed to Hidalgo will depend on what additional evidence surfaces. But it certainly appears that someone on her staff is cooperating with investigators, so there is likely more to come.
But regardless of the legal outcome, Hidalgo’s aura of transparency and claim to adhere to high ethical standards has been shattered. It is hard to imagine Harris County residents will give her a second term after these revelations.