It initially reminded the reader that it did not endorse in the general election. It then tears into the Super PACS that spent hundreds of thousands of dollars slamming Charbonnet. The first on the paper’s hit list was none other than Sidney Torres and his Super PAC, Voice PAC. The Tribune alleges that the reason for Torres’s wrath was due to personal reasons, his real estate, not for speaking for the public good, as he has claimed. Here is what the Tribune said, initially:
As time went on, we hoped the rest of New Orleans would see, as we had, through the baseless attacks against Desiree Charbonnet, which were later revealed to be funded by Leslie Jacobs, Lane Grigsby, Jay Lapeyre, Stuart Phillips, Boysie Bollinger,  and other White business elite through the Not For Sale NOLA political action committee they formed for the express purpose of attacking Charbonnet reputed to have cost several hundred thousand dollars. When Sidney Torres also put Charbonnet in his crosshairs, we began to struggle with our decision. We have to question the intent and motivation of anyone who fought tooth and nail against putting a dozen or so affordable units in the high-end apartment building he is developing with the use of generous tax credits. His baseless attacks against Charbonnet clearly have nothing to do with what is best for ALL of the people of New Orleans. The way we see it is that if he really he cared about ALL of the people of New Orleans, surely he would not be against making a handful of apartment units cost effective for low and moderate income New Orleanians. 

 

The second target was the SuperPAC, Not for Sale NOLA.  This sentence is a jaw-dropper:
As time went on, we hoped the rest of New Orleans would see, as we had, through the baseless attacks against Desiree Charbonnet, which were later revealed to be funded by Leslie Jacobs, Lane Grigsby, Jay Lapeyre, Stuart Phillips, Boysie Bollinger,  and other White business elite through the Not For Sale NOLA political action committee they formed for the express purpose of attacking Charbonnet reputed to have cost several hundred thousand dollars. 

Now, the rest of that paragraph:
When Sidney Torres also put Charbonnet in his crosshairs, we began to struggle with our decision. We have to question the intent and motivation of anyone who fought tooth and nail against putting a dozen or so affordable units in the high-end apartment building he is developing with the use of generous tax credits. His baseless attacks against Charbonnet clearly have nothing to do with what is best for ALL of the people of New Orleans. The way we see it is that if he really he cared about ALL of the people of New Orleans, surely he would not be against making a handful of apartment units cost effective for low and moderate income New Orleanians.

The Tribune said initially, it could not decide upon which of the candidates it would support as it did not see much of the difference between the leading candidates. However, the paper now questions the motives of those who attacked Charbonnet:
Here’s the bottom line. If we can look at Bagneris, Charbonnet, Cantrell, Henry and Vassel, and see no substantial differences in their ability to govern fairly, honestly and with integrity, we are left to wonder one thing: What is it about Desiree Charbonnet that has raised the ire of rich, shadowy folk to the extent that they would sabotage her campaign with a smidgen of their money and even more of their baseless, unfounded accusations of “cronyism” and “corruption”—words we haven’t heard in eight years?
I urge you to read the rest of the editorial and tell us what you think: