↓
 
Home » Ken Paxton acquitted in Texas Senate

Ken Paxton acquitted in Texas Senate

The New Neo Posted on by

I haven’t written much about the impeachment of Ken Paxton, the Republican attorney general of Texas. Today was the vote in the Texas Senate, and he’s been acquitted of charges of bribery, corruption, and being unfit for office.

The Texas legislature is controlled by the GOP, and yet in the House the vote to impeach Paxton was overwhelming. In the Senate, which requires 2/3 to convict, it wasn’t close. What’s going on? It’s not that easy to tell, but from reading a bunch of newspaper articles (not especially informative) and a ton of blog posts and comments, the gist of the rumors goes like this: the impeachment was an attempt by Bush forces in Texas and the Republican Speaker of the Texas House to take Paxton – a far more conservative, Trump-supporting guy – down.

Here’s a little recent history about Paxton and the speaker:

On May 19, 2023, Phelan struggled to speak while executing his duties as speaker of the Texas House. Fellow Republican and attorney general Ken Paxton called upon Phelan to resign due to “apparent debilitating intoxication”. Phelan “negatively impacted the legislative process and constitutes a failure to live up to his duty to the public” according to the statement. Phelan’s office characterized Paxton’s statement as “a last-ditch effort to save face” given the timing – that same day, a Republican-led House committee came public with an investigation into Paxton that had been ongoing since March of that year. That investigation led to the House formally impeaching Paxton on May 27 by a vote of 121–23.

I know very little about inner Texas politics or the Texas GOP, except that I assume there is a split between the anti-Trump Bush forces and the pro-Trump conservatives. The scuttlebutt also is that the House members voted quite quickly for the impeachment, fearing retaliation from Phelan if they didn’t vote that way. I have no idea whether this is true, but if anyone knows more about Texas politics than I – and that might be many of you – feel free to opine in the comments.

Comments

Ken Paxton acquitted in Texas Senate — 89 Comments

  1. I think you’d have to view all the testimony to get an idea of what sort of skulduggery was alleged. The articles of impeachment as stated are not all that informative. The gist appears to be that he violated intra-office procedures in order to do favors for a contributor named Nate Paul and that Paul had an odd hold over him because he (Paul) was the employer of Paxton’s mistress. I follow the Catholic blawger Donald McClarey (who has a criminal defense practice, though he’s primarily a bankruptcy lawyer), and his view is the case is a nothingburger and that it arose from factional politics engaged in by the Bush camarilla. The Bush family certainly doesn’t get the benefit of the doubt anymore. I did think seeing one clip that Paxton’s detractors in the office had a hair trigger in contacting the FBI. A lawyer working in the office on contract had a subpoena served on a local bank (something I imagine happens fairly routinely in state AG’s offices) and a bloc of lawyers therein were on the horn to the FBI the next day without conferring with the lawyer in question or Paxton.

  2. The Bushs in TX are not Texans, they are Yankees. An older Bush was US Senator from CT, and GW was born and raised in New England, coming to TX to make his fortune (successfully) in the Oil Bidness, as we say down here.W is a nominal Texan by birth and was an unfortunate prez.
    The Bush family owns a peninsula at Kennebunkport, Maine, where they are all now probably still gathered, including Jeb! (sic).

  3. Cicero:

    You are mixing Bush Sr. with Bush Jr.. It was Bush Sr. who came to Texas to make his fortune in the oil business, not GW (unless “GW” is a typo and you meant “HW”). Bush Sr. brought Bush Jr. with him to Texas when W was two years old, and W was raised in Texas except for the first two years of his life. I think we can safely say that makes George W. Bush a Texan, with New England ancestors.

    Also, that “peninsula” in Kennebunkport is a small spit of land – I’ve seen it quite a few times, and it originally was not a Bush residence, it was from the family of Barbara Bush, the Walkers, and then became a Bush thing. They often spent summers there – I assume to escape the Texas heat.

  4. They brought up a pet peeve of mine. George P. Bush allowed his law license to lapse in 2010. He was permitted to re-activate it ten years later (in October 2020), he’s allowed to ‘reactivate’ it by filing an application. IMO, after that length of time, you should have to sit for the bar examination again. While we’re at it, at the time of periodic renewals for those who keep their license active, you should have to supply some documentation of having done some transactional law practice in the intervening years.

  5. I sat in a chair on the floor of the Texas Senate in their state capitol building. It was for the Texas Book Fair.

    The room was designed like Nebraska’s, but the Texas room was nicer.

    I think the lesson here is that there is a real rift in the GOP party. We have some of that here in NE, but nearly as bad.

    And, face it, there’s certainly all sorts of soft corruption in the TX Legislature.

  7. and W was raised in Texas except for the first two years of his life.
    ==
    He did spend about 27 months resident at Phillips Exeter, another 28 months at Yale, and 24 months in Boston while at Harvard Business School, so his Texas upbringing has some leavening. Bar his time on the road and in Washington, he’s made his home in Texas since 1975. Jeb was 13 when the family decamped to Washington, attended boarding school where I cannot recall, then enrolled at the University of Texas, spending the next 13 years in Texas before decamping to south Florida. Neil and Marvin were around 10 when the family decamped to Washington and attended boarding school in Virginia. Neil has lived in several states but has for some time made his home in Texas. Marvin has lived in NoVa all these years. Their sister was seven when the family moved to Washington and hasn’t lived in Texas since. She had about eight years in Maine before decamping to greater Washington, where she’s lived since. Her (2d) husband is a lobbyist plugged into the Democratic Party. W has a noticeable Southern accent; Neil a light Southern accent; Jeb no Southern accent. Marvin at age 30 had a light drawl, which may have disappeared in the intervening years. Doro has no Southern drawl.

  8. Only thing I know about Jeb! is that he seemed to be a decent governor but ran into a Freightliner when he ran against Trump in the ’16 primary. Also at play was the old adage ” a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush and two Bushs are better than three.”

  9. The Bushs in TX are not Texans, they are Yankees. An older Bush was US Senator from CT, and GW was born and raised in New England, coming to TX to make his fortune (successfully) in the Oil Bidness, as we say down here.W is a nominal Texan by birth and was an unfortunate prez. The Bush family owns a peninsula at Kennebunkport, Maine, where they are all now probably still gathered, including Jeb! (sic).
    ==
    The Walker family has owned vacation property in Maine since about 1895. Dorothy Walker married Prescott Bush and their children’s association with Maine is a consequence of they being Walker scions.
    ==
    Please note, Prescott Bush, Sr and Prescott Bush Jr were residents of and active in the municipal politics of Greenwich, Connecticut. That town is smack on the New York / Connecticut border and chock-a-block with men who commute into Manhattan, as did these two. Prescott Bush Sr. spent about five years in sum living in New England attending school between the ages of 14 and 25 and spent the first three years of his business career there as well (in western Massachusetts, IIRC). After 1922, he lived in Greenwich and commuted into New York until his departure for Washington in 1952. He did not grow up in New England, but in Columbus, Ohio. His father made his career (as a railway executive) in Ohio, but grew up no particular place as his clergyman father had a number of postings over the years (only one in New England, IIRC). The Rev. Bush, IIRC, grew up in Upstate New York, not New England).
    ==
    Mrs. Prescott Bush (nee Dorothy Walker) grew up in St. Louis, though her family did have that aforementioned New England connection. They made their money in dry goods. Then, fairly late in life, her father decamped to New York and worked in finance. You’d have to go back several generation in her pedigree to find someone who made their life in New England.
    ==
    BTW, Barbara Bush (nee Pierce) grew up in the New York City suburbs. Her father and father-in-law commuted on the same trains for years, although they never met. Her parents arrived in New York from Ohio in 1919 and her father began to build a career in magazine publishing. Both sides of her family had several generations living in Ohio or the border counties in Pennsylvania.
    ==
    Please note also that Barbara Bush was born in 1925 into a middle-class family that grew wealthy as her father’s career advanced. Marvin Pierce was the son of a pharmacist, his wife the daughter of a prosecutor (later judge). Prescott Bush, Sr.’s family was up-and-coming during his upbringing; he was not born into wealth but was born into prosperity. His wife was born into money, but the money was not that old. The dry goods business which made the Weir / Walker family wealthy had been founded in 1878; she was born in 1902.

  10. Art Deco:

    The question had to do with George W. Bush and whether he had lived in Texas while growing up. The parents obviously had not.

  11. The question had to do with George W. Bush and whether he had lived in Texas while growing up. The parents obviously had not.
    ==
    His characterization – and this is common – suggested the Bush family was from New England. Their lives included time in New England, but their primary upbringing was elsewhere. And their money was not that old.
    ==
    I should also note that Prescott Bush, Sr.’s daughter Nancy married a man from Boston and made her life there. Prescott Jr. worked abroad (for Pan Am) the first leg of his career, then in Manhattan the rest of his career, repairing to where his son lived in Massachusetts only near the end of his life. George made is life in Texas and in Washington. Jonathan bounced between Washington and New York, settling in southern Connecticut only in his last years. Bucky decamped to St. Louis in 1962 and spent the rest of his life there. The New England meme for these people is way overdone.

  12. Much chatter online about how this marks the end of the Bush dynasty and how they should move back to Maine. It does no good to point out that the Bush Sr. came in third in Maine in 1992, and that W was never popular there, or to suggest that Texas may be changing in ways that we can now only imagine.

  14. Much chatter online about how this marks the end of the Bush dynasty and how they should move back to Maine.
    ==
    They’ve owned property in Maine. Several of Prescott Sr’s 17 grand children settled in New England, but only Doro Bush was ever a year round resident of Maine, and that was > 35 years ago.
    ==
    George P. Bush has spent nearly his entire life in either south Florida or Texas. The rest of his close family has lived in south Florida since 1984, with scant interruption.

  15. The animus towards the Bush family on the conservative side isn’t to the level of TDS; but give it a few more years and soon some will be claiming to have been a part of the Bushitler crowd from 2001-2008. Funny how hindsight and memory works.

    But on to current troubles.

    In an interview with Megan Kelly, President Trump seemed “flexible” when asked if a ‘man could become a woman.’

  17. Part of the outcome was indeed anti-Bush sentiment.

    Getting into speculation territory:
    Setting down a marker that the use of the impeachment process to get rid of a disliked political office-holder is not to be tolerated.

    A second speculation- impatience with vaguely worded laws.
    There is little disagreement over what was or was not done by AG Paxton.
    There is great disagreement over whether those activities are over-the-line impeachable, or just not exactly kosher but not worth raising a Federal (or state) case over.

    They found the man, but could not show the crime.
    Refreshing.

  19. Re Texas “roots” of the Bush family-
    GHWB (the one who lost to Clinton) moved his family into a modest 1400 sq ft house in Midland in 1951 https://tinyurl.com/366hu7es . The house still exists; has been moved to a new location and looks considerable spiffier than it did when they lived there. As noted above, W was a small child when the family moved there.
    GHWB later moved into the Houstonian Hotel on the west side of Houston and was elected to Congress while residing in the hotel. He later became CIA director, the rest is history.

  21. It’s a fact that a lot of the Republicans in the Texas House are RINOs. Most House Speakers have been old school Democrats. It’s easy for a Republican to be elected and most voters think they’re solid conservatives. They’re not. But it’s changing. The Bush family is losing power and that’s a good thing.

  22. One thing to factor into the politics. The Speaker of the House is not the Republican choice. He’s Republican, but he was selected by Democrats working with centrist Republicans to get a more center Speaker. This gives Democrats more control of the House than they represent.

    Besides the impeachment, another event that played out this legislative session is that each side of the legislature refused to come together on a tax reduction plan. Both had one, but the House wasn’t as much as the Senate wanted. It took two extended special sessions before the Senate managed to win out, but the prize for winning was a last day impeachment of Ken Paxton.

    Plus all the other politics mentioned earlier particularly including the Bush family. The impeachment was mostly sour grapes politics from centrists, but I do agree with WTI Crude that Paxton activities were not particularly clean as the driven snow nor extraordinarily corrupt.

  24. Neo, yes a typo. I meant George HW Bush, then his son George W.
    I have seen the Bush Maine peninsula and it is not tiny, Last I read, Jeb was building his own house on it, adding to the several houses already there

  25. Cicero:

    As I stated, I’ve seen the house many times. The land it’s on isn’t “tiny” compared to a typical backyard, but it is tiny compared to what people ordinarily envision when they read the word “peninsula.” It’s usually referred to as a “point” or a “promontory.” See this:

    The estate is situated on a promontory of land called Walker’s Point which juts out into the Atlantic Ocean. The large central house, built in the New England shingle style, has nine bedrooms, four sitting rooms, an office, a den, a library, a dining room, a kitchen, and various patios and decks. Next to the main house are a four-car garage, a pool, tennis court, dock, boathouse, and guesthouse. There are spacious lawns on either side of the house, on which there is a small sportsfield.

    The entire family compound is composed of 9 acres, according to this.

  26. This will definitely sell issues of Texas Monthly, which will no doubt offer an entertaining inside-baseball look at the proceedings at some point.

    I don’t follow Texas politics very much, because too much of it comes in this kind of flavor. Phelan is an inadequate lightweight in his position, with a very entitled and ‘country club – boy’s club’ insider approach that consistently fails to deliver results that benefit Texans, and often fails to build consensus. My sense was that this is less about the Bushes, and more about Phelan and his coterie, which identifies with the Bush family power center. It seems to me the Bush family has been evoked in order to garner support for the drive, and they may have aligned on the basis that Paxton is so strongly pro-Trump.

    Texas Democrats have been aching to be rid of Paxton for years. He’s a perennial thorn in their side, and they have waged ceaseless lawfare campaigns against him. They got a terrific boost out of Phelan’s efforts, really playing up how bad Paxton simply must be, if he’s dividing Republicans. Let’s hope this boost doesn’t contribute to a Red state turning Blue.

  27. Aggie:

    You last sentence describes what I’m concerned about. The party is very split. Of course, that may have been true for years and this is just evidence of it.

  28. @ Neo > The party has been split for years, if not decades, but IMO the rift became very visible when McCain’s own staff torpedoed his too-popular running mate, Sarah Palin.
    That McCain, and then Romney, were the GOP choices to compete with Obama is more evidence.

    No rift, no Trump.

  29. Here in MT we have a serious rift within the R party. I doubt if they will be much good for us in 2024.

  30. I don’t see anyone addressing the underlying factual issues. Paxton was alleged to have done specific things, including obtaining confidential police records for his friend, delaying foreclosure sales for his friend, and investigating the friend’s enemies. In return the friend was alleged to have paid to renevate Paxton’s house and helped him hide an extramarital affair. I understand that the state of Texas has paid 7 figure settlements to employees from Paxton’s office who were fired, allegedly in retaliation for cooperating with the FBI in investigating these things.

    So, did these things happen? Most of them are factual issues that would not be difficult to prove or disprove. Quite simply, is Paxton corrupt? Did the Texas Senate find that Paxton was not guilty of the factual allegations against him or was this just the MAGA folks covering for their own? Almost all of the commentary that I can find on this matter, here and elsewhere, focuses on the politics – Bushies vs. MAGA. That doesn’t inspire confidence.

    There’s an ongoing FBI investigation of Paxton over the same allegations raised by the impeachment. No doubt that will be waived off by MAGA world as solely driven by the partisanship of the FBI. Is it? Does the existence of politicized investigations by the FBI mean that every FBI investigation is politicized? I do know this, the existence of politicized investigations by the FBI creates an opportunity for scoundrels to avoid the consequences of their sleaze by crying partisanship. Is this that scenario or something else? (Shame on Democrats for creating this situation, but don’t exlude the possibility that unsavory Republicans are exploiting it. And just because someone is on “your side” of a political issue doesn’t mean that they are not corrupt. Neither virtue nor vice is distributed neatly by political views.)

    And this comes the same week that Lauren Boebert’s exploits broke along with the alleged multi-year Noem/Lewandowsi affair. And yet MAGA world will still act like they are entitled to the support of social conservatives – real social conservatives, as in those of us who actually take our marriage vows seriously and would never destroy our chidrens’ homes. Maybe social conservatives truly have no where else to go, but I can’t see how many would be excited about it.

    The knock on the GOPe is that they are a bunch of grifters who never actually advanced their constituents’ interests but just sucked up donor money and support to fund their own vices and extravagent lifestyles. It sure looks to me as though MAGA world has been fully assimilated into that ecosystem.

    Lie down with dogs, get up with fleas.

  31. I don’t see anyone addressing the underlying factual issues.
    ==
    I don’t see you have any critical engagement with the accusers’ case, but I do see you devoting pixels to extraneous matters, so piss off.

  32. Courios what the Concerned Conservative™ is fixated on. It’s not the facts, it’s the allegations of evil in the world of MAGA.

  33. The animus towards the Bush family on the conservative side isn’t to the level of TDS; but give it a few more years and soon some will be claiming to have been a part of the Bushitler crowd from 2001-2008. Funny how hindsight and memory works.
    ==
    George W. Bush’s remarks on January 6th and his refusal for more than 10 years to offer any commentary at all about concerning abusive behavior by the Democratic Party (starting with Lois Lerner) pretty much soured me on the man. And, yes, I noticed that Bill Clinton managed to worm his way into the elder Bush’s circle of friends (the Carters keep their distance from the Clintons) and that the Obamas were also welcome at the elder Bush’s funeral. I’ll give Jeb and George P. one point for endorsing the Dobbs decision.
    ==
    By the way, George W. Bush has been pleased to engage in a mess of buckraking. The thing is, he generally speaks to confidential fora, so his remarks are not published. (Evidently, they’re not interesting enough to leak). Gerald Ford was the 1st quondam President to do this. Richard Nixon got schlonged for accepting $600,000 from David Frost in 1976 for interviews (a contextually similar sum today would be about $4,000,000), but he then sat for 29 hours of unscripted cross-examination. (He also had the excuse of overdue legal bills). Bilge Clinton was getting six figure sums for 50 minutes of boilerplate.
    ==
    Many of us have figured out that the Bush clan and the Cheney clan and John McCain never gave a rip about the people who actually voted for them. Like Addison Mitchell McConnell, they’re bag men for the corporate set.

  34. when you know who the players are, a medici consiglieri like johnny sutton, who railroaded those two border agents, 17 years ago, when you see how chummy they were with both the clintons and the obamas, how he failed to defend himself when obama tore at the program and men, he put on the field,

  35. I have no knowledge of this Paxton affair in Texas, but if it has dumbpublicans engaging in a circular firing squad, this is just normal behavior for dumbpublicans.

    Dumbpublicans do not need demokrats to help them lose elections or otherwise engage in political suicide; they do just fine all by themselves.

  36. Art Deco – No one on the right will address the truth of the allegations, so the only sources reporting on the facts are from the left. No one on the right will accept any factual assertion coming from the left. And now, no one can point out that the facts aren’t being addressed unless they provide “critical engagement with the accuser’s case” – which is not possible without relying on left leaning sources because the right won’t touch it.

    Therefore, no one on the right can talk about the facts. QED.

    One of us needs to piss off. It isn’t me.

  37. om – Everything I raised was “the facts.” The Boebert thing is on tape. The Noem/Lewandowski thing is either true or it is false. Again, a fact one way or another.

    Same with the Paxton thing. Maybe there’s an innocent explanation, though I surely haven’t heard one – just a lot of posturing about Bushies and about Paxton is now “exonerated.”

  38. there is no truth to them, like the delta house garbage, paxton stands against the reconquista, bush jr does not,

  39. Bauxite:

    Look up definition of “fact” and “allegation” and then write them down 100 times. Ponder on them. Maybe then the difference will sink in.

    Other pairings are “riot” and “insurrection,”
    “tresspass” and “treason.”

    Your concern is duly noted and given the weight it deserves.

  40. Bauxite-
    I am confident that there is at least some truth in the allegations against Paxton (smoke~fire).
    What I am certain of is that the majority of the politicians who were tasked with judging him are guilty of similar/analogous activity. Who among them hasn’t adjusted a vote to favor the local GM dealer or realtor lobbyist who gave a generous contribution?
    Politics is a dirty business- more than enough dogs and fleas to go around, as you aptly stated. The alternative to an at least slightly dirty Paxton is not Mr./Senator Smith, it’s a another pol who may be slightly less dirty, but in a quantitative not qualitative way, or maybe just less flamboyant about it. This entire exercise was a small-ball example of the lawfare that is being waged against Trump.
    In this particular situation, the MAGA team, which is way closer to my preferred way of governance, gets a W. The Lawfare team gets a major L.
    I can live with that. Holding out for honest politicians is a fools game.

  41. About all I know about the Texas legislature is it convenes once every two years for a maximum of 140 days and I wish all states and our national legislature would adopt the same procedure, but, perhaps, shorten the length by 139 days.

  42. West TX Intermediate Crude – Thank you for actually engaging on the facts.

    I don’t disagree with much of what you said, but what you’re describing is a pure power play. It puts the lie to the whole “drain the swamp” thing. So the swamp is fine if the the people on our side are the swampy ones?

    You may be correct that the practical politics of petty corruption prevent us from acheiving anything beyond “our side wins, their side loses.” But if that is the case, what is the point of MAGA – especially given the electoral failures of MAGA over the past three election cycles? If we are engaging in the politics of “just win baby,” shouldn’t we nominate candidates who win?

    The petty corruption and tawdry scandals out of MAGA world are starting to make them look like the religious right in the 1990’s and early 2000’s. They talk a big game, but its all a show. There have been mentions of Liviningston, Gingrich, Hastert, and the like in this thread. They were just a few examples of the sleaze that came from the leadership of the religious right. I think that sleaze (and the accompanying hypocrisy) was a big factor in the comprehensive defeat of the religious right on social issues.

    If MAGA wans to preach “draining the swamp” while practicing the same kind of swampy politics that they decry, they will suffer the same fate, and the country will be worse off for it.

  44. Bauxite,

    The leader and creator of MAGA is DJT, no member of the religious right, nor paragon of virtue. As you point out, some less than genuine people may be using the MAGA label as cover for mendacity or seeking power for power’s sake, but I assure you there are millions of voting age Americans who sincerely believe in the “drain the swamp” edict. Just as millions of Americans sincerely believed in the Tea Party’s message (and Occupy Wall Street, for that matter).

  45. Bauxite-
    I’m not as cynical as my earlier post implied.
    Some guy once said that effective politics is the process of motivating bad people to do good things. I read that Trump, when president, had a policy of deleting 2 regulations for every new regulation that his administration put into place; further that the actual ratio was closer to 3:1. If true, that is actual, true goodness.
    Trump failed miserably at draining the swamp, but succeeded spectacularly at raising it as an issue. I’m confident that he will be far more successful during his next administration. He will be motivated by revenge in addition to whatever his motivating force was previously (maybe even that it was the right thing to do?), and he will be far more skeptical of those who would betray him. I’m sure he will do a lot of things that will be counterproductive, and a lot of things that I will be totally opposed to. He will give some comfort to some truly terrible people.
    All in, though, he’s the best chance we have to save this republic.
    I would be equally happy with RDS, based on his record in FL, but I don’t buy the argument that RDS is more electable than Trump. Neither will get the woke crowd, but Trump has a better chance of breaking into the BIPOC vote, on the male side to be sure. AWFLs will turn out in force against either one.
    My 2 cents; YMMV.

  46. they said gingrich was terrible, but then they saddled us with hastert, an actual pervert and degenerate, and bought by the turkish lobby,

  47. The petty corruption and tawdry scandals out of MAGA world are starting to make them look like the religious right in the 1990’s and early 2000’s. They talk a big game, but its all a show.
    ==
    The scandals concerned two televangelist enterprises in 1987, and didn’t concern any political activity by either one.
    ==
    Ralph Reed is a scandal of a different sort. He’s a commercial vendor who had the religious right as clients.

  48. WTI Crude regarding electability: it may not just be BIPOC. Yancey Ward made a comment here a week or two ago suggesting that Trump was stronger than DeSantis in *electoral* votes.

    Consider how Trump won in 2016, by flipping industrial states (PA, MI, WI) that had voted Democrat for decades. While some claimed Hillary was such a bad candidate that any Rep would have won I realized after the election that only Trump could have won those states by winning over traditionally Dem blue-collar voters. It is possible that another candidate might do better than Trump in the *popular* vote by getting the proverbial soccer moms who dislike Trump – but live in blue states like CA, NY, IL and MA that will never go Republican. And still lose the electoral vote that Trump might win.

  50. Rufus T. Firefly – I don’t doubt that there is a large cohort of voters who want to “drain the swamp” and that were sincere Tea Partiers. I consider myself one of them. I question whether the leadership is actually interested in doing so, or whether they’re just interested in getting in on the graft themselves. The harm that I see is not corruption or tawdriness on its own, it’s when the same leadership that bleats on about “family values” (in the 1990’s) or “draining the swamp,” (with MAGA) plainly practice the opposite.

    West TX Intermediate Crude – You might be right about DJT being more electable than DeSantis. I think Trump will pull voters that DeSantis likely cannot and DeSantis’s own weaknesses with college-educated suburbanites may approach be Trump’s own levels. If Trump really is stronger than DeSantis, however, then I think the GOP is sunk in 2024. (Frankly, if we’re willing to trade conservative reliability for victory, I think that Haley may be the best bet. She’s not my first choice by any means, but she would be worlds better than Biden/Harris.)

  51. Bauxite,

    I agree. We have a little more history with the Tea Party and there seemed to be some sincere Tea Party politicians who came out of the movement, but the RNC led by Mitch McConnel effectively double dealed with them to kill the movement in the crib.

  52. I don’t see anyone addressing the underlying factual issues.

    Did you miss the testimony from the whistleblowers that they took “no evidence” to the FBI? That is what they said under oath.

    Defense attorney Mitchell Little asked Vassar, “You went to the FBI on September 30 with your compatriots and reported the elected attorney general of this state for a crime without any evidence — yes?”

    “That’s right, we took no evidence,” Vassar responded.

    What is the basis for your “factual” issues? They didn’t have evidence. Their argument is “we aren’t investigators” but were “witnesses”, yet none of them actually saw what they claim to be witnesses to occurring. None. of. them.

  55. You mean, Kevin D Williamson? otay.

    No matter how hard he tries, he can’t transition from his birthplace or his family. It is his undying shame.

  56. “…cynical…”
    (From the state that brought us Stacey Abrams!)
    THIS is how it’s done!
    “Fani Willis’s Monstrous Trump Case”—
    https://www.nationalreview.com/2023/09/fani-williss-monstrous-trump-case

    + Bonus:
    THE REASON why “Biden” (and “his” fellow travelers) MUST ABSOLUTELY destroy the family (well, among other things, including destroying Trump)…
    “The Privilege That Dare Not Speak Its Name”—
    https://blazingcatfur.ca/2023/09/15/the-privilege-that-dare-not-speak-its-name/

  57. The part of Williamson’s article that is free mocks Paxton’s lawyers for saying their client pleaded not guilty. He was acquitted, which means the Senate found him not guilty. Apparently Williamson wanted Paxton to do us a favor and plead guilty to accusations backed with no evidence. Do I need to look up Williamson’s opinion of Russia Collusion in 2017? I think I know his opinion. No need to pay for garbage.

  59. Hmmm. KDW was right on point, as always
    ==
    Kevin D. Williamson was issuing his denunciations of the culture or ordinary wage earners in Lubbock and Amarillo (and, most notably, Owsley County, Ky) did so while collecting a salary of over $200,000 a year from a philanthropic corporation that then employed fewer than 50 people. If you fancy that his salary and Mr. Lowry’s similar salary were a consequence of an arms-length transactions between the two of them and National Review‘s board, I’m vending bridges.

  60. Bauxite:

    As far as I know there were few facts but plenty of allegations, and many of those allegations turned out not to be facts.

    However, apparently Paxton is pretty abrasive and no saint.

  61. Art Deco:

    Your point is made quite adequately without your devoting pixels to the extraneous “piss off.”

  62. one is reminded of the ted stevens case, when the supposed overcharges alleged by a corrupt degenerate william allen,* ,actually did not happen

    *he was an fbi asset with a nc 17 relationship with his handler, mary beth kempner

  63. I didn’t follow the case. Paxton had 20 counts against him in the articles of impeachment, (https://www.texastribune.org/2023/05/25/ken-paxton-20-articles-impeachment/) and the opportunity to present evidence on each and every count was on the floor of the House. In the end, after the evidence was presented, there were 14 votes to impeach out of the required 21 on most of the articles, and 12 of those were Democrats. The two Republicans were Kelly Hancock (Dallas) and Robert Nichols (Jacksonville, East Texas). Both of these politicians are not up for re-election until 2026 and Nichols is rumored to be bowing out. The votes against impeachment were mostly all Republicans. With the exception of 2 of the articles, all Democrats voted to convict on all the articles.

    The usual histrionics have followed, on both sides. I still don’t see any strong thumbprints of the Bush Dynasty, nor do I think it portends the end of Bush family influence. I think Paxton’s every bit as pure and uncomplicated as Tom Delay was, which is to say that he navigates close to the line and is highly effective as a politician. This ‘ends-justify-means’ effectiveness is why he has held onto his position, and perhaps why Democrats are so vitriolic, seeing their own tactics being deployed against them.

    Not sure why there are cries to ‘review the evidence’ here, when this has already happened on an official level, with these decisive results. It looks to me like the charges were weak, which I suspected when I started to hear thrilling backstories about the FBI ‘investigations’ trying to make a mountain. I’ve seen Gov. Perry and other Texas Republicans harassed in a similar way – any pretext will do, when Lawfare is the playing ground instead of governance. The ones that use these tactics should not be surprised when it eventually comes to pass that serious charges are met with cynical indifference because abuse-by-impeachment has become both farcical, and the norm.

    FWIW I know two of the Senators that voted – one used to be a neighbor of mine, and the other was officiating when my wife and child became citizens. Both are principled, and I would guess that both are Trump supporters, but not acolytes. From what I know of their character, both would vote their conscience if the evidence was compelling.

  64. sure they aren’t saints fairly effective in the promotion of policy objectives, no reason to abuse the impeachment function in favor of law fare parties,

  65. Given the history of the FBI and, more extensively, the Justice Department, does the adage that, “It is better that ten guilty men go free than one innocent man is convicted” apply? As jurors. As someone asked by an agent about something. As voters.

  66. Art Deco:

    And? Surely you do not mean to say it is wrong to have $200k salary or anything a person who gets $200k salary is wrong because it is wron…can you be more lucid?

  67. ” “It is better that ten guilty men go free than one innocent man is convicted”

    I wonder if this, in our modern era, has become something more like, ‘there are no innocent men, and we have ten confidential human sources that have avoided prosecution by telling us so.’

  68. Aggie, your latest comment covers my sentiment well. This article to me is the most damning of the impeachment (the previous link was meant to go here): https://thefederalist.com/2023/09/11/the-case-against-ken-paxton-is-all-hat-no-cattle/

    As you note, the cries to “review the evidence” are absurd to me when you understand the “evidence” presented. The accusers admitted under oath, one after the other, they were merely making the allegations without evidence and it was up others to investigate and find the evidence. That’s just bullshit.

  69. LL and Buaxite:

    See Leyland’s and Aggie’s comment and cites; your allegations without evidence are best put “where the sun don’t shine.”

    LL, you seem to be new as a commentor, nowhere to go but up.

  71. “If you have the facts on your side, pound the facts; if you have the law on your side, pound the law; if you have neither the facts nor the law, pound the table.”

    • Watched the trial initially via clips – primarily Buzbee – then pulled up the full-length recordings on YouTube.

    Quick Thoughts:

    1) The defense had both the Facts and Law on their side – and the prosecution had neither.

    2) It was striking that no evidence – other than the word of the whistleblowers – was presented for any of the 16 articles of impeachment (as many have noted).

    3) The defense team appeared stronger – not just Buzbee – and not just because they had the stronger hand.

    4) The prosecution was left with just Suggestions/ Smoke/ Smears, which is why Paxton was able to run the gauntlet of articles – any one of them could have led to his impeachment.

    5) For those who wish to “dig deeper” by going to the source – without watching every moment of the trail – I can suggest these trail days: Prosecution closing + Day 8 (+ Day 7 if gone that far).

  72. “…no reason to abuse the impeachment function in favor of law fare parties”
    Except that there’s EVERY REASON: It’s precisely how Obama/”Biden” “do business”.
    IOW, this putrid, reeking impeachment has the Obama/”Biden” M.O. all over it.

    Paxton was put through the meat grinder and even though Obama/”Biden” came up empty this time one shouldn’t ignore the pain-causing and all-important INTIMIDATION aspect of the attempted defenestration.
    It’s a warning to others.
    For Paxton, enough is enough and has delivered a warning of his own: it’s high time for some “disincentives”…
    “Texas AG Sends Threatening Warning to Biden After Being Cleared From Impeachment Charges”—
    https://townhall.com/tipsheet/saraharnold/2023/09/16/texas-ag-sends-warning-to-biden-after-being-cleared-from-impeachment-charges-n2628534
    Key grafs:
    ‘…”The sham impeachment coordinated by the Biden Administration with liberal House Speaker Dade Phelan and his kangaroo court has cost taxpayers millions of dollars, disrupted the work of the Office of Attorney General, and left a dark and permanent stain on the Texas House,” Paxton’s letter read.
    ‘…”The weaponization of the impeachment process to settle political differences is not only wrong, it is immoral and corrupt,” Paxton’s letter continued.
    ‘…The Republican criticized the Biden Administration for infringing upon American’s rights, promising the president that the time will come for him to face the same political persecution he targets toward conservatives….’

    He’s right and good luck to him, since he’s up against a monstrous regime that has no qualms about using every “trick” in the book against its perceived opponents (and anyone else who stands in its way).

  73. Thanks to Aggie and Leland. Aggie’s comments and Leland’s Federalist article are the first analysis that I have seen about the allegations against Paxton in the mainstream press or the partisan press, for that matter. The Federalist is on my list of sources to read, and then check by reading a bit on the other side of the issue before forming an opinion, but I still know more than I did before reading Beebe’s reporting.

    To om and Art Deco, I think all of us could do without the “piss off” and “stick it where the sun don’t shine” nonsense. For pity’s sake, it is not self-evident that you are correct about everything. If you spent your time making your case instead of making snide comments, you might actually persuade people in a way that you certainly do not with that sort of crap. There are a lot of people other than me who will not just accept a point of view because it is what “our team” believes. And frankly, if the right has become so insular that people can’t handle a little self-criticism, we may as well head for the hills now because there’s nothing but losing in the future.

  74. . If you spent your time making your case
    ==
    You never made any any case and 2/3 of your post was on trivia irrelevant to the issues under discussion. That’s apart from confusing church scandals with political scandals and displacing them in time by 15 years.
    ==
    The rest of us are not pretending we do not notice something: ethics charges in general and impeachment proceedings in particular have over many decades been used for political warfare and it’s gotten stupefying at the federal level contra one particular person. We’re not going to begin with the assumption that there’s any there there.
    ==
    I rely on Donald McClarey’s judgment because criminal law is part of his book of business and I know what his biases are as we have been communicating online for 20 years. My own thoughts on the matter at hand have been stated in this thread already. My thoughts on your particular intervention in this thread (which is the latest iteration of your standard template) do not require extensive verbiage because we have had this exchange 100x before.

  75. I thought it time to put this thread to bed, but then read an astonishing WSJ editorial about the acquittal https://tinyurl.com/bdjrbrbm
    It states that “the fix was in” because Lt Gov Patrick, the presiding officer, “…had kept quiet during the House debate.” Further, it was “obvious” that the Lt Gov had lobbied “his fellow GOP Senators to unite against the House articles of impeachment.” So obvious that WSJ thought that there was no need to cite evidence that this had occurred.
    They also think that ascribing any Bush influence to the entire affair is a “joke.”
    I usually read their “news” articles with skepticism and their editorials with less cynicism, but no more…

  76. I didn’t pay much attention either, even though I am a long-time Texas resident. My immediate reaction on skimming this post was shame- that I didn’t keep up with local events. Then a name came to my mind: Ronnie Earle, who was Travis County (Austin) DA for 30 years. Which goes a long way towards explaining why I didn’t pay attention.

    From the Austin American Statesman: BREAKING (2020): Former Travis County DA Ronnie Earle has died..

    Through the county’s Public Integrity Unit, which he founded, Earle prosecuted some of the state’s top politicians — including then-Texas Attorney General Jim Mattox, then-U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison and then-U.S. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay — with mixed success.

    A jury acquitted Mattox and the case against Hutchison became a high-profile failure when charges were dismissed. DeLay was convicted of a money laundering charge, but that conviction was later overturned by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals.

    Interesting that the Statesman said that Ronnie Earle had “mixed success” when none of the three cases resulted in convictions. From another POV, Ronnie Earle was VERY successful, as he made life difficult for Republican poobahs.

    There has been in the post 2016 era a lot of talk about Democrats waging “lawfare” against Republicans. Looks to me like Ronnie Earle pioneered “lawfare.”

  77. Strange coincidence, just like Project Veritas after the Pfizer Expose:

    “In case you missed it, back in May, only three weeks after Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton started investigating Gain of Function research and covid-19 vaccine manufacturer deceptive practices, he was suddenly brought up on impeachment charges. Charges alleging bribery — oh, the irony — and corruption.”

    https://www.coffeeandcovid.com/p/chicken-legs-monday-september-18

  78. And? Surely you do not mean to say it is wrong to have $200k salary or anything a person who gets $200k salary is wrong because it is wron…can you be more lucid?
    ==
    No, I’m saying it’s wrong to have a handsome salary which is not the issue of an arms length transaction while issuing animadversions contra others for their low earning power and various other all too human shortcomings.
    ==
    Kevin D. Williamson is notable for his contempt for ordinary people and for a particular antagonism to the part of the world in which he grew up and the society in which he grew up. Some of the tales he tells on himself are stupefying. Either he does not see this as troublesome behavior or he’s proud of it.

  80. I have very mixed feelings on Paxton. On a positive note he fights the good fight against the left and currently is a big thorn in the Biden administration’s side.

    On the other hand, he’s slimy IMO. He agreed to a fine for violating the Texas State Securities Act for failing to register as a investment advisor chromextension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://www.ssb.texas.gov/sites/default/files/2021-05/IC14CAF03.pdf.

    His current securities fraud case is based on the fact that he received 100,000 shares of stock in Servergy in exchange for soliciting investors and ultimately receiving $840,000 for Servergy, without disclosing the stock consideration. Ken beat the SEC’s charge on this, but the state and I believe federal securities fraud charges are still pending, and setting aside the fact he was receiving consideration for selling stock when he wasn’t a registered investment advisor, the key question is whether he should have disclosed that compensation to potential investors. Most securities lawyers think this is a no-brainer and you can put it in a PPM or other document provided to potential investors and they wouldn’t care, given that almost no one reads PPMs or a prospectus. I suspect he didn’t include that in the disclosure document because to do so would be an admission he was violating the Texas State Securities Act, for which he accepted a reprimand and fine, albeit a small one ($1000), but I haven’t spent a lot of time looking at it.

  81. I am a Texan and have watched this since the start. The House was presented with a $3.3 million request to pay the settlement of the whistleblower suit. They looked into it and saw Paxton acting like an idiot, affair with a three time divorcee who can’t keep her pants on, lies about critical matters, hiring unqualified outside counsel, experienced non-RINO Texas Ranger among the whistleblowers, and obvious misuse of his office to help Nate Paul. They voted overwhelmingly to impeach.

    Since that time Trump has released the Mug Shot, and tribalization has reached levels not seen in decades. IMO the result of this tribalization among the GOP Senators was: Screw it, we are not going to impeach a GOP elected official. Paxton acted like an idiot, but he is OUR idiot.

    Added to this is the total disgust with the supposedly GOP House Speaker Dade Phelan who managed to avoid doing almost everything the Texas GOP wanted. This was a chance to stick it to him. IMO the Bush issue was trivial, just another thing to throw on the bonfire since someone with the name Bush was involved.

  83. I moved to Texas over a decade ago, and Texas government and politics are surprisingly complicated and broken. As Leland and other commenters pointed out, the House leadership is not very representative of the GOP in Texas overall; the leaders get there by making backroom deals with all sides, playing power games, and are consistently among the very least conservative of the Republican legislators. The result is a legislature often at odds with the state executive branch and one that is much less conservative than the state as a whole. Along with the legislative schedule, this leads to a legislature that is surprisingly ineffective at passing a conservative agenda—the most glaring example being how they defanged Abbott’s efforts to rid the Texas University system of DEI initiatives. The leadership exercises significant power over what happens in the legislature, and this power makes it darn near impossible for them to be effectively challenged. My perception is that these dynamics are central to what has happened with Paxton, and that the Bush connection is only a peripheral influence.

  84. I moved to Texas over a decade ago, and Texas government and politics are surprisingly complicated and broken.
    ==
    Your description sounds like a generic state legislature. There’s an antheap of things you could do so that legislatures could run more efficiently and not be the preserve of party barons, but they’re hardly ever done. I loathe our politicians.
    ==

  86. @ Dick Illyes

    “The House was presented with a $3.3 million request to pay the settlement of the whistleblower suit. They looked into it and [1] saw Paxton acting like an idiot, [2] affair with a three time divorcee who can’t keep her pants on, [3] lies about critical matters, [4] hiring unqualified outside counsel, [5] experienced non-RINO Texas Ranger among the whistleblowers, and [6] obvious misuse of his office to help Nate Paul. They voted overwhelmingly to impeach.”

    • Always appreciate the perspective of folks in the states/ locations/ organizations impacted by the events we read about.

    • Can appreciate that you may not think highly of Paxton, and if I lived there might have formed the same opinion.

    • However, it strikes me that all of us are impacted when government decides it is the arbitrator of which election outcomes are allowed to stand and which are not allowed to stand.

    • And I formed that opinion because the timeline ^^ of events makes it clear that:

    a) the voters had two years to review the allegations – which had not been “tested” in court – and two opportunities – primary & general election – to not return Paxton to office.

    b) the House also had two years to act on the allegations, independent of their oversight of the “purse strings” (i.e., approve 2023 settlement).

    ^^ = Key Dates are below

    • I’ll add that I considered your point #6 the most serious, and during the trial paid close attention to the Impeachment Articles that alleged bribery, etc.

    • I was completely underwhelmed ^^ by what the prosecution put forward as “evidence” of bribery, etc. – “underwhelmed” is me being polite – and would not want myself to be convicted of similar charges based on what was put forward to try and convict Paxton. Some may feel differently about the threshold used to convict themselves.

    ^^ = struck me that there were key “Dog did not bark” moments – and shades of the 2014 Gov. McDonnell trial

    • I interpreted your points #1-5 as signs of your frustration/ opinion – but not legitimate reasons to impeach & remove an elected official.

    • Lastly, the House acted improperly, and I do hope the voters try to hold them accountable.

    ******

    January 2015 – Paxton takes office after his election as Texas attorney general, the state’s top law enforcement officer. He previously served for a decade in the Texas House of Representatives, from 2003 to 2013, and for two years in the Texas Senate, from 2013 to 2015.

    July 2015 – Paxton is indicted by state prosecutors on three felony securities fraud charges. The indictment alleges Paxton misled investors in a technology company and failed to register as a securities adviser. Paxton maintains his innocence in the case, which has faced repeated delays and not yet gone to trial.

    November 2018 – Paxton is elected to a second term as attorney general.

    2020 – Whistleblowers from the Texas attorney general’s office accuse Paxton of multiple corruption allegations, which he denies. Several whistleblowers are fired or forced from the office. A federal corruption investigation into Paxton opens.

    November 2022 – Paxton is elected to a third term as attorney general.

    February 2023 – Paxton agrees to settle a lawsuit brought by four of the whistleblowers for $3.3. million, without admitting wrongdoing. The lawsuit remains pending before the Texas Supreme Court; no settlement payment has been made. The Justice Department’s Public Integrity Section takes over the separate federal corruption investigation, according to the special prosecutors in Paxton’s state case.

    May 23, 2023 – The Texas House Committee on General Investigating says it has been investigating Paxton for months. The investigation was triggered by Paxton’s request that the legislature approve taxpayers’ funds to pay the $3.3 million settlement with the whistleblowers. Lawmakers refused to fund payment of the settlement.

    May 25, 2023 – The Texas House Committee on General Investigating recommends in a 5-0 vote that Paxton be impeached on 20 articles including accusations of bribery, abuse of public trust and obstruction. Paxton says he is innocent of all allegations and that the action is politically motivated.

    May 27, 2023 – The Texas House votes 121-23 to impeach Paxton. He is temporarily suspended of his duties pending an impeachment trial in the Texas Senate, which also is controlled by Republicans. Paxton’s wife, Angela, is a senator.

    May 29, 2023 – The Texas House names 12 members – seven Republicans and five Democrats – to prosecute the case against Paxton in the Senate trial. The Senate in a resolution creates a seven-member committee to lay out the rules for Paxton’s trial. The rules will be made public on June 20. The Senate says the trial shall begin no later than August 28, 2023.

    https://www.reuters.com/world/us/impeachment-texas-attorney-general-ken-paxton-2023-05-30/

  87. All the blather about who was from where and when does nothing for me but does support the commenter who said they are Yankees. They ARE Yankees by any definition that a Southerner would use.

  88. All the blather about who was from where and when does nothing for me but does support the commenter who said they are Yankees. They ARE Yankees by any definition that a Southerner would use.
    ==
    OK, but George P. Bush, age 47, has spent about 1/3 of his life in south Florida and 2/3 in Texas. His father owns a vacation property in Maine but has otherwise spent about 4 of his 70 years as a resident of the northern United States.
    ==
    The problem with the Bush clan is not that they’re northerners (or, more precisely, midwesterners transplanted to New York), but that they’re programmatically vacuous, indifferent to people unlike their crowd, and easily rolled by the education and social work lobby.

  89. tim ferrell

    All the blather about who was from where and when does nothing for me but does support the commenter who said they are Yankees. They ARE Yankees by any definition that a Southerner would use.

    I was born and raised in New England, but moved to Texas over 40 years ago. My mother was born and raised in Oklahoma. Her parents were born and raised in Texas. All four of my mother’s grandparents moved from Tennessee to Texas in the 1870s.

    My father’s paternal grandparents moved from Virginia to Illinois in the 1850s.

    My family fought on both sides of the Civil War, including two who were killed in the conflict: a Confederate Colonel and a member of John Brown’s band who was killed at Harper’s Ferry.

    Back in New England, I am not considered a Yankee because my parents were from “away.” (Though from one grandparent there were some Puritan ancestors who became Quakers and skedaddled for Pennsylvania.)

    If you have read Mary Chesnut’s Civil War diaries, you might recall that there were Northerners (Philadelphia?) in her or her husband’s family tree.

    Yankee, schmankee.
    Redneck, schmedneck.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

↑