whiterock said:

---

quash said:

---

whiterock said:

---

quash said:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

House impeaches by simple majority. Senate convicts by 2/3rds. Trump's impeached, then acquitted

The standard of evidence for a senator to convict is whatever the senator thinks it is. Senator can vote to convict for any reason or no reason at all.fo

---

no argument from me

---

Impeachment is not a legal process. It's a political process. Rules of due process do not apply, although the bodies involved will establish rules that are facsimiles of due process.

Literally, the people voting to impeach and convict are looking at how their vote will affect their re-election process.

---

I don't disagree. I'm wondering if senators believe it is helpful politically to acquit a guy whose been indicted once and may be indicted again. Do they want their political futures tied up with this guy?

---

Thanks for bringing the conversation back to my initial point: they could have avoided that dilemma entirely by not impeaching him in the first place and letting the courts handle it........

---

If, and only if, the allegations are true then his conduct in office is despicable.

If not impeachment then what sanction would you impose? (Aside from "let the voters decide" which is fair.)

---

He has been under indictment (but inexplicably not prosecuted) for 7-8 years on one (specious) charge.
He is (recently) being investigated by the FBI on another.

Are you going to remove him from office just because he's accused?
(remember, he's been accused of some of the counts for a long, long time and been elected anyway.)
Or are you going to let the processes in motion play out and remove him if/when convicted?

Why the rush to impeach?
Could it be that the legal cases against him are so weak?
Would it not be more fair to him and the majority of people who voted for him to let the legal processes lay out FIRST?

"Nah, I don't like the SOB and most especially the nutjobs who support him, so I'll help the Democrats screw him over the first chance I get, voters be damned."
--Osodecentx

---

Nothing in the Texas construction or the rules of the legislature require that body to pause while other charges are resolved. There is no interplay
I didn't suggest there were. You did.

Neither is there a "rush". Resolving this between sessions is entirely appropriate.
Of course there was a rush. It could have waited until after he was convicted of something. Instead, this was a surprise to the public....no drumbeat escalating PR build up, over months to drive up polling support for it. Just BOOM, out of left field. Impeachment is in deed a political process and the politics of this one were quite incompetently done.

Not sure why you asked me those questions: as I said if he is convicted he's out, if not he can stay as far as I'm concerned.

But you didn't answer the question I asked: what sanction would you impose if the evidence supports the charges?

---

you've crafted quite the strawman, there quash. This impeachment would have had little opposition had it been done after a conviction.

---

I see you chose not to answer.

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Aliceinbubbleland said:

---

After listening all day today I think this is the best defense that can be offered at this time in hearings. Something about these 8 and Sutton doesn't set well. Also the bank President got to the top because of 44 years, not qualifications. He is either stupid or wanted to appear that way as something stinks about the foreclosure sale.

I don't know where Hardin was going today but it was boring. The young attorney, Cammack, was hung out to dry by Paul and Paxton. That was the only thing I could see today that meant Paxton was the creep I suspected him to be.

I had no clue until I got Buzbee's campaign flyer today that he is a MAGA. I never would have suspected him to be associated with them.

---

The question is, where are the swing Senators on the question of Sutton & the Gang of 8? Not sure about that, but know for sure that no sane elected official would want to reward someone else's palace coup with victory, when they are so dependent on their own staff.

---

LOL. You're just gobbling up what MQS is dishing out aren't you?

High level staff, all movement conservatives, suspect illegal activity. They report it to FBI. That isn't a palace coup, that is being honest . I guess dishonest state senators might see it as "rewarding the palace coup".

Convicting Paxton and removing him from office isn't rewarding the whistle blowers. It's thinning the herd of a dishonest AG; it would be rewarding the taxpayers of Texas. Republicans would also be the winners.

---

LOL so you do have a hard-on for MQS. So, I post video footage of the trial pulled from a MQS post and I'm gobbling his stuff? Ever heard of genetic fallacy?

You could not have been listening to the testimony. They provided, by their own words, no evidence of any illegal activity whatsoever. They were just "concerned" that it looked like something might happen (only it didn't).

You posts here make no sense. I am concerned you might be making meth in your bathroom. Expect the cops to arrive shortly.

---

You are gobbling up mucous ( MQS)

Meth?

---

Your glide path got gummed up with mucous

---

You win. Paxton is the face of the Texas Republican Party
You own him

---

No, the people of Texas do, but thanks for revealing the "vanity uber alles" that drives your thinking.

If/when he's convicted if something, I'll lead the charge to impeach. Until then, I'm going to work to punish the numbskulls who incompetently executed up a half-baked impeachment idea that could only have been worse politics had it succeeded.

What dumba$$es…..

---

He is the face of Republicans
He's your boy

---

Not really. Hasn't made much news nationally. Hasn't really been splashed about much even in Texas. Perhaps that's because the whole thing was pretty weak sauce - bland ingredients, under-cooked, poorly presented, etc.... And in a few days, it'll be old news. A month forgotten. Won't hear much unless/until he's convicted of something, which at this long date doesn't seem terribly likely. If they don't get him by 2024, they probably won't. That's what this whole thing is about, you know - paying him back for fighting voter fraud in 2020, and trying to sideline him for 2024. They thought the impeachment itself would cause him to fold, or that his donors/supporters would force him to fold. But it didn't work out that way, did it. People seem to like a fighter. Why, it sure seems like the guy who always shows up with his sword & shield stacks up a lot of favors, thereby gaining opportunity to be effective.

but it is terribly instructive that you continue to perceive this as a morality play replete with pious refusals to caucus with anyone who offends your sensibilities. For that matter, you seem to be dismissive of anyone who gets any grease on their fingernails while making sausage in politics for any reason. So why on earth do you bother to engage at all?

I'll caucus with Paxton. And MQS. And Romney. And Bush. And Trump. And RDS. They and more are welcome in my tent. I'll even hold my nose and try not to bump into those pompous *******s Christie and Hutchinson, as long as they can bring themselves to show up. I'll caucus with anyone who will help me defeat progressive agendas. Sure, I may get mud on my shoes. Or have to take pictures with people I'm not terribly excited about, like that one with John Boehner. Oh the things one has to do to help a friend raise money. I might even have to defend something I'd rather not defend. But if I do that, I'll have people standing with me when I take incoming fire. People who are effective do tend to attract incoming fire, you know. That's what coalitions do - stick together....successful ones, anyway....

But if you're too good for that kind of stuff, by all means you be you. Be sure to be real loud about it. Otherwise people won't know how much more virtuous you are than the rest of us. Would be a shame to make the posture and nobody see it.

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Aliceinbubbleland said:

---

After listening all day today I think this is the best defense that can be offered at this time in hearings. Something about these 8 and Sutton doesn't set well. Also the bank President got to the top because of 44 years, not qualifications. He is either stupid or wanted to appear that way as something stinks about the foreclosure sale.

I don't know where Hardin was going today but it was boring. The young attorney, Cammack, was hung out to dry by Paul and Paxton. That was the only thing I could see today that meant Paxton was the creep I suspected him to be.

I had no clue until I got Buzbee's campaign flyer today that he is a MAGA. I never would have suspected him to be associated with them.

---

The question is, where are the swing Senators on the question of Sutton & the Gang of 8? Not sure about that, but know for sure that no sane elected official would want to reward someone else's palace coup with victory, when they are so dependent on their own staff.

---

LOL. You're just gobbling up what MQS is dishing out aren't you?

High level staff, all movement conservatives, suspect illegal activity. They report it to FBI. That isn't a palace coup, that is being honest . I guess dishonest state senators might see it as "rewarding the palace coup".

Convicting Paxton and removing him from office isn't rewarding the whistle blowers. It's thinning the herd of a dishonest AG; it would be rewarding the taxpayers of Texas. Republicans would also be the winners.

---

LOL so you do have a hard-on for MQS. So, I post video footage of the trial pulled from a MQS post and I'm gobbling his stuff? Ever heard of genetic fallacy?

You could not have been listening to the testimony. They provided, by their own words, no evidence of any illegal activity whatsoever. They were just "concerned" that it looked like something might happen (only it didn't).

You posts here make no sense. I am concerned you might be making meth in your bathroom. Expect the cops to arrive shortly.

---

You are gobbling up mucous ( MQS)

Meth?

---

Your glide path got gummed up with mucous

---

You win. Paxton is the face of the Texas Republican Party
You own him

---

No, the people of Texas do, but thanks for revealing the "vanity uber alles" that drives your thinking.

If/when he's convicted if something, I'll lead the charge to impeach. Until then, I'm going to work to punish the numbskulls who incompetently executed up a half-baked impeachment idea that could only have been worse politics had it succeeded.

What dumba$$es…..

---

He is the face of Republicans
He's your boy

---

Not really. Hasn't made much news nationally. Hasn't really been splashed about much even in Texas. Perhaps that's because the whole thing was pretty weak sauce - bland ingredients, under-cooked, poorly presented, etc.... And in a few days, it'll be old news. A month forgotten. Won't hear much unless/until he's convicted of something, which at this long date doesn't seem terribly likely. If they don't get him by 2024, they probably won't. That's what this whole thing is about, you know - paying him back for fighting voter fraud in 2020, and trying to sideline him for 2024. They thought the impeachment itself would cause him to fold, or that his donors/supporters would force him to fold. But it didn't work out that way, did it. People seem to like a fighter. Why, it sure seems like the guy who always shows up with his sword & shield stacks up a lot of favors, thereby gaining opportunity to be effective.

but it is terribly instructive that you continue to perceive this as a morality play replete with pious refusals to caucus with anyone who offends your sensibilities. For that matter, you seem to be dismissive of anyone who gets any grease on their fingernails while making sausage in politics for any reason. So why on earth do you bother to engage at all?

I'll caucus with Paxton. And MQS. And Romney. And Bush. And Trump. And RDS. They and more are welcome in my tent. I'll even hold my nose and try not to bump into those pompous *******s Christie and Hutchinson, as long as they can bring themselves to show up. I'll caucus with anyone who will help me defeat progressive agendas. Sure, I may get mud on my shoes. Or have to take pictures with people I'm not terribly excited about, like that one with John Boehner. Oh the things one has to do to help a friend raise money. I might even have to defend something I'd rather not defend. But if I do that, I'll have people standing with me when I take incoming fire. People who are effective do tend to attract incoming fire, you know. That's what coalitions do - stick together....successful ones, anyway....

But if you're too good for that kind of stuff, by all means you be you. Be sure to be real loud about it. Otherwise people won't know how much more virtuous you are than the rest of us. Would be a shame to make the posture and nobody see it.

---

The Texas house GOP cooked this up to pay Paxton back for "fighting voter fraud."?

You are a special kind of MAGA hack.

quash said:

---

whiterock said:

---

quash said:

---

whiterock said:

---

quash said:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

House impeaches by simple majority. Senate convicts by 2/3rds. Trump's impeached, then acquitted

The standard of evidence for a senator to convict is whatever the senator thinks it is. Senator can vote to convict for any reason or no reason at all.fo

---

no argument from me

---

Impeachment is not a legal process. It's a political process. Rules of due process do not apply, although the bodies involved will establish rules that are facsimiles of due process.

Literally, the people voting to impeach and convict are looking at how their vote will affect their re-election process.

---

I don't disagree. I'm wondering if senators believe it is helpful politically to acquit a guy whose been indicted once and may be indicted again. Do they want their political futures tied up with this guy?

---

Thanks for bringing the conversation back to my initial point: they could have avoided that dilemma entirely by not impeaching him in the first place and letting the courts handle it........

---

If, and only if, the allegations are true then his conduct in office is despicable.

If not impeachment then what sanction would you impose? (Aside from "let the voters decide" which is fair.)

---

He has been under indictment (but inexplicably not prosecuted) for 7-8 years on one (specious) charge.
He is (recently) being investigated by the FBI on another.

Are you going to remove him from office just because he's accused?
(remember, he's been accused of some of the counts for a long, long time and been elected anyway.)
Or are you going to let the processes in motion play out and remove him if/when convicted?

Why the rush to impeach?
Could it be that the legal cases against him are so weak?
Would it not be more fair to him and the majority of people who voted for him to let the legal processes lay out FIRST?

"Nah, I don't like the SOB and most especially the nutjobs who support him, so I'll help the Democrats screw him over the first chance I get, voters be damned."
--Osodecentx

---

Nothing in the Texas construction or the rules of the legislature require that body to pause while other charges are resolved. There is no interplay
I didn't suggest there were. You did.

Neither is there a "rush". Resolving this between sessions is entirely appropriate.
Of course there was a rush. It could have waited until after he was convicted of something. Instead, this was a surprise to the public....no drumbeat escalating PR build up, over months to drive up polling support for it. Just BOOM, out of left field. Impeachment is in deed a political process and the politics of this one were quite incompetently done.

Not sure why you asked me those questions: as I said if he is convicted he's out, if not he can stay as far as I'm concerned.

But you didn't answer the question I asked: what sanction would you impose if the evidence supports the charges?

---

you've crafted quite the strawman, there quash. This impeachment would have had little opposition had it been done after a conviction.

---

I see you chose not to answer.

---

of course I did. It was just a silly question, because we know the answer. If convicted, he's impeached and out of office. If not, he returns. Since we now know the latter unfolded, we can fairly impute the evidence did not support the charges. And upon close inspection, it clearly did not. There was no evidence he had actually DONE anything alleged.

My critique all along has been that the Paxton impeachment was premature. For that reason, the case had a number of deficiencies: inadequate evidence, non-existent preparatory messaging, and zero political preparation. It was a pure morality play, and for the foregoing reasons a very, very bad one. It accomplished nothing except to divide the GOP. Time has proven my assessment spot on.

You COULD have impeached him, if only had you waited for the outcome of all the investigations/prosecutions he's facing to generate some truly damaging smoking gun evidence. But you couldn't wait for that, because they will not likely resolve in a helpful time frame. So you had to make hasty pudding. And now it's in your face.

The Paxton impeachment worked out exactly as it should have. And now Phelan is going to have his cunning plan audited to see where the money went. Will Paxton's critics have the same level of concern over Phelans malfeasance? Doesn't a political failure of this magnitude warrant him stepping down?

Phelans Malfeasance. Has a nice ring to it, doesn't it?

Frank Galvin said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Aliceinbubbleland said:

---

After listening all day today I think this is the best defense that can be offered at this time in hearings. Something about these 8 and Sutton doesn't set well. Also the bank President got to the top because of 44 years, not qualifications. He is either stupid or wanted to appear that way as something stinks about the foreclosure sale.

I don't know where Hardin was going today but it was boring. The young attorney, Cammack, was hung out to dry by Paul and Paxton. That was the only thing I could see today that meant Paxton was the creep I suspected him to be.

I had no clue until I got Buzbee's campaign flyer today that he is a MAGA. I never would have suspected him to be associated with them.

---

The question is, where are the swing Senators on the question of Sutton & the Gang of 8? Not sure about that, but know for sure that no sane elected official would want to reward someone else's palace coup with victory, when they are so dependent on their own staff.

---

LOL. You're just gobbling up what MQS is dishing out aren't you?

High level staff, all movement conservatives, suspect illegal activity. They report it to FBI. That isn't a palace coup, that is being honest . I guess dishonest state senators might see it as "rewarding the palace coup".

Convicting Paxton and removing him from office isn't rewarding the whistle blowers. It's thinning the herd of a dishonest AG; it would be rewarding the taxpayers of Texas. Republicans would also be the winners.

---

LOL so you do have a hard-on for MQS. So, I post video footage of the trial pulled from a MQS post and I'm gobbling his stuff? Ever heard of genetic fallacy?

You could not have been listening to the testimony. They provided, by their own words, no evidence of any illegal activity whatsoever. They were just "concerned" that it looked like something might happen (only it didn't).

You posts here make no sense. I am concerned you might be making meth in your bathroom. Expect the cops to arrive shortly.

---

You are gobbling up mucous ( MQS)

Meth?

---

Your glide path got gummed up with mucous

---

You win. Paxton is the face of the Texas Republican Party
You own him

---

No, the people of Texas do, but thanks for revealing the "vanity uber alles" that drives your thinking.

If/when he's convicted if something, I'll lead the charge to impeach. Until then, I'm going to work to punish the numbskulls who incompetently executed up a half-baked impeachment idea that could only have been worse politics had it succeeded.

What dumba$$es…..

---

He is the face of Republicans
He's your boy

---

Not really. Hasn't made much news nationally. Hasn't really been splashed about much even in Texas. Perhaps that's because the whole thing was pretty weak sauce - bland ingredients, under-cooked, poorly presented, etc.... And in a few days, it'll be old news. A month forgotten. Won't hear much unless/until he's convicted of something, which at this long date doesn't seem terribly likely. If they don't get him by 2024, they probably won't. That's what this whole thing is about, you know - paying him back for fighting voter fraud in 2020, and trying to sideline him for 2024. They thought the impeachment itself would cause him to fold, or that his donors/supporters would force him to fold. But it didn't work out that way, did it. People seem to like a fighter. Why, it sure seems like the guy who always shows up with his sword & shield stacks up a lot of favors, thereby gaining opportunity to be effective.

but it is terribly instructive that you continue to perceive this as a morality play replete with pious refusals to caucus with anyone who offends your sensibilities. For that matter, you seem to be dismissive of anyone who gets any grease on their fingernails while making sausage in politics for any reason. So why on earth do you bother to engage at all?

I'll caucus with Paxton. And MQS. And Romney. And Bush. And Trump. And RDS. They and more are welcome in my tent. I'll even hold my nose and try not to bump into those pompous *******s Christie and Hutchinson, as long as they can bring themselves to show up. I'll caucus with anyone who will help me defeat progressive agendas. Sure, I may get mud on my shoes. Or have to take pictures with people I'm not terribly excited about, like that one with John Boehner. Oh the things one has to do to help a friend raise money. I might even have to defend something I'd rather not defend. But if I do that, I'll have people standing with me when I take incoming fire. People who are effective do tend to attract incoming fire, you know. That's what coalitions do - stick together....successful ones, anyway....

But if you're too good for that kind of stuff, by all means you be you. Be sure to be real loud about it. Otherwise people won't know how much more virtuous you are than the rest of us. Would be a shame to make the posture and nobody see it.

---

The Texas house GOP cooked this up to pay Paxton back for "fighting voter fraud."?

You are a special kind of MAGA hack.

---

GOP = Great Old Paxton, he is the Texas Republican Party

A vote along party lines does not prove any assertions.

Osodecentx said:

---

Frank Galvin said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Aliceinbubbleland said:

---

After listening all day today I think this is the best defense that can be offered at this time in hearings. Something about these 8 and Sutton doesn't set well. Also the bank President got to the top because of 44 years, not qualifications. He is either stupid or wanted to appear that way as something stinks about the foreclosure sale.

I don't know where Hardin was going today but it was boring. The young attorney, Cammack, was hung out to dry by Paul and Paxton. That was the only thing I could see today that meant Paxton was the creep I suspected him to be.

I had no clue until I got Buzbee's campaign flyer today that he is a MAGA. I never would have suspected him to be associated with them.

---

The question is, where are the swing Senators on the question of Sutton & the Gang of 8? Not sure about that, but know for sure that no sane elected official would want to reward someone else's palace coup with victory, when they are so dependent on their own staff.

---

LOL. You're just gobbling up what MQS is dishing out aren't you?

High level staff, all movement conservatives, suspect illegal activity. They report it to FBI. That isn't a palace coup, that is being honest . I guess dishonest state senators might see it as "rewarding the palace coup".

Convicting Paxton and removing him from office isn't rewarding the whistle blowers. It's thinning the herd of a dishonest AG; it would be rewarding the taxpayers of Texas. Republicans would also be the winners.

---

LOL so you do have a hard-on for MQS. So, I post video footage of the trial pulled from a MQS post and I'm gobbling his stuff? Ever heard of genetic fallacy?

You could not have been listening to the testimony. They provided, by their own words, no evidence of any illegal activity whatsoever. They were just "concerned" that it looked like something might happen (only it didn't).

You posts here make no sense. I am concerned you might be making meth in your bathroom. Expect the cops to arrive shortly.

---

You are gobbling up mucous ( MQS)

Meth?

---

Your glide path got gummed up with mucous

---

You win. Paxton is the face of the Texas Republican Party
You own him

---

No, the people of Texas do, but thanks for revealing the "vanity uber alles" that drives your thinking.

If/when he's convicted if something, I'll lead the charge to impeach. Until then, I'm going to work to punish the numbskulls who incompetently executed up a half-baked impeachment idea that could only have been worse politics had it succeeded.

What dumba$$es…..

---

He is the face of Republicans
He's your boy

---

Not really. Hasn't made much news nationally. Hasn't really been splashed about much even in Texas. Perhaps that's because the whole thing was pretty weak sauce - bland ingredients, under-cooked, poorly presented, etc.... And in a few days, it'll be old news. A month forgotten. Won't hear much unless/until he's convicted of something, which at this long date doesn't seem terribly likely. If they don't get him by 2024, they probably won't. That's what this whole thing is about, you know - paying him back for fighting voter fraud in 2020, and trying to sideline him for 2024. They thought the impeachment itself would cause him to fold, or that his donors/supporters would force him to fold. But it didn't work out that way, did it. People seem to like a fighter. Why, it sure seems like the guy who always shows up with his sword & shield stacks up a lot of favors, thereby gaining opportunity to be effective.

but it is terribly instructive that you continue to perceive this as a morality play replete with pious refusals to caucus with anyone who offends your sensibilities. For that matter, you seem to be dismissive of anyone who gets any grease on their fingernails while making sausage in politics for any reason. So why on earth do you bother to engage at all?

I'll caucus with Paxton. And MQS. And Romney. And Bush. And Trump. And RDS. They and more are welcome in my tent. I'll even hold my nose and try not to bump into those pompous *******s Christie and Hutchinson, as long as they can bring themselves to show up. I'll caucus with anyone who will help me defeat progressive agendas. Sure, I may get mud on my shoes. Or have to take pictures with people I'm not terribly excited about, like that one with John Boehner. Oh the things one has to do to help a friend raise money. I might even have to defend something I'd rather not defend. But if I do that, I'll have people standing with me when I take incoming fire. People who are effective do tend to attract incoming fire, you know. That's what coalitions do - stick together....successful ones, anyway....

But if you're too good for that kind of stuff, by all means you be you. Be sure to be real loud about it. Otherwise people won't know how much more virtuous you are than the rest of us. Would be a shame to make the posture and nobody see it.

---

The Texas house GOP cooked this up to pay Paxton back for "fighting voter fraud."?

You are a special kind of MAGA hack.

---

GOP = Great Old Paxton, he is the Texas Republican Party

---

Yeah, we heard you the first time, lefty.

The best exposure of the process was Patrick's insane rant against members of the House. How in the world the state of Texas has fallen captive of fake Christian fundamentalists funding is beyond belief. His wife is even more disgusting. What a trifecta.

Aliceinbubbleland said:

---

The best exposure of the process was Patrick's insane rant against members of the House. How in the world the state of Texas has fallen captive of fake Christian fundamentalists funding is beyond belief. His wife is even more disgusting. What a trifecta.

---

Agreed. Paxton and Patrick are embarrassments. We used to have pretty decent government in both parties, now we just have crazies.

Wrecks Quan Dough said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Frank Galvin said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Aliceinbubbleland said:

---

After listening all day today I think this is the best defense that can be offered at this time in hearings. Something about these 8 and Sutton doesn't set well. Also the bank President got to the top because of 44 years, not qualifications. He is either stupid or wanted to appear that way as something stinks about the foreclosure sale.

I don't know where Hardin was going today but it was boring. The young attorney, Cammack, was hung out to dry by Paul and Paxton. That was the only thing I could see today that meant Paxton was the creep I suspected him to be.

I had no clue until I got Buzbee's campaign flyer today that he is a MAGA. I never would have suspected him to be associated with them.

---

The question is, where are the swing Senators on the question of Sutton & the Gang of 8? Not sure about that, but know for sure that no sane elected official would want to reward someone else's palace coup with victory, when they are so dependent on their own staff.

---

LOL. You're just gobbling up what MQS is dishing out aren't you?

High level staff, all movement conservatives, suspect illegal activity. They report it to FBI. That isn't a palace coup, that is being honest . I guess dishonest state senators might see it as "rewarding the palace coup".

Convicting Paxton and removing him from office isn't rewarding the whistle blowers. It's thinning the herd of a dishonest AG; it would be rewarding the taxpayers of Texas. Republicans would also be the winners.

---

LOL so you do have a hard-on for MQS. So, I post video footage of the trial pulled from a MQS post and I'm gobbling his stuff? Ever heard of genetic fallacy?

You could not have been listening to the testimony. They provided, by their own words, no evidence of any illegal activity whatsoever. They were just "concerned" that it looked like something might happen (only it didn't).

You posts here make no sense. I am concerned you might be making meth in your bathroom. Expect the cops to arrive shortly.

---

You are gobbling up mucous ( MQS)

Meth?

---

Your glide path got gummed up with mucous

---

You win. Paxton is the face of the Texas Republican Party
You own him

---

No, the people of Texas do, but thanks for revealing the "vanity uber alles" that drives your thinking.

If/when he's convicted if something, I'll lead the charge to impeach. Until then, I'm going to work to punish the numbskulls who incompetently executed up a half-baked impeachment idea that could only have been worse politics had it succeeded.

What dumba$$es…..

---

He is the face of Republicans
He's your boy

---

Not really. Hasn't made much news nationally. Hasn't really been splashed about much even in Texas. Perhaps that's because the whole thing was pretty weak sauce - bland ingredients, under-cooked, poorly presented, etc.... And in a few days, it'll be old news. A month forgotten. Won't hear much unless/until he's convicted of something, which at this long date doesn't seem terribly likely. If they don't get him by 2024, they probably won't. That's what this whole thing is about, you know - paying him back for fighting voter fraud in 2020, and trying to sideline him for 2024. They thought the impeachment itself would cause him to fold, or that his donors/supporters would force him to fold. But it didn't work out that way, did it. People seem to like a fighter. Why, it sure seems like the guy who always shows up with his sword & shield stacks up a lot of favors, thereby gaining opportunity to be effective.

but it is terribly instructive that you continue to perceive this as a morality play replete with pious refusals to caucus with anyone who offends your sensibilities. For that matter, you seem to be dismissive of anyone who gets any grease on their fingernails while making sausage in politics for any reason. So why on earth do you bother to engage at all?

I'll caucus with Paxton. And MQS. And Romney. And Bush. And Trump. And RDS. They and more are welcome in my tent. I'll even hold my nose and try not to bump into those pompous *******s Christie and Hutchinson, as long as they can bring themselves to show up. I'll caucus with anyone who will help me defeat progressive agendas. Sure, I may get mud on my shoes. Or have to take pictures with people I'm not terribly excited about, like that one with John Boehner. Oh the things one has to do to help a friend raise money. I might even have to defend something I'd rather not defend. But if I do that, I'll have people standing with me when I take incoming fire. People who are effective do tend to attract incoming fire, you know. That's what coalitions do - stick together....successful ones, anyway....

But if you're too good for that kind of stuff, by all means you be you. Be sure to be real loud about it. Otherwise people won't know how much more virtuous you are than the rest of us. Would be a shame to make the posture and nobody see it.

---

The Texas house GOP cooked this up to pay Paxton back for "fighting voter fraud."?

You are a special kind of MAGA hack.

---

GOP = Great Old Paxton, he is the Texas Republican Party

---

Yeah, we heard you the first time, lefty.

---

You RINO globalists sound worried

Osodecentx said:

---

Wrecks Quan Dough said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Frank Galvin said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Aliceinbubbleland said:

---

After listening all day today I think this is the best defense that can be offered at this time in hearings. Something about these 8 and Sutton doesn't set well. Also the bank President got to the top because of 44 years, not qualifications. He is either stupid or wanted to appear that way as something stinks about the foreclosure sale.

I don't know where Hardin was going today but it was boring. The young attorney, Cammack, was hung out to dry by Paul and Paxton. That was the only thing I could see today that meant Paxton was the creep I suspected him to be.

I had no clue until I got Buzbee's campaign flyer today that he is a MAGA. I never would have suspected him to be associated with them.

---

The question is, where are the swing Senators on the question of Sutton & the Gang of 8? Not sure about that, but know for sure that no sane elected official would want to reward someone else's palace coup with victory, when they are so dependent on their own staff.

---

LOL. You're just gobbling up what MQS is dishing out aren't you?

High level staff, all movement conservatives, suspect illegal activity. They report it to FBI. That isn't a palace coup, that is being honest . I guess dishonest state senators might see it as "rewarding the palace coup".

Convicting Paxton and removing him from office isn't rewarding the whistle blowers. It's thinning the herd of a dishonest AG; it would be rewarding the taxpayers of Texas. Republicans would also be the winners.

---

LOL so you do have a hard-on for MQS. So, I post video footage of the trial pulled from a MQS post and I'm gobbling his stuff? Ever heard of genetic fallacy?

You could not have been listening to the testimony. They provided, by their own words, no evidence of any illegal activity whatsoever. They were just "concerned" that it looked like something might happen (only it didn't).

You posts here make no sense. I am concerned you might be making meth in your bathroom. Expect the cops to arrive shortly.

---

You are gobbling up mucous ( MQS)

Meth?

---

Your glide path got gummed up with mucous

---

You win. Paxton is the face of the Texas Republican Party
You own him

---

No, the people of Texas do, but thanks for revealing the "vanity uber alles" that drives your thinking.

If/when he's convicted if something, I'll lead the charge to impeach. Until then, I'm going to work to punish the numbskulls who incompetently executed up a half-baked impeachment idea that could only have been worse politics had it succeeded.

What dumba$$es…..

---

He is the face of Republicans
He's your boy

---

Not really. Hasn't made much news nationally. Hasn't really been splashed about much even in Texas. Perhaps that's because the whole thing was pretty weak sauce - bland ingredients, under-cooked, poorly presented, etc.... And in a few days, it'll be old news. A month forgotten. Won't hear much unless/until he's convicted of something, which at this long date doesn't seem terribly likely. If they don't get him by 2024, they probably won't. That's what this whole thing is about, you know - paying him back for fighting voter fraud in 2020, and trying to sideline him for 2024. They thought the impeachment itself would cause him to fold, or that his donors/supporters would force him to fold. But it didn't work out that way, did it. People seem to like a fighter. Why, it sure seems like the guy who always shows up with his sword & shield stacks up a lot of favors, thereby gaining opportunity to be effective.

but it is terribly instructive that you continue to perceive this as a morality play replete with pious refusals to caucus with anyone who offends your sensibilities. For that matter, you seem to be dismissive of anyone who gets any grease on their fingernails while making sausage in politics for any reason. So why on earth do you bother to engage at all?

I'll caucus with Paxton. And MQS. And Romney. And Bush. And Trump. And RDS. They and more are welcome in my tent. I'll even hold my nose and try not to bump into those pompous *******s Christie and Hutchinson, as long as they can bring themselves to show up. I'll caucus with anyone who will help me defeat progressive agendas. Sure, I may get mud on my shoes. Or have to take pictures with people I'm not terribly excited about, like that one with John Boehner. Oh the things one has to do to help a friend raise money. I might even have to defend something I'd rather not defend. But if I do that, I'll have people standing with me when I take incoming fire. People who are effective do tend to attract incoming fire, you know. That's what coalitions do - stick together....successful ones, anyway....

But if you're too good for that kind of stuff, by all means you be you. Be sure to be real loud about it. Otherwise people won't know how much more virtuous you are than the rest of us. Would be a shame to make the posture and nobody see it.

---

The Texas house GOP cooked this up to pay Paxton back for "fighting voter fraud."?

You are a special kind of MAGA hack.

---

GOP = Great Old Paxton, he is the Texas Republican Party

---

Yeah, we heard you the first time, lefty.

---

You RINO globalists sound worried

---

A RINO globalist? LOL.

Osodecentx said:

---

Wrecks Quan Dough said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Frank Galvin said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Aliceinbubbleland said:

---

After listening all day today I think this is the best defense that can be offered at this time in hearings. Something about these 8 and Sutton doesn't set well. Also the bank President got to the top because of 44 years, not qualifications. He is either stupid or wanted to appear that way as something stinks about the foreclosure sale.

I don't know where Hardin was going today but it was boring. The young attorney, Cammack, was hung out to dry by Paul and Paxton. That was the only thing I could see today that meant Paxton was the creep I suspected him to be.

I had no clue until I got Buzbee's campaign flyer today that he is a MAGA. I never would have suspected him to be associated with them.

---

The question is, where are the swing Senators on the question of Sutton & the Gang of 8? Not sure about that, but know for sure that no sane elected official would want to reward someone else's palace coup with victory, when they are so dependent on their own staff.

---

LOL. You're just gobbling up what MQS is dishing out aren't you?

High level staff, all movement conservatives, suspect illegal activity. They report it to FBI. That isn't a palace coup, that is being honest . I guess dishonest state senators might see it as "rewarding the palace coup".

Convicting Paxton and removing him from office isn't rewarding the whistle blowers. It's thinning the herd of a dishonest AG; it would be rewarding the taxpayers of Texas. Republicans would also be the winners.

---

LOL so you do have a hard-on for MQS. So, I post video footage of the trial pulled from a MQS post and I'm gobbling his stuff? Ever heard of genetic fallacy?

You could not have been listening to the testimony. They provided, by their own words, no evidence of any illegal activity whatsoever. They were just "concerned" that it looked like something might happen (only it didn't).

You posts here make no sense. I am concerned you might be making meth in your bathroom. Expect the cops to arrive shortly.

---

You are gobbling up mucous ( MQS)

Meth?

---

Your glide path got gummed up with mucous

---

You win. Paxton is the face of the Texas Republican Party
You own him

---

No, the people of Texas do, but thanks for revealing the "vanity uber alles" that drives your thinking.

If/when he's convicted if something, I'll lead the charge to impeach. Until then, I'm going to work to punish the numbskulls who incompetently executed up a half-baked impeachment idea that could only have been worse politics had it succeeded.

What dumba$$es…..

---

He is the face of Republicans
He's your boy

---

Not really. Hasn't made much news nationally. Hasn't really been splashed about much even in Texas. Perhaps that's because the whole thing was pretty weak sauce - bland ingredients, under-cooked, poorly presented, etc.... And in a few days, it'll be old news. A month forgotten. Won't hear much unless/until he's convicted of something, which at this long date doesn't seem terribly likely. If they don't get him by 2024, they probably won't. That's what this whole thing is about, you know - paying him back for fighting voter fraud in 2020, and trying to sideline him for 2024. They thought the impeachment itself would cause him to fold, or that his donors/supporters would force him to fold. But it didn't work out that way, did it. People seem to like a fighter. Why, it sure seems like the guy who always shows up with his sword & shield stacks up a lot of favors, thereby gaining opportunity to be effective.

but it is terribly instructive that you continue to perceive this as a morality play replete with pious refusals to caucus with anyone who offends your sensibilities. For that matter, you seem to be dismissive of anyone who gets any grease on their fingernails while making sausage in politics for any reason. So why on earth do you bother to engage at all?

I'll caucus with Paxton. And MQS. And Romney. And Bush. And Trump. And RDS. They and more are welcome in my tent. I'll even hold my nose and try not to bump into those pompous *******s Christie and Hutchinson, as long as they can bring themselves to show up. I'll caucus with anyone who will help me defeat progressive agendas. Sure, I may get mud on my shoes. Or have to take pictures with people I'm not terribly excited about, like that one with John Boehner. Oh the things one has to do to help a friend raise money. I might even have to defend something I'd rather not defend. But if I do that, I'll have people standing with me when I take incoming fire. People who are effective do tend to attract incoming fire, you know. That's what coalitions do - stick together....successful ones, anyway....

But if you're too good for that kind of stuff, by all means you be you. Be sure to be real loud about it. Otherwise people won't know how much more virtuous you are than the rest of us. Would be a shame to make the posture and nobody see it.

---

The Texas house GOP cooked this up to pay Paxton back for "fighting voter fraud."?

You are a special kind of MAGA hack.

---

GOP = Great Old Paxton, he is the Texas Republican Party

---

Yeah, we heard you the first time, lefty.

---

You RINO globalists sound worried

---

LOL

Please provide a rationale description of a RINO globalist and examples of their nefarious actions .

It’s a new day in Texas. May we remember The Alpha and The Omega. Today, I thank Him. pic.twitter.com/ym3KGqJGJI

— Attorney General Ken Paxton (@KenPaxtonTX) September 17, 2023

Amazing we haven't hired him and Angela on our BOD. They could share an Uber. Might even bring Nate and Laura to prayer meeting.

Wrecks Quan Dough said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Wrecks Quan Dough said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Frank Galvin said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Aliceinbubbleland said:

---

After listening all day today I think this is the best defense that can be offered at this time in hearings. Something about these 8 and Sutton doesn't set well. Also the bank President got to the top because of 44 years, not qualifications. He is either stupid or wanted to appear that way as something stinks about the foreclosure sale.

I don't know where Hardin was going today but it was boring. The young attorney, Cammack, was hung out to dry by Paul and Paxton. That was the only thing I could see today that meant Paxton was the creep I suspected him to be.

I had no clue until I got Buzbee's campaign flyer today that he is a MAGA. I never would have suspected him to be associated with them.

---

The question is, where are the swing Senators on the question of Sutton & the Gang of 8? Not sure about that, but know for sure that no sane elected official would want to reward someone else's palace coup with victory, when they are so dependent on their own staff.

---

LOL. You're just gobbling up what MQS is dishing out aren't you?

High level staff, all movement conservatives, suspect illegal activity. They report it to FBI. That isn't a palace coup, that is being honest . I guess dishonest state senators might see it as "rewarding the palace coup".

Convicting Paxton and removing him from office isn't rewarding the whistle blowers. It's thinning the herd of a dishonest AG; it would be rewarding the taxpayers of Texas. Republicans would also be the winners.

---

LOL so you do have a hard-on for MQS. So, I post video footage of the trial pulled from a MQS post and I'm gobbling his stuff? Ever heard of genetic fallacy?

You could not have been listening to the testimony. They provided, by their own words, no evidence of any illegal activity whatsoever. They were just "concerned" that it looked like something might happen (only it didn't).

You posts here make no sense. I am concerned you might be making meth in your bathroom. Expect the cops to arrive shortly.

---

You are gobbling up mucous ( MQS)

Meth?

---

Your glide path got gummed up with mucous

---

You win. Paxton is the face of the Texas Republican Party
You own him

---

No, the people of Texas do, but thanks for revealing the "vanity uber alles" that drives your thinking.

If/when he's convicted if something, I'll lead the charge to impeach. Until then, I'm going to work to punish the numbskulls who incompetently executed up a half-baked impeachment idea that could only have been worse politics had it succeeded.

What dumba$$es…..

---

He is the face of Republicans
He's your boy

---

Not really. Hasn't made much news nationally. Hasn't really been splashed about much even in Texas. Perhaps that's because the whole thing was pretty weak sauce - bland ingredients, under-cooked, poorly presented, etc.... And in a few days, it'll be old news. A month forgotten. Won't hear much unless/until he's convicted of something, which at this long date doesn't seem terribly likely. If they don't get him by 2024, they probably won't. That's what this whole thing is about, you know - paying him back for fighting voter fraud in 2020, and trying to sideline him for 2024. They thought the impeachment itself would cause him to fold, or that his donors/supporters would force him to fold. But it didn't work out that way, did it. People seem to like a fighter. Why, it sure seems like the guy who always shows up with his sword & shield stacks up a lot of favors, thereby gaining opportunity to be effective.

but it is terribly instructive that you continue to perceive this as a morality play replete with pious refusals to caucus with anyone who offends your sensibilities. For that matter, you seem to be dismissive of anyone who gets any grease on their fingernails while making sausage in politics for any reason. So why on earth do you bother to engage at all?

I'll caucus with Paxton. And MQS. And Romney. And Bush. And Trump. And RDS. They and more are welcome in my tent. I'll even hold my nose and try not to bump into those pompous *******s Christie and Hutchinson, as long as they can bring themselves to show up. I'll caucus with anyone who will help me defeat progressive agendas. Sure, I may get mud on my shoes. Or have to take pictures with people I'm not terribly excited about, like that one with John Boehner. Oh the things one has to do to help a friend raise money. I might even have to defend something I'd rather not defend. But if I do that, I'll have people standing with me when I take incoming fire. People who are effective do tend to attract incoming fire, you know. That's what coalitions do - stick together....successful ones, anyway....

But if you're too good for that kind of stuff, by all means you be you. Be sure to be real loud about it. Otherwise people won't know how much more virtuous you are than the rest of us. Would be a shame to make the posture and nobody see it.

---

The Texas house GOP cooked this up to pay Paxton back for "fighting voter fraud."?

You are a special kind of MAGA hack.

---

GOP = Great Old Paxton, he is the Texas Republican Party

---

Yeah, we heard you the first time, lefty.

---

You RINO globalists sound worried

---

A RINO globalist? LOL.

---

"lefty"? LOL
If you say **** so will i

Numerous reports that @KenPaxtonTX Senate jury got to 20 to convict on multiple charges but could not reach 21 so all but two R's folded. In other words, @AngelaPaxtonTX non-vote vote saved her husband. Otherwise, they would have only needed 20. #txlege #quorumreport

— harvey kronberg (@HKronberg) September 17, 2023

boognish_bear said:

---

Numerous reports that @KenPaxtonTX Senate jury got to 20 to convict on multiple charges but could not reach 21 so all but two R's folded. In other words, @AngelaPaxtonTX non-vote vote saved her husband. Otherwise, they would have only needed 20. #txlege #quorumreport

— harvey kronberg (@HKronberg) September 17, 2023

---

In other words, if she had been disqualified, then 20/30 and he's gone. Since she abstained, it took 21/31.

Osodecentx said:

---

Wrecks Quan Dough said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Wrecks Quan Dough said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Frank Galvin said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Aliceinbubbleland said:

---

After listening all day today I think this is the best defense that can be offered at this time in hearings. Something about these 8 and Sutton doesn't set well. Also the bank President got to the top because of 44 years, not qualifications. He is either stupid or wanted to appear that way as something stinks about the foreclosure sale.

I don't know where Hardin was going today but it was boring. The young attorney, Cammack, was hung out to dry by Paul and Paxton. That was the only thing I could see today that meant Paxton was the creep I suspected him to be.

I had no clue until I got Buzbee's campaign flyer today that he is a MAGA. I never would have suspected him to be associated with them.

---

The question is, where are the swing Senators on the question of Sutton & the Gang of 8? Not sure about that, but know for sure that no sane elected official would want to reward someone else's palace coup with victory, when they are so dependent on their own staff.

---

LOL. You're just gobbling up what MQS is dishing out aren't you?

High level staff, all movement conservatives, suspect illegal activity. They report it to FBI. That isn't a palace coup, that is being honest . I guess dishonest state senators might see it as "rewarding the palace coup".

Convicting Paxton and removing him from office isn't rewarding the whistle blowers. It's thinning the herd of a dishonest AG; it would be rewarding the taxpayers of Texas. Republicans would also be the winners.

---

LOL so you do have a hard-on for MQS. So, I post video footage of the trial pulled from a MQS post and I'm gobbling his stuff? Ever heard of genetic fallacy?

You could not have been listening to the testimony. They provided, by their own words, no evidence of any illegal activity whatsoever. They were just "concerned" that it looked like something might happen (only it didn't).

You posts here make no sense. I am concerned you might be making meth in your bathroom. Expect the cops to arrive shortly.

---

You are gobbling up mucous ( MQS)

Meth?

---

Your glide path got gummed up with mucous

---

You win. Paxton is the face of the Texas Republican Party
You own him

---

No, the people of Texas do, but thanks for revealing the "vanity uber alles" that drives your thinking.

If/when he's convicted if something, I'll lead the charge to impeach. Until then, I'm going to work to punish the numbskulls who incompetently executed up a half-baked impeachment idea that could only have been worse politics had it succeeded.

What dumba$$es…..

---

He is the face of Republicans
He's your boy

---

Not really. Hasn't made much news nationally. Hasn't really been splashed about much even in Texas. Perhaps that's because the whole thing was pretty weak sauce - bland ingredients, under-cooked, poorly presented, etc.... And in a few days, it'll be old news. A month forgotten. Won't hear much unless/until he's convicted of something, which at this long date doesn't seem terribly likely. If they don't get him by 2024, they probably won't. That's what this whole thing is about, you know - paying him back for fighting voter fraud in 2020, and trying to sideline him for 2024. They thought the impeachment itself would cause him to fold, or that his donors/supporters would force him to fold. But it didn't work out that way, did it. People seem to like a fighter. Why, it sure seems like the guy who always shows up with his sword & shield stacks up a lot of favors, thereby gaining opportunity to be effective.

but it is terribly instructive that you continue to perceive this as a morality play replete with pious refusals to caucus with anyone who offends your sensibilities. For that matter, you seem to be dismissive of anyone who gets any grease on their fingernails while making sausage in politics for any reason. So why on earth do you bother to engage at all?

I'll caucus with Paxton. And MQS. And Romney. And Bush. And Trump. And RDS. They and more are welcome in my tent. I'll even hold my nose and try not to bump into those pompous *******s Christie and Hutchinson, as long as they can bring themselves to show up. I'll caucus with anyone who will help me defeat progressive agendas. Sure, I may get mud on my shoes. Or have to take pictures with people I'm not terribly excited about, like that one with John Boehner. Oh the things one has to do to help a friend raise money. I might even have to defend something I'd rather not defend. But if I do that, I'll have people standing with me when I take incoming fire. People who are effective do tend to attract incoming fire, you know. That's what coalitions do - stick together....successful ones, anyway....

But if you're too good for that kind of stuff, by all means you be you. Be sure to be real loud about it. Otherwise people won't know how much more virtuous you are than the rest of us. Would be a shame to make the posture and nobody see it.

---

The Texas house GOP cooked this up to pay Paxton back for "fighting voter fraud."?

You are a special kind of MAGA hack.

---

GOP = Great Old Paxton, he is the Texas Republican Party

---

Yeah, we heard you the first time, lefty.

---

You RINO globalists sound worried

---

A RINO globalist? LOL.

---

"lefty"? LOL
If you say **** so will i

---

Lol. You so silly.

Your hate is palpable? Why?

whitetrash said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

Numerous reports that @KenPaxtonTX Senate jury got to 20 to convict on multiple charges but could not reach 21 so all but two R's folded. In other words, @AngelaPaxtonTX non-vote vote saved her husband. Otherwise, they would have only needed 20. #txlege #quorumreport

— harvey kronberg (@HKronberg) September 17, 2023

---

In other words, if she had been disqualified, then 20/30 and he's gone. Since she abstained, it took 21/31.

---

I read that the highest was 14 votes. Far below threshold

Rawhide said:

---

whitetrash said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

Numerous reports that @KenPaxtonTX Senate jury got to 20 to convict on multiple charges but could not reach 21 so all but two R's folded. In other words, @AngelaPaxtonTX non-vote vote saved her husband. Otherwise, they would have only needed 20. #txlege #quorumreport

— harvey kronberg (@HKronberg) September 17, 2023

---

In other words, if she had been disqualified, then 20/30 and he's gone. Since she abstained, it took 21/31.

---

I read that the highest was 14 votes. Far below threshold

---

Sort of like the SEC vote to accept Texas & OU as new members was 14-0, when we knew A&M leaked the potential exit early in hopes to derail the process. A&M voting for Texas as a new member of the SEC was a joke.

With the vote outcome known, no Rs cast a removal vote that didn't matter.

Rawhide said:

---

whitetrash said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

Numerous reports that @KenPaxtonTX Senate jury got to 20 to convict on multiple charges but could not reach 21 so all but two R's folded. In other words, @AngelaPaxtonTX non-vote vote saved her husband. Otherwise, they would have only needed 20. #txlege #quorumreport

— harvey kronberg (@HKronberg) September 17, 2023

---

In other words, if she had been disqualified, then 20/30 and he's gone. Since she abstained, it took 21/31.

---

I read that the highest was 14 votes. Far below threshold

---

Now that it's overwith, expect both sides to play it up as a big win for their side

Keyser Soze said:

---

Rawhide said:

---

whitetrash said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

Numerous reports that @KenPaxtonTX Senate jury got to 20 to convict on multiple charges but could not reach 21 so all but two R's folded. In other words, @AngelaPaxtonTX non-vote vote saved her husband. Otherwise, they would have only needed 20. #txlege #quorumreport

— harvey kronberg (@HKronberg) September 17, 2023

---

In other words, if she had been disqualified, then 20/30 and he's gone. Since she abstained, it took 21/31.

---

I read that the highest was 14 votes. Far below threshold

---

Sort of like the SEC vote to accept Texas & OU as new members was 14-0, when we knew A&M leaked the potential exit early in hopes to derail the process. A&M voting for Texas as a new member of the SEC was a joke.

With the vote outcome known, no Rs cast a removal vote that didn't matter.

---

I read the 14 votes after it was tallied. It wasn't leaked.

Rawhide said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

Rawhide said:

---

whitetrash said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

Numerous reports that @KenPaxtonTX Senate jury got to 20 to convict on multiple charges but could not reach 21 so all but two R's folded. In other words, @AngelaPaxtonTX non-vote vote saved her husband. Otherwise, they would have only needed 20. #txlege #quorumreport

— harvey kronberg (@HKronberg) September 17, 2023

---

In other words, if she had been disqualified, then 20/30 and he's gone. Since she abstained, it took 21/31.

---

I read that the highest was 14 votes. Far below threshold

---

Sort of like the SEC vote to accept Texas & OU as new members was 14-0, when we knew A&M leaked the potential exit early in hopes to derail the process. A&M voting for Texas as a new member of the SEC was a joke.

With the vote outcome known, no Rs cast a removal vote that didn't matter.

---

I read the 14 votes after it was tallied. It wasn't leaked.

---

Sounds like you didn't understand my whole post

Thank you, President Trump. Looking forward to defending liberty for Texas. pic.twitter.com/EM89ODKV73

— Attorney General Ken Paxton (@KenPaxtonTX) September 17, 2023

Hopefully the Texas AG sees the handwriting on the wall and eventually steps aside for another Republican.

KaiBear said:

---

Hopefully the Texas AG sees the handwriting on the wall and eventually steps aside for another Republican.

---

I fear the opposite.... he may now feel bulletproof and want to keep a good thing going.

KaiBear said:

---

Hopefully the Texas AG sees the handwriting on the wall and eventually steps aside for another Republican.

---

Nope. He will view this as a license to do anything he wants. He'll be gunning for Patrick's seat next.

Horrible outcome. Patrick is an idiot.

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Aliceinbubbleland said:

---

After listening all day today I think this is the best defense that can be offered at this time in hearings. Something about these 8 and Sutton doesn't set well. Also the bank President got to the top because of 44 years, not qualifications. He is either stupid or wanted to appear that way as something stinks about the foreclosure sale.

I don't know where Hardin was going today but it was boring. The young attorney, Cammack, was hung out to dry by Paul and Paxton. That was the only thing I could see today that meant Paxton was the creep I suspected him to be.

I had no clue until I got Buzbee's campaign flyer today that he is a MAGA. I never would have suspected him to be associated with them.

---

The question is, where are the swing Senators on the question of Sutton & the Gang of 8? Not sure about that, but know for sure that no sane elected official would want to reward someone else's palace coup with victory, when they are so dependent on their own staff.

---

LOL. You're just gobbling up what MQS is dishing out aren't you?

High level staff, all movement conservatives, suspect illegal activity. They report it to FBI. That isn't a palace coup, that is being honest . I guess dishonest state senators might see it as "rewarding the palace coup".

Convicting Paxton and removing him from office isn't rewarding the whistle blowers. It's thinning the herd of a dishonest AG; it would be rewarding the taxpayers of Texas. Republicans would also be the winners.

---

LOL so you do have a hard-on for MQS. So, I post video footage of the trial pulled from a MQS post and I'm gobbling his stuff? Ever heard of genetic fallacy?

You could not have been listening to the testimony. They provided, by their own words, no evidence of any illegal activity whatsoever. They were just "concerned" that it looked like something might happen (only it didn't).

You posts here make no sense. I am concerned you might be making meth in your bathroom. Expect the cops to arrive shortly.

---

You are gobbling up mucous ( MQS)

Meth?

---

Your glide path got gummed up with mucous

---

You win. Paxton is the face of the Texas Republican Party
You own him

---

No, the people of Texas do, but thanks for revealing the "vanity uber alles" that drives your thinking.

If/when he's convicted if something, I'll lead the charge to impeach. Until then, I'm going to work to punish the numbskulls who incompetently executed up a half-baked impeachment idea that could only have been worse politics had it succeeded.

What dumba$$es…..

---

He is the face of Republicans
He's your boy

---

I'll caucus with Paxton. And MQS. And Romney. And Bush. And Trump. And RDS. They and more are welcome in my tent. I'll even hold my nose and try not to bump into those pompous *******s Christie and Hutchinson, as long as they can bring themselves to show up. I'll caucus with anyone who will help me defeat progressive agendas. Sure, I may get mud on my shoes. Or have to take pictures with people I'm not terribly excited about, like that one with John Boehner. Oh the things one has to do to help a friend raise money. I might even have to defend something I'd rather not defend.

But if you're too good for that kind of stuff, by all means you be you. Be sure to be real loud about it. Otherwise people won't know how much more virtuous you are than the rest of us. Would be a shame to make the posture and nobody see it.

---

You seem to be at odds with your fellow travelers. They say the Bush family are trying to take over Texas? Do you believe that "globalists" were behind the impeachment of Paxton?
Are the state reps who voted to impeach welcome in your tent? Will you caucus with Dade Phelan?

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Aliceinbubbleland said:

---

After listening all day today I think this is the best defense that can be offered at this time in hearings. Something about these 8 and Sutton doesn't set well. Also the bank President got to the top because of 44 years, not qualifications. He is either stupid or wanted to appear that way as something stinks about the foreclosure sale.

I don't know where Hardin was going today but it was boring. The young attorney, Cammack, was hung out to dry by Paul and Paxton. That was the only thing I could see today that meant Paxton was the creep I suspected him to be.

I had no clue until I got Buzbee's campaign flyer today that he is a MAGA. I never would have suspected him to be associated with them.

---

The question is, where are the swing Senators on the question of Sutton & the Gang of 8? Not sure about that, but know for sure that no sane elected official would want to reward someone else's palace coup with victory, when they are so dependent on their own staff.

---

LOL. You're just gobbling up what MQS is dishing out aren't you?

High level staff, all movement conservatives, suspect illegal activity. They report it to FBI. That isn't a palace coup, that is being honest . I guess dishonest state senators might see it as "rewarding the palace coup".

Convicting Paxton and removing him from office isn't rewarding the whistle blowers. It's thinning the herd of a dishonest AG; it would be rewarding the taxpayers of Texas. Republicans would also be the winners.

---

LOL so you do have a hard-on for MQS. So, I post video footage of the trial pulled from a MQS post and I'm gobbling his stuff? Ever heard of genetic fallacy?

You could not have been listening to the testimony. They provided, by their own words, no evidence of any illegal activity whatsoever. They were just "concerned" that it looked like something might happen (only it didn't).

You posts here make no sense. I am concerned you might be making meth in your bathroom. Expect the cops to arrive shortly.

---

You are gobbling up mucous ( MQS)

Meth?

---

Your glide path got gummed up with mucous

---

You win. Paxton is the face of the Texas Republican Party
You own him

---

No, the people of Texas do, but thanks for revealing the "vanity uber alles" that drives your thinking.

If/when he's convicted if something, I'll lead the charge to impeach. Until then, I'm going to work to punish the numbskulls who incompetently executed up a half-baked impeachment idea that could only have been worse politics had it succeeded.

What dumba$$es…..

---

He is the face of Republicans
He's your boy

---

I'll caucus with Paxton. And MQS. And Romney. And Bush. And Trump. And RDS. They and more are welcome in my tent. I'll even hold my nose and try not to bump into those pompous *******s Christie and Hutchinson, as long as they can bring themselves to show up. I'll caucus with anyone who will help me defeat progressive agendas. Sure, I may get mud on my shoes. Or have to take pictures with people I'm not terribly excited about, like that one with John Boehner. Oh the things one has to do to help a friend raise money. I might even have to defend something I'd rather not defend.

But if you're too good for that kind of stuff, by all means you be you. Be sure to be real loud about it. Otherwise people won't know how much more virtuous you are than the rest of us. Would be a shame to make the posture and nobody see it.

---

You seem to be at odds with your fellow travelers. They say the Bush family are trying to take over Texas? Do you believe that "globalists" were behind the impeachment of Paxton?
Are the state reps who voted to impeach welcome in your tent? Will you caucus with Dade Phelan?

---

You have spent so much time on Texas politics, you must be getting behind on your witch-burning.

Trump now giving himself the credit for springing Pax

Trump just now: “Yes, it is true that my intervention through TRUTH SOCIAL saved Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton from going down at the hands of Democrats and some Republicans… It was my honor to have helped correct this injustice!” #txlege pic.twitter.com/wZQEXlHiRX

— Jasper Scherer (@jaspscherer) September 18, 2023

And you are surprised by this? Trump is the guy who goes to a restaurant and if he enjoys the meal sends compliments to himself.

boognish_bear said:

---

Trump now giving himself the credit for springing Pax

Trump just now: “Yes, it is true that my intervention through TRUTH SOCIAL saved Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton from going down at the hands of Democrats and some Republicans… It was my honor to have helped correct this injustice!” #txlege pic.twitter.com/wZQEXlHiRX

— Jasper Scherer (@jaspscherer) September 18, 2023

---

Is there anything he cannot do?

Wrecks Quan Dough said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

Trump now giving himself the credit for springing Pax

Trump just now: “Yes, it is true that my intervention through TRUTH SOCIAL saved Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton from going down at the hands of Democrats and some Republicans… It was my honor to have helped correct this injustice!” #txlege pic.twitter.com/wZQEXlHiRX

— Jasper Scherer (@jaspscherer) September 18, 2023

---

Is there anything he cannot do?

---

be humble?

boognish_bear said:

---

Wrecks Quan Dough said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

Trump now giving himself the credit for springing Pax

Trump just now: “Yes, it is true that my intervention through TRUTH SOCIAL saved Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton from going down at the hands of Democrats and some Republicans… It was my honor to have helped correct this injustice!” #txlege pic.twitter.com/wZQEXlHiRX

— Jasper Scherer (@jaspscherer) September 18, 2023

---

Is there anything he cannot do?

---

be humble?

---

I don't know. That seems like the fallacious line of argument that asks, "If G-d can do anything, then can he make a rock so heavy that he cannot lift it." We cannot expect a man of Trump's Trumpish Trumpiness to be humble. He is Omni-Trumpscient afterall.