Paxton also got $15K from Gary Gates, one of the House Republicans who voted to impeach Paxton. The donation is reported the same day Gates said he went to see Paxton at an event in his district to try to smooth things over: https://t.co/dAv3nSGcYH #txlege

— Patrick Svitek (@PatrickSvitek) December 8, 2023

Paxton's attorney lost his race

Mary Nan Huffman declares victory over Tony Buzbee in Houston City Council race. https://t.co/vzgYtBs687

— Texas Tribune (@TexasTribune) December 10, 2023

This is our District. I don't like her but i voted for her because Buzbee is gawd awful aggie pal of crooked Paxton

Ouch

BREAKING: Taxpayer cost of impeaching Attorney General Ken Paxton tops $4.3M, @PhilJankowski reports.

Tops the $3.3M proposed in a whistleblower settlement that triggered the impeachment effort, obviously.

Not that dollars and cents alone were at issue. https://t.co/z5vtRSXhrn

— Bob Garrett (@RobertTGarrett) December 14, 2023

Send the bill to Angela and Nate Paul. They should be able to pay the bill from their Nazi friends.

whiterock said:

---

quash said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

quash said:

---

GrowlTowel said:

---

If you wanted to remove, you should have presented the evidence in public. As there was nothing but allegations (based on the testimony), removal was not warranted.

That sums up the impeachment trial.

No evidence, no removal.

---

Solid eyewitnesses, solid evidence as pudding were the allegations

---

Presented in public, thereby demonstrating the incompetence of those who crafted such an amateurish charade.

---

FIFY. The countertops are not granite. They're still tile.
Dude. Your witnesses testified to things which were demonstrably NOT true.

Either your boy Dade botched a winnable case, or pushed an unwinnable case. Either way, he's not up to the job. You should expect more from leadership. at least Paxton gets stuff done. All Dade does is help Democrats slow down the entire Republican agenda.

Maybe that's why you like him so much.

---

Did your donor give your mistress a job?

The countertops are tile.

---

The allegation was that the tile countertops were replaced with granite, as a political payoff.
As you note, the countertops are STILL tile.
THAT is evidence....cold, hard, undisputable evidence.....the avatar for how your boy Phelan botched the impeachment. He put up allegations as fact, some of them easily disprovable, in the most amateurish display of political leadership in Austin in my lifetime.

---

Nice dance.

Yes, I think it is established that the countertops are tile.

In your response, I'd like you to try and get past that one piece of debunked charge that ultimately means very little.

Deal with the mistress getting a job from the donor.

Not the countertop part. We agree on that.

Address a different point.

Mistress. Job. Donor.

quash said:

---

whiterock said:

---

quash said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

quash said:

---

GrowlTowel said:

---

If you wanted to remove, you should have presented the evidence in public. As there was nothing but allegations (based on the testimony), removal was not warranted.

That sums up the impeachment trial.

No evidence, no removal.

---

Solid eyewitnesses, solid evidence as pudding were the allegations

---

Presented in public, thereby demonstrating the incompetence of those who crafted such an amateurish charade.

---

FIFY. The countertops are not granite. They're still tile.
Dude. Your witnesses testified to things which were demonstrably NOT true.

Either your boy Dade botched a winnable case, or pushed an unwinnable case. Either way, he's not up to the job. You should expect more from leadership. at least Paxton gets stuff done. All Dade does is help Democrats slow down the entire Republican agenda.

Maybe that's why you like him so much.

---

Did your donor give your mistress a job?

The countertops are tile.

---

The allegation was that the tile countertops were replaced with granite, as a political payoff.
As you note, the countertops are STILL tile.
THAT is evidence....cold, hard, undisputable evidence.....the avatar for how your boy Phelan botched the impeachment. He put up allegations as fact, some of them easily disprovable, in the most amateurish display of political leadership in Austin in my lifetime.

---

Nice dance.

Yes, I think it is established that the countertops are tile.

In your response, I'd like you to try and get past that one piece of debunked charge that ultimately means very little.

Deal with the mistress getting a job from the donor.

Not the countertop part. We agree on that.

Address a different point.

Mistress. Job. Donor.

---

Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus.

Phelan is a virtue posturing doofus doing Democrat bidding.
I would advise anyone to avoid emulating him.

whiterock said:

---

quash said:

---

whiterock said:

---

quash said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

quash said:

---

GrowlTowel said:

---

If you wanted to remove, you should have presented the evidence in public. As there was nothing but allegations (based on the testimony), removal was not warranted.

That sums up the impeachment trial.

No evidence, no removal.

---

Solid eyewitnesses, solid evidence as pudding were the allegations

---

Presented in public, thereby demonstrating the incompetence of those who crafted such an amateurish charade.

---

FIFY. The countertops are not granite. They're still tile.
Dude. Your witnesses testified to things which were demonstrably NOT true.

Either your boy Dade botched a winnable case, or pushed an unwinnable case. Either way, he's not up to the job. You should expect more from leadership. at least Paxton gets stuff done. All Dade does is help Democrats slow down the entire Republican agenda.

Maybe that's why you like him so much.

---

Did your donor give your mistress a job?

The countertops are tile.

---

The allegation was that the tile countertops were replaced with granite, as a political payoff.
As you note, the countertops are STILL tile.
THAT is evidence....cold, hard, undisputable evidence.....the avatar for how your boy Phelan botched the impeachment. He put up allegations as fact, some of them easily disprovable, in the most amateurish display of political leadership in Austin in my lifetime.

---

Nice dance.

Yes, I think it is established that the countertops are tile.

In your response, I'd like you to try and get past that one piece of debunked charge that ultimately means very little.

Deal with the mistress getting a job from the donor.

Not the countertop part. We agree on that.

Address a different point.

Mistress. Job. Donor.

---

---

whiterock said:

---

quash said:

---

whiterock said:

---

quash said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

quash said:

---

GrowlTowel said:

---

If you wanted to remove, you should have presented the evidence in public. As there was nothing but allegations (based on the testimony), removal was not warranted.

That sums up the impeachment trial.

No evidence, no removal.

---

Solid eyewitnesses, solid evidence as pudding were the allegations

---

Presented in public, thereby demonstrating the incompetence of those who crafted such an amateurish charade.

---

FIFY. The countertops are not granite. They're still tile.
Dude. Your witnesses testified to things which were demonstrably NOT true.

Either your boy Dade botched a winnable case, or pushed an unwinnable case. Either way, he's not up to the job. You should expect more from leadership. at least Paxton gets stuff done. All Dade does is help Democrats slow down the entire Republican agenda.

Maybe that's why you like him so much.

---

Did your donor give your mistress a job?

The countertops are tile.

---

The allegation was that the tile countertops were replaced with granite, as a political payoff.
As you note, the countertops are STILL tile.
THAT is evidence....cold, hard, undisputable evidence.....the avatar for how your boy Phelan botched the impeachment. He put up allegations as fact, some of them easily disprovable, in the most amateurish display of political leadership in Austin in my lifetime.

---

Nice dance.

Yes, I think it is established that the countertops are tile.

In your response, I'd like you to try and get past that one piece of debunked charge that ultimately means very little.

Deal with the mistress getting a job from the donor.

Not the countertop part. We agree on that.

Address a different point.

Mistress. Job. Donor.

---

Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus.

---

That is a bull**** way to dodge. I don't come that often anymore. Your series of replies are why I choose not to waste my time.

quash said:

---

whiterock said:

---

quash said:

---

whiterock said:

---

quash said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

quash said:

---

GrowlTowel said:

---

If you wanted to remove, you should have presented the evidence in public. As there was nothing but allegations (based on the testimony), removal was not warranted.

That sums up the impeachment trial.

No evidence, no removal.

---

Solid eyewitnesses, solid evidence as pudding were the allegations

---

Presented in public, thereby demonstrating the incompetence of those who crafted such an amateurish charade.

---

FIFY. The countertops are not granite. They're still tile.
Dude. Your witnesses testified to things which were demonstrably NOT true.

Either your boy Dade botched a winnable case, or pushed an unwinnable case. Either way, he's not up to the job. You should expect more from leadership. at least Paxton gets stuff done. All Dade does is help Democrats slow down the entire Republican agenda.

Maybe that's why you like him so much.

---

Did your donor give your mistress a job?

The countertops are tile.

---

The allegation was that the tile countertops were replaced with granite, as a political payoff.
As you note, the countertops are STILL tile.
THAT is evidence....cold, hard, undisputable evidence.....the avatar for how your boy Phelan botched the impeachment. He put up allegations as fact, some of them easily disprovable, in the most amateurish display of political leadership in Austin in my lifetime.

---

Nice dance.

Yes, I think it is established that the countertops are tile.

In your response, I'd like you to try and get past that one piece of debunked charge that ultimately means very little.

Deal with the mistress getting a job from the donor.

Not the countertop part. We agree on that.

Address a different point.

Mistress. Job. Donor.

---

Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus.

---

That is a bull**** way to dodge. I don't come that often anymore. Your series of replies are why I choose not to waste my time.

---

No, it's a thermonuclear torpedo to your argument. If you use the same exact "evidence" to allege one thing as you do another, then both are discredited when one is proven false.

You have no evidence that Paxton asked a donor to hire a mistress. You only have the fact that the donor did hire her and Paxton may not have immediately terminated the (ill-defined) relationship with her. That's it. That's all you got.

Your boy Phelan has a -9 approval rating. Because he screwed up the impeachment, from arsehole to appetite.

whiterock said:

---

quash said:

---

whiterock said:

---

quash said:

---

whiterock said:

---

quash said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

quash said:

---

GrowlTowel said:

---

If you wanted to remove, you should have presented the evidence in public. As there was nothing but allegations (based on the testimony), removal was not warranted.

That sums up the impeachment trial.

No evidence, no removal.

---

Solid eyewitnesses, solid evidence as pudding were the allegations

---

Presented in public, thereby demonstrating the incompetence of those who crafted such an amateurish charade.

---

FIFY. The countertops are not granite. They're still tile.
Dude. Your witnesses testified to things which were demonstrably NOT true.

Either your boy Dade botched a winnable case, or pushed an unwinnable case. Either way, he's not up to the job. You should expect more from leadership. at least Paxton gets stuff done. All Dade does is help Democrats slow down the entire Republican agenda.

Maybe that's why you like him so much.

---

Did your donor give your mistress a job?

The countertops are tile.

---

The allegation was that the tile countertops were replaced with granite, as a political payoff.
As you note, the countertops are STILL tile.
THAT is evidence....cold, hard, undisputable evidence.....the avatar for how your boy Phelan botched the impeachment. He put up allegations as fact, some of them easily disprovable, in the most amateurish display of political leadership in Austin in my lifetime.

---

Nice dance.

Yes, I think it is established that the countertops are tile.

In your response, I'd like you to try and get past that one piece of debunked charge that ultimately means very little.

Deal with the mistress getting a job from the donor.

Not the countertop part. We agree on that.

Address a different point.

Mistress. Job. Donor.

---

Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus.

---

That is a bull**** way to dodge. I don't come that often anymore. Your series of replies are why I choose not to waste my time.

---

No, it's a thermonuclear torpedo to your argument. If you use the same exact "evidence" to allege one thing as you do another, then both are discredited when one is proven false.

You have no evidence that Paxton asked a donor to hire a mistress. You only have the fact that the donor did hire her and Paxton may not have immediately terminated the (ill-defined) relationship with her. That's it. That's all you got.

Your boy Phelan has a -9 approval rating. Because he screwed up the impeachment, from arsehole to appetite.

---

Perhaps we will get more evidence. Will Paxton take the nickel?

December 20, 2023 4:27 PM
Judge Soifer rules Paxton can be compelled to give sworn testimony in whistleblower suit
Paxton's top staff, including first assistant AG Brent Webster, can also be deposed, per the order. Paxton was reportedly served with a subpoena today

The ruling means that for the first time, Paxton might be required to answer questions under oath about why he marshaled attorney general office resources to aid friend and campaign donor Nate Paul. The four former employees sued Paxton after the attorney general fired them for reporting him to the FBI in 2020.

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

quash said:

---

whiterock said:

---

quash said:

---

whiterock said:

---

quash said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

quash said:

---

GrowlTowel said:

---

If you wanted to remove, you should have presented the evidence in public. As there was nothing but allegations (based on the testimony), removal was not warranted.

That sums up the impeachment trial.

No evidence, no removal.

---

Solid eyewitnesses, solid evidence as pudding were the allegations

---

Presented in public, thereby demonstrating the incompetence of those who crafted such an amateurish charade.

---

FIFY. The countertops are not granite. They're still tile.
Dude. Your witnesses testified to things which were demonstrably NOT true.

Either your boy Dade botched a winnable case, or pushed an unwinnable case. Either way, he's not up to the job. You should expect more from leadership. at least Paxton gets stuff done. All Dade does is help Democrats slow down the entire Republican agenda.

Maybe that's why you like him so much.

---

Did your donor give your mistress a job?

The countertops are tile.

---

The allegation was that the tile countertops were replaced with granite, as a political payoff.
As you note, the countertops are STILL tile.
THAT is evidence....cold, hard, undisputable evidence.....the avatar for how your boy Phelan botched the impeachment. He put up allegations as fact, some of them easily disprovable, in the most amateurish display of political leadership in Austin in my lifetime.

---

Nice dance.

Yes, I think it is established that the countertops are tile.

In your response, I'd like you to try and get past that one piece of debunked charge that ultimately means very little.

Deal with the mistress getting a job from the donor.

Not the countertop part. We agree on that.

Address a different point.

Mistress. Job. Donor.

---

Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus.

---

That is a bull**** way to dodge. I don't come that often anymore. Your series of replies are why I choose not to waste my time.

---

No, it's a thermonuclear torpedo to your argument. If you use the same exact "evidence" to allege one thing as you do another, then both are discredited when one is proven false.

You have no evidence that Paxton asked a donor to hire a mistress. You only have the fact that the donor did hire her and Paxton may not have immediately terminated the (ill-defined) relationship with her. That's it. That's all you got.

Your boy Phelan has a -9 approval rating. Because he screwed up the impeachment, from arsehole to appetite.

---

Perhaps we will get more evidence. Will Paxton take the nickel?

December 20, 2023 4:27 PM
Judge Soifer rules Paxton can be compelled to give sworn testimony in whistleblower suit
Paxton's top staff, including first assistant AG Brent Webster, can also be deposed, per the order. Paxton was reportedly served with a subpoena today

The ruling means that for the first time, Paxton might be required to answer questions under oath about why he marshaled attorney general office resources to aid friend and campaign donor Nate Paul. The four former employees sued Paxton after the attorney general fired them for reporting him to the FBI in 2020.

---

Drunk Dade could have done a better job getting to the bottom of that, couldn't he. He could have subpoena'd Paul, or Paul's associates, or any of Paxton's other staffers or political aides at the time. He could have put the (weak) witnesses he had up in front of the entire house to sing, sing, sing, so that the media tabloids would fill the internet with tales of wickedness and drive down Paxton's approval numbers. Coulda done that with all of those other sources, too (presuming there were any).

Or, he could have realized he didn't have the goods, wasn't likely to get the goods from any of those sources, thus waited for the results of the lawsuit (and prosecution, and FBI investigation) to spit out the goods, and move when circumstances were more favorable.

But ol' Drunk Dade didn't do any of that. He just scooped up a pile of accusations he couldn't prove, had a committee of cronies (chairman of which is facing doxxing charges and decided not to run for re-election) assemble them in secret from "witnesses" not sworn under oath, and then whipped his caucus into voting for impeachment without all the usual pageantry of impeachment like open hearings or cross-examinations. As a result, when the case got to the Senate and subjected to proper vetting of full sunlight.....it fell to pieces.

Best case you have, Oso, is that Drunk Dade botched the impeachment of a guilty man, who (if one accepts the premise of guilt) would have been delivered accountability anyway in civil or criminal court, or in a future impeachment done with far better preparation, evidence, and procedure. Worst case is, Paxton isn't nearly as dirty as his opponents need him to be and actually isn't impeachable. But ol' Drunk Dade screwed all of that up for you. You won't be able to get him replaced before 2024. Probably won't happen before his next election cycle, either. The failure of this impeachment drastically raises the bar for the next one.

You moderates really do need better leadership. If you could find some, you'd probably find it easier to get along with the 3/4 of the party you're fighting with (and losing to). Everyone would be better off without ol' Drunk Dade. Dude is far, far worse for the party than Paxton was, is, or ever could be. At least Paxton accomplishes things for his voters.

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

quash said:

---

whiterock said:

---

quash said:

---

whiterock said:

---

quash said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

quash said:

---

GrowlTowel said:

---

If you wanted to remove, you should have presented the evidence in public. As there was nothing but allegations (based on the testimony), removal was not warranted.

That sums up the impeachment trial.

No evidence, no removal.

---

Solid eyewitnesses, solid evidence as pudding were the allegations

---

Presented in public, thereby demonstrating the incompetence of those who crafted such an amateurish charade.

---

FIFY. The countertops are not granite. They're still tile.
Dude. Your witnesses testified to things which were demonstrably NOT true.

Either your boy Dade botched a winnable case, or pushed an unwinnable case. Either way, he's not up to the job. You should expect more from leadership. at least Paxton gets stuff done. All Dade does is help Democrats slow down the entire Republican agenda.

Maybe that's why you like him so much.

---

Did your donor give your mistress a job?

The countertops are tile.

---

The allegation was that the tile countertops were replaced with granite, as a political payoff.
As you note, the countertops are STILL tile.
THAT is evidence....cold, hard, undisputable evidence.....the avatar for how your boy Phelan botched the impeachment. He put up allegations as fact, some of them easily disprovable, in the most amateurish display of political leadership in Austin in my lifetime.

---

Nice dance.

Yes, I think it is established that the countertops are tile.

In your response, I'd like you to try and get past that one piece of debunked charge that ultimately means very little.

Deal with the mistress getting a job from the donor.

Not the countertop part. We agree on that.

Address a different point.

Mistress. Job. Donor.

---

Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus.

---

That is a bull**** way to dodge. I don't come that often anymore. Your series of replies are why I choose not to waste my time.

---

No, it's a thermonuclear torpedo to your argument. If you use the same exact "evidence" to allege one thing as you do another, then both are discredited when one is proven false.

You have no evidence that Paxton asked a donor to hire a mistress. You only have the fact that the donor did hire her and Paxton may not have immediately terminated the (ill-defined) relationship with her. That's it. That's all you got.

Your boy Phelan has a -9 approval rating. Because he screwed up the impeachment, from arsehole to appetite.

---

Perhaps we will get more evidence. Will Paxton take the nickel?

December 20, 2023 4:27 PM
Judge Soifer rules Paxton can be compelled to give sworn testimony in whistleblower suit
Paxton's top staff, including first assistant AG Brent Webster, can also be deposed, per the order. Paxton was reportedly served with a subpoena today

The ruling means that for the first time, Paxton might be required to answer questions under oath about why he marshaled attorney general office resources to aid friend and campaign donor Nate Paul. The four former employees sued Paxton after the attorney general fired them for reporting him to the FBI in 2020.

---

Drunk Dade could have done a better job getting to the bottom of that, couldn't he. He could have subpoena'd Paul, or Paul's associates, or any of Paxton's other staffers or political aides at the time. He could have put the (weak) witnesses he had up in front of the entire house to sing, sing, sing, so that the media tabloids would fill the internet with tales of wickedness and drive down Paxton's approval numbers. Coulda done that with all of those other sources, too (presuming there were any).

Or, he could have realized he didn't have the goods, wasn't likely to get the goods from any of those sources, thus waited for the results of the lawsuit (and prosecution, and FBI investigation) to spit out the goods, and move when circumstances were more favorable.

But ol' Drunk Dade didn't do any of that. He just scooped up a pile of accusations he couldn't prove, had a committee of cronies (chairman of which is facing doxxing charges and decided not to run for re-election) assemble them in secret from "witnesses" not sworn under oath, and then whipped his caucus into voting for impeachment without all the usual pageantry of impeachment like open hearings or cross-examinations. As a result, when the case got to the Senate and subjected to proper vetting of full sunlight.....it fell to pieces.

Best case you have, Oso, is that Drunk Dade botched the impeachment of a guilty man, who (if one accepts the premise of guilt) would have been delivered accountability anyway in civil or criminal court, or in a future impeachment done with far better preparation, evidence, and procedure. Worst case is, Paxton isn't nearly as dirty as his opponents need him to be and actually isn't impeachable. But ol' Drunk Dade screwed all of that up for you. You won't be able to get him replaced before 2024. Probably won't happen before his next election cycle, either. The failure of this impeachment drastically raises the bar for the next one.

You moderates really do need better leadership. If you could find some, you'd probably find it easier to get along with the 3/4 of the party you're fighting with (and losing to). Everyone would be better off without ol' Drunk Dade. Dude is far, far worse for the party than Paxton was, is, or ever could be. At least Paxton accomplishes things for his voters.

---

Nice slime.
You guys are now sending out mailers accusing the Speaker of being pro-Muslim. Is there any slander y'all won't try.
Far-right activist blasts Speaker Phelan for being "pro-Muslim" in political mailer
https://www.texastribune.org/2023/12/24/texas-conservative-muslim-mailer-ramadan-dade-phelan/

Over 70% of Republican House members voted to impeach. When Senators got close to 21 votes, the judge (Lt Gov intervened by phoning two senators to threaten them with their chairmanships. Then after the trial, issued a daitribe from the bench. Imparialiality? Or carrying water for Trump.

Will you be working against the 3 Tx S. Ct judges who did not back Paxton's motion?
Three court of criminal appeal judges up for reelection targeted by Ken Paxton's political revenge machine
Paxton promised to go after the Republican judges over their 2021 ruling that struck down the attorney general's ability to unilaterally prosecute voter fraud.
https://www.texastribune.org/2023/12/13/ken-paxton-court-of-criminal-appeal-primary-republicans/

You guys have the burden of 2 probable trials of Paxton in the next 12 months. Are you guys carrying water for Guiliani too?

Wondering if Paxton will take the Fifth in his civil trial because of the criminal trial which will surely follow

December 20, 2023 4:27 PM
Judge Soifer rules Paxton can be compelled to give sworn testimony in whistleblower suit
Paxton's top staff, including first assistant AG Brent Webster, can also be deposed, per the order. Paxton was reportedly served with a subpoena today

Osodecentx said:

---

Wondering if Paxton will take the Fifth in his civil trial because of the criminal trial which will surely follow

December 20, 2023 4:27 PM
Judge Soifer rules Paxton can be compelled to give sworn testimony in whistleblower suit
Paxton's top staff, including first assistant AG Brent Webster, can also be deposed, per the order. Paxton was reportedly served with a subpoena today

---

If this development is so momentous, why didn't Drunk Dade wait until after the testimony was given before launching his impeachment effort?

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

quash said:

---

whiterock said:

---

quash said:

---

whiterock said:

---

quash said:

---

Did your donor give your mistress a job?

The countertops are tile.

---

The allegation was that the tile countertops were replaced with granite, as a political payoff.
As you note, the countertops are STILL tile.
THAT is evidence....cold, hard, undisputable evidence.....the avatar for how your boy Phelan botched the impeachment. He put up allegations as fact, some of them easily disprovable, in the most amateurish display of political leadership in Austin in my lifetime.

---

Nice dance.

Yes, I think it is established that the countertops are tile.

In your response, I'd like you to try and get past that one piece of debunked charge that ultimately means very little.

Deal with the mistress getting a job from the donor.

Not the countertop part. We agree on that.

Address a different point.

Mistress. Job. Donor.

---

Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus.

---

That is a bull**** way to dodge. I don't come that often anymore. Your series of replies are why I choose not to waste my time.

---

No, it's a thermonuclear torpedo to your argument. If you use the same exact "evidence" to allege one thing as you do another, then both are discredited when one is proven false.

You have no evidence that Paxton asked a donor to hire a mistress. You only have the fact that the donor did hire her and Paxton may not have immediately terminated the (ill-defined) relationship with her. That's it. That's all you got.

Your boy Phelan has a -9 approval rating. Because he screwed up the impeachment, from arsehole to appetite.

---

Perhaps we will get more evidence. Will Paxton take the nickel?

December 20, 2023 4:27 PM
Judge Soifer rules Paxton can be compelled to give sworn testimony in whistleblower suit
Paxton's top staff, including first assistant AG Brent Webster, can also be deposed, per the order. Paxton was reportedly served with a subpoena today

The ruling means that for the first time, Paxton might be required to answer questions under oath about why he marshaled attorney general office resources to aid friend and campaign donor Nate Paul. The four former employees sued Paxton after the attorney general fired them for reporting him to the FBI in 2020.

---

Drunk Dade could have done a better job getting to the bottom of that, couldn't he. He could have subpoena'd Paul, or Paul's associates, or any of Paxton's other staffers or political aides at the time. He could have put the (weak) witnesses he had up in front of the entire house to sing, sing, sing, so that the media tabloids would fill the internet with tales of wickedness and drive down Paxton's approval numbers. Coulda done that with all of those other sources, too (presuming there were any).

Or, he could have realized he didn't have the goods, wasn't likely to get the goods from any of those sources, thus waited for the results of the lawsuit (and prosecution, and FBI investigation) to spit out the goods, and move when circumstances were more favorable.

But ol' Drunk Dade didn't do any of that. He just scooped up a pile of accusations he couldn't prove, had a committee of cronies (chairman of which is facing doxxing charges and decided not to run for re-election) assemble them in secret from "witnesses" not sworn under oath, and then whipped his caucus into voting for impeachment without all the usual pageantry of impeachment like open hearings or cross-examinations. As a result, when the case got to the Senate and subjected to proper vetting of full sunlight.....it fell to pieces.

Best case you have, Oso, is that Drunk Dade botched the impeachment of a guilty man, who (if one accepts the premise of guilt) would have been delivered accountability anyway in civil or criminal court, or in a future impeachment done with far better preparation, evidence, and procedure. Worst case is, Paxton isn't nearly as dirty as his opponents need him to be and actually isn't impeachable. But ol' Drunk Dade screwed all of that up for you. You won't be able to get him replaced before 2024. Probably won't happen before his next election cycle, either. The failure of this impeachment drastically raises the bar for the next one.

You moderates really do need better leadership. If you could find some, you'd probably find it easier to get along with the 3/4 of the party you're fighting with (and losing to). Everyone would be better off without ol' Drunk Dade. Dude is far, far worse for the party than Paxton was, is, or ever could be. At least Paxton accomplishes things for his voters.

---

Nice slime.
You guys are now sending out mailers accusing the Speaker of being pro-Muslim. Is there any slander y'all won't try.
Far-right activist blasts Speaker Phelan for being "pro-Muslim" in political mailer
https://www.texastribune.org/2023/12/24/texas-conservative-muslim-mailer-ramadan-dade-phelan/

Over 70% of Republican House members voted to impeach. When Senators got close to 21 votes, the judge (Lt Gov intervened by phoning two senators to threaten them with their chairmanships. Then after the trial, issued a daitribe from the bench. Imparialiality? Or carrying water for Trump.

Will you be working against the 3 Tx S. Ct judges who did not back Paxton's motion?
Three court of criminal appeal judges up for reelection targeted by Ken Paxton's political revenge machine
Paxton promised to go after the Republican judges over their 2021 ruling that struck down the attorney general's ability to unilaterally prosecute voter fraud.
https://www.texastribune.org/2023/12/13/ken-paxton-court-of-criminal-appeal-primary-republicans/

You guys have the burden of 2 probable trials of Paxton in the next 12 months. Are you guys carrying water for Guiliani too?

---

I saw that mailer. Tough politics, but fair. There's no slander at all. Phelan actually did do the meeting and the PR of it. It's entirely appropriate to let voters know that our Speaker is playing nice with Muslim groups, and it's good politics to contrast that with the way he treats effective conservatives (attack them relentlessly with wildly contrived allegations of things Democrats are openly and widely doing).

I do think it is appropriate in the next election to have primary challenges against the judges who stopped Paxton from going after voter fraud. Election integrity is a high priority for the party and the public. Why would you want to go easy on people who cheat? Why would we want to let partisan prosecutors give cover to election shenanigans by their own party? Isn't what Paxton did an entirely appropriate exercise of checks & balances in a properly functioning system?

If Paxton is convicted, I'll assess the fairness of the trial to determine if we should move to impeach immediately or wait on appeals. It would look awkward to impose an irretractable punishment on a person whose conviction got overturned on appeals, would it not? You moderates have lost all appreciation for due process. Your standard seems to be that if you don't like someone, you can do anything you want. Moderates have turned into quite the authoritarians, in that regard.

This is an honest question I don't know the answer to: can the Speaker only bring articles of impeachment forward during a legislative session? Or can he do it outside of a session and still call together the necessary pieces/people on his own?

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

quash said:

---

whiterock said:

---

quash said:

---

whiterock said:

---

quash said:

---

Did your donor give your mistress a job?

The countertops are tile.

---

The allegation was that the tile countertops were replaced with granite, as a political payoff.
As you note, the countertops are STILL tile.
THAT is evidence....cold, hard, undisputable evidence.....the avatar for how your boy Phelan botched the impeachment. He put up allegations as fact, some of them easily disprovable, in the most amateurish display of political leadership in Austin in my lifetime.

---

Nice dance.

Yes, I think it is established that the countertops are tile.

In your response, I'd like you to try and get past that one piece of debunked charge that ultimately means very little.

Deal with the mistress getting a job from the donor.

Not the countertop part. We agree on that.

Address a different point.

Mistress. Job. Donor.

---

Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus.

---

That is a bull**** way to dodge. I don't come that often anymore. Your series of replies are why I choose not to waste my time.

---

No, it's a thermonuclear torpedo to your argument. If you use the same exact "evidence" to allege one thing as you do another, then both are discredited when one is proven false.

You have no evidence that Paxton asked a donor to hire a mistress. You only have the fact that the donor did hire her and Paxton may not have immediately terminated the (ill-defined) relationship with her. That's it. That's all you got.

Your boy Phelan has a -9 approval rating. Because he screwed up the impeachment, from arsehole to appetite.

---

Perhaps we will get more evidence. Will Paxton take the nickel?

December 20, 2023 4:27 PM
Judge Soifer rules Paxton can be compelled to give sworn testimony in whistleblower suit
Paxton's top staff, including first assistant AG Brent Webster, can also be deposed, per the order. Paxton was reportedly served with a subpoena today

The ruling means that for the first time, Paxton might be required to answer questions under oath about why he marshaled attorney general office resources to aid friend and campaign donor Nate Paul. The four former employees sued Paxton after the attorney general fired them for reporting him to the FBI in 2020.

---

Drunk Dade could have done a better job getting to the bottom of that, couldn't he. He could have subpoena'd Paul, or Paul's associates, or any of Paxton's other staffers or political aides at the time. He could have put the (weak) witnesses he had up in front of the entire house to sing, sing, sing, so that the media tabloids would fill the internet with tales of wickedness and drive down Paxton's approval numbers. Coulda done that with all of those other sources, too (presuming there were any).

Or, he could have realized he didn't have the goods, wasn't likely to get the goods from any of those sources, thus waited for the results of the lawsuit (and prosecution, and FBI investigation) to spit out the goods, and move when circumstances were more favorable.

But ol' Drunk Dade didn't do any of that. He just scooped up a pile of accusations he couldn't prove, had a committee of cronies (chairman of which is facing doxxing charges and decided not to run for re-election) assemble them in secret from "witnesses" not sworn under oath, and then whipped his caucus into voting for impeachment without all the usual pageantry of impeachment like open hearings or cross-examinations. As a result, when the case got to the Senate and subjected to proper vetting of full sunlight.....it fell to pieces.

Best case you have, Oso, is that Drunk Dade botched the impeachment of a guilty man, who (if one accepts the premise of guilt) would have been delivered accountability anyway in civil or criminal court, or in a future impeachment done with far better preparation, evidence, and procedure. Worst case is, Paxton isn't nearly as dirty as his opponents need him to be and actually isn't impeachable. But ol' Drunk Dade screwed all of that up for you. You won't be able to get him replaced before 2024. Probably won't happen before his next election cycle, either. The failure of this impeachment drastically raises the bar for the next one.

You moderates really do need better leadership. If you could find some, you'd probably find it easier to get along with the 3/4 of the party you're fighting with (and losing to). Everyone would be better off without ol' Drunk Dade. Dude is far, far worse for the party than Paxton was, is, or ever could be. At least Paxton accomplishes things for his voters.

---

Nice slime.
You guys are now sending out mailers accusing the Speaker of being pro-Muslim. Is there any slander y'all won't try.
Far-right activist blasts Speaker Phelan for being "pro-Muslim" in political mailer
https://www.texastribune.org/2023/12/24/texas-conservative-muslim-mailer-ramadan-dade-phelan/

Over 70% of Republican House members voted to impeach. When Senators got close to 21 votes, the judge (Lt Gov intervened by phoning two senators to threaten them with their chairmanships. Then after the trial, issued a daitribe from the bench. Imparialiality? Or carrying water for Trump.

Will you be working against the 3 Tx S. Ct judges who did not back Paxton's motion?
Three court of criminal appeal judges up for reelection targeted by Ken Paxton's political revenge machine
Paxton promised to go after the Republican judges over their 2021 ruling that struck down the attorney general's ability to unilaterally prosecute voter fraud.
https://www.texastribune.org/2023/12/13/ken-paxton-court-of-criminal-appeal-primary-republicans/

You guys have the burden of 2 probable trials of Paxton in the next 12 months. Are you guys carrying water for Guiliani too?

---

I saw that mailer. Tough politics, but fair. There's no slander at all. Phelan actually did do the meeting and the PR of it. It's entirely appropriate to let voters know that our Speaker is playing nice with Muslim groups, and it's good politics to contrast that with the way he treats effective conservatives (attack them relentlessly with wildly contrived allegations of things Democrats are openly and widely doing).

I do think it is appropriate in the next election to have primary challenges against the judges who stopped Paxton from going after voter fraud. Election integrity is a high priority for the party and the public. Why would you want to go easy on people who cheat? Why would we want to let partisan prosecutors give cover to election shenanigans by their own party? Isn't what Paxton did an entirely appropriate exercise of checks & balances in a properly functioning system?

If Paxton is convicted, I'll assess the fairness of the trial to determine if we should move to impeach immediately or wait on appeals. It would look awkward to impose an irretractable punishment on a person whose conviction got overturned on appeals, would it not? You moderates have lost all appreciation for due process. Your standard seems to be that if you don't like someone, you can do anything you want. Moderates have turned into quite the authoritarians, in that regard.

---

When Crooked Ken is convicted you'll visit him in prison.

Will Crooked Ken take the nickel in the civil depositions? It will be the first time he has been required to testify under oath because he refused to appear before the House Committee when asked by Chairman Leach.

Regarding judges, does it bother you at all that Crooked Ken and Trump go after the judges who check their overreaching? Both apparently hate the idea of checks and balances

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

quash said:

---

whiterock said:

---

quash said:

---

whiterock said:

---

quash said:

---

Did your donor give your mistress a job?

The countertops are tile.

---

The allegation was that the tile countertops were replaced with granite, as a political payoff.
As you note, the countertops are STILL tile.
THAT is evidence....cold, hard, undisputable evidence.....the avatar for how your boy Phelan botched the impeachment. He put up allegations as fact, some of them easily disprovable, in the most amateurish display of political leadership in Austin in my lifetime.

---

Nice dance.

Yes, I think it is established that the countertops are tile.

In your response, I'd like you to try and get past that one piece of debunked charge that ultimately means very little.

Deal with the mistress getting a job from the donor.

Not the countertop part. We agree on that.

Address a different point.

Mistress. Job. Donor.

---

Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus.

---

That is a bull**** way to dodge. I don't come that often anymore. Your series of replies are why I choose not to waste my time.

---

No, it's a thermonuclear torpedo to your argument. If you use the same exact "evidence" to allege one thing as you do another, then both are discredited when one is proven false.

You have no evidence that Paxton asked a donor to hire a mistress. You only have the fact that the donor did hire her and Paxton may not have immediately terminated the (ill-defined) relationship with her. That's it. That's all you got.

Your boy Phelan has a -9 approval rating. Because he screwed up the impeachment, from arsehole to appetite.

---

Perhaps we will get more evidence. Will Paxton take the nickel?

December 20, 2023 4:27 PM
Judge Soifer rules Paxton can be compelled to give sworn testimony in whistleblower suit
Paxton's top staff, including first assistant AG Brent Webster, can also be deposed, per the order. Paxton was reportedly served with a subpoena today

The ruling means that for the first time, Paxton might be required to answer questions under oath about why he marshaled attorney general office resources to aid friend and campaign donor Nate Paul. The four former employees sued Paxton after the attorney general fired them for reporting him to the FBI in 2020.

---

Drunk Dade could have done a better job getting to the bottom of that, couldn't he. He could have subpoena'd Paul, or Paul's associates, or any of Paxton's other staffers or political aides at the time. He could have put the (weak) witnesses he had up in front of the entire house to sing, sing, sing, so that the media tabloids would fill the internet with tales of wickedness and drive down Paxton's approval numbers. Coulda done that with all of those other sources, too (presuming there were any).

Or, he could have realized he didn't have the goods, wasn't likely to get the goods from any of those sources, thus waited for the results of the lawsuit (and prosecution, and FBI investigation) to spit out the goods, and move when circumstances were more favorable.

But ol' Drunk Dade didn't do any of that. He just scooped up a pile of accusations he couldn't prove, had a committee of cronies (chairman of which is facing doxxing charges and decided not to run for re-election) assemble them in secret from "witnesses" not sworn under oath, and then whipped his caucus into voting for impeachment without all the usual pageantry of impeachment like open hearings or cross-examinations. As a result, when the case got to the Senate and subjected to proper vetting of full sunlight.....it fell to pieces.

Best case you have, Oso, is that Drunk Dade botched the impeachment of a guilty man, who (if one accepts the premise of guilt) would have been delivered accountability anyway in civil or criminal court, or in a future impeachment done with far better preparation, evidence, and procedure. Worst case is, Paxton isn't nearly as dirty as his opponents need him to be and actually isn't impeachable. But ol' Drunk Dade screwed all of that up for you. You won't be able to get him replaced before 2024. Probably won't happen before his next election cycle, either. The failure of this impeachment drastically raises the bar for the next one.

You moderates really do need better leadership. If you could find some, you'd probably find it easier to get along with the 3/4 of the party you're fighting with (and losing to). Everyone would be better off without ol' Drunk Dade. Dude is far, far worse for the party than Paxton was, is, or ever could be. At least Paxton accomplishes things for his voters.

---

Nice slime.
You guys are now sending out mailers accusing the Speaker of being pro-Muslim. Is there any slander y'all won't try.
Far-right activist blasts Speaker Phelan for being "pro-Muslim" in political mailer
https://www.texastribune.org/2023/12/24/texas-conservative-muslim-mailer-ramadan-dade-phelan/

Over 70% of Republican House members voted to impeach. When Senators got close to 21 votes, the judge (Lt Gov intervened by phoning two senators to threaten them with their chairmanships. Then after the trial, issued a daitribe from the bench. Imparialiality? Or carrying water for Trump.

Will you be working against the 3 Tx S. Ct judges who did not back Paxton's motion?
Three court of criminal appeal judges up for reelection targeted by Ken Paxton's political revenge machine
Paxton promised to go after the Republican judges over their 2021 ruling that struck down the attorney general's ability to unilaterally prosecute voter fraud.
https://www.texastribune.org/2023/12/13/ken-paxton-court-of-criminal-appeal-primary-republicans/

You guys have the burden of 2 probable trials of Paxton in the next 12 months. Are you guys carrying water for Guiliani too?

---

I saw that mailer. Tough politics, but fair. There's no slander at all. Phelan actually did do the meeting and the PR of it. It's entirely appropriate to let voters know that our Speaker is playing nice with Muslim groups, and it's good politics to contrast that with the way he treats effective conservatives (attack them relentlessly with wildly contrived allegations of things Democrats are openly and widely doing).

I do think it is appropriate in the next election to have primary challenges against the judges who stopped Paxton from going after voter fraud. Election integrity is a high priority for the party and the public. Why would you want to go easy on people who cheat? Why would we want to let partisan prosecutors give cover to election shenanigans by their own party? Isn't what Paxton did an entirely appropriate exercise of checks & balances in a properly functioning system?

If Paxton is convicted, I'll assess the fairness of the trial to determine if we should move to impeach immediately or wait on appeals. It would look awkward to impose an irretractable punishment on a person whose conviction got overturned on appeals, would it not? You moderates have lost all appreciation for due process. Your standard seems to be that if you don't like someone, you can do anything you want. Moderates have turned into quite the authoritarians, in that regard.

---

When Crooked Ken is convicted you'll visit him in prison.
Not likely to happen (the prison sentence).

Will Crooked Ken take the nickel in the civil depositions? It will be the first time he has been required to testify under oath because he refused to appear before the House Committee when asked by Chairman Leach.
He should take the 5th. No reason to let lawfare create a trap.

Regarding judges, does it bother you at all that Crooked Ken and Trump go after the judges who check their overreaching? Both apparently hate the idea of checks and balances
The voters will hold the judges accountable, one way or the other. It is amusing indeed to see you complaining about campaign rhetoric on this issue while remaining silent on the actual abuse of power Democrats are engaging in at state and federal level all across the country,

---

Paxton is living rent-free in your brain, dude. Seek help.

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

quash said:

---

whiterock said:

---

quash said:

---

whiterock said:

---

quash said:

---

Did your donor give your mistress a job?

The countertops are tile.

---

The allegation was that the tile countertops were replaced with granite, as a political payoff.
As you note, the countertops are STILL tile.
THAT is evidence....cold, hard, undisputable evidence.....the avatar for how your boy Phelan botched the impeachment. He put up allegations as fact, some of them easily disprovable, in the most amateurish display of political leadership in Austin in my lifetime.

---

Nice dance.

Yes, I think it is established that the countertops are tile.

In your response, I'd like you to try and get past that one piece of debunked charge that ultimately means very little.

Deal with the mistress getting a job from the donor.

Not the countertop part. We agree on that.

Address a different point.

Mistress. Job. Donor.

---

Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus.

---

That is a bull**** way to dodge. I don't come that often anymore. Your series of replies are why I choose not to waste my time.

---

No, it's a thermonuclear torpedo to your argument. If you use the same exact "evidence" to allege one thing as you do another, then both are discredited when one is proven false.

You have no evidence that Paxton asked a donor to hire a mistress. You only have the fact that the donor did hire her and Paxton may not have immediately terminated the (ill-defined) relationship with her. That's it. That's all you got.

Your boy Phelan has a -9 approval rating. Because he screwed up the impeachment, from arsehole to appetite.

---

Perhaps we will get more evidence. Will Paxton take the nickel?

December 20, 2023 4:27 PM
Judge Soifer rules Paxton can be compelled to give sworn testimony in whistleblower suit
Paxton's top staff, including first assistant AG Brent Webster, can also be deposed, per the order. Paxton was reportedly served with a subpoena today

The ruling means that for the first time, Paxton might be required to answer questions under oath about why he marshaled attorney general office resources to aid friend and campaign donor Nate Paul. The four former employees sued Paxton after the attorney general fired them for reporting him to the FBI in 2020.

---

Drunk Dade could have done a better job getting to the bottom of that, couldn't he. He could have subpoena'd Paul, or Paul's associates, or any of Paxton's other staffers or political aides at the time. He could have put the (weak) witnesses he had up in front of the entire house to sing, sing, sing, so that the media tabloids would fill the internet with tales of wickedness and drive down Paxton's approval numbers. Coulda done that with all of those other sources, too (presuming there were any).

Or, he could have realized he didn't have the goods, wasn't likely to get the goods from any of those sources, thus waited for the results of the lawsuit (and prosecution, and FBI investigation) to spit out the goods, and move when circumstances were more favorable.

But ol' Drunk Dade didn't do any of that. He just scooped up a pile of accusations he couldn't prove, had a committee of cronies (chairman of which is facing doxxing charges and decided not to run for re-election) assemble them in secret from "witnesses" not sworn under oath, and then whipped his caucus into voting for impeachment without all the usual pageantry of impeachment like open hearings or cross-examinations. As a result, when the case got to the Senate and subjected to proper vetting of full sunlight.....it fell to pieces.

Best case you have, Oso, is that Drunk Dade botched the impeachment of a guilty man, who (if one accepts the premise of guilt) would have been delivered accountability anyway in civil or criminal court, or in a future impeachment done with far better preparation, evidence, and procedure. Worst case is, Paxton isn't nearly as dirty as his opponents need him to be and actually isn't impeachable. But ol' Drunk Dade screwed all of that up for you. You won't be able to get him replaced before 2024. Probably won't happen before his next election cycle, either. The failure of this impeachment drastically raises the bar for the next one.

You moderates really do need better leadership. If you could find some, you'd probably find it easier to get along with the 3/4 of the party you're fighting with (and losing to). Everyone would be better off without ol' Drunk Dade. Dude is far, far worse for the party than Paxton was, is, or ever could be. At least Paxton accomplishes things for his voters.

---

Nice slime.
You guys are now sending out mailers accusing the Speaker of being pro-Muslim. Is there any slander y'all won't try.
Far-right activist blasts Speaker Phelan for being "pro-Muslim" in political mailer
https://www.texastribune.org/2023/12/24/texas-conservative-muslim-mailer-ramadan-dade-phelan/

Over 70% of Republican House members voted to impeach. When Senators got close to 21 votes, the judge (Lt Gov intervened by phoning two senators to threaten them with their chairmanships. Then after the trial, issued a daitribe from the bench. Imparialiality? Or carrying water for Trump.

Will you be working against the 3 Tx S. Ct judges who did not back Paxton's motion?
Three court of criminal appeal judges up for reelection targeted by Ken Paxton's political revenge machine
Paxton promised to go after the Republican judges over their 2021 ruling that struck down the attorney general's ability to unilaterally prosecute voter fraud.
https://www.texastribune.org/2023/12/13/ken-paxton-court-of-criminal-appeal-primary-republicans/

You guys have the burden of 2 probable trials of Paxton in the next 12 months. Are you guys carrying water for Guiliani too?

---

I saw that mailer. Tough politics, but fair. There's no slander at all. Phelan actually did do the meeting and the PR of it. It's entirely appropriate to let voters know that our Speaker is playing nice with Muslim groups, and it's good politics to contrast that with the way he treats effective conservatives (attack them relentlessly with wildly contrived allegations of things Democrats are openly and widely doing).

I do think it is appropriate in the next election to have primary challenges against the judges who stopped Paxton from going after voter fraud. Election integrity is a high priority for the party and the public. Why would you want to go easy on people who cheat? Why would we want to let partisan prosecutors give cover to election shenanigans by their own party? Isn't what Paxton did an entirely appropriate exercise of checks & balances in a properly functioning system?

If Paxton is convicted, I'll assess the fairness of the trial to determine if we should move to impeach immediately or wait on appeals. It would look awkward to impose an irretractable punishment on a person whose conviction got overturned on appeals, would it not? You moderates have lost all appreciation for due process. Your standard seems to be that if you don't like someone, you can do anything you want. Moderates have turned into quite the authoritarians, in that regard.

---

When Crooked Ken is convicted you'll visit him in prison.
Not likely to happen (the prison sentence).

Will Crooked Ken take the nickel in the civil depositions? It will be the first time he has been required to testify under oath because he refused to appear before the House Committee when asked by Chairman Leach.
He should take the 5th. No reason to let lawfare create a trap.

Regarding judges, does it bother you at all that Crooked Ken and Trump go after the judges who check their overreaching? Both apparently hate the idea of checks and balances
The voters will hold the judges accountable, one way or the other. It is amusing indeed to see you complaining about campaign rhetoric on this issue while remaining silent on the actual abuse of power Democrats are engaging in at state and federal level all across the country,

---

Paxton is living rent-free in your brain, dude. Seek help.

---

Phelan is living rent free in your brain. Have you sought help? Please advise

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

quash said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus.

---

That is a bull**** way to dodge. I don't come that often anymore. Your series of replies are why I choose not to waste my time.

---

No, it's a thermonuclear torpedo to your argument. If you use the same exact "evidence" to allege one thing as you do another, then both are discredited when one is proven false.

You have no evidence that Paxton asked a donor to hire a mistress. You only have the fact that the donor did hire her and Paxton may not have immediately terminated the (ill-defined) relationship with her. That's it. That's all you got.

Your boy Phelan has a -9 approval rating. Because he screwed up the impeachment, from arsehole to appetite.

---

Perhaps we will get more evidence. Will Paxton take the nickel?

December 20, 2023 4:27 PM
Judge Soifer rules Paxton can be compelled to give sworn testimony in whistleblower suit
Paxton's top staff, including first assistant AG Brent Webster, can also be deposed, per the order. Paxton was reportedly served with a subpoena today

The ruling means that for the first time, Paxton might be required to answer questions under oath about why he marshaled attorney general office resources to aid friend and campaign donor Nate Paul. The four former employees sued Paxton after the attorney general fired them for reporting him to the FBI in 2020.

---

Drunk Dade could have done a better job getting to the bottom of that, couldn't he. He could have subpoena'd Paul, or Paul's associates, or any of Paxton's other staffers or political aides at the time. He could have put the (weak) witnesses he had up in front of the entire house to sing, sing, sing, so that the media tabloids would fill the internet with tales of wickedness and drive down Paxton's approval numbers. Coulda done that with all of those other sources, too (presuming there were any).

Or, he could have realized he didn't have the goods, wasn't likely to get the goods from any of those sources, thus waited for the results of the lawsuit (and prosecution, and FBI investigation) to spit out the goods, and move when circumstances were more favorable.

But ol' Drunk Dade didn't do any of that. He just scooped up a pile of accusations he couldn't prove, had a committee of cronies (chairman of which is facing doxxing charges and decided not to run for re-election) assemble them in secret from "witnesses" not sworn under oath, and then whipped his caucus into voting for impeachment without all the usual pageantry of impeachment like open hearings or cross-examinations. As a result, when the case got to the Senate and subjected to proper vetting of full sunlight.....it fell to pieces.

Best case you have, Oso, is that Drunk Dade botched the impeachment of a guilty man, who (if one accepts the premise of guilt) would have been delivered accountability anyway in civil or criminal court, or in a future impeachment done with far better preparation, evidence, and procedure. Worst case is, Paxton isn't nearly as dirty as his opponents need him to be and actually isn't impeachable. But ol' Drunk Dade screwed all of that up for you. You won't be able to get him replaced before 2024. Probably won't happen before his next election cycle, either. The failure of this impeachment drastically raises the bar for the next one.

You moderates really do need better leadership. If you could find some, you'd probably find it easier to get along with the 3/4 of the party you're fighting with (and losing to). Everyone would be better off without ol' Drunk Dade. Dude is far, far worse for the party than Paxton was, is, or ever could be. At least Paxton accomplishes things for his voters.

---

Nice slime.
You guys are now sending out mailers accusing the Speaker of being pro-Muslim. Is there any slander y'all won't try.
Far-right activist blasts Speaker Phelan for being "pro-Muslim" in political mailer
https://www.texastribune.org/2023/12/24/texas-conservative-muslim-mailer-ramadan-dade-phelan/

Over 70% of Republican House members voted to impeach. When Senators got close to 21 votes, the judge (Lt Gov intervened by phoning two senators to threaten them with their chairmanships. Then after the trial, issued a daitribe from the bench. Imparialiality? Or carrying water for Trump.

Will you be working against the 3 Tx S. Ct judges who did not back Paxton's motion?
Three court of criminal appeal judges up for reelection targeted by Ken Paxton's political revenge machine
Paxton promised to go after the Republican judges over their 2021 ruling that struck down the attorney general's ability to unilaterally prosecute voter fraud.
https://www.texastribune.org/2023/12/13/ken-paxton-court-of-criminal-appeal-primary-republicans/

You guys have the burden of 2 probable trials of Paxton in the next 12 months. Are you guys carrying water for Guiliani too?

---

I saw that mailer. Tough politics, but fair. There's no slander at all. Phelan actually did do the meeting and the PR of it. It's entirely appropriate to let voters know that our Speaker is playing nice with Muslim groups, and it's good politics to contrast that with the way he treats effective conservatives (attack them relentlessly with wildly contrived allegations of things Democrats are openly and widely doing).

I do think it is appropriate in the next election to have primary challenges against the judges who stopped Paxton from going after voter fraud. Election integrity is a high priority for the party and the public. Why would you want to go easy on people who cheat? Why would we want to let partisan prosecutors give cover to election shenanigans by their own party? Isn't what Paxton did an entirely appropriate exercise of checks & balances in a properly functioning system?

If Paxton is convicted, I'll assess the fairness of the trial to determine if we should move to impeach immediately or wait on appeals. It would look awkward to impose an irretractable punishment on a person whose conviction got overturned on appeals, would it not? You moderates have lost all appreciation for due process. Your standard seems to be that if you don't like someone, you can do anything you want. Moderates have turned into quite the authoritarians, in that regard.

---

When Crooked Ken is convicted you'll visit him in prison.
Not likely to happen (the prison sentence).

Will Crooked Ken take the nickel in the civil depositions? It will be the first time he has been required to testify under oath because he refused to appear before the House Committee when asked by Chairman Leach.
He should take the 5th. No reason to let lawfare create a trap.

Regarding judges, does it bother you at all that Crooked Ken and Trump go after the judges who check their overreaching? Both apparently hate the idea of checks and balances
The voters will hold the judges accountable, one way or the other. It is amusing indeed to see you complaining about campaign rhetoric on this issue while remaining silent on the actual abuse of power Democrats are engaging in at state and federal level all across the country,

---

Paxton is living rent-free in your brain, dude. Seek help.

---

Phelan is living rent free in your brain. Have you sought help? Please advise

---

You're the one who keeps coming back and posting nonsense.
I'm just posting facts.
And the facts are, the impeachment you ballyhooed (see thread title) turned into a Keystone Kops routine, precisely because of a series of bad decisions by leadership (your boy Dade) fortified with incompetent execution (by the people appointed by your boy Dade), resulting in either (at best) a guilty man getting off scott-free, or (at worst) an innocent man getting put unnecessarily thru the wringer at the cost of significant taxpayer expense and division within the GOP. (pretty clear latter is at least mostly the situation....)

Wise leadership would step away from the scene of their incompetence (failed impeachment) and go make news elsewhere on items that would restore goodwill with the voters (like passing school choice instead of fighting it). Wait for ongoing legal processes elsewhere to clunk forward. Maybe some actual evidence will come forth from the federal investigation. I mean, it's not like we couldn't expect juicy details about a GOP statewide official to leak from a Democrat-controlled DOJ. Or maybe even the Paxton trial will at long last happen and spin off some nasty testimony. Perhaps he might even be convicted. A conviction would build a lot of moral imperative to act, putting the House Speaker in the position of "reluctantly moving forward" rather than "I hate this guy and I"m gonna get him by hook or crook."

Seriously, dude. You do not have the goods. Continuing to grind away on Paxton just reminds everyone of how you like to play with turds & punchbowls.

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

quash said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus.

---

That is a bull**** way to dodge. I don't come that often anymore. Your series of replies are why I choose not to waste my time.

---

No, it's a thermonuclear torpedo to your argument. If you use the same exact "evidence" to allege one thing as you do another, then both are discredited when one is proven false.

You have no evidence that Paxton asked a donor to hire a mistress. You only have the fact that the donor did hire her and Paxton may not have immediately terminated the (ill-defined) relationship with her. That's it. That's all you got.

Your boy Phelan has a -9 approval rating. Because he screwed up the impeachment, from arsehole to appetite.

---

Perhaps we will get more evidence. Will Paxton take the nickel?

December 20, 2023 4:27 PM
Judge Soifer rules Paxton can be compelled to give sworn testimony in whistleblower suit
Paxton's top staff, including first assistant AG Brent Webster, can also be deposed, per the order. Paxton was reportedly served with a subpoena today

The ruling means that for the first time, Paxton might be required to answer questions under oath about why he marshaled attorney general office resources to aid friend and campaign donor Nate Paul. The four former employees sued Paxton after the attorney general fired them for reporting him to the FBI in 2020.

---

Drunk Dade could have done a better job getting to the bottom of that, couldn't he. He could have subpoena'd Paul, or Paul's associates, or any of Paxton's other staffers or political aides at the time. He could have put the (weak) witnesses he had up in front of the entire house to sing, sing, sing, so that the media tabloids would fill the internet with tales of wickedness and drive down Paxton's approval numbers. Coulda done that with all of those other sources, too (presuming there were any).

Or, he could have realized he didn't have the goods, wasn't likely to get the goods from any of those sources, thus waited for the results of the lawsuit (and prosecution, and FBI investigation) to spit out the goods, and move when circumstances were more favorable.

But ol' Drunk Dade didn't do any of that. He just scooped up a pile of accusations he couldn't prove, had a committee of cronies (chairman of which is facing doxxing charges and decided not to run for re-election) assemble them in secret from "witnesses" not sworn under oath, and then whipped his caucus into voting for impeachment without all the usual pageantry of impeachment like open hearings or cross-examinations. As a result, when the case got to the Senate and subjected to proper vetting of full sunlight.....it fell to pieces.

Best case you have, Oso, is that Drunk Dade botched the impeachment of a guilty man, who (if one accepts the premise of guilt) would have been delivered accountability anyway in civil or criminal court, or in a future impeachment done with far better preparation, evidence, and procedure. Worst case is, Paxton isn't nearly as dirty as his opponents need him to be and actually isn't impeachable. But ol' Drunk Dade screwed all of that up for you. You won't be able to get him replaced before 2024. Probably won't happen before his next election cycle, either. The failure of this impeachment drastically raises the bar for the next one.

You moderates really do need better leadership. If you could find some, you'd probably find it easier to get along with the 3/4 of the party you're fighting with (and losing to). Everyone would be better off without ol' Drunk Dade. Dude is far, far worse for the party than Paxton was, is, or ever could be. At least Paxton accomplishes things for his voters.

---

Nice slime.
You guys are now sending out mailers accusing the Speaker of being pro-Muslim. Is there any slander y'all won't try.
Far-right activist blasts Speaker Phelan for being "pro-Muslim" in political mailer
https://www.texastribune.org/2023/12/24/texas-conservative-muslim-mailer-ramadan-dade-phelan/

Over 70% of Republican House members voted to impeach. When Senators got close to 21 votes, the judge (Lt Gov intervened by phoning two senators to threaten them with their chairmanships. Then after the trial, issued a daitribe from the bench. Imparialiality? Or carrying water for Trump.

Will you be working against the 3 Tx S. Ct judges who did not back Paxton's motion?
Three court of criminal appeal judges up for reelection targeted by Ken Paxton's political revenge machine
Paxton promised to go after the Republican judges over their 2021 ruling that struck down the attorney general's ability to unilaterally prosecute voter fraud.
https://www.texastribune.org/2023/12/13/ken-paxton-court-of-criminal-appeal-primary-republicans/

You guys have the burden of 2 probable trials of Paxton in the next 12 months. Are you guys carrying water for Guiliani too?

---

I saw that mailer. Tough politics, but fair. There's no slander at all. Phelan actually did do the meeting and the PR of it. It's entirely appropriate to let voters know that our Speaker is playing nice with Muslim groups, and it's good politics to contrast that with the way he treats effective conservatives (attack them relentlessly with wildly contrived allegations of things Democrats are openly and widely doing).

I do think it is appropriate in the next election to have primary challenges against the judges who stopped Paxton from going after voter fraud. Election integrity is a high priority for the party and the public. Why would you want to go easy on people who cheat? Why would we want to let partisan prosecutors give cover to election shenanigans by their own party? Isn't what Paxton did an entirely appropriate exercise of checks & balances in a properly functioning system?

If Paxton is convicted, I'll assess the fairness of the trial to determine if we should move to impeach immediately or wait on appeals. It would look awkward to impose an irretractable punishment on a person whose conviction got overturned on appeals, would it not? You moderates have lost all appreciation for due process. Your standard seems to be that if you don't like someone, you can do anything you want. Moderates have turned into quite the authoritarians, in that regard.

---

When Crooked Ken is convicted you'll visit him in prison.
Not likely to happen (the prison sentence).

Will Crooked Ken take the nickel in the civil depositions? It will be the first time he has been required to testify under oath because he refused to appear before the House Committee when asked by Chairman Leach.
He should take the 5th. No reason to let lawfare create a trap.

Regarding judges, does it bother you at all that Crooked Ken and Trump go after the judges who check their overreaching? Both apparently hate the idea of checks and balances
The voters will hold the judges accountable, one way or the other. It is amusing indeed to see you complaining about campaign rhetoric on this issue while remaining silent on the actual abuse of power Democrats are engaging in at state and federal level all across the country,

---

Paxton is living rent-free in your brain, dude. Seek help.

---

Phelan is living rent free in your brain. Have you sought help? Please advise

---

You're the one who keeps coming back and posting nonsense.
I'm just posting facts.
And the facts are, the impeachment you ballyhooed (see thread title) turned into a Keystone Kops routine, precisely because of a series of bad decisions by leadership (your boy Dade) fortified with incompetent execution (by the people appointed by your boy Dade), resulting in either (at best) a guilty man getting off scott-free, or (at worst) an innocent man getting put unnecessarily thru the wringer at the cost of significant taxpayer expense and division within the GOP. (pretty clear latter is at least mostly the situation....)

Wise leadership would step away from the scene of their incompetence (failed impeachment) and go make news elsewhere on items that would restore goodwill with the voters (like passing school choice instead of fighting it). Wait for ongoing legal processes elsewhere to clunk forward. Maybe some actual evidence will come forth from the federal investigation. I mean, it's not like we couldn't expect juicy details about a GOP statewide official to leak from a Democrat-controlled DOJ. Or maybe even the Paxton trial will at long last happen and spin off some nasty testimony. Perhaps he might even be convicted. A conviction would build a lot of moral imperative to act, putting the House Speaker in the position of "reluctantly moving forward" rather than "I hate this guy and I"m gonna get him by hook or crook."

Seriously, dude. You do not have the goods. Continuing to grind away on Paxton just reminds everyone of how you like to play with turds & punchbowls.

---

Whatever comes of the criminal investigations, we know for a fact that, at Paxton's direction, Paul had extraordinary access to the most powerful people in the attorney general's office to personally work on matters concerning Paul and Paul alone.

According to evidence presented during the impeachment, Paxton intervened on Paul's behalf in these major areas:
-- He tried to get the attorney general's office to give Paul access to protected law enforcement information about the ongoing criminal investigation.
-- He tried to have the office assist Paul in a lawsuit with the charitable Mitte Foundation.
-- He used the office's powers to halt foreclosure sales in Texas when properties belonging to Paul were going to be sold on the courthouse steps.
-- He personally deputized an outside attorney to issue grand jury subpoenas on Paul's behalf after his deputies refused to do so.
"In each instance, we were being asked to use the power of the office in a way that would provide no meaningful, tangible benefit to the people of the state of Texas," Bangert said.



https://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/editorials/2023/12/31/how-ken-paxton-whistleblowers-stood-up-for-texas-and-the-truth/

Attorney General @KenPaxtonTX blamed House Speaker Dade Phelan for “doxxing” him, leading to a raid at his McKinney home on New Year's day.

However, the story isn't adding up. https://t.co/TUpr9VXvcF

— Texas Monthly (@TexasMonthly) January 5, 2024

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

quash said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus.

---

That is a bull**** way to dodge. I don't come that often anymore. Your series of replies are why I choose not to waste my time.

---

No, it's a thermonuclear torpedo to your argument. If you use the same exact "evidence" to allege one thing as you do another, then both are discredited when one is proven false.

You have no evidence that Paxton asked a donor to hire a mistress. You only have the fact that the donor did hire her and Paxton may not have immediately terminated the (ill-defined) relationship with her. That's it. That's all you got.

Your boy Phelan has a -9 approval rating. Because he screwed up the impeachment, from arsehole to appetite.

---

Perhaps we will get more evidence. Will Paxton take the nickel?

December 20, 2023 4:27 PM
Judge Soifer rules Paxton can be compelled to give sworn testimony in whistleblower suit
Paxton's top staff, including first assistant AG Brent Webster, can also be deposed, per the order. Paxton was reportedly served with a subpoena today

The ruling means that for the first time, Paxton might be required to answer questions under oath about why he marshaled attorney general office resources to aid friend and campaign donor Nate Paul. The four former employees sued Paxton after the attorney general fired them for reporting him to the FBI in 2020.

---

Drunk Dade could have done a better job getting to the bottom of that, couldn't he. He could have subpoena'd Paul, or Paul's associates, or any of Paxton's other staffers or political aides at the time. He could have put the (weak) witnesses he had up in front of the entire house to sing, sing, sing, so that the media tabloids would fill the internet with tales of wickedness and drive down Paxton's approval numbers. Coulda done that with all of those other sources, too (presuming there were any).

Or, he could have realized he didn't have the goods, wasn't likely to get the goods from any of those sources, thus waited for the results of the lawsuit (and prosecution, and FBI investigation) to spit out the goods, and move when circumstances were more favorable.

But ol' Drunk Dade didn't do any of that. He just scooped up a pile of accusations he couldn't prove, had a committee of cronies (chairman of which is facing doxxing charges and decided not to run for re-election) assemble them in secret from "witnesses" not sworn under oath, and then whipped his caucus into voting for impeachment without all the usual pageantry of impeachment like open hearings or cross-examinations. As a result, when the case got to the Senate and subjected to proper vetting of full sunlight.....it fell to pieces.

Best case you have, Oso, is that Drunk Dade botched the impeachment of a guilty man, who (if one accepts the premise of guilt) would have been delivered accountability anyway in civil or criminal court, or in a future impeachment done with far better preparation, evidence, and procedure. Worst case is, Paxton isn't nearly as dirty as his opponents need him to be and actually isn't impeachable. But ol' Drunk Dade screwed all of that up for you. You won't be able to get him replaced before 2024. Probably won't happen before his next election cycle, either. The failure of this impeachment drastically raises the bar for the next one.

You moderates really do need better leadership. If you could find some, you'd probably find it easier to get along with the 3/4 of the party you're fighting with (and losing to). Everyone would be better off without ol' Drunk Dade. Dude is far, far worse for the party than Paxton was, is, or ever could be. At least Paxton accomplishes things for his voters.

---

Nice slime.
You guys are now sending out mailers accusing the Speaker of being pro-Muslim. Is there any slander y'all won't try.
Far-right activist blasts Speaker Phelan for being "pro-Muslim" in political mailer
https://www.texastribune.org/2023/12/24/texas-conservative-muslim-mailer-ramadan-dade-phelan/

Over 70% of Republican House members voted to impeach. When Senators got close to 21 votes, the judge (Lt Gov intervened by phoning two senators to threaten them with their chairmanships. Then after the trial, issued a daitribe from the bench. Imparialiality? Or carrying water for Trump.

Will you be working against the 3 Tx S. Ct judges who did not back Paxton's motion?
Three court of criminal appeal judges up for reelection targeted by Ken Paxton's political revenge machine
Paxton promised to go after the Republican judges over their 2021 ruling that struck down the attorney general's ability to unilaterally prosecute voter fraud.
https://www.texastribune.org/2023/12/13/ken-paxton-court-of-criminal-appeal-primary-republicans/

You guys have the burden of 2 probable trials of Paxton in the next 12 months. Are you guys carrying water for Guiliani too?

---

I saw that mailer. Tough politics, but fair. There's no slander at all. Phelan actually did do the meeting and the PR of it. It's entirely appropriate to let voters know that our Speaker is playing nice with Muslim groups, and it's good politics to contrast that with the way he treats effective conservatives (attack them relentlessly with wildly contrived allegations of things Democrats are openly and widely doing).

I do think it is appropriate in the next election to have primary challenges against the judges who stopped Paxton from going after voter fraud. Election integrity is a high priority for the party and the public. Why would you want to go easy on people who cheat? Why would we want to let partisan prosecutors give cover to election shenanigans by their own party? Isn't what Paxton did an entirely appropriate exercise of checks & balances in a properly functioning system?

If Paxton is convicted, I'll assess the fairness of the trial to determine if we should move to impeach immediately or wait on appeals. It would look awkward to impose an irretractable punishment on a person whose conviction got overturned on appeals, would it not? You moderates have lost all appreciation for due process. Your standard seems to be that if you don't like someone, you can do anything you want. Moderates have turned into quite the authoritarians, in that regard.

---

When Crooked Ken is convicted you'll visit him in prison.
Not likely to happen (the prison sentence).

Will Crooked Ken take the nickel in the civil depositions? It will be the first time he has been required to testify under oath because he refused to appear before the House Committee when asked by Chairman Leach.
He should take the 5th. No reason to let lawfare create a trap.

Regarding judges, does it bother you at all that Crooked Ken and Trump go after the judges who check their overreaching? Both apparently hate the idea of checks and balances
The voters will hold the judges accountable, one way or the other. It is amusing indeed to see you complaining about campaign rhetoric on this issue while remaining silent on the actual abuse of power Democrats are engaging in at state and federal level all across the country,

---

Paxton is living rent-free in your brain, dude. Seek help.

---

Phelan is living rent free in your brain. Have you sought help? Please advise

---

You're the one who keeps coming back and posting nonsense.
I'm just posting facts.
And the facts are, the impeachment you ballyhooed (see thread title) turned into a Keystone Kops routine, precisely because of a series of bad decisions by leadership (your boy Dade) fortified with incompetent execution (by the people appointed by your boy Dade), resulting in either (at best) a guilty man getting off scott-free, or (at worst) an innocent man getting put unnecessarily thru the wringer at the cost of significant taxpayer expense and division within the GOP. (pretty clear latter is at least mostly the situation....)

Wise leadership would step away from the scene of their incompetence (failed impeachment) and go make news elsewhere on items that would restore goodwill with the voters (like passing school choice instead of fighting it). Wait for ongoing legal processes elsewhere to clunk forward. Maybe some actual evidence will come forth from the federal investigation. I mean, it's not like we couldn't expect juicy details about a GOP statewide official to leak from a Democrat-controlled DOJ. Or maybe even the Paxton trial will at long last happen and spin off some nasty testimony. Perhaps he might even be convicted. A conviction would build a lot of moral imperative to act, putting the House Speaker in the position of "reluctantly moving forward" rather than "I hate this guy and I"m gonna get him by hook or crook."

Seriously, dude. You do not have the goods. Continuing to grind away on Paxton just reminds everyone of how you like to play with turds & punchbowls.

---

Whatever comes of the criminal investigations, we know for a fact that, at Paxton's direction, Paul had extraordinary access to the most powerful people in the attorney general's office to personally work on matters concerning Paul and Paul alone.

According to evidence presented during the impeachment, Paxton intervened on Paul's behalf in these major areas:
-- He tried to get the attorney general's office to give Paul access to protected law enforcement information about the ongoing criminal investigation.
-- He tried to have the office assist Paul in a lawsuit with the charitable Mitte Foundation.
-- He used the office's powers to halt foreclosure sales in Texas when properties belonging to Paul were going to be sold on the courthouse steps.
-- He personally deputized an outside attorney to issue grand jury subpoenas on Paul's behalf after his deputies refused to do so.
"In each instance, we were being asked to use the power of the office in a way that would provide no meaningful, tangible benefit to the people of the state of Texas," Bangert said.



https://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/editorials/2023/12/31/how-ken-paxton-whistleblowers-stood-up-for-texas-and-the-truth/

---

if those allegations were true, why was he not convicted?

Was it because there was a problem with the underlying allegations?
Was it because Phelan badly mishandled the entire process?

Seems to me it was a little of the former and a LOT of the latter.

boognish_bear said:

---

Attorney General @KenPaxtonTX blamed House Speaker Dade Phelan for “doxxing” him, leading to a raid at his McKinney home on New Year's day.

However, the story isn't adding up. https://t.co/TUpr9VXvcF

— Texas Monthly (@TexasMonthly) January 5, 2024

---

Amazing, isn't it. Paxton is swatted. He calls out his foes on it. They change the subject to doxxing. And Democrat media runs with it as though the swatting never happened.

whiterock said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

Attorney General @KenPaxtonTX blamed House Speaker Dade Phelan for “doxxing” him, leading to a raid at his McKinney home on New Year's day.

However, the story isn't adding up. https://t.co/TUpr9VXvcF

— Texas Monthly (@TexasMonthly) January 5, 2024

---

Amazing, isn't it. Paxton is swatted. He calls out his foes on it. They change the subject to doxxing. And Democrat media runs with it as though the swatting never happened.

---

Crooked Ken got caught lying ... again. One of his senate allies called him out on it.
And it's Crooked Ken & you trying to change the subject.

Imp to note that while @KenPaxtonTX implies a tie between the publicly posted House docs that had his home address on it w/the swatting incident, the address on those docs was his Austin home address, not his McKinney home address, which is where the swatting occurred.

Why does Crooked Ken resist testifying under oath?

January 12, 2024 5:26 PM
Texas Supreme Court denies Paxton request to prevent him from having to give sworn testimony in whistleblower lawsuit
"We look forward to the opportunity to finally place the attorney general and the other witnesses under oath and question them about the facts in our lawsuit," said a lawyer for the former Paxton employees
https://www.quorumreport.com//

Former Gov Rick Perry and NRA endorse Speaker Phelan

Speaker Phelan announced the endorsement of former Gov. Rick Perry, who had lobbied state senators to consider the evidence against Paxton. Perry's endorsement called Phelan a "fearless conservative and a Texas Hero."

He more recently got the endorsement of the National Rifle Association, which cited the House's 2021 passage of a law allowing permitless carry of handguns.

Osodecentx said:

---

Former Gov Rick Perry and NRA endorse Speaker Phelan

Speaker Phelan announced the endorsement of former Gov. Rick Perry, who had lobbied state senators to consider the evidence against Paxton. Perry's endorsement called Phelan a "fearless conservative and a Texas Hero."

He more recently got the endorsement of the National Rifle Association, which cited the House's 2021 passage of a law allowing permitless carry of handguns.

---

Neither is terribly instructive. The current governor is aggressively going after Phelan's people. (except that it does show how the impeachment has divided the party).

You may not be aware that NRA (as is the case with many PACs) always endorses incumbents with acceptable voting records. It's a policy. Shun partisanship. Ignore any ideology (except your own). Build relationships on both sides of the aisle by supporting the ones most likely to win, as long as those incumbents have a positive voting record. So a guy with a B or C grade is going to the nod over a challenger. Even a challenger named Ruger Remington Berretta, who was nicknamed "Colt" and a sitting member of the Smith & Wesson board, would have a hard time getting an NRA nod over some random incumbent with an "A" grade voting record.

the idea that the first vote a Democrat with an "A grade" takes is to elect a speaker with an "F grade" who will sponsor an unrelenting assault on the 2nd Amendment is not a factor. As long as that Democrat keeps voting with the NRA thru thick & thin.

Not saying it should be that way. Just saying it is.

In newly published campaign finance report, @KenPaxtonTX discloses $2.3M in legal fees to lawyers who worked on his impeachment trial #txlege pic.twitter.com/gMxlt1MWLg

— Patrick Svitek (@PatrickSvitek) January 18, 2024

New: Attorney General Ken Paxton sought Thursday to end the long-running whistleblower lawsuit against him — and avoid sitting for a deposition — by saying he would not contest the facts of the case and accept any judgment. https://t.co/CXFeqHMhaT

— Texas Tribune (@TexasTribune) January 18, 2024

TOTAL VINDICATION
Today, Attorney General Ken Paxton admitted he violated the Texas Whistleblower Act and confirmed offenses laid out in Texas House Impeachment Articles 6, 7, 8 and 15. I suppose Mr. Paxton views this total reversal as more appealing than answering questions… https://t.co/k5HlsmeYnL

— Rep. Jared Patterson (@JaredLPatterson) January 18, 2024

Statement from another Paxton whistleblower attorney, TJ Turner: pic.twitter.com/0CXeah5g8q

— Patrick Svitek (@PatrickSvitek) January 18, 2024

“Mr. Paxton, in a move that speaks volumes, has dropped all pretense of innocence. He's admitted to what many in the Texas House have known in our hearts to be true: he flagrantly broke the law, violated the Whistleblower Act and betrayed the trust placed in him by retaliating… pic.twitter.com/FReJARpeE5

— Jeff Leach (@leachfortexas) January 19, 2024

Ken Paxton has never answered questions about his illegal and corrupt conduct," Nesbitt said. "He is clearly terrified of doing so - even if it means taking a different position now about him breaking the law than he did at his impeachment trial."