AG Paxton roped into securities fraud debacle between financial advisor, ex-partners

584 Views | 18 Replies | Last: 1 mo ago by whiterock
Osodecentx
How long do you want to ignore this user?
May 5, 2021 2:35 PM
DMN: AG Paxton roped into securities fraud debacle between financial advisor, ex-partners

From the scoop by Dallas Morning News reporter Lauren McGaughy
Two former business partners have successfully pulled Ken Paxton into yet another securities fraud dispute, adding to the attorney general's mounting legal problems. The case dates to 2016, when the man who oversees Paxton's financial assets accused a company called Unity Resources and two of its investors of defrauding him. The two men denied the allegations and pointed the finger back at Paxton, arguing he was responsible because he too was an investor and served as the company's lawyer.
Last week, the Fifth Court of Appeals in Dallas agreed with the two men that Paxton could be named a "responsible third party" in the suit. The 11-1 opinion by the Democrat-dominated court reversed its previous decision that initially found Paxton could not be added to the case.


quash
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The way this is going my kid will have to live long enough to see a verdict.
“Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.” (The Law, p.6) Frederic Bastiat
Chamberman
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Where there is smoke, there is usually fire of some sort.

Ken doesn't have a good track record on investing, from either side.
whiterock
How long do you want to ignore this user?
OTOH these things have been bubbling for years and never seem to materialize into anything. Whiffs of fake news.
midgett
How long do you want to ignore this user?
whiterock said:

OTOH these things have been bubbling for years and never seem to materialize into anything. Whiffs of fake news.
I'd probably be bothered a bit less if he was just another politician. He is the attorney general. I definitely hold him to higher standards. I have yet to cast a vote for him in any election.
quash
How long do you want to ignore this user?
whiterock said:

OTOH these things have been bubbling for years and never seem to materialize into anything. Whiffs of fake news.

Materialized into criminal charges. How much more material can it get? A conviction maybe.
“Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.” (The Law, p.6) Frederic Bastiat
whiterock
How long do you want to ignore this user?
quash said:

whiterock said:

OTOH these things have been bubbling for years and never seem to materialize into anything. Whiffs of fake news.

Materialized into criminal charges. How much more material can it get? A conviction maybe.

5 years and no trial.
Can't the prosecutor build a case?
HuMcK
How long do you want to ignore this user?
whiterock said:

OTOH these things have been bubbling for years and never seem to materialize into anything. Whiffs of fake news.

The Trump strategy: use powers inherent in his office to delay/derail accountability, point to a lack of actions taken as evidence of false claims. It's a cynical game, but it seems to work well enough on the rubes.
PartyBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
It dates back to 2016? He was the Attorney General then. How could he also in private practice representing this company back then? If true just that right there is a huge problem whether he was advising his client to break the law or not.
Osodecentx
How long do you want to ignore this user?
PartyBear said:

It dates back to 2016? He was the Attorney General then. How could he also in private practice representing this company back then? If true just that right there is a huge problem whether he was advising his client to break the law or not.
I think it dates to when he was in the Tx House
PartyBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I dont know if 2016 is a misprint. He is in his second term right now. First elected AG in 2014.
Osodecentx
How long do you want to ignore this user?
PartyBear said:

I dont know if 2016 is a misprint. He is in his second term right now. First elected AG in 2014.
Yes. I thought the allegations/indictments dated to his House days. Maybe I am an indictment or 2 behind.
PartyBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
You are probably right. It says the case dates back to 2016. Maybe they mean that is when it was filed rather than the facts giving rise to the case occurred in 2016.
quash
How long do you want to ignore this user?
whiterock said:

quash said:

whiterock said:

OTOH these things have been bubbling for years and never seem to materialize into anything. Whiffs of fake news.

Materialized into criminal charges. How much more material can it get? A conviction maybe.

5 years and no trial.
Can't the prosecutor build a case?
More than once. Paxton gets a legislative continuance every two years.
“Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.” (The Law, p.6) Frederic Bastiat
whiterock
How long do you want to ignore this user?
quash said:

whiterock said:

quash said:

whiterock said:

OTOH these things have been bubbling for years and never seem to materialize into anything. Whiffs of fake news.

Materialized into criminal charges. How much more material can it get? A conviction maybe.

5 years and no trial.
Can't the prosecutor build a case?
More than once. Paxton gets a legislative continuance every two years.
how does legislative continuance survive sine die?
quash
How long do you want to ignore this user?
whiterock said:

quash said:

whiterock said:

quash said:

whiterock said:

OTOH these things have been bubbling for years and never seem to materialize into anything. Whiffs of fake news.

Materialized into criminal charges. How much more material can it get? A conviction maybe.

5 years and no trial.
Can't the prosecutor build a case?
More than once. Paxton gets a legislative continuance every two years.
how does legislative continuance survive sine die?
It doesn't but somehow Paxton never gets a court setting between sessions. Or something. If the state had been responsible for this much delay you'd get a slam dunk speedy trial motion granted.
“Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.” (The Law, p.6) Frederic Bastiat
PartyBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I thought there had been issues with the prosecution having been defunded which also causes delay and of course is pretty corrupt itself.
Booray
How long do you want to ignore this user?
PartyBear said:

I thought there had been issues with the prosecution having been defunded which also causes delay and of course is pretty corrupt itself.
To be fair the special prosecutors are asking to make themselves millionaires off this one case. It stinks all the way around.
whiterock
How long do you want to ignore this user?
quash said:

whiterock said:

quash said:

whiterock said:

quash said:

whiterock said:

OTOH these things have been bubbling for years and never seem to materialize into anything. Whiffs of fake news.

Materialized into criminal charges. How much more material can it get? A conviction maybe.

5 years and no trial.
Can't the prosecutor build a case?
More than once. Paxton gets a legislative continuance every two years.
how does legislative continuance survive sine die?
It doesn't but somehow Paxton never gets a court setting between sessions. Or something. If the state had been responsible for this much delay you'd get a slam dunk speedy trial motion granted.
or maybe their case is so esoteric that only a jury of Wall Street traders can understand it, so they're letting it live just for the shade it casts.

It's already lasted long enough to move beyond whiff of political BS and into the stench category. If they don't get it tried by the end of the year, then it's just being kept alive for campaign fodder.
Refresh
Page 1 of 1
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.