Ken Paxton is dirty? NO FUCKING WAY!

[Gil Bang 25894]

On 6/1/2023 at 1:33 PM, Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand said:

When you hear what this googly-eyed motherfucker did you're gonna turbo shit your pants off!

motion to change thread title

[chainsaw 9836]

[atomheartbevo 89395]

44 minutes ago, Beau Vine said:

I still have trouble buying that the legislature is blowing all this shit up over $3M.  That's a fucking rounding error in this state.  

40 minutes ago, Pescado_Rojo said:

Yea, I still think they're trying to get out front of something really ugly. Laundering campaign money for personal use for most of the Republicans in Texas or something like that. 

I'd have to go back through the thread, but it's not the $3 million itself, it's that if they paid it, anything relating to those whistleblowers and their actions can't be used against Paxton later on.  If something truly ugly comes out, and Paxton can't be prosecuted because the legislature paid off the whistleblowers, then the lege comes out looking like accessories after the fact.

I could be wrong, but I swear there was something that would be triggered if the whistleblowers were paid off, and that they couldn't be compelled to testify against Paxton, or evidence in their case couldn't be used against Paxton. Some speculated cartel money.

[Brisketexan 104537]

2 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

I'd have to go back through the thread, but it's not the $3 million itself, it's that if they paid it, anything relating to those whistleblowers and their actions can't be used against Paxton later on.  If something truly ugly comes out, and Paxton can't be prosecuted because the legislature paid off the whistleblowers, then the lege comes out looking like accessories after the fact.

I could be wrong, but I swear there was something that would be triggered if the whistleblowers were paid off, and that they couldn't be compelled to testify against Paxton, or evidence in their case couldn't be used against Paxton. Some speculated cartel money.

Yeah....unless there's some super-obscure exception that I'm missing, settling a civil whistleblower complaint cannot abrogate the criminal subpoena process.  And I'm even MORE confident that settling a state-law whistleblower complaint means jack shit re: a Federal criminal prosecution.  When Whistleblower #1 gets a subpoena from the Feds to testify in Paxton's Federal criminal trial, good luck quashing that subpoena with "but the Whistleblower signed a settlement agreement under state law that says shutup."

[atomheartbevo 89395]

44 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Yeah....unless there's some super-obscure exception that I'm missing, settling a civil whistleblower complaint cannot abrogate the criminal subpoena process.  And I'm even MORE confident that settling a state-law whistleblower complaint means jack shit re: a Federal criminal prosecution.  When Whistleblower #1 gets a subpoena from the Feds to testify in Paxton's Federal criminal trial, good luck quashing that subpoena with "but the Whistleblower signed a settlement agreement under state law that says shutup."

Then it could all go back to the whistleblowers were more tied into Patrick, Abbott, Roy, Cornyn, etc., than Paxton was.

It's weird for sure.

[atomheartbevo 89395]

@Brisketexan Found this - you may understand it better, but it jives with what I posted - basically if the legislature had paid out the money, then it doesn't go to discovery phase, Paxton doesn't have to take the stand, and texts, emails, etc. don't get entered into the record.

https://www.dallasobserver.com/news/whistleblowers-ken-paxtons-settlement-agreement-is-off-16723152

Quote

The latest delay facing the whistleblowers is SOP for Paxton when facing legal jeopardy: deny, attack and cobble together a bizarre stew of circular illogic to exploit court procedures in order to halt forward movement on the whistleblowers’ lawsuit. Delay and cover up are the goals. The strategy is straight from the Donald Trump legal playbook, which isn’t surprising. Paxton isn’t just an ardent Trump supporter. He’s his Mini-Me.

The new roadblock thrown up by Paxton and his minions involves the “mediated settlement agreement” that the whistleblowers reached with the OAG in February, which would have provided them $3.3 million to settle their case, contingent upon the Legislature agreeing to pay.

Quote

The trouble is that the OAG and plaintiffs agreed to ask the Texas Supreme Court, which has a separate appeal in the case filed by the OAG seeking to quash the case, to hold off — “abate” — action on that appeal while the settlement agreement went before the Legislature. A favorable ruling for the plaintiffs from the Supreme Court on that appeal would allow the whistleblowers suit to move into the discovery phase, aka the juicy part, in which the plaintiffs could depose witnesses — including Paxton — and gain access to texts, emails and other potential evidence that might bolster their case.

Faced with the settlement agreement negotiated by the OAG, House lawmakers chose to go another way: No money. They impeached Paxton.

Quote

If you think it’s just the Observer that believes Paxton’s ultimate goal is to exploit court processes to cover up evidence of his wrongdoing, take a gander at No. 8 among the 20 articles in the House’s impeachment resolution: “While holding office as attorney general, Warren Kenneth Paxton misused his official powers by concealing his wrongful acts in connection with whistleblower complaints made by employees whom Paxton had terminated.

Quote

“Specifically, Paxton entered into a settlement agreement with the whistleblowers that provides for payment of the settlement from public funds. The settlement agreement stayed the wrongful termination suit and conspicuously delayed the discovery of facts and testimony at trial, to Paxton's advantage, which deprived the electorate of its opportunity to make an informed decision when voting for attorney general.”

(The bulk of the accusations against him concern alleged bribes he took from an Austin real estate developer in exchange for favorable treatment and subsequent actions Paxton allegedly undertook to cover up the bribery scheme.)

Quote

In March, getting a sense of where the Legislature stood on paying the $3.3 million, the whistleblowers filed a motion asking the Supreme Court to end its abatement and rule on the OAG’s appeal, since the settlement agreement was dead.

“...In oral communications with Respondents, OAG contends that it has maneuvered Respondents into a GOTCHA position. ... OAG tells Respondents the case will never resume; they have given up their claims forever, even if legislative approval is not forthcoming. OAG thus reaps all benefits of a settlement, and Respondents achieve none,” the whistleblowers’ motion states.

Quote

Settlements are contracts, Austin Kaplan with the Kaplan Law Firm told us. If the settlement is contingent upon money being paid but none is forthcoming, then the settlement agreement is no longer in effect. In this case, “the Legislature says no, no, and hell no, and impeaches the attorney general,” then obviously the contingency included in the settlement agreement hasn’t been met.

Michael Maslanka, an associate professor at the UNT-Dallas College of Law, said much the same: “The settlement agreement was contingent upon the Legislature, therefore the settlement agreement is off, full-stop.”

Quote

Perhaps it’s cynical to suggest that the OAG was motivated to make the settlement agreement to forestall the Supreme Court from agreeing with the lower courts and sending the case back for discovery and a potential trial. On the other hand, if you’re following Paxton’s career and this case and not feeling awash in cynicism, you should try harder. Let us help: If the whistleblowers’ case does go to trial and succeeds, the bill will likely be much more than $3.3 million. Want to know who’ll end up paying? Find a mirror.

Kaplan offered at least one bright spot: While going to trial would be a less-than-ideal outcome for the plaintiffs, it would be “a great result for the rest of us,” as we’d get a peek inside Paxton’s office, possibly uncovering more wrongdoing.

 

[Beau Vine 53978]

2 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

@Brisketexan Found this - you may understand it better, but it jives with what I posted

[Beau Vine 53978]

5 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

basically if the legislature had paid out the money, then it doesn't go to discovery phase, Paxton doesn't have to take the stand, and texts, emails, etc. don't get entered into the record.

https://www.dallasobserver.com/news/whistleblowers-ken-paxtons-settlement-agreement-is-off-16723152

Is that any different if Paxton had paid the money out of his own pocket?  

I have a lot of trouble believing that Paxton couldn't/wouldn't come up with $3M on his own if it would've gotten him off scott-free and ended all his troubles.

[atomheartbevo 89395]

2 minutes ago, Beau Vine said:

I like to troll English majors, but sometimes it feels like there's lesser and lesser of them, not helped that our built-in grammar checkers in our browsers/OSes allow us to make fewer and fewer mistakes to bring them out of the woodwork.

[Sawbonz 27392]

[atomheartbevo 89395]

6 minutes ago, Beau Vine said:

Is that any different if Paxton had paid the money out of his own pocket?  

I have a lot of trouble believing that Paxton couldn't/wouldn't come up with $3M on his own if it would've gotten him off scott-free and ended all his troubles.

Greedy people are greedy?  It jibes with Paxton's personality.

https://www.fox7austin.com/news/texas-ag-ken-paxton-agrees-to-pay-3-3m-with-taxpayer-money-in-lawsuit-filed-by-former-employees

Quote

MIKE WARREN: Matt, Speaker Dave Phelan said he didn't like the idea of taxpayers picking up the bill here, but it's a deal the former employees want passed as well, correct?

Quote

MATT MACKOWIAK: It is. And this is protected under the Texas Whistleblower Act. And the law requires not that any individual state employee be sued personally, but that the agency could be sued. And so, you know, the legislature has really two choices. You know, allow taxpayer funding to close, close up the settlement or to reject the settlement. There is no way to force an individual state employee to pay their own funds or pay campaign funds to settle any kind of settlement. So I understand some of the frustration here. And in the AG defense, I do think it is less costly to taxpayers to have to settle this at that level than to continue with the lawsuit being pursued at the local level. And then presumably being appealed to the appellate court and then to the state Supreme Court. 

 

Edited June 5, 2023 by atomheartbevo

[Beau Vine 53978]

3 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

It jibes

[scottsins 1953]

Yea, I still think they're trying to get out front of something really ugly. Laundering campaign money for personal use for most of the Republicans in Texas or something like that. 

I totally agree with this prediction and expect actual federal criminal charges.

[Brisketexan 104537]

15 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

@Brisketexan Found this - you may understand it better, but it jives with what I posted - basically if the legislature had paid out the money, then it doesn't go to discovery phase, Paxton doesn't have to take the stand, and texts, emails, etc. don't get entered into the record.

https://www.dallasobserver.com/news/whistleblowers-ken-paxtons-settlement-agreement-is-off-16723152

 

Oh, that's right.  But understand, that's the CIVIL record.  If you settle a case before it heads into discovery, yeah, none of that discovery (depositions, document production, etc.) happens.  But even then, just taking DISCOVERY doesn't make it part of any "record."  Unless and until it's filed in court in connection with another motion or somesuch, it's not part of the "record."

And in any case, NONE of that matters with respect to any parallel or subsequent criminal proceeding.  Law enforcement might want to use something that was provided/produced in the civil case, but they neither need the civil case discovery nor are they impeded my any "agreement" the parties make in a civil case.  "But Mr. District Attorney, you can't subpoena my text messages because I already settled a civil case with the victim where we agreed that we'd keep stuff confidential" is not an objection that will even get off the launch pad.

Settling the whistleblower suit was going to be effective to keep those particular mouths quiet for a period of time, in any venue other than a criminal proceeding.  It buys time.  But if the criminal process is coming to his doorstep, well, the civil settlement don't make a shit.

[Brisketexan 104537]

20 minutes ago, Beau Vine said:

Is that any different if Paxton had paid the money out of his own pocket?  

I have a lot of trouble believing that Paxton couldn't/wouldn't come up with $3M on his own if it would've gotten him off scott-free and ended all his troubles.

Also...he was clearly motivated to try to buy time and quiet the noise, and if he could have come up with the $3 million himself, he would have.  BUT....I suspect that his money spigot rhymed with "Gate Gaul," and that spigot is now shut off and capped.

[Bozo_Casanova 26271]

23 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

I like to troll English majors, but sometimes it feels like there's lesser and lesser of them, not helped that our built-in grammar checkers in our browsers/OSes allow us to make fewer and fewer mistakes to bring them out of the woodwork.

 

 

[Beau Vine 53978]

4 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Also...he was clearly motivated to try to buy time and quiet the noise, and if he could have come up with the $3 million himself, he would have.  BUT....I suspect that his money spigot rhymed with "Gate Gaul," and that spigot is now shut off and capped.

Spigot?  $3M can't be that much in personal funds to the AG of Texas.   Shit, I could probably come up with close to that if I needed it to stay out of jail.

 

[kevwun 15608]

If the FBI is all up in his ass, he may not have access to most of his money anymore.

Edited June 5, 2023 by kevwun

[SydneyCarton 47836]

10 minutes ago, Beau Vine said:

Spigot?  $3M can't be that much in personal funds to the AG of Texas.   Shit, I could probably come up with close to that if I needed it to stay out of jail.

 

So THIS is why Abbot is so eager to end tenure.

I kid, I kid. 

[Brisketexan 104537]

1 minute ago, kevwun said:

If the FBI is all up in his ass, he may not have access to most of his money anymore.

Pssh.  You're talking a lot of law there, law dog.  You understand that in GQP-land, law don't go around here, savvy?

 

Seriously.  It's one of the foundational rules of GQP-world: the law doesn't apply to them.  At all.  They are the living embodiment, the pure id, of the old saw: Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.

The law PROTECTS old Ken and his pals.  It doesn't bind them. 

 

 

[Pescado_Rojo 19330]

35 minutes ago, Beau Vine said:

Spigot?  $3M can't be that much in personal funds to the AG of Texas.   Shit, I could probably come up with close to that if I needed it to stay out of jail.

 

Clearly you don't have an ex-wife. 

[Paper_jam 828]

1 hour ago, atomheartbevo said:

I like to troll English majors, but sometimes it feels like there's lesser and lesser of them, not helped that our built-in grammar checkers in our browsers/OSes allow us to make fewer and fewer mistakes to bring them out of the woodwork.

Don't you mean fewer and fewer?

[Kel Varnsen 8429]

3 hours ago, Beau Vine said:

Spigot?  $3M can't be that much in personal funds to the AG of Texas.   Shit, I could probably come up with close to that if I needed it to stay out of jail.

 

[safe sex 11676]

[DDD Dad 14243]

15 hours ago, atomheartbevo said:

I like to troll English majors, but sometimes it feels like there's lesser and lesser of them, not helped that our built-in grammar checkers in our browsers/OSes allow us to make fewer and fewer mistakes to bring them out of the woodwork.

 

Edited June 6, 2023 by DDD Dad

[cactusflinthead 27594]

Haven't seen it here.

We should be talking more about Buzbee as counsel for Paxton.

 

[atomheartbevo 89395]

33 minutes ago, cactusflinthead said:

Haven't seen it here.

We should be talking more about Buzbee as counsel for Paxton.

It's almost like he doesn't understand how impeachment works.

[SydneyCarton 47836]

4 hours ago, cactusflinthead said:

Haven't seen it here.

We should be talking more about Buzbee as counsel for Paxton.

 

 

3 hours ago, atomheartbevo said:

It's almost like he doesn't understand how impeachment works.

Seriously. Is that a joke? That happens in the senate trial. Buzzbee already has had plenty of signs he’s caught a case of the brainworms. Hoo boy this could get real entertaining. 

[BevoAbyss 2057]

On 6/5/2023 at 12:00 PM, Brisketexan said:

Our pal Mackowiak

Saw this and for some strange reason, these numbers keep flashing in my brain: 66-3   66-3   66-3   66-3   66-3

[atomheartbevo 89395]

5 hours ago, SydneyCarton said:

Seriously. Is that a joke? That happens in the senate trial. Buzzbee already has had plenty of signs he’s caught a case of the brainworms. Hoo boy this could get real entertaining. 

Yeah, not sure how he's this ignorant- everything he is bitching about is literally everything he's going to be contending with in the Senate trial, and was never meant to be a part of the House stuff.

I'm going to assume he knows how it all actually works (although if not, Paxton is even more fucked) and he's just saying this bullshit for the rubes who aren't paying attention.

If he is this ignorant though, I look forward to him trying to explain away all of the Nate Paul stuff.  And he probably knows that Paxton firing the whistleblowers pissed off Dan Patrick and other Republican power players.

[kevwun 15608]

Buzbee is crazy, so I don't think you can say one way or another what he understands or believes.

[Pato del Muerto 52336]

It’s not ignorance on his part. He’s fluffing the ignorance of the texas Republican voters.  Possibly all Republican voters if this is a national story. Keep them upset.  Make them think that lack of proof so far is equal to proof of innocence. 

[atomheartbevo 89395]

1 minute ago, Pato del Muerto said:

It’s not ignorance on his part. He’s fluffing the ignorance of the texas Republican voters.  Possibly all Republican voters if this is a national story. Keep them upset.  Make them think that lack of proof so far is equal to proof of innocence. 

Texas Republican voters won't remember this a year from now, nor will it cause them to vote for Democrat instead of Republican legislators even if they did remember.

[Pato del Muerto 52336]

Just keeping them in a state of outrage so that they keep giving their money away. 

[Brisketexan 104537]

27 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

It’s not ignorance on his part. He’s fluffing the ignorance of the texas Republican voters.  Possibly all Republican voters if this is a national story. Keep them upset.  Make them think that lack of proof so far is equal to proof of innocence. 

This.  It's the same play Trump ran when the House voted to impeach, and send the case to the Senate for trial.  "I didn't get a fair trial in the House!  They didn't even let me call any witnesses!  Fake impeachment!"  It was utterly stupid, had zero connection to how anything works in the real world.....and worked like a charm....

25 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

Texas Republican voters won't remember this a year from now, nor will it cause them to vote for Democrat instead of Republican legislators even if they did remember.

....because this.  Paxton could be convicted in a trial that includes recorded confessions of every other state official admitting to making millions off the Cartel drug and human trafficking trade, and saying "the part I like best is selling children into sex slavery," and the Texas GQP will actually GAIN votes, because....somehow, they'd spin that into "and that's how we're fighting the marxist communist Biden crime family!"

You can put whatever product you want on the shelves, but the Texas voting public is going to clean out the "stupid" aisle, and leave every other aisle untouched.

[chainsaw 9836]

3 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

This.  It's the same play Trump ran when the House voted to impeach, and send the case to the Senate for trial.  "I didn't get a fair trial in the House!  They didn't even let me call any witnesses!  Fake impeachment!"  It was utterly stupid, had zero connection to how anything works in the real world.....and worked like a charm....

....because this.  Paxton could be convicted in a trial that includes recorded confessions of every other state official admitting to making millions off the Cartel drug and human trafficking trade, and saying "the part I like best is selling children into sex slavery," and the Texas GQP will actually GAIN votes, because....somehow, they'd spin that into "and that's how we're fighting the marxist communist Biden crime family!"

You can put whatever product you want on the shelves, but the Texas voting public is going to clean out the "stupid" aisle, and leave every other aisle untouched.

trump is a lot more important to the party than paxton though

[Beau Vine 53978]

32 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

Texas Republican voters won't remember this a year from now, nor will it cause them to vote for Democrat instead of Republican legislators even if they did remember.

[Brisketexan 104537]

3 minutes ago, Beau Vine said:

And this.  Y'all still don't fully grasp that a Republican official could rape a puppy to death on live TV while simultaneously shooting kindergarteners in the head, declare that he was doing it to "own the libs," and he would gain votes.  Being a complete fucking asshole is a STRENGTH, not a weakness.

[Pig Bellmont 8691]

On 6/5/2023 at 2:08 PM, atomheartbevo said:

And there's still the settlement matter - if the lege doesn't provide the funding, isn't there some kind of court process that will drag much of this out into the light of day?

Yes. If the settlement isn’t approved, the case will go to trial. 

[Pig Bellmont 8691]

7 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

And this.  Y'all still don't fully grasp that a Republican official could rape a puppy to death on live TV while simultaneously shooting kindergarteners in the head, declare that he was doing it to "own the libs," and he would gain votes.  Being a complete fucking asshole is a STRENGTH, not a weakness.

You’re not wrong. I mean giving speeches at the violent coup attempt to overthrow our democracy resulting in the death of police officers isn’t even a blip on the impeachment/resignation calculus 

[Horn Under a Bad Sign 20342]

This whole twitter thread is great:
 

 

 

 

[atomheartbevo 89395]

8 minutes ago, Horn Under a Bad Sign said:

This whole twitter thread is great:

So is that photo from Paxton's condo or home in Austin, the home in College Station or the one in Collin County?

[cactusflinthead 27594]

 

[atomheartbevo 89395]

[atomheartbevo 89395]

Who had Rusty Hardin referencing My Cousin Vinny in his official response to Buzbee on their bingo card?

[tx 3 putt 76294]

4 hours ago, Horn Under a Bad Sign said:

This whole twitter thread is great:
 

 

 

 

 

[Biff Tannen 45491]

See, now this is when I love the simulation. If you’re going to put us through this bullshit, at least throw us a bone once in a while. Thank you. 

[wreckatx 141]

This is great. At his press conference yesterday, Buzbee put up a picture of a receipt for remodel work to prove that KP didn’t get a free remodel from Nate Paul. Before now, there was no real proof that Nate was even involved in the remodel, just secondhand hearsay from a Paxton aide. Anyway, the construction company on the receipt is affiliated with-guess who?-Nate Paul.

 https://www.wsj.com/articles/ken-paxtons-home-renovation-payment-disclosure-shows-new-ties-to-donor-d2f7c899

[YGIFS 19449]

yeah, that had to be one of the nicer moments of the Simulation.  General Paxton doesn't even know Nate Paul, other than being at the same group dinner on one occasion.  I mean yeah, I guess I'll produce a receipt showing my client had some remodel work done by one of his real estate entities that can be directly tied back to an international money laundering scheme.  But other than that, he is a humble public servant looking to get some kinda discount on countertops.  

[kevwun 15608]

Did Buzbee specify if that was the 1st or 2nd house that Paxton claimed a homestead exemption on?