Jump to content

Ken Paxton is dirty? NO FUCKING WAY!

Gil Bang

By Gil Bang
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 3.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Chewbacca
Chewbacca

Here's a hint - if you vote for someone, you support them.  Whether it's Paxton, Abbott, Trump, Cruz, your vote says you support their actions.

SydneyCarton
SydneyCarton

Ah, yes. The “I don’t like this guy, but voting for a a literal criminal into a position of power is better than voting for someone who fights for civil liberties. Because fuck democrats and people wh

BevoAbyss
BevoAbyss

Lulz. With all due respect, what this really means in 2023 GQP Texas is: "I lean hard fascist, but I've never been a fan of fascist Paxton. Of course, I am a fan of many other fascists and voted

Posted Images

YGIFS

YGIFS 19,449

Posted
Posted

Hmmm, 11-day trial schedule Ken?  Be weird if anybody got swept up in the Dies y Seis celebrations Mexico after that?  Weird considering who is on Calendars Committee.  I'm sure you'll skate just fine.  Just a very ominous harbinger for your sorry ass.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31,184

Posted
Posted
On 6/19/2023 at 8:04 PM, TexEx15 said:

 

That's not what the Constitution says, Angela. 

 

Sec. 3. IMPARTIAL TRIAL BY SENATE; CONCURRENCE OF TWO-THIRDS REQUIRED. When the Senate is sitting as a Court of Impeachment, the Senators shall be on oath, or affirmation impartially to try the party impeached, and no person shall be convicted without the concurrence of two-thirds of the Senators present.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31,184

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, TexEx15 said:

Senator Paxton must recuse.

13FAA3B3-2D17-427D-BA55-F835BAB396A8.png

She doesn't have to recuse.

She won't be permitted to vote, no matter what she does.

Rule 31. Conflict. A member of the court who is the spouse of a party to the

 court of impeachment is considered to have a conflict pursuant to

 Article III, Section 22, of the Texas Constitution. Such member of

 the court shall be seated in the court of impeachment pursuant to

 Article 15 of the Texas Constitution. However, such member of the

 court shall not be eligible to vote on any matter, motion, or

 question, or participate in closed sessions or deliberations.

 

 Notwithstanding any other rule, a member of the court who is the

 spouse of a party to the court of impeachment shall be considered

 present and eligible only for the purpose of calculating the number

 of votes required for any and all matters, motions, and questions

 under these rules.

  • Hook 'Em 7
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
YGIFS

YGIFS 19,449

Posted
Posted

I get the politics of it all, Angela.  And you can file motions and appeals to process behind the scenes discretely.  But this is very much the part of the movie where you're going to want to go ahead and be quiet.    

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
cactusflinthead

cactusflinthead 27,593

Posted
Posted
52 minutes ago, YGIFS said:

I get the politics of it all, Angela.  And you can file motions and appeals to process behind the scenes discretely.  But this is very much the part of the movie where you're going to want to go ahead and be quiet.    

But, she has so many words in her head. They have to get out. You need to hear them. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
atomheartbevo

atomheartbevo 89,362

Posted
Posted
14 hours ago, YGIFS said:

I get the politics of it all, Angela.  And you can file motions and appeals to process behind the scenes discretely.  But this is very much the part of the movie where you're going to want to go ahead and be quiet.    

I think it maybe a sign they are serious about removing him.  Also, them requiring him to be there in person for the impeachment was a nice little bit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
atomheartbevo

atomheartbevo 89,362

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

Meh. Angela can't vote but it didn't lower the threshold of required votes to convict him. It's the same as if she had pre-voted to acquit.

No argument there, but if they had allowed her to vote, then they had no intention of him being booted out.

I'm still amazed that he may actually have to get up and testify.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pescado_Rojo

Pescado_Rojo 19,327

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, atomheartbevo said:

Nobody there is going to know who he is, or if a random Texan stumbles across him, is not going to fucking care one bit.

I'd try to do that thing where I pretend (wink) to be drunk and turn to talk to him standing at a urinal and piss all over his shoes. If I could get the urinal on the right he'd never see it coming. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 4
  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brisketexan

Brisketexan 104,462

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, tx 3 putt said:

WTF ???

Paxton is MAGA.  You know, the people who scream all day long about the Chicoms and whatnot.

Wait, have you not read my pamphlet, "Every Accusation is a Confession: the GQP Way?"  I could have sworn you were on my mailing list.

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 3
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted

Y'all read that article? He went with a group of AGs from around the country. Don't know why a group of AGs need to go to China... but singling out Paxton for it seems a bit disingenuous. 

However, if we want to get to where even a whiff of impropriety means you are out of public office, I'd be ok with that too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brisketexan

Brisketexan 104,462

Posted
Posted
20 minutes ago, FirstTimeCaller said:

Y'all read that article? He went with a group of AGs from around the country. Don't know why a group of AGs need to go to China... but singling out Paxton for it seems a bit disingenuous. 

However, if we want to get to where even a whiff of impropriety means you are out of public office, I'd be ok with that too.

Yeah, it was a larger crooked boondoggle.  Both dem and repub AGs went on it.

The fucking naked corruption we don't just allow, but encourage and reward, is super-shitty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Biff Tannen

Biff Tannen 45,477

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, FirstTimeCaller said:

Y'all read that article? He went with a group of AGs from around the country. Don't know why a group of AGs need to go to China... but singling out Paxton for it seems a bit disingenuous. 

However, if we want to get to where even a whiff of impropriety means you are out of public office, I'd be ok with that too.

Ok. Hang ‘em all then.  No sweat off my sack. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...